In a seminal article, J. R. Morgan asserts that the greater part of Heliodorus' Aethiopica explores ‘the antithesis between true love and various corrupt or otherwise unsatisfactory alternatives’.Footnote ¹ This it does not only through Cnemon's novella,Footnote ² which is narrated mainly in the first two books of the novel, but also through the incident involving the Persian queen Arsake, which to a certain extent replicates Cnemon's story. This narrative duplication is enhanced by the fact that both stories are intertextually related to the myth of Phaedra.Footnote ³ Building on Morgan's argument, my contention is that the antithesis between pure love, conditioned by sophrosyne, and illicit desire permeates the entire novel and does not exclusively concern the primary couple or the persons involved in the abovementioned episodes, but relates to almost all the main characters. More importantly, it is precisely this antithesis that constitutes the most fundamental component of the work's structural principle or thesis.

The most important distinction between pure love and illicit desire is not a sharp differentiation in the erotic symptoms of the primary couple and those experienced by the antagonists; in fact, the reader might even notice some similarities between the way that Arsake reacts as the result of her ardent lust for Theagenes and Charicleia's response to her love for the male protagonist.Footnote ⁴ Nor are different terms applied by the author to refer to each emotional state separately.Footnote ⁵ The most crucial difference is the presence or absence of sophrosyne. Throughout the Aethiopica, the concept of sophrosyne is almost always linked exclusively to chastity; indeed, both Charicleia and Theagenes are virgins and unwilling to consummate their relationship before it is sanctioned by marriage.Footnote ⁶ Nevertheless, it is in their constant efforts to preserve this chastity in the face of the multiple threats and dangers posed mainly by the various antagonists that the term assumes an additional, more spiritual significance, despite the fact that it is never stated plainly by Heliodorus: sophrosyne comes to denote also the ability to preserve chastity through the application of resourcefulness. These two meanings of sophrosyne, the explicit and the implicit, combined are crucial to the understanding of our writer's premise.

The antithesis between pure love and illicit desire is stressed not only through the contrasting erotic attitudes of the primary couple, on the one hand, and of the characters involved in Cnemon's story and in the Arsake episode, on the other, but also through the different terminations of their fate: notably enough, all those who either display illicit desire or assist in its fulfilment ultimately fail in their erotic objectives and invariably end up losing their lives.Footnote ⁷ Demaenete throws herself into a well to avoid public disgrace (Heliod. Aeth. 1.17.5); Thisbe is mistaken for Charicleia and is killed by Thyamis (1.30.7); Thermouthis is bitten by a snake and dies (2.20.2); Trachinus is murdered by Pelorus (5.32.2), who, in his turn, succumbs to Theagenes' sword (5.32.6); Arsake commits suicide (8.15.2); Cybele unknowingly drinks the poison intended for the female protagonist (8.7.7); and Achaimenes is killed by an Ethiopian soldier (9.20.6). In most of these cases, it is either implied or stated plainly that their death was what they deserved. The factors that render their desire illicit, as well as antithetical to that of Theagenes and Charicleia, are the conspicuous absence of the Platonic terminology occasionally employed to describe the love of the protagonists,Footnote ⁸ their lack of shame and hesitation to express their feelings directly, and their indifference to the consent of their object of desire; they simply aim at sexual gratification through a display of power or through manipulation. In contrast, the primary couple, who are the paragon of pure love, achieve their goal: they manage to reach Ethiopia, Charicleia's homeland, where they are finally united in marriage. In the middle of this continuum between pure love and illicit desire can be placed those characters who, in one way or another, help the two protagonists to reach their goal – Calasiris, Cnemon, and Thyamis. It is important to note that all three of them had been removed from their cities and had severed their familial ties because they either yielded or were tempted to succumb to illicit desire: the beginning of Calasiris' woes was his lust for the courtesan Rhodopis, owing to which he considered it best to abandon Memphis for the time being (2.25.1–5); in all probability nothing bad would have happened to Cnemon if he had not responded positively to Thisbe's advances (1.11.3); and Thyamis would not have lost his rightful office of priesthood and would not have left his city to become a bandit had not Arsake been infatuated by his charm (7.2).

Interestingly, Thyamis is the only antagonist for whom things turn out well in the novel, since he eventually regains his office. The reason for this happy outcome is not difficult to surmise: even though he experiences great difficulty in controlling his feelings for Charicleia (1.24.2), his desire for her cannot be characterized as illicit because not only are his intentions honourable by social and generic standards, as becomes apparent from his wish to get married to the heroine, but he also gallantly asks her opinion on the matter (1.21.1), despite the fact that he is in a position of power and has absolute control over her fate. Apart from that, we must bear in mind that Thyamis' desire for the female protagonist can be considered as a part of divine providence, which eventually rewards those who remain true to the ideal of pure love while punishing those who try to hinder it or who experience an ethically inferior erotic emotion. Not only does he reveal his feelings for the heroine after a god-sent dream, but his unwilling murder of Thisbe, resulting from his effort to interpret this dream, can also be viewed as an act of divine justice, since the Athenian courtesan who was mistaken for Charicleia pays the penalty for all the havoc she has maliciously wreaked in Cnemon's story. However, an inconsistency of characterization springs from the need to coordinate the workings of divine providence in the novelistic universe of Heliodorus and the motivation of the pious and, generally speaking, moderate Thyamis to try to kill the woman he loves, since he is called a barbarian at that point by the author (1.30.6), a characterization that the rest of the novel patently disproves.Footnote ⁹

Aside from Thyamis' good fortune, another antagonist who does not end up losing his life is the Tyrian merchant who was enamoured with Charicleia; in all probability, he embarks along with the rest of his shipmates in a small boat after his vessel is captured by the pirates (5.25.2–3). He too had not attempted to appropriate the heroine against her will, while he had asked her hand from her supposed father, Calasiris. For the rest of the erotic rivals, however, fate is relentless.

On the other hand, we must take into consideration the fact that the characters who are cast as helpers of the primary couple, Cnemon and Calasiris, not only are initially removed from their cities and families – ties that define the very identity of a person – owing to illicit desire, but also manage subsequently to be reunited with them because of the assistance they offer to the blossoming and eventual fulfilment of the pure love of the two protagonists. Cnemon brings about the reunion of Charicleia and Theagenes by informing the latter of his beloved's whereabouts after the assault of the bandits on Thyamis' camp (2.2.1), and, more significantly, prevents him from committing suicide when he mistakes Thisbe's corpse for Charicleia in the cave where she had been secured (2.3.4). Had he not been acquainted with the two young protagonists and then with their spiritual guide, Calasiris, it is highly doubtful that he would have met the merchant Nausicles, who knew the truth about Thisbe's schemes at Athens, since he was the one who helped her escape, and who could thus effect the reinstatement of Cnemon's father and of Cnemon himself by testifying at court, as he implies (6.8.1).Footnote ¹⁰ Not only are Cnemon's wanderings and tribulations terminated, as he is now allowed to return from exile, but he also finds true love in the person of Nausicleia, Nausicles' daughter; the implicit identification of Cnemon's erotic feelings with those of Charicleia – he is described by the author as her ‘fellow-suffering’ (6.7.8) – rather serves to elevate them morally, although the motives of Nausicleia's father for this union are not so disinterested. Moreover, Cnemon is not ethically condemned for his failure to further assist Charicleia and Calasiris in their quest for Theagenes because the heroine does not consider him the most suitable fellow-traveller (6.7.8).

The help that Calasiris offers to the development and protection of the primary couple's love is undeniable. Without his crafty mediation, none of the protagonists would have been able to confess their feelings for one another and it is highly doubtful that they would have decided to elope.Footnote ¹¹ On the one hand, their inability to express their erotic emotions and the shame that they feel are unmistakable signs of their sophrosyne, which sharply differentiates them from the rest of the enamoured characters presented in the novel and contributes significantly to their positive characterization. On the other, the ethical blame that could potentially be attached to the elopement is neutralized both because their departure is dictated by the divine oracle partly deciphered by Calasiris and because the need arises for Charicleia to avoid the prearranged marriage with her foster-father's nephew (4.6.6; see also 4.12.2). Subsequently, Calasiris, with the succour of luck (which is closely linked, if not identical, to divine providence), secures the necessary means of transportation and skilfully circumvents the danger posed by Trachinus' desire for the female protagonist. It is after he has met Charicleia and Theagenes that Calasiris sees Artemis and Apollo in his dream commanding him to return to Egypt along with them (3.11.5). Thus, by divine ordinance, his fate is entwined with that of the primary couple and we might maintain that the assistance he offers them redeems him from his previous ethical lapse – the mere contemplation of yielding to Rhodopis' allure – and ensures his timely arrival at Memphis, which stops his two sons from killing each other. Even his death that same night, which finds him in his native city and in the arms of his two sons, can be considered as a happy outcome for him, if we choose to believe the words of the sexton that the death of a prophet means that the gods have chosen to give him a better and happier life (7.11.9).

After having examined the implications of the dominant antithesis between pure love and illicit desire, let us now take a closer look at the relationship between the two protagonists and define its spiritual dimension. Apart from the Platonic terminology applied by Heliodorus to describe their love at first sight, which undoubtedly serves to elevate it morally and to distinguish it qualitatively from the rest of the erotic liaisons featured in his novel, it is important to point out that Charicleia's confession to Calasiris of her feelings for Theagenes coincides with the revelation of her true identity (4.10–11),Footnote ¹² while the fulfilment of the primary couple's love occurs shortly after the heroine's restoration to her homeland (10.40–41). It is precisely this deep feeling of love, which clashes violently with her sense of modesty, causing an intense disease, that prompts the sage Calasiris, who has been commissioned by Charicleia's foster-father to cure his daughter's nosos, to examine the band on which the heroine's story had been engraved by her mother.Footnote ¹³

In all probably, had not Charicleia fallen in love with Theagenes, she would never have discovered her origins. It hardly needs mentioning that, according to the ancient Greek mentality, the self was to a great extent (if not entirely) defined by the knowledge of who one's parents are and by the sense of belonging to their community; the cases of Oedipus and Ion are characteristic of this way of thinking. Pure love is therefore implicitly linked by Heliodorus with the discovery of the very identity of the self; it is the force which finally unfolds what our author has artfully kept hidden from his readers for the first three books through a set of paralepses, a narrative strategy that was meant to delay the revelation of the heroine's identity. We can now understand that the purpose of these continuous postponements was the overlapping of love and the discovery of the self. It should be noted, however, that this connection exclusively concerns the female protagonist and that her male counterpart functions mostly as a helper throughout her course of finding herself and then being eventually restored to her homeland and true parents, since Theagenes unhesitatingly forgets his own city and family for the sake of his beloved. In fact, Theagenes' family is not even mentioned. At the end of the novel, the marriage between the two protagonists takes place after Charicleia's recognition by her parents and is conflated with the assignation of the symbols of priesthood to them by Hydaspes; thus, their love becomes divinely sanctioned and, as Charicles brings to his mind the oracle of Delphi (10.41.2), we come to realize that its consummation should be viewed as a reward of their virtue.

This virtue is sophrosyne, which acquires the double meaning mentioned above and enables the couple to overcome all the adversities that they encounter during the journey that begins with the conception of their love and ends at its fulfilment. For the entirety of this intermediate stage their psychic and mental capacities are put to the test mainly by the threats posed to their chastity by the various antagonists. The two protagonists overcome these dangers through their Odyssean resourcefulness by resorting to postponements, by concealing their true identity and relation to each other, and by skilfully manipulating the conflicting interests of their erotic adversaries. In this aspect, they emulate their spiritual guide, Calasiris, especially after his death at Memphis. Moreover, by managing to preserve her chastity, Charicleia remains true to the injunction of her mother, inscribed on her belt, to honour sophrosyne (4.8.7), and thus proves herself, at a deep level, to be her true daughter. But, apart from the protagonists' qualities, the divine factor often intervenes in their favour and facilitates Charicleia's journey of return.Footnote ¹⁴ Thus, we may assert that the goal of the primary couple's fulfilment of their pure love is doubly determined: it is divinely ordained, as becomes manifest from the Delphic oracle, the assistance of chance, and the god-sent dreams; and it is a test of their character, their devotion, and their commitment to each other, as becomes apparent through the trials that they undergo.Footnote ¹⁵

Furthermore, there are several indications in the text which encourage us to perceive that Heliodorus intends to ascribe to Charicleia's story a paradigmatic value, rendering it thus relevant to the experience of his readers. When Cnemon asks Calasiris to recount the protagonists' story as a reward for informing him that they are alive and for disclosing their whereabouts, the latter responds that his reward will be bigger than all the riches of the world (2.23.4); consequently, Heliodorus stresses the spiritual dimension of the primary couple's story and, through an implicit evaluative hierarchy, considers it more significant than any kind of material possession. It should be noted that this precedence is unlikely to be attributed exclusively to the aesthetic pleasure derived by the narration; there possibly exists some kind of ‘lesson’ to be learned from it whose value surpasses everything that the hylic world has to offer.

Later on, Calasiris himself recognizes to a certain extent the paradigmatic significance of the heroine's story after he has read the band on which her real mother had engraved her story: his soul feels pity for human life, which is unstable and uncertain and which passes through various and sometimes excessive alterations, ‘as becomes manifest in Charicleia's fortune’ (ἐν ταῖς Χαρικλείαις τύχαις γνωριζόμενον, 4.9.1); we must bear in mind that, for the time being, Calasiris has witnessed only the beginning of the heroine's fate and it is natural for him to be unable to grasp the entirety of the meaning of her divinely predetermined life experience, an inability that justifies his resort to Greek philosophical commonplaces in his effort to decipher what he learns. Likewise, he is incapable of explaining the whole Delphic oracle that concerns the fortune of the two protagonists (3.5.7). Nevertheless, by his comment the author does draw our attention to the wider significance that he eventually intends to impart to his heroine's story. Subsequently, just before Calasiris resumes the narration after Nausicles' request, Cnemon asserts that the former wishes to hear ‘truly mystical things that contain indeed divine pleasure’ (πραγμάτων δὲ μυστικῶν ὡς ἀληθῶς καὶ ἡδονῇ θείᾳ τῷ ὂντι συγκράτων, 5.16.3); we may assume that the terms that Cnemon applies to refer to the content of Charicleia's story underline its religious significance, which is not irrelevant to the fact that, throughout her life, the heroine has received the protection and spiritual guidance of three priests, Sisimithres, Charicles, and Calasiris. As Calasiris' narration approaches its end, Cnemon seems to be able to grasp its true meaning without, however, revealing it entirely to the reader, either because of his inability to perceive it wholly, since he does not follow the primary couple to their final destination, or because the author himself wishes so. If the second hypothesis is valid, then the task of interpretation is ultimately entrusted by Heliodorus to the reader, who has to wait until the last chapter of the Aethiopica in order to infer its complete meaning.

Up till now, two of the three indications that encourage us to ascribe a paradigmatic value to the story of Charicleia and Theagenes have been pronounced by Calasiris, who serves as a mouthpiece of the author despite his unavoidably incomplete cognition. However, the last – and, in my opinion, most important – hint is provided by the writer himself and is presented in the form of a passing and seemingly inconspicuous authorial comment just before the final book of the novel, which contains the denouement. In a digression, Heliodorus concludes his aetion on the origin of the Egyptian festival in honour of the Nile with the remark that the mythological explanation, which purports that the life-giving river and the fertilized earth are gods who are united, is created by people seriously occupied with physical and theological issues who do not want to reveal their conceptions to the profane ones and who provide a first initiation in the form of myth, while reserving the acquisition of supreme intuitive knowledge for rites performed in sanctuaries illuminated ‘by the fire-bearing torch of the beings’ (τῇ πυρφόρω τῶν ὂντων λαμπάδι, 9.9.5).Footnote ¹⁶ The terminology once again refers us to Platonic philosophy and the context is religious, as was the case in Cnemon's last mention of the value of the story that Calasiris narrated. Is it then inconceivable that this authorial comment, with its apparent restraint, can also be regarded as an implicit warning to the reader that Heliodorus' novel is similarly an attempt to disguise certain deep religious and philosophical conceptions that determine human life in the form of an entertaining romantic story?Footnote ¹⁷ In this way, the conceptions stay protected from the profane ones, while the receptive reader, to whom the task of interpretation is assigned by the author, is somehow initiated, although not fully, to the philosophical truths implied by Heliodorus.

Indeed, there are certain elements in Heliodorus' text that prompt us to adopt an allegorical approach,Footnote ¹⁸ notably Calasiris' tendency to read additional meanings into certain passages from the Homeric epics (3.12.2–3.13.3). Sometimes the meaning he ascribes to them seems to the erudite reader of our age rather implausible and incompatible with what Homer intended his audience to comprehend. However, one might surmise that it is precisely this apparent implausibility that all the more encourages the reader of Heliodorus to search below the surface of his text for hidden meanings. After all, the writer himself legitimizes this practice by having one of his principal characters exercising it in the great poet whom Heliodorus himself tries to imitate on many occasions and to whose texts he makes multiple references.Footnote ¹⁹

However, in my attempt to trace the lurking meaning of Heliodorus' novel, I will confine myself to well-established philological methods and will explore only tentatively the possible allegorical implications. It has been widely accepted by modern literary criticism that every narration is organized by a structural principle, a premise or thesis, if you like, that converts the succession of events taking place in a novel or a play to interconnected entireties that have meaning; as a result of this reflective action the whole plot can be translated to a ‘thought’,Footnote ²⁰ which we might not be wide of the mark to identify to an extent with what the old school of philological thought used to term the ‘message’ of a work of literature. I think that by now it has become evident that the premise of Heliodorus' Aethiopica is that pure love, conditioned by sophrosyne, can lead us to the discovery of the true essence of our self, while illicit desire ultimately results in somehow ‘losing’ it, often at the cost of our lives.

Charicleia's life experience might encourage us to view the whole process of her removal from her homeland and then her return to it after passing numerous trials and tribulations and after receiving the protection and guidance of priests, as well as the assistance of Theagenes, as a kind of spiritual journey, which is not so dissimilar to the journey of the soul on earth as described in Plato's Phaedrus (244a–257b).Footnote ²¹ In that case, too, it is the intense feeling of pure love and the critical psychic and spiritual guidance of the lover that ‘gives wings’ to his own and to his beloved's soul and that prompts them to ‘return’ to their initial state by recalling what they had seen during their journey above the sky along with the gods. Significantly, these sights are referred to with the same term that Heliodorus employs to describe the acquisition of supreme knowledge at the inner sanctuaries, that is the ‘beings’ (τὰ ὂντα). Thus, in both Heliodorus' novel and Plato's philosophic dialogue we are dealing with a kind of reinstatement of the self through the supreme power of love.

No wonder Ethiopia is presented by the author as the ideal state,Footnote ²² a state whose leader is moderate, pious (as he submits his will to the judgement of the priesthood [10.10.4]), and just to the utmost degree (since he reaches the point of declaring publicly his willingness to sacrifice his newly found daughter for the interest of his people [10.16.3–10]).Footnote ²³ We might assume that the main purpose of the quasi-historical interlude of Book 9 is precisely to paint a portrait of Hydaspes, who in his military enterprises admittedly displays a resourcefulness similar to that of his daughter, as the perfect ruler, and, consequently, enhances the image of Ethiopia as an ideal state. Even the subjects of Hydaspes imitate his virtue, as becomes evident from the permission a soldier asks from him in order to keep the spoils that by the law of war rightfully belong to him (9.23.3–4). The only flaw of Ethiopia, the human sacrifices, is abolished with the recognition of Charicleia by her true parents and with her marriage to Theagenes.Footnote ²⁴ In fact, the denouement sanctions the conflation of the Greek and Ethiopian civilizations, since not only had Charicleia been brought up in Greece and received a Greek education but also her husband represents the quintessence of everything Greek, as his origin and comparison to Achilles makes clear (2.34.2 and 4).Footnote ²⁵ This conflation reinforces the ideal character of Ethiopia.Footnote ²⁶ We may assert that Ethiopia comes to represent more accurately the Greek spiritual values that the corrupt Athens depicted in this novel more or less denounces.

In the light of the above observations, I do not consider improbable the basic contention of Philip the Philosopher, a Byzantine scholar of the twelfth century, that Charicleia can be viewed as the symbol of the soul and of the mind that adorns it,Footnote ²⁷ although I cannot agree with most of his argumentation. This contention has subsequently been taken up and modified by Reinhold Merkelbach, who compares Charicleia to the human soul;Footnote ²⁸ in that case, too, it seems to me that the rest of his analysis should be approached with the utmost caution and scepticism.Footnote ²⁹ To my mind there is little doubt that Heliodorus intended to ascribe to his narration certain symbolic or allegorical ramifications, a speculation that might be reinforced by the fact that Charicleia's reinstatement is presented as a rite of passage.Footnote ³⁰ The risk of being sacrificed involves an experience of near death, from which she emerges transformed: she had initially appeared as a Greek and a captive and then she is proven a native Ethiopian and the sole heir to the throne. Significantly enough, the whole process is effected through her sophrosyne, since she has not only been chosen as a sacrificial victim because of her chastity but has also managed to bring about the liberating recognition because of the education she received in Greece through her foster-father, which constitutes the flip side of this virtue, as analysed above. Apart from that, I believe that the task of the scholar who attempts to define further exactly what Heliodorus' symbolic or allegorical implications are will not be easy.