Aspects of Apuleius' Golden Ass, Volume II: Cupid and Psyche. A Collection of Original Papers

124 Pages·1998·4.81 MB·English

by  Benjamin Lodewijk Hijmans, R. T. van der Paardt, Vincent Hunink, Maaike Zimmerman, Thomas D. McCreight

ASPECTS OF
APULEIUS' GOLDEN ASS
VOLUME II
CUPID AND PSYCHE
A COLLECTION OF,ORIGINAL PAPERS
EDITED BY
M. ZIMMERMAN, V. HUNINK, TH.D. MCCREIGHT
D. VAN MAL-MAEDER, S. PANAYOTAKIS,
V. SCHMIDT, B. WESSELING
EGBERT FORSTEN.
GRONINGEN 1998
ISBN 90 6980 121 3
Copyright © Egbert Forsten, Groningen Ben Hijmans et Rudi van der Paardt
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be in studiis Apuleianis valde curiosis
gratas gratias meminerunt
reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmilled, in
huius libri editores
any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical,
photocopying, recording, or othenvise, withouz the prior
writlen permission of the publisher.
Preface
This volume arises out of the sessions of the 'Groningen Commentaries on
Apuleius' group, who are at present working on the commentary on Cupid
and Psyche. During our discussion of various chapters of Cupid and Psyche
it became increasingly evident that we should single out some aspects of this
part of Apuleius' novel for separate treatment, not least because, in the course
of their work on these chapters, some members of the group had already
encountered aspects which deserved fuller treatment than could be given in a
lemma of the commentary. We then decided to invite contributions from other
colleagues who we knew were researching various aspects of the tale. Some
of the articles published here were first presented as papers during an inspiring
'Cupid and Psyche day' of the 19th Groningen Colloquium on the Novel in
1996.
With these points of departure in mind, it will immediately become clear
that this volume should in no way be considered a replacement for the solid
anthology edited by G. Binder and R. Merkelbach published in 1968. A glance
at the general bibliography and references in the footnotes of the articles shows
that many authors in our volume acknowledge their debt to that anthology, on
whose foundations they build.
Another debt owed by Apuleian scholarship is to Carl Schlarn, who has
left us a number of influential studies. In this volume his work on Platonica in
the Metamorphoses of Apuleius (Schlam 1970) is renewed by the contribution
of O'Brien. She studies Cupid and Psyche as an explanation, in the mode of
platonic myth, of Apuleius' discourse theory. To Schlarn we also owe some
thorough overviews and assessments of the scholarly search for the sources of
Apuleius' myth, both in the eighth chapter of his 1992 monograph and in his
contribution in GCN 5 (1993), 64-73. In the latter he confidently asserts: "The
Apuleian tale created rather than preserved a myth of Cupid and Psyche"; and
in his monograph (Schlam 1992, 90) he remarks: ''The focus of our thinking
about the Apuleian narrative should shift from where it came from to where
it is going." Schlam would, however, certainly have welcomed the way in
which, in this volume, the question of 'where the Apuleian narrative came
from' is raised once again by Dowden, who opens our eyes to the philosophical
viii Preface Preface IX
and religious discourses very much alive in the intellectual circles in which 'Aspects of Apuleius' Golden Ass'. We unanimously decided to dedicate this
Apuleius participated, and against the background of which he created the tale new volume, now devoted entirely to aspects of Cupid and Psyche, to Hijmans
of Cupid and Psyche. and van der Paardt, thereby acknowledging our great debt to these two scholars.
In our forthcoming commentary we give much attention to the integration Because of other obligations they are no longer active members of the commen
of Cupid and Psyche into the whole of the Metamorphoses. The reader of this tary group, but both are still taking a strong interest in Apuleian studies. During
volume will notice that in many of the essays collected here the central tale of the past decades they not only placed the work of the Groningen Apuleius group
Apuleius' novel is not studied in isolation, but as an integral part of the eleven on the map of international studies on the ancient novel, but also encouraged
books of the Metamorphoses (especially by Smith and James, but also by Dow the present members of the group, who now try to carry forward the commen
den, van Mai-Maeder/Zimmerman, Keulen and Panayotakis). tary work in their spirit. The special form of group discussion developed over
A number of articles presents recent findings in matters of intertextual the years around the 'Groningen Commentaries on Apuleius' was established
ity (Mattiacci, Harrison, Smith) and interdiscursivity (Dowden, O'Brien). by them and continues to be inspired by them. We dare to hope that this second
Other articles explore aspects of a narratological nature (Van Mai-Maeder/ volume of 'Aspects' too will find its way to a wide circle of readers.
Zimmerman), or employ insights of modem linguistic theory to shed light on We feel privileged in always being able to rely on the support and interest
Apuleius' structuring of the narrative of Cupid and Psyche (Pinkster). Arche of Egbert Fors ten, the publisher not only of our series of 'Groningen Commen
ological finds prove to be helpful in shaping our ideas on how contemporary taries on Apuleius', but also of the first volume of' Aspects of Apuleius' Golden
readers would view the description of Cupid's palace (Brodersen). Some Ass' (1978) and of the Groningen Colloquia on the Novel. A unique form of co
articles single out special passages whose rich imagery deserves elaborate operation has grown up between him and our research group over these many
treatment (Keulen, Panayotakis). years and it is with particular pleasure that we now present this volume as its lat
On the whole, the subjects covered in the articles collected here and outlined est, but certainly not last, product. We also would like to thank RoelfBarkhuis,
above reflect the choices which the group has made for its commentary. Al who with great accuracy and thoroughness has taken care of the practical exe
though the reception of Apuleius' tale in visual art will in our commentary fig cution of the elegant design of this book, in close communication in every way
ure only occasionally in notes, we are glad to present in this volume one contri with Egbert Forsten and ourselves.
bution on this subject by our Groningen colleague Jan de Jong. He investigates The editors would also like to thank Justa Renner, the administrator of the
the creative way in which some Italian Renaissance painters handled the tale of Centre for Classical, Oriental, Medieval and Renaissance Studies (COMERS),
Cupid and Psyche in their works. Most often they did not render the story lit for lending us the financial support through which this publication was made
erally, but purposefully 'translated' the hwnor and ingenuity of Apuleius' text possible.
into their own medium, just as writers, including Apuleius himself, often 'trans
late' works of art into literary descriptions of them.
Maaike Zimmerman and Stelios Panayotakis
In this collection of papers on aspects of Cupid and Psyche by different au
thors the reader will at times be confronted by diverging perspectives on the
tale or its various episodes. It has never been the aim of the editors to smooth
out such differences. The tale of Cupid and Psyche is like a multi-faceted di
amond and it will continue to provoke varied interpretations depending on the
angle from which it is viewed.
In 1978 Ben Hijmans and his younger colleague Rudi van der Paardt pub
lished a collection of original papers on 'Aspects of Apuleius' Golden Ass'. In
the years since then this has proved to be an important and influential collection,
consulted not only by all the specialists involved in Apuleian studies but also
by a much wider circle of readers. We are, as in so many other ways, following
the lead of the editors of 'Aspects 1978' in presenting here a second volume of
Contents
K. Dowden (Birmingham)
Cupid and Psyche: A Question of the Vision of Apuleius I
M. O'Brien (Maynooth)
'For every tatter in its mortal dress': Love, the Soul and her Sisters 23
P. James (Milton Keynes)
The Unbearable Lightness of Being: Levis Amor in the
Metamorphoses of Apuleius 35
S.J. Harrison (Oxford)
Some Epic Structures in Cupid and Psyche 51
W.S. Smith (Albuquerque)
Cupid and Psyche Tale: Mirror of the Novel 69
D. van Mai-Maeder and M. Zimmerman (Groningen)
The Many Voices in Cupid and Psyche 83
H. Pinkster (Amsterdam)
The use of narrative tenses in Apuleius' Amor and Psyche I 03
S. Brodersen (Mi.inchen)
Cupids Palace-A Roman Villa (Apul. Met. 5,1) 113
S. Mattiacci (Siena)
Neoteric and Elegiac Echoes in the Tale of Cupid and Psyche
by Apuleius 127
S. Piinayotakis (Rethymno/Groningen)
ll'.oJJ,\:t·
Slander and War Imagery in Apuleius' Tale of Cupid and Psyche
(Apul. Met. 5,5-5,21) 151
xii Contents
W.H. Keulen (Groningen)
A Bird's Chatter: Fonn and Meaning in Apuleius' Met. 5,28 165
J.L. de Jong (Groningen)
'II pittore a le volte ep uro poeta ':
Cupid & Psyche
Cupid and Psyche in Italian Renaissance Painting
(with an appendix, illustrations and a specialized bibliography) 189 A Question of the Vision of Apuleius
General Bibliography 217
General IEdex 229 Ken Dowden
Birmingham
Apuleius' Sincerity
There is no doubt that the author of the Golden Ass professed Platonism. This
is not something which we need to read out of his text, as we might in the case
of Heliodoros (Dowden 1996). We know that the real Apuleius propagated
Platonic ideas in his Carthaginian period, that he translated the Phaedo, knew
his Platonic texts - and other philosophical texts - in detail and generally, as
Hijmans has shown 1, saw Platonism and philosophy as a way of life, a bios.
Perhaps the likeliest assumption is that he adopted Platonism, taking it to his
heart in some way, at that formative stage of his education, in Athens. This
gives us a lifelong portrait of Apuleius philosophus Platonicus. It begins in
Athens and continues through his Roman period, where I have argued that he
wrote the Golden Ass in the early 150s (Dowden 1994 ); it then goes on past the
phi/osophus fonnonsus ('pretty philosopher') of Oea, onward to the megastar
of Carthage and the author of surely authentic books de Platone to Faustino
filio ('On Plato - to his son2 Faustinus').
Yet, Platonism in the novel lies outside the mainstream of modem criticism
and is perhaps cffsagreeable to a 'stakeholder' culture where individual readers
cease to be educated by literature (or 'the Greek achievement') and prefer to
engage democratically in its activities. These shifts in focus may indeed have
the advantage of constantly renewing our literature and describing what these
works can do for people of our age, but there is also ~ttendant danger of
e~cluding Apuleius' own design from his novel. On some theories this may not
>
1 Hijmans 1987,passim but e.g. 396-7, 416-7, 422, and esp. 470, a compelling vision.
2 'This is what the Latin says though scholars h.ave tried to evade the obvious meaning and to
allege, for instance, a fictional addressee - see Hijmans 1987, 414 for more information.
2 Ken Dowden Cupid & Psyche 3
matter, but it is surely an analytic truth that it should matter to any student of It is a convenient fiction, which scholars of religion now challenge, that the
the ancient world. In any case, it will be seen that this biographically derived faith of the pagan Roman aristocracy was in some way less than that of the
wor•ldt-viiewt and 'mythology' informs the text. emerging Christian competition6• Apuleius the committed Platonist is not an
was Ap:n]eius like? He seeas_t o m~gt~Victorian', if not so stiff. isolated phenomenon: I have drawn attention elsewhere to the similarities be
When, as a sophist, he performs his Platonic pieces, ~--~tanchil sa position of tween Justin, who slipped from Platonism to Christianity, and Apuleius and also
authority in front of his audience, dictating views. Most exactly, he perpetu to the conflict between Justin and that Roman establishment to which Apuleius
ates the master-pupil relationship, or extends the guru-disciple relationship, of was personally attached (Dowden 1994, 429-30). Fronto sniped at the Chris
Athenian philosophers to the Gelliuses and Apuleiuses of the young cultural tians in the course of an oration in the Senate and Marcus Aurelius had no time
elite. More impressionistically, he resembles one great Victorian expression of for them and their martyrs ( 11.3.2). Christians were found so offensive that we
authority - the conductor wielding the newly-invented baton before an inter can be sure of the depth of pagan conviction 7•
nal audience (the orchestra) and the audience proper. In the world of Gellius Despite the indiscriminacy of characterising a whole age at once, we can
and Lucian it was the job of self-professed philosophers to lead and guide their still affirm that the age in which Apuleius lived was one which was particu
audiences, as we can see from Gellius' pilgrimage to the hut (ashram?) of Pere larly concerned to reassert traditionaloand historic values - the resurrection of
grinus outside Athens and from Lucian's vitriolic testimony to the very special the vocabulary ofEnnius and Plautus is not so very different from Herodes At
character of Peregrinus.
ticus declaiming on the theme of Nicias in Sicily (Philostratus, Vit.Soph. 574).
If, then, we find areas of Apuleius' novel where religious and philosophi Faced with the challenge of new developments, notably in religion and philoso
3
cal issues are in some way raised, what interest might Apuleius have in these phy, Antonine intellectuals could either incorporate the new into authorised tra
ideas- and what interest should we ourselves take in them? Cupid and Psyche, ditional discourse or, if as in the case of Christianity this was impossible, reject
the structural equivalent of Aeneas' katabasis (descent to the underworld), is it outright. One feels the force behind that rejection in the case of the Miller's
the crucial point for this decision. Perhaps it is a 'folk-tale', a popular story of Wife (9,14) whose monotheism is firmly attached to herffagitia ('crimes' - so
some sort engagingly incorporated into high literature, or perhaps we should Apuleius is no Pliny) and also in the case of the Dea Syria (8,27), a cult firmly
pay attention to the hellenistic literary colour and enjoy this souvenird'Apollo rejected also by Floros. Conversely however, Isis is accommodated into appro
n;us. Though Fehling exploded the idea of Grimm-style folk-tale in Apuleius4 priate discourse through that ambitious myrionymity (11,5, which nevertheless
i_!_diso ubtless true that ~~ori~~ h~llenistic approaches uncover some is careful to exclude the Dea Syria) which reached out through the figure of the
thing of valuejn the text. At the samP-time botlrn.P.W-9~]:°ecso nform to nwdem moon ultimately. to a philosophical divinity. So too the priest Mithras is a de
critical culture and both evade the question of meaning. E~en,-howevei; if"ilP la liberately dissonant note to emphasise the broader a licabili of
tonic dimension is admitted in Cupid a~ Psyche, will we be prepared to talk of ~en correc y un ers o m establishment language.
more than just another colour on Apuleius' palette, part of the 'literary texture' To sum up my rather general argument so far: we should not be tempted
and surface gloss? That restrictive approach, comfortable for our irrev~tent if by priorities in modern criticism or by our own personal disinclinations to cast
aesth~~ age, is IllS <>lrlul~in ger, maybe, of disparaging Apuleius, COIIlQllJ:!fient aspersions on the commitment of Apuleius to Platonic philosophy. His was a
~-d the faith he- and others of his age - lived by 5. committed age on whose firm rocks Justin and other Christians shipwrecked
themselves.
,/
3 ~losophy and religion are scarcely separable; cf. Hijmans 1987, 397 and n.7, and Dowden ...:._
1996, 2~ (on Heliodoros). ~------------ ......._ Ideas in Dialogue (Rome in the 150s): Psyche and the Valentinians
4 Fehling 1977.
5 Why exactly does Kenney 1990b, 193 n.59 feel it necessary to argue that Apuleius need not?
have studied his Phaedrus very closely or approve the idea that 'a vague knowledge of Eros c::.__ Rome in the early 150s was philosophically and religiously alive. This was the
in the Pnaedrus' was just part of the rhetorician's stock-in trade? And why does Edwards environment in which Marcus Aurelius was growing to maturity - appreciat-
1992, 93 feel it necessary to distance Apuleius from the world of Gnostic ideas and to dub
<
him 'only an occasional philosopher'? Would we say such things to Apuleius' own face? 6 E.g., Wilken 1984, eh. ill 'The Piety of the Persecutors'.
For a sensitive and balanced ~~~~s~~l!t2f thena~e ~d _despt-h-:o - f -Ap-ul-e-iu-s-' -P-la-to-n-is·m - 7 On hostility to Christians, see, e.g., Sordi 1988, 160-1. Fronto's speech concerned with
and how b.ea cquired it -now see Sandy 1997, 22-36 and eh.
Christians probably only in passing, Lane Fox 1986, 427.
4 Ken Dowden Cupid & Psyche 5
ing the dour stoicism of Claudius Maximus (M. Aur. l.15.1, 1.16.3). The influ original myth. Heinrici (1897, 410-17) found ~n
ence of Sextus nephew of Plutarch still lingered on (as we can see, e.g., from P~develo ment 14 ofValentinus' myth of Sophia and Cupid and Psy
Met. 1.2). Apuleius, if I am right, was busy an the Golden Ass and if I am che in an article which I myself built on in I 980 15. These similarities go e
wrong Viasa il the same in Rome at a forrnativejntellectual age, allowed only yond coincidence and represent something more specific than Heinrici's (416)
towrite nu ae ('Trivia') by evolutionist criticism. Christians irritated Lollius 'dieselbe Sehnsucht nach Erlosung' as may be seen from the following analysis
rbicus the praefectus ur 1 an Justin in particular complains to him in his Sec of Ptolemaeus' myth under headings emphasising shared features.
ond Apology about the martyrdom of Ptolemaeus, an event which may underlie
Apuleiu s' tale of the Miller's Wife 8• At this same time Valentinus was preach
Vocabulary
ing and writing up an esoteric Gnostic soteriology and already had his follow
Aeon an immaterial, intellectual, godlike being.
ers: he had arrived in Rome a Christian around 136--40, but split with the more
Achamoth the 'Anxiety' of Sophia.
orthodox Christians probably on the accession of Pius I in 142. He and his fol
Pleroma the Plenitude, Gnostic heaven, where deficiencies do not ex
lowers nevertheless remained within the church, despite hostility from people
like Justin and, in the next generation, from Irenaeus of Lyon who catalogued ist 16.
and denounced Gnostic heresies. Valentinus himself was still in Rome in the psyche an intermediate substance between nous (the higher, intellec
time of Pope Anicetus (155-66) 9• It is not clear to me bow small a place in tual and moral part of us) and worldly material (e.g., body).
tellectual Rome was, or how ideas were disseminated between very different
intellectual camps: public lectures like those of Maximus a generation later 10 I the story centres on a heroine - both are Soul;
and public disputes, like that between Justin and the cynic Crescens, are clearly
an important part. It is likely that these camps were aware of each other and that There is one Sophia in Valentinus himself 17, but two, with characteristic
their membership even overlapped and, on occasion, defected. Val_entin_up_lSa Gnostic proliferation, in Ptolemaeus - Sophia 18 and, a sort of avatar,
tonised_a nd gnosticised Christianity Gust as Lucian's Peregrinu;..bandoned it) Sophia Achamoth. On any Platonic reading, Sophia is the World-Soul and
and appears from his fragments to be, in Stead's words, 'a biblical Platonist'; necessarily a prototype for our soul 19• One reason for this depiction is
indeed, Chadwick has called him 'the most obviously Platonic of all known that, in the ideology of traditional Mediterranean cultures, a single female
gnostics•H. Conver~ely, Justin (and others like him 12) moved on from Platon is obviously deficient and requires a husband, a ou(uyoc; (cf. Scopello
i~_t_o~ ()~~ry-~~_ye_C §s~~tf thouifliesbll wore Pliii<:>.hl9-~lHQoiwln ng. 1985, 120).
did Apuleius view Vale11tin_11Ts?h e rnore-acGef)taWe-f~J,tianity? And
then thereisVa!entinus' disciple Ptolemaeus who could just have been the very
same person as the Christian martyred around 152 (above). 14 Both Heinrici 1897 and Dowden 1981 make the mistake of attributing Ptolemaeus' system,
Whate~~ctly-iYalentinus,~ op~sed to his follo:wers,J<111_gi_sl _nIo!t easy to without further thought, to Valentinus.
state defirutlvely . But what 1s of mterest for us is the system attributed to his 15 Gnostic ideas are taken up again, apparently without knowledge ofHeinrici 1897 or Dowden
1981 (or Dowden 1982), by Edwards 1992, 87-92.
pupil Ptolemaeus by Irenaeus, which doubtless draws heavily on Valentinus'
16 For a study of pleroma, see MacDerrnot 1981, 76-81.
17 Quispe! 1947, 45, based on Iren. adv.haer_ 1,11,1. Cf. Stead 1969, 88-89, with the qualifi
cation 'one erring Sophia'_
8 Dowden 1994, 429-30; Baldwin 1989, 55_ 18 SUJprisingly, Sophia is declared to be the 'father' of (female) Achamoth at Iren. 1.4.1; even
9 Dawso111992, 127; Foerster 1972, i.121 (with slightly different dates). 'Remained until An more curiously, Sophia is declared 'male and a father' at Philo, de Juga 52. Generally on
icetus'; Irenaeus Haer. 3,4,3_ Philo as a seedbed for the Gnostic Sophia, see Stead 1969, 96-7 and Pearson 1984, 314,
10 Under Commodus in the 190s; full title: Maximus of Tyre, Lectures Given in Rome during discussing R.M. Wilson, The Gnostic Problem: a study of the relations between Hellenistic
his Fir.litV isit (Ma~[µou Tup[ou ,wv EV< Pwµn 6iaAE~E<,},TVj <;1 tpW,T)<tm; oT)µ[a<;). Judaism and the Gnostic Heresy, London 1958, 183-202.
11 G.C. St~ in Layton 1980, 78. Intriguingly, he sees Valentinus' Aeons as a development of 19 World-Soul, cf. Plotinus 2.9 (Against the Gnostics) §4, with H. Chadwick in Layton 1980,
the Platoruc Forms (ibid. 88). Chadwick in Layton 1980, 11-12. · 12. 'She represents the evil (i.e. responsible for the origin of evil) world-soul, which is also
12 Tatian, Athenagoras, Clement of Alexandria - Wlosok 1960, 113-4 and nn. the prototype of the human soul which falls from its true home through attachment to matter'
13 See, e.g., G.C. Stead in Layton 1980, 75ff; G. Quispe! ibid. 123-5; Quispe! 1947; Stead 1969. (my parentheses}, Stead 1969, 100- thus both Venus-Isis and Psyche.
6 Ken Dowden Cupid & Psyche 7
2 tE:t!Jallg f~o_p_1!!~~Y~l:i!sec aused by a culpable_a£.!i>JJryip.z_t<lapP.!l:~e_(n d spirit {1tvEU[J.ll"vtColE pa.), entering imperceptibly and unseen within the
God20;_ ... --·~------
Pleroma will be given away as brides to the Angels about the Saviour ...
for nothing of soul-character (4iux~x6v) may enter the Pleroma.' (Iren.
'Silence' restrains Nous from the attempt to reveal the limitless character
1,7,1)23_
of God to the Aeons, but Sophia tries to grasp it anyway and this is where
trouble begins; this was a fit of passion without the participation of her hus
-rnu This is not just the sort of system that was in the air. It is a specific system of ap-
band, and it consisted in the ~ ~TI}mc; m:npoc;( lren. adv.haer. 1.2.1-2).
p~--~]!Qs.fioytbm :an~Jnten!!~l!.:~~~e.spci~d.§_!&!!if!£~wt}iyth_ that /
3 the soul is rescued as the result of an act of grace 21, by the intervention of of Cupid and Psyche. Notably, curiositas causes th~~-~!.f~~tl!!e distinctive ~ //
a diune redeemer; f
to this Gnostic system~-
WITHIN THE PLEROMA:C hrist and the Holy Spirit are sent to bring the ----niere 1s muctrthaf is unknown and much that requires further research
Aeons to an understanding of the Father (lren. 1,2,5). here. Curiositas or periergia in the sense of 'culpable looking' requires an
26
agre~dliistory of its own , but it does appear to be new at around this time in
OUTSIDET HE PLEROMA:A chamoth, deserted by the Logos, searches for
a myth of a Fall and the Latin word, as is well known, only breaks through with
the light ( of the Pleroma) and suffers woefully (Iren. 1,4, 1) . The Paraclete
Apuleius. Conceptually, it cl~arly belongs to.mys.te,:y_!~~<?n, as a corollary of
'i.e. the Saviour' (standing in for Christ) is sent to rescue her (Iren. 1,4,5).
the secrecy which is its defining characteristic. The act of grace surely belongs
4 the soul is married to the redeemer and has offspring22. here too27: the ancestor is Demeter saving Kore from the world of death into
which she has fallen through her own fault; and another comparand is Isis
WITHIN THE PLEROMA:t he Aeons are now all transformed into Noes
saving Osiris from death. But there may be another comparand that produces
(nous's, Iren. 1,2,6).
the gender distribution and marriage that we have in our two myths - Dionysos
OUTSIDET HE PLEROMA:A chamoth is cured of her passions and, receiv
and Ariadne. <
ing with joy the vision of the lights of the Paraclete's attendant Angels, What we are seeing is the reconciliation of alternative discourses. Plato C
becomes pregnant by them. (lren. 1,4,5).
himself is somewhat godless. The souimiislrise-drrough its internal efforts,
AT THE END: 'When all the seed (of the Church) is perfected, Achamoth ~it-has-the natura.Lfoo;e of the divine love to draw it UJ!,_ Ifie language
its mother will move from the place of Middleness and come within the of the Symposium or of wings and white horse in the Phaedrus do not supply
Pleroma and receive her bridegroom the Saviour who is born from all (the Apuleius with the moment of grace - or indeed the Isiac last book. The one
Aeons?) so that there may be a marriage of Saviour and Sophia Achamoth exception may be that moment in the Politicus (273de) when the resumption
. . . and the Pneumatics, taking off their souls and becoming intellectual
23 Also,w iths ignificanitm plicationfso r ascribingth ise lementt o Valentinusin, Oernent,E x
cerpta ex Theodoto 63,l; cf. Quispe!1 947,7 2-73,4 4.
20 Thist ranscendencoef God is familiara lsoi n Philo,c f. Pearson'sa ccounto f Jonas( Pearson 24 Evidentlyi,f Ptolemaeuws ast hem artyr of c. 152.B ute quallyt he systemi ~r epoaeda lready
1984,3 04-6), andi s an importanfte atureo f the newP ythagoreanisinPgla tonismof Eudoros fii Irenaeus1 nTsn.----- . . . .
whichm ayu nderlieth e 'mainstreamw' hichI discussi n section4 belowc, f. Wlosok1 960, 25 Cf. Stead 1969,7 8 (characteristiocf his versionA ), and Plotinos2 .9,4 (not mentioned);
53, DiUon1 977,1 27-8. Scopello1 985,6 6 comess traighto ut and callst hisV alentiniacna useo f the fall 'curiositas'.
21 Kenne:y1 990a.1 4u sefullys tressesth e strictlyu ndeservedch aracteor f thes alvationo f both Particulatro Valentinus'T: hen atureo f Sophia'sf aulti s one of them ostv ariablef eatureso f
Psychea ndL uciusS. copello1 985,3 0 commentso, n EA 135.4-15( seeb elow)',b ienq ue la the myth';S tead1 969,1 02.
collaboratiodne l'ame soitn ecessairec,' est par la graceq u'on obtientle salut' 26 Theb ibliographoyn Apuleiancu riositas is of courses izeableb, ut I drawp articulaar ttention
22 Thisc orrespondtso thed octrine(G .C.S teadi n Layton1 9809, 2)t hatt hee lectw illb e united to Moreschin1i 978e, h.i ii forh isb alanceb etweente chnicapl hilosophirce ferencea ndw ider
with heavenlyb ridegroomasn d enter the pleroma (Gnostich eaven/Olympu'sb)e coming reference.
themselveisn telligiblAe eons'( ClementE, xcerpta ex Theodoto 64,I ). Thea ctualo ffspring, 27 Edwards1 992,8 1-2 citesP lotinos3 .5.9 for the momento f salvationp: syche living with
Voluptas (Met. 6,24),i s parallelledin the Treatise witlwUl Title (NagH arnmadill,51) 09,16- nous(= Cupid;c f. Dowden1 982),s eparatedf romn ous, and theno nce againb eingf illed
22 (Painchaud1 995,1 74-5)w hereE ros,d escendingto the levelo f earth,b egets~ oov~ (the (plerotheisa, cf. theG nosticpl eroma) withl ogoi. Buti nasmucha s Plotinosh erec allst o mind
Greekw ordi s actuallyi n the Coptict ext);P ainchaud( 1995,3 64)i mplausibldye rivest he a momento f salvation( andi t is verya bstract-howe xactlyd oesa soulg et a logoi-refill?),
Gnosticu sef romA puleius''v ersiond uc onte',b ut usefullyc omparePs hilo,d e Opijicur161. he is reflectingre ligioustr adition.
8 Ken Dowden Cupid & Psyche 9
of control of a faltering universe by its demiurge provides a distant ancestor sensitive and learned modern scholar32• Yet, if Apuleius was a serious Platonist
( and who are we to deny that he was, accusing him of empty posturing and hyp
for Apuleius' episode.J:onYers_~Jy,t.h e_! <!llgµageo f Eleusiniano_!'Jsiacmyth
doe~ not on._itos wn _S!l-I?Qlyj!l!!!Jlectdµe_mala nds of the highest form of Greek ocritical gamesmanship?) and ifhe was acquainted with the discourses in which
relig~~f!__!l_!_!_t_i1 _-J_Ti!I_Y_t~h -:~.---fifst-- by-'Orphi<:_' tl)ixµcei2sS-,l-?y_t~st intellectuals described the mysteries and in which Valentin us and his friends de
scribed cosmogony and the soul, then he would have understood 'Psyche on the
influenti~ly thro'-!Kht he PlatQ!!!_£in_t ellectual koine. Thus the function, for
instance, of Plutarch's Isis and Osiri; 1si c,c-triw-tishise r eligion into Platonic Rock'. I do not believe, however, that it is a complete account of the Platonism
of our myth. One obvious lack is that it does not take account of the particular
and intellectual discourse - it is an aggressive, and authorising, act of inter
pretation 29• Equally, Gnosticism is about discourse or it is about nothing. In it vices which the sisters show, worldly ones as Carl Schlam emphasised (Schlam
1992, 96), or the particular virtues which Psyche attempts to leamprogrediens
are blended Platonic-koine cosmology (e.g., from the 1imaios), doctrine of the
soul (presumably from the mysteries, translated into para-Platonic intellectual 1 ad modestiam ('on her first steps to decency and propriety'), something which
language 30), and the jargon-delight of eastern and Egyptian magico-mysticism it might be illuminating to do in the company of de Platone, Bk 2.
So, Cupid and Psyche must have some place in _this dialogue of ideas.
- whence Barbelo and Achamoth and so on. This multiplicity of sources an
Otherwise, paradoxica.Ilyffwoulo6enecessacy--to~~ppose that Apuleius,
matters because it has the effect of cumulating authority.
expert in Platonic discourse and a person initiated in religions, had found this
Cupid and.Psyche's relationship to Valentinian discourse is close enough for
~oces ta he identjfieq.T hem ulfiplecos-rriic-levelsandbeings liaveTaigely story in some more or less contemporary author and used only its folksy shell,
emptying out its religio-philosophical contents. Where, then, does it fit in the
been stripped out. What is left is Venus as elementorum origo initialis ('first
principle of the elements' 31, Met. 4,30 - in Gnostic-speak perhaps the arkhe stemma of mid-2nd century ideas? Given the way in which Ptolemaeus and
Valentinus built on their predecessors, it is practically impossible that these
of the Aeons). This is a light and ironic touch, given her characterisation in the
Gnostics were influenced by a youthful Apuleius. There remain two possibil
text, but itis a revealing one. Venus is the driving force behind this myth as Isis,
ities: either there was a common source for the introduction of curiositas (a
equally saeculorum origo initialis ('first principle of the Aeons'?, Met. 11,5),
mystery-source? Aristophontes of Athens?), or Apuleius is re-setting Gnostic
will be for the whole novel. What looks like jest now becomes serious later, as
mythology. In either case, w~ius is in effect doing is to transpose the
the process of metamorphosis of Venus into Isis charges Venus retrospectively
Valentinian myth into discourse culturally-:iccepfaok to the Roman estab
with significance. The female appears thrice over in Ptolemaeus (Ennoia is the
a
~. Thus Cupid anif"PsycneTs conservative woix,-ofiliCalftiie-s-ame
consort of the ultimate, original god; Sophia falls and is recovered, leaving be
colonises new religious ground. Platonic or mystic thesis, confronted with
hind only Achamoth): in Apuleius Psyche is confused with Venus - and Isis
Gnostic antithesis yields Apuleian synthesis.
somehow lies behind Fortuna. In the foreground for Apuleius' story, however,
is the individual Psyche, more human, less cosmic.
I attempted to discern the detail of the Platonic discourse in my 'Psyche on
the Rock' of 1982. That article attempted to read Cupid and Psyche as a Philo,
32 'Tanto vale, allora, riprendere ii metodo e le conclusioni de! Dowden che richiamano, l'uno
a Plutarch(l,2; 2,3) or, later, a Plotinos would have read it-even if its allegori
e le altre, Fulgenzio ... Credo che non sia necessario dar troppo peso a questo revival di
cal method seemed to recreate the critical approach of Fulgentius, anathema to a Fulgenzio', Moreschini 1994, 63--4. Is the problem perhaps that Cupid & Psyche actually
requires, in part, a particularly literal form of intertextuality (allegory) to which modem crit
ics find it hard to subscribe (though late antiquity and the renaissance could do so readily,
cf. Moreschini 1994, 26)? So, to say that 'Charite is Dido' is interesting and provocative be
cause obviously approximate and tantalising, but to say that 'Psyche is soul and Cupid hei:
28 F. Graf, Eleusis und die orphische Dichtung Athens, Berlin 1974.
personal dairrwn, Platonic Love' is to be wooden, literal, and 1500 years out of date like
29 Similarly later Julian's Hymn to the Mother of the Gods I 66b makes her acceptable to think
Fulgentius. Cupid & Psyche perhaps exhibits what one might term the intertextuality of the
ing circles by depicting her as the source of the intellectual and demiurgic gods.
matrix. This, I think, explains ~triking paradax •bara Mm:eschinwi ho wriles brilliantly
30 Dillon 1977, 384-9, if unsympathetically, charts something of the use Gnostics such as
Yalentinus made of Plato. Whittaker 1987, 121-3 accommodates Gnosticism more gener on Apuleio e il platonisrrw (Fire11¥ 1978) must ~~E!. £1_p~,,Q!:_l0Q_J_Ha!r!~!! ..!Qf Platonism
ously withinth e developing climate of ideas that also included Middle Platonism. in_tfi_e_ii<I~e1andiftso .c entral m.J'!QL_miesne abyme. A_11uleiusp' hilosophica too canb erefared
'to Gnostic thought: see, on the de Platone 190--1 and such issues as negative theology, van
31 'Elements' include such things as Heaven, Earth, Water, Fire, Air, Sun, Moon, and even the
den Broek 1996, ch.3.
Aeon; cf. Reitzenstein 1927, 225; there is also a discussion in Griffiths 1975, 301-3.