Ethnicity and Local Myth 237just coincidence that their conflict begins at the sanctuary of Poseidon at Onchestos,
one of the main centers of the Boiotianethnos(Apollod. Bibl. 2.4.11; Paus. 9.37.1–3).
Heracles finally defeats Erginos (Schol. Pind.Ol. 14.2; Eur.HF48–50, 220–221, 560;
Isoc. 14.10; Diod. Sic. 4.10.2–6; Strab. 9.2.40 [C414]; Apollod. Bibl. 2.4.11; Paus.
9.17.1–2, 25.4, 26.1, 37.2–3), secures Theban supremacy over Boiotia by clogging up
the pipes of the Kopais drainage system, and thus floods the northern Boiotian basin,
which was presided by Orchomenos. Consequently, he destroyed the economic base of
Orchomenian power (Diod. Sic. 4.18.7; Paus. 9.38.7; Polyaenus,Strat. 1.3.5).
Of course, this is a foundation myth defending the hegemonic position of Thebes in
Boiotia. However, it is much more than an account rooted in the sixth centuryBC,when
Thebes began to promote her hegemonic position, or an account suitable for the fourth
centuryBCillustrating Theban supremacy at the height of her power. It reveals that
the growing regional identity of the Boiotianethnosdid not replace local identity pat-
terns, which can be traced back to preceding centuries, and that Boiotian identity did
not ever entirely displace the strong ties that bound individuals to their separatepoleis.
The regionalethnosrather provided another level of integration to be invoked in differ-
ent situations, another level of integration that could become a foundation for political
institutions on a regional base (see, in this volume, Chapter 18 by Emily Mackil, titled
“Ethnos and Koinon”).
To enforce regional cohesion by myths, the eponymous hero Boiotos had to play his
part. Some authors declare him as being Poseidon’s son (Korinna F 5PMGPage; Eur.,
TrGFV.1 F 481; Hellanikos,FGrH4 F 51; Nikokrates,FGrH376 F 5; Diod. Sic. 4.67.2,
19.53.6; Hyg.,Fab. 186), others as Arne’s son (Hellanikos,FGrH4 F 51; Nikokrates,
FGrH376 F 5; Diod. Sic. 4.67.2–4). Some declare him as being the son (Paus. 9.1.1;
Steph. Byz. s.v.Bo휄휔휏í훼) or the father (Diod. Sic. 4.67.7) of Itonos; others present
him as the grandchild of Aiolos (Asios F 2PEG;Eur.,TrGFV.1 F 481; Strab. 6.1.15
[C265]; Diod. Sic. 19.53.6; Hyg.,Fab. 186; Paus. 9.1.1). Sometimes, he is the father
of Onchestos (Hes. F 219 Merkelbach/West). Genealogically, he is thus mainly linked
to the panregional sanctuary of Poseidon at Onchestos or to eponymous heroes such as
Arne, Itonos, and Aiolos, representing Boiotian immigration.
To understand Boiotian identity, however, the myths directly linked to the eponymous
hero Boiotos or to the myths of a common homeland are not enough. How complex
ethnic identity was, how complex the attempt to describe ethnicity by investigating local
myths really is, becomes evident when understanding the far-reaching implications of
inconspicuous genealogical links. For instance Korinna, a poetess from Boiotian Tana-
gra writing in the first half of the fifth century or in the third centuryBC, proclaims
that Ogygos was a son of Boiotos (Korinna F 18PMG). Given that genealogies were
one way of expressing hierarchical relations between several communities, and assum-
ing that Ogygos is the Theban king we know from Pausanias, this genealogy demands
Theban subordination to Boiotian affairs by declaring Boiotos more ancient and thus
more legitimate than the first Theban king. The example clearly demonstrates that eth-
nic identity cannot be understood as simply supersedingpolisidentities. We have to take
into account the local myths of all the places and communities involved to understand
regional identity. We have to observe how these myths changed over time, we have to
keep in mind their variants and interconnections in order to get an idea of the regional
web of myths, to understand the changing relations between the individual communities