THE POLITICS OF RELIGION: LIBATION AND TRUCE IN EURIPIDES’ BACCHAE

Euripides’ Bacchae is one of the most intensively studied Greek tragedies. Generations of scholars have explored the play from different perspectives and offered fascinating insights. But there are still aspects that have not received the attention they deserve. One such aspect is Euripides’ use of libation as a dramatic motif. Even though this motif relates directly to the question of the tragic conflict between Dionysus and Pentheus, it has never been discussed in detail and its dramatic impact has not been fully acknowledged.

My aim in this paper is to explore the motif of libation as a multifaceted feature of the Bacchae. In particular, I will try to show that in the four passages in question Euripides makes deliberate use of the double sense of the group σπένδω-σπονδή in order to deepen the notion of the tragic conflict from the two perspectives of religion and politics that are crucial concerns of the play. The libation motif is not just connected to questions of worship and piety; it also forms part of the depiction of the tragic conflict in terms of military action; it points, moreover, to the role of liquids as an aspect of Dionysus' nature and stands in close relation to the role of sacrifice.
The argument that Euripides plays with the double sense of the words of the group σπένδω-σπονδή is not entirely new, but has never been seriously considered. Sandys and a few other commentators in the nineteenth century suggested a double sense for σπένδεται in the first episode (284), and Segal believed as much for ἔνσπονδος in the fourth episode (924). 3 But these are isolated suggestions that have not been explored further. Just as it has not been asked whether there is a double sense in all four passages, so the question of its dramatic function has not been discussed. When briefly touching the motif of libation in his seminal book on the Bacchae, Segal does not acknowledge its full extent; in the context of a structural interpretation in terms of oppositions, libation is reduced to an aspect of 'normal civic ritual' that proves 'irrelevant' in the realm of the god. 4 But why does Dionysus himself mention libation in his complaint about Pentheus in the prologue (45)? Is the god's early reference to libation not a clear sign that the ritual matters to him, and are the polis and politics not essential spheres of his influence? 5 Does the libation motif in the Bacchae perhaps have a greater dramatic impact than interpreters have assumed? 6

THE GOD'S COMPLAINT
The play opens with Dionysus explaining his arrival at Thebes. Having been rejected as a god in the town of his birth and by his own relatives, he has returned to demonstrate his divine power. The prologue makes it clear that this process has already been set in motion: the Theban women have been driven out of the city and roam, possessed by the god, through the wilderness of Mount Cithaeron (23-38). But Thebes is in danger of even greater troubles. The god wants to punish the entire city (39-40), and his anger is directed especially at Pentheus: 3 For these suggestions, see below, sections 1 and 3 respectively. 4 Cf. C. Segal, Dionysiac Poetics and Euripides' Bacchae (Princeton, 1997 2 ), 45-6. The pertinent commentaries do not include discussion of libation as a motif in the Bacchae. These include E.R. Dodds, Euripides: Bacchae (Oxford, 1960 2 ), R. Seaford, Euripides: Bacchae (Warminster, 1996) and J. Roux It is usually taken for granted that this accusation concerns only worship and cult. Libation and prayer are, in fact, often mentioned together, and it is rightly acknowledged by scholars of Greek religion that they are complementary ritual features. 8 The juxtaposition of σπονδῶν and εὐχαῖς may, therefore, simply refer to ritual action and speech: Pentheus refuses to pour libations in Dionysus' honour and to include the god in his prayers. 9 But why is his refusal of worship addressed in terms of libation (σπονδή) rather than sacrifice (θυσία), the main form of public worship of the gods? And how certain is it that σπονδῶν is not used here in the political sense 'truce' which it can also have?
The question of whether the plural σπονδαί means 'libations' or 'truce' depends entirely on the respective context. 10 While a decision is usually not difficult to make, in the present context there are several indicators that suggest that Euripides plays with both senses. Among other things, Dionysus' self-introduction is a powerful political statement that aims at the disruption of the whole polis (39-40, 47-8). The fact that the god speaks of Pentheus as the ruler and representative of Thebes (43-4) highlights his official role and his responsibility for the city and the well-being of its inhabitants. 11 More importantly, the relationship between the god and the Theban ruler is described in terms of war and fighting: in line 45, σπονδῶν is not just combined with εὐχαῖς; it is also juxtaposed with θεομαχεῖ, which is first attested in the Bacchae 12 and prominently, at the beginning of the sentence, characterizes Pentheus as a person who 'does battle with the god'. The notion of violent physical action is further enhanced by the metaphor σπονδῶν ἄπο | ὠθεῖ με (45-6), which emphasizes that Pentheus is not just religiously negligent but outright hostile and aggressive. With ὠθέω Euripides uses a word that denotes, in the context of war, the forcing back of the enemy. 13 9 The crucial point of the complaint is Pentheus' general refusal to worship the god, which includes libations and prayers in all kinds of circumstances. Seaford (n. 4), 153 suggested that it may concern 'community (not palace) rituals'. 10 For the semantic difference between the singular σπονδή ('libation') and the plural σπονδαί ('libations', 'truce'), see Casabona (n. 1), 253-65. The plural also denotes the so-called 'sacred truce' which was announced by heralds called σπονδοφόροι before greater festivals such as the Olympian Games (e.g. If the city of the Thebans seeks in anger to drive the bacchants out of the mountain with weapons, I will lead my army of maenads into battle. Thus σπονδῶν (45) is clearly drawn into the sphere of political conflict and warfare. In view of the references to polis, war and fighting at the very beginning of the drama, there is good reason to believe that σπονδῶν is used to bring out the political implications of the conflict between Dionysus and Pentheus no less than to indicate its religious dimension. The god and the human ruler are opposed to each other like two parties of war, and one of them refuses to make a truce. 14 The assumption that Euripides deliberately uses σπονδῶν in a double sense also receives external support from passages in Homer and Aristophanes that show the close connection of libation and truce, both in terms of institution and in terms of language. In a famous scene in Iliad Book 3 (264-301) the Greeks and the Trojans make an agreement in the form of an oath to decide the war through a single combat. As has been rightly noted by scholars, the pouring of a libation is a central ritual feature of the ceremony. 15 The narrator not only carefully prepares for the ritual by listing utensils, such as wineskin, mixing vessel and golden cups, and by alluding to the mixing of the wine; he also describes the actual performance of the libation in detail. After two lambs have been slaughtered, the wine is poured on the earth, and this ritual action, which concludes the whole ceremony, symbolically enforces the conditional curse that accompanies it. 16 A word of the group σπένδω-σπονδή is not used in this case, but in Iliad Book 4, when Agamemnon comments on Pandarus' breach of the oath, he singles out σπονδαὶ ἄκρητοι or 'unmixed libations' along with the blood of lambs and the shaking of hands as ritual features that enforce agreements (158-9). These passages contain two points of interest for the present discussion: first, the Homeric usage of the plural σπονδαί is generally held to prefigure the later usage in the sense 'truce'. 17 Second, the detailed description of the oath gives a vivid example of the political dimension of the libation ritual: the pouring of a liquid (wine) stands out as an essential element of a truce. 18 A passage in Aristophanes' Wasps illustrates how a dramatist can employ the double meaning of σπονδαί. When Philocleon and his son Bdelycleon eventually agree to settle their quarrel, and Philocleon is willing to establish a law-court at home, the two make 14 Euripides uses the plural σπονδαί in the sense 'truce' in Med. 898, Hel. 1235 and Ph. 364-6. For the truce Polynices speaks of in the latter passage, see also Ph. 81, 273 and 450 (ὑπόσπονδον μολεῖν); Ph. 171 (ἔνσπονδος). For the middle voice ἐσπείσαντο in Ph. 1240, see n. 33 below. 15   καὶ μὴν ἡμεῖς ἐπὶ ταῖς σπονδαῖς καὶ ταῖς εὐχαῖς φήμην ἀγαθὴν λέξομεν ὑμῖν, ὅτι γενναίως ἐκ τοῦ πολέμου καὶ τοῦ νείκους ξυνέβητον.
We, too, will speak a good word for you on the occasion of your truce-libations and your prayers, for after this war and quarrel you have come to terms in noble fashion.
Although in this passage the juxtaposition of σπονδαῖς and εὐχαῖς is even closer than the combination of the two words in the Bacchae, several commentators have not hesitated to take σπονδαῖς in the technical sense 'truce'. 19 There are also scholars who believe that it retains its ritual sense, 20 but why should either sense be excluded from the interpretation at all? The chorus describe the quarrel of the two protagonists metaphorically in terms of war (πολέμου, 866) and agreement (ξυνέβητον, 867). This justifies taking σπονδαῖς in the political sense 'truce'. But Bdelycleon and Philocleon also want to burn incense and say a prayer (859-62). This preparation for a religious action justifies the assumption that σπονδαῖς has a ritual sense, and may refer to libations, even though the pouring of liquids is not explicitly mentioned. 21 It seems that Aristophanes chose the plural of σπονδή exactly for the reason that it captures (unlike θυσία or θυμίαμα) the combination of both notions, religion and politics.
Dionysus' complaint in the prologue of the Bacchae gains dramatic depth if σπονδῶν is understood in the double sense of 'libations' and 'truce'. 22 The ambiguity of religion and politics has a signal function, as it prepares for two aspects that prove crucial to the play. It not only addresses Pentheus' neglect of ritual action and verbal acknowledgement in a general religious sense, but also shows that the encounter between Dionysus and the Theban ruler takes the form of a violent conflict that has the impact of a war. Moreover, the mention of libations prefigures Dionysus' close associations with liquids, especially wine, and points to his role in the socio-religious framework of the polis. The  22 The double meaning of σπονδῶν is also reflected by the compound θεομαχεῖ (45) which unites the notions of divinity and war. θεομαχεῖ also points to an ambiguity concerning the standings of the two opponents. The fact that the god himself makes the complaint seems to imply that he takes Pentheus seriously as an opponent. It fits into this notion that in the play Pentheus is not just described as a human ruler but also compared with a 'murderous giant' (543-4); cf. Segal (n. 4), 129-30. THE POLITICS OF RELIGION 55 complaint implies that Pentheus does not take part in or allow any form of Dionysiac worship, which, within the polis, means in particular that no festivals are held in the god's honour.

TIRESIAS' WARNINGS
The motif of libation is taken up in the first episode. In a controversy about the divine status of Dionysus, the seer Tiresias tries to convince the young ruler Pentheus that Dionysus is a god and deserves worship. It has long been noted that his speech (266-327) follows the pattern of contemporary Greek oratorical practice and has a formal structure that includes an introduction, a series of proofs or pleas and a peroration. 23 In the first proof, the seer addresses the greatness of the god in terms of wine (272-85). He states that 'there are two primary things among humanity' (274-5). 24 The first 'primary thing' is the goddess Demeter. She, the seer says, is earth (γῆ) 25 and nurtures humans with solid food (275-7). The second 'primary thing' is Dionysus. Tiresias first asserts that the son of Semele discovered wine 26 and introduced it to humanity (279-80). He then enumerates the benefits from this drink (280-3), saying that it 'frees distressed mortals from pain, when they have a fill' of it, that it 'gives sleep, which makes them forget their daily hardships', and that 'there is no other medicine against suffering' (ὃ παύει τοὺς ταλαιπώρους βροτοὺς | λύπης, ὅταν πλησθῶσιν ἀμπέλου ῥοῆς, | ὕπνον τε λήθην τῶν καθ᾿ ἡμέραν κακῶν | δίδωσιν, οὐδ᾿ ἔστ᾿ ἄλλο φάρμακον πόνων). After that, he concludes (284-5): οὗτος θεοῖσι σπένδεται θεὸς γεγώς, ὥστε διὰ τοῦτον τἀγάθ᾿ ἀνθρώπους ἔχειν.
He, being a god, is poured in libations to the gods / makes a truce with the gods, so that because of him men have all the good things.
What are the meaning and the function of this sentence in the context of Tiresias' argument and in the wider context of play? How does it relate to Pentheus' prejudice against Dionysus, and what does it say about libation and the nature of the god?
In the pertinent interpretations of the Bacchae it is taken for granted that σπένδεται has only one meaning and that Tiresias says that the god Dionysus is poured in libations to the gods. Accordingly, the discussion centres on the question of how to make sense of this enigmatic statement. Based on the notion of an identification or equation of the god with his gift of wine, one group of scholars sees it as part of a satirical characterization of Tiresias. Winnington-Ingram, for instance, interpreted it in a Socratic fashion, arguing that it is a reductio ad absurdum that 'men bribe the gods by offering up a god to them'. 27 According to Segal, Tiresias' explanation of Dionysus in terms of wine has a religious value, but is, nevertheless, part of a severe misconception of the nature of the god. 28 Another group believes instead that Tiresias' words have a deep religious meaning. Dodds interpreted them as an expression of a 'primitive' feeling comparable to the 'complete identification in Indian thought of the god Soma with the drink Soma […]'. 29 Burkert and Gallistl took Tiresias' statement as an expression of a sacramental notion that implies the death of the god; and against the background of Dionysiac mystery cult, Seaford described it as 'a kind of mystic instruction'. 30 As different as these interpretations are, they all have in common the assumption that σπένδεται must be passive. However, just as in the case of σπονδῶν in the prologue, this assumption appears to be a self-imposed limitation. The form σπένδεται itself is ambiguous, since it can represent not only the passive but also the middle voice. While the passive refers to the performance of the libation ritual, the middle has a different meaning and refers to the conclusion of a truce. With σπένδεται in the passive, Tiresias says: 'He, being a god, is poured in libations to the gods, so that because of him men have all the good things.' With σπένδεται in the middle, the sense changes to: 'He, being a god, makes a truce with the gods, so that because of him men have all the good things.' As has been mentioned, some commentators acknowledged the ambiguity of σπένδεται. According to Sandys, the middle voice is grammatically applicable to the god himself, while the passive involves a reference to his gift of wine. 31 Yet, unfortunately neither Sandys nor any other scholar posed the question of the dramatic function of such a double sense, and, ever since Dodds refuted the middle voice as meaningless in the context, this possibility has played practically no role in the scholarly discussion. 32 There is, however, good reason to believe that the choice of the ambiguous form is deliberate and that Euripides plays with both senses of σπένδεται.

THE POLITICS OF RELIGION
First, the middle sense 'to make a truce' is frequently attested in historical writings of the classical time and also used by Euripides three times outside the Bacchae. 33 In contrast, the passive sense 'to be poured in libations' or 'as a libation' is not problematic in itself, but it is not found in classical literature outside the Bacchae. 34 Grammatically, both the passive voice and the middle voice are equally possible in the case of Tiresias' statement. In the passive, the dative θεοῖσι refers to the gods as divine recipients of the libations; in the middle, it denotes the gods as the party with which the truce is made. 35 Second, a play with the ambiguity and the double sense of σπένδεται accords with the sophistic argumentation and the rhetorical character of Tiresias' speech. 36 Pentheus is opposed to everything that relates to Dionysus, and is determined to fight the god even with physical force. Tiresias is concerned for the Theban ruler and tries to change his mindset by proving him wrong about the god. The central point of the first proof, which focusses on the greatness of Dionysus in terms of wine, seems to be the identification or equation of the god with his liquid gift. But this notion is only evoked by the context. 37 It can be said to serve as a theological premise, based on which the god is associated with the performance of libations. The identification is prepared for by the abstract expression δύο […] τὰ πρῶτα (274-5) and by the claim that the goddess Demeter is earth (275-6). Ambiguity is also characteristic of the phraseology in lines 284-5. On the one hand, θεὸς γεγώς, which may mean both 'being a god' and 'coming into existence as a god', evokes the notion of Dionysus as an anthropomorphic god and benefactor. A personal subject accords well with the middle sense of σπένδεται. On the other hand, Tiresias mentions concrete benefits of wine (without using the word οἶνος once), and an impersonal subject fits σπένδεται in the passive voice. Ambiguity helps strengthen Tiresias' argument, as it allows the seer to allude to the god in a rationalistic way as wine without abandoning the notion of Dionysus as a personal god. Pentheus' 33 For the use of the middle voice of σπένδω, see Citron (n. 10), 3-48; Casabona (n. 1), 241-6; see also LSJ s.vv. σπένδω, σπονδή. While agreeing in general on the usage of the middle voice, Citron and Casabona differ in that the former maintains that the middle always has the sense 'to make a truce', whereas the latter believes that there are a few cases in which it has the concrete sense of pouring a libation (in the context of a truce). For discussions of historical spondai-treaties, with consideration also of the ritual features, see Baltrusch (n. 10), 92-188, especially 99-104; Sommerstein and Bayliss (n. 15), 241-306. For σπένδομαι as middle voice in Euripides, see Ph. 1240-1, Med. 1140, Or. 1680-1. In the latter two passages the middle refers not to a truce proper but to a settlement in a private quarrel. 34 The only evidence in the archaic and classical times comes from two cult inscriptions; cf. It refers either to the other party of a truce or to the party in whose interest a truce is made. In Bacch. 284-5, the latter is excluded because of ὥστε with infinitive, which identifies humanity as the party of interest. 36 Cf. Roth (n. 23), 62-3, who rightly lists the ambiguity of σπένδεται among the rhetorical features of Tiresias' speech, but offers no discussion. In general, for ambiguity and double meanings in the Bacchae, see Stanford (n. 31), 174-9; C. Segal, 'Etymologies and double meanings in Euripides' Bacchae', Glotta 60 (1982), 81-93. 37 Cf. Leinieks (n. 5), 230; see also Seidensticker (n. 24), 280 n. 32.
S EBASTIAN ZERHOCH 58 rejection of the god is thus not just addressed from one angle but from two different perspectives. A third point concerns the ritual nature and the cultural significance of the libation ritual. Some scholars have suggested that Euripides wants to allude here to sacrifice and/or the death of Dionysus, 38 but this would clearly undermine Tiresias' argument of the greatness of the god. More importantly, the seer does not use a sacrificial term. The very use of a form of σπένδω makes it clear that the focus is on libation, and this includes particular aspects and general associations of the ritual as well as the situational contexts in which it is performed. Libation is first and foremost a religious action that centres on liquids and pouring. It fits these characteristics that Tiresias not only speaks of Dionysus as the inventor of wine but also juxtaposes wine drinking (280-3) and libation (284-5). Considering that both wine drinking and libations (σπονδαί) belong together in various situations, it becomes clear that their juxtaposition in the speech is not a mere rhetorical exercise; rather, it is charged with religious meaning and highlights both actions as interrelated manifestations of Dionysus. 39 Furthermore, Tiresias' description of Dionysus' greatness in terms of a liquid and its uses corresponds with the miraculous flows and springs of liquids which the maenads experience during their celebrations with the god in the mountains. 40 In her commentary, Roux rightly pointed out the religious significance of libation in the fifth century. 41 In fact, the ritual pouring of liquids is omnipresent in Greek culture from the earliest times. 42 Libation is a feature of private as well as of public worship, and figures prominently in various situations and institutions of socio-political concern. Libations (σπονδαί) not only form part of the performance of animal sacrifice (which makes them a noticeable aspect of public cult) but also belong to everyday life and to situations of departure and arrival, and, while their socio-religious dimension is highlighted at the symposium, their political dimension is stressed in the context of oath-ceremonies and truces. 43 Libation is a ritual that creates positive reciprocity with the gods, the heroes and the dead, and expresses piety, εὐσέβεια, on a fundamental level; but, at the same time, it is also a ritual that serves to create close bonds between 38 See Burkert (n. 29), 248-9; Gallistl (n. 30), 66-7. 39 For the complexity of the connection between Dionysus and wine, see W. those who take part in its performance. 44 Wine, whether mixed or unmixed, used alone or in combination with other liquids, is the liquid that is most commonly used in and associated with libations, whether at the symposium and at festive sacrificial feasts or in oath-ceremonies and truces. 45 Against the background of these general considerations, Tiresias' statement can be interpreted as comprising three interrelated aspects: (1) With σπένδεται in the passive, the religious aspect of the libation ritual is highlighted. The statement forms a paradox, raising the question of how a god can be poured out as a libation. This paradox is resolved by the implied identification of Dionysus with wine. 46 The word θεός indicates that Dionysus' power is present and reveals itself whenever libations with wine are poured to any of the gods (θεοῖσι). 47 What Tiresias tells Pentheus is that, just as humans benefit from Dionysus by drinking his liquid gift, they also benefit from him by using it in the performance of the libation ritual. Therefore, whenever Pentheus pours wine as a libation to the gods and asks them for a favour in return, he shows them their due respect, which allows him to expect a positive reaction. He benefits from Dionysus' mediation, whether wine is regarded as his divine gift or the god's power is considered present in the liquid. 48 If Pentheus accepts this, and he must, lest he prove himself to be ἀσεβής, 'impious', 49 he must also acknowledge that Dionysus is in fact a very powerful god who influences the relationship between humans and gods in fundamental ways. Thus, instead of alluding to the death of the god in a sacrificial sense, Tiresias' statement clearly indicates, as part of a religious argument, that the power of the god is present in the libation ritual and that Pentheus should honour him.
(2) At the same time the notion of a truce, which belongs to the middle sense of σπένδεται, is evoked by the context (and reinforced by the frequent use of the middle in general). Pentheus is the king and political representative of Thebes, and throughout the drama his relationship with Dionysus is described in terms of war and fighting. As a θεομάχος, for instance, he is characterized not only by Dionysus in the prologue (45) and in the third episode (635-6) but also by the chorus in the second stasimon (544) and by his own mother Agaue in the exodus (1255). Most importantly for the present discussion, Tiresias also holds this view, as he makes clear at the end of his speech (325). Tiresias' words relate, moreover, to Dionysus' threat in the prologue to wage war against Thebes and its ruler with his army of maenads (50-2). The seer mentions the god's involvement in the sphere of war not just in general terms, but highlights his capacity to stir 44 These aspects are also a major feature in art; cf. Gaifman (n. 1), 151, who argues that the 'images draw attention to the performance of the libation and highlight its communicative role in giving physical expression to the affirmation of ties and hierarchies among mortals and immortals'. 45 For wine as the main libation liquid, see e.g. Burkert (n. 1), 114; also Graf (n. 1), 209-21, who proposes a structural explanation according to which libations with mixed wine stand for normality, while libations without wine as well as those with unmixed wine represent marginality. 46 The whole first argument centres on the connection of the god with his gift of wine. 47 For the statement as a paradox and for the notion of Dionysus' power being present in wine, see also Roux (n . 4) (302-4). 50 Roth argued that the mention of Dionysus' role in war serves as a warning for Pentheus. 51 An allusion to a truce not only fits this warning but also enhances it, for it stresses the urgency for Pentheus to come to terms with his enemy. If the young ruler is reasonable and listens carefully to the seer, he will understand σπένδεται as a hint to σπονδαί in the sense of a 'truce', and will try to make peace with his enemy, who has already demonstrated his power over the city of Thebes.
(3) Beside this indirect evocation of the notion of a truce, the middle sense σπένδεται becomes relevant also in a direct way. With σπένδεται in the middle voice, the sentence literally means that Dionysus 'makes a truce with the gods'. 52 The context makes it clear that this is to be understood metaphorically. 53 In lines 280-3, the seer describes the human condition principally as a state of suffering and hardship that wine helps to alleviate and forget. 54 Against this background, the notion that Dionysus makes a truce with the gods serves as a metaphor for the benefits Tiresias associates with wine drinking: whenever humans find, through wine drinking, temporary relief and liberation from their struggles, Dionysus makes a 'truce' with the gods on their behalf. Thus Tiresias does not introduce a new point in lines 284-5, but summarizes in a metaphor what he has said before about the benefits of wine, emphasizing the role of the god. 55 This metaphor is not a mere sophism, but forms part of a sophisticated usage of σπένδεται that points, in a deeper sense, to the well-being of the polis and its citizens under the auspices of Dionysus. Libations of wine (σπονδαί) and wine drinking have a prominent place in the context of festivals and symposia, two central institutions of the polis, and it is in the context of these institutions that they are often associated with notions and experiences to which Tiresias alludes in his argument.
The assumption that σπένδεται points to the socio-religious framework of the polis and Dionysus' role in it finds strong support in the first stasimon (370-433). There, libations are not mentioned, but the Asian bacchants, who sing and dance in praise of 50 For further passages where the relationship of Pentheus and Dionysus is described in terms of war and military, see Bacch. 778-86, 789, 798-9, 804, 809, 837, 845; see also Segal (n. 4), 99. For κατάσκοπος, another military term, see n. 69 below. 51 Roth (n. 23), 61. 52 For the function of the dative, see n. 35 above. It should be noted that the meaning of the middle is not that Dionysus 'makes libations to the gods'. 53 Cf. Kraus (n. 32), 8, who rightly took the middle voice metaphorically ('gleichsam ein Abkommen'), but failed to acknowledge the ambiguity of σπένδεται. For the notion, in a comic setting, of gods trying to make σπονδαί on behalf of humans, see Ar. Pax 212-13. 54 For the pessimistic view in Tiresias' speech, see H. Rohdich, Die Euripideische Tragödie. Untersuchungen zu ihrer Tragik (Heidelberg, 1968), 139. 55 As regards Dionysus' role as a 'truce-maker', it is worth mentioning that the god is associated aetiologically with the institution of the truce in a myth told by Diodorus. In 3.71.6 the historian narrates that Dionysus, after defeating the Titans in battle, offered each of his prisoners of war a libation of wine (διδόντα σπονδὴν οἴνου) and made them swear to join his campaign. The aetiological point of the story is stressed, when Diodorus comments that it is because of these past events (and the Titans being the first to be called ὑπόσπονδοι, 'protected under a truce') that truces have been given the name σπονδαί. Unfortunately, we do not know whether a version of this story was already current in Euripides' time. But, in any case, it is remarkable that there is a myth which tells of a war between Dionysus and other divine beings, makes the god himself the first to offer libations for the purpose of a truce, and plays with the double sense of the group σπένδω-σπονδή. For Diodorus' source of the account of the Libyan Dionysus, see J.S. Rusten, Dionysius Scytobrachion (Opladen, 1982), 102-12. Seaford (n. 4), 224 suggests a link between this story and mystic initiation, but the story's explicit aetiological function speaks against this.
He is in charge of these things: to celebrate in the thiasos with dancing, to laugh to the sound of the aulos, and to make an end of anxieties, whenever the joy of the grape cluster comes to the feast of the gods and the mixing vessel throws sleep around ivy-wreathed men at festivities. 56 In addition, and this lends further support to the assumption that σπένδεται in line 284 has a double sense, at the end of the first stasimon the chorus sing (417-20): ὁ δαίμων ὁ Διὸς παῖς χαίρει μὲν θαλίαισιν, φιλεῖ δ᾿ ὀλβοδότειραν Εἰρήναν, κουροτρόφον θεάν.
The god, Zeus's son, enjoys festivities, and he loves Peace, the giver of happiness, the goddess who rears the youth.
Dionysus is described here as a political god who cares for the well-being of the citizens. He is associated not only with festivities (θαλίαισιν) but also with Εἰρήνη, Peace herself, who provides wealth and happiness (ὄλβος) and takes care of the city's continuity by tending the young (κουροτρόφον). 57 What matters most for the present discussion is that the notions expressed by the chorus recall not only the actual function of a truce (σπονδαί) as a means to end war and establish peace but also the close association of the word σπονδαί itself with wine and peace.
Similar ideas are expressed in Aristophanes' Acharnians with great clarity. There, σπονδαί (in the double sense of 'truce' and 'wine' as used in libations), Dionysus and festive joys form a powerful triad that symbolizes peace and the well-being of the community in opposition to war and destruction: no sooner has Dicaeopolis received private σπονδαί (that is, a thirty-year treaty which he samples as if it were a fine old wine) from Sparta than he announces the celebration of the rural Dionysia (later in the play, he even enjoys the Dionysiac Anthesteria). 58 Aristophanes' explicit play with the double meaning of σπονδαί is not just meant to arouse laughter; it also has serious connotations, as it makes the abstract notion of peace a tangible reality. The close connection of libations (with wine) and peace also becomes clear, by contrast, when, in a later passage (Ach. 977-87), personified War is associated with the destruction of the vines and the violent spilling of wine.
In Tiresias' first proof, the double sense of σπένδεται turns out to have an important function. As part of a sophistic and sophisticated argumentation, which includes rhetorical means, such as ambiguity, paradox and metaphor, it addresses the politico-religious shortcomings of Pentheus. It highlights libation as a basic expression of piety and wine as a central feature of Dionysus' nature; it hints at the importance of recognizing Dionysus' place in the sphere of the polis; and it provides a strong warning and reminder for Pentheus. As ruler of Thebes, Pentheus cannot neglect or offend the new god if he wants his city to prosper and enjoy peace.
Pour libations, take part in Bacchic celebration, and garland your head! What exactly does Tiresias' advice imply, and why does the seer refer to libation a second time in his speech? Just as in the first proof, a word of the group σπένδω-σπονδή is used; however, unlike σπένδεται in line 284, σπένδε is unambiguous and has one particular meaning: it denotes the performance of the libation ritual. The three imperatives in line 313 can be understood as a religious reminder in which the unspecified σπένδε points to the importance of piety in general, 59 βάκχευε to an intrinsic form of worship of Dionysus, and στέφου κάρα to an outward sign of commitment to the god. At the same time, the pouring of libations is connected with the worship of Dionysus himself. It is a ritual that has to be performed in honour of this 'new' god no less than in honour of the other gods.
But as a general and unspecified admonition to pour libations, σπένδε also includes the particular situation of a truce, and since Tiresias' pleading at the end of his speech has a strong political flavour, there is good reason to assume that it also serves as a subtle reminder for Pentheus to end his war against the god. 60 The reference to libation comes after a warning of the limitations of the ruling power (κράτος) of humans (310-12) and specifies the welcome of the god in the country (312). In the peroration, moreover, the seer declares that he will not give in to Pentheus' words and he will not do battle with the god (κοὐ θεομαχήσω σῶν λόγων πεισθεὶς ὕπο, 325), and, while the alliteration πύλαις-πολλοί-Πενθέως-πόλις (319-20) underscores the political role of Pentheus, the ring composition of πόλις in line 320 and πολίτης in line 271 emphasizes the political aspect of the whole speech. 59 Tiresias does not name a divine recipient in whose honour Pentheus should pour libations. 60 It is noteworthy that in Thuc

THE POLITICS OF RELIGION
Thus σπένδεται (284) and σπένδε (313) reinforce each other and highlight not only the religious significance of the libation ritual with particular regard to the nature of Dionysus but also the political dimension of the conflict between the human ruler and the god.

THE GOD'S CRUEL SENSE OF IRONY
In the fourth episode, the libation-truce motif appears again in connection with Pentheus and, as in the prologue, it is the god himself who uses a word of the group σπένδω-σπονδή. When Pentheus comes out of the palace, dressed up as a maenad and ready to go to Mount Cithaeron, he suddenly has a vision. It seems to him that he sees two suns, two cities of Thebes, and the stranger leading the way in the shape of a bull (918-21). Astounded by this vision, he asks the stranger whether he once was an animal (922). Dionysus gives an enigmatic answer (923-4): ὁ θεὸς ὁμαρτεῖ, πρόσθεν ὢν οὐκ εὐμενής, ἔνσπονδος ἡμῖν· νῦν δ᾿ ὁρᾶις ἃ χρή σ᾿ ὁρᾶν.
The god, who was previously not well-disposed, accompanies us as our ally. Now you see, what you must see.
There are several nominal compounds of the group σπένδω-σπονδή. As Casabona has pointed out, some of them belong to the language of libation, while others are part of the vocabulary of treaties. 61 The compound ἔνσπονδος clearly belongs to the latter; it denotes the state of being included in a truce and implies, in a wider sense, the notion of an ally. 62 There is no doubt that the meaning of ἔνσπονδος in line 924 accords with the general usage. 63 But even if ἔνσπονδος is not normally used for the performance of a libation itself, the ritual sense of a σπονδή is present and can become relevant, when the context calls for it. 64 This seems to be the case in the present passage. The adjective refers to the relationship of Dionysus and Pentheus in a political sense, thereby also lending support to the assumption that Euripides plays with the political meaning of σπονδῶν (45) and σπένδεται (284), and even uses σπένδε (313) to allude to the notion to the tragic death of Pentheus, overlapping with the beginning of the sacrificial pattern. 71 After line 924, libation terms are not used any more, and the action turns more and more violent. 72 Thus the question as to why Pentheus' refusal to accept Dionysus' divinity is referred to in the first part of the drama in terms of libation finds a threefold answer. Libation is not only an expression of piety and an aspect of Dionysus' manifestations through liquids, especially wine; in its technical sense the libation terminology also refers to the martial character and political dimension of the conflict; and the ironic use of ἔνσπονδος in line 924 indicates that the possibility of a peaceful outcome of the conflict has now definitively become obsolete, as libation makes way for the violence of sacrifice.

CONCLUSION
The discussion of the four passages in which Euripides uses words of the group σπένδω-σπονδή (45, 284, 313, 924) shows that the motif of libation forms an integral part of the Bacchae. Euripides plays with the group's two senses 'libation' and 'truce' and thus highlights religion and politics as two interrelated and crucial perspectives of the tragic conflict between Dionysus and Pentheus.
The words and forms of the group σπένδω-σπονδή refer to libation as a basic form of worship of the gods from which Dionysus should not be excluded. The god himself makes it clear twice that libations (σπονδαί) matter to him, first in the prologue (45-6) in an angry complaint, then in the fourth episode (923-4) in an ironical remark. The importance of libation in connection with Dionysus is further indicated by Tiresias who refers to libation twice (284, 313) as part of his attempt to convince Pentheus that Dionysus is a god and deserves worship. Based on the implied identification of the god with his gift of wine, the seer describes libation as a manifestation of the power of the god and thereby urges Pentheus to honour Dionysus. The seer's argument also has wider socio-religious implications and points to the well-being of the polis under the auspices of Dionysus. 73 At the same time, the words of the group σπένδω-σπονδή refer to the notion of a truce and thus form part of the political dimension of the play. They relate to Pentheus, the king and representative of Thebes, who has the power to go to war and make peace; they are integrated in the language of war and military conflict, which is prominently used throughout the play to characterize Pentheus' encounter with Dionysus; in particular, they highlight the failure of the human ruler, who is repeatedly described as a θεομάχος, to come to terms with his enemy. As regards the use of the political sense of the group σπένδω-σπονδή, it is noteworthy, moreover, that there are several other passages in the play where the language of agreement and treaties is 71 For the dressing scene as the analogue of the first step of the sacrificial rite, see Seidensticker (n. 70), 182-3. 72 The mention of blood in the context of Pentheus' death (cf. Bacch. 1135-6, 1163-4)-foreshadowed by references to blood in the report about the maenads' sparagmos of the cows (cf. Ba. 741-2, 767-8)-is not expressed in terms of libation; in the framework of the sacrificial pattern, it may be interpreted in the sense that it replaces a 'normal' libation with wine. 73 An allusion to Bacchic-Dionysiac mystery cult (cf. Seaford [n. 4], 174-6) seems unlikely for dramatic reasons. It is also noteworthy that libation may not even have had a particular significance in this cult-context; cf. F. Graf and S.I. Johnston, Ritual Texts for the Afterlife: Orpheus and the Bacchic Gold Tablets (London, 2007), 149: '[…] not everything in the panoply of the mysteries was strange and unusual: sacrifice and libation are, after all, the "staple rituals" of ancient religion'. S EBASTIAN ZERHOCH used for relationships between the god and his worshippers. In line 175, for instance, Tiresias speaks of an agreement (ξυνεθέμην) he made with Cadmus to become followers of Dionysus. Similarly, when Pentheus suspects (807) a secret agreement between the stranger and the Theban maenads that guarantees eternal Bacchic revelry (ξυνέθεσθε κοινῆι τάδ᾿, ἵνα βακχεύητ᾿ ἀεί), Dionysus does not deny it, but ironically replies (808) that he, indeed, made an agreement with the god (καὶ μὴν ξυνεθέμην τοῦτό γ᾿, ἴσθι, τῶι θεῶι). Most importantly, in lines 1341-3 Dionysus proclaims that, if they had been sensible, the Thebans would now be truly happy, having the son of Zeus as their 'ally' (σύμμαχον). By showing that religion is, in fact, perceived in terms of politics in the Bacchae, these instances strongly support the argument that Euripides also plays with the political sense of the words of the group σπένδω-σπονδή. 74 Finally, the words of the group σπένδω-σπονδή are part of a wider association of Dionysus with liquids. Whereas his manifestation through wine drinking and libations of wine is associated with one (and predominantly male) sphere of Dionysiac experience, the manifestation through miraculous springs of liquids in nature is associated with maenadism as another (and predominantly or exclusively female) sphere of Dionysiac experience. 75 Through the libation terms of the group σπένδω-σπονδή, Dionysus is associated with the well-being of the polis and her people, with liberation from hardships and with festivity, cheerfulness and peace. It is Pentheus' failure to acknowledge both the polis and maenadism as spheres of Dionysiac influence that has tragic consequences in the Bacchae.

SEBASTIAN ZERHOCH Freie Universität, Berlin
sebastian.zerhoch@fu-berlin.de 74 The argument is further strengthened by the fact that συμμαχία, συντίθεμαι and other terms of agreement are often combined with σπονδαί and σπένδομαι in their political sense; cf. e.g. Thuc


POETIC HARMONY IN CLASSICAL GENRES’ TRANSLATION

Translating classical lyrical texts of the Muslim East into Western languages is a very complex task. The first hurdle is the weight problem. The second hurdle is the affiliation of Eastern lyric genres and western lyric genre requirements to different poles. Therefore, evaluating a translation in terms of adequacy or equivalence does not allow for an objective assessment. Probably because of this, we will limit ourselves to showing the winning side of each translation of the poem. We also welcome the options that are completely out of touch with reality. Let’s compare the weight barrier, which is the first hurdle. Originally formed in Arabic poetry, aruz later became the main system of classical poetry in Persian and ancient Turkic. Its main feature is that short, long and very long syllables are grouped according to a certain order.

Introduction
Oriental philosophy and literature have made a great contribution to the development of world civilization for centuries. While the innovations and inventions made in the fields of science by the great representatives of the Muslim East formed the basis of many modern sciences, the classics created in the field of literature served the development of human society by promoting universal values and singing ideals of human perfection. From the second half of the twentieth century, interest in Muslim Eastern culture and literature in Europe increased dramatically. Modernism, and especially postmodernism, has become a leading trend in Western literature, and for the older generation of intellectuals, the romanticism inherent in Eastern literature has become a source of attractive spiritual pleasure and enjoyment. In his time, Goethe developed a great love for Persian literature through the translation of Hafiz's poems, which he loved to read and was deeply moved by. Famous figures of Persian literature, such as Omar Khayyam, Hafiz Shirazi, Saadi Shirazi, Jalaliddin Rumi, became the favorite poets of thousands of Europeans. There has also been some experience in Europe in translating Iranian literature into English. However, unfortunately, samples of Uzbek classical literature remained unknown to foreign readers due to the ideology of the communist regime. After the independence of Uzbekistan, at the personal initiative of some dedicated translators, an attempt was made to translate Alisher Navoi's ghazals into English. The international recognition of Uzbekistan has also increased the interest of the peoples of the world in its literature.
The article will discuss the current issues of poetic translation using several translations of the same stanzas from different ghazals of Alishe Navai. The selection criteria of the TTs were the formal, semantic and poetic transformations that happened as the (mis)interpretation of the ST by the translators. According to our explorations, faithfulness to the form, in most cases, have been achieved at the cost of meaning, and vice-versa. The accuracy of the images converted from the same source is not the same, as well. The paper will focus on the process of the translation not as rendering from language A to language B, but to the factors that influence on the translator's decisions before, during and after the translation process is finished.

Materials and methods
The main focus of the paper is concentrated on the translation process of the same ghazal done by several translators and their own visibility in the ultimate translations. The research explores various translated text formally, semantically and poetically in order to get the glimpses of the commonalities and differences.
1. To provide the scientific value of the article the methods of comparative, descriptive and analytical analyses are used in order to discuss the harmony of the translations and the original texts structure, language and meanings. We suggest the following scheme of tackling with the translation of an Uzbek ghazal into English: Translation in general and a poetic translation in particular is a creative process. Different types of transformation such asomissions, addition, exclusion, generalization, concretization, a transposition or permutation, a replacement or substitution, compensation, metonymic translation (translating a cause by its effect or vice versa), grammatical form changes and antonymic translation are of widely use in this creative process. As a rule, any kind of the abovementioned transformations come to existence because of the differences in phonetic-phonological, morphological, lexical, syntactical, semantic, phraseological and pragmatic levels and registers (high formal, formal, neutral, informal and vulgar) of SL and TL. A good translation will depend on the harmony that translator creates between the form and meaning of a ST and TT. In a broad sense, there are two main terms used in order to label the quality of a translation that are "equivalency" and "adequacy" or the lack of them. First of all we shall have a look to a stanza from ghazal which starts with "Gool sochar yel bogh aro…" 1 ; the ghazal is about an unconditional and unanswered love which tortures the lyric hero. The poet has been suffering for a very long time because of his love. Now, on his deathbed, he would not like to see the most beautiful girls in the world, whose perfect beauty would take both the breath and 1 Badoyi ul-Bidoya p.475; Nawodir un-Nihoya p.469; Badoyi ul-Vasat p.528; souls of the one who sees them. All he craves for taking his last breath is to see his mistress for whom he cared his unconditional love throughout his life.  Though hooligans may threaten, may strike at me, Only she can succeed, she, the pitiless one.
(1a) The general idea of a ST is rendered very beautifully in the TT. The word "mahvash" which literally means "moonlike" 2 has been replaced by "those mysterious", which presupposes that there are several beautiful ladies who the lyric hero knows; moreover, they are mysterious. We tend to believe that being a poetess herself, the translator's reason could be to keep the phonetic closeness to the word "mahvash". However, as the idea of the original imagery was to compare several "moonlike" beautiful ladies with the beloved of the poet, and prove the superiority of the latter one, we suggest keeping this adjective as it is in the translation as well.
(1b) To begin with, the translator changes the addressee of the interjection and addresses to "my beauties". We would like to remind the readers one more time that the beauties are not really coming in this stanza; it is rather the display of the preference, it sounds as if it were written in a subjunctive mood. The idea is to stress that even on the deathbed the lyric hero would not see any other beauties rather than his beloved. So, we consider that this change was not a necessary idea to introduce. Secondly, we suggest to read the expression "But tell my" in the form of "But tell me" in order to recreate grammatical accuracy.
(1c) Most of the transformations in both the form and meaning have taken place in this translation. To start with, we take the "moonlike" beautiful ladies of the originals who were turned into "hooligans" in TT. This is a serious deviation from the original that turns over the idea of the poet upside down. This misunderstanding could have appeared as the result of lack of sufficient knowledge of translator not only in the language of the original but also in classic literary traditions, where there is no place to any kinds of hooligans at all. The next line continues surprising us with imagery transformations of the ideas, where the beloved is compared to the abovementioned hooligans, summarizing that the personal ideas of the translator, not the poet.
It is turn to have a look to the next stanza; it is taken from the same ghazal thet we have just discussed.

You have not told wheatear the long lost dear one has come.
Usually, the penultimate stanzas of Navai's ghazals contain a philosophical-symbolic meaning. His love has made him an outstanding figure among the ones who are in love. The word "ko'y" 4 at the beginning of the stanza means "street". The word "ushshoq" 5 is a plural form of the word "oshiq" which stands for "a person in love; the word cab be synonym for the expression "ishq ahli" as well, and it mostly describes people who devote themselves to the service of Allah. So, most of the time, when they say beloved they mean Allah.
In his love, the poet reached so high, that other people in this way started pilgrimage to his place. He does not care, because all he cares for is bless of Allah, and he wanders if he ever would be able to unify with Him. One the other hand, more practical analysis would tell us, that a lot of people, who cared for him and even strangers who heard about his state sympathize and come to visit him, whereas the beloved still shows no hint of appearing in his side.  First is the rendering of the word "ko'y" as "music", which is actually written as "kuy". As the result, instead of the original meaning, we get completely different image in the translation. Second, the idiomatic expression of "benomu nishonim" which has the meaning of "the one whom you have not heard from for a long time"has been rendered literally as "unknown my nameless". Ultimately, we have the image of a strange and nameless girl, which is absolutely, does not correspond to the meaning of the original text.
(2b): From grammatical point of view, the word "suitor" which is used in singular, does not correspond to the plural form of the original. Further we have more serious misinterpretation of a translator according to which, the one who is in love with the lyric hero has come to see the latter. We have a crowd of apprentices who come to see the hero, but they are not in love with him. The second line of the stanza is rendered correctly, though.
(2c): we have already discussed the meaning of the original stanza above, so it is obvious that the meaning register of the word "petitioners" is not suitable to this context at all. From the translations, it is logical for petitioners to have "dire troubles" but it has nothing in common with the idea of "ushshoq" and the reason for their visit.
The next two stanzas we are going to analyze are taken from the ghazal that starts with "Yor bordi-yu, ko'nglimda aning nozi qolibtur 6 ".

Kim bog' aro bir sarvi sarafrozi qolibtur.
While in the garden his beautiful cypress has been left This stanza is the logical continuation of the third stanza of the ghazal, where the soul of the poet was compared to a nightingale, which used to fly from one flower to another before it was caught by the trap of tresses of the beloved. Mainly, the stanza explain why the poet cannot enjoy the other "flowers" anymore; he is so in love with his beloved, that knowing that she was left alone, he cannot imagine being somewhere else enjoying his time. Wherever he goes, all his thoughts are now about his beloved; as it was said before, he has been trapped. In both of the following translations the idea of the original is completely transformed.

Translation from "P.O." (3a):
When the bird-heart flees it goes in search of happiness Because a lovely slender surrus still remains in the garden.

Translation by D.Daly (3b):
In the center of this garden, a lovely cypress, Long-limbed haven, found in flight by trembling bird-heart (3a): First of all, "the bird" of the original has become "bird-heart"; this is a concretizationtype of transformation, where knowing the context, the translator gives dome more details that are not given in SL but obvious from the context ot factual. The further we read, the stranger it gets; the translator creates totally illogical scene from the point of view of ghazal rules, while he says that one has to "flee" away from their beloved ones, in order to find happiness. Everything comes back to its logical order, once we replace the word "flee / flees" with the word "fly / flies".
(3b): The translation completely lacks the first line of the original. Instead, a very detailed translation-compensation is given for the second line. Moreover, the beloved is transformed into "longlimbed heaven".
Here comes the last stanza of the ghazal; it logically finishes the story, and has several poetic devices that embroider its structure and meaning.
Be thankful for hundred times that most has gone and few have left. First of all, the expressions "hijronu visol" (parting -tryst) and "ko'pu oz" (a lot -few) forms "tazod"the antonomasia; secondly, there is a poetic device which is called "taqsim" -"the respective division"; in accordance with taqsim, one should read the lines as following: 1. "Hijroni kopu, visoli oz"there are a lot of partings; 2. "Hijronning kopi ketib, visolga oz qoldi"most of the partings have passed, there is little left to achieve tryst; We can see that bothe of the translators managed to keep the pen-name of Navoi in the maqta -the last stanza of the ghazal. Nevertheless, both of the translators, unfortunately, were not able to recreate poetic device, which was found in the text of the original.
Translation from "P.O." (4a) Translation by D.Daly (4b) Navoiy, do not complain that there were many meetings and partings -Navoiy, why do you complain of meetings and partings? Be grateful a hundred times that a great deal has passed and only a very little remains… Give thanks for those long moments that still fill your heart.
(4a): the translation supposes that Navai is complaining not only because of a lot of partings but numerous of trysts as well. Usually, one does not complain of the trysts with the beloved; this shift in meaning appeared because the construction used in the original was either incorrectly interpreted, or it was comprehend correctly but rendered not appropriately. As both lines were logically and formally connected in the ST, and as we have just seen, the idea was not translated correctly, the meaning of second line gets ambiguous automatically.
Great deal of what has passed, and only few of what have letit is not clear from the translation. The last note on this translation would be to suggest reading the phrase "a very little" as "very little".
(4b): the first line of the translation will receive the same feedback from us as (4a). in the second line, the translator uses the omission to the partings and compensation for the tryst.

Then why my beloved has shown me courtesy in the first place.
Here, the poet one more time uses antonomasia using the words "the poor" and "the royalty" together. It is very beautiful and melodic ghazal, which is full of various metaphors, allusions and similes. The idiomatic expression "ko'zga ilmoq" means "to find somebody equal", "to treat as equal", "to show respect, kindness or even affection to someone". So, basically, the poet assumes that the beloved does not find him equal to herself. She is a princess and he is a beggar. Anybody who is in love ia a beggar. They are in constant need of the tryst of the beloved. This is not always has to be connected with material status of a person. The poet wonders, why would his beloved showed him courtesy initially at all, though she knew his poor status; and why would she restrict him now. We shall be able to analyze only one translation, as D.Daly has omitted this stanza from his translation.

Translation from "P.O." (5a)
Translation by D.Daly (5b) Tis known there is no love lost twixt princess and beggars, X Perhaps that is why I was discarded in my lowliness by my beloved. X (5a): the usage of "tis" instead of "this" and "twixt" gives the piece a classic breath. However, the usage of both "no" and "lost" in the same sentence creates a semantically wrong sentence. We would suggest crossing out the word "lost" from this sentence. Continuing on the semantics of the second 7 Badoyi ul-Bidoya p.161; line, we discussed that poet makes a regretful inquiry to his beloved. This tone was transformed to a guess in the translation. The last stanza to be comparatively analyzed in this paper is taken from the ghazal starting with "Ne navo soz aylagay boolbool goolistondin joodo 8 ".
That dawn was him from his candle of night to isolate.
The stanza describes a situation of moth being attracted to the light. It is commonly believed that flying at night, moth navigates with the help of the moonlight. Once it has got into some building, or there is no moonlight available because of some any reasons, moth has to find an alternative source of light. However, any alternative source of light to the moon will not help but on the other hand will only distract the moth from its destination. As the result, it will fly circles trying to get out, but in vain. Ultimately, if the source is fire, moth dies burnt by it. As there was no electricity available in the time of Navai, people would always light the candles at night, while they were having joyful meetings. So, the candle here is a metaphor for the very important light that gathers around itself whoever needs the lightenlightenment. It is safe and worm and comforting as long as you keep a distance from it. Once you touch it, it burns. The moth is in love with the candle fire. They meet every night and they have their time till dawn, when ultimately, people put the fire out.

Translation by D.Sultanova (6a):
The moth knows, the parting hour would come as soon as down breaks, And it has to pass away as its fond candle from its burning parts.

Translation from "P.O." (6b):
The moth suffered so he could see his love though well he knew The dawn would deprive him of both the candle and his night's shelter.

Translation by D.Daly (6c):
Even the moth following his compulsive need Loses its candle at daylight, night drifts apart.
(6a): the translator uses explanatory and transposition of the lines in translation in order to convey the idea of the original. At the same time, the idea of the second line is more like an interpretation rather than translation from the source. The word "shami shabiston", which is literally translated as "the candle of the night", according to translation, is parting from its burning and knowing this, the moth "has to pass away"why? The moth is attracted not by the candle; candle is the form. The main idea here is the fire -the light. Moreover, the usage of "have to" is a poor choice in this context, as this is a metaphor for an unconditional love.
(6b): first of all, moth did not suffer. It has itself sacrificed to be unified with his fond candle. Secondly, the word "hamono" means "as soon as", "spontaneously" or "out of a sudden". So, the moth was not planning to die that night. It was full of joy being next to the beloved. It is very important nuance to understand. Once, the dawn was to break, and the light of the candle was to be put out, moth had very little time to think; he either flies away and finds another candle at another night or he would be gone together with his beloved, as moth sees no reason to 8 Badoyi ul-Bidoya p.67; Gharoyib us-sighar p.52.
live the life without this light. The self-sacrifice is a great condition of a perfect love which Navai implies in these lines. Thirdly, "night's shelter" has no equivalent idea in the original text. Taking into consideration that the translator did not care for any formal feature of the original to be recreated in this translation, we do not see any reason for its usage.
(6c): the difference between oriental and western philosophy of life in general and love in particular is clearly seen in the translation. The stanza has two main heroes: the moth and the candleits light to be more precise. So, saying "even the moth" presupposes that moth is only one of the several other "participants". The word "compulsive" has a rather negative coloring and can hardly be applied to this context. Moth was only flying around; no any physical contact was involved till the very end when moth chooses an honorable death over meaningless life. The cause and effect was shifted in this translation, moth does not lose the candle because of its compulsive need. It was given a choice, so it made the choice. The part of nights drifting apart is a logical compensation, though.

CONCLUSION
In the paper we have analyze 14 stanzas chosen from different translations of ghazals of Alisher Navai. The choice of the translation was based on the forma, semantic and poetic together with pragmatic value of the ST and the recreation of these characteristics in the English language by three different translators. All of the 6 stanzas analyzed here were chosen to present the issue of the recreation of primary and secondary characteristics and meanings of the poem. The main idea of this paper was to point out the stages of translation whish are the most "dangerous" and tricky for a translator. From all the above mentioned we draw the following conclusions: 1. In five of six cases every stanza was translated in the English language. In the case of (5) stanza D.Daly has omitted the translation. we suppose that the lines were tricky for him to understand it as there was an idiomatic expression used in an inversed sentence with an archaic word implied; 2. None of the rhymes of the originals were recreated in any of the translations; most of the cases it was impossible because of the pivotal differences between an agglutinative language that is Uzbek and analytical English. The form and amount of words used to introduce the same ideas and concepts would most of the time require the different amount of words because of this core differences. There is hardly anything that a translator would be able to do in this situation; 3. Translations made by D.Sultanova most of the time recreates the radif, the word that comes repetitively at the end of the phrases throughout the ghazal, in English. In the translation from "P.O" there is no such an element as a radif. D.Daly keeps the radif but he replaces the words of the original with the ones that would allow him to use them eight times during the ghazal; so formally he has a radif, but in prevalent cases those are not the words given in the original; 4. The easiest and rhythmical translation to read is one made by D.Daly. Nevertheless, it should be pointed out that it does not correspond with the rhythm of the original. Still, none of the three of the translation does; 5. All of the translations contain the changes of the ideas and images of the original; However, in comparison, the most deviations and misinterpretations can be traced in the Translation by D.Daly. Being a genuine poet himself, D.Daly creates very beautiful lines that are super easy for reading. Nevertheless, the lack of the deeper knowledge of the language, culture and literature makes a very bad service to his work as a translator; 6. Almost every TT we have analyzed contains the interpretation-translation by the authors of the translation. We would never dare to hesitate in the language competence of all three translators, especially in case of D.Dalyan English speaker. Nevertheless, we proved one more time the fact that knowing only one language or even both of them is not enough. Poetry is more than just language units ordered in some presupposed way. Behind each word in a poetic text there lies a symbolic or poetic meaning that gives us pragmatic understanding of a text. The best translated text would be the one which recreates the ST in all language levels that we have discussed at the beginning of this paper; 7. The lines that contain metaphors, idioms and collocations are the ones that are most challenging to the translator. Translator, who works with a poetic text, will always be exposed to the figurative language using challenge. In case of ghazals of Alisher Navai, it is even the most important rule; 8. One of the greatest reasons of most translators' mistakes we observed in this paper were the result of misinterpretation of the original and not checking the ST using special dictionaries of works of Navai or professional who specializes in poetry of Navai; 9. Translator should be aware of symbolic images that are traditionally used in the poetry of A.Navai. Moreover, translator must always consult with special references or other professionals should any misunderstanding appear during the translation process;