pothos.org

amyntoros wrote:Oh, and Marcus, there does seem to be some kind of connection with the Romance. In the book Studies in the Alexander Romance by D.J.A. Ross there's an article titled: Olympias and the Serpent: The Interpretation of a Baalbek Mosaic and the Date of the Illustrated Pseudo-Callisthenes. I'm guessing it's the same mosaic unless there's another one featuring Alexander!

I think it must be the same mosaic.

Interesting about the schema in the quotation you gave. It was because of this that I started wondering about it in the first place - particularly with Nymphe having the name she does. Maybe she is a nurse - although we should remember that we know the name of Alexander's wet-nurse - but no doubt he would have had more than one woman looking after him.

Can't see any serpent in the mosaic, however, unless I haven't looked carefully enough at the other parts of the mosaic, yet.

ATB

marcus wrote:
Can't see any serpent in the mosaic, however, unless I haven't looked carefully enough at the other parts of the mosaic, yet.

ATB

Not too easy to see, but it's twisted around Olympias' right arm, a little above the wrist, and you can see the tail of the snake just below her right knee.

Best regards,

amyntoros wrote:

marcus wrote:
Can't see any serpent in the mosaic, however, unless I haven't looked carefully enough at the other parts of the mosaic, yet.

ATB

Not too easy to see, but it's twisted around Olympias' right arm, a little above the wrist, and you can see the tail of the snake just below her right knee.

Best regards,

Nope, can't see it. You'll have to find some way of highlighting it and posting it, cos I've zoomed in almost to tile level, and can only see the folds of her garments.

ATB

I am utterly hopeless at manipulating digital photographs, but I managed to find a clear online image here. Looks like it was taken under much better lighting conditions, perhaps by the people who worked on it before it was placed in the museum?

Best regards,

amyntoros wrote:I am utterly hopeless at manipulating digital photographs, but I managed to find a clear online image here. Looks like it was taken under much better lighting conditions, perhaps by the people who worked on it before it was placed in the museum?

Please note that I'm not saying you're wrong ... but I still can't see it! Anyway, we know the story, and if the serpent is there, then it does at least tie in with the Romance as discussed ...

ATB

I'll lend you my reading glasses Marcus!

Adult female figure on the left. On her right forearm about a third of the way up. It curls around then runs down the right thigh and the tail dangles from the knee. It is green.

Paralus wrote:I'll lend you my reading glasses Marcus!

Adult female figure on the left. On her right forearm about a third of the way up. It curls around then runs down the right thigh and the tail dangles from the knee. It is green.

Aaaaahhhhh! I was looking at the female figure above Alexander, who is clearly identified as Olympias. The other isn't identified because of the damage to the mosaic, and as Amyntoros said it was on the Olympias I didn't look at the other figures.

Gotcha (at last)!

ATB

Unless I too need Paralus' glasses I read the name tag above 'OLYMPIAS' as OLYMPTH..the final letter is not iota, compare with the iota of PHIL.. Similarly above the snake bearing figure I read ...MPO.. whatever the last letter it too is not iota. Then there is THERAPENA and the other male ...TOS they need to be taken into account too.

This may be a schema related to Dionysus and Achilles but this particular case seems one of reading what we want to see, made easier by what we would expect to see. Alexander, Phil...,Olymp... and a snake but if there is no Olympias then we have only a possible Philip, Phil is a common beginning to Greek names, and an Alexander not a rare name either.

Now it could be that the mosaic has been poorly restored but then one would expect the restoration to give Olympias, a name known and right for a context including a definite Alexander. The general rule is to keep the lectio difficilior .

Please tell me I need glasses

agesilaos wrote:Unless I too need Paralus' glasses I read the name tag above 'OLYMPIAS' as OLYMPTH..the final letter is not iota, compare with the iota of PHIL.. Similarly above the snake bearing figure I read ...MPO.. whatever the last letter it too is not iota.

Just a wild guess, but perhaps the name was written as 'Olympeias'. The trace you identify as 'th' could also be an 'e', as is seen in 'Therapena' and 'Alexandros'. The Olympeia existed as a festival in honour of Zeus, and in the fourth century AD there was no difference in pronunciation between 'Olympeias' and 'Olympias' due to iotacism, so this orthographic variant might be possible. Something seems wrong with the word 'Therapena' too. Enough things to check when I have more time...

abm wrote:

agesilaos wrote:Unless I too need Paralus' glasses I read the name tag above 'OLYMPIAS' as OLYMPTH..the final letter is not iota, compare with the iota of PHIL.. Similarly above the snake bearing figure I read ...MPO.. whatever the last letter it too is not iota.

Just a wild guess, but perhaps the name was written as 'Olympeias'. The trace you identify as 'th' could also be an 'e', as is seen in 'Therapena' and 'Alexandros'. The Olympeia existed as a festival in honour of Zeus, and in the fourth century AD there was no difference in pronunciation between 'Olympeias' and 'Olympias' due to iotacism, so this orthographic variant might be possible. Something seems wrong with the word 'Therapena' too. Enough things to check when I have more time...

Is it "therapaina" = "handmaid"? (I found a picture of a mosaic that is in the National Museum of Damascus, showing a woman with the name "Therapena" and someone has suggested that it is a version of "therapaina" - perhaps there was a corruption during the Roman period?

agesilaos wrote:Then there is THERAPENA and the other male ...TOS they need to be taken into account too.

Hi agesilaos,

It's probably "...POS" rather than "...TOS". Quite likely Philippos again, since Olympias is evidently repeated. The clothes and the sceptre(?) are similar anyway. Yes, I would think Therapena is the handmaiden of Olympias.

Best regards,

Andrew

Well, all the clothes are similar; I agree it could be an epsilon by comparison with those in Therapena but I don't think that there quite enough room for Olympeias, nor is the snake which one would think of as designating Olympias is not repeated. Again it could be ...POS, in fact, I think it is, on closer inspection, but that is not to say it is Philippos. There seems little rationale in the repetition of the figures. Having 'Philip' standing behind 'Olympias' to the left and seated next to her to the right seems especially otiose and I can see no narrative thread running from the left to explain it; this seems more of a snap-shot than a comic-strip.

Also why name the otherwise unknown nurse, Nymphe and yet merely give Therapena a job title?

agesilaos wrote:Also why name the otherwise unknown nurse, Nymphe and yet merely give Therapena a job title?

Actually nymphe means a newly-wed woman in the first instance in Greek. Of course, it has a secondary meaning equivalent to "nymph" in English, but it looks as though it is the first meaning that is intended here. A wet-nurse would often have been a newly married woman who had lost her first child, so perhaps that is the gist of it.

I would point out that the leftmost figure does wear exactly the same clothing as the other Philippos - down to the vertical stripe on his tunic! And that they both bear light-brown rods (perhaps sceptres - a common designation of rulership status in Greek art.) Given the coincidence of the surviving letters of his name too, I fear you're doing a bit of a Tarn-turn on this one agesilaos.

Best wishes,

Andrew

Taphoi wrote:I fear you're doing a bit of a Tarn-turn on this one agesilaos.

Ouch!

I shall remember that one, Andrew! A nice phrase ...

ATB

Taphoi wrote:
I would point out that the leftmost figure does wear exactly the same clothing as the other Philippos - down to the vertical stripe on his tunic! And that they both bear light-brown rods (perhaps sceptres - a common designation of rulership status in Greek art.) Given the coincidence of the surviving letters of his name too, I fear you're doing a bit of a Tarn-turn on this one agesilaos.

My turn to wonder if I need (stronger) glasses, but I only see one rod in the center of the mosaic. Not that I'm disagreeing with you that both figures are probably Philip. I may be oversimplifying things, but it looks to me like the clockwise scenario starting from the left is (a) conception - hence the snake, (b) labor/birth, and (c) little Alexander!

Best regards,