Achilles' teachers: Chiron and Phoenix in the 'Iliad.'
Despite the importance of Chiron in the various myths of Achilles' early life there are only four references to him in the Iliad. Two of these describe the spear that Chiron gave to Peleus which Achilles uses in the fight with Hector(16.141-4=19.388- 91). The spear is an ashen one which only Achilles can use. It is the single object of Achilles' armour which Patroclus does not take with him in his return to the fighting. It was brought by Chiron from Mount Pelion (presumably as a wedding present), and Peleus passed it on to Achilles. It is a formidable weapon of which the Trojans have great fear (5.790).(5) When Aeneas is about to confront Achilles in Book 20 of the poem he complains that his opponent always has a god beside him, and that his spear flies straight of its own accord (20.97 ff.).
The two earlier references to Chiron in the text concern his capacity as a teacher of medicine (4.217-19 and 11.828-32). In the former Chiron is referred to as teaching medicine to Asclepius the father of Machaon. Asclepius passed on his skill as a healer to his son who treats Menelaus after his wounding by Pandarus. Indeed Machaon uses drugs from the store which Chiron gave to Asclepius (4.218-19). In the latter episode Chiron (who in this case is [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], `most just of the centaurs') is referred to as the teacher of medicine to Achilles, who then passed on his knowledge to Patroclus. Machaon has just been wounded (11.504 ff.), and Achilles, who catches a glimpse of this, sends out Patroclus to get details. When he is out on his mission Patroclus is asked by the wounded Eurypylus to patch him up. Patroclus is keen to get back to Achilles, but he cannot bring himself to reject his comrade's plea for help.
Given that Patroclus' mission leads eventually to the return to combat of Patroclus himself and Achilles (a fact highlighted by the poet, [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], `this was the beginning of evil for him', 11.604), the special interest in Machaon is worthy of note. It is significant for instance that the narrative of the embassy is constructed around Machaon, not for instance around a greater figure like Diomedes who is wounded in the same book (also by Paris, 11.373 ff.). Achilles' special interest in Machaon's welfare would seem to be a consequence of his special connection with Asclepius and his family.(6) Achilles and Asclepius are fellow medical students of Chiron, and in the war at Troy Achilles and Machaon have Chiron's medical wisdom in common, and also a shared background in Thessaly.
Despite all this the four brief references to Chiron in the Iliad do not really amount to much given the importance of the centaur in the other ancient sources for the early career of Achilles. The post-Iliadic tradition of Chiron as Achilles' teacher is a strong one, but pima facie it is scarcely borne out by the Iliad itself. Moreover the allusions to Chiron within the text raise more questions than they answer. They imply that Homer's audience is quite familiar with the Chiron/Achilles tradition, but at the same time they provide a lamentable lack of detail. Linked to this, inevitably, is the figure of Phoenix who leads the embassy to Achilles in Iliad 9.(7) In the actual discussions with Achilles Phoenix is quite specific about his teaching role (9.438-43 and 9.485-95, on which see below). Add to the teaching roles of Chiron and Phoenix the claims of Thetis (18.57 ff. and 436 ff.) that she raised Achilles herself, then the matter of Achilles' tutelage becomes complex and rather difficult. One aspect of Homer's technique is his flexibility in the matter: Phoenix appears when there is a need for an old man figure who is very close to Achilles;(8) and Thetis makes her claims at a poignant moment for mother and son. No doubt to some degree the given references to a specific teacher are determined by the context of the surrounding narrative.
But there still appears to be a general process at work whereby Chiron is consciously excluded from the Iliad, and it is worthwhile to examine the nature of this. At a most basic level Phoenix is quite clearly a more appropriate figure for the poem because of his human form. One finds it difficult to imagine the embassy to Achilles being led by a centaur in a poem like the Iliad.(9) Leaving aside various separatist arguments concerning the embassy to Achilles,(10) there seems to be a fairly general consensus that Chiron is consciously excluded from the poem. This is a long-standing view and is put most stridently and succinctly by Hainsworth in the recent Cambridge commentary: `Kheiron would have been unacceptable to Homer in any case as tutor to the protagonist of his epic; for all his justice (11.832) Kheiron was a centaur, one of the mountain dwelling [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (1.268) whom Homer banishes to the sidelines of the Iliad.'(11) It has also been argued that this exclusion is part of a larger process in which many elements of the fantastic are suppressed in the Iliad. jasper Griffin has argued that this is one principal characteristic of Homer and distinguishes him from the Epic Cycle.(12) Griffin's basic argument is that the love of the supernatural in the Cycle is largely alien to the Iliad in which there is an insistence on human form and human limitations.
This notion of Homer's suppression of the supernatural is undoubtedly one important aspect of the Iliad, but it must be remembered that it is only a partial process. As one recent writer has pointed out `the Iliad includes a cap of invisibility, a talking horse, a warrior who fights with a river god, and a body magically preserved against decay.'(13) One aspect of this partial suppression of the supernatural is the retention of Chiron's name at various points in the narrative when it would make some sense, if only for the sake of consistency, to exclude him altogether. Griffin's point (41) is that Chiron has been excluded `as far as possible' from the text of the poem; but we are entitled to ask what is the exact nature of such a limit? Presumably his total exclusion from the poem is possible, and indeed rather simple, given that there are only four allusions to him in the extant text. The forgetfulness of the poet not being a consideration, the basic assumption in all that follows is that Chiron has been consciously retained in the Iliad; and that, in any case, the references to him have their part to play in telling us something about Achilles. There is a danger that in our haste to identify the process of Chiron's exclusion from the Iliad we fail to consider the full implications of the references to him.
My proposal is that there is a conscious limit placed on the exclusion of Chiron from the poem; and that this limit is based largely on the notion that Achilles' complexity as an individual requires double, or even multiple, tutelage. Chiron and Phoenix together help to reveal different aspects of his personality, different skills and impulses that motivate him during the war at Troy. To have a single teacher like Phoenix, who is a kind of generic old man figure, would do little justice to a unique warrior like Achilles. The separation and isolation of Achilles from the other Achaean princes, and some of the special features of his person require special characteristics reaching back into his childhood, and for this reason Chiron is never excluded entirely from the poem. The complete suppression of Chiron's name would leave Achilles with a background very much the same as the other princes, something which would scarcely be appropriate for such a warrior figure. Thus, to qualify Hainsworth's statement, Chiron is indeed `banished to the sidelines of the Iliad' but the poet is equally careful not to remove him altogether.
It is worth being clear about exactly what the two teachers are meant to have taught him. Apart from Phoenix's care for Achilles as a very young child, in which he describes sitting him on his knee and feeding him (9.485 ff.), the old man is specific about his period of instruction: reflecting on their past together Phoenix says to Achilles that his task was to teach him warfare ([GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]) and debate ([GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]) about which he knew nothing (9.441). In the course of the poem we get some vague glimpses of this process. At 9.439 Phoenix says that he was given this task to teach Achilles 'Warfare and debate on the day that Achilles departed to Agamemnon from Phthia. Achilles is still innocent ([GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], 9.440) at his point. Likewise Nestor in his address to Patroclus recalls the same day (with the same formula 9.439 = 11.766),(14) and refers to the advice that Menoetius gave his son (11.787-8). The recollections of Phoenix and Nestor indicate the immaturity of Achilles in debate and warfare when he leaves to join the army.
The pedagogical process which Achilles undergoes with Phoenix has its Odyssean parallel in the person of Telemachus. One important verbal parallel ([GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], `a mere child, who knew nothing yet of equal war, nor of debate', Il. 9.440-41 and [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], `a mere child who knows nothing of toils, nor of debate', Od. 4.818) helps to point to this connection.(15) The Odyssey line is uttered by Penelope about her son who has gone off to Pylos and Sparta. The line reminds as that debate and the ability to endure labours are Athena's pedagogical aims for Odysseus' son. Achilles in the Iliad and Telemachus in the Odyssey therefore have certain things in common. Phoenix taught Achilles warfare and debate, and Athena must conduct a process whereby Telemachus learns something very similar. Athena's task is to take him from childhood (1.88 ff. and 296-7), and the first step is his calling of an assembly in order to get a ship (1.272ff.). The bold effort of Telemachus in the assembly (2.40ff. and 212ff.) ends in tears of failure (2.80 ff.), and Athena must acquire the ship herself (2.288-95). Achilles too endures a kind of failure and humiliation in the assembly of Book 1 by his decision to accede to Agamemnon's authority in the dispute over Briseis. Both epics commence with an assembly scene in which there is a public humiliation. This humiliation is symbolized most prominently in both cases by their throwing of the sceptres to the ground ([GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], `and he threw the sceptre to the ground', Il. 1.245; Od. 2.80). In Telemachus' case the throwing of the sceptre to the ground precedes his transition into manhood, something which is reflected in his bursting into tears (2.81).(16) But he finds himself in a position later to avenge those who humiliate him. In Achilles' case however it is a much more serious challenge, one which even threatens his involvement in the war itself.
So the text points to Phoenix as instructing Achilles in the 'community' skills, how to play one's part in the debates of the princes, and how to fight in a war. There being great virtue in the process of collective decision-making among Homer's princes, and in a collective war against foreigners, the role of Phoenix is an important one. He helps to lead Achilles into the common war effort (9.438 ff.), and then he tries to heal the schism between him and Agamemnon (9.434-605). He is a human teacher, and he teaches Achilles skills that all the princes share, albeit in different measure. One acquires wealth, glory, and reputation through counsel and combat, as Phoenix himself points out (9.441).(17) But everybody has strengths and weaknesses, and inevitably some are stronger in debate, others in the fighting. At 18.105-6 Achilles himself says that none of the Achaeans is better in war ([GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]) but there are others better in counsel ([GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]; cf. 18.252; 19.216ff.). Thus Phoenix teaches Achilles the `normal' things for a prince to learn. But no one would ever accuse Achilles of being normal, and for some of the exceptional things that characterize him we must turn to Chiron.
One thing that Chiron certainly teaches Achilles is medicine. The two pupils who have access to his special healing powers in the Iliad are Achilles (11.832) and Asclepius (4.219). In Hesiod and Pindar Asclepius is a much more colourful figure whose healing powers extend to reviving the dead, thereby challenging the very nature of Zeus's role over mortals.(18) There is none of this in the Iliad, nor is there reference to Apollo and Coronis as his parents, nor to his being plucked from his mother's womb by Apollo as she lay on the funeral pyre (Pindar, Pythian 3.3 2 ff.). In the Iliad Asclepius seems to be a rather ordinary Thessalian student of Chiron who then passed on his medical wisdom to his sons Machaon and Podalirius, who themselves lead a brigade of Thessalians to Troy (2.729-33). The portrayal of Asclepius would appear to be a case of Homer's avoidance of magical healing in favour of a much more conservative and respectable form of medicine. If Homer does degrade Asclepius in the Iliad for his sins in reviving the dead there is of course every reason to degrade his teacher Chiron for much the same reasons. Whether this same process takes place in the case of Achilles' healing powers we cannot say for certain, although there appears to be nothing remarkable or magical about his medicine. One thing that is certain is that the reference to Achilles as a healer, uttered by Eurypylus in the heat of battle, comes out of the blue, and sets him apart from the other princes. It would seem to suggest rather strongly that healing was an important part of the earliest accounts of the hero.
Other than medicine there is no clear evidence of any other skill taught by the centaur, although the text provides us with some scope for speculation. Chiron takes his name from [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], the Greek word for a hand, and many of the skills that he teaches involve the hand (mixing herbs for drugs, music, archery, etc.).(19) Archery tends to be one of Chiron's specialties, but in the Iliad no self-respecting aristocrat of the highest order would be seen dead near a bow and arrow (for the locus classicus see Diomedes' sentiments at 11.385-95). In the Odyssey Odysseus is an exceptional archer (8.215ff. etc.), but he leaves his bow and arrow behind when he ventures to Troy.(20) Paris is an aristocrat (albeit a Trojan one) who does use a bow, but he has no self respect, and this fact is pointed to by his characteristic weapon. In the Iliad it is the spear that brings great reputation, and it is by the spear (Chirons' spear, 16.141-4=19.388-91) that Achilles wins his great victories at Troy. The fact that he uses Chiron's spear with such devastating effect may point to Chiron as his teacher in markmanship in the earliest accounts, but the text of the Iliad does not spell this out.(21)
Thus Achilles' healing skills come directly from Chiron, and his flair as a marksman has, at the very least, associations with Chiron through the spear. Chiron's name is therefore alluded to at three crucial points in the narrative; at the turning point of Patroclus' mission for information (Book 11), as Patroclus goes off into battle (Book 16), and as Achilles himself prepares to re-enter combat (Book 19). A third skill of Achilles, that of singing and playing the lyre, may involve Chiron too. In a rather remarkable description (9.182 ff.), Phoenix, Odysseus, and Ajax embark on their embassy along the shore and come upon Achilles who is singing to the lyre:
[GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]
And they found Achilleus delighting his heart in a lyre, clear-sounding,
splendid and carefully wrought, with a bridge of silver upon it,
which he won out of the spoils when he ruined Eetion's city.
With this he was pleasuring his heart, and singing of men's fame.
The passage is unique in the Homeric poems in describing a member of the aristocratic warrior class who doubles up as an amateur singer.(22) After the dispute with Agamemnon Achilles retreats to the shore and takes pleasure in his music. He resembles Vergil's Orpheus who tries to console himself with singing on the shore after Eurydice's death (Georgics 4.464-6). Orpheus tries to deal with his loss of Eurydice by singing of her alone on the shore during the night and day. In much the same way Achilles is set apart from the others (except Patroclus, 9.1901) on the shore, and takes pleasure in singing of the glorious deeds of men ([GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], 9.189). Thus, as with Orpheus, the subject of his song is specifically related to his suffering. Achilles is absent from the fighting, and now takes pleasure in singing of it.
The emphasis on personal pleasure in the face of suffering signifies a connection between Achilles' music and his power as a healer. His song is not oral performance per se, in the sense of performance in front of an audience (like Phemius, or Demodocus, or Homer himself). There is no audience to speak of in Achilles' case: Patroclus sits by rather glumly (9.190-1), and the Myrmidons are nowhere near. The emphasis is on separation not communion. Achilles' song is essentially a solitary performance, a way of dealing with his bitterness at the dispute with Agamemnon. He reaches for his lyre for its soothing power (cf. [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], 189). Medicine and music are very much different sides of the same coin. Achilles is possessed of both skills, and is thus able to heal the physical form with drugs (11.831-2), and to sooth his bitterness with music (9.186-9). It is partly in these qualities that he resembles Apollo in the Mad. Apollo is himself described as healer and lyre player in the poem (16.514ff. and 24.63), and these are two aspects of a strong thematic connection between the god and the hero. The open hostility between Apollo and Achilles tends to disguise the fact that the two mirror each other in different ways, something which has drawn comment in recent times.(23) The references to Achilles' medical skills, and his singing to the lyre are an important aspect of this.
This brings us back to Chiron. It would seem reasonable to suggest that implicit within the text is the notion that Chiron taught Achilles his musical skills. He does so of course in much later sources,(24) but the text of the Mad makes no specific statement to this effect. However certain things probably point us in this direction: the healing aspect of his lyre playing, the fact that Achilles alone of the princes seems to possess the skill reflecting perhaps a unique education, that it is a skill of the hand ([GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]), and an essentially private pursuit. It is so to speak one aspect of Achilles' separation and isolation from those around him, and thus fittingly the preserve of Chiron.
Yet the question of the identity of Achilles' music teacher notwithstanding, there is no doubt that the encounter between Phoenix as the leader of the embassy, and Achilles playing the lyre is one in which public meets private. Phoenix is an especially significant individual in the Mad because he represents half of Achilles' education, the community skills of warfare and debate by which he could take a pre-eminent place among the princes. But these skills have led him nowhere, or so he thinks, and thus he turns to the personal skills that he also possesses. In terms of orality, one kind of oral performance (debate in the assembly) is rejected in favour of the dulcet tones of his lyre and his singing. As Achilles himself says to Odysseus when he comes as a member of the embassy, 'hateful is that man to me just as the gates of Hades who conceals one thing in his mind and says another' (9.312-13). One aspect of Achilles' wrath following the dispute with Agamemnon is that personal song replaces public speech. Kind as he is to Phoenix when he comes on his mission, Achilles has rejected, at least temporarily, the skills that the old man once taught him.(25)
This article began with the question of why Chiron is not excluded entirely from the poem when it would appear to have been a simple and logical step to take. The tradition of Chiron as Achilles' teacher is presumably the stronger one prior to the Iliad, just as it is afterwards, which suggests that the inclusion of Phoenix is a radical piece of poetic licence. To some degree Chiron seems to teach the skills of self-reliance in the wild (medicine/hunting etc.), but with an application to war if need be, whereas Phoenix's task is more specific to Achilles' conduct in the war at Troy. The inclusion of a second teacher, who is given primacy over the first, no doubt meets the needs of a poem where the emphasis is on the human rather than the fantastic or the supernatural. It is also linked to the complex kind of hero that Achilles is in the poem, and the dilemma in which he finds himself after the dispute with Agamemnon. The retention of Chiron as Achilles' teacher, albeit much reduced in prominence from earlier versions, provides us with the vaguest glimpse of an Achilles whose separation and isolation from the community reach right back into his childhood. Thus Chiron's shadowy presence helps to inform the kind of individual that Achilles is in the Iliad: the fact that he is torn between the demands and expectations of the common war effort, from where fame comes, and another impulse to be separate from the host.
(1.) For Achilles as the student of Chiron on Mount Pelion, Hesiod, Cat. fr. 204.87ff., Merkelbach and West, Fragmenta Hesiodea (Oxford, 1967); Pind. Pyth. 6.21-3, Nem. 3.43-58; cf. Hesiod, Cat. 40.2 (Jason); Theog. 1001 (Medeius). See too R. Janko, `P.OXY. 2509: Hesiod's Catalogue on the Death of Actaeon', Phoenix 38 (1984), 299-307.
(2.) See Pausanias 9.31.5; for one fragment of the text, M-W (above n. 1), fr. 283.
(3.) Proto-Attic Peleus-Chiron amphora in Berlin; LIMC Vol. 1 s.v. `Achilleus', pl. 21. On the question of the separation of Peleus and Thetis, and the rather contradictory evidence in the Iliad, see Janko, The Iliad: a Commentary Volume IV: Books 13-16 (Cambridge, 1992), ad 16.220-32.
(4.) For the ancient sources, J. Escher, RE 1112 (1899), 2302-8, s.v. `Chiron'.
(5.) For a detailed treatment, see Janko's note (above n. 3) to 16.130-54.
(6.) Something which is indicated by his use of the patronymic [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (11.614). On the brothers Machaon and Podalirius, see G. S. Kirk, The Iliad. a Commentary Volume I Books 1-4 (Cambridge, 1987), ad. 4. 193-4.
(7.) On the subject of the introduction of Phoenix as Achilles' teacher, R. von Scheliha, Patroklos: Gedanken uber Homers Dichtung und Gestalten (Basel, 1943), 222 ff.; W. Kullmann, Die Quellen der Ilias (Wiesbaden, 1960), 371.
(8.) Janko (above n. 3), ad 16.141-4, argues that `by suppressing Kheiron in favour of Peleus, Homer is able to reinforce the leitmotif of the aged father, vital to the whole poem'.
(9.) Contrast Apollonius Rhodius, Argonautica 1.553 ff. in which Chiron and his wife come down from Pelion to farewell the Argonauts bearing the young child Achilles.
(10.) Most prominently, D. L. Page, History and the Homeric Iliad (Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1959), 297-304.
(11.) Bryan Hainsworth, The Iliad: a Commentary Volume III: Books 9-12 (Cambridge, 1993), ad 9.442.
(12.) Jasper Griffin, `The Epic Cycle and the Uniqueness of Homer', JHS 97 (1977), 39-53.
(13.) R. B. Rutherford, Homer (Oxford, 1996), 3.
(14.) =9.253. In a short space of time Odysseus, Phoenix, and Nestor apply maximum pressure to Achilles and Patroclus.
(15.) On these passages and their part in the poetic tradition, see A. Hoekstra, Homeric Modifications of Formulaic Prototypes (Amsterdam, 1965), 40 f.
(16.) For the youth and immaturity of Telemachus in the early books see, inter alia, 1.88ff., 296 ff.; 2.253 ff.; 3.22-4; 4.638 ff., 663 ff. For the later maturity of Telemachus, 15.24-6, 125 ff.; 18.175-6, 215 ff., 267 ff.; 19.88, 158 ff., 530 ff.; 21.128. Telemachus has many self doubts about his identity at the start (1.214 ff.), but is the proud son of Odysseus when he returns (15.265 ff.). One aspect of this is the parallel of Orestes (1.41, 298 ff.; 3.195 ff., 303 ff.; 4.91 ff., 512 ff.; 11.387 ff.). For a contrary argument, that Telemachus' coming of age occurs in Book 1. see Stephanie West's commentary, in Heubeck, West and Hainsworth, A Commentary on Homer's Odyssey, Volume 1 (Oxford, 1990), 67ff.
(17.) Cf. the feminine adjective [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] used of [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (Il. 4.225 etc.), and [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (1.490). One aspect of Thersites' baseness is his perceived weakness in the fighting and in counsel (2.202).
(18.) For Asclepius in Hesiod, frs. 50, 51, 53, 58, 60 M-W (above n. 1).
(19.) See I. Dabasis, [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], Platon 22 (1970), 211-22; Ian Brookes, `The Death of Chiron: Ovid, Fasti 5.379-414', CQ (1994), 447-8.
(20.) It is worth noting that in the Iliad (5.192 ff.) Pandarus does the opposite. But he is on the Trojan side, and is a truce-breaker at that.
(21.) In Apollonius of Rhodes' Argonautica 1.88, Odysseus' bow is a gift of Apollo (cf. that of Pandarus at R. 2.827), a notion that is quite plausible for the Odyssey too, although unstated; see E. D. Francis, Image and Idea in Fifth Century Greece (London and New York, 1990), 76 ff. The point is that in both Homeric epics the origin of the crucial weapon (Achilles' spear/Odysseus' bow) is a matter of some importance.
(22.) On the social roles of singers, Ruth Finnegan, Oral Poetry (Cambridge, 1977), 188-201.
(23.) For the similarities between Achilles and Apollo as a factor in divine hostility, W. Burkert, `Apellai und Apollon'. Rheinisches Museum 118 (1975), 19; Gregory Nagy, The Best of the Achaeans (Baltimore, 1979), 142ff.; jenny Strauss Clay, The Wrath of Athena (Princeton, 1983), 181-2; Robert J. Rabel, 'Apollo as a model for Achilles in the Iliad, AJP 111 (1990), 42940.
(24.) See, for instance, Horace, Epodes 13; Ovid, Ars 1.11, `Phillyrides puerum cithara perfecit Achillem', and Fasti, 5.385ff. On this subject, see A. Kossatz-Deissmann's section `Unterricht im Leierspiel', LIMC Vol. 1, s.v. `Achilleus', 48-50.
(25.) See Hainsworth's summary (above n. 11), ad loc. Despite his obvious ability as a speaker, Achilles' frustration in the assemblies is apparent throughout (cf. 1.230; 9.312ff.; 9.375-6). Likewise he states his rejection of warfare (9.316ff..; cf. [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], 322; [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], 326; [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], 337). The misguided response of Phoenix is to affirm his own role as Achilles' teacher of the very things that he rejects (i.e., debate and warfare, 9.438-41).
|Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback|
|Publication:||Greece & Rome|
|Date:||Apr 1, 1997|
|Previous Article:||Cicero and the End of the Roman Republic.|
|Next Article:||An alternative sexual morality for classical Athenians.|