previous next

H. is supposed to have borrowed this story of Helen in Egypt from Hecataeus (cf. Diels, Hermes, 22). In the fragments attributed to that writer, Menelaus is certainly brought to Egypt (fr. 287, F. H. G. i. 20), and Helen is in some way connected with Canopus (fr. 288). But H.'s account differs in important details; e. g. he does not mention Pharos (contrast fr. 287), and his story of the slaves has nothing to do with fr. 318. We know there was a great variety of legends about Helen (cf. especially Stesichorus, fr. 32, who said that only a phantom of Helen was taken to Troy). Hence the connexion of H.'s story with Hecataeus is at least unproven.


For the Canopic Nile cf. 15. 1 n. There was a ‘curing station’ (ταριχεῖαι) also near the Pelusiac Nile (ib.).


H. seems to have visited this temple, but no Egyptian parallel has been found for such a general right of asylum as H. speaks of. The temple, however, is a reality (cf. Strabo, 788, who makes it one of the western boundaries of Egypt).


The name Θῶνις comes originally from Od. iv. 228 (cf. 116. 4), where the wife of Θῶν makes presents to Helen; his name was combined with the early town, Thonis, on the Canopic Nile (Strabo, 800), and he was made an Egyptian official.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.

An XML version of this text is available for download, with the additional restriction that you offer Perseus any modifications you make. Perseus provides credit for all accepted changes, storing new additions in a versioning system.

hide References (1 total)
  • Commentary references from this page (1):
hide Display Preferences
Greek Display:
Arabic Display:
View by Default:
Browse Bar: