whose chief falls in love with the heroine, the supposed killing of the heroine, due to mistaken identity, and the trial of the heroine's chastity at the end of her adventures.

The only one of these borrowings which seems to require a detailed examination in order to determine its extent and importance is that from the Odyssey. It is my purpose in this article, first, to make such an examination of the extent of the influence of the Odyssey upon the plot of the Aethiopica; second, to develop from the results of this examination some conjectures as to the growth of the plan of the work in the mind of its author; and, third, to attempt to discover what elements of originality remain to Heliodorus' credit after the elimination of all these borrowings, and the importance of these elements in the development of fiction.*

We must first mention a peculiarity of Heliodorus' with respect to his borrowings from the classics. He frequently seems proud of them, and is careful to call them to the attention of his readers. He does this, for example, in the Cnemon-Demaeneta episode by making Demaeneta call Cnemon, "her young Hippolytus, her Theseus."

He is especially careful to indicate to the reader his adoption of the general plan of the Odyssey. In fact he motivates it in his story through a prophecy made by the deified Odysseus. While the aged Calasiris is staying at Zacynthus in company with Theagenes and Chariclea, Odysseus appears to him in a dream. After expressing his indignation for the contempt Calasiris has shown for him by neglecting to visit Ithaca when in the vicinity, he prophesies swift punishment for this neglect in the following words: "You shall experience sufferings like mine, meeting enemies both on sea and land." This prophecy is followed by another, sent by Penelope, which foretells final good fortune to the young heroine, Chariclea. And as Calasiris is addressed in the singular in the prediction quoted above, it appears to apply to him alone.

'Familiarity with the story is assumed throughout the paper. not seemed worth while to give an outline of the plot, as such outlines are available in Rohde, Der griechische Roman, pp. 424-432, and in Wolff, op. cit., pp. 11-28.

It has

'I, 10.

στοιγάρ τοι τούτων ὑφέξεις οὐκ εἰς μακρὰν τὴν δίκην καὶ τῶν ὁμοίων ἐμοὶ παθῶν αἰσθήσῃ, θαλάττη τε ἅμα καὶ γῇ πολεμίοις ἐντυγχάνων. V, 22.

Disregarding for the present the implications of the prophecy, and considering the two narratives in general, the most obvious point of resemblance is the fact that the Aethiopica, as well as the Odyssey, is a vóoros story. Chariclea is the chief character, and her return home is the main theme of the novel. The returns of Calasiris and Thyamis are also important elements in the narrative. The general structure of the Aethiopica is also clearly very similar to that of the Odyssey. Heliodorus plunges "in medias res" at the very beginning, bringing in the earlier part of the story through the narrative of Calasiris. And here "in medias res" is a precise, not an approximate expression. The point of beginning is "caught up with" in Calasiris' narrative at the end of Book V, exactly the middle point of the work. After that the narrative proceeds almost entirely in chronological order. All this is obviously a careful imitation of the Odyssey, for Odysseus ends his narrative to the Phaeacians at the end of Book XII.

The definite break between the two halves of the Odyssey is also faithfully reproduced in the Aethiopica. In Odyssey XIII, the hero takes leave of his friends the Phaeacians, who have received him as their guest, listened to the story of his adventures, and are about to escort him home. Immediately afterwards he begins his adventures in Ithaca. In the same way Calasiris and Chariclea, in Book VI, take final leave of the friends who have listened to their story, of Cnemon, who has helped them on their way, of Nauricles, who has entertained them at his home, and of his daughter Nausiclea. The only purpose this young lady serves in the story, it seems, is to help in disposing neatly of Cnemon. However, as Nausicles is in a way the Alcinous of the Aethiopica, it seems clear that the introduction of Nausiclea was suggested by the episode of Nausicaa. At any rate, the departure of these characters from the narrative, and the setting out of Calasiris and Chariclea alone in search of Theagenes, make a break in the story which is almost as distinct as that in the middle of the Odyssey, and clearly similar to it in character.

There is also a clear similarity to the Odyssey in the point where Heliodorus begins his story. This is exactly where the adventures on shipboard end and those on land begin. The only incident of a

nautical character which comes later is the battle on the lake." The story of the Odyssey does not indeed begin at the point where all adventures on the sea are at an end, but it does commence with those adventures of Odysseus which follow upon the loss of his ship and crew. The only nautical adventures which follow are the briefly recounted voyages on the raft and on the Phaeacian ship. In both cases all the adventures on shipboard are recounted later by Odysseus and by Calasiris respectively.

The books of the Odyssey frequently begin at dawn and end when the characters go to their rest at night. This precedent is followed in Books I, IV, V, and VI of the Aethiopica.

Heliodorus naturally had to insert in his novel an account of how his chief characters came to leave their homes, whereas this is of course unnecessary in the story of Odysseus' return. To some extent Calasiris' account of his own journey to Delphi, and of how Chariclea came to be brought there may be said to take the place of the story of Telemachus' wanderings. The only common element appears to be the fact that we are taken back to the homes of the chief characters in both cases. But Cnemon's story can perhaps be said to take the place of that of Telemachus to a still greater degree. Here we have an account of the troubles at home and of the wanderings abroad of a young man who is to be closely associated with the chief characters later. In this respect the episode corresponds closely to the story of Telemachus. Its position in the novel is also striking, as it is introduced in the very first part, before we have been told anything of importance about the chief characters.

A search for particular episodes in the story which show imitation of the Odyssey yields few results in the first half of the Aethiopica. Of course the clever tricks of Calasiris and Chariclea remind us of the wily hero's ways. The passage in which Chariclea tells Thyamis a false story of her identity and adventures may particularly be compared with some of the accounts which Odysseus gives of himself.8

Turning to the second half of the Aethiopica, we find, first of all, two episodes which are not only obvious imitations of the Odyssey, but are called to our attention as such, in accordance with Heliodorus' habit.

'I, 31-32.

I, 22. Compare Od. XIV, 199 ff., etc.

The plan of disguising themselves as beggars is first proposed to Chariclea by Theagenes in II, 19. Cnemon, in playful objection to the plan, says: Καὶ ἐμοὶ δοκεῖτε τοιοίδε ὄντες οὐκ ἀκόλους ἀλλ ̓ ἄοράς τε Kai λéßηTas airýoav, obviously referring to Odyssey XVII, 221-222, and thus to Odysseus' masquerade as a beggar.

9

The plan is actually put into effect by Chariclea and Calasiris in VI, 11. There again we are reminded of the corresponding disguise in the Odyssey by the bag (pa) carried by Chariclea. The scene 10 in which Calasiris intervenes to stop the fight between his sons, is unrecognized until he throws off his disguise, and then is welcomed joyfully, is evidently a reminiscence of Telemachus' recognition of Odysseus.11 And the blow which, in the passage immediately following, Chariclea receives from Theagenes before she is recognized by him, reminds us of the buffets received by Odysseus in his own house while disguised as a beggar.

Immediately following the adoption of the beggar's disguise occurs the other episode whose Homeric source Heliodorus indicates to us. This is the incantation scene in which the old woman, unwittingly watched by Calasiris and Chariclea, brings the body of her son to life in order to obtain a prophecy from him.12 This experience is referred to by Heliodorus as a véκvia.13 This is the title by which the eleventh book of the Odyssey was known; otherwise the word is very rarely used. Its use here would undoubtedly recall the Odyssey story to Heliodorus' readers, and was obviously intended to do so. The experience itself is similar to that of Odysseus in that a dead person is called up to give a prophecy, and that he foretells final happiness to both Calasiris and Chariclea. The heroine's happiness is to be attained after many trials, as was to be the case with Odysseus, according to Teiresias' prophecy.14

When we come to the various recognition scenes, we find there also several obvious resemblances to the Odyssey. In the first place, there are three important recognitions in the Aethiopica; first, that

'XIII, 430-438.

10 VII, 7.

"Od. XVI, 172-219.

12 VI, 14-15.
13 VII, 1.

14 This particular form of véкvia was probably suggested to Heliodorus by episodes in works of prose fiction with which he was familiar. Compare Apuleius II, 21-30. Of course we cannot tell whether he got the idea directly from Apuleius or not.

of Calasiris by his sons, second, that of Chariclea by Theagenes, and, third, that of Chariclea by her parents. These evidently correspond to the recognitions of Odysseus, first, by Telemachus, second, by Penelope, and, third, by Laertes. We have called attention above to the clear resemblance between the recognition of Odysseus by Telemachus and that of Calasiris by Thyamis.

The emphasis, of course, is differently placed in the two stories. In the Odyssey the most important, and therefore the most gradual, recognition is that by Penelope, while in the Aethiopica the recognition of Chariclea by her parents is the most important and longest delayed. Upon comparing these most important recognitions in the two works, we find some points of similarity. The black mark or mole on Chariclea's arm evidently corresponds to the scar on Odysseus' thigh. And, as Chariclea can have no recollection of her birthplace, the evidence of her mother's letter takes the place of Odysseus' memories. The part played by Sisimithres seems to correspond roughly to that of Odysseus' nurse. The unimportance of the conventional tokens is striking.

One of Theagenes' adventures in the latter part of the novel may perhaps be mentioned in this connection also. His conflict with the Ethiopian wrestler may possibly be a reminiscence of Odysseus' flight with Irus in the corresponding part of the Odyssey.

This seems to be the extent of Heliodorus' imitation of the Odyssey. It appears that the character of Odysseus is actually represented in the Aethiopica not by Calasiris alone, as we might have expected from the prophecy, but by both Calasiris and Chariclea. If Theagenes can be thought of as taking on the character of the Homeric hero at all, it is after the death of Calisiris.

These facts tempt us to hazard a conjecture in regard to the development of the plan of the novel in the mind of its author. As the imitation of the Odyssey appears to be basic, we must suppose that the author's first idea was to write a romance on its general plan. How did this idea develop? In the completed work, the heroine, Chariclea, is in succession under the guardianship of three mature and virtuous priests, Sisimithres (Ethiopian), Charicles (Greek), and Calasiris (Egyptian). To the last of these comes the prophecy that he shall experience sufferings like those of Odysseus. It seems very probable, therefore, that Heliodorus' first plan included only one mature priest, who was to be approximately the