Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner.  Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

Longus and Thucydides: A new interpretation
Cueva, Edmund P
Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies; Winter 1998; 39, 4; ProQuest
pg. 429

Longus and Thucydides: 
A New Interpretation 

Edmund P. Cueva 

I
N THE PROOEMIUM to his narrative Longus refers to Thu­
cydides' Archaeology (1.22.4) when he terms his novel a 
K'tlll.lu 'tEp1tviOv 1tacrtv aVepO}1tOt~. Many scholars view this 

allusion as one of many learned references in the text. l This 
essay argues that Longus intends more than a show of erudi­
tion: by recalling the historian, he not only stays within the 
tradition of opening a novel historiographically/ but also 

IE. E. Seiler, ed., Pastoralia Graeca (Leipzig 1843) 161; G. Valley, aber den 
Sprachgebrauch des Longus (Uppsala 1926) 101-102; H. H. O. Chalk, "Eros 
and the Lesbian Pastorals of Longos," JHS 80 (1960) 32-51; P. Turner, 
"Daphnis and Chloe: An Interpretation," G&R 7 (1960) 117-123; W. E. 
McCulloh, Longus (New York f970) 31-32, 68, and 85; A. M. Scarcella, "La 
Tecnica dell' Imitazione in Longo Sofista," GIF 23 (1971) 34-59; R. L. Hunter, 
A Study ~ Daphnis & Chloe (Cambridge 1983) 4 n.18, 85 n.6, and 48-52; T. A. 
Pandin, 'Daphnis and Chloe: The Art of Pastoral Play," Ramus 14 (1985) 116-
141; J. R. Vieillefond, ed., Longus: Pastorales (Paris 1987) cxviii-cxx; B. D. 
MacQueen, Myth, Rhetoric, amI Fiction (Lincoln 1990) 64, 140-141, 146-148, 
and 157-159; J. R. Morgan, "Daphnis and Chloe: Love's Own Sweet Story," in 
J. R. Morgan and Richard Stoneman, edd., Greek Fiction: The Greek Novel in Con­
text (London/New York 1994) 64-79. These are cited hereafter by authors' 
names. 

2The historical in Daphnis and Chloe has not gone unnoticed. Niklas Holz­
berg, The Ancient Novel (transl. Christine Jackson-Holzberg [London/New 
York2 1995]) 10, has shown that Longus in a historiographical manner 
"presents chronologically or relates the respective adventures of the separated 
protagonists in parallel accounts," and argues that Longus purposely lffiitates 
histonographical methods. Consuelo RUlz-Montero, "The Rise of the Greek 
Novel" ill Gareth Schmeling, ed., The Novel in the Ancient World (Leiden 1996), 
writes that the earliest form of the novel, Ninus, uses history and historical 
figures as background, and because the historical can also be found in 
Sesonchosis, MetlOchus and Parthenope, and Chaereas and Callirhoe it has been 
theorized that "the novel was viewed as a deviation from histOriography" 
(45). Ruiz-Montero is a bit more tempered in evaluating the role of history in 

Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 39 (1998) 429-440 
© 2000 GRBS 

429 



Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner.  Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

430 LONGUS AND THUCYDIDES 

demonstrates that even though conversant with historiography 
he will not be writing a historical account. Instead he uses 
history to help him alter the genre. Proof of this modification 
appears in the second and third books of the novel when 
Longus renders 'tEp1tvo"dpa the serious Thucydidean account 
dealing with Mytilene and Methymna. Given the use of 
Thucydides as subject matter in the Hellenistic and Roman 
rhetorical schools, I believe that Longus here is refashioning 
Thucydides in technique and narrative.3 

Precedents for historiographical introductions in the novel 
are found in Chaereas and Callirhoe and in Ephesiaca. Chariton 
writes: Xapi'tcov 'A<PPOOtcrtEU<;, 'A81lvayopou 'tOu i:r1l'topo<; U1tO­
ypa<pEu<;, 1t&8o<; EPCO'ttKOV EV LuppaKoucrat<; YEVO~EVOV 

Otllrflcro~at (1.1.1): he identifies himself, his place of origin, and 
says that he will relate an amorous account. The archetypes 
upon which to base this historical approach to opening a prose 
work included Hecataeus of Miletus (FGrHist 1 F 1), Herodotus 
(1.1-5), and Thucydides (1.1). In the opening to Ephesiaca Xeno­
phon Ephesius writes: ~v EV 'E<p£crep av~p 'twv 'tex 1tpwm hEt 

ouva~Evcov, AUKOj.l1l01l<; ovo~a. 'tOu'tep 'to AUKOj.l1l0£l EK yuvat­
KO<; E1ttxcopia<; eE~t(J'tOU<; yiVE'tat 1tat<; . A~POKO~ll<; (1.1). He 
does not identify himself, but gives the parentage of the novel's 
hero. Although this may not seem to reflect historiography, it 
does in fact parallel the opening of an historical text: ~ap£iou 

the develop,ment of the novel: history played a "crucial part in the formation of 
the novels' (48). For discussion of history and the novel see Holzberg 35-42, 
esp. 41-42, and J. R. Morgan, "History, Romance, and Realism in the Althiopika 
of Heliodorus," ClassAnt 1 (1982) 221-265. T. Hagg, "Callirhoe and Par­
thenope: The Beginnings of the Historical Novel," ClassAnt 6 (1987) 184-204, 
notes that the earlier novels are historical in tone. On historiography and 
Chariton see R. L. Hunter, "History and Historicity in the Romance of 
Chariton," ANRW 2.34.2 (1994) 1055-1086. 

3See Valley 101 and Vieillefond cxviii-cxix on the use of Thucydides in 
sections of the novel other than the prooemium. Cf Virgilio Paladini, La Storia 
della scuola nell' antichitii (Milan 1952) 58; Frederick A. G. Beck, Greek 
Education: 450-350 B.C. (New York 1964) 145-146, 285, 312-313; A. B. 
Bosworth, From Arrian to Alexander: Studies in Historical Interpretation 
(Oxford 1988) 65, 67, 76, 138; R. Nicolai, La Storiografia nell' educazione antica 
(Pis a 1992) 228 and 240-242. 



Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner.  Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

EDMUND P. CUEVA 431 

Kat napucrunoos yiYVOV'tal na'ioEs Duo, npEcr~u'tEPOs !l£V 'Ap'ta­
~£P~l'\s, VEOtEPOs O£ Kupos (Xen. An. 1.1). Xenophon Ephesius 
imitates his namesake by giving the names of the hero's parents 
and by echoing yiyvov'tat na'ioEs with yivE'tat na'is. 

Just as Chariton echoes the opening lines of histories and 
Xenophon reflects the work of his namesake, Longus pays 
homage to his literary predecessors. He does not start his work 
with the expected "I am X, hail from Y, and shall write about 
Z." Instead he comments that he will be writing (presumably his 
novel) in response to a picture he saw while hunting in Lesbos. 
He writes that the document is a Ktl1fla 'tEpnVQV nacrtv av-
8pwnols, "a pleasing possession for all men." 

Longus' juxtaposition of Ktl1flU and n:pnvov has caused 
scholars to ask if and why Longus alludes to the Archaeology of 
Thucydides (in particular 1.22.4). Several answers have been 
suggested: Turner proposes that Longus wants to reveal that he 
has a serious purpose in mind, a purpose as serious as that of 
Thucydides, which is to make "people understand human life" 
by producing "something of universal significance ('a possession 
for all men')" (118). He sees the inclusion of myth as facilitating 
the conveyance of the novel's purpose to the reader. For Turner 
the aim of this book is didactic in nature and serves as guide for 
the eventual maturation of the reader. The reader should be able 
to integrate harmoniously life's events, some of which can be 
disturbing and most of which are common to all, by reading the 
story of Daphnis and Chloe. Longus' plan, therefore, correlates 
to Thucydides' goal of providing a source through which people 
can predict the future by understanding and examining past 
human behavior. 

McCulloh views the reference to the historian as II external 
validation through association with historiography": Longus 
repeats the key word "possession," reverses the role of delight, 
keeps the instructional utility of the past for the future, and 
adapts the justificatory principle of the perennial and universal 



Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner.  Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

432 LONGUS AND THUCYDIDES 

recurrence of the subject chosen for analysis (31-32). Hunter 
convincingly interprets the literary echoes as Longus affiliating 
himself with Herodotus (49): by stressing the element 'to 

'tEp1tVOV within an allusion to Thucydides, Longus aligns his 
work with that of Herodotus, whom ancient scholars saw as the 
object of Thucydides' attack in 1.22. 

MacQueen suggests that the Thucydidean terminology in the 
prooemium is intrusive in nature: the framework of the novel is 
pastoral and the historical breaks the "frame of reference." 
Longus' approach to serious historiography is continued in the 
first passages of the novel proper, but, MacQueen warns, 
"Longus invites us to think about history but will not allow us 
to mistake what we are reading for history" (64, 158). 

Morgan (73-74) proposes that Longus' novel is "preoc­
cupied with its own status as a fiction, and the relationship 
between fiction and experience in general," and that the pro­
oemium echos and subverts Thucydides' Archaeology. He notes 
that the historian meant his work to have a "propaedeutic 
function by embodying universal truths of human nature which 
readers in the future will find helpful in making sense of their 
own experience." Like Turner, Morgan views the novel as an 
educational introduction to an emotion that we all may ex­
perience: 

His readers will be able to draw from the fiction knowledge of 
universals which can be applied in reality. But where Thu­
cydides contrasted the utility of his history with the plea­
sures of myth (or could we say fiction?), Longus sees pleasure 
and utility as yet another pair of harmonizing opposites: as a 
garden combines art and nature, so a novel fuses myth and 
history, fiction and truth. Thus, in his prologue, Longus can 
describe his story as a history of love, historia erotos. 

Longus, according to Morgan, replaces the "narrative specifics" 
that exemplified human nature with Love. 

Thucydides writes that in his work the fabulous, 'to JlU8&OEC;, 



Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner.  Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

EDMUND P. CUEVA 433 

is excluded, and that perhaps as a result the work will be less 
pleasing to its audience. He also prefers to write a possession 
for all time (KtTlIla E~ <X id) rather than something that will be 
momentarily pleasing. Finally, the historian proceeds to the 
causes for the outbreak of the war between the Greek city­
states. In the narrative, therefore, Thucydides goes from the 
fabulous, to IlUe&OE~, and what leads to it, to a work of true 
worth, K'tllll<X E~ aid, and ends up with the causes of the 
Peloponnesian War. The outline may then be formulated as 
myth-intrinsic worth-cause (history). 

Longus reverses this progression. He begins by writing that 
he has seen (eioov, pro 1) a picture that told a story. He uses the 
term t(nopia for the content of the painting,4 and clarifies the 
word by writing that he will tell his readers the stories (myths) 
found in the painting and dedicate them to the mythological 
characters Eros, Pan, and the Nymphs. It is the pointed inser­
tion of the word i<nopia that makes clear Longus' approach: he 
wants to make the factual in his novel resemble myth, and 
thereby distances himself from Thucydidean stylistics. 

Before the dedication of the book, however, Longus declares 
that his work is more than just a literary exercise: K'tlllla 'tEp1t­

v&v 1tucrtv a.vepO)1tOt~, 0 Kat vocrouvta. iacrEtat, Ka\ AU1tOUIlEVOV 

(pr. 3). The novelist then proceeds to relate the myth of Daphnis 
and Chloe. Longus' outline, therefore, is cause (history)­
intrinsic worth-myth, a modified reversal of Thucydides.5 

4 The tenn icrtopiu can mean the written account of an investigation, e.g. Hdt. 
7.96 and Arist. Rh. 1.14.13. In the prooerniurn Longus' use of this word does not 
echo Thucydides but rather Herodotus (1.1, 2.99, 2.118, 2.119). Marios Philip­
pides, Longus: Antiquity's Innovative Novelist (diss. SUNY Buffalo 1978) ch. I, 
suggests that Longus is familiar with the elements that constitute an historical 
enquiry and knows that O"'t~ and c:IKOl] are therefore necessary. In addition, 
when Longus writes that his work is a 1.0'-ropiuv EPo)'tO~ that voO'ouv'tu iaO'EWt 
he is also categorizing the term 1.0''tOplU, and consequently his work, as a 
searched for and investigated cure for an erotic illness (ef Hippoc. De arte 1.3, 
Praee. 2.7, 8.5, 12.4, 13.9-13). 

5 Although Pandiri (117) examines the pastoral significance of the pro­
oemium, she seems to be headin& to this same conclusion: "Longus ... slyly 
reverses his (Thucydides') values. ' This reversal of Thucydidean methodology 



Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner.  Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

434 LONGUS AND THUCYDIDES 

In order to make sure that the reader understands that he is 
using historiographical elements, Longus also reports on what 
must be done in order to write history or to research the 
necessary material. The method consists of seeing (doov) or 
having first hand experience of the data; in this case it is the 
ypa<p~v (pr. 1) that tells the lovers' l<nopia, or £pya.6 A written 
response (o.vnypa'Vm, pro 2) should then be produced. If first­
hand experience of the subject matter cannot be attained, 
second-hand knowledge must be sought (o.vaSll'tllaall£vo~, pro 
3) such as reports (<p~llllv, pro 1).7 The finished product should 

is consistent with the experimental nature of Daphnis and Chloe. Longus 
deliberately adapts regular plot ingredients, such as the Scheintod of the 
heroine, or voyages to distant places, into new forms. His uniqueness has 
caused some scholars to exclude fum from their surveys of this !?enre: F. A. Todd, 
Some Ancient Novels (London 1940) 2, on the baSIS that thIS work "stands 
alone in ancient literature as a union of the Romance with the pastoral"; M. 
Hadas, "Cultural Survival and the Origins of Fiction," South Atlantic Quar­
terly 51 (1952) 258, views Longus as excessively contaminated by "the bucolic 
tradition"; M. Fusillo, "Textual Patterns and Narrative Situations in the Greek 
Novel," in Groningen Colloquia on the Novel I, ed. H. Hofman (Groningen 1987), 
17-31, isolates this novel because supposedly "it is a perfumed ~astoral 
written by a sophisticated aristocrat for sophisticated aristocrats" (17). Daph­
nis and Chloe, flOwever, should be studied because it demonstrates that after 
Chariton and Xenophon of Ephesus, whether or not through the influence of the 
Second Sophistic, the novel genre begins to change from a historically detailed 
form to one that is more mytfiological in nature. 

It can be said that the texts of Chariton and Xenophon, with their inclusion 
of the gods Venus, Eros, and Isis, are just as mythological as Longus. Longus' 
setting, however, is in a less obvious historical period. And although the war 
between Mytilene and Methymna may tie the narrative to the events of the fifth 
century B.C., Longus does not seem to want to make his narrative too realistic in 
nature because realism may spoil the idyllic milieu of the novel. Longus does 
supply some information on topography; for research done on this data see H. J. 
Mason, "Longus and the Topograpny of Lesbos," TAPA 109 (1979) 149-163; 
P. Green, "Longus, Antiphon, and the Topography of Lesbos," JHS 102 (1982) 
210-214; E. L. Bowie, "Theocritus' Seventh Idyll, Philetas and Longus," CQ 35 
(1985) 67-91. Although these scholars postulate that Longus knew the 
topography of Lesbos, this inclusion of topographical data tells us nothing 
about the novel's historical setting. 

6 A. Wouters, "The eikones in Longus' Daphnis and Chloe IV 39,2: 'Beglau­
bigungsarparat'?" (Sacris Erudiri. Jaarboek voor Godsdienstwetenschappen 31 
[1989/90 465-479) 476, argues that the EtJ(OVE<; in the last book of the novel 
form the painting mentioned in the prooemium. They are, according to Wouters, 
"the codification of Daphnis' and Chloe's experiences." 

7The narrator's work of research (uvaSll'tllcruIlEvo<;) parallels Thucydides' 
research. Longus, however, will modify the historian at a different level. 



Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner.  Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

EDMUND P. CUEVA 435 

be written down (ypaq>ElV) in some form (~{~A.o'U<;, pro 3). Longus 
also notes that this is not easy work (E~EnOVllcrallllv).8 

Longus continues his narrative by including immediately 
after the prooemium more Thucydidean echoes (1.1-2): 

1tOA.l~ Ecrn 'tft~ AEcrpou MunA.11VTj, IlEYUA.Tj Ked KaA.11· Ou::iA.Tj1t'tat 

yap fupi1tOl~ {)1tflcrpEOUcrTj~ 'tft~ SaA.u't'tTj~, Kat KfKocrllTj'tal Yf­
<puPat~ ~f(J't01> Kat A.fUK01> A.iSou. vOllicrat~ OU 1tOA.1V opav aA.A.a 
vftcrov. aA.A.a ~v 'tau'tTj~ 'tft~ 1tOA.fro~ 'tft~ MunA.lJvTj~ ocrov a1to 
cr'taotrov olaKocrtrov aypo~ avopo~ fuoaillovo~, K'tftlla KUA.A.lcr'tOV. 

Longus seems compelled to call attention to the word K'tTllla. 
He already used it in the prooemium, and made clear that his 
"possession" would be one that was "a pleasing possession for 
all men" in contrast to the lnTllla9 found in Thucydides. In 
addition to the use of K'tTllla, Longus further emphasizes the 
connection with the historian by mentioning Mytilene. The pur­
pose of these additional allusions needs explanation. I suggest 
that Longus wants to apply his reversal of the Thucydidean 
progression to the account (3.1-50) of Mytilene's revolt from 
Athens and its war with Methymna. Longus, in other words, 
will change the serious tone of the historical conflict into 
something 'tEpnvo'tepa in the novel's account of the skirmish 
between Methymna and Mytilene. 

Since it has been established that Longus employs Thucydi­
dean phraseology in his prooemium, I shall now comment on 
some of the allusions (some direct borrowings) to Thucydides in 
order to show that it is the Mytilenean-Methymnaean narrative 
that Longus wishes to transform.10 

(1) Long. **1.22.1: 6 Iltv KtVOUVO'U napa 'tocro1hov E1"awv rv 

sPerhaps E~f1tOVT]O'allT]v may refer to Theoc. Id. 7.51 and not to Thucydides. 
9The lC'tllllCl of 1.1.2 is reinforced by the lC'tllIlCl'tCl in 3.2.1, where the 

narrative dealing with the Mytilenean and Methymnaean skirmish comes to an 
end. 

lOThe followinq is a compilation of the passages found in Valley and 
Vieillefond. Valley s contributions are markea witn ", Vieillefond's with .... , 
and mine with ....... 



Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner.  Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

436 LONGUS AND THUCYDIDES 

Thuc. 3.49.4: 1tapa 'tocrO\)'tov !lEV il MU'tlA~Vll ~A8£ Ktv8uvou. In 
1.22.1 Longus relates Dorcon's escape from the dogs with the 
help of Chloe and his rival Daphnis, while Thuc. 3.49.4 tells of 
the rescue of Mytilene by the second trireme dispatched by 
Diodotus. There seems to be no parallel between the two nar­
ratives, except perhaps that destruction is averted by rivals in 
the nick of time. In **Long. 2.19.1 there is a similar echo, 'to't£ 

!lEV 8" 1tapa 'tocrOU'tOV Lla<j>vt<; ~A8£ lC1lKOU; in the passages 
leading up this line the villagers rescue Daphnis from the 
Methymnaeans. In addition to Thuc. 3.49.4, this phraseology 
also appears in ***Thuc. 7.2.4: 1tapa 'tocrOU'tOV !lEV ~upaKoucrat 

~A8ov Ktv8uvou; once again, the theme of averting destruction is 
present. 
(2) Long. *2.14.1: KAU8wvtov IV Thuc. 2.84.3: KAU8wvtY In 
2.14.1 Longus writes that a wave caused by the wind blowing 
(Ktv1l8Ev'to<; ... 'to'll 1tv£u!la'to<;) from the mountains pushed the 
boat into the open sea. In 2.84.3 Thucydides explains that it 
was a wind (w<; 8E 'to 'tE 1tVEU!la Ka'tTln) that caused the heavy 
seas that made Phormio signal his ships to attack. Although 
seas troubled by the wind are a common occurrence, never­
theless a parallel exists. 
(3) au't£phat<; (Long. *2.20.1) may allude to au't£pE'tat (Thuc. 
1.10.4,3.18.4) when combined with £1tE1tAEt 'tOt<; (Long. *2.20.1); 
this combination occurs in numerous places in Thucydides.12 

11 KAUOOOVlOV is a varia iectio in Thuc. 2.84.3. 
12More than sixty-five forms of bttltAEtV occur in Thucydides (cf M. H. N. 

von Essen, Index Thucydideus [Berlin 1887] 154). Some may be echoed in 
Lon~s (most dealing WIth military action of some sort), for example: A.a~Ecreal 
XWplCOV in ***2.2.3, ltOAUXElpia~ in ***2.2.4, {J1tEIPEUYE in ***2.4.2, ltpOcrKOOltOU~ in 
*2.12.1, E~ avoAK~v Ait:lou in *2.13.1, OlaeEovtE~ in ***2.13.4, ~EtEWPOV in 
***2.14.1, ErtEKaAElto in ***2.14.4, KaKouPYElV in ***2.19.3, alt6~O"lv in 
***2.20.2, avaAa~EtV in ***2.25.1, ailPviOlOV in ***2.25.3, KiiJ1tal KaelEVtWV in 
***2.26.2, altEcrltacratE in ***2.27.2, alto~aepa~ in ***2.28.3, OltAa K1VEtV in 
*3.1.1, OUK avacrXEtov vo~icraVtE~ in *3.1.1, ~EtEYiV(J)crKOV in ***3.2.2, aOE&~ 
Eltl~iyvucreal Kat Kata yftv Kat Kata eaAacrcrav in *3.2.3, EltEltTjYEl Or 
KpucrtaA.A.o~ in *3.3.2, autoKpatWp in ***3.2.4. All these words and phrases can 
be found in the historian's text (cf von Essen). This is not to say that Longus 
borrowed each and every instance from Thucydides, but these words give the 
novel's narrative a distinctly Thucydidean flavor. 



Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner.  Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

EDMUND P. CUEVA 437 

In Daphnis and Chloe the military narrative pertaining to the 
war between Mytilene and Methymna is limited to 2.12.1-3.3.1, 

and the majority of the words that are Thucydidean in nature 
appear in this section of the novel. Moreover, aOEffi~ ernlliy­
vucr8at Ked KCna yllV Kat Kala 8aAacrcrav in *3.2.3 confirms 
that Longus had Thucydides in mind (Thuc. 1.2.2, ouo' £1tt­

IltYVUVlE~ aOEffi~ aAAllAot~ 015lE Kala yllV 015lE (>ta 8aAacrcrl)~). 
Since it is clear that Longus verbally echoes Thucydides, I 
suggest that Longus had Thucydides' text as a model for his 
narrative of the Lesbian conflict. Longus, however, transforms 
this well-known episode of the Peloponnesian War. 

Thucydides writes that Mytilene, along with all of Lesbos, 
with the exception of Methymna, rebelled from Athens because 
they feared the abuse of Athenian power: ou yap dKO~ ~v 
au"tOu~ OU~ Il£V IlE8' flllffiv £vcr1t6vOou~ £1totllcrav"tO Kala­
crlp£\jlacr8at, "tOu~ O£ {)1toAoi1tou~, £1 1tOlE (ipa OUVl)8EtEV, Ill, 

opacrat "tOu"tO (3.1O.6). No such grandiose justification is given 
in the novel for the military action between the two Lesbian 
cities. Rather the cause of hostilities finds its origin in a 
Methymnaean hunting trip in Mytilenean land (2.12-3.2). The 
hunters suffer the loss of their ship because the vine that they 
used to fasten their ship to the shore was eaten by a goat. As 
retaliation they beat Daphnis, and consequently some of Daph­
nis' compatriots attempt to help him. All participants end up 
giving their accounts of the event to an arbiter, who finds in 
favor of Daphnis; the Methymnaeans seek recourse in their own 
town. 

This quasi-judicial episode parallels the famous policy 
debate between Cleon and Diodotus in Thucydides 3.37-48. It 
may be argued that Longus does not recall the debate between 
Cleon and Diodotus in the trial scene in the second book. But if 
the general premise is accepted that Longus is altering 
Thucydides by including the mythical in his novel and 
producing a work that will serve to instruct and at the same 



Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner.  Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

438 LONGUS AND THUCYDIDES 

time please the audience, we can see that Longus modifies the 
debate on Mytilene. Evidence of this is the pity (otK'tOC;) he 
describes when Daphnis has finished his defense (tOUtOlC; 

E1tEOaKpucrEv 6 ~a<pvlC; Kat dc; OtKtOV u1tllYaYEto tOUC; aypoiKouC; 
1tOAUV, 2.17.1). It is OtKtOC;. compassion, which moves Philetas 
to invoke Pan and the Nymphs to witness that Daphnis is 
blameless. Thucydides, conversely, has Cleon warn the 
Athenians not to make a mistake and yield to pity (<X/lapt l1t E 11 
OtKtcp EVOOOtE, 3.37.2; /l110E ... OtKtcp ... <X/laptavEtv, 3.40.2). 
Diodotus also employs this word when he argues against Cleon 
(/l"tE OtKtcp 1tAEOV Vtl/lavtEC;, 3.48.1). It is compassion, however, 
that moves Philetas to call upon the gods (the mythological), 
and thereby changes the serious tone of Thucydides. The 
historical narrative continues with the Athenians sending out a 
second ship to rescind the first decree, and concludes with 
1tapa. tocrOUtov /lEV r, MUtlA"Vl1 ~AeE KtvOUVOU (3.49.4); this is 
the basis for Longus' tOtE /lEV 01, 1tapa. tocrOUtOV ~a<pvlC; ~AeE 
KaKOU (2.19.1). 

In keeping with Longus' transposed historical technique, the 
novel modifies the tenor of Thucydides' serious and important 
account. There is no real justification for the outbreak of 
hostilities in the novel. It may be said that the Methymnaeans, 
angered by the verdict favorable to Daphnis, did lose a great 
amount of money with the loss of their ship. The simplicity of 
the resolution of the skirmish, however, demonstrates that the 
war could not have been so important (3.2.4-3.1): 

tOY llfV ot>v KltPUlCa tOl<; MUtlA:'1vaiot<; 0 "I1tltacro<; a1tocrtEAAEt, 
lCaitol'YE aUtOlCpatOlp crtpatTl'Yo<; lCEXEtPOtOVT1I1EVO<;, auto<; Of tl1<; 
MTl8ullVTl<; ocrov a1to O£lCa crtaOtOlV crtpat01tEOOV ~aAollEvo<; ta<; 
ElC tl1<; 1tOAEOl<; EVtOAa<; av EllEV E. lCat ovo OtaYEVOllEVOlV T,IlEProv 
EA8wv 0 UYYEAO<; t~V tE ap1tarTlv EKEAEUcrE lCollicracr8at lCat 
aOtlClJcraVta llTloi:v avaXOlpE'iv O\lCaoE. 1tOAEllOU yap lCat eiPlJvTl<; 
EV a\.pEcrEt YEVOllEVOt t~V eip~vT\V EupicrlCEtV lCEpOaAEOltEpav. 0 



Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner.  Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

EDMUND P. CUEVA 439 

IlEV 01] M1l8ullatv(J)v 1(a1 Mu'tlt.:r\vat(J)v 1tOA£Il0\; u061(T\'tOv Aa~rov 
UPX1]V 1(a1 'tEAO\; ou't(J) Ot£AU8T\.13 

If the conflict had been on the scale of the war in Thucydides' 
history, more than a simple diplomatic solution would have 
been necessary. 

In the opening of the third book Longus concludes his 
account of the skirmish, and drives home the point that he is 
reworking Thucydides by including in 2.1.1-3.1 an abundance 
of historical and military terminology: bti1tAOUV, VEWV, ap1tayfjv, 

01tAa 1(tVEtV, J(a'taA.£~av'tEi; aO'1tiDa 'tptO'XtAiav J(at l1t1tOV 1tEv'ta­
J(oO'iav, 0''tpa'tT)y6v, €~op!lllSdC;, WC; €1tEtO'1tEO'OU!lEVOC; a<ppoupr,­

'tOtC; mtc; 1tUAatC;, O'mDiouc;, J(l1pu~ cmav'tCf O'1tOVDac; J(O!liswv, 
mJ'toJ(pa'twp 0''tpa'tlly6c;, O'mDiwv, 0''tpa't61tEDOV, aYYEAOC;, 1tOAE­
!lOU, etc. The militaristic tone set by these words and phrases, 
however, is altered by the simplistic resolution offered by 
Longus. 

Longus adapts the historical account in the following 
manner. First, he takes a serious and weighty historical episode 
and reverses its somber tenor by reducing it in the novel to a 
squabble over a lost ship. Second, he interjects into the military 
narrative the mythological figures and stories of the Nymphs, 
Syrinx, and the god Pan. The insertion of the episode involving 
Pan is a clear reference and reverse correlation to the !luSWDEC; 

of the Archaeology. In his epiphany to Bryaxis Pan declares 
a1tEO'1taO'a'tE D£ PW!lWV 1tapStvov €~ ~C; "EpwC; ll'uSOV 1totl1O'at 
StAtt (2.27.2), which is specifically what Thucydides wants to 
avoid in his history. Thucydides does not want to include the 

13"Hippasus responded by sending the envoy to the people of Mytilene, 
although fie had been elected as a general with full power to take decisions; 
meanwhile he pitched camp about a mile from Methymna and waited for his 
city's orders. Two days later, a messenger came and told him to recover the 
booty and return home without doing any damage. Being in a position to choose 
between war and peace, they found peace more profitable. And so the war 
between Methymna and Mytilene came to an end, finishing as suddenly as it 
had begun" (transl. ChristoJ?her Gill, in B. P. Reardon, ed., Collected Ancient 
Greek Novels [Berkeley 1989J 318). 



Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner.  Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

440 LONGUS AND THUCYDIDES 

mythical lest he run the risk of making his work an icr'topia 
n:p7tVo'tEpa, as Herodotus, the object of the attack in the 
Archaeology, had done (specifically in his account of Pan's 
epiphany to Pheidippides, Hdt. 6.105). 

Turner writes that Longus is a "highly conscious artist with 
clear ideas about the purpose of his art, and he has left us a 
preface explaining them-or rather hinting at them, for the full 
meaning of his words is not immediately apparent" (117). 
Indeed the "full meaning" of the prooemium is not apparent 
until one realizes that Longus is playing an inter textual game. 
Morgan interpreted this intertextual dialectic as subverting the 
Archaeology because it made history into something fictional or 
mythical that conveyed "truth, about ourselves and about the 
world" (76). Longus' use of Thucydides is one of many in­
stances of variation on earlier literature. I hope to have shown 
that by alluding to Thucydides Longus transforms the his­
torian's approach to writing history, orients his work to the 
"pleasing" nature of Herodotus' writing style, and thereby com­
poses a work that is both a K't~I . .ta 'tEp7tVOV 7tiicrtv aVepOl1tOt~ 

and a K't~lla E~ aid. 

July, 2000 Dept. of Classics 
Xavier University 
Cincinnati, Ohio 45207-5181 
cueva@xavier.xu.edu