Journal Phasis - Greek and Roman Studies

Abatzopoulou, Fragiski

Τα Αργοναυτικά των Ελλήνων υπερρεαλιστών

Kakashvili, Maia

Phasis 10 (II), 2007 
 
 
Maia Kakashvili (Tbilisi) 
FORMS OF REFLECTION OF THE ARGONAUT THEME 
IN THE BYZANTINE ROMANCE NOVEL1 
The whole Byzantine culture, which assumed the role of the successor to and 
protector of the intellectual treasure of old times, is marked with vigorous 
interest in ancient world. The age of "the Revival of Comnenos"
2
 devoted 
special attention to the heritage of ancestors. An essentially new genre – a 
romance, a story of love and adventure – systematizes the plot, characters and 
literary images in compliance with ancient Greek literary works and 
represents the best example of the conservation of ancient culture. For this 
very reason, some scholars took interest in Byzantine novels as in "the 
archive of Hellenism".  
Ancient world holds a significant place in the works of Byzantine 
novelists. The Byzantine novel is distinguished by the tradition of quoting 
many literary works of different genres and by including the reminiscences of 
ancient authors. Eumathios Makrembolites refers to quite a large number of 
ancient authors. Theodore Prodromos’ Rodánthe and Dosiklís is the climax in 
this regard.
3
 Niketas Eugenianos is distinguished by an original and creative 
treatment of ancient works,
4
 while in Constantine Manasses’ work ancient 
reminiscences are remarkably infrequent. 
                                                 
1
  The term ‘romance’ is rather conventional in this case. It is common knowledge that it came 
into use in the West to refer to love stories written in the Romance languages and not in Latin.  
2
  The use of the term ‘Revival’ in connection with the Byzantine literature is rather conventional 
as interest in ancient world is among the whole string of factors characteristic of the Revival, 
and by no means is the only one.    
3  It should be stated in general that Theodore Prodromos’ works abound of reminiscences. 
4
  Фрейберг Л. А., Попова Т. В., Византийская литература эпохи расцвета IX-XV вв., Моск-
ва, 1978, 160. 
Maia Kakashvili 
 
42 
I will confine myself to showing the forms of the reflection of the 
Argonaut theme in the Byzantine novel, and in particular in the works by 
Eumathios Makrembolites
5
 and Theodore Prodromos.  
These two writers treat the Argonaut legend in different ways. In my 
opinion, two types of reflection of the Argonaut legend can be distinguished 
in Eumathios Makrembolites’ work. The writer uses a riddle
6
 and presents the 
myth as well as his own interpretation of it. 
a) An overview of a particular episode of a myth:  
4) IV, 22.1 
7
"She [Hysimine – M.K.] meanwhile bites my lip, planting all her teeth in 
it. And Eroses, more bewildering than giants, grow up in my soul."
8  
Here Hysimine is compared to Jason, who planted dragon’s teeth in the 
earth, and the soul of the narrator is compared to the earth, which gives birth 
to Eros, i.e. love, instead of ruthless giants. 
Out of the literary works composed on the Argonaut theme, only 
Euripides’ Medea is reflected in Eumathios’ Hysimine and Hysimines. 
Similarly to citing the pieces of classical poetry in general, the author makes 
slight changes to the quotations from Euripides’ work, to which he admits 
himself. He refers to the above mentioned tragedy three times
9, all the three 
cases being precise quotations. The author borrows unaltered not only 
individual lexical formatives, but whole phrases as well. 
                                                 
5
  The role of Makrembolites’ novel in the history of development of the genre, the extent of its 
impact and its role in the processes of Greek and world literature are discussed in my doctoral 
thesis called Ancient Reminiscences in Byzantine Prose Fiction (Eumathios Makrembolites), 
2006 (in Georgian) and in my articles Repetition as a Literary Device in Hysimine and Hysi-
mines by Eumathios Makrembolites, Logos, The Annual Journal of Hellenic and Roman Stu-
dies, 3, Tbilisi, 2005 (in Georgian); Homeric Reminiscences in Hysimine and Hysimines by Eu-
mathios Makrembolites, Byzantine Studies in Georgia, Tbilisi, 2007 (in Georgian). 
6
  A riddle is among symbolic-allegorical devices and is characteristic of the novel. In the times of 
Eumathios Makrembolites, a literary puzzle was a genre of Byzantine literature. 
7
  Eustathius Macrembolites, De Hysmines et Hysminiae amoribus, libri XI, edidit Miroslav 
Marcovich, Bibliotheca Scriptorum Graecorum et Romanorum Teubneriana, Monachii, Lipsiae, 
Saur 2001. All the fragments from Eumathios Mekrembolites’ work cited in the paper are taken 
from this edition. 
8
  Eumathios Makrembolites, Hysimine and Hysimines, translated from Greek into Georgian, 
introduced and commented on by M. Kakashvili, Tbilisi, 2006, 77. 
9
  Eumathios Makrembolites’ novel includes reminiscences from Euripides’ other tragedies as 
well. They are: Hecuba (9 cases), Hipollytes (2 cases), Phoenician Women (2 cases).  
Forms of Reflection of the Argonaut Theme in the Byzantine Romance Novel 
 
43 
b) Precise quotation of particular phrases: 
1) III, 9. 12-13
’
     
Eur. Med. 408-409 
’    
10   
 
2) H, 20. 18-19 
  
       
Eur. Med. 54-55 
 
  
 
3) O, 23. 3-4 
< ’>  
  
Eur. Med. 265-266 
’   
   
It should be noted that Makrembolites uses ancient reminiscences only as 
embellishment aimed to stir associations, so that the reader could better 
comprehend the plot and the spiritual sensations it conveys. The novel does 
not offer the cases of deeper, creative perception.  
Theodore Prodromos’ work Rodánthe and Dosiklís is different in this 
regard. The author does not precisely quote the words by Euripides and 
Apollonius Rhodius, as we have it in Eumathios’ novel. Theodore uses only 
partial citation; therefore, the scrupulous eye of a specialist can detect a whole 
string of receptions. The phrases are not precisely repeated; Theodore 
borrows individual lexical formatives and phrases from various authors and 
uses them as tools for composing his own lines. Naturally, the works 
mentioned in this paper cannot have been the direct source of influence, but 
their linguistic impact is obvious in the majority of cases. I should also 
mention here that out of the works composed after the Argonaut legend, 
                                                 
10
  Euripides, Fabulai, Recognovit brevique adnotatione critica instruxit Gilbertus Murray, Tomus 
I, Great Britain 1958. All the fragments from Euripides’ Medea cited in the paper are taken 
from this edition.  
Maia Kakashvili 
 
44 
Makrembolites quotes only Euripides’ Medea, while Prodromos cites not only 
the mentioned tragedy, but also Apollonius’ Argonautica. 
Reflection of individual lexical formatives:  
Rodánthe and Dosiklís reflects individual lexical formatives and 
collocations. There are 14 cases of citing Euripides’ Medea and 3 cases of 
citing Apollonius’ Argonautica. 
 
1) 191 b 
;
Eur. Med. 145 
    
;     
 
2) 476 b 
‘
Eur. Med. 769 
’    
  
 
3) 372 b 
Eur. Med. 76 
   
’   
 
4) 56 b 
Eur. Med. 590 
   
  
 
5) 52 b 
Eur. Med. 1139 
  
Forms of Reflection of the Argonaut Theme in the Byzantine Romance Novel 
 
45 
’ ’    
   
 
6) 297 b 
’
Eur. Med. 538 
’  
   
  
 
7) 150 a 
Eur. Med. 928 
 
 
8) 176 
Eur. Med. 217 
’ ’ ’  
  
 
9) 415 
. 
Eur. Med. 1277 
’∙   
’     
 
10) 449 a 
’
Eur. Med. 513 
   
 
 
11) 228 
’
Eur. Med. 278 
Maia Kakashvili 
 
46 
   
   
 
12) 91 b 
Eur. Med. 1285 
’    
    
 
13) 181 b 
Eur. Med. 1031 
’ ’    
’   
 
14) 373 
Eur. Med. 469 
’ ’    
’     
Reminiscences from Apollonius’ Argonautica 
1) 144 
Apoll. Rhod. 1. 456 
 
2) 215 
Apoll. Rhod. 2. 43 
 
3) 204 b 
Apoll. Rhod. 2. 1249 
Forms of Reflection of the Argonaut Theme in the Byzantine Romance Novel 
 
47 
 
Conclusion 
I believe that it is not necessary to go deeper into the novels to understand 
that Eumathios Makrembolites’ work is closer to the most traditional text 
based on the Argonaut myth and in the majority of cases reflects it directly at 
the level of plot as well as language, i.e. it shows obvious textual encounters 
with the source. As concerns Theodore Prodromos, his novel reflects ancient 
sources at the level of lexical formatives and collocations. 
The novels The Story of Hysimine and Hysimines and Rodánthe and Do-
siklís imply receptions of all authors included on the list of the so-called 
‘recommended’. Therefore, reminiscences from Euripides’ and Apollonius’ 
works appeared in the Byzantine novels not because of their authors’ 
particular interest in their literary heritage in the Argonaut myth, but because 
the ‘novelists’ used a great number of collected works and textbooks 
composed as a result of increasing community of readers and the marvelous 
revival of university life in the 11
th
-12
th
 centuries. 
So, the above-mentioned leads to the conclusion that with respect to the 
reflection of the mythological information, and namely, of the Argonaut 
myth, this period was distinguished not by the forms of creative reception, but 
by direct borrowing and citation.  
 


English

Forms of Reflection of the Argonaut Theme in the Byzantine Romance Novel

Pontani, Filippomaria

The Unforgettable Fire: Medea\u27s Dreams in POxy 4712

Stavropoulou, Erasmia-Louiza

O Αργοναυτικός μύθος στην ποίηση του Γιάννη Pίτσου

Kamushadze, Maka

Phasis 10 (II), 2007 
 
 
Maka Kamushadze (Tbilisi) 
MEDEA IN A. EMBIRIKOS’ ARGO OR AEROSTAT FLIGHT 
Andreas Embirikos, a well-known Greek surrealist poet offers another 
interesting interpretation of the Argonaut theme in his prose work Argo or 
Aerostat Flight. 
The writer does not follow the story-line of the myth, as it could be 
expected, but offers an interesting attempt of surrealistic interpretation of the 
myth. Various lexical units, characters and scenes, chaotically scattered in the 
work, allude to the Argonauts’ voyage and the tragic story of Jason and 
Medea. 
The plot of Andreas Embirikos’ work follows two story-lines. The first is 
the family drama of a history lecturer of the Santa Fe De Bogotá University, 
and the second is the flight of the aerostat Argo. In the present paper, I will 
not dwell on how the pathos of the entire Argonaut legend is rendered in the 
work; neither will I focus on its psychoanalytical aspect. The objective of the 
paper is to find out if the work reflects Medea’s image, and if so, comment on 
the Embirikos’ interpretation of the mythical character. It is very important to 
bear in mind that Argo or Aerostat Flight is a surrealistic work, where the 
subconscious is more important than the conscious, and where associative 
thought prevails. However, the subconscious does not necessarily mean 
ununderstandable, existing somewhere beyond logics. Much of what 
represents the product of the subconscious in an artistic work is definitely 
perceptible, irrespective of whether the process of its artistic accomplishment 
is prevailed by a logical or intuitive principle. We can see there beauty as well 
as sense, and receive semantic as well as aesthetic information. 
It should be stated from the very start that neither of the so-called 
characters of the work is directly and unambiguously related to Medea. In my 
opinion, Medea’s image is reflected in all the six female characters of the 
work. Each of them is associated either with a particular character trait of the 
Medea in A. Embirikos’ Argo or Aerostat Flight 
 
197 
traditional mythical image, or with one of the motifs of her story. In my 
opinion, eight associative elements can be singled out in Embirikos’ work: 1. 
Woman’s affection for the man who is unacceptable for her parents; 2. 
Woman’s relationship with the world of plants; 3. Unfaithfulness and 
jealousy; 4. Sister-and-brother relationship; 5. The call against murdering the 
innocent; 6 Prophetic gift; 7. Abduction of a woman with the Argo; 8. 
Miraculous ascension to the sky. Now let us consider how these motifs are 
developed in the work and what associations they may stir. 
1. One of the central characters of the work is an eighteen-year-old Colum-
bian girl, Carlotta, the daughter of Don Pedro Ramirez, who is in love with 
her neighbour, a rich farmer Pablo Gonsalez. Although Carlotta’s father is 
categorically against their love, the girl goes on seeing Pablo. Her father 
threatens that if she does not stop seeing him, he will take her back to the 
convent. Besides, Carlotta’s father does not allow her to attend the most sig-
nificant celebration of the city, the flight of the Argo. 
   In this particular case, Carlotta is associated with Medea, who falls in love 
with Jason. Pablo Gonsalez, the ineligible suitor in the eyes of Carlotta’s fa-
ther, is associated with Jason, who came to Aeetes with unfriendly intentions. 
Carlotta, who goes against her father’s will, resembles Medea, who betrayed 
her father. 
2. Every time when Carlotta appears in the story, she is either holding a bunch 
of flowers in her hands, or is surrounded with flowers. "Dressed in a loose 
skirt, and holding a bunch of flowers in her hands, she was running to him"
1
, 
"... the branches of trees and bushes swiftly filled up with flowers and birds 
and fruit, and eighteen-year-old Carlotta – as the girl has now become Carlot-
ta – stood beneath the trees and waited as Donna Isabella."
2 The setting for 
love relations between Carlotta and Pablo, and for her death, is the garden, the 
hay-stack.
3 Carlotta’s world, filled with flowers and plants, may also be asso-
ciated with Medea, whom the goddess Hecate taught how to prepare magic 
drugs. Owing to this divine knowledge, Medea is intrinsically linked with the 
world of plants in ancient tradition. 
3. Another significant female character of the work is Isabella, Carlotta’s 
mother and Don Pedro Ramirez’ wife, who died young from some disease. 
The author characterizes her as a jealous wife. However, Isabella’ jealousy is 
not ungrounded as Don Pedro is notorious for his love affairs. In this case, 
parallels can be drawn between Isabella, abandoned by Don Pedro, and Me-
                                                 
1
  Α. Εμπειρίκος, Αργώ ή πλοσς αεροστάτοσ, ύψιλον/βιβλία, 1980, 14. 
2
  Ibid., 28-29. 
3
  Α. Εμπειρίκος, Αργώ ή πλοσς αεροστάτοσ, ύψιλον/βιβλία, 1980, 67. 
Maka Kamushadze 
 
198 
dea, abandoned by Jason." ... You pretend, you say you love her and play the 
role of a lover with the woman whom you do not love any more"
4 – these are 
the thoughts of Don Pedro Ramirez, whose love for his wife has faded away. 
At a certain stage, he realizes that he does not love his wife Isabella any more 
– analogically with Jason, who, after years of happy life with Medea, decides 
to break up his family ties and marry Creusa, the daughter of Creon, king of 
Corinth. In my opinion, this episode accentuates the motif of husband’s un-
faithfulness and loss of love for one’s wife, which reminds of Euripides’ tra-
gedy. 
4. A female image of relatively less significance is a fifteen-year-old acroba-
tess, who performed acrobatic tricks at the ceremony of the flight and at-
tracted people’s attention. However, the majority of the crowd was viewing 
the gigantic sphere. Interestingly, the girl was accompanied with her brother, 
who was playing the tambourine. The acrobatess and her brother may be re-
lated to the ‘sister-and-brother’ theme of the Argonaut legend. They may be 
associated with Medea and Apsyrtus, who on Aeetes’ order pursued Medea 
after she left Colchis together with the Argonauts. 
5. Another female character of the work is a likewise fifteen-year-old girl, 
who attended the ceremony. When a photographer took up a camera to take a 
picture of the people on board the Argo, she shrieked in a desperate voice: 
‘Don’t kill, don’t kill ... they are innocent’, and fell down unconscious. In my 
mind, this quite unexpected yell is the repercussion of the scene of child-
slaughter in Euripides’ tragedy.
5 
Another female character is an old matchmaker, who emerges from the 
crowd gathered at the ceremony and prophesies an earth-quake in Santa Fe 
De Bogotá. In my opinion, this scene is associated with Medea’s prophetic 
gift, which is clearly presented in the Forth Pythian Ode of Pindar: ‘Hear me, 
sons of great-heatred men and gods. I declare that one day from this sea-
beaten land the daughter of Epaphos will have planted within her a root of 
famous cities at the foundations of Zeus Ammon.’
6
  
6. Likewise noteworthy is the image of Marianna, who is not in fact a real 
character – she is the fruit of Ernesto Larie-Nanse’s imagination. Ernesto is a 
Frenchman, who is among the people on board the Argo. She is a prostitute, 
who asks the Frenchman to kill two peasants, and promises to stay with him 
                                                 
4
  Ibid., 22.  
5
  Euripides, Medea, Everyman’s Library, The Plays of Euripides in English, translated by M. 
Wodhull, 1934, 111. 
6  Pindar, Olympian Odes, Pythian Odes, The Fourth Pythian Ode, 14-15, the Loeb Classical 
Library, Harward University Press, Cambridge, Massachussets, London, England, University 
Press, 2002.  
Medea in A. Embirikos’ Argo or Aerostat Flight 
 
199 
overnight. Marianna, existing in Ernesto’s imagination, can be associated 
with vengeance and the murder of Creon and his daughter. Three interesting 
details can be singled out: the requirement to kill the peasant women, the 
death of a man in black and Marianna’s words ‘I will show them who the real 
whore is ...’. Marianna’s wish to have the peasant women killed is motivated 
by her desire to revenge. This phrase can be related to quite a number of 
words from Euripides’ Medea expressing Medea’ haughtiness. 
7. Another important character of the work is a fifteen-year-old girl with 
chocolate-colour complexion, an inmate of a children’s asylum, who is also 
attending the ceremony. She presents a Russian admiral, Verkhoi, with a par-
rot sitting in a cage on behalf of the inmates of the asylum. The admiral on his 
part takes her up in his arms, kisses her and gives her a golden watch. He is 
so fascinated with the girl that as the Argo is taking up, he jumps out, seizes 
the girl and takes her with him to the Argo. This episode stirs miscellaneous 
associations: the golden watch and the Golden Fleece, the Aerostat Argo and 
the ship Argo, the Argo’s flying up to the sky, and the chariot of Helios, the 
Aerostat Argo takes away a woman, which may be the repercussion of the 
abduction of Medea with the Argo, while the ascension of the chocolate-
colour girl, sitting in the Aerostat, can be associated with the Euripidean 
scene when a chariot sent by Helios carries away Medea and her dead child-
ren.
7 It is not difficult to trace parallels between the girl and Medea as well as 
between admiral Verkhoi and Jason. 
So, Medea can be regarded as the prototype of the female characters of 
Argo or Aerostat Flight by A. Embirikos. The mythological image is pre-
sented through various aspects. Very often, the character of Embirikos’ work 
is not even mentioned by name. Even an almost unknown, peripheral charac-
ter can stir associations with Medea. Carlotta in love and Medea in love – the 
choice of both is unacceptable for their fathers; Carlotta’s and Medea’s 
relationship with plants; the acrobatess and her brother – Medea and 
Apsyrtus; the chocolate-colour girl, abducted by the Russian admiral, and 
Medea taken away by Jason; jealous Isabella and jealous Medea, both 
abandoned, as their husbands’ love for them has faded away; vengeful and 
haughty Medea and Marianna. Although Medea is not mentioned in 
Embirikos’ work, all the female images of it imply certain elements or motifs, 
the unity of which is related to the integrated image of Euripides’ Medea. All 
key aspects of Medea’s image can be found in the six female characters of the 
work; although the author does not repeat the story of Medea and Jason, the 
impression it leaves is definitely associated with the myth. The application of 
                                                 
7
  Euripides, Medea, 1934, 112. 
Maka Kamushadze 
 
200 
particular traits of the single image of Medea to several characters does not 
appear unnatural for the surrealistic principle of thought. 
The work of Embirikos unites the elements, which although do not make 
up a single logical context, are anyway distinguished for their clearly 
expressed definiteness, which I would even call their mimetic nature. A. 
Embirikos’ Argo or Aerostat Flight is another proof to attest to the idea that 
in his creations, associative links may be distinct and even systemic, as 
Embirikos amply presented the traits and motifs related to the traditional 
image of Medea through the female characters of the work.  
  


Medea in A. Embirikos’ "Argo or Aerostat Flight"

Chikovani, Ann

Phasis 10 (II), 2007 
 
 
 
Ann Chikovani (Tbilisi) 
GRIGOL ROBAKIDZE’S NOVEL,  MEGI - A GEORGIAN MAIDEN, 
AND THE INTERPRETATION OF MEDEA’S IMAGE 
IN MODERN GREEK LITERATURE 
The present paper aims to investigate the literary image of Megi, a heroine of 
Megi – a Georgian Maiden. The novel was written by Grigol Robakidze, a 
famous Georgian writer of the first half of the 20th century, in German 
language. It was first published in 1932 in Tubingen.1 The author revived the 
myth about Medea. The fate and the character of the young Mengrelian2 girl 
are easily associated with the fate and character of the famous Colchian 
sorceress and healer – Medea. It is interesting, that the initial title Robakidze 
gave to the novel was Medea’s Braids. 
I shall discuss in the present paper Grigol Robakidze’s interpretation of 
Medea’s image, and shall draw parallels with Medea’s image and the 
interpretation of the Argonaut’s journey as offered by Modern Greek writers. 
Medea’s image, interpreted in many different ways, has been popular 
among writers for thousands of years. Medea, who contained within herself 
mutually contradictory traits, was an ideal vehicle through whom authors and 
artists could explore what modern scholarship has called the problem of 
"self" and "other". Not only her checkered career allows authors and artists 
                                                 
1  In 1934, the Italian version of Megi – a Georgian Maiden with the title Le Trecce di Medea 
(Medea’s Braids) was published in Milan. The book was introduced by the author’s Autobio-
graphy (for detailed information see G. Sharadze, Book I, 115). Unfortunately, the novel has 
never been published in Georgian language. During the preparation of the present paper I re-
ferred to the Russian translation of the novel, which was published as a book in 2003 with the 
title: Меги Грузинская девушка. The translation is done by S. Okropiridze. 
2  Mengrelia, or Samegrelo – region of Georgia, on the territory of ancient Colchis. 
Gr. Robakidze’s Novel – Megi, a Georgian Maiden... 131
 
to explore the opposing concepts of self and other, as she veers between 
desirable and undesirable behavior, between Greek and foreigner; it also 
allows them to raise the disturbing possibility. . . that the "normal" carry 
within themselves the potential for abnormal behavior. . . 3 
Ancient Greek sources accentuate the otherness of the Colchians: as soon 
as the Argonauts reach the bank of the Phasis river, they discover, that in this 
country the dead are wrapped in animal skins and hung on the trees – this fact 
immediately make Greeks feel the otherness of the Colchian people. The 
different aspects of Medea – that of the other and the Barbarian – are 
observed in detail in Mariana McDonald’s essay Medea as Politician and 
Diva:4 However, the issue we would like to discuss is that the interpretation 
of Medea’s Image in Georgia and generally the position of Georgian writers, 
readers or audience is radically different from that in Greece or in the other 
parts of the world. For Georgians Medea is the Self, his/her famous past and 
consequently the boundary between the Other and the Self does not exist. 
More ever – in Greece or in other countries one can never meet anyone called 
Medea – nobody will give the name of children-murderer to his/her daughter, 
people are afraid of this name even nowadays. On the contrary, in Georgia 
Medea is an acceptable and even desirable name, wrapped with mystery and 
charm. Here the girls are often named Medea because parents want their 
daughters to inherit the wisdom, power, courage, knowledge of Medicine and 
many other merits. In Georgia nobody will ever tell you, that this is a name of 
children-murderer, this characteristic of Medea is either denied or neglected 
under different reasons. 
It is interesting to investigate Grigol Robakidze’s view about this 
character, who is beloved by Georgians and treated by them as their Self.  
From the very first pages of the novel Megi – a Georgian Maiden the 
reader is convinced that Megi, with her beauty, internal power and majestic 
charm is the descendant of Medea. This is emphasized by the author 
throughout the whole novel. In order to learn how the literary character of 
Megi does coincide with the stereotypic image of Medea, let’s see the 
differences and the similarities between the Medea from Ancient traditions 
and sources and Megi from Grigol Robakidze’s novel: 
                                                 
3  S. I. Johnston, Introduction, in the book: Medea, Essays on Medea in Myth, Literature, Philoso-
phy and Art, Princeton University Press, 1997, 7-8. 
4  M. McDonald, Medea as Politician and Diva: Riding the Dragon into the Future, in the book: J. 
J. Clauss and S. I. Johnston (Ed.), Medea, Essays on Medea in Myth, Literature, Philosophy and 
Art, Princeton University Press, 1997, 297-324. 
Ann Chikovani 
 
132 
Differences: 
 
1. Medea is Other 
2. Medea is helper-
maiden, with the use of 
magic she helped Jason to 
obtain the Golden Fleece  
3. Medea followed Jason 
to Greece 
4. Medea killed her 
brother, Apsyrtos 
5. Medea killed Glauce  
 
6. Medea is clever 
7. Medea is Hecate’s 
priestess 
Megi is Self, she is not Other 
Megi is not helper-maiden (but contrary to 
Jason, Astamur did not need Megi’s help and 
those factors are interrelated) 
 
Megi didn’t follow Astamur to Aphkazia  
 
Megi is the only child and this factor is also 
missing in the story 
Megi didn’t kill Astamur’s supposed fiancée, 
Khatuna Didia 
Megi’s cleverness is not emphasized 
Megi is not a priestess 
 
Similarities: 
 
1. Medea is a princess, 
king’s daughter 
2. Medea is a healer 
 
 
 
3. Medea brought up her 
children and then killed 
them 
4. After Medea’s death, 
her cult was established 
  
 
5. Medea’s aunt was the 
sorceress Circe  
 
 
 
 
 
 
Megi is a princess, daughter of the noble 
family 
Megi herself does not heal people, but her 
portrait was miracle-working and was 
healing hundreds of ill, mainly those with 
mental diseases  
[Megi did not bring up her only son,] Megi 
killed or by accident strangled her son with 
her braids  
After Megi’s disappearance, her portrait was 
healing the ill and we can speak about the 
portrait’s cult, to which people used to bring 
different offerings  
Megi’s grandmother / her mother’s nurse 
Meneki is the hypostasis of Medea or maybe 
of Circe. She is a sorceress, healer, and 
exorcist. She knows mysteries of magic 
herbs as well as ancient myths and legends. 
She is Megi’s close relative and teacher. 
Meneki was able to rejuvenate, she used 
different herbs in order to look younger than 
Gr. Robakidze’s Novel – Megi, a Georgian Maiden... 133
 
 
6. Medea is manlike  
 
 
 
 
 
 
7. Medea is considered to 
have functions of Goddess 
 
 
8. Medea is hot-tempered 
and violent, fierce 
 
 
9. Medea is terrifying, 
frightful  
 
10. Medea is bewitching, 
enchanting 
 
11. Medea is proud 
 
 
12. Medea is a witch 
 
 
13. Medea is the  
Granddaughter of Helios, 
the Sun 
she really was 
Megi also is manlike (author sometimes 
compares her to Amazon). Megi is good at 
horse-riding, she goes hunting with a hawk 
etc. – these characterize her as manlike, but 
according to the novel, these qualities of her 
are considered normal and usual for her 
region – Samegrelo, or Colchis 
Gr. Robakidze compares Megi to the 
Goddess Diana; Megi’s portrait is called "St. 
Mary". This somehow is an endeavor to 
attribute divinity to Megi 
Megi is also violent; in a surge of wrath she 
wrung the hawk’s neck, which Astamur had 
presented her with. Megi’s wrath is 
compared to the Amazon’s axe  
Sometimes Megi is also frightful 
 
Megi is also bewitching, enchanting, the 
author frequently mentions the bewitching 
power of Megi’s eyes 
 
Megi is extremely proud 
 
The crowd accuses Megi of being a witch  
Indirectly, Megi is also Sun’s daughter;  
 
The symbolic function of Sun is attached to 
Megi’s rich red (pomegranate) Braids. This 
is emphasized throughout the novel by the 
author 
 
From the comparison we can see, that Grigol Robakidze’s Megi ‘falls 
short’ of some properties of ancient Greek Medea. Nevertheless, the 
similarity of Medea and Megi is clear and we can say that Megi is Medea’s 
hypostasis. The resemblance or the identity of Megi with Medea will become 
more evident if we add that the enchanting and bewitching power of the 
Samegrelo or Colchis land and a parallel retelling of Jason’s and Medea’s 
story by Megi’s grandmother Meneki – are leitmotivs running throughout the 
whole novel. The main difference between the story of Megi and that of 
Ann Chikovani 
 
134 
Medea maybe considered the following: in the Argonaut myth Medea is an 
Other, Barbarian from a land on the far edge of the world, who despite all her 
positive qualities, her power, her wisdom and the help she provided, remains 
the Other. On the contrary, in Grigol Robakidze’s novel, Megi is not Other; 
she is in her own country. Although, at the end of the novel Megi is 
marginalized from her society, because after her son’s death she is not 
able/does not want to return to her home and starts roaming around the 
country. Megi wanders from one place into another. Her beauty bred passion 
and burst of effusion everywhere, but her spirit stayed virgin, emphasizes the 
author. In the last episode of the novel, Megi is proclaimed witch by the 
crowd, because of her similarity with her own portrait, which by that time 
was considered to be holy and was healing thousands of diseases. So she goes 
on her lonely way searching for her Self and for her place under the sun. In 
the very last chapter of the novel, the author turns Megi toward the reader and 
makes us feel and believe that she is not the Other, she is the Self to a greater 
extent than one could imagine, that she is the present and the future of 
ourselves, that will exist forever, like the shafts of sunlight in her fiery red 
braids.5 
As we already mentioned, Grigol Robakidze wrote the novel Megi - a 
Georgian Maiden in German language. Consequently, the novel is primarily 
targeted at German or European reader. From this point of view, it might have 
been difficult for the Georgian writer to present Megi in the way acceptable 
for the European reader. The German reader had to accept Megi, the Other as 
a Self. This task was really difficult to be achieved, but taking into 
consideration the reviews and references, with which the novel was praised6, 
we can say, that the author succeeded in overcoming the difficulties in 
establishing the heroine’s image. Megi is an example of Self’s representation, 
with all its positive and negative sides.  
The 20th century European literature, music and art found especially 
relevant the theme, the image and the role of Medea as a stranger, other, 
whose seemingly barbarian’s deeds make people reassess their deepest 
values.  
In modern progressive world it is unacceptable to discriminate on the 
basis of nationality, race, sex or religion, it is unacceptable to discriminate 
between civilized and less civilized cultures. The Other, the different one 
enters the everyday life and makes us believe that they are like us, that they 
are not different from our Self. 
                                                 
5  Григол Робакидзе, Меги Грузинская девушка, Тбилиси 2003, 136-137.   
6   See G. Sharadze, ibid.  
Gr. Robakidze’s Novel – Megi, a Georgian Maiden... 135
 
For the European literature and culture Medea as an exploited barbarian 
sometimes is considered to be a symbol of freedom fighter. Some researchers 
claim that she can be accepted as a revolutionary symbol. It is interesting that 
in Africa, Haiti and Ireland performances of Medea are staged as an 
affirmation of liberty.7  
Despite the fact that the majority of literary works dedicated to the 
Argonauts’ story and to Medea’s theme follow the Euripidean interpretation 
of the myth, in the 20th century new literary works are created where an 
author, whether openly or not, tries to rehabilitate the Colchian heroine of 
myths. From European literature we can mention Christa Wolf’s novel 
Medea. We do not intend to dwell on the work here, but would like to 
mention that the author suggests modern account of Medea’s story. Christa 
Wolf’s Medea flatly denies that she committed any of those crimes which 
have been attributed to Medea throughout centuries. Christa Wolf describes 
how the sins made by others (Aeetes – King of Colchis, or the Corinthians) 
through intrigues were ascribed to Medea – the wise and special other – who 
along with other Colchians is viewed as alien and consequently, an ideal 
scapegoat for anything that might go wrong.8 
As concerns Modern Greek literature, it is interesting to draw parallels 
with the novel Argo by Giorgos Theotokas’ (1905-1966). The author’s view 
on Argonaut’s journey is not ordinary. It is introduced in the novel through a 
young boy’s impressions and ideas. Father explains to his son a lesson in 
mythology. The theme of the lesson is the Argonauts’ story. The son can not 
understand many things – and especially, why it was right that Jason took 
away the treasure [the Golden Fleece] from the Barbarians, as far as this 
treasure didn’t belong to Greeks and the Barbarians had no wish to give it 
away. Or why Medea helped Jason – a stranger – to rob her own country of 
the treasure. It is incomprehensible why it was wrong when Medea made the 
daughters of Pelias kill him, as far as according to the lesson, Pelias was a 
wrong and evil man?9 By offering impressions and ideas of a child, the author 
emphasizes the other side of the question, formerly ignored by the Greeks. 
Destruction of Patriarchal stereotypes is attempted by the famous Greek 
writer – Lily Zographou (1922-1998) in her book: From Medea to Cindarella. 
The author notes in the foreword that she is not a feminist, and on the 
contrary she is passionate anti-feminist.10 Lily Zographou asserts that the 
                                                 
7  For detailed information about the issue, see: M. McDonald, ibid., 301-304. 
8  Christa Wolf, Medea, A Modern Retelling, Translated from German by J. Gullin, Virago Press 
London 1998 (Introduction by Margaret Atwood). 
9  Γεώργιου Θεοτοκά, ΑΡΓΩ,  Βιβλιοπωλείον της "Εστίας" Ι. Δ. Κολλάρου & ΣΙΑΣ Α. Ε, τ. 2, 172. 
10  Λ. Ζωγράφου, Από τη Μήδεια στη Σταχτοπούτα, Η Ιστορία του φαλλού, εκδόσεις Αλεξάνδρεια 
1998, 10. 
Ann Chikovani 
 
136 
image and the reputation of Medea had been unfairly sullied by history, that 
only the transition from matriarchy to patriarchy was the reason that Medea, a 
typical heroine of matriarchal society, was disgraced and the label of infant 
murderer was attached to her. Although Lily Zographou’s book makes no 
mention of the word Self or Other, the whole book, written in an essay style, 
is dedicated to the rehabilitation of woman, as other, and of Medea, whom 
patriarchy placed in the marginal position.  
Modern Greek Literature offers another new intrpretation of Medea’s 
image: this is the comedy Medea by Greek satirist and playwright, Bost – 
Chrysanthos Mendis Bostantzoglou. This comedy is a parody on Euripides. 
The Medea of Bost is one of the most comic plays in the contemporary Greek 
theatrical repertoire. Bost turns the Euripidean tragic protagonist into a 
tragicomic character and at the same time through the Aristophanic metaphors 
and invalid interpretations criticizes and castigates contemporary Greek 
reality. Evaluating his comedy Medea, Bost himself mentions: This is a play, 
which criticizes critics, troubles judges and liberates the audience.11 This is 
one more example of showing parallels and differences between the Self and 
the Other. 
All I have mentioned above prove that the theme of Medea is eternal and 
that it will remain in the conscience of mankind, to make us feel or to make 
us remember the opposition between the own Self and the Other. In the 
contemporary world the issue is considered to be of global importance. It 
once again attests to the vitality of mythos, and to the fact that problems 
stated in myths re-aquire relevance from time to time and revive in new 
works of literature, music, and art. Grigol Robakidze’s Megi – a Georgian 
Maiden is the graphic evidence to this, as well as Medea’s rehabilitated image 
in several works of the 20th century literature. 
                                                 
11  Newspaper: Καθημερινή, 10. 09. 2007. 


Grigol Robakidze’s Novel, "Megi - A Georgian Maiden", and the Interpretation of Medea’s Image in Modern Greek Literature

West, Martin L.

Phasis 10 (I), 2007 
 
 
Martin L. West (Oxford) 
THE ARGONAUT LEGEND IN EARLY GREEK POETRY 
The story of the Argonauts’ expedition to a distant land to acquire the Golden 
Fleece is one of the most famous of Greek myths. The oldest surviving 
connected narrative account of it appears in Pindar’s Fourth Pythian Ode, 
composed in 462 BCE. But there are many allusions to it in earlier poets _ 
the Iliad and the Odyssey, Hesiod and the pseudo-Hesiodea, Mimnermus, 
Simonides _ which confirm the currency of the myth by 700 BCE at the 
latest. I shall argue that it was much older. 
Let us begin with the Homeric references. In three places in the Iliad (7. 
467-9, 21. 40 f., 23. 746 f.) we hear of Jason’s son Euneos, born to Hypsipyle 
on Lemnos: this union of Jason and Hypsipyle was always treated as an 
episode of the Argonautic expedition. The poet of the Odyssey (12. 69-72) 
mentions the Argo itself and how it succeeded, with Hera’s help, in getting 
past the Clashing Rocks on its way home from Aietes. The reference to 
Hera’s assistance implies a narrative with divine machinery, which points to 
an epic treatment. This old epic Argonautica was evidently the source from 
which the Odyssey poet knew of the Clashing Rocks. In fact, as many 
scholars since Kirchhoff have argued, he appears to have borrowed several 
adventures and motifs from the same source and transferred them to 
Odysseus.1 They include the Sirens, of whom I shall say more later, and Circe 
the sister of Aietes. 
Hesiod in his catalogue of the world’s major rivers (Th. 338-45) includes 
the Phasis; this was a mythical stream known only in connection with the 
Argo story. There are more explicit references to the myth towards the end of 
the Theogony (956-62, 992-1002), and many allusions to the subject matter in 
                                                 
1  See M. L. West, Odyssey and Argonautica, Classical Quarterly 55, 2005, 39-64. 
Martin L. West 
 
200 
fragments from other Hesiodic poems.2 The seventh-century elegist 
Mimnermus devoted several lines to Jason’s recovery of the Fleece from the 
ends of the earth (frs. 11–11a W.). Clearly the story was widely known by 
this time. We can assume that epic was the primary genre in which it was 
current. 
We know of several epic poems of archaic or classical date in which the 
myth was treated. But none of these can have been early enough to be the 
source for the Homeric poets. The story was at least touched on (and 
developed) in the Korinthiaka attributed to Eumelos (frs. 17, 20–3 W.); this 
poem, however, cannot be dated earlier than the mid sixth century.3 There 
was an ample account of the Argonauts’ voyage in the Naupaktika attributed 
to Carcinus (Carmen Naupactium frs. 3–9 W.), but this too reflected a 
Corinthian or Corinthian-colonial elaboration of the legend, in which Jason 
moved to Corcyra after the death of Pelias. Then there is record of a poem in 
6, 500 lines on ‘the building of the Argo and Jason’s voyage to Colchis’ 
ascribed to Epimenides (Diog. Laert. 1. 111 = DK 3 A 1). In this poem, as in 
pseudo-Eumelos, Helios’ son Aietes was a native of Corinth. So here again 
we are looking at a secondary version, not an original source; in general the 
ascription of poetry to the semi-legendary seer Epimenides seems to have 
begun in the fifth century.4 So none of these attested poems represented the 
archetypal account of the legend. Hesiod and the poets of the Iliad and the 
Odyssey must have known an older Argonautic epic or epics that existed only 
in oral form, or, if they were ever fixed in writing, they disappeared before 
the Hellenistic age. 
I have recently analysed the relationship between the Odyssey and its 
Argonautic source, and tried to show that the topography of the Argonautic 
poem related to a northerly sector of the Black Sea from the Crimea to the 
Straits of Kerch and the Sea of Azov.5 If my argument is accepted, the poem 
must have been composed at a time when that sector was the frontier zone of 
Greek exploration, tentatively prospected but not yet colonized. We should 
probably think of the mid part of the seventh century as the time when this 
area was being sporadically traversed, and when rumours of what it contained 
were coming back to Greece. That should be the date of the Argonautic poem. 
The mythical Aia was not yet located at Colchis; it will have lain at the 
eastern extremity of that northern zone, the Phasis being perhaps identified 
                                                 
2  Catalogue of Women, frs. 38, 40, 63, 241 M.-W.; Megalai Ehoiai, frs. 253-5; Keykos gamos, 
fr. 263; Aigimios, fr. 299. 
3  See M. L. West, "Eumelos": A Corinthian Epic Cycle?, Journal of Hellenic Studies 122, 2002, 
109-33, at 130 f. 
4  M. L. West, The Orphic Poems, Oxford 1983, 45–53.  
5  See n. 1. 
The Argonaut Legend in Early Greek Poetry 
 
201
with the Tanais.6 The Colchian localization is first attested in the sixth-
century pseudo-Eumelos (fr. 17. 8 W.), after the date of the Greek settlement 
in Colchis. 
The seventh-century Argonautica will not have been the first epic on the 
subject. The legend may go back much further. How much further? Can we 
identify a particular historical period favourable to the development of such a 
story? If we reduce it to its basic scheme, a quest by a band of companions for 
a treasure located in a distant land and guarded by a sleepless dragon – a 
quest that succeeds thanks to the help of the local king’s daughter, who falls 
in love with the leading hero – then it appears as a timeless Märchen complex 
that could have originated at any period. But if we take into consideration the 
circumstantial details that characterize the Greek myth, the question is not 
quite so open. The heroes set forth from the northern city of Iolkos. Their 
leader, Jason, is a claimant to the throne, which has been occupied by Pelias, 
the brother of Neleus and uncle of Nestor. So the story is anchored in a wider 
mythological framework. It is part of what we may call the Thessalian epic 
cycle of saga poetry centred on the Mycenaean capital of Iolkos and featuring 
heroes such as Pelias, Peleus, and Achilles. This poetry looked back to the 
late Mycenaean age, the period before the sack of Iolkos, which 
archaeologists date to sometime in the twelfth century. In the century or so 
following that event the poetic traditions relating to that region will have 
taken shape among the Aeolian Greeks of Thessaly.  
The Argonauts’ voyage is also anchored, at least in part, on the geography 
of the real world. From Iolkos they sail across the north Aegean by way of 
Lemnos, up through the Bosporos, and out into the greater sea beyond. At the 
same time as their saga poetry was taking shape, the Aeolian Greeks of 
Thessaly were raiding and settling the coastal regions of north-west Anatolia. 
Then, if not before, they must have become familiar with the Hellespont; they 
must have sailed up the Bosporos and found that it gave access to a vast open 
sea stretching away to the north and east, to unknown regions. For mariners 
of the north Aegean this was the natural direction in which to situate the 
fabulous land of the Golden Fleece and the voyage that took the Argonauts to 
many strange places and adventures. To this period, then, say between 1150 
and 1000, we may plausibly date, not the origin of the Märchen complex 
itself, but the framing of that particular form of the legend in which the 
adventurers were led by Jason at the behest of Pelias and in which their goal 
lay somewhere out in the east, beyond the Bosporos. 
                                                 
6  As it still was in the fifth century by the author of the Prometheus trilogy. Cf. U. von 
Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, Aischylos. Interpretationen, Berlin 1916, 152 f.; J. D. P. Bolton, 
Aristeas of Proconnesus, Oxford 1962, 56-8. 
Martin L. West 
 
202 
There is another argument for the antiquity of the myth. The name of the 
Phasis, the river of that land of the sunrise where the sun’s rays are stored in a 
golden chamber by Oceanus’ rim (Mimnermus fr. 11a) and where Helios’ 
children Aietes and Circe live, has a clear and simple Greek etymology: it 
means ‘shiner’, from the old root verb bhā- ‘shine’, which was used 
especially in connection with the dawn.7  corresponds exactly in form 
to the Sanskrit noun bhātis ‘shining, lustre’, except that it is masculine, with 
the -tis suffix making a nomen agentis.8 This is evidently an archaic formation 
that must have been created several centuries before Homer. It may be 
conjectured that in the original myth Phasis took the place of Oceanus itself 
as the river from which the sun rose. 
One of the dangers that the Argonauts had to overcome was the seductive 
singing of the Sirens. The Sirens of course also appear in the Odyssey, as a 
threat to Odysseus and his men. It is very probable that this is one of the 
motifs that the poet of the Odyssey borrowed from the Argonaut story. The 
Argonauts countered the danger by a means not available to Odysseus. They 
had on board a marvellous singer of their own, and when they came within 
earshot of the Sirens he took up his lyre and sang better than they did, so that 
the Argonauts were not tempted to land on the Sirens’ shore. The episode is 
related by Apollonius Rhodius (4. 891–919), but it certainly goes back to 
much earlier versions of the myth.  
The Argonauts’ singer is usually identified as Orpheus. The evidence that 
he was one of the Argonauts goes back to at least the middle of the sixth 
century. According to the mythographer Herodorus of Heraclea, who wrote 
around 400 BCE (FGrHist 31 F 43 = fr. 43 Fowler), it was in order to counter 
the Sirens that Orpheus was included in the company: the wise Centaur 
Chiron told Jason to take Orpheus with him for that precise contingency. As 
Meuli saw, the Argo legend had the pattern of what he calls the 
Helfermärchen, the type of story in which a band of people embark on a 
dangerous journey or quest, having among them certain individuals with 
exceptional abilities, and each of these individuals enables the company to 
overcome a particular danger.9 Orpheus’ inclusion among the Argonauts fits 
this pattern. 
                                                 
7  Od. 14. 502    , and in Indo-Iranian; see M. L. West, Indo-European 
Poetry and Myth, Oxford 2007, 219. 
8  As in   See C. D. Buck and W. Petersen, A Reverse Index of Greek Nouns and 
Adjectives, Chicago 1949, 574. 
9  K. Meuli, Odyssee und Argonautika, Berlin 1921, 1-24 = Gesammelte Schriften, Basel 1975, ii, 
593-610. 
The Argonaut Legend in Early Greek Poetry 
 
203
How old is the episode of Orpheus and the Sirens? The direct evidence, as 
I say, begins in the sixth century. But if the poet of the Odyssey borrowed the 
Sirens from the older Argonautica that he knew, that takes them back at least 
a century earlier. It may seem bold to suggest that Orpheus appeared in a pre-
Homeric Argonautica, because we have no evidence for his existence in any 
connection before the sixth century. When he does appear, however, he 
appears first in the role of Argonaut. He is shown, labelled with his name, on 
a sculptured metope from the Sicyonian Treasury at Delphi, dating from 
around 570 BCE, standing in a ship which is generally recognized to be the 
Argo.10 He appeared with the Argonauts also in pseudo-Eumelos (fr. 22* 
West). The earlier allusions to the Argo legend in Hesiod, Mimnermus, and 
the Odyssey, are so brief that we could not expect Orpheus to be mentioned in 
them. When Circe warns Odysseus about the Sirens, she does not even 
mention the Argo, as she does in the case of the Clashing Rocks. She could 
not conveniently have done so, for if she had told him that the Argonauts got 
past the Sirens safely, she would have had to explain too that they had 
achieved this because they had an expert singer with them, and that 
information would have been of no use to Odysseus. So I think it is perfectly 
possible, even likely, that Orpheus was already present in the pre-Homeric 
version of the Argonaut legend.  
Indeed I see no reason why he should not have played his part in the story 
from the beginning. The Thracian music-maker, the grandson of Pieros, 
should have been at home originally, like the Pierian or Olympian Muses 
themselves, in that north Greek poetic tradition, to be carried from there 
across the sea to Lesbos, where Orpheus’ severed but prophetic head was 
later said to be located. And there is another thing that points to his antiquity. 
I have already referred to the archaic formation of the name Phasis as 
evidence of the early origins of the Argo legend. Orpheus’ name too is of an 
archaic sort. Names in -, genitive -, are an old type, found in the 
Linear B tablets, common with Homeric heroes (Achilleus, Odysseus, Peleus, 
Neleus, Tydeus, Atreus, and others), but no longer productive in the historical 
period. Names of this form were not still being created in the seventh or sixth 
century. Orpheus must have been celebrated much earlier – and probably as 
an Argonaut. 
                                                 
10  Fouilles de Delphes 4, pl. 4; LIMC Argonautai no. 2 = Orpheus no. 6; cf. West (as n. 1), 46. 


The Argonaut Legend in Early Greek Poetry

Childs, Mary

A Thoroughly Georgian Medea?: Classical Motifs in Otar Chiladze’s "A Man Went down the Road"

Sikharulidze, Ketevan

Phasis 10 (I), 2007 
 
 
Ketevan Sikharulidze (Tbilisi) 
AN UNKNOWN VERSION OF THE ARGONAUT LEGEND 
The surviving Argonautic adventure is a version treated in literary terms. It is 
based on a folk plot, which must have certainly had versions in oral tradition. 
This is also attested by the fact that ancient authors sometimes provide 
different information about particular episodes and characters. These versions 
are not known, but I believe that one of them can be reconstructed with the 
help of the painting on a red-figured cylix kept in the Vatican Museum. It 
features a dragon emitting swallowed Jason. Although this scene is not 
attested in written records, it should be regarded not as the author’s invention, 
but as the rendering of an episode known to him. Remarkably, painters and 
sculptors did not interfere with a mythic plot; they normally depicted an 
important scene of a mythic story, and for this purpose resorted to written 
records as well as folk patterns. Since some of the scenes could have failed to 
be reflected in literary works, they could have been cast into oblivion. So, we 
may often come across artifacts featuring a scene which may not be attested 
in the surviving mythopoetic tradition. The above-mentioned cylix belongs to 
such group of artifacts. 
In general, the swallowing of a hero by a dragon is a very old and 
universal plot. It is connected with the semantic of dragon’s image, which 
determined the mythological perception of the initiation ritual. Dragon is a 
complex image established in consequence of the development and merging 
of mythological images of snake and fish, as it units in itself their symbols 
and functions. The body of a dragon represents a combination of snake and 
big fish (whale/dolphin) (which is exactly rendered in its Georgian name) and 
has wings. These outer features point to the syncretic nature of dragon and to 
its links with the earth, water and heaven. Thus it incorporates the knowledge 
of all the three spheres. Therefore, along with its physical strength, dragon 
also embodies wisdom. All those who achieve communion with him acquire 
Ketevan Sikharulidze 
 
164 
special faculties. This motif was later reflected in the myths about snake-
eaters, according to which the characters eating the flesh of a snake 
understood the language of living beings and unanimated things. Owing to 
such beliefs, snake/dragon was related to sorcery and initiation. 
In order to be entitled to the status of a soldier and the king, a hero was to 
be distinguished by particular strength, omnipotence and an ability to foresee. 
He could receive these faculties from the dragon by going down into his 
depths (his bosom). The hero came out from the dragon’s belly already 
transformed. This process was perceived as the communion with the deity 
through death, which acquired a new semantic of re-birth. 
Later, the scope of the initiation ritual was expanded. Every boy, reaching 
the age of maturity and preparing to enter manhood, took part in it. The rituals 
were performed in small dragon-shaped structures.1 
Evidently, the swallowing and omitting of a hero by the dragon was an 
important episode of archaic mythology. It became the foundation for the 
initiation ritual, and the rudiments of it survived in the ethnographic and folk 
material of peoples all over the world. The same is believed to be implied in 
the dialogues between the king and the snake included in the Hittite royal 
rituals, according to which the king owed its throne and power to the snake of 
the sea (the dragon).2 
This plot can be discerned in the story of Apollo taking control over the 
oracle at Delphi. Delphi at first belonged to Python created by Gaea the Earth 
 means the bottom of the earth; through this meaning the creature is 
associated with the primal forces and knowledge). Some sources mention it as 
Dolphin, to which the oracle owed its name. Apollo killed Python and 
attempted to seize the oracle, but enraged Earth confused the minds of the 
priests. They were unable to prophesy until Apollo redeemed his sin. He 
stayed in the nether world for nine years to achieve catharsis. Evidently, there 
he came into communion with the nature of Python and, in fact, replaced it. 
This was physically expressed from time to time. In one of Homeric hymns, 
Apollo appears as a huge whale (dolphin) before the Cretans on their way to 
Pylus.3 
Later, the changes in mythological-religious beliefs resulted in inverted 
roles of the characters in the archetypal plot and the classical model of snake-
fighter was developed. However, the appearance and accessories of some 
snake-fighting heroes retained archetypal traits. In Egyptian mythology, Ra, 
fighting against snake Apop, gets into the body of the beast and comes out 
                                                 
1  В. Пропп, Исторические корни волшебной сказки, Ленинград 1946. 
2  В. Ардзимба, Ритуалы и мифы древней Анатолии, Москва 1982. 
3  Homeric Hymns, Tbilisi 1982. 
An Unknown Version of the Argonaut Legend 
 
165
from his mouth. Marduk rushed into the body of Thiamath by force and cut 
his innards from the inside. Consequently, he is called ‘Nibim’ – ‘he who 
entered’ and ‘who saw the middle’. In German epos, the body of Siegfried is 
covered with the reptile membrane, which makes him unbeatable. The hero 
fighting a dragon wears symbolically a dragon skin, which points that he has 
been in the beast’s bosom. 
Saint George also fights against the Dragon and on some icons; his armor 
resembles fish (dragon) scales. The metal pieces of his armor are arranged in 
the form of fish or dragon scales. Such ornaments were also made on the 
Caucasian bronze articles and are called tevzipkhuri – ‘herringbone’. Such an 
armor was likewise characteristic of Roman war equipment, but its 
mythological semantic had long been forgotten. 
The fragments of the archetypal plot are also preserved in the Caucasian 
folklore. The dragon lying in the mountain cavity reared a hero and gave him 
a chain mail shirt, which made him invulnerable. Besides, the hero’s ring 
featured sacral signs – the sun, the moon and the cross – which probably 
indicated the hierarchical steps of mystical initiation. The powerful cult of the 
dragon in the Caucasus is attested not only by the ethnographical and folk 
material, but also by the abundance of megalithic figures, dragonoids.4 Some 
of them bear on their backs an imprinted image of a fleece, which in the 
Hattian-Hittite mythology had the function of wealth and protection of royal 
power. Therefore, a fleece hanging on a tree was specially guarded. 
Consequently, the dragon of the Argonaut legend guarding the Fleece is 
rooted in the tradition of the Caucasus and Asia Minor. 
If we bear in mind the universal character of the archetypal plot and the 
Caucasian tradition, Jason could as well have been among the heroes 
swallowed by the Dragon as he went to Colchis in order to return home in the 
royal capacity. 
I believe that in the unpreserved version of the myth (which in my opinion 
is one of the earliest) Jason does not seize the Fleece; he obtains it through 
initiation as the symbol of royal power.  
                                                 
4  K. Sikharulidze, Archetypal Plot of Snake-Fighters in Caucasian Folklore, Kartvelian Heritage, 
VI, Kutaisi 2002 (in Georgian). 


An Unknown Version of the Argonaut Legend

Khelaia, Nani

Shengelia, Ramaz

Gagnidze, Revaz

Chikhladze, Nino

Phasis 10 (II), 2007 
 
 
Nani Khelaia, Ramaz Shengelia, 
Revaz Gagnidze, Nino Chikhladze (Tbilisi) 
NEW INFORMATION ABOUT THE PLANTS  
FROM MEDEA’S GARDEN AND THEIR USE FOR MEDICAL 
PURPOSES IN TRADITIONAL AND MODERN MEDICINE 
The story of Medea and the Argonauts is eventually unwrapped of its 
mythological veil. The existence in ancient Colchis (the 13th-12th centuries) of 
a garden with healing plants associated with Medea’s name was studied as 
early as by Greek and Roman authors of ancient world. 
  Later, a German scholar, Ioakhim Kurt Shprengel (1766-1833) started 
his works about the History of Medicine with a chapter devoted to ancient 
Colchian medicine. Referring to the sources available (mostly Greek and 
Roman), he argued that none of the countries but ancient Colchis was known 
as the initial cradle of world medical culture. Moreover, he regarded the 
widely admitted medicine of the kingdom of Pontus as the successor to the 
Colchian medicine. He noted that the origins of the world medicine were 
rooted in Colchian civilization. Referring to various initial sources, and 
mostly to the "Orphic Argonautica" by pseudo-Orpheus, he studied the 
healing plants growing in the kingdom of Pontus, the Caucasus, Iberia and 
Colchis, namely in Medea’s Garden. Having studied medical properties of 
these plans, he stated that Medea used to prepare various medications, 
poisons and anti-poisons, which later Mithridates the Eupator, the great king 
of Pontus, used in his medical practice as remedies against a number of 
diseases, cases of intoxication and poisoning.1  
                                                 
1  Sprengel K., Test Versuch einer pragmatichen Geschicte der Arzneykunder. Zweyter Abschnitt, 
Alteste Kolchische Medicin, Halle, 1821, 44-55. 
Nani Khelaia, Ramaz Shengelia, Revaz Gagnidze, Nino Chikhladze 
 
202 
 A Georgian scholar and physician, professor Mikheil Shengelia (1916-
1999), devoted several researches to the issues on the locality of Medea’s 
Garden, to collecting information about the plants growing therein and about 
their habitat, as well as to the identification of their names. In his work he 
analyzed in detail notes and fragments attested in various initial sources, once 
again pointed to the actual existence of the garden and offered relatively fresh 
and comprehensive information about the names of 58 plants.2 
  Our studies targeted the following directions:  
1. Specify the names of the plants growing in Medea’s Garden and 
identify them;  
2. Look for the information about the use of these plants in traditional 
medicine.  
3. Look for the information about the use of these plants in modern 
medicine.  
According to the "Orphic Aurgonautica", on the garden territory grew 29 
species (the work offers a list of these species) and many poisoning herbs (the 
latter are not listed). The sorceress Medea, with the help of Artemis (Hecate) 
used to gather here healing herbs.3 
 The "Orphic Argonautica" is translated into Georgian by N. Melashvili. 
She notes that the author of the "Orphic Argonautica" had perfect knowledge 
of nature. Having done her best to provide comprehensive comments, the 
author nevertheless admits that the nomenclature should be studied by 
experts.4 
 K. Shprengel did not even discuss the first three plants of Medea’s 
garden, and commented on the rest 26 according to the works of Dioscurides, 
Pliny, Theophrastus and Galen.5 
 M. Shengelia almost shared the idea of identification of these plants; he 
only completed the plant list with the ones from K. Shprengel’s work. He 
noted that according to K. Shprengel’s data, 36 species grew in Medea’s 
garden. However, Ch. D. Kuptsis added 5 more species to the list of the plants 
growing in Medea’s garden. Such inclusion could have been based on various 
sources, or on the interpretation of the "Orphic Argonautica".6 
 We have put together the results of K. Shprengel and M. Shengelia only 
with regard to Medea’s garden. We found it necessary to present the existing 
                                                 
2  Shengelia M., Ancient Colchian-Iberian Medicine, Tbilisi, 1979, 203 (in Georgian). 
3  Orphica, Rec G. Hermenus, Lipsiae, 1805, (916-925), 168-170 (in Greek). 
4  Pseudo-Orpheus, Argonautica, Translated by N. Melashvili, Tbilisi, 1977, 39, 123 (in Georgian). 
5  Sprengel K., Test of Pragmatic History of Medical Art, Article 2, Ancient Colchian Medicine, 
Halle, 1821, 44-55. 
6  Shengelia M., Ancient Colchian-Iberian Medicine, Tbilisi, 1979, 203 (in Georgian). 
New Information about the Plants... 
 
203
data side by side, in a single table in order to compare them and venture our 
own opinion on the definition of particular plants’ names.  
The table of the versions to be compared: 
The sequence 
follows the 
one in the 
"Orphic 
Argonautica" 
K. Sprengel’s 
version 
M. Shengelia’s 
version 
Our version 
1. davfnai 1. - 1. Laurus nobilis 1. Laurus   
nobilis 
2. kravneiai 2. - 2. Cornus mas  
 
2.Cornus mas 
 
3. platavnisoi 3.- 
 
3. Platanus 
occidentalis,  
P. Orientalis 
3. Platanus 
orientalis 
 
4. ajsfovdelo" 4. Asphodelus 
ramosus 
4. Asphodelus 
ramosus 
4. Asphodeline 
 
5. kluvmenov" 5. Lathyrus 
clymenum  
5. Lathyrus 
climenum 
5. Lathyrus 
climenum  
6. ajdivanto" 6. Adiantum 
capillus  
6. Adiantum 
capillus 
6. Adiantum 
capillus-veneris 
7. qrivon 7. Solanum 
insanum 
 
7. Solanum 
insanum, 
S. dulcamara  
7. Solanum 
dulcamara 
 
8. kivpeiron 8. Cyperus 
rotundus 
8. Cyperus 
rotundus 
8. Cyperus 
rotundus 
9. ajri;serewvn 9. Verbena supina 
 
9. Verbena 
supina, 
V. officinalis 
9. Verbena 
officinalis 
 
10. aj-
nemwvnh 
10. Anemone 
coronaria  
 
10. Anemona 
coronaria, 
 A. fascicularis 
10. Anemone 
fasciculata 
11. o{rminon 11. Salvia 
horminum  
 
11. Salvia 
horminum,  
S. officinalis 
11. Horminum 
 
12. eijrivsi-
mon 
12. Sisymbrium 
polyceratum 
 
12. Sisimbrium 
policeratum.  
S. irio, S. loeselli, 
S. officinalis  
12. Iris lazica  
 
Nani Khelaia, Ramaz Shengelia, Revaz Gagnidze, Nino Chikhladze 
 
204 
13. kiklamiJ" 13. Cyclamen 
hederaefolium  
 
13. Cyclamen 
europaeum,  
C. persicum, 
C. ibericum  
13. Cyclamen 
 
14. soicav" 14. Lavandula 
stoechas 
14. Lavandula 
stoechas 
14. Lavandula 
stoechas 
15. paionivh 15. Peonia 
officinalis, 
P. corallina 
 
15. Peonia 
officinalis,  
P. abchasica, 
P. tenuifolia,  
P. caucasica,  
P. carthalinica 
15. Peonia 
officinalis 
 
16. kavterne" 16. Mentha 
cervina 
 
16. Mentha 
aquatica,  
M. longifolia,  
M. piperita,  
M. pulegium 
16. We could 
not determine 
 
17. mandra-
govrh" 
17. Atropa 
mandragora 
17. Mandragora 
officinalis  
17. Mandragora 
officinalis  
18. povliovn 18. Teucrium 
montanum  
 
18. Teucrium 
montanum, 
T. chamaedrus, 
T. polium 
18. Teucrium 
trapezunticum 
 
19. divktam-
non: 
19. Origanum 
dictamnus 
 
19. Origanum 
dictamnus,  
O. maiorana, 
O. vulgare 
19. Origanum 
dictamnus  
 
20. krovko" 20. Krokus 
 
20. Crocus 
sativus, 
C. speciosus 
20. Crocus 
sativus 
 
21. kavrda-
mon: 
21. Lepidium 
sativum 
 
21. Lepidium 
sativum,  
L. campestre 
21. Eletteria 
cardamomum 
 
22. kh'mo" 
 
22. Micropus 
erectus 
22. Micropus 
erectus 
22. Micropus 
erectus 
23. smivlax 23. Smilax aspera 
 
23. Smilax aspera 23. Similax 
aspera 
24. camaivmh-
lon 
24. Matricaria 
chamomilla, 
Anthemis nobilis, 
24. Matricaria 
chamomilla, 
Anthemis nobilis, 
24. 
Chamomilla 
 
New Information about the Plants... 
 
205
Pyrethrum 
parthenium 
Pyrethrum 
parthenium 
25. mhvkwn 25. Glaucium 
luteum 
25. Glaucium 
luteum 
25. Glaucium 
26. ajlkeivh 26. Malva 
tournefortiana  
26. Malva 
tournefortiana 
26. Malva 
 
27. pavnake" 27. Ferula 
opopanax, 
Pastinaca lucida, 
Echinophora 
tenuifolia  
27. Ferula 
opopanax,  
F. assafoetida,  
F. galbaniflua 
27. Ferula 
opopanax 
28. kavrpason 28. Valeriana 
tuberosa 
28. Valeriana 
tuberosa,  
V. officinalis 
28. Carpesium 
 
29. ajkovniton 29. Aconiton 
cammarum, 
A. lycoctonum, 
A. ochroleucum 
29. Aconitum 
caucasicum,  
A. tuscheticum, 
A. anthora 
29. Aconitum 
orientale  
 
 
 Botanical-systematic and taxonomic study, taking into account ecotopo-
logical data, enabled us to trace corrections in past examinations. We 
identified the names of 28 different plants. As shown in the table, seven 
plants were identified at the level of genus, twenty-one – at the level of 
species, and their binary nomenclature was indicated. We have modified the 
binary nomenclature of five plants, we couldn’t agree with description of one 
plant: in particular, in the "Orphic Argonautica", kavterne" is characterized as 
having many branches (polivknhmovn), but in a Latin footnote it is presented 
as a variety (kateivdwlo"), which is a vascular plant (katavdendro") with 
multiple (multiplicandi) bended down (katav) leaves. Its morphological 
structure is different from the Mentha kind.7  
 The study revealed that part of those plants is still widespread within as 
well as outside Georgia. None of them is a Georgian endem, some were 
brought into Georgia and are cultivated here at present as well, while others 
                                                 
7  Orphica, 1805, (916-925), 168-170 (In Greek); Dhmhtravkh" D., Mevga lexiko;n th'" 
eJllhnikh'" glwvssh", V, Aqhvnai, 1939; Hederici  B., Lexicon Graeco-Latinum et Latino-
Graecum, Romae, MDCCC, XXXII; Pape W., Griechiche-Deutsches Bandworterbuch. 
Braunschweig, I, 1908; Gagnidze R., Vascular Plants of the Georgian Nomenclatural Cata-
logue, Tbilisi, 2005, 247. 
Nani Khelaia, Ramaz Shengelia, Revaz Gagnidze, Nino Chikhladze 
 
206 
do not grow in Georgia; they used to be imported from foreign countries and 
are still imported nowadays.8 
 Medea successfully applied medical plants growing in her garden for the 
treatment of various diseases, for relieving symptoms or for preventive 
purposes. According to Greek-Roman sources, Medea used to treat 
barrenness, psychical diseases, various kinds of wounds, she could relieve 
pain symptoms. For these purposes, she applied ointments, which she 
prepared with her own hands, she was skilled in cosmetic manipulations, etc. 
However, it is not specified which particular plant or combination of plants 
she used in each particular case. 
 We attempted to collect information about the use of the plants from 
Medea’s garden in traditional medicine. Such information survived through 
written records as well as oral tradition.  
 For this purpose we examined eight Georgian medical manuscripts of the 
10th-18th centuries. Four of them had been studied and published by various 
authors; we treated the remaining four manuscripts as well and prepared them 
for publication.9 
 We also studied Georgian medical-ethnological material, which we 
collected during scientific expeditions. Systematization and analyses showed 
us that the material includes centuries-old information about healing plants 
that used to be applied and were approved.10 
 We also collected information from modern medical literature about the 
remedial properties of the plants from Medea’s Garden and evaluated its 
authenticity. 
 In compliance with the materials obtained, we grouped the plants into the 
following categories: 
                                                 
8  Makashvili A., Botanical Dictionary, Tbilisi, 1951, 260 (in Georgian); Гроссгейм A., 
Растителъные богатства Кавказа, Москва, 1952, 611; The Flora of Georgia, vol. I-XIV, Tbi-
lisi, 1971-2003 (in Georgian). 
9  Гроссгейм A., Растителъные богатства Кавказа, Москва, 1952, 611; The Flora of Georgia,  
vol. I-XIV, Tbilisi, 1971-2003 (in Georgian); Kananeli, Ustsoro Carabadini (‘Matchless 
Medical Book’), Tbilisi, 1997, 665 (in Georgian); Kophili Khoja, Tsigni Saakimoi (Medical 
Book by Khoja Kopili), Tbilisi, 1936, 381 (in Georgian); Panaskerteli-Tsitsishvili Z., 
Samkurnalo Tsigni-Carabadini (Medical Book), Tbilisi, 1978, 508 (in Georgian); Bagrationi D., 
Iadigar Daudi, Tbilisi, 1938, 741 (in Georgian); Georgian Medical Manuscripts:  
a) H-414. Carabadini Kargi da Margebeli (‘A Medical Handbook, Good and Benevolent’), the 
16th-17th c., 95.  
b) H-916 Abram Mtsereli, Carabadini Martali da Cheshmariti (‘A Medical Book, True and 
Authentic’), the 17th c., 82. 
  c) H-3045 Saeqimo Tsigni (‘A Medical Book’), the 18th c., 221. 
  d) F 46-6 Azrumeli, Tsnobari (‘Reference Book’), the 18th c., 55.  
10  Xелаиа Н., Лекарственные растения в грузинских медицинских рукописях XVI-XVIII ве-
ков, Киев, 1985, 19. 
New Information about the Plants... 
 
207
To the first group were assigned nine different officinal plants. They are 
thoroughly studied and applied in our national as well as foreign traditional 
and modern medicine (Aconitum orientale, Carpesium, Chamomilla, 
Glaucium, Horminum, Lavandula stoechas, Origanum vulgare, Paeonia 
officinalis, Solanum dulcamara).11 
The second group includes sixteen different plants, which are studied 
partially. They are used only in traditional medicine (Adiantum capillus-
veneris, Anemone fasciculata, Cornus mas, Crocus sativus, Elletteria 
cardamomum, Cyclamen, Cyperus rotundus, Ferula opopanax, Iris lazika, 
Lathyrus limenum, Laurus nobilis, Malva, Mandragora officinalis, Smilax 
aspera, Teucrium trapezunticum, Verbena officinalis).12 
The third group includes three different plants. We failed to obtain in the 
sources available any information regarding their healing qualities or their use 
in the traditional or modern medicine (Asphodeline, Micropus erectus, 
Platanus orientalis,). We believe that the future study of these plants will 
enable us to make objective conclusion about their reliability and the 
appropriateness of their use. This will facilitate their thorough and purposeful 
study, and will point to the necessity either to apply them in Modern Medical 
practice, or to ban their use. 
 They are attested in the "Orphic Argonautica" as existing on the territory 
of Medea’s garden. The definition of their names is the task of the future and 
we plan to continue our researches in this direction. 
 The results of the study lead to the conclusion that the healing qualities of 
the plants growing in Medea’s garden are unquestionable, and this may serve 
as the evidence attesting to the actual existence of Medea’s garden. 
 
 
                                                 
11  The Fund of the Museum of Georgian History of Medicine, Tbilisi, 1960-1990; Eristavi L., 
Farmacognozia, Tbilisi, 2005, 675 (in Georgian); Муравьёва Д., Фармакогнозия, Москва, 
198, 656.  
12  Шретер A., Лекарственная флора Кавказа, Москва, 1979, 368; Ковалёва Н., Лечение рас-
тениями, Москва, 1972, 350; Полная энциклопедия народной медицины, Москва, 1998, 
vol. 1: 751, vol. 2: 799; PDR for Herbal Medicines, Montvale, New Jersey, 1998, 1244. 


New Information about the Plants from Medea’s Garden and their Use for Medical Purposes in Traditional and Modern Medicine

Not a member yet