This intriguing new monograph by M. focuses on the use of identity-forging and ideological aspects of myths relating to Orpheus. Originally published in Polish, M. affirms that approximately 85% of the original work has been altered for the English publication.
The volume continues M.'s publications on the topic of ancient Greek mythology by analysing traditions belonging to the hero Orpheus and his role in the Hellenisation of the Macedonians (for other works by M., see Between Tradition and Innovation [2011]; Mythos 14 [2020] and ZPE 205 [2018], 68–76). This is the first thorough attempt to examine the Pierian aspects of the myth of Orpheus (p. 7). In the introduction M. outlines the scope, noting areas falling beyond the volume's remit: the debate of whether the Macedonians were Greek and an analysis of Orphic literature (pp. 9–10). Following the introduction, the volume consists of seven chapters and an epilogue, with each chapter further divided into subheadings, helpfully guiding readers through the main themes.
In Chapter 1, ‘Orpheus and the Mythical Tradition’, M. introduces examples of the reception of Orpheus in early opera and in the film Black Orpheus (pp. 11–12). Also outlined is his use of ‘applied mythology’, developed by A. Henrichs, which regards myth as ‘a network of interconnected stories which generated diverse realisations and readings in different periods’ (p. 12). This opening sets up a discussion on the mythical traditions surrounding Orpheus. M. considers Orpheus as a hero before outlining the sources detailing his atypical heroic character. M. provides an excellent overview of sources and various local traditions relating to Orpheus, including an array of less-known narratives. For example, M. highlights the story of Orpheus’ death by Zeus's lightning (Alcidamas, Ulixes 24; Pausanias 9.30.5) or by being torn apart by the hands of Thracian women, cursed with fatal desire by Aphrodite as revenge for Orpheus’ mother's judgement in the argument over Adonis (Hyginus, Astronomy 2.7.4). Proceeding after this selection of lesser-known stories, M. concludes that ‘we cannot attempt to answer the question of if Orpheus was a Thracian, but rather where, when and why he would be one’ (pp. 26–7).
Chapter 2 focuses on the two major assumptions for Orpheus’ Thracian identity: his father Oeagrus' Thracian origins and the idea that Orpheus resided in Thrace. M. outlines the chapter's focus in its introduction, namely classical and Hellenistic accounts and early iconographical representations of Orpheus and his relationship to Thrace. M. briefly discusses mythical heroes and ethnicity (p. 39), though he omits to provide his own working definition for the concept. He is, perhaps, correct to surmise that ethnicity in Greek mythical stories would not have been understood as the concept is today; however, as the concept of ethnicity remains loosely defined, the provision of a clear definition to contextualise M.'s usage would have been insightful. Nonetheless, M. states that the reference to a hero's ethnicity in a myth is not a result of otherness but a ‘confluence of diverse factors, including the political context, mythographic or poetic decisions, and ad hoc choices for a given circumstance’ (p. 85). M.'s conclusion that whether Orpheus was Thracian depended on the specific source and context is convincing (pp. 41–2), as is his argument that links between Athens and Thrace from the sixth century may have contributed to the solidification of Orpheus as a Thracian (p. 40).
Chapters 3 and 4 investigate the third assumption that traditionally portrays Orpheus as a Thracian hero: that he lived in Thracian Pieria. As in Chapter 1, M. outlines his methodological approaches, consisting of an interdisciplinary combination of E. Said's ‘imaginary geography/imaginative geographies’, C. Lévi-Strauss's bricolage (helpful when analysing the modification of myths) and E. Rosch's prototype theory from cognitive psychology (pp. 46–7). M.'s analysis of Apollonius’ reference to ‘Bistonian Pieria’ (Apollonius, Argonautica 1.23) is particularly good, especially considering how, as M. highlights, the phrase ‘Bistonian Pieria’ has been a challenge in research on Orpheus. He resolves this issue by pointing out that Apollonius wrote when Bistonia was under Ptolemaic control (pp. 65–6). As Apollonius resided in Alexandria, this argument fits well, emphasising Orpheus’ connection to a Ptolemaic controlled territory rather than Antigonid Macedonia, and therefore fitting a political use of the Orpheus myth in the Hellenistic period.
Chapter 4 rejects the idea of a Macedonian invasion leading to the expulsion of Thracians from Macedon, as outlined by Thucydides (Thucydides 2.99), concluding that ‘one can hardly talk of Macedonians before the sixth century’ (p. 81). Through this, M.'s arguments align with current scholarship on regional groups in ancient Greece as late developments that started in the Archaic period. His argument regarding the gradual development of Macedonian identity bolsters his suggestion that Strabo's and Pausanias’ identification of Orpheus as Thracian better reflects the authors themselves and their period rather than the historical Thracians or early Macedon (p. 88).
Chapter 5 investigates the local Pierian myth of Orpheus, underlining genealogical links for the hero to Pieria, dated to the fifth century (pp. 100–4). Genealogies are an excellent tool for deciphering the ideological and identity-creating aspects of Greek myth, and M. argues well for the fifth-century origin of this mythical tradition. In this specific genealogy Orpheus is descended from Pieria's eponymous hero, constructing a familial link between Orpheus and the city, thus emphasising Orpheus as a localised hero in Pieria (p. 104).
The sixth chapter, ‘Orpheus’ Tomb in Pieria’, begins with an account of the Italian early Renaissance poet Francesco Petrarch's visit to Arezzo in 1350, the city of his birth, where he was remembered as a hero despite not having visited since he was born – and found that the house he was born in was preserved as the ‘home of Petrarch’ (p. 109). The chapter ends with a coda discussing the two shrines of Saint Adalbert, which both claim to contain his remains (p. 134). These enclose an intriguing discussion of ancient accounts indicating the presence of a tomb of Orpheus at Pieria whilst also considering other locations where his tomb is mentioned, such as on Lesbos (pp. 110–14). In this chapter M. also examines the cults of poets, which spread in the Hellenic world in the fifth and fourth centuries. Among these, he considers the story of the famous musician Linus, the bones of whom Pausanias claimed that Phillip II transferred from Thebes to Macedonia (Pausanias 9.29.8). Memories and stories of significant characters are key aspects of a group's identity that can be used for ideological gain. Indeed, M. persuasively argues that the story of the relocation of Linus’ tomb fits a fourth-century context (pp. 131–2). Supporting this argument, M. also discusses genealogies connecting Linus and Orpheus through familial ties (pp. 129–30), showing how Greek genealogical links could substantiate ideological claims of descent from mythical characters.
The final chapter, ‘Mousikē, Identity and Ideology’, brings together M.'s investigations to propose a chronological framework for the Pierian traditions and their links to Orpheus. For the ancient Greeks, there was a distinct connection between mythical traditions and historical narratives, as illustrated by this volume: ‘An investment in the myth and cult of Orpheus may be seen as a signal to the Greeks that Macedonia had always been Greek’ (p. 148). Constructing and rewriting narratives of Orpheus in this way allowed the Macedonians to portray themselves as Greeks through an ideological use of myth history, as evidenced throughout. A short epilogue named ‘Orpheuses, not Orpheus’ – poignantly collating the variant versions of the hero from antiquity – concludes the volume. M. asks ‘who could the Pierian Orpheus be …?’, concluding that in Macedonia he was predominantly the first musician, and the association between Macedon and Orpheus gave the Macedonian kings a stake in the debate over the origin of Greek music and culture (p. 154).
