Roman Svetlov

Plato and Euhemerus: "Egyptian Logos" and "Sacra Historia"

Roman Svetlov - Department of Philosophy, Theology and the Study of Religion, Russian Christian Humanitarian Academy (Saint-Petersburg, Russia). spatha@mail.ru

Antiquity developed several types of interpretation of the myth: allegorical, rational (critical), pragmatic and euhemeristic (historical). We find all of them in the texts of Plato, who lived long before Euhemeras and Palaephatus. The article examines the well-known Plato's texts about Thamus and Theuth in "Phaedrus" (274c-275a) and "Philebus" (18b-d), as well as thematically closest fragment of the "Politicus" (274b-d). It is shown that the Platonic "euhemerism" is one of the inner preconditions and basis in the teachings of Plato. We have in mind Plato's cosmology and view of history (movements of Cosmos), which gave the opportunity to talk about Plato's "earthly gods". Didactic story about gods Thamus and Theuth as earthly rulers could become a background for the doctrine of Eugemerus that the gods worshiped by people are the great kings of antiquity. Relationship among the teachings of Plato and Eugemer can be seen not only on the basis of analysis of the legend about Atlantis (this legend could be the model for the "Sacra Historia" of Eugemerus). The fragment of "Phaedrus" gives us an example of the

This work was supported by the Russian Humanitarian Science Foundation in the framework of the project: "The Golden Age: Mythological Historiosophy and Sociogenesis in Ancient Greek and Hebrew Traditions" (project N 14 - 03 - 00219).

Svetlov R. Platon i Euhemerus: "Egyptian Logos" and "Sacred Record" / / Gosudarstvo, religiya, tserkva v Rossii i za rubezhom [State, Religion, Church in Russia and abroad]. 2015. N 3 (33). pp. 382-396.

Svetlov, Roman (2015) "Plato and Euhemerus: 'Egyptian Logos' and 'Sacra Historia'", Gosudarstuo, religiia, tserkou' v Rossii i za rubezhom 33(3): 382 - 396.

page 382
interpretation of the myth, which was peculiar to Plato, but it could be a prerequisite for the interpretation developed by Euhemerus. Moreover, in the text of "Phaedrus" we find a critical consideration of "rational" interpretation of mythology. Plato rejected this strategy, preferring to create its own historical mythology, where "Egyptian logos" from "Phaedrus" had a definite place.

Keywords: Euhemerism, Plato, ancient interpretation of mythology, Egyptian "logos" in the "Phaedrus".

The "EGYPTIAN Logos" from Plato's dialogue Phaedrus, dedicated to the discovery of writing by the Egyptian god Teut (Thoth) (274c - 275b), is best known in the context of disputes about the significance of Plato's recorded writings for the reconstruction of his philosophical doctrines, as well as in the context of discussions of Plato's concept of rhetoric. It has repeatedly been the subject of controversy between supporters of the "esoteric" and "dramatic" approaches to the interpretation of Plato's legacy, as well as those who support the traditional view of the evolution of the ideas of the great Athenian philosopher. One discussion of this controversy may become the subject of a separate monograph. However, if we pay attention to the plot, and not to the philosophical implications of the "Egyptian" legend, we find in this place a strange consonance with that formally later phenomenon known as "Euhemerism". From the moralizing account of the gods Thamus and Teutus as earthly rulers, a bridge can probably be thrown to the story of Euhemerus that the gods worshipped by people are the great rulers of antiquity. The connection between the teachings of Plato and Euhemerus has already been attempted on the basis of the Atlantis legend, which could become a model for the "Sacred Record" of Euhemerus1. However, this passage from Phaedrus does not give us a sample of a utopian or anti-utopian text, but an example of the interpretation of the myth that was peculiar to Plato and which could become a prerequisite for interpretations similar to Euhemerus. We will try to show that Euhemerus ' teaching as a whole was based on a variety of strategies for interpreting the myth, giving rise to-

1. См. Honigman, S. (2009) "Euhemerus of Messene and Plato's Atlantis", Historia 58(1): 1 - 35.

page 383
This passage from Phaedrus will serve as an example of how these interpretations manifested themselves in philosophical literature, which created the intellectual context in which Euhemerus ' ideas were formed.

But first, we will try to understand what is meant by the term "euhemerism" in modern literature.2 In our opinion, this concept is used in two senses, which can be designated as "wide" and"narrow". In a broad sense, this is the idea that the cult of the gods arose from the deification of people - rulers and inventors who did something important for the history of the human race, 3 the prerequisite for which could be the cult of heroes-ancestors. With this understanding, the history of Euhemerism should certainly begin long before Euhemerus. Even a century before him, the sophist Prodicus argued that religion arose from the veneration of everything useful for human life - including people who made discoveries and inventions. Add to Prodicus Hecataeus of Miletus, who in the Genealogies explained many religious cults by deifying the creators of certain ideas (for example, the concept of afterlife retribution). The fifth book of the Historical Library of Diodorus Siculus, our main source on Euhemerus, contains many examples of similar ideas attributed by the historian, for example, to the Cretans (Diod. Bibl. Hist. V. 66 et seq.).

In a narrow sense, Euhemerism is the veneration of deified ancient rulers. However, even here we find the predecessors of Euhemerus, as exemplified in the epic tales in particular. Epic mythology introduces us to cases of" transmutation " of certain characters from ancestral heroes to deities and, conversely, from deities to ancestral heroes (rulers). It is enough to recall Achilles, the figure of the Trojan epic cycle, whose cult was of a general Greek character, but was especially widespread in the Northern Black Sea region. Achilles was revered both as a hero and as a god, which caused a well-known legend.

2. The variety of interpretations of this concept is so great that it is extremely difficult to summarize them in one review. An example of this is Roubekas, N. (2014) "What is Euhemerism? A Brief History of Research and Some Persisting Questions", Bulletin for the Study of Religion 43(2): 30 - 37.

3. See, for example, Weinberg I. P. The Birth of History. Historical Thought in the Middle East of the middle of the first millennium BC, Moscow, 1993, p. 16; Kraiko Yu. V. The ancient myth of Atlanta and Atlantis: the experience of folklore consideration. Dissertation for the degree of Candidate of Philological Sciences, Moscow, 2006, p. 113.

page 384
a discussion about the direction of transformation of this image - whether from god to the hero, or, on the contrary, from the epic ancestor - hero to god (and, perhaps, in both directions)will be presented to the Russian reader4. The fact that the spontaneous "euhemerization" of the divine image could have taken place long before the formation of the rationalistic tradition is confirmed by the fate of some of the tribal gods of Asia Minor who were involved in Greek epic history and received within it the fate of heroes-rulers of the second plan.5
We see a similar picture in Phoenician mythology. The cosmogony attributed by Philo of the Bible to Sankhunyaton combines allegorical, euhemerical features and features known from the teachings of Prodicus (the deification of inventors and cultural heroes). At the same time, Philo insists that this is a true teaching that has been forgotten or distorted by later writers. Philo's text has a very obvious dependence on the theological and socio-cultural ideas of the Hellenistic era. However, it has enough archaic features to suggest the presence of a Phoenician "spontaneous Euhemerism" that does not depend on the Hellenic tradition.6
These observations lead us to recognize that the understanding of Euhemerus ' teaching as a result of the development of ancient rationalism is very difficult.-

4. See H. Hommel. Akhill-god / / VDI. 1981. N 1. p. 53-76; Toporov V. N. About the archaic layer in the image of Akhill: The problem of reconstruction of prototext elements / / Image-meaning in ancient culture. Moscow, 1990. p. 64-95; Zakharova E. A. On the question of the Chthonic essence of the cult of Akhill in the Northern Black Sea region // Mnemonic. Research and publications on the history of the ancient world. Issue 3. St. Petersburg, 2004, pp. 349-359. More recently, an attempt has been made to explain the" Chthonic " character of the Black Sea cult of Achilles through the possible identification of this character (by consonance) with Ahi-Vala, a Chthonic serpent worshipped by the Indo-Aryans, who, according to some modern assumptions, were found by Greek colonists in the Northern Black Sea region. Cm. Yailenko VP Essays ethnic, political and cultural history of Scythia VIII -III centuries B. C. M., 2013. Page 64 - 100. SRV. Rusyaeva A. S. Voprosy razvitiya kul'ta Akhilla v Severnom Prichernomorye [Issues of the development of the cult of Achilles in the Northern Black Sea region]. Kiev, 1975. pp. 174-185; Klein L. S. Anatomiya "Iliad" [Anatomy of the Iliad]. St. Petersburg, 1998, pp. 332-335.

5. See Krugloe E. A. The Cult of Apollo of Telmessos (Caro-Lycian origins of the Hellenistic teaching of Euhemerus). Research and publications on the history of the ancient world. Issue 5. St. Petersburg, 2006, pp. 363-374.

6. Turaev B. A. Finikiyskaya mifologiya / / Finikiyskaya mifologiya, SPb., 1999. p. 69; Shifman I. I. Drevnyaya Finikiya - mifologiya i istoriya [Ancient Phoenicia-mythology and History] / / Finikiyskaya mifologiya, SPb., 1999. p. 222 et seq. Срв. Brown, Т. (1946) "Euhemerus and the Historians", Harvard Theological Review 39: 259.

page 385
ma and freethinking 7 should be clarified. First, Euhemerus followed the existing tradition 8, interpreting it in the current political spirit for that time. At the time of the diadochi struggle, when his "Sacred Record" was created, the deification of the monarch was one of the means of ideological motivation and mobilization of the masses. Euhemerus shows that this process goes back to the very beginnings of human history (we leave aside the discussion of the social model that exists in the Panhaya). If he really came from Messena Sicilia, then his teaching may well have been inspired by the peculiarities of Sicilian history, which has many examples of great monarchs (primarily Syracusan) who demanded every kind of veneration.9 So we can agree with the assumption made by M. K. Trofimova that " The story of Pankhaya... It can be perceived as a rather explicit justification for new forms of absolute power. " 10
Secondly, the fate of Euhemerus ' teaching within the framework of Roman religious and political consciousness is interesting. Although ancient authors ranked Euhemerus among the atheists (See, for example, Sext. Empir. Adv. Math. IX. 2.1), his doctrine was used in Rome to justify the deification procedure of a prominent public figure or ruler. These procedures appeared in Rome before the establishment of the empire, and the first example of them was the legendary theosis of Romulus. This reading of Euhemerus in Rome is supported by Ennius ' translation of the Sacred Record into Latin as early as the first half of the second century BC. Even if Ennius did not intend to prepare the deification of Scipio Africanus (the possibility of which is discussed by M. Vinyarczyk, one of the most authoritative modern scholars dealing with Euhemerus), in the future this method was used text played

7. Here is how Euhemerus is attested in the notes to Cicero's treatise On the Nature of the Gods: "Euhemerus of Messana in Sicily is a fourth-century Greek philosopher who proposed a rationalistic interpretation of Greek mythology..." Philosophical treatises, Moscow: Nauka Publ., 1985, p. 329. You can give a lot of other examples.

8. См. Winiarczyk, M. (2013) The "Sacred History" of Euhemerus of Messene, p. 28. Berlin: De Gruyter.

9. See the discussion of the Sicilian origin of Euhemerus in De Angelis, F. & Garstad, B. (2006)" Euhemerus in Context", Classical Antiquity 25(2): 211-242.

10. Trofimova M. K. Utopia of Euhemerus / / Istoriya sotsialisticheskikh ucheniy [History of socialist teachings], Moscow, 1986, p. 275.

11. Winiarczyk, M. The "Sacred History" of Euhemerus of Messene, pp. 110 - 114.

page 386
He also played a significant role in shaping Roman ideas about deification and influenced Cicero (despite the fact that Cicero was critical of him in De natura Deorum: I. 118) .12 The Romans loved the "argument from precedent". The assessment of the" Sacred Record " as a kind of historical record, and of the inscriptions on the stele in Panhaya as an analogue of the Roman annals, made it an authoritative precedent for political deification procedures.13
Third, let us not forget that, quite in the spirit of Plato's and, apparently, Aristotelian ideas, Euhemerus speaks of the existence of heavenly gods-eternal and perfect heavenly bodies. Here he is not at all original, and we can hardly attribute to him any special " astral theology."

Finally, and fourthly, Euhemerus ' ideas cannot be called a rationalistic critique of myth, if by the latter we mean the reduction of myths to some rationally interpreted, that is, natural, and not supernatural, events incorrectly depicted by epic poets. The latter tradition is represented in antiquity by the names of Palaethates, Heraclitus Paradoxographus, and a number of others (as we will see, Plato!). One of its predecessors may have been Critias (if the fragment preserved from his satire drama Sisyphus expresses the views of the author himself). Palefatus sought to rationalize the traditions either as delusions of people "who believe everything they are told", or as incidents that have received religious significance through a misunderstanding. The tradition of Palefate et al. is an obvious critique of mythology and folk religion.

Unlike Palefate, Euhemerus finds the historical "background" of mythological texts.14 Leaving aside the miraculous deeds of the gods, Euhemerus creates a historical bio for each of them.-

12. Cole, S. (2006) "Cicero, Ennius, and the Concept of Apotheosis at Rome", Arethusa 39: 539; срв., Carswell, Ch. J. A. (2009) Sidera Augusta: The Role of the Stars in Augustus' Quest for Supreme Auctoritas, p. 41. Ontario, Canada: Queens University Kingston.

13. Despite the apparently "godless" nature of this work, it could be used as another argument in favor of the deification of historical figures. Such was the specificity of Roman consciousness: what was accepted and accomplished in ancient times (if all this was perceived as real things that happened, and not as fiction) was a precedent that the Romans treated with legal respect.

14. For the difference between Euhemerus and the Palaefatic tradition, see Stern, J. (2003) " Heraclitus the Paradoxographer: Peri Apiston (On Unbelievable Tales)", Transactions of the American Philological Association 133 (1): 55-57; Hawes, G. (2014) Rationalazing Myth in Antiquity, pp. 26 28. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

page 387
graph), while maintaining the significance of stories about Uranus, Zeus, and others. According to Greta Hos, "Euhemerism demonstrates a generally historicist understanding of the world. " 15 M. Vinjarczyk rightly argues that the purpose of the" Sacred Record " was to explain the origin of religion, and not an allegorical interpretation of it. 16 But, we will add, the explanation is already an interpretation, simply of a different kind than in the case of Palefatus. The concept of Euhemerus does not reject religion as such, but historically legitimizes the cult of "earth gods". It is interesting that the first Russian author who seriously studied Euhemerus, S. G. Stepanov, also believed that he sought to understand and explain Olympic mythology from a pragmatic point of view17.

Thus, Euhemerism belonged to those diverse types of interpretation and adaptation of mythology to the changing cultural horizon of ancient society (allegorical, historical, pragmatic, 18 rational), which began their formation in the pre-Platonic period. Much later, Platonists, following Plutarch (who, however, still has both pragmatic and "rationalistic" interpretations of individual myths), will begin to understand the mythological narrative as an inspired text, and therefore its allegorical theological interpretation will become the only legal one. Plutarch's interpretation of the story of Isis and Osiris, Plotinus ' interpretation of the basic cosmogonic tradition from The Theogony, Porphyry's interpretation of the fragment from Homer about the cave of the nymphs, and Sallust's interpretation of the myth of Adonis show a normative late - Antique way of understanding the mythological narrative. In turn, Christian apologists will interpret "pagan fables" either as the machinations of demons, or through appeals to the ancient experience of "rationalistic" and" euphemistic " interpretation of myths (presenting its results in a negative way for the ancient religion)19.

15. Hawes, G. (2014) Rationalazing Myth in Antiquity, p. 27.

16. Winiarczyk, M. The "Sacred History" of Euhemerus of Messene, pp. 106 - 107. Срв. Shakhnovich M. M. Paradoxes of theology of Epicurus, St. Petersburg, 2000, pp. 80-81.

17. Stepanov S. G. Evguemer i evguemerizm [Evguemer and evguemerism]. St. Petersburg, 1911. pp. 103-126.

18. Explaining the origin of religion from the veneration of all that is useful to man.

19. It is important to note that euhemerism during this period becomes one of the rhetorical topos in interreligious polemics and is also used by critics of the Christian Orthodox Church.-

page 388
However, if we go back to the beginning of the Platonic tradition, it turns out that, contrary to his late Antique followers, Plato was more diverse in the interpretation and use of mythological narratives. We should agree with L. Brisson, who wrote that it is with Plato that the understanding of the word "myth" in the modern context begins. Plato understands myth as a special type of narrative and discourse, contrasting it with the logos of philosophers.20 This contrast is connected with Plato's general critical attitude towards traditional mythology, which, from his point of view, only imitates reality - divine, epic, moral. There is a well-known passage from the Phaedrus in which Socrates discusses the legend of the abduction of Orithia by Boreas.21 Socrates ironically offers a perfectly rational explanation for this story: Orithia was simply thrown off a cliff by a gust of wind. His words that he thinks "like wise men" - Phaedr. 229c), suggest that similar "rationalistic" explanations of mythical plots took place in Greece long before Palefate. However, Socrates is not happy with them. Just a few lines below, he refuses to reconstruct the appearance of hippocentaurs, chimeras, gorgons, pegasi (possibly referring to Empedocles '"paleontological" research), considering it difficult and not bringing special results (Phaedr. 229d). This passage shows Plato's critical attitude to the rationalistic forms of myth interpretation that are characteristic of both Herodotus and the sophists.

Instead of the traditional mythology and the "rational" view of the history of the universe that opposes it, Plato creates a complex of his own mythological narratives that deal not only with the immortality of the soul, its nature, but also with the history of the universe.-

stianstvo. См. Roubekas, N. (2012) "Which Euhemerism Will You Use? Celsus on the Divine Nature of Jesus", Journal of Early Christian History 2(2): 80 - 96.

20. Here is what he writes: "Plato was the first to use the term mythos in the sense in which we understand it today. Using this term not at all metaphorically, Plato means by it a certain discourse, the authors of which were poets, contrasting it with the word logos, which was used by philosophers " (Brisson L. The role of myth in Plato and in Late antiquity // Bulletin of the Russian Christian Humanitarian Academy. 2012. Volume 13. Issue 1. pp. 65-66. See also Brisson, L. (2004) How Philosophers Saved Myths: Allegorical Interpretation and Classical Mythology, pp. 11, 15. Chicago. The University of Chicago Press).

21. Phaedrus calls this story See Phaedr. 229c.

page 389
exodus of the universe. Plato is also the author of an impressive historical myth that has both cosmological and moral-political implications.22
One of the particular elements of Plato's historical meta-narrative is the reference of Socrates in Phaedrus to the Egyptian gods Thamus and Teutus. Plato names the cities where the first one rules (Thebes, from here he extends his power to all of Egypt) and the second one is born (Navkratis). Formally, Thamus and Teut are referred to as" god "and" demon "respectively, but the legend has an obvious euhemeric "flavor": the most important Egyptian deities are depicted as the oldest rulers of the Nile Valley. 23 The first argument in favor of the "euhemeric" reading of the "Egyptian logos" from the Phaedrus is the fact that Thamus is called "king" there."(Phaedr. 274d). Second, and no less important, is the attribution in the dialogue "Phileb" of Teutus as a certain god or divine person (Phileb, 18b). This expression recalls the tradition preserved by Herodotus and Xenophon about the Spartan lawgiver Lycurgus. When the latter came to Delphi, the oracle allegedly addressed him with the words: "I think what to call you-god, or man" (Xenophon. Apolog. 15; wed. Herodot. Hist. I. 65). Thus, for Socrates, Thamus and Teutus could well have been divine people, that is, those who were under the protection of higher powers and were worthy of posthumous deification - as happened, according to Herodotus, with Lycurgus (Ibid. 66). Regardless of the degree of historicity of the latter evidence, Herodotus brought to us a tradition that Plato could well have associated with Teutus, which is probably suggested by the above quote from Philebus. Thus, we can speak of the "euhemericity" of the Teutus tradition in both the broad and narrow sense of the word.

In the story of the discovery of writing, there is one strange moment. Plato clearly means exactly Greek, alphanumeric, writing, and not hieroglyphics. In the dialogue "Philebus", Socrates again refers to the invention of grammar by Teutus, which he understands as the ability to discover the connection between letters

22. Svetlov R. V. Myth from the dialogue "Politician" and the first "Battle for history" / / Bulletin of the Russian Christian Humanitarian Academy. 2014. Volume 15. N 4. pp. 33-38.

23. We will not touch upon the actual Egyptian premises of such an interpretation of the gods, since this topic still requires a detailed study.

page 390
(mute, semivowel, and vowel: Phileb. 18b-c). This attribution is certainly surprising. But first, in his mythological excursions, Plato connects a lot of important knowledge with the Nile Valley. Secondly, it is known that in Ancient Egypt some hieroglyphs were used as alphabetic signs denoting individual consonants. Closer to the fifth century BC, demotic writing appears, where the number of "letter" signs increases and, most importantly, the cases of writing individual words by them become more frequent. In the already mentioned text of Philo Biblsky, the opening of the letter is also attributed to Thoth (in Philo-Taaut). Since the written signs were borrowed by the Greeks from the Phoenicians, the long-standing hypothesis that Egyptian hieroglyphics nevertheless served as a model for the early Phoenician writing system cannot but attract attention.24 So attributing the discovery of all kinds of writing to Toth-Teut can be quite understandable (although historically incorrect).

But why does Plato need an account of the Egyptian rulers to explain the nature of rhetoric and the meaning of written speech? Phaedrus first exclaims: "You are at liberty, Socrates, to make up Egyptian and other fables!" (Phaedr. 275b), but quickly agrees that truth can be expressed not only in writing, but even in a divine sign (for example, in the whisper of oak leaves in the Dodona sanctuary). C. Morgan believes that Plato uses the "argument from Tamus" in favor of gods-pleasing correct rhetoric (Phaedr. 274b) based on truth rather than scholarship 25. But in our opinion, the Egyptian story told by Socrates fits into the general Platonic history of the Cosmos, known to us from Timaeus and Politius.

Since we live in a cycle of the universe in which the gods no longer provide for us directly, 26 neither direct knowledge nor direct communication with them is possible. Therefore, a person is forced to use the whole series

24. See on the" Egyptian " hypothesis of the origin of the Phoenician script in Friedrich I. Istoriya pisma (History of Writing), Moscow, 1979, pp. 95-120 (especially pp. 102-103). However, this hypothesis has been repeatedly criticized. Cf., for example, Dyakonov I. M. Zapadnosemitskoe pismo [West Semitic letter]. Sovetskaya entsiklopediya, 1990, pp. 163-164.

25. Morgan, K.A. (2004) Myth and Philosophy from the Presocratics to Plato, p. 162. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

26. See the myth of the direct and "backward" reversal of Space-Plato, Politicus, 268d-264e.

page 391
tools that allow him to somehow join the higher knowledge or at least imitate it. Writing is one of these tools. Completely unnecessary in the era of the proximity of the divine sphere ("the age of Kronos "according to "Politik"), it is invented in the "age of Zeus". Thamus, who represents the Hellenic Zeus in full accordance with the interpretatio graeca, critically evaluates it. But it does not prevent (or cannot prevent) the introduction of this art into the life of the human race. The transformation of the gods into inhabitants and rulers of Egypt is also quite understandable. Plato's Politique, quite in the spirit of Prodicus, tells about the first inventions of ancient people, who found themselves in a helpless and primitive state after the Cosmos unfolded its movement, and the gods withdrew from the sublunar world:

At first the people were unskilled and unskilful, food no longer came to them by itself, and they did not yet know how to get food, because before necessity did not force them to do so. 27 Because of all this, they found themselves in great difficulty. This is why the ancient tradition tells us that the gods gave us gifts: fire, along with the necessary training and education, was given by Prometheus, the arts-by Hephaestus (d) and his skillful co-worker 28, seeds and plants-by others 29. Everything that helps in establishing human life originates from there: because, as I say, everything that helps in the establishment of human life. As I have just said, the care of the gods for people was a thing of the past, and they had to direct their own lives and take care of themselves, just like the whole Cosmos that we imitated and followed... (Politicus 274 c-d)

The "ancient tradition" mentioned by Plato can mean both the saving intervention of the gods, and the understanding of inventions as heavenly gifts, which turns into deification.-

27. These words of Plato allow him to fit his "great myth" into the picture of the gradual improvement of human existence from primitive savagery to enlightened civil life, which was created by Thucydides and Democritus and, with the addition of divine intervention, developed by Protagoras (see Protag., 31c).

28. This refers to Athena. See "Laws": "The artisan class is under the protection of Hephaestus and Athena "(Nomoi, 920d. Cf. Prot., 31e). Is the divine couple Hephaestus-Athena a "replica" of Thamus-Teutus?

29. The Laws list Demeter, Persephone (Cora), and Triptolemus (782b).

page 392
I welcome creators of essential human arts and skills.

In this case, the wise Thamus and the inventive Teut are quite euhemerical characters, whose power did not go beyond Egypt, but whose activities (like the entire legacy of Egyptian civilization) turned out to be so important for humanity. The deification of the pharaohs, which is well known to the Greeks, may have been the context in which Plato presents his tradition, and then Thamus and Teutus are characters in the Egyptian epic story, skillfully imitated by Socrates.30
There is another possible "trace" that combines a fragment from Phaedrus with Euhemerus ' description of utopian islands. We have already mentioned the golden stele on which the deeds of the "earth gods" are recorded, located in the very heart of Panhaya, in the temple of Zeus of Triphylia. This structure resembles the Egyptian stelae, so popular in Hellenistic times among the Hellenes and Romans. Since they were supposed to record the deeds of the Egyptian rulers, Euhemerus must have told them something similar. Since deceased Pharaohs are gods, reports of their deeds were preserved by the Egyptians, and Plato was well aware of this. It is not without reason that in the Timaeus an Egyptian priest, who told Solon about Atlantis, says :" No matter what glorious or great deed or even remarkable event has taken place, whether in our region or in any country of which we receive news, all this has been recorded from ancient times in the records that we keep in our temples"31 (Tim. 22e-23a). A Panhai stele is also found inside temple 32. With a little imagination, it can be assumed that when Socrates prefaces his account of Thamus and Teutus in Phaedrus with the words" I can only tell you that our ancestors heard about it " (Phaedr. 274c), he refers to the same Solon who once communicated with the priests in the Egyptian Saiss. Thus, the method of obtaining information about the ancient kings - gods of Egypt coincides with the one by which Euhemerus learns about the "earthly" Uranus, Cronus and Zeus on Panchaia. A possible match does not mean borrowing. However, it indicates the general context in which the Pla-

30. Compare the history of the image of Imhotep in ancient Egyptian culture.

31. Translated by S. S. Averintsev.

32. The laws commanded to Atlantis by Poseidon are also found on the orichalcum stele inside the temple of Poseidon-see Plato / Critias, 119c.

page 393
Thon and Euhemerus saw ways to store and broadcast sacred history.

We can see that the history of rational understanding of the mytho-religious complex in ancient Greece, which took place both with an adaptive and critical purpose, has a really diverse and long tradition. In some cases, it directly follows from the mythological narrative, which is rich in plots that simply asked to be borrowed by representatives of allegorical and euhemeric types of interpretation. As for Plato, he was certainly not a Euhemerist. But among the various discourses that we find in Plato's presentation or analysis of myths, there is also a place for a discourse that is close to euhemerical, and most likely was not at all surprising to readers of his dialogues. In turn, Euhemerus of Messene may well have been inspired for his "historical" reinterpretation of mythology not only by Plato's account of Atlantis, but also by the interpretation of the Egyptian gods in Phaedrus and Philebus as the most ancient rulers. What Euhemerus did was to directly link the Olympians ' acquisition of divine status to their political power.

Bibliography / References

Brisson L. Rol ' mifa u Platona i v Pozdnoi antichnosti [The role of Myth in Plato and Late Antiquity]. 2012. Volume 13. Issue 1. pp. 65-74.

Weinberg I. P. Rozhdenie istorii [The Birth of History]. Historical Thought in the Middle East of the middle of the first millennium BC, Moscow: Nauka Publ., 1993.

Dyakonov I. M. Zapadnosemitskoe pismo [West Semitic letter]. // Linguistic Encyclopedia, Moscow: Sovetskaya entsiklopediya, 1990, pp. 163-164.

Zakharova E. A. On the Chthonic essence of the cult of Achilles in the Northern Black Sea region // Mnemonic. Research and publications on the history of the ancient world. Issue 3. St. Petersburg, 2004, pp. 349-359.

Klein L. S. Anatomiya "Iliad" [Anatomy of the Iliad]. St. Petersburg: SPbU Publishing House, 1998.

Kraiko Yu. V. The ancient myth of Atlanta and Atlantis: the experience of folklore review. Dissertation for the degree of Candidate of Philological Sciences, Moscow, 2006.

Krugloe E. A. The Cult of Apollo of Telmessos (Caro-Lycian origins of the Hellenistic teaching of Euhemerus). Research and publications on the history of the ancient world. Issue 5. St. Petersburg, 2006, pp. 363-374.

Rusyaeva A. S. Voprosy razvitiya kul'ta Akhilla v Severnom Prichernomorye [Issues of the development of the cult of Achilles in the Northern Black Sea region]. Kiev, 1975. pp. 174-185.

Svetlov R. V. Myth from the dialogue "Politician" and the first "Battle for history" / / Bulletin of the Russian Christian Humanitarian Academy. 2014. Volume 15. Issue 4. pp. 33-38.

page 394
Stepanov S. G. Evguemer i evguemerizm [Evguemer and evguemerism]. St. Petersburg, 1911. pp. 103-126.

Toporov V. N. Ob arkhaichnom sloe v obraze Akhilla: problema rekonstruktsii elementov prototeksta [On the archaic layer in the image of Achilles: the problem of reconstruction of prototext elements]. Obraz-smysl v antichnoi kul'tury [Image - meaning in ancient Culture], Moscow: Pushkin State Museum of Fine Arts, 1990, pp. 64-95.

Trofimova M. K. Utopia of Euhemerus / / Istoriya sotsialisticheskikh ucheniy [History of socialist teachings], Moscow: Publishing House of the USSR Academy of Sciences, 1986, pp. 266-282.

Turaev B. A. Finikiyskaya mifologiya [Phoenician Mythology]. Saint Petersburg: Letny sad Publ., 1999.

Fridrikh I. Istoriya pis'ma [History of Writing], Moscow: Nauka Publ., 1979.

Hommel H. Achilles-god / / VDI. 1981. N 1. pp. 53-76. Cicero Mark Tullius. Philosophical Treatises, Moscow: Nauka Publ., 1985. Shakhnovich M. M. Paradoxes of Epicurus Theology, St. Petersburg: SPbU Publishing House, 2000.

Shifman I. I. Drevnyaya Finikiya - mifologiya i istoriya [Ancient Phoenicia-mythology and History].

Yailenko VP Essays ethnic, political and cultural history of Scythia VIII-III centuries BC. M.: Onebook.ru, 2013.

Brisson, L. (2004) How Philosophers Saved Myths: Allegorical Interpretation and Classical Mythology. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Brisson, L. (2012) "Rol' mifa u Platona i v Pozdnei antichnosti" [The Role of Myth in Plato, translated from French], Vestnik Russkoi khristianskoi gumanitarnoi akademii 13(1): 65 - 74.

Brown, T. (1946) "Euhemerus and the Historians", Harvard Theological Review 39: 259 - 274.

Carswell, Ch. J. A. (2009) Sidera Augusta: The Role of the Stars in Augustus' Quest for Supreme Auctoritas. Kingston, Ontario: Queen's University.

Cole, S. (2006) "Cicero, Ennius, and the Concept of Apotheosis at Rome", Arethusa 39: 531 - 548.

De Angelis, F. & Garstad, B. (2006) "Euhemerus in Context", Classical Antiquity 25(2): 211 - 242.

D'iakonov, I.M. (1990) "Zapadnosemitskoe pis'mo" [West Semitic Writing System], in Lingvisticheskii entsiklopedicheskii slovar'. M. S. 163 - 164.

Fridrikh, I. (1979) Istoriia pis'ma [The History of Writing, translated from German]. M.: Nauka.

Hawes, G. (2014) Rationalazing Myth in Antiquity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Honigman, S. (2009) "Euhemerus of Messene and Plato's Atlantis", Historia 58(1): 1 - 35.

Iailenko, V.P. (2013) Ocherki etnicheskoi, politicheskoi i kul'turnoi istorii Skifii VIII-Ш vv. do n.e. [Sketches of Ethnic, Political and Cultural History of Scythia VIII-III Centuries. ВС]. M.: Onebook.ru.

Khommel', Kh. (1991) "Akhill-bog" [Achilles-god, translated from German], VDI. N1. M.

S. 53 - 76. Klein, L.S. (1998) Anatomiia "Iliady" [Anatomy of the "Iliad"]. SPb.: Izdatel'stvo SPbGU.

Kraiko, Iu.V. (2006) Antichnyi mif ob Atlante i Atlantide: opyt fol'kloristicheskogo rassmotreniia. [The Ancient Myth of Atlans and Atlantis: Experience of Folklore Consideration (Thesis of PhD Dissert.)]. Dissertatsiia na soiskanie stepeni kandidata filologicheskikh nauk. M.

Kruglov, E.A. (2006) "Kul't Apollona Tel'messkogo (karo-likiiskie istoki ellinisticheskogo ucheniia Evgemera)" [The Cult of Apollo of Telmess (Caro-Lycian Sources of the

page 395
Hellenistic Teachings of Euhemerus)], Mnemon. Issledovaniia i publikatsii po istorii antichnogo mira. Vyp. 5. S. 363 - 374.

Morgan, K.A. (2004) Myth and Philosophy from the Presocratics to Plato. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Roubekas, N. (2012) "Which Euhemerism Will You Use? Celsus on the Divine Nature of Jesus", Journal of Early Christian History 2(2): 80 - 96.

Roubekas, N. (2014) "What is Euhemerism? A Brief History of Research and Some Persisting Questions", Bulletin for the Study of Religion 43(2): 30 - 37.

Rusiaeva, A.S. (1975) "Voprosy razvitiia kul'ta Akhilla v Severnom Prichernomor'e" [Issues of Development of the Cult of Achilles in the Northern Black Sea Coast], Skifskii mir. S. 174 - 185.

Shakhnovich, M.M. (2000) Paradoksy teologii Epikura [Paradoxes of the Theology of Epicurus]. SPb.: Izdatel'stvo SPbGU.

Shifman, I.I. (1999) "Drevniaia Finikiia - mifologiia i istoriia" [Ancient Phoenicia - Mythology and History], Finikiiskaia mifologiia. SPb.: Letnii sad.

Stepanov, S. G. (1911) "Evgemer i evgemerizm" [Euhemerus and Euhemerism], in S. V. Platonovu - ucheniki, druz'ia, pochitateli, s. 103 - 126. SPb.

Stern, J. (2003) "Heraclitus the Paradoxographer: Peri Apiston (On Unbelievable Tales)", Transactions of the American Philological Association 133(1): 51 - 97.

Svetlov, R.V. (2014) "Mif iz dialoga 'Politik' i pervaia 'bitva za istoriiu'" [Myth from the Dialogue "Politicus" and the First "Battle for History"], Vestnik RChHA 15(4): 33 - 38.

Toporov, V.N. (1990) "Ob arkhaichnom sloe v obraze Akhilla: Problema rekonstruktsii elementov prototeksta" [On the Archaic Layer in the Image of Achilles: The Problem of Reconstruction of the Elements of Prototext], Obraz-smysl v antichnoi kul'ture, s. 64 - 95. M.: Gosudarstvennyi muzei izobrazitel'nykh iskusstvim. Pushkina.

Trofimova, M.K. (1987) "Utopiia Evgemera" [Utopia of Euhmerus], Istoriia sotsialisticheskikh uchenii, s. 266 - 282. M.: Izdatel'stvo AN of USSR.

Tsitseron (Cicero) Mark Tullii (1985) Filosofskie traktaty [Philosophical treatises, translated from the Latin]. M.: Nauka.

Turaev, B.A. (1999) Finikiiskaia mifologiia [Phoenician mythology]. SPb.: Letnii sad.

Veinberg, I.P. (1993) Rozhdenie istorii. Istoricheskaia mysl' na Blizhnem Vostoke serediny I tysiacheletiia do n.e. [The Birth of History. Historical Thought in the Middle East Near the Middle of I Millennium BC]. M.: Nauka.

Winiarczyk, M. (2013) The "Sacred History" of Euhemerus of Messene. Berlin: De Gruyter.

Zakharova E.A. "K voprosu o khtonicheskoi sushchnosti kul'ta Akhilla v Severnom Prichernomor'e" [On the question of the nature of chthonic cult of Achilles in the northern Black Sea coast], Mnemon. Issledovaniia i publikatsii po istorii antichnogo mira 3: 349 - 359.

page 396

Permanent link to this publication: