Talk:Sappho

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:
Sappho was a good article nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these are addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Reviewed version: January 21, 2007

Contents

[edit] Older discussion

The paragraph about Renaissance speculation needs to go, since it's silly and ahistorical (and badly spelled). The notion of some monolithic “early Roman Catholic and Byzantine church” destroying classical works because they were erotically charged could only emerge from some undergrad fever dream. Ovid, anyone? Catullus? Or, for that matter, the Song of Songs?

If you have a fact, then state it. Leave the speculation to the novelists. _______ A very weird article indeed. It was not only due to Sappho's eroticism that her texts didn't come to us, actually this happened with all arcaic lyric texts except Theognis and Pindar, of various subjects. Even Solon, who is praised by St. Basil or Clement of Alexandria, survived only in quotes of various auctors... Such lines stating "work was disapproved of by the Christian church" must be deleted, for there are several other reasons.

This article has a strange view of the transmission of Greek classics to the modern world. I'd like to know the source for the Arab transmission of Sappho, particularly; that's one I've never read. I've never done any specialized reading on the text of Sappho, but i've read a lot about transmission in general. --MichaelTinkler

I'm embarassed to say that I was working from a quote I recalled from a quite old book on greek history. I transposed some concepts in my mind, and committed them to the wiki. It was in reference to Plato, of course.

From now on, I'm afraid I can't take for granted what I remember :-( --Alan D

Welcome to middle age! I can't trust my right knee, myself. Actually, I'm glad to hear it's Plato. I couldn't imagine a nice Syriac Christian gentleman translating Sappho into Arabic for ANY amount of money.

Regarding the "Fragment 1V" subpage. Is it actually called 1V (arabic numeral 1, roman letter V), or is this just someone's mistyping of the roman numeral IV, as I suspect? -- SJK

It is actually just fragment 1. Typo. Will an admin please move the page? Thanks --Dmerrill

questions about the fragment - is it public domain? who's the translator (even if it's public domain the translator deserves credit)?

I'm not really sure. To keep Wikipedia safe I replace the text with one I know is out of copyright -- from a 1925 translation in public domain -- noted the source, with url, on the page as well. --Dmerrill
Odd. I always thought fr. 16 was considered a complete poem. If there is interest, I have a translation of it (under my copyright) at [1]. -- llywrch 00:56 Dec 14, 2002 (UTC)

[edit] Mean old Christians!

I've changed the final paragraph, which had said outright that frowning Christians had invented Sappho's love affair with Phaon. That kind of nonsense is sloppy and childish. The story of Phaon with Sappho goes to Rome, to Ovid and Lucian, so it was hardly some conspiracy of men. Also, it's a bit silly to say that Sappho had to be a "lesbian." First, it's not clear that she was ever entirely same-sex oriented. Second, demanding that the dead conform to our narrow, historically bounded concept of "queer" is fulsome nonsense. She was not a bourgeoise, Western woman, and to imagine that something like lesbianism is a transhistorical condition is absurd. Let her sleep, and stop playing football with her sexuality as we report on what the ancients said and the later have done with it. Geogre 21:08, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)

[edit] New Sappho papyrus

Just thought I would throw this out there for others to peruse as this is not my area. [Lost Sappho love poem published after 2,600 years] --jphillips66

[2] — if anyone can get their hands on the original text published in the TLS, please post it here! dab (ᛏ) 14:16, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

it's fragment 58, which was about half complete already. So it is not really proper to say a new poem has been discovered. Rather, about half-a-poem. dab (ᛏ) 28 June 2005 07:34 (UTC)
re [3], wrong, the journal article was by Daniel and Gronewald. West did just the translation in the TLS article. Also, the poem was already half-complete all along, they just discovered maybe another quarter, so that it is now something like 80% complete. It's not a "new" poem. The text of fragment 58 (which will remain to be the text of fragment 58) I put here specifically so it can be expanded when the additional fragment becomes available. It is not "outdated" until the "new" text is posted here. dab (ᛏ) 29 June 2005 07:02 (UTC)

21351.II begins with barys. This must be West's

my heart’s grown heavy, my knees will not support me,

corresponding to

[                       ]α̣ι, γόνα δ' [ο]ὐ φέροισι

i.e.

barus de mo[i] um.ttetto ēt]α̣ι, γόνα δ' [ο]ὐ φέροισι
pad etot..a..estiorkh'ησθ' ἴσα νεβρίοισιν

(I can really hardly read this...) dab (ᛏ) 29 June 2005 09:51 (UTC)

Νεβρός is a young deer, for whatever it's worth Chronographos 29 June 2005 10:45 (UTC)
Generally translated as fawn; see [4] for example. Filiocht | Talk June 29, 2005 11:14 (UTC)
Also, a piece of useless information; "βροδόπαχυν" in this fragment is the Doric version of the Ionic, Homeric "ροδόπαχυν", usually translated "rosy-fingered [dawn]". Filiocht | Talk June 29, 2005 11:19 (UTC)
that would be rhodo-daktylos, here we have "rosy-armed" Dawn. rhodo-pachus would be "rosy-thick", rhodo-pechus rosy-armed :). Anyway, this is a bit of a hoax. West's translation has 12 lines. Fragment 58 has at least 26 lines. So what they have is at best a complete half-a-poem. dab (ᛏ) 29 June 2005 11:37 (UTC)

[edit] copyvio?

The extensive quotations on this page, introduced by 'dab' were covered by copyright and also misleading: The text of fr. 1 was taken from the copyright edition of Lobel and Page and shorn of its last line. Fr. 16 ditto. Fr. 31 taken over from their edition of frr. 31-42, without indication of fragment-boundaries! Fr. 58 taken over from their edition, and a poem is now known to begin at line 11 and end at line 22 within this sequence of line-ends ('dab' has missed this point), and the new accessions are not included, so that this Greek text is positively misleading and unhelpful. The last reliable work on this section of the text seems to be that in the version of 28 June 16.34, to which I have reverted. Also, it is not true to say that 'West did just the translation'. He produced a completely new reconstruction of the text, published and explained at the place indicated in the earlier version of the article, a reference deleted by 'dab'. And '80% complete' is a considerable underestimate. [unsigned, by User:81.179.125.227 ]

dear '81.179.125.227', the shearing of their last lines of the fragments was unintentional, please correct them. As for your claim that the fragments are copyrighted, because they are taken from an edition, I have my doubts. Are you saying the Greek text of the Iliad is copyrighted too, because it was edited? We can attribute the conjectures, or in the extreme, remove the conjectures altogether, but the text of the papyri itself is certainly not copyrightable. As for "missing the point" of the recent fragment 58 developments, well, see above: we have been trying to piece together what happened from sparse online references. If you know better, by all means correct the current version, no hostility is necessary. Since you seem to have access to the current reading, why not post it rather than deleting the current text of fragment 58? dab (ᛏ) 3 July 2005 13:41 (UTC)

thanks to User:Chronographos, we have the reconstructed text now, Image:Sappho new.gif. dab (ᛏ) 5 July 2005 11:58 (UTC)

I quickly typed it in, but somebody with a polytonic keyboard layout could do a better job. Or else we could give all texts in capitals, as it is attested anyway. I removed my attempt at translating the fragment, since the whole text should now be considered. dab (ᛏ) 5 July 2005 12:26 (UTC)

Copyright probably does cover a scholarly edition of a text to the extent that the scholarly work is creative. In the case of the present text, it seems to me fairly clear that most of the interpolations (and possibly also the word-breaks, accents, and punctuation) are covered by copyright. The text on the papyri is not copyrightable to the extent that it doesn't require creative scholarship to read. In more practical terms: is there room for disagreement among competant scholars, or is it a routine (though perhaps difficult) task? I don't know enough about papyrology in general, or these particular papyri in particular, to judge. Perhaps someone could write to the editors and see what they claim. --Macrakis 5 July 2005 16:29 (UTC)

punctuation and diacritics are certainly not covered. Where West restitutes entire half-lines, they should be considered his intellectual property. For this reason I omitted the restituted three half-lines from his text. West's conjectures consist of about 12 words. Since it was published in an academic journal, it should be permissible to quote this restitution, clearly attributing it to him. We are not trying to plagiarize West's text, we are referencing it. dab (ᛏ) 5 July 2005 16:55 (UTC)

In Suda lexicon (800 b.c) she is too reported as killing herself over a man.

[edit] Fragment 16

This translation is unattributed yet it is clearly a modern one typical of the 20th century translations and subject to copyright. Whoever inserted this translation should, at the very least, provide an attribution and permission for its use. If no-one provides a proper attribution I will remove this translation in order to aviod copyright violations. Ande B. 23:26, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Since no-one has responded to my previous concerns about copyright violations, I have removed the very nice but unauthorized translation of frgment 16. If I find an adequate sample in the public domain, I will add it later. Ande B. 00:20, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

I copied Bliss Carman's version of "peer of the gods" as a public domain alternative to the earlier copyright protected sample. Ande B. 21:32, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bizarre

Someone stupid could say "Sappho=Satan".

Well, they could. But if they put that in the article, it would be vandalism, and the Elders of Wikipedia would have to send the Wikipedia Militia to take their computer away. --FOo 14:11, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Merge material?

There's a section about Sappho, including long poetry excerpts, at History of lesbianism - anything there worth merging or otherwise commenting on? Tearlach 14:13, 11 September 2005 (UTC)

Please do not merge the useless drivel on the History of Lesbianism page with the material in the Sappho article. Groundless assertions are made in nearly every sentence, sources are not cited, common falsehoods are repeated and, perhaps worst of all, there appear to be quite a few quotes from translations that are under copyright protection. Ande B. 06:43, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

I removed the request to merge from the History of Lesbianism page. The two articles cover different topics and no-one has voiced any support for the merger in 7 months. Ande B 07:39, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "Peer of the gods"

I applaud the idea of putting a translation of fr. 31 in the article, but the one given is IMO awful. "Peer of the gods he seems/Who in thy presence/Sits..." may have been decent poetic style at the turn of the 19th/20th cent., but it doesn't work for this early 21st century reader. Plus, the fifth and sixth stanzas aren't in the Greek text.

I realize that it's hard to find public domain translations, but if this one were my first exposure to Sappho I don't think I'd want to read more. Can we find something else? (I could even try my hand at translating it, if there's nothing available.) Akhilleus 21:46, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

I agree that these public domain styles are not to the taste of many people at all. I only read them to get a historical comparison. You're right about the extra lines that Carman added; that's typical of the majority of translators prior to Barnard. Personally, I wouldn't mind if someone posted their own translation but I was under the impression that we weren't supposed to be doing that on the Wikipedia. Otherwise I might have been tempted to post one of my own! I could be totally wrong about that restriction, however, so don't take my word on it. My own preference is the original language with a near literal translation. If you don't like this poem, just remove it. Ande B. 02:32, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Oxyrynchus link is great

Thanks to whoever added the P.Oxy link to the "New Poem" section. I've added a link to the full collection at Oxford to the External links. If you can read ancient Greek, it's well worth taking a look at these hi-res jpegs. They're not always as clear as you might like, but for the mast part, I'm quite happy to see them. Ande B 03:16, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Clarification needed?

This passage: "Starting in the Rennaissance, at least two different Gregories have been accused of having copies of Sappho's poetry deliberately destroyed. Bishop Gregory of Nazianzus (329-374) is alleged to have incited the burning of many texts by pagan writers, either on his own instance or at the urging of his son, who is known as St. Gregory of Nazianzus. Pope Gregory VII(1073–1085)" reads to me as if the two Gregories lived in the Renaissance, which of course is not what's meant. Presumably uit really means that some critics in the Renaissance were saying this. Might be useful to clarify this, naming the critics. (Sorry but I'm in no position to do this myself). PiCo 10:06, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Good point, Pico. I'll try to pull out my reference books to get a more precise description of the critical sources. In the mean time, I'll tighten up the language a bit. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. Ande B 21:36, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Unclear implication

Older critics sometimes alleged that she led an aesthetic movement away from typical themes of gods to the themes of individual human experiences and emotions, but it is now considered more likely that her work belongs in a long tradition of Lesbian poetry, and is simply among the first to have been recorded in writing.

I'm a bit confused as to the meaning of this passage. Why are these two theories contradictory?--Starwed 07:05, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure. It sounds a bit POV to me. I'd remove it, as the category of "Lesbian poetry" wasn't around in Sappho's time, at least not in the modern sense as it's used here. Also: is is sourced? If not, needs to be clipped as POV (IMHO). --DanielCD 23:41, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
It's possible "Lesbian poetry" simply meant poetry from Lesbos. If so, it should probably be reworded... but it would need a source either way. --Starwed 07:29, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
I corrected "Lesbian" to "lyric." Basically what this sentence says is that there was a view, once common among scholars, that Sappho and the other lyric poets were the first Greek poets to focus on an individual's emotions as the basis for poetry, in opposition to epic, which was about the noble deeds of heroes and gods. You can find older critics talking about lyric poetry as the first place in Greek literature where we have a true sense of an individual personality behind the poetry. Following Nagy and other scholars, many people now think there was a long tradition of oral composition of lyric poetry, just as there was for epic poetry, but this tradition is lost to us because it didn't get written down.
This sentence, while not particularly well-written, conveys pretty commonplace ideas, so I don't feel like it's crying out for sources. However, if others feel they are required, a place to look for the "older" view might be Albin Lesky's Greek Literature, and a place for the "newer" view might be Gregory Nagy's Pindar's Homer, or the article on Greek Lyric in the Cambridge History of Greek Literature. --Akhilleus (talk) 18:25, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Poor text

Sapphos' other love was well, women. This was inventing of lesbians.

I can't think of a good way to rephrase these entences, but I think it needs attention. 125.62.94.252 11:53, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Lesbian or Bisexual?

Her lesbianism is based on her poetry, no? Well, she wrote poems of sexual attraction to men also. Shouldn't she be listed as a bisexual writer?Andral 18:36, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

I would agree that both categories are appropriate for Sappho. Clearly, she came from Lesbos and would be a Lesbian under that geographic link alone : - ) But what little we have of her works and what little we can guess of her life seems consistent with the bi-sexual designation as well. I would hope that there is no policy restricting our choices of categories here. Ande B. 07:18, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
Wait a minute, out of all her works only ONE has so far been found almost intact with many of her fragments translated into modern era idealism, with translators filling in the gaps as to what she might have actually been writing; in essence modern translators were writing Sappho's poems for her. So how come its take at face value that she was a lesbian or bisexual? There is nowhere in her own written works which she claims a physical sexual relationship with another woman. How can someone who has lived over 2000 years ago be categorized "lesbian", "bisexual" when there isn't any evidence of such in her own actual works. BONK 13 June 2006
Sappho's poetry clearly expresses same-sex desire; it's not necessary for someone to have a physical relationship for the claim that they're lesbian, gay, bisexual, or whatever. Historically, Sappho has been a kind of Lesbian icon, so no matter what an individual editor might think her poetry says, because she's historically been perceived as a Lesbian poet, the category belongs.
It is, however, a commonplace of classical scholarship that categories such as lesbian, bisexual, and gay are relatively recent historical developments, and don't accurately describe ancient Greek and Roman sexuality. (Michel Foucault and Holt Parker are some references that immediately spring to mind.) Nevertheless, the lesbian and bisexual categories should be used on this article, simply because they'll help guide Wikipedia users here. --Akhilleus (talk) 01:46, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
How can it be clearly expressed as same-sex desire when only one of the poems from her nine books survived intact with several of her fragments translated in modern era idealism in which the translators are filling in the gaps? What I mean about translators filling in the gaps are comments such as these:
"There seem to be no problems inreading this English translation just as it stands, but there are two readings in the badly fragmented papyrus of the Greek which are difficult. First, just what word has disappeared right after the goddess "Persuasion" (Peitho)? Could that word "peitho" be not the Goddess but a form of the verb "persuade", e.g. "you persuade..."? Second and more important, the what are words "despite herself" (etheloisa)? This is important because "etheloisa" is a feminine form and this word is the only sure evidence that it is a girl that Sappho and the goddess are speaking about. Since we have nothing better for a reading here, we should go with this reasonable feminine participle, and continue with the poem being spoken to a girl." [5]
Its only one poem which talks about a young woman's beauty which could be seen or not be seen as "same-sex" desire. Where is the mounted of evidence and poems which support her desires of the fairer sex? Plus her original works she writes epithalamia. BONK 13 June 2006
How about this translation of fragment 94, from the same site that you quote from:
I just really want to die.
She, crying many tears, left me
And said to me:
"Oh, how terribly we have suffered, we two,
Sappho, really I don't want to go away."
And I said to her this:
Go and be happy, remembering me,
For you know how we cared for you.
And if you don't I want to remind you
.............and the lovely things we felt
with many wreathes of violets
and ro(ses and cro)cuses
and.............. and you sat next to me
and threw around your delicate neck
garlands fashioned of many woven flowers
and with much...............costly myrrh
..............and you anointed yourself with royal.....
and on soft couches.......(your) tender.......
fulfilled your longing..........

--Akhilleus (talk) 04:15, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Wow, you just proved my point about how the same poem when translated from another language can have different meanings and feel to them when translated into a foreing language... and this one by the same translator no less. The following is also from Harris, I belive, in pdf file from the same site [6] scroll down to page 123 to read this version of his fragment 94 translation, specifically notice how the wording in each version changes in specific areas which gives it a different feel/meaning when comparing the version you posted above and the one I posted below. BTW, the one below is closer to the original Greek version found on page 122 here[7], so no, the one above is not as "faithful" to the orignal Greek as believed...oh and Harris does state that the underline letters of words in his translations, including the Greek version on page 122, are his tentative guesses (see page 127 for this): BONK 15 June 2006
“I….really wish I were dead”
She, shedding many tears, was leaving me
And she said to me:
“Oh my! What awful things we have had to endure,
Psappho. It is really unwillingly that I leave you now…”
And I answered her with these words:
“Go away in happiness, remembering
Me, for you know how I cared for you.
And if you don’t know, I want to
Remind you….. (if)
And we felt lovely things
With many garlands of violets
And roses and crocus for you
An….you set down beside me
And sweet scented garlands with many
Braids around your lovely neck
Your threw, of flowers fashioned,
And with much…..myrrh
The royal ru...n
Then desire…… ……nidon
And nobody or nothing
Holy nor……
Was there, from which we were lacking
Nor grove dance
Instruments
Song….”

Doesn't look same-sex desire to me when read this way. Infact it could be a tender moment between any two females of a whole wide range, mother or sister saying goodbye to daughter/sister getting married; best friend moving away; etc. not necessary between two lovers only. ~Mallaccaos, 16 June 2006

This looks like same-sex desire to me. No, nothing explicitly says that Sappho desires this girl, but it sure looks like it to me, and I think most readers would agree. And that's with all the holes in the papyrus. Anyway, regardless of what we want to think, countless readers have seen Sappho as a lesbian or bisexual or whatever you'd like to call it, and the scholarly consensus is that Sappho portrays same-sex desire, and that's more important than our personal opinions: Wikipedia is supposed to report the opinions of experts. --Akhilleus (talk) 04:15, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
That poem can be interpreted as epithalamia. Also its nicely translated into 'English' which can fit whatever ones view want's it to be, but anyone can tell that meaning of words and phrases, specifially when one translates from ancient dialects such as Aeolic Greek, which is not understood by many, are usually Lost in Translation when even translated into modern Koinen Greek, never mind another totally foreing language all together. The point of my posting from that website was to show how some who translate her poems are basically filling in the gaps, in which case as the writer from that site states: "First, just what word has disappeared right after the goddess "Persuasion" (Peitho)? Could that word "peitho" be not the Goddess but a form of the verb "persuade", e.g. "you persuade..."? Second and more important, the what are words "despite herself" (etheloisa)? This is important because "etheloisa" is a feminine form and this word is the only sure evidence that it is a girl that Sappho and the goddess are speaking about." Its the second and most imporant word that is missing, etheloisa, which I find interesting, because as the writer of that site states, its that word which would tell us if Sappho is talking about a female or not. As for wikipedia, I was under the impression that its an encyclopedia base on much factual info as possible and if opposing views are out there, then they are also put into the articles. Am I not correct in that regards? Thanks for clearing it up for me, if that is true. Regards. BONK 13 June 2006
Do you read ancient Greek? If so, find a text of Sappho, and compare Harris' translation with it; I think you'll find he's faithful and accurate. In the translation quoted above, the ellipses and parentheses represent where words are missing or difficult to read, so he's not making stuff up. --Akhilleus (talk) 05:05, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
Yes, I'm very familiar with the different ancient Greek dialects that existed back then, as well as the different modern ones in existance today and as pointed above, there are two Harris translations each given the poem a different feel and meaning to it. The fact remains that no piece of literature is a complete translation from one language into the other as faithfully as one would think them to be. Even Harris himself states "Sappho is virtually impossible to translate effectively" and even quotes Robert Frost, "Poetry is what's lost in translation". [8] As Harris points out, words, notions and sentiments are not cross-culturally exchangable, especially when one is trying to translate from such an obscure dialect as Aeolic. Each translation, is often fudged to reflect the translator's interpretation, which in this case has been an essential element in the influence of Sappho's poem on later writers of lyric that can have different meanings from each other and from the original. Sappho's poems are difficult to translated, even by academic standards, some of the forms are different from the modern ones, there are variant forms and the vocabulary can be interpretated in different ways. Also the sound of her poems, which are of extreme importance have consistently resisted translation into English and since the Greek language is incompatible with English, its impossible to convey into the translation. BONK 15 June 2006
Further, you've misread his essay. The word etheloisa is apparently difficult to read on the papyrus, but the word is there. Nearly every editor agrees that etheloisa is the correct reading (as does Harris). There's no controversy on this point, unless you go back to the mid-19th century, when readers were scandalized by the idea that Sappho might have desired another woman. Anyway, the fragment with etheloisa is a different poem than the one I quoted above, so I don't see how your objection applies here. --Akhilleus (talk) 05:05, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
Not necessarily correct since there is no way of knowing how the word was actually written and in Greek a slight twicking of a word can give a sentence a whole different meaning. I'm not saying that what Harris and others are claiming is not true, only that the likelyhood of them being wrong is just as good as is the translators from the 19th century being wrong, since there is no way of ever finding out. Which is why I said different people can translate literature of another language in different ways, giving the work different meanings not always faithful to the original work, particualry when one is talking about literature from over 2000 years ago in which little of the original work is in existance and from a dialect as obscure as Aeolic. BONK 15 June 2006
I don't think epithalamia are usually written in the first person (well, I think they often use a first person plural, since they're performed by a chorus), --Akhilleus (talk) 05:05, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
Sappho composed epithalamia for performance by a group but she also composed songs to be sung or recited by an individual to the accompaniment of a lyre, some perhaps for religious festivals such as the only complete poem that is in existance, Ύμνος στην Αφροδίτη', credited to Dionysos, 30 BC. During the 2nd AD Roman-Greco world Sappho was sung in a set performed by groups. In the papyri titled Poetarum Lesbiorum fragmenta 44, ed. Lobel-Page, it preserves a composed epithalamia composed lyrics of the wedding of Hector and Andromache singed by a Sappho, Lyrics; Beta. BONK 15 June 2006
but even if this poem is an epithalamium, what's your point? This fragment still represents same-sex desire, no matter what genre it belongs to. --Akhilleus (talk) 05:05, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
Not if you read it in its original Greek it doesn't sound so, nor does it sound as such in the other translation of Harris' found hereScroll to page 123. When those versions are read you can't tell if there is any same-sex desire between the two. Infact the original sounds like any relationship found between two females who have a very close bond with each other who are feeling sorrow at the fact that they will be parting ways, be they mother/daughter, sisters, female friends, female teacher to female student or even lovers. If you read the actual work you can't tell if it represents same-sex desire, just that these two females have a close bond which is felt in their sorrowful good-bye which are feeling not exclusively only towards female lovers. The point being here is that there is no refrence in Sappho's lyrics to any physiological detail of female homoerotic involvement. Even Judith Hallett admits that there isn't any evidence of such in Sappho's works. And since we are refrencing Harris here alot, he also makes a point to remind us that "its a poem and not an entry in a lady poet's diary." BONK 15 June 2006


Wikipedia is based on expert opinion, and should represent opposing views where they exist. See WP:V and WP:NPOV. If you've got verifiable sources for what you're arguing, then we should consider including your arguments in the article. --Akhilleus (talk) 05:05, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
Fair enough. BONK 15 June 2006

I'll just respond down here. Love the Frost quote, but he's not saying that translation is impossible, he means something similar to what our friend Harris says (p. 6 of the pdf linked to above): "Translation can do fairly well with Meaning if done conscientiously and with attention to background and historical change, but the Form can only try to match the original at specific points, as it manages to touch base with the original text here and there." So our translator, at least, thinks that he can communicate the meaning of the original poem fairly well. The idea that translation cannot reliably capture the meaning of the original leads to the conclusion that we cannot understand the ancient Greek language at all, nor anything about ancient Greek society and culture. You'll pardon me if I disagree; I don't think the time I spent learning Greek (including Aeolic) was in vain.

Instead of generalities about translation, let's focus on a specific passage: lines 21-23 of fragment 94, καὶ στρώμν[αν ἐ]πὶ μολθάκαν / ἀπάλαν πα . [ ] . . . ων / ἐξίης πόθο[ν ] . . νίδων. A literal (but non-poetic) translation: "and on soft beds you satisfied your desire for tender _______" Pretty suggestive of same-sex desire to many readers (e.g. Klinck, Journal of Homosexuality, 49 (2005), p. 200), though perhaps there's wiggle room since a few words (probably an objective genitive governed by πόθον) are missing. Not everyone sees this passage as erotic (e.g. Lardinois, Making Silence Speak, p. 51, Princeton 2001), but the majority of readers do, and I think it's hard to interpret ἐξίης πόθον ("you satisfied your desire") as meaning anything else. I can't see this as part of a poem in which two sisters are saying goodbye to each other. At any rate, look at how Harris translates these lines in both of his versions and decide which is more accurate; I think you'll find that it's the first.

On etheloisa in fragment 1, I'd have to agree with Harris' note on p. 83: "Traditional Classicists have had a problem with this word 'etheloisa' on what seemed then a textual problem but was certainly more of a sexual than textual matter." In other words, though the manuscripts are not completely clear, scholars are now confident that etheloisa is the correct reading; different readings were motivated by prudery, not textual criticism.

Your reference to Judith Hallett seems to depend on this website. The verb "admits" mischaracterizes what Hallett says; it implies that Hallett doesn't want to acknowledge an inconvenient fact. In fact, Hallett argues that Sappho was not a lesbian--the idea that there was no "physiological detail of female homoerotic involvement" supports her case. But it doesn't matter if there's no "physiological detail", which apparently means that there's no detailed description of sexual activity between women. We're talking about desire--an emotion, not a "physiological detail" (although fragment 16 is a vivid picture of the physical effects of passion). And a majority of readers have found same sex-desire, not just in fragment 94, but in 1, 16, 31, and 96, among others.

If your last quote from Harris is urging us to avoid the biographical fallacy, I completely agree. But we can talk about what Sappho's poetry says, and how readers have responded to it, and that's exactly what I'm doing when I say that the poems represent same-sex desire. --Akhilleus (talk) 06:26, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

SR I dont see the problem about her sexuality. Sappho writes love poems towards other women,one doesn't need to talk about sex to be in love with a women sexually. She compares a woman leaving her with Helen of Troy, the most sexual and desirable of ancient women (with a very bad reputation see Sappho's contemporary Alkaois on Helen) hardly someone you would compare you loved sister with. Now it is very normal for works in which women become more than the object of men's desires to be questioned by some forms of partiarchy and this seems one of those times. We might only have fragments of her work survive but the ancient authors had full poems and knew them well. Now SUPA says of Sappho she had hetairai in her groups of pupils, that can be translated as associates (which could have also described the other group Supa describes as Mathetai or student) or Herairai in Supa's time quite often meant sexual partners, he also mentions she had a bad name for indecent friendships with her girls. Many ancient writers eg Latinus refer to Sappho as homosexual or a lover of women,does this mean they also translated the texts wrong?

Women who had sex with women were well known in the Ancient World whose idea of gender was slightly different than ours(see the tribas or tribades..thus Ptolemy Tetrabiblus 3.14.171) I don't see the fuss anyway, she may have loved other women, big deal many do. However the body of academic work seems to think she had homosexual tendencies so I think wiki should stick with the experts on this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.110.250.137 (talk) 16:28, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Olisbos

The article states:

"With less certainty, she may have invented the plectrum, or pick, which is used to strum the strings of the lyre. Prior to the development of the plectrum, the strings of the lyre were plucked by the fingers. The word which is generally understood to refer to the plectrum is olisbos, but its derivation is uncertain and other meanings have been proposed, thus the uncertainty of it being the specific invention of Sappho. It does appear, however, that she made great use of the plectrum at a time when others were content to pluck the strings."

I was under the impression that olisbos was the Greek term for dildo. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Narkissos (talk • contribs) .

You're quite right,[9] and "generally understood" is perhaps too strong. West has proposed that the phrase in fr. 99, col. 1, be translated "[strings] which welcome the plectrum." But Campbell (Greek Lyric Loeb vol. 1, p. 125 with n. 1) also regards "[women] who use the dildo" as possible, commenting, "perhaps with hostile reference to the descendants of Polyanax; text uncertain." (Campbell leaves olisbos untranslated in his actual translation: "...descendants of Polyanax...strike the strings...receiving the 'olisbos'...kindly...quivers...") Wareh 13:23, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
 : So, I changed it to "often understood".

Vultur 04:08, 22 November 2006 (UTC)Vultur (21 November 2006)

[edit] scholar or scholars?

The recent edit provides one reference from J. Fairweather. Is that the only reference to assert that "scholars have rejected a biographical reading of the poetry and have cast grave doubts"? If that is the only ref, we should attributed to that specific scholar. ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 04:07, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Nope, two references, one to Fairweather, one to Lefkowitz. I'd be very interested in any references to scholarship on Sappho since these publications that has disputed their views. These are very widely cited works. Wareh 04:15, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
There is a collection of refs in the References section thaty seem to provide support for the material in the article. I would argue for adding some wording about the fact that there is a dipute about the historicity of Sappho, rather than assert that the "grave doubts" are a fact. ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 04:19, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
It's not clear to me why you think those books support an optimistic view about what we know of Sappho's life. Are you familiar with these books? The first sentence of the publisher's blurb for duBois's Sappho is Burning is "To know all we know about Sappho is to know little." Likewise, the publisher's blurb on Margaret Williamson's book:

She lived on the island of Lesbos around 600 B.C.E. She composed lyric poetry, only fragments of which survive. And she was--and is--the most highly regarded woman poet of Greek and Roman antiquity. Little more than this can be said with certainty about Sappho, and yet a great deal more is said.

How true. Of the remaining titles, only the Greek editions are even meant to be taken as works of scholarship, and I don't remember that Campbell takes a particularly credulous attitude either. So what support is there? I could have just deleted huge passages of the "Life" section for just this reason (what it implies is almost universally regarded as false or doubtful). But that's not my Wikipedia philosophy. Instead, I added the valuable content I knew I could add: a warning about scholarly skepticism regarding the ancient traditions of authors' biographies. I must point out that my addition is currently the only part of this article that is specifically supported by references to respected works of scholarship, so that I'm mystified at being called out for this. Wareh 04:36, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
You are doing good work, Wareh. When I read the text you added, it seemed to be just an unsupported opinion. You are welcome to re-add it, this time with an inline ref for these sources. ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 20:11, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Assessing recent major edit

(diff) I don't have Barnard's translation at home, and obviously Barnard's numbers are not a standard of reference. Now, enough context for "#78" is there to recognize it as a fragment Lobel-Page consider "Sappho or Alcaeus" (frr. adespota 11). So this uncertainty should be noted. If an important statement is to be retained on the basis of "#72," we need to check it carefully. Does someone here have easy access to Barnard? If so, please post the translation, so it can be identified and checked in Greek. Wareh 01:22, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

This edit was well-intentioned and added valuable substance. But inevitably, by relying on a 50-year-old translation to support some of its points, it is subject to criticism. I have tried to make the minimum necessary cutback, which I will explain here. For the statement, "Certainly, Sappho wrote love poetry to men," the editor cites fr. 121 Lobel-Page. The problem here is that the poem's speaker is giving a reason why she will not share a bed with the male addressee, so it just makes too fine a point to suggest that the spaker's reasoning ("for I will not endure being the elder one in a partnership," trans. Campbell) somehow makes it certain or even likely that Sappho addressed love poems to males. For this, to put it bluntly, we'd need an "I want to be with you" poem, not a "Here's why I won't be with you" poem. Now for the point about Sappho as teacher. Fr. adesp. 11 LP is not evidence for this, for two reasons. First, as I mentioned above, there is no good reason to suppose that Sappho wrote the poem; Herodian cites it simply as an example of the Aeolic dialect, and it could be by Alcaeus. Second, while there are evident textual problems with the fragment, the manuscript reading is ἐξεδίδαξε Γυάρων, "he/she taught"—not "I taught," though this latter could interpret Schneidewin's conjecture ἐξείδαξ' ἐκ Γυάρω. Wareh 18:39, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi - I was responsible for the last 'major edit'. I have also recently been blocked for trolling and uttering physical threats by Luna Santin - I am an unregistered user (so I brought this on myself - normal IP 65.94.86.69) and when I last edited Sappho before being blocked I could see something to the effect of "ewwww...lesbianism" on the page, but when I clicked "edit" to remove the text, this mysterious and juvenile message had already disappeared. Anyway - I appreciate Wareh's comments on my edit - I am glad it was considered well intentioned (it was!). I also have Barnard's translation at home, but because of the blocking can't access Wiki from home anymore: I will add her text here in the discussion page and you all can discuss its meaning/any implications it may have re. Sappho's sexual preferences. I am obviously a Wiki-noob, so if anyone could guide me through this unblocking process I would much appreciate it. 132.206.99.13 20:42, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

You say you are an unregistered user. If you mean that you have never registered, and that your IP was blocked for someone else's actions, the obvious solution is to create an account and start taking responsibility for your own edits & avoiding responsibility for others'. (If your registered account was blocked, perhaps the information at Wikipedia:Appealing a block could be relevant.) In any case, please see my second comment above. I did get Barnard's translation from the library, and I checked more scholarly sources and explained above my reasons for not keeping some of your edit. I was able to determine which texts you were citing, so there's no reason for any further checking on your part. If you have any questions about Sappho or ideas about the article you'd like to discuss, please do bring them up here. Wareh 21:44, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

I missed your second point - studying for a Judicial Institutions and Civil Procedure exam rots the mind! Ok - I set up an account - but I can't find out how to contact the relevant administrator/editor, LUNA SANTIN (it seems i can only acces their email from home on my 'you are blocked' page, which also of course prevents me from actually emailing them). The Appealing Block page is useful but only suggests ways to go about handling the situation and, aside from leaving messages here, doesn't really suggest how I can go about actually interacting with the relevent editor. Anyway, this is all very irrelevent to Sappho and everyone else on this page -- so if LUNA could email me at my new account that would be fantastic.Brutus cassius 22:42, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

This is Luna Santin's talk page. Click here to leave Luna Santin a message on the talk page, or click here to email Luna Santin. Wareh 23:00, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] GA nomination failure

GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    a (fair representation): b (all significant views):
  5. It is stable.
  6. It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.
    a (tagged and captioned): b lack of images (does not in itself exclude GA): c (non-free images have fair use rationales):
  7. Overall:
    a Pass/Fail: [[Image:|15px]]

It's clear that significant work has gone into this article, but I'm afraid I can't currently support GA status for it in its current state. Comments follow on the areas of the GA criteria I think the article fails to meet.

1(b). The article's structure strikes me as somewhat awkward. The section on "Sappho: myth and legend", given its content, should be renamed to something like "Reception in antiquity". It also seems odd to have that section separated by "Works" from "Transmission and loss of Sappho's works", when most of "Transmission" concerns the poems' fate after antiquity. I would favour putting "Works" directly after "Life"; the opening sentences of "Works" contain enough information about transmission to make clear the fragmentary state of the poems. The article could have a structure something like this:

  • Life
  • Works (including brief coverage of transmission, but saving reasons for loss until later)
  • Reception
    • In antiquity (currently "Sappho: myth and legend")
    • Loss of Sappho's works
    • References in modern literature

Also, the external links in "Works" should be moved to footnotes; in the body of the text, they simply make it difficult to read.

  • fixed, but "Works" needs to be reworded

2(b). The article needs a lot more inline citations. It's fine to have a list of references, but for most of the text it isn't clear which are being used. For example, some statements from "Life" that need citations are:

  • "Sappho is believed to have been the daughter of Scamander and Cleïs and to have had three brothers."
  • "Some translators have interpreted a poem about a girl named Cleïs..."
  • "...the sophistication of her language and the sometimes rarified environments which her verses record..."
  • "There was a tradition that suggested Sappho killed herself..."

Statements about the content of Sappho's work can, of course, reference the poems themselves.

3(a). I think the section on "Works" doesn't say enough about the poems themselves. Questions that could be addressed: What are the different types of poems in the surviving corpus? What are their main themes? How are they similar or different from the work of the male lyric poets? What metres does Sappho use? ("References in modern literature" refers to Swinburne's adaptation of the Sapphic stanza, but the article hasn't even mentioned that Sappho used this.)

4(a). I failed this simply because of the remark about "a fine modern translation". Easily fixed.

  • fixed

I hope this doesn't sound too negative. This article contains much good content, and large parts of it are very well-written. I would definitely recommend re-nomination for GA status if the issues I've raised can be dealt with. EALacey 20:44, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Bad cleanup tags?

I'm thinking of reverting the insertion of the cleanup tags that were just placed on the page, but wanted to get some input - maybe from the person that put them there? First, there are quite a few - some might say an excessive amount. Second, it looks like the wrong ones were added - for instance, the "not verified" tags at the end of the "Life" section break the paragraph twice, whereas "citation needed" tags wouldn't. But if the user that placed them here really feels they belong, please respond. -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 15:08, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

The tags are indeed inappropriate and were added to already referenced statements. I believe whoever added them did not bother to consult the "References" at the end of the article. Had the editor done so, he/she would have seen that:
  • the Rayor and Campbell translations are listed in references (the first flagged statement was simply that Rayor and Campbell have used a certain translation)
  • Page DuBois's work is also in references (and, obviously enough, it is the source that both summarizes earlier Victorian views that Sappho was "the head-mistress of a girls' finishing school" and makes the argument that these views were "based more on conservative sensibilities than evidence"). This takes care of the editor's next two "Not verified" tags.
If anyone wants to take this as a cue to add footnotes with even more specific references to these books, great. Meanwhile, unlike most of Wikipedia, all these statements are clearly attributed to reliable sources and furthermore presented without any POV problems I can discern. Wareh 16:51, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] A few reservations about today's edit (diff)

  1. "Greatly admired in her own lifetime" is a point that does need to be clear, and indeed stronger: "throughout antiquity" would be much better.
  2. This sentence is confusing: "Contemporary admiration of her poetry and writing skill, however, is expressed often in diverse ancient sources from her own and other cultures, during a time when few are recognized among the educated of other cultures." In the previous sentence, "contemporary" means "contemporary with Sappho." What is the "contemporary admiration" from "other cultures"? This should be deleted if it can't be explained better.
  3. "It is based upon the ancient legend regarding the withholding of sexual activity with their husbands by the women of Lesbos—in order to put a stop to war—is unrelated to Sappho." Reliable source? This is poorly written, and to me, as it stands, suggests that the eventual use of "Lesbian" to refer to sexual orientation has nothing to do with Sappho of Lesbos, which is dubious at best.
  4. To say that Socrates (as opposed to Plato, maybe) "disparaged the pleasures of the senses" is perhaps half true, but seems tendentious here.

My conclusion: This edit was well-intentioned, but it contains error and imprecision, and it lacks a single footnote pointing to a reliable source. I'm reverting but using #1 to improve he last sentence of the lead. But I wanted to mention my reasons here, so that other editors can look at the changes and see if there is anything valuable to which I'm not giving due consideration, or for which citations can easily be found. Wareh 15:16, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Didn't see you comments until I had made another edit -- will look over your comments and respond later today -- do not have time at this moment... 83d40m 15:55, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
The edit summary for your second edit says "insert missing word and moved discussion of work to follow the work section." As far as I can tell, the word you inserted is "There was a Roman tradition that suggested Sappho killed herself by jumping off the Leucadian cliffs for love of Phaon." But this tradition goes back at least to Menander (fragment 258 in Koerte's numeration) in the 4th century BC. If you'd like to learn more about this, I'd recommend the article "Phaethon, Sappho's Phaon, and the White Rock of Leukas: 'Reading' the Symbols of Greek Lyric", by Gregory Nagy (conveniently in Reading Sappho: Contemporary Approaches). Meanwhile, while everyone who works on this article accepts that it has deficiencies, I hope you will bring up proposed changes here on the talk page, especially when they are facts for which one would expect citations, and when your information does seem a bit incomplete. Wareh 16:11, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sappho vs. Sapphire

There's no relation between the two, is there? Mathwhiz90601 01:30, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Sappheiros is lapis lazuli, and I believe it's been suggested that the name 'Sappho' may be derived from it, just as in English we have the old-fashioned names Pearl, Amethyst, Emerald, Ruby, and so forth. (Those names don't seem to have survived long, but Jade, being more recent, is still with us.) Xn4 23:24, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Charles Gounod's Sappho an homage?

I added the entry on Gounod's opera on Sappho, and the description in the article was changed to call it an 'homage'. Based on my understanding of the word, the Wikipedia definition thereof, and my knowledge of the opera, I really wouldn't call it an 'homage'. Are there any objections to it being changed? Perhaps my original wording wasn't ideal, but it was IMO more accurate. Anchoress 10:14, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Music

The references you are looking for can be found at Ovid's Heroides, letter XV. This also covers the part of the Sapphic stanza and her relationship to Phaon. Please replace this material that you removed yesterday - thanks. --Doug talk 23:29, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Ovid's Heroides is overtly a work of fiction, so anything derived from it needs to go in the "Legacy" section, clearly presented as Ovidian fiction. As to the music section, if the goal is to add something that doesn't need to be slapped with Template:Fiction, then the beginning but not the end of the process is to browse the ancient traditions gathered in the Loeb Classical Library edition of Sappho and Alcaeus (Greek Lyric Poetry, ed. David A. Campbell, vol. 1). (A) anything Campbell doesn't include among his testimonia is going to need an explanation of why it's valuable, reliable, or notable (and by "explanation" I mean attributing the interpretation of the evidence's value to a specific modern scholarly source); (B) anything that is in Campbell needs to be carefully presented as an attributed ancient account, not as fact. Meanwhile, if your goal is really to do valuable work on the Sapphic stanza, etc., read Denys Page's Sappho and Alcaeus or something of the kind, not the Heroides! As to Phaon, we already have more apocryphal fancies than are warranted. The references to Lefkowitz etc., clearly establishing the bogus nature of such stories, would be adequate grounds for reducing the space given to such credulous or playful nonsense; there is certainly no need for much more on Phaon here. A better article for this material, if you remain convinced it is encyclopedic, would be Heroides. But the first step I'd recommend is simply to read the current article Sappho; you'll find that much of what you tried to add is already treated, better (to name just one example, Plato and the tenth Muse). Wareh (talk) 02:28, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Added back in the "Music" section because it is a major part of her life and how ancient history records this with about a dozen references. The large picture gallery from Wikimedia Commons even shows over half the pictures are with Sappho depicted with string instruments, in particular the kithara and barbitos.--Doug talk 19:18, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

None of those images is from Sappho's lifetime. Of course a music section would be nice to have, and of course Sappho played the lyre to accompany her poems. However, the section you are trying to add degrades the quality of the article and is based on substandard and irrelevant sources; Byzantine music and Boccaccio are not relevant to this topic. Look at the "further reading" here for some titles that would, in contrast, be appropriate to base such a section on. Wareh (talk) 19:25, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Is there any reason why the Music section was removed and why she should not be showed as associated with music?--Doug talk 19:27, 13 December 2007 (UTC) The references are not all to Byzantine music, but show ancient references as to how she is associated with these musical string instruments. The only reference to Boccaccio is a woodcut depiction showing Sappho playing the kithara. All three pictures on the article also show her with these instruments. Should these images then be removed from the article, since they are not a true representation of her?--Doug talk 19:40, 13 December 2007 (UTC) All your references are about Ancient Greek Music, ancient papyrus, or Ancient Roman Music, none are of Sappho. There is no Sappho text material there to reference to. All of my references relate to Sappho and her relationship to poetry and music.--Doug talk 21:25, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

The references I gave you, which obviously you have not had any time to consult, do a pretty good job of covering everything known about ancient Greek music from the beginning to well after Sappho's death. Of course, you will also need to consult respected scholarly sources on Sappho. You've made a start on this: the Snyder and Yatromanolakis articles qualify, at least. If your contribution had introduced the ideas of those two articles accurately and logically, I don't think I would have had any issues. Wareh (talk) 22:10, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
As Wareh says, it's a question of distinguishing between fact and fiction. There aren't any contemporary sources for Sappho's life apart from her own poetry. I see no harm in saying somewhere (with suitable references) "In ancient (and later) art, Sappho is often depicted with string instruments, in particular the lyre, the kithara and the barbitos". That and some other material in Doug's proposed Music section could indeed go into the Legacy section, bearing in mind that there are no contemporary portraits of Sappho. Perhaps other parts of that proposed Music section might fit better into our articles on ancient music? When it comes to Boccaccio, we could only quote him on Sappho with caution, bearing in mind that he was more than a little inclined to poetic flights of fancy, but we don't need him here, as there are so many far better sources. Wareh isn't hostile to the principle of a Music section - but it would need to be carefully referenced, not least, of course, from Sappho's own work. Xn4 23:00, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Since music was such a large part of Sappho's life and her poetry writtings, let's see if we can agree on what it would take to add a music section. I believe the section that I would like to have in the article relating to Sappho's association to music is a good springboard to work from to show that she is closely associated to ancient Greek string instruments, especially the kithara and the barbitos. Is there room for improvement - of course, there is always room for improvement. Could there be different or better references? Yes, I'm sure there can be. These I have already submitted are good starts and additional references to support these that can be added from such sources like what you are suggesting. Below is the Music section I propose to enter in the main article of Sappho that was taken out yesterday.

[edit] Music

1473 woodcut of Boccaccio's depiction of Sappho playing kithara
1473 woodcut of Boccaccio's depiction of Sappho playing kithara

Sappho is closely associated with music,[1][2] especially string instruments like the kithara and the barbitos.[3][4] She was a woman of high social standing and composed songs that focused on the emotions.[5] Sappho often wrote poetry about ancient Greek string instruments like these.[6][7]

Giovanni Boccaccio compiled images of women notable and famous throughout history. One of his images was Sappho playing a kithara. Often Sappho is also depicted playing the barbitos, which has longer strings and a lower pitch.

The barbitos is also closely associated with the poet Alcaeus along with Sappho and the island of Lesbos,[8] her birth place. Here it is called a barmos. The music from this instrument was said to be the lyre for drinking parties[9] and is considered an invention of Terpander. Aristotle said that these string instruments were not for educational purposes but for pleasure only - depicted in much artwork showing Sappho playing these.[10]

  1. ^ Early accounts of Lesbian singers like Sappho
  2. ^ Background on Ancient Hellenic music instruments
  3. ^ The Barbitos in the Classical Period
  4. ^ "The Evolution of Ancient Greek Music in Byzantium"
  5. ^ JSTOR: Visualizing Poetry: An Early Representation of Sappho
  6. ^ Ancient Greek Music and Music Instruments
  7. ^ Perseus Encyclopedia
  8. ^ The evolution of ancient Greek music
  9. ^ "Polyhymnia" Explained
  10. '^ Knowledge Builders for Perseus - Music & Dance


First sentence: The additional references that you are suggesting speak of ancient Greek music and as you point out during the time of Sappho. There is probably text in certain of those that will associate Sappho to ancient string instruments, especially the string instruments of the kithara and the barbitos, as well as to her singing and her poetry writtings about these. This then backs up my first sentence which already has four (4) good references on these points.

Second sentence: The JSTOR reference gives details on this.

Third sentence: These two sources show she wrote poetry about string instruments - as well as does the first four references.

Fourth sentence and Fifth sentence: This is demonstrated in the image, however note that there are no Boccaccio footnotes. I don't believe anyone disbutes these statements. Interestingly, to me anyway, is that this woodcut image would be a much closer representation of Sappho than the "modern" pictures we now have in the article. As you have pointed out none of those images are from Sappho's lifetime - so maybe we should remove them from the article. These pictures all show a "modern depiction" of Sappho with the kithara whereas the woodcut representation is closer to her time period.

Sixth sentence The fact that the barbitos having longer strings and a lower pitch I don't believe is disputed. Sappho as depicted playing the barbitos can be shown in the gallery of pictures of Wikipedia Commons.

Seventh sentence: This is backed up with an excellent reference about ancient Greek music and poets associated with Sappho. The references you suggest would furnish the same information.

Eighth sentence: I don't believe this statement is disputed. It is already shown in many previous references.

Ninth sentence This is backed up with an excellent reference about ancient Greek dance and poets associated with Sappho. The references you suggest would furnish the same information. The part that it is an invention of Terpander I don't believe is disputed.

Tenth sentence The Aristotle statement I don't believe is disputed.

--Doug talk 14:37, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
There's no logical connection between the first sentence and the second, nor between the second and the third. In addition, the third sentence is false; the word "lyra" may appear in some of Sappho's poetry, but her poetry is not about musical instruments.
Boccaccio is not worth mentioning in this article, and is not an authoritative source about the ancient world. Please stop trying to put material from De Mulieribus Claris in articles about ancient Greece and Rome; it is not improving the articles, and is creating big headaches for the editors who are trying to improve these articles. --Akhilleus (talk) 05:33, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Oh, yeah, your last paragraph appears to be plagiarized from this source. Aside from that, this article is not the place for a history of Greek musical instruments. --Akhilleus (talk) 05:39, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Doug asked me to comment.
It has to be admitted that if a legacy section is relevant to an ancient author at all, it should (where appropriate) include classical, medieval and modern legacy. If Mengin's painting has anything to do with Sappho's legacy (and it has) then the woodcut has as well. Both the similarities between them and the contrasts between them are instructive.
If there is to be a section on Sappho-and-music preceding the legacy section, then -- I agree with others -- it has to start from Sappho's own surviving words. If that option is not rewarding (I don't know, without rereading) then, in my view, the topic needs to go under "legacy" and needs to be written as a history of the perceived connection between Sappho and music; which began very early, of course, and which both these images illustrate. Andrew Dalby 12:48, 15 December 2007 (UTC)