A NOTE ON SAPPHO FR.

I1
Sappho fr. i, (Lobel-Page) 15-25
. . . yf]pe' OTT[I Srjvre ndirovOa KWTTI
8rj]vre K[OA]^[^/XI 16
KJCUTTI [/xoi fiaAiora deXui yeveadai
fj.]aiv6\ai \dvjxaii- Ti'va 8rjvre -neidw
. ] . crdyrjv [is crav ^ l A d r a r a ; ris or', ai

ai
(at 8e 8u>pa f*,r] 84K€T', dXXa Sciaet,)>
<^cu 8e fj.rj <f>lAei, Taverns (j>Mjaei)
(KWVK ideXoiaa.y 24
fi,oi xal vvv . . .

19 . ] . .ayij.f pap.: . ] , spatium ut vid. unius litt. non amplius ] . . , primo hastae apex in
ahum surgentis, t/i sive <f>; sequitur ut vid. litt. c arcus superior, infra in linea punctulum
(signo interpunctionis simile) ij ex « ut vid. factum .[, h.v., apicis ad sinistram atra-
menti vestigium; v possis, quanquam non adeo prompte in mentem venit itaque .]^r c.
ayrjv[, unde ai/i a' ayi)v possis, quanquam hac lectione nee punctum post c explicatur neque
accentus nee signi a ratio redditur ^<u (f* delet. caud. in |8 corr.) aayrp/iaaax Dion. Hal.
comp. 173-9 ("• 114-116 Us.-Rad.) cod. P ; Kai aayrjviaaav eiusd. cod. F (qui juatvo super, v.
om.), xal a. Dion. Hal. epitom. 114—16.
24 Kcoii KedeXovcra Dion. Hal. loc. cit. cod. F, K' IOVK' ideXoia. cod. P, «cJ ti KO.1 dtXets Heph.
Ench. xiv 1 (pp. 43 seq. Consbr.) codd. R, D, V.
Page, Sappho and Alcaeus, pp. 3, 9-10, prints cty fmjyiji'f is oav <j>iXoTaTa at 1. 19.

The letters odyrjv are constant in the tradition of 1. 19 and must be taken as
genuine. It follows that we have to do either with ayrjv 'lead' or with one of its
compounds. At any rate nobody has found another word of like appearance
that willfitthe context.2
Since the first publication of P. Oxy. xxi. 2288, Dr. Lobel has maintained
that the surviving fragment of the letter before a is the top of the vertical stroke
of ip or (f>. If he is right, we must prefer tfi; for, unless we are to condemn o- itself,
<j> is impossible. And acceptance of 1/1 means that we must read the beginning of
the line as atfi a' ayrjv.
The meaning of the sentence will then be: 'whom then do I (Sappho) urge
thee (Aphrodite) to bring back to the Love that is thine (Aphrodite's) ?' i.e.
Tiva is the object of ayrjv; ere is the object ofirdQai. Sappho is in love with some-
one who runs away and will have nothing to do with her (cf. 11. 21-23),3 and she
calls upon Aphrodite to bring this person back to her. The Love in question
belongs to Aphrodite in the sense that it is the emotion which she inspires or the
relationship between two mortals which she favours.
The construction as I have explained it is quite simple, and there are only
two matters that call for comment. First, the order of words is a little difficult,
1 3
I am indebted to Mr. A. H. Coxon, who It is possible to regard favyei, Siii^et, in
read the typescript of this article and made the first of Aphrodite's assertions (1. 21) as
several corrections. being a response to ay-qv. You ask me to lead
2
Page's Tayrjv demands an arbitrary someone, says the goddess, but that person
change of a and introduces an element of will not need to be led; he (or she) will give
military or official jargon that is foreign to chase.
the context.

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. Bibiliothèque interuniversitaire de Santé, on 26 Dec 2019 at 13:52:39, subject to the
Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0009838800015226
 A NOTE ON SAPPHO FR. 1 181
or at least may not be immediately obvious to the reader. But, apart from the
fact that for dtfi cr' dyrjv one might prefer a' andyrjv in prose, there is no means
of improving it. It if a difficulty, however, that a' after w\> would be inaudible,1
and I would suggest that Sappho may have intended w\i dyrjv, without a\ For
the omission of the object ae, cf. OTTI KOAIJJU/U 16, oaaa 8e fj.01 reXeaaai. dOfios
Ijieppec 26-27 (see below, n. 4).
Secondly, it is to be observed that the riva 8' yvre TT^LOOJ . . . sentence is in
series with the three questions (beginning with OTTI Srjvre, KWTTL SrjSre, and
KO>TTI fioi) that precede it; like them it depends on -rjpeo, 1. 15. This connexion is
guaranteed both by the repetition of Srjvre and by the presence of a 1st pers.
sing, verb (nevovBa, KaXrjfxfu, 8£\a>, neCdco) in all four sentences. There is,
moreover, a bond of meaning that unites the four verbs. By way of contrast,
we note that in the next sentence—rls O* & Wan^ dSi/ojei;—there is no con-
nective particle, the verb is in the 3rd pers. sing., and it is unrelated in sense to
the other four. Thus it is plain, despite the fact that Professor Page and others
assume a change from indirect to direct speech at rlva 8-qvre neWa),2 that no
such change is necessary, or even likely, at that point. On the contrary, the
structure of the passage suggests that this change should occur after is crav

T h e transition between rlva Syvre -TTeidco . . . and rls a' c5 Wd.TT<f>' aSiKrjei is
abrupt, but is not to be doubted on that account. There is a similar transition
at Alcaeus fr. G 1 (Lobel-Page), 11. 8-9, where the poet jumps from a narrative
about an invocation to the text of the invocation itself. What is unusual in the
case of Sappho fr. 1 is that the transition occurs not in the course of a simple
narrative but within the framework of reported speech. Apart from the omis-
sion of a connective particle and the change in the personal reference and
meaning of the verb, there is one mark that makes this transition certain and
unmistakable. This is the reinforcement of <re by the name <L WO.TT<J>OI.. The
vocative proclaims that, although av, 06s, etc., previously meant Aphrodite,
addressed by Sappho, now they mean Sappho herself, addressed (in direct
speech reported) by Aphrodite.

In 11. 21-23 the goddess's address to Sappho continues. On an earlier occa-

sion, she had promised to bring back the runaway lover. 'If. . . runs away, . . .
will soon give chase; if... refuses gifts, . . . will give them; if... does not love,
. . . will soon love.'3 Through divine influence, the tables will be turned. The
loved one who is now indifferent or impatient of love will soon be made to love
Sappho whole-heartedly. This had been the effect of Aphrodite's intervention
in the past, and Sappho prays that she may now do the same again. So in 11.
25-28 she continues: '. . . come to me even now and save me from cruel
distress. All that my heart desires thee to fulfil for me, do thou fulfil.4 Thyself
stand by me in the fight.'
1
Contrast TI? a' 19, where the length of below, pp. 182 f.
4
the syllable indicates to the hearer the pre- Page translates: 'fulfil all that my heart
sence of the pronoun. (In fr. 31. 7 & a' thai desires to fulfil'. In his note, however, he
is restored but is not certain.) allows the possibility of the rendering I have
2
The change from the interrogative- given. To me it seems that reAeooai and
relative to the interrogative pronoun need reXeaov should be strictly parallel, and there-
not be significant. fore that ae should be understood as subject
3
Editors usually supply the subject 'she', of the infinitive. See above,
connecting it with eBeXoioa 1. 24; but see

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. Bibiliothèque interuniversitaire de Santé, on 26 Dec 2019 at 13:52:39, subject to the
Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0009838800015226
 18a A. J. BEATTIE
The question outstanding is: what is the sense and relevance of 1. 24? Lobel-
Page read KWVK idiXoura, following theparadosis. Page does the same, but without
enthusiasm. His note reveals the seriousness of the linguistic difficulty involved.
In Lesbian poetry we find OeXw quite frequently, never eOiXw; and Bergk's
emendation KWVKI OeXoiaa is excluded because OV(K) occurs in this dialect, but
not OVKL Lobel observed that the paradosis implies KWV /ce deXoioa, but admitted
the strange appearance of this phrase; it is indeed too strange to be accepted.
But we have also to consider the impact of KWVK eOeXoiaa and variants of it on
11. 21-23. Page's translation runs: '. . . and if she loves not, she shall love soon
even against her will'. He explains this later (p. 15): 'Why against her will?
Because her love for you will then be unrequited; she will suffer as you suffer
now, and she will pray for relief as you do today.' To this we may answer
first, that there is no question of Sappho ceasing to love and being vainly pur-
sued ;' Sappho summons the goddess to help her now, as in the past, and she
expects that in consequence she will win the love she desires. Secondly, we may
say that, whether the other person's love were unrequited or not, she would
not be in love against her will; love and will in such a case are not separate
forces, but two aspects of the same force. And anyone who is moved by the
power of Aphrodite herself will neither refuse to love nor make a show of
reluctance, nor yet want real enthusiasm. It seems a necessary conclusion that
KWVK ideXoiaa etc., construed with 11. 21-23, does not make sense.
There is, however, a further difficulty involved in this construction. It would
mean that the person whom Sappho loves vainly is a woman or a girl. This is
accepted without question or complaint by most commentators. It is evidently
in harmony with Sappho's reputation and that of her compatriots, and it is
thought to be borne out by fr. 31 and perhaps also by other fragmentary poems.
. Professor Page has shown, however (pp. 110-46), that all charges of immorality
brought against Sappho may well be due to scandalous gossip in later times
and that poems other than frs. 1 and 31, although they display warm and
even passionate affection (as well as passionate hatred and jealousy) for other
women, need not imply homosexual practices. To this I would add that strong
emotions need not imply even homosexual tendencies. In my opinion even
fr. 31 should be set aside, on the ground that it is more probably concerned with
love for a man and jealousy of a woman than with love for a woman and
jealousy of a man. 2 At all events, there is not much elsewhere to confirm the
initial supposition that in fr. 1 Sappho is in love with a woman. And the only
evidence to be found in fr. 1 itself is the association of KWVK edeXoiaa with 11.
21-23, which in other respects gives poor sense.
But it is proper to ask also whether Sappho would compose a formal invoca-
tion to Aphrodite about her love for a woman. The rules of piety and moral
convention may be somewhat relaxed in the cult of Aphrodite as compared with
other deities. But it does not seem likely that she would be asked to champion
homosexual relations, or still less mere friendship between two women ;3 and
1 3
For this reason we must reject Knox's Page rightly rejects the notion that
emendation KOJV oe OeXoioav, despite the fact Sappho was a priestess of Aphrodite or an
that it is linguistically unobjectionable and instructress in cult matters. The topsy-
achieved with minimum damage to the turvy view of Aphrodite and Eros presented
paradosis. in Plato, Symp. 180 c-182 a certainly does
1
I have tried to demonstrate this in an not suggest that the goddess would be in-
article published in Mnemosyne, series iv, vol. voked in the case of a homosexual relation-
ix*(io,56),pp.iO3-i I, and especially pp. iogf. ship in real life.

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. Bibiliothèque interuniversitaire de Santé, on 26 Dec 2019 at 13:52:39, subject to the
Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0009838800015226
 A NOTE ON SAPPHO FR. 1 183
to put such a request in the form of a hymn would look like sacrilege or, at best,
a poor jest. It seems safer to assume that, by invoking Aphrodite, Sappho
proclaims her love for a man.
And there is nothing surprising in this. For, although she has much to say in
her poems of her female friends, rivals, and enemies, she is known to have been
married and to have had at least one child. If this situation is not incompatible
with homosexual inclinations or practices, at least it does not point definitely
towards them and might well lead in the other direction. I conclude that neither
in the general context of fr. 1 nor in what is known of Sappho from other
sources is there enough evidence to make us associate KWVK eWAoicra with 11.
21-23, in face of the linguistic and other difficulties which this entails.
The solution, it seems to me, lies in reading KO>S oil 6e\oioa and construing it
with 1. 25 IA0e fx.01 teal vvv. We may compare the Aeschylean passage quoted by
Page in his note on 1. 27: Cho. 19 (Zev) yevov 8e avfxyLaxos BiXwv ipoi. Here
KOIS will refer back to 1. 5 aAAa rvt&' eX8', a" irora Karipoxra. The speech attri-
buted to Aphrodite will now end at the close of 1. 23, and av in 1. 24 will mean
Aphrodite, addressed by Sappho. The corruption in the manuscripts might
have arisen in various ways, of which I mention only the following:
OYCG
KOCCYG > K63CCY9 > K(0YCC£G > K60YKG9

The vital mistake would seem to have been the adoption of the variants a>
and on, av and ere into the text alongside each other. The restored text will
mean: '. . . will soon love (you). Even so consent to come to me now . . ..'
By thus connecting 1. 24 with 11. 25-28 we deprive ourselves of the only
scrap of evidence for determining the sex of the subject of 11. 19-24. It is not
possible for us to deny that it was a woman. The rumours and gossip that
surround Sappho's life are not easily dispelled, and the evident warmth of her
affection for some of her female companions does not allay suspicion. But at
least we can say that fr. 1 gives no positive indication of a homosexual relation-
ship of any kind or degree. I for my part would go farther and say that the
invocation to Aphrodite in this poem suggests love for a man. To support this
opinion I would cite the treatment of an ordinary love-theme (as it seems to
me) in fr. 31 and also the failure of commentators to establish abnormality
in other poems of Sappho.
University of Edinburgh A. J . BEATTIE

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. Bibiliothèque interuniversitaire de Santé, on 26 Dec 2019 at 13:52:39, subject to the
Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0009838800015226