2026/03/01 by Anna Stelow
Arts and Humanities · Social Sciences · #Ancient Near East History #Classical Antiquity Studies #Linguistics and language evolution
paper · doi:10.1111/rsr.70230
openalex publication_date 2026/03/01 · openalex created_date 2026/07/24 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/24
The Greek hero Telephus, son of Heracles and Auge, has long been due a comprehensive treatment in English. Delucchi surveys the extant linguistic, literary, and artistic instances of the figure from Greek prehistory through the end of the Hellenistic period. Reversing the usual pattern of heroic cross-pollination between mainland Greece and Asia Minor, Telephus' parentage is Greek, but he rules the barbarian kingdom of Mysia. According to Delucchi's reconstruction, the hero was originally and ultimately Anatolian. While Telephus is absent from the Iliad (though the Mysians are twice mentioned as Trojan allies), the Odyssey identifies his son by the patronym Telephides (Od. 11. 519) in a context suggestive of an already-existing tradition about the hero. Seeking the origins of the hero in his name, Delucchi considers a possible Mycenean reflex (qe-re-qo-ta/pe-re-qo-ta, PY En. 659.1) and a Hittite theonym/dynastic name. Delucchi proposes that Greek settlers in Asia Minor Hellenized the name of the Hittite ruler Telipinu > Telephus (cf. Hitt. Mursili > Myrsilus). Missing here is fuller consideration of Telephus' possible origin in the folktale, as indicated by the obvious Greek etymology of his name and that of his mother, Auge, as figures associated with light. Whatever the prehistory, by the Archaic period, a local Anatolian figure had been endowed with a Greek origin story: Telephus was made a son of Heracles by a Tegean princess. The earliest stories featuring Telephus, in Hesiod, Archilochus, and the Epic Cycle, largely involve his battle against the Greeks at the Caicus River during the “Teuthranian expedition” (in which the Greeks mistook the Mysian city for Troy). Delucchi presents and illustrates the papyrological fragments of Archilochus' still-recently published “Telephus Elegy” (P.Oxy. 4708), though not all will agree with her rejection of Heracles' name (as reconstructed in the editio princeps) on paleographical grounds and the seeming narrative disruption caused by an epiphany of Heracles on the battlefield. Delucchi ably demonstrates how the Telephus myth underwent significant re-modeling in the early fifth century as audiences' tastes and the historical-political context changed. Under the threat of Persian imperialism, Hellenic sentiment soared among Greek poleis in Asia Minor. Telephus accordingly was then fully Hellenized, perhaps first by Hecataeus of Miletus, who identified the place of his conception as Arcadia; and stories about the hero began to be told on the mainland. Delucchi suggests that these local variants, along with the changing tastes of audiences, help account for the greatly increased variety of episodes featuring Telephus in Athenian drama. Although no Telephus tragedy survives complete, Delucchi's considered presentation of the numerous fragments supports the claim that Aristotle considered him among “the VIPs of [Athenian] tragedy” (cf. Arist. Po. 1453a 17–23). Moreover, Delucchi devotes a chapter to how popular themes in fifth-century drama (such as child abandonment and supplication) were played out in Telephus tragedies. Among the most famous of the new tragic episodes is Telephus' visit to Argos seeking healing of a wound suffered at the battle of the Caicus. Telephus has become a suppliant, taking refuge at an altar and holding the infant Orestes hostage. Both Aeschylus and Euripides dramatized this theme, and it went on to become one of the most distinctive—and popular—images in fifth and fourth century art. Aristophanes hilariously parodied Euripides' Telephus in Acharnians and Thesmophoriazusae; one wishes that Delucchi had included a discussion of the paratragic Telephus in his own right. In the final chapter, Delucchi explores Telephus' apogee as the chosen heroic patron of the Attalid family who ruled at Pergamon from the late third to the second centuries B.C. The Attalids exploited Telephus' mythic power in their diplomatic policy, as in the granting of mutual citizenship with Tegea based on their mythic kinship (through Telephus' mother Auge); and they used the story of Telephus to justify their conquest of territory across Asia Minor and north to the Caucasus. The iconography on the monumental Pergamon Altar, the centerpiece of Attalid cultural policy, showed Telephus in familiar episodes as well as novel ones, to link Telephus with local indigenous populations and with Rome. For all its carefully chosen geopolitical messaging, the Pergamon Altar reflects the continuing popularity and importance of the Athenian Telephus-themed tragedies in the Hellenistic world. Delucchi's study thus improves our understanding of the seminal role of the theater and its images in the diverse Mediterranean culture of the late first millennium.