Christopher Ell (Brown University)
The Greek symposion has been extensively studied (e.g. Murray, ed. 1990, 2018; Catoni 2010; Lynch 2011; Topper 2012; Hobden 2013; Węcowski 2014; Corner 2015), and it is widely accepted that this convivial custom dates to the 8th century, largely based on influential interpretations of Nestor’s Cup from Pithekoussai by Murray (1994) and Węcowski (2014:127-139, 2017). I argue that both interpretations go beyond the evidence: though Nestor’s Cup suggests several aspects of the later symposion, it is not sufficient to prove its existence in the 8th century. The Cup features an epigram which Murray and Węcowski interpret as a witty play on epigraphic conventions and possibly as a joking reference to the Homeric Nestor (cf. Hansen 1976, Agostiniani 1982, West 1994, Bartoněk and Buchner 1995, Pavese 1996, Tzifopoulos et al. 2017). The epigram also mentions Aphrodite, and the grave in which it was found contains additional convivial ceramics; the cup therefore demonstrates the nexus of (literary) witticism, wine drinking, and eroticism, widely viewed as fundamental to the symposion. Murray and Węcowski make additional claims about the Cup, however, that are unsupportable. Murray contends that the mention of Aphrodite implies the presence of klinai and hetairai. This contention is highly implausible: the leap from an erotic joke to sexual activity involving hetairai plying their trade on klinai is considerable (cf. Węcowski 2014: 131-132). Murray also proposes (cf. Powell 1989: 340) that the Cup’s epigram testifies to skolion (a game in which symposiasts perform impromptu poetic witticisms). The fact that the epigram was fixed in writing (either before an initial performance or in commemoration of one), however, stands at odds with the ephemerality of skolion. Węcowski argues that the ownership tag suggests a use context in which the cup could be misplaced. He accordingly argues that it was passed in a circle (consistent with later sympotic practice), suggesting that the epigram was read aloud as it circulated. The ownership tag, however, could be fully explained by the literary joke and need not imply that the vessel circulated. Węcowski’s belief in a use context involving circulating cups is required neither by Nestor’s Cup nor by comparable contemporary evidence; it is suggested only by anachronistic comparison with evidence from later centuries. I accordingly conclude that, though Nestor’s Cup attests wine-centered conviviality featuring literary witticisms and eroticism, it does not offer firm evidence of impromptu performance, circulating cups, klinai, hetairai, or any of the other features of the symposion. Though scholars have placed different emphasis on these features in their varied definitions of the Archaic and Classical symposion, there is consensus that it takes more than wine, literary wit, and eroticism to make a symposion. Nestor’s Cup therefore does not demonstrate the existence of the symposion in the 8th century. This conclusion has significant implications for the history of Greek conviviality, as the erroneous belief that Nestor’s Cup demonstrates the existence of an 8th century symposion has influenced many readings of the 8th century material record, of Homeric poetry, and of 7th century lyric poetry.