by Peter Jones
115–28: And Arachne is not finished yet (does Ovid’s use of a string of apostrophes (115–20) introduce a note of wonder, perhaps, at Arachne’s brilliance or her foolhardy courage?). She turns from Jupiter to other gods. Neptune (Poseidon) is depicted on the pull in various guises, and all perfectly rendered in look and location (115–22); so too Apollo (122–4), Bacchus/Dionysus (125) and Saturn (126). While Minerva bordered her tapestry with olives, Arachne surrounds hers with flowers intertwined with ivy, a much more complex creation. So Arachne’s ‘take’ on the gods in her tapestry is of a quite different order from Minerva’s. In Minerva’s effort, grandiose divinities bring blessings to a city but punish any who dare to challenge them by transforming them (i.e. mortals transformed by divine hatred); in Arachne’s, all the gods, without exception, transform themselves into various undignified forms, human, animal, vegetable and mineral, to indulge what seems to be their sole purpose in life, sex with mortal females (i.e. gods transformed by mortal lust).
129–45: There is no official judging, but it is clear who has won. Arachne’s tapestry cannot be faulted (129–30); and Minerva’s dolor at Arachne’s successū ends any possible doubts on the matter. Minerva had wanted to be praised (3): and she has failed. Her rage is instant and terrible. Now uirāgo, emphasising her warlike nature (130), Minerva reacts at once, ripping into Arachne’s masterpiece, tearing it to pieces (131) in surely one of the most terrifying lines in Ovid, with its brilliantly ambiguous caelestia crīmina: the canvas both depicts the scandals of the gods and is itself a scandal against the gods, because it is so clearly superior to Minerva’s efforts. She then ferociously attacks Arachne herself (132–3). A mortal does not cross a god; even less does one defeat a divinity in a contest. Gods do not lose to mortals. But Ovid does not construct Arachne’s inner thoughts for us. We can, perhaps, try. She thought (perhaps) this was to be a fair fight. Her whole life was given to her art. She knew she had won. Why carry on, if this was the divine response? So in pride (animōsa, 134) and despair (īnfēlīx), she hangs herself (appropriately, for someone who has used thread all her life). Minerva has pity on her (miserāta, 135), holds her up to stop her hanging (leuāuit, 135) and allows her to live (uīue, 136). But it does not stop Minerva from ensuring that Arachne understands the implications of victory (improba, 136) and does not get above herself in the future (the implication of sēcūra futūrī, 137). The price Arachne pays for life is still a poena (137) for her and her descendants – the life of a humble spider (Ovid aetiologising again; see the Glossary of Technical Literary Terms). To effect the transformation Minerva scatters Arachne with witch’s juice (139–40), and Ovid rises brilliantly to the challenge of transforming a young woman into a spider. He starts with the head: that must lose hair, nose and ears (141). Then size: everything shrinks (142). Legs become fingers, located along her side (143), and everything else (arms, neck, trunk and so on) becomes belly (144), from which the thread issues that enables her to carry on a travesty of her former activity (144–5) – for every spider’s web is the same as every other (and very easy to destroy).
12 Cephalus and Procris, Metamorphōsēs 7.694–756, 796–862
Background
Androgeos, son of Minos, king of Crete, had been raised in Athens. When he grew up, he took part in the All-Athenian games and won everything. The king of Athens, Aegeus, already suspicious of the young man’s ambitions, sent him to kill the bull of Marathon – and the bull duly killed him. His father Minos decided to take his revenge and set out to attack Athens. He approached king Aeacus on the island of Aegina (opposite Athens in the Saronic gulf) for help, but Aeacus decided to side with Athens, a decision much welcomed by the Athenians in the person of their envoy to Aegina, Cephalus. In the course of his stay on Aegina, Aeacus’ son Phocus asks Cephalus about the spear he is carrying. Cephalus agrees to tell its story, explaining that it caused the death of his beloved wife (Procris).
7.694–9: Cephalus describes his superlative wife
†‘Procris^ erat, sī forte magis peruēnit ad aurēs*
†Orītha *tuās, raptae ^soror Orīthae.
695
sī faciem mōrēsque uelīs †cōnferre duārum,
dignior †ipsa rapī. pater hanc mihi iūnxit Erechtheus,
hanc mihi iūnxit Amor; fēlīx dīcēbar eramque.
(nōn ita dīs uīsum est, aut nunc quoque †forsitan essem.)’
7.700–13: Cephalus is warned by the goddess Aurora, whose advances he rejected
‘alter †agēbātur post sacra iugālia mēnsis
700
†cum mē, cornigerīs tendentem rētia ceruīs,
†uertice dē summō semper flōrentis Hymettī
†lūtea^ māne uidet pulsīs ^Aurōra tenebrīs
†inuītumque rapit. liceat mihi uēra referre,
pāce deae: †quod sit roseō spectābilis ōre,
705
quod teneat †lūcis, teneat cōnfīnia noctis,
†nectareīs quod alātur aquīs – ego Procrin amābam,
pectore Procris erat, Procris mihi semper in ōre.
†sacra torī coitūsque nouōs thalamōsque recentēs
prīmaque †dēsertī referēbam foedera lectī.
710
mōta dea est, et “siste tuās, †ingrāte, querēlās!
Procrin habē!” dīxit; “quod sī mea †prōuida mēns est,
nōn habuisse uolēs”, mēque †illī īrāta remīsit.’
7.714–22: Cephalus returns home, suspecting Procris of infidelity
‘dum redeō mēcumque deae †memorāta retractō,
esse metus coepit nē iūra iugālia coniunx
715
nōn bene seruāsset. faciēs aetāsque iubēbat
crēdere †adulterium, prohibēbant crēdere mōrēs;
†sed tamen āfueram, sed et haec erat, unde redībam,
crīminis †exemplum, sed cūncta timēmus amantēs.
quaerere †quod doleam statuō dōnīsque pudīcam
720
sollicitāre fidem; fauet hc Aurōra †timōrī,
†immūtatque meam (uideor sēnsisse) figūram.’
7.723–42: Disguised, Cephalus finally ‘proves’ that Procris is unfaithful
†‘Palladiās ineō nōn cognōscendus Athēnās,
†ingrediorque domum; culpā domus ipsa carēbat,
†castaque signa dabat, dominōque erat anxia raptō.
725
†uix aditus per mīlle dolōs ad Erechthida factus.
et uīdī, †obstipuī, meditātaque paene relīquī
†temptāmenta fidē; male mē quīn uēra fatērer
†continuī, male quīn, ut oportuit, ōscula ferrem.
trīstis †erat (sed nūlla tamen fōrmōsior illā^
730
esse potest ^trīstī) †dēsīderiōque dolēbat
coniugis †abreptī. tū collige quālis^ in illā*,
Phōce, ^decor fuerit, *quam sīc dolor ipse †decēbat!
quid referam, quotiēns †temptāmina nostra pudīcī^
†reppulerint ^mōrēs, quotiēns “ego” dīxerit “ūnī
735
seruor; †ubīcumque est, ūnī mea gaudia seruō”?
c^ nōn ista fidē satis †experientia ^sānō
magna †foret? nōn sum contentus, et in mea pugnō
uulnera, dum †cēnsūs dare mē prō nocte pacīscor,
mūneraque †augendō tandem dubitāre coēgī.
740
†exclāmō male uictor: “ego en, ego fictus adulter
uērus eram coniunx; mē, †perfida, teste tenēris!” ’
7.743–56: Cephalus admits his error to Procris, who gives him a hunting-dog and spear
†‘illa nihil; tacitō tantummodo uicta pudōre
†īnsidiōsa malō cum coniuge līmina fūgit,
†offēnsāque meī genus omne perōsa uirōrum
745
montibus errābat, studiīs †operāta Diānae.
tum mihi dēsert�
� uiolentior †ignis ad ossa
peruenit; ōrābam †ueniam, et peccāsse fatēbar
et potuisse datīs^ similī †succumbere culpae
mē quoque ^mūneribus, sī mūnera tanta darentur.
750
†haec mihi cōnfessō, laesum prius ulta pudōrem,
redditur et dulcēs †concorditer exigit annōs.
dat mihi †praetereā, tamquam sē parua dedisset
dōna, canem †mūnus, quem cum sua^ trāderet illī
^Cynthia, “currendō superābit” dīxerat “omnēs.”
755
dat simul et †iaculum manibus quod (cernis) habēmus.’
[Cephalus first tells the story of the hunting-dog, which he unleashed to pursue a wild beast that was terrorising Thebes. The beast kept just out of the dog’s reach, and Cephalus was about to hurl his spear at it when the two animals were turned to marble, as if the god did not want either of them to lose. Phocus, the son of Aeacus to whom Cephalus is telling the story, now enquires about the spear.]
7.796–803: Cephalus describes the love he and Procris had for each other
‘gaudia †prīncipium nostrī sunt, Phōce, dolōris;
illa prius referam. iuuat ō meminisse †beātī
temporis, †Aeacidā, quō prīmōs rīte per annōs
coniuge eram fēlīx, fēlīx erat illa marītō!
†mūtua cūra duōs et amor sociālis habēbat,
800
nec Iouis illa meō^ thalamōs †praeferret ^amōrī,
†nec mē quae caperet, nōn sī Venus ipsa uenīret,
ūlla erat; †aequālēs ūrēbant pectora flammae.’
7.804–20: Cephalus explains that, after hunting, he would call on the breeze to refresh him
‘sōle ferē †radiīs feriente cacūmina prīmīs,
†uēnātum in siluās iuuenāliter īre solēbam,
805
nec mēcum †famulī nec equī nec nāribus ācrēs^
īre ^canēs nec līna sequī †nōdōsa solēbant;
tūtus eram †iaculō. sed cum satiāta ferīnae^
dextera ^caedis erat, repetēbam †frīgus et umbrās
†et quae dē gelidīs exībat uallibus auram.
810
aura petēbātur mediō mihi †lēnis in aestū,
auram exspectābam, †requiēs erat illa labōrī.
“aura,” (†recordor enim) “ueniās” cantāre solēbam,
“mēque luēs intrēsque †sinūs, grātissima, nostrōs,
utque facis, †releuāre uelīs quibus ūrimur aestūs.”
815
forsitan addiderim (sīc mē mea fāta trahēbant)
†blanditiās plūrēs, et “tū mihi magna uoluptās,”
dīcere sim solitus, “tū mē †reficisque fouēsque,
tū †facis ut siluās, ut amem loca sōla, meōque^
†spīritus iste tuus semper captātur ab ^ōre.” ’
820
7.821–34: Cephalus’ words are reported to Procris, who thinks he is being unfaithful
‘uōcibus †ambiguīs dēceptam praebuit aurem
†nescioquis, nōmenque aurae tam saepe uocātum
†esse putat nymphae, nympham mē crēdit amāre.
crīminis †extemplō fictī temerārius index
Procrin adit, linguāque refert audīta †susurrā.
825
†crēdula rēs amor est; subitō conlāpsa dolōre
(†ut mihi nārrātur) cecidit, longōque^ refecta
^tempore sē miseram, sē fātī dīxit †inīquī,
dēque fidē questa est, et crīmine †concita uānō
quod nihil est metuit, metuit sine corpore nōmen
830
[and the unhappy woman grieved as if over a real mistress].
saepe tamen dubitat spēratque miserrima fallī,
†indiciōque fidem negat et, nisi uīderit ipsa,
†damnātūra suī nōn est dēlicta marītī.’
7.835–50: Procris spies on Cephalus at the hunt, and is mistakenly killed by his spear
†‘postera dēpulerant Aurōrae lūmina noctem;
835
ēgredior, siluāsque petō uictorque per herbās,
“aura, uenī,” dīxī “nostrōque †medēre labōrī!”
et subitō †gemitūs^ inter mea uerba uidēbar
^nescioquōs audīsse; “uenī,” tamen “optima” dīxī.
fronde leuem rūrsus †strepitum faciente cadūcā,
840
sum ratus esse fēram, tēlumque †uolātile mīsī;
Procris erat, mediōque tenēns in pectore uulnus
†“ēī mihi!” conclāmat. uōx est ubi cognita fīdae
coniugis, ad uōcem praeceps †āmēnsque cucurrī;
†sēmianimem et sparsās foedantem sanguine uestēs
845
et sua (mē miserum!) dē uulnere †dōna trahentem
inueniō, corpusque †meō mihi cārius ulnīs
mollibus †attollō, scissāque ā pectore ueste
uulnera saeua †ligō, conorque inhibēre cruōrem,
†neu mē morte suā scelerātum dēserat, ōrō.’
850
7.851–62: Procris’ dying words reveal her misunderstanding
‘uīribus illa carēns et iam †moribunda, coēgit
haec^ sē ^pauca loquī: “per nostrī foedera lectī,
perque deōs †supplex ōrō superōsque meōsque,
per sī quid †meruī dē tē bene, perque manentem^
nunc quoque cum pereō, causam mihi mortis, ^amōrem:
855
†nē thalamīs Auram patiāre innūbere nostrīs.”
dīxit, et errōrem tum dēnique nōminis esse
et sēnsī et docuī. sed quid docuisse iuuābat?
†lābitur, et paruae fugiunt cum sanguine uīrēs.
dumque aliquid spectāre potest, mē spectat et in mē
860
īnfēlīcem animam nostrōque †exhālat in ōre;
sed uultū meliōre morī sēcūra uidētur.’
Learning vocabulary for Passage 12, Cephalus and Procris
careō 2 lack, be free of (+ abl.)
fateor 2 dep. fassus confess, admit (to)
faueō 2 fauī fautum (+ dat.) encourage
fict-us a um false, disguised
foedus foeder-is 3n. bond, obligation
forsitan perhaps (often + subj.)
iacul-um ī 2n. hunting spear
iugāl-is e to do with marriage; iugāl-ia ium 3n. pl. marriage
male hardly, scarcely
nescio-quis/quae/quid some(one) or other
pudīc-us a um honourable, chaste
Procris (Greek acc. Procrin) Procris
reficiō 3 refēcī refectum refresh, revive
rēt-e is 3n. net
Study section
1. No serious transformations occur in this story – or do they? And if so, of what sort are they?
2. ‘It seems Cephalus had learnt nothing from his early experiences and, despite great happiness with Procris, persisted in going out alone to hunt’ (Fantham, 2004, 84). Do you agree with this analysis?
3. Does Aurora get her revenge in the end?
4. There are four other versions of the Cephalus and Procris story (below). How has Ovid modified them, and with what effect on his version of the story? Consider in particular the themes of mutual love, guilt, and the role of the narrator. How is the homosexual motif dealt with? (Ovid himself reworks the story at Ars Amātōria 3.684–746, as a lesson to girls not to jump to conclusions about their menfolk.)
Pherecydes (fifth century BC)
Cephalus tries to ‘prove’ Procris’ virtue by an eight years’ absence and returning in a disguised form. He successfully seduces her with gifts and reveals his true identity, but is reconciled to her. Later Procris suspects that, while out hunting, he is having an affair with another woman. She questions a servant, who tells her that Cephalus has been heard to ask ‘cloud’ (Greek Nephelē
) to come to him. She investigates and runs towards him when she hears him so talking. Cephalus panics and accidentally kills her with the spear.
Scholium on Homer’s Odyssey 11.321
Apollodorus (third century BC)
Cephalus married Procris, but Dawn fell in love with him and carried him off.
Library 1.9.5
