Babrius Prologue 14-17

Greek Learning Greek
1

Perry’s Loeb edition reads Babrius Prologue 14-17 as:

μάθοις ἄν οὕτω ταῦτ᾽ [sc. that the rest of animals also speak] ἔχοντα καὶ γνοίης

ἐκ τοῦ σοφοῦ γέροντος ἧμιν Αἰσώπου

μύθους φράσαντος τῆς ἐλευθέρης μούσης

ὧν νῦν ἕκαστον ἀνθίσας ἐμῇ μνήμῃ

I encounter two problems:

(1) how to understand τῆς ἐλευθέρης μούσης?

Perry translates it as “in the free manner of prose,” apparently taking ἐλευθέρης to refer to a literary form not bounded by metre, i.e. prose. This is plausible enough. The Luzzatto & Le Penna edition (Teubner), however, reads οὐκ ἐλευθέρης μούσης. Le Penna seems to conjecture that οὐκ ἐλευθέρης alludes to Aesop’s condition as a slave, and therefore to his use of prose.

What do you think? Niklas Holzberg has plainly “in der freien Muse,” whereas John Davies translates as “in free, outspoken song.”

(2) how to understand ἐμῇ μνήμῃ?

If taken with ἀνθίσας, it functions as dative of instrument, hence Holzberg’s “mit den Blüten meiner Erinnerung geschmückt,” and Perry’s “adorn … with the flowers of my own Muse” (though his is as if it is ἐμῇ μούσῃ).

By contrast, John Davies seems to take it to be dative of interest, translating “These [sc. Fables] should a place in thy remembrance get” (i.e. for the benefit of your remembering these fables), but since it is ἐμῇ μνήμῃ, shouldn’t it be for the benefit of your remembering me?

I find Holzberg’s most satisfying. Nevertheless, it is difficult to understand what “mit den Blüten meiner Erinnerung” means. He sweetens the fables with the blossoms of his memory? Memory of what? It could not be the memory of the fables because it is those fables that have to be sweetened. No wonder Perry has it “Muse”?

2

Perry glosses ἐλευθέρης μούσης with oratione soluta, i.e. prose, which I imagine is right, and it pointedly contrasts with Aesop’s servile status. I see nothing in favor of οὐκ ἐλευθέρης μούσης.

ἀνθίσας is a conjecture for the manuscript’s ἂν θείης (unmetrical), and seems unlikely to be right. And I frankly don’t understand ἐμῇ μνήμῃ (or Μνήμῃ, as Perry prints), unless it just means his recollection of the fables.

It’s good to see ἧμιν printed in preference to ἡμῖν.

3

Thank you for answering. May I ask what edition do you consult? Since my Loeb seems to print somehow differently.

I prefer τῆς ἐλευθέρης μούσης now, for, after all, it is “οὐκ scripsi.” But I presume the reason that La Penna writes οὐκ is that the free Muse (or the Muse belonging to free men) would speak not in prose, but in metre? The problem that I face is that ἐλευθέρης can refer either to the social status or to the literary style. So Perry should mean the latter when reading τῆς ἐλευθέρης μούσης, unless he deems prose belonging to free men. I am not sure if I make sense here though.

I thought besides that it is contra metrum, ἀνθίσας is conjectured because the verb is θήσω in the following line, or it would be parataxis which is unlikely?

4

Aesop was famously a slave, which I would assume is the intention behind the οὐκ. It doesn’t really work for me.

5

I was using Perry’s monumental Aesopica I (1952), which has a full apparatus.

I was suggesting that ἐλευθέρης μούσης not only implies oratione soluta i.e. prose but at the same time alludes to Aesop’s slave status (highlighted in the Life of Aesop), making a kind of oxymoron: he may have been a slave but his language was “freed.” I expect this was Perry’s understanding too. To add ουκ strikes me as cloth-headed.

ἀνθίσας makes decent sense but is unlikely to underlie ἂν θείης. Lachmann had proposed ἂν θέλῃς, tame but very much closer.