In recent years the subtlety and complexity of Apollonius' Ar-

gonautica have been better appreciated, but in Dr Hunter's view

the purposes and aesthetic of the epic are still not readily under-
stood and much basic analysis remains to be done. The present
book seeks both to offer some of that analysis and to place the
Argonautica within its social and intellectual context. A series of
studies deals with notions of heroism; with eros and the suffering
of Medea; the role of the divine; poetic voice and literary self-
consciousness; and the Ptolemaic context of the poem. A perva-
sive theme of the book is Apollonius' creative engagement with
Homer, and a final chapter sketches out an approach to Virgil's
use of Apollonius in the Aeneid. The Argonautica emerges as a
brilliant and original experiment.
This book is the only advanced study of the Argonautica cur-
rently available. Scholars of Greek and Roman literature, es-
pecially Alexandrian poetry and the epic, will find it essential
reading. All Greek is translated.
THE ARGONAUTICA OF APOLLONIUS
THE ARGONAUTICA OF
APOLLONIUS
Literary studies

RICHARD HUNTER
University Lecturer in Classics, University of Cambridge,
and Fellow of Pembroke College

CAMBRIDGE
UNIVERSITY PRESS
PUBLISHED BY THE PRESS SYNDICATE OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE
The Pitt Building, Trumpington Street, Cambridge, United Kingdom

CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS

The Edinburgh Building, Cambridge CB2 2RU, UK
40 West 20th Street, New York NY 10011-4211, USA
477 Williamstown Road, Port Melbourne, VIC 3207, Australia
Ruiz de Alarcon 13, 28014 Madrid, Spain
Dock House, The Waterfront, Cape Town 8001, South Africa

http ://www. cambridge.org

© Cambridge University Press 1993

This book is in copyright. Subject to statutory exception

and to the provisions of relevant collective licensing agreements,
no reproduction of any part may take place without
the written permission of Cambridge University Press.

First published 1993

First paperback edition 2004

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

Library of Congress cataloguing in publication data

Hunter, R. L. (Richard L.)
The Argonautica of Apollonius: literary studies / Richard Hunter.
p. cm.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 0 521 41372 9 hardback
1. Apollonius, Rhodius. Argonautica. 2. Argonauts (Greek
mythology) in literature. 3. Epic poetry, Greek — History and
criticism. 4. Jason (Greek mythology) in literature. 5. Medea
(Greek mythology) in literature. 6. Heroes - Greece - Mythology.
I. Title.
PA3872.Z4H78 1993
883'.01—dc20 92-13398 CIP

ISBN 0 521 41372 9 hardback

ISBN 0 521 60438 9 paperback
 Contents

Preface page IX
List of abbreviations x

1 Introduction
2 Modes of heroism 8
(i) Epic character 8
(ii) The heroism of Jason i5
(iii) Heracles 25
(iv) Hylas 36
(v) Death and some deaths 4i

3 Images of love 46
(i) Lemnos and Colchis 47
(ii) Jason's cloak 52
(iii) Suffering for love 59
(iv) Drepane 68

4 The gods and the divine 75

(i) Gods as characters 77
(ii) Phineus and prophecy 90
(iii) Hera and Thetis 96
5 The poet and his poem 101
(i) The epic voice IOI
(ii) Framing the epic 119
(iii) Similes 129
(iv) Speech and speeches ,38

6 The Argonautica and its Ptolemaic context

(i) The Argonautica and court poetry •54
(ii) Creating a new order 162
viii Contents

7 Argonautica and Aeneid 170

(i) Aeneid 3 and the 'idea' of the Argonautica 173
(ii) Circe, Medea, Dido 175
(iii) Underworlds 182
(iv) Apollonius and Virgil: an overview 188

Appendix
ev aeiCT|ia 6ir|V6K6s: Aristotle, Callimachus, Apollonius 190
Bibliography 196
General index 201
Index of passages discussed 204
 Preface

Why I have written this book is set out in the Introduction. Here is
rather the place to acknowledge debts and give thanks to those who
have helped in one way or another, and I hope that Alan Cameron,
Susan Moore, Peter Parsons and two anonymous readers for Cam-
bridge University Press will accept this small token of my gratitude
for their much larger help. Parts of this book have been inflicted on
many audiences over the past few years on both sides of the Atlantic.
I have got far more from this experience than they have; where I am
conscious of a particular debt, I have sought to acknowledge it, but
these occasions have often identified weaknesses and obscurities in
ways which I can no longer associate with a particular individual.
The final version was prepared during an idyllic few months at
Princeton University as a guest of The Council of the Humanities
and the Department of Classics; I am deeply indebted to Elaine
Fantham, Froma Zeitlin and all their colleagues for offering me the
chance to work in such a locus amoenus, for the warmth of their
welcome and the stimulus of their company.
As I read over what I have written, I recognise one debt which
outweighs all others. For many years now I have been lucky enough
to have the chance to discuss ancient literature week in and week out
with a group of Cambridge friends. Unlike the Argonauts, they
require no Catalogue but, like good Greeks, they will know who they
are; Orpheus, for example, comes in all shapes and sizes. I am very
conscious how much they have taught me, though this book may
make them wish to deny it; I offer it to them, nonetheless, with
gratitude and affection.
Earlier versions of parts of Chapters 2 and 3 appeared in Classical
Quarterly 37 (1987) and 38 (1988), and are here reprinted by permis-
sion of Oxford University Press.

Cambridge R.L.H.
February, igg2
 Abbreviations

1. The text of Apollonius is cited, unless otherwise stated, from

the Bude edition of Francis Vian (Paris 1974-81). Reference is
made to the three volumes of this edition as Vian 1,11 and in.
2. Unless otherwise specified all translations are my own. The Iliad
is normally cited from the translation by Martin Hammond
(Harmondsworth 1987) and the Odyssey from the version of
Walter Shewring (Oxford 1980).
3. Abbreviations for periodicals usually follow the system oiUAnnee
Philologique.
4. In the spelling of Greek names, ease of recognition rather than
consistency has been the principal aim. Thus, familiar names
are usually latinised, whereas less familiar ones may simply be
transliterated.
5. Modern works cited in the notes by author and date only are
listed in the Bibliography.
6. Standard abbreviations for collections of texts and works of refer-
ence are used, but the following may be noted:

CA J. U. Powell (ed.), Collectanea Alexandrina (Oxford

1925)
Ebeling H. Ebeling (ed.), Lexicon homericum (Leipzig 1880-5)
KRS G. S. Kirk, J . Raven and M. Schofield, The Presocratic
Philosophers (edn 2, Cambridge 1983)
LIMC Lexicon iconograpkicum mythologiae classicae (Zurich/
Munich 1981- )
Roscher W. H . Roscher (ed.), Ausfiihrliches Lexikon dergriechischen
und romischen Mythologie (Leipzig 1884-1937)
SH H. Lloyd-Jones and P. Parsons (eds.), Supplementum
Hellenisticum (Berlin/New York 1983)
 CHAPTER I

Introduction

The study of Hellenistic poetry in general and of Alexandrian poetry

in particular ought to stand on the threshold of a golden period. 1
On the one hand, there are the important accessions to our corpus
of texts which the papyri have brought and which are now gathered
in the splendid Supplementum Hellenisticum of Peter Parsons and Hugh
Lloyd-Jones. Although it is only Callimachus who has been a big
winner in terms of new texts, our sense of what is typical of the period
has improved dramatically; it would be churlish to complain that
Egypt has not necessarily given us what we would have wished.2
Moreover, many recent trends in literary criticism would seem to suit
well a poetry as self-conscious as that of the high Alexandrian period,
and there are indeed signs that these texts are now finding new and
sympathetic readers. Nevertheless, some attempt must be made here
to analyse the reasons for the generally poor critical reception of
Alexandrian poetry in general and of the Argonautica in particular,
both because future progress must have a context and because these
reasons will explain many structural features of the present book.
Four broad types of explanation — beyond the poor state of textual
survival — may be identified; the types do, of course, overlap at many
points.3
The first is a matter of both literary and political history. The
tendency to view Alexandria as a staging-post - or, perhaps rather,
detour - on the road between classical Athens and imperial Rome
1
On the history and development of the notion of the 'Hellenistic' cf. R. Bichler,'Hellenismus'.
Geschichte und Problematik eines Epochenbegriffs (Darmstadt 1983). I do not imagine that my use
of 'Hellenistic' and 'Alexandrian' throughout this book has been entirely consistent, but I
use the former as the more general term; I have tried to refer to poetry as 'Alexandrian' only
when there are good grounds for associating it (or its author) with Alexandria.
2
A significant fragment of a poem of Apollonius other than the Argonautica would be a precious
find indeed.
3
Any full account would presumably demand a history of taste in the twentieth century; I
hope that no one will be disappointed not to find that here.
2 Introduction

has greatly restricted the range of questions which has usually been
asked of its poetry. Seen either as a scholarly game of'fooling around'
with classical models,4 or as a series of almost prophetic foreshadow-
ings of Roman developments to come, the texts have been viewed
as mediators between other bodies of texts, rather than themselves as
significant products (and definers) of a dynamic society. There are,
of course, important exceptions in the history of scholarship, but
the broad truth of this generalisation is, I think, hard to deny. 5
Ptolemaic culture is, after all, of less importance for the cultural his-
tory of the West (as narrowly defined) than that of classical Athens
or Augustan Rome; the ultimate 'failure5 of Ptolemaic power and
culture has affected the way that the poetry of third-century Alexan-
dria has been read. The seeds and omens of this 'failure' must be
visible in Alexandrian poetry of the high period; or so, I think, did
the (often) unstated assumption run.
Secondly, Alexandrian poetry is, by and large, the product of
royal patronage; thus the Argonautica was probably composed in Alex-
andria by the Head of the Royal Library in the middle years of the
century, during the latter part of the reign of Ptolemy II Philadel-
phus.6 A rather vague distaste for 'patronage-poetry' and the prob-

1
Cf. still Hainsworth 1991.57: 'prettified verse [which] flattered its readers' pretensions
to Hellenism and the cultivated mind and did not disturb their moral complacency'.
Unsurprisingly, this assertion is not accompanied by any argument.
' Fraser 1972 is a partial exception, but serious literary criticism is not that book's concern.
On Hutchinson 1988 cf. JHS 110 (1990) 233-4.
1
For the evidence and discussion cf. Hunter 1989. 1-9. I did not there discuss Anthony
Bulloch's important argument for the priority of Arg. 2.444-5 over Call. h. 5.103, cf. AJP
98 (1977) 121-2, his edition of A. 5 at p. 41 and his note on vv. 103-4; if correct, this would
have important chronological implications, as the Callimachean poem seems to be parodied
by Asclepiades/Poseidippus at Anth. Pal. 5.202.4 ( = HE 977), which is unlikely to be later
than c. 260, cf. A. Cameron, GRBS 31(1990) 304-11. The argument is a strong one, but not,
I think, conclusive. Both Call. h. 5.103 and Arg. 2.444 echo //. 1.526 (Zeus to Thetis), a
passage which is a crucial model also at h. 5.131-6; thus the echo of the Iliad in v. 103 fits a
repeated theme of the close association of Athena and Zeus and a repeated pattern of
allusion, and certainly does not need an origin in Apollonius (where the Iliadic echo reminds
us that Zeus is behind Phineus' blindness). Bulloch's claim that 'reminiscence of Apollonius
adds various dimensions to Callimachus' text' really amounts to very little. More potent is
his observation that the placing of a proclitic immediately before the central caesura is
paralleled three times in the Argonautica (2.1203, 3.115, 4.1554), but is otherwise unexampled
in our corpus of Callimachus; he argues, with proper caution, that this seems to point to the
priority of Apollonius. This, however, leaves unanswered the problem of why Callimachus
should at this point abandon his normal practice and offer a verbatim quotation which may
well be metrically marked as such. I wonder whether the apparent stylistic oddity is not of
a piece with the repetition of 6Toc yuvai (vv. 97, 103) in characterising Athena's striking
mixture of firmness - the caesura in v. 103 isolates and highlights the negative - and
consolation. At the very least, I do not believe that the priority of either poet in this instance
has been established.
 Introduction 3
lems it raises has until recently exercised an unhealthy influence on
the attitudes of many classical scholars; this may be seen in the extra-
ordinary contortions which some critics have performed in order to
free, say, Pindar and the Augustan poets from the dreaded 'shackles'
of patronage. Where those 'shackles' have been accepted, it is the
esteem of critics for the value and success of the patron that has too
often been influential in the critical reception of the poetry honour-
ing that patron: it is one thing to write for Augustus, quite another
for Nero. Scholarship on both Pindar and imperial Latin poetry has
apparently emerged from this coyness, and a similar freedom is now
being enjoyed by Callimachus. Very little attention has, however,
been paid to the Ptolemaic context of Apollonius' epic, to the question
of why the Head of the Library should write on this subject rather
than any other. Even in formulation the question sounds strange.
Until recently it would have been thought hardly worth asking.7
Thirdly, there is what is perhaps the most discussed aspect of
Alexandrian poetry - its creative re-use of the literature of the past,
its overt and self-conscious 'textuality', the fact that, for example, the
Argonautica consistently demands to be read against Homer, indeed
can only thus be understood, and in a way which is qualitatively dif-
ferent from, say, Attic tragedy's constant engagement with archaic
epic. Related to this feature is the open display and exploitation
of the apparatus of scholarly learning which so marks this period.
These phenomena remain stumbling-blocks for many modern
readers. Despite modern parallels, the notion of 'scholarly' poetry
has seemed to many 'scholars' who themselves stand, ironically
enough, in a fairly direct line of descent from their Alexandrian
prototypes to be rather a poor thing after the public grandeur and
self-proclaimed importance of the poetry of the archaic and classical
periods. 'Callimachus is not Aeschylus' is not a very sophisticated
critical position, but it is not hard to feel it lurking behind much
that - at least until recently - has dominated the field. When a
scholar who probably did more than anyone else for the study of
Hellenistic poetry in this century was able to say of it that 'it showed
no original magnitude of subject or gravity of religious and ethical
ideas',8 it is plain that those less knowledgeable and thoughtful were
7
For an attempt at an answer cf. Chapter 6 below.
8
Pfeiffer 1955.73. Gf. Dover 19.71.lxix '[the great Hellenistic poets] did not bring their
intelligence to bear upon profound issues which excite the intellect and the emotions simul-
taneously'; what is most surprising about this assertion - above all from this scholar - is the
assumption that we could always identify such issues, particularly in another culture, and
that everyone in a culture will be 'excited' by the same issues.
 4 Introduction

unlikely to have much patience with these poems. For what it is

worth, I believe that this assertion is quite false, but we must recog-
nise that such attitudes to Alexandrian poetry arise not least from the
very different rhetoric which, broadly speaking, distinguishes Alex-
andrian poets from their predecessors - namely, a persistent and
ironic rhetoric of doubt, self-effacement, deferral. These poets have
indeed written their own reception. A poetry which so openly ad-
vertises its dependence upon the past, what has rightly been called
its sense of'perceived epigonality and artistic disjunction',9 is unsur-
prisingly damned with faint praise. A particular manifestation of this
attitude is the (sometimes unintentional) implication that Hellenistic
poetry is not 'about anything'. A familiar quotation from Wendell
Clausen may serve as illustration: 'The poetry of Callimachus and
others like him could be appreciated by only a very few readers as
learned or nearly as learned as themselves. Theirs was a bibliothecal
poetry, poetry about poetry, self-conscious and hermetic.'10 This
interpretation is, I think, derived not merely from a reading of the
poems themselves, but also from views about the circumstances of
production and narrow circulation of these texts.
Any response to such criticism must, of course, be grounded in
close readings of the relevant poems, but certain general observations
may be made. We know very little about the contemporary perfor-
mance and circulation of the poems of Callimachus and Apollonius,
even if it is in fact conceded that such knowledge could illuminate
the nature of the poems themselves. Comparative evidence shows
clearly that 'intensely intellectual' poetry11 can be enjoyed by read-
ers and listeners who are themselves not intense intellectuals, and
that such poetry does not necessarily aim exclusively at a very nar-
row audience. Both Callimachus and Apollonius, to judge from the
numerous papyri, were widely circulated in later antiquity;12 what
external evidence there is indeed points away from the more extreme
versions of the 'ivory tower' view of their poetry. More important for
present purposes, however, is the fact that the prominent use of
intertextual allusion may be (perhaps, usually is) a significant mode
for conveying often complex meaning. What that meaning is it is the
9
Bing 1988*75. There is much of interest and importance in W. R.Johnson, 'The problem
of the counter-classical sensibility and its critics', CSC A 3 (1970) 123-51.
10
GRBS 5 (1964) 183. Bulloch 1985.543 stands in the same tradition.
11
The phrase is from Bulloch 1985.542-3.
12
For Apollonius cf. Vian 1 lxxxviii-xc; Haslam 1978. Note also the remarks of Hutchinson
1988.6-7.
 Introduction 5
task of readers and critics to elucidate, but a strong sense of'historical
self-consciousness'13 does not necessarily go hand in hand with shal-
lowness of ideas. Put like this, of course, the idea seems completely
absurd, and yet it is precisely that notion which surfaces all too often
in discussions of post-classical poetry.
Pfeiffer's apparently damning observation which I have just
quoted is couched in terms ultimately derived from Aristotle's Poetics
('magnitude', neyeQos; 'gravity', airouSaTov), and this fact points to
a final feature which has worked against the reception of Alexan-
drian poetry and of the Argonautica in particular. Post-Aristotelian
'classicism' has tended to privilege (often unexamined) notions of
unity and consistency, whereas it may well be that the predominant
Alexandrian aesthetic is to be sought elsewhere. This is something
much more than a concern for variety over long stretches of text or
within a corpus; it is central to the whole conception of this poetry.
Inconsistency and unevenness reign in all aspects of the Argonautica
- narrative style, tonal level, characterisation, Realien,1* literary tex-
ture, and so forth. To what extent this may be a deliberate shattering
of received norms - specifically Aristotelian prescriptions - will be
considered later. 15 Here it will be sufficient to note that, for example,
many modern readers have found it hard to believe that Book 2, with
its long stretches of ethnography and geography, and the univer-
sally admired Book 3 belong to the same poem, hard to understand
Medea's 'character' except as a sign of singular poetic incompetence,
and hard to accept Jason's virtual disappearance from large parts of
Book 4. Such readers are, I believe, operating for the most part with
an explicit or implicit notion of unity and consistency which is held
to be 'artistically satisfying' and would be defended, if need be, by
appeal to two proofs: Homer and Virgil on one side, and 'real life' or
'common sense' on the other. Only the former need be considered
here. Homer and Virgil do, each in his own way, display an extra-
ordinarily powerful poetic vision, which manages to impose order
upon threatening disorder, where the myriad voices of the text all
seem to 'speak the same language', even when - as with Dido
and Aeneas - the gap of incomprehension is at its widest.16 In the
13
Cf. Greene 1982.17.
14
Thus, for example, whereas there is a fairly consistent attempt to reproduce 'Homeric'
sailing technology, the architecture of Aietes' palace spans both the 'Homeric' and the
contemporary.
15
Cf. the Appendix.
16
Cf. below p. 172.
 6 Introduction
Argonautica, however, the myriad voices work against each other,
creating disorder and fracture. When the poet professes himself help-
less before his task (4.1 -5), this is not merely a passing literary fancy;
it is a statement, or perhaps a particularly obvious manifestation, of
a total poetic strategy. The material, in all its diversity, imposes upon
the poet and runs uncontrollably riotous.17
If the poet lays the difficulties of his task before us, it is also true
that the Argonautica is not an easy poem to read. Written in epic
hexameters on a traditional subject of Greek heroic myth, it never-
theless seems to flaunt an awkwardness of structure, unevenness of
tone and style, and a refusal to treat tradition in traditional ways. It
is perhaps therefore not surprising that it is now finding new ad-
mirers at a time when literary criticism is concerned as never before
with the difficulties and pleasures of 'reading' (in all its manifold
senses). Thus, for example, in the last ten years the Argonautica has
been the subject of a detailed and fruitful narratological reading,18
and (with rather less argumentation) it has been claimed that
'Apollonius was what we now call a Deconstructionist'.19 This epic
is thus set fair to become - indeed has become already - a site of
critical struggle, as the process of revising the way we look at 'post-
classical' literature continues to gather pace; the current critical
interest in 'Silver Latin' epic may be an analogous phenomenon. In
one way, at least, both the criticism of Apollonius and that of the
'Silver Latin' poets have, until recently, suffered from a similar
handicap: prior assumptions about these poets' intentions and
methods and the quality of their poems have affected the way in
which the poems have been read (or not read, as the case may be).
Thus even a very sympathetic reader has recently described the
Argonautica as 'one of the finest failures in the whole of Greek litera-
ture', 20 apparently confident that 'it is patent that Apollonius con-
ceived his poem as being fundamentally Homeric . . . an attempt to
construct a Homeric epic for the Alexandrian world',21 an attempt
which then clearly failed. My own impression is that the purposes
and aesthetic of the epic are not (or at least not to everyone) 'patent',
and that much basic analysis, of the kind we take for granted with

17
For the actual control of the poet cf. Chapter 5 below.
18
Fusillo 1985.
19
John Gardner in Beye i982.x-xi.
20
Bulloch 1985.586.
21
Ibid. 589.
 Introduction 7
most ancient poetry, remains to be done before any judgement is
possible (if indeed we believe that that is a task proper to the literary
critic). This present book seeks both to offer some of that analysis and
to place the Argonautica within its social and intellectual context.
The Argonautica is a poem which invites 'readings' rather than 'a
reading', and though I hope that my overall conception of the poem
does emerge, I have tried not to conceal my awareness that criticism
of this epic is at a very early stage. It need hardly be said that if this
book can prompt others to read or re-read the Argonautica and then
take discussion beyond what is offered here, it will have fulfilled one
of its most important tasks.
 CHAPTER 2

Modes of heroism

(i) EPIC CHARACTER

For many readers of poetry 'epic' and 'heroic' are virtually synony-
mous terms; epics, after all, are about heroes. Achilles is named, and
Odysseus and Aeneas alluded to, in the opening verses of the epics
devoted to their deeds. At one level, the Argonautica, which is to tell
of the 'glorious deeds of men of old' ( I . I ) , follows the pattern, al-
though Jason does not actually enter the poem until the sixth verse.
The Argonauts, like Homer's heroes, belong to Hesiod's age of'semi-
divine heroes', and during the classical and Hellenistic periods some
of them in fact received cult honours as 'heroes' in the technical sense
of Greek ritual; the hymnic coda with which the poem ends makes a
clear allusion to this status.1 Nevertheless, many modern readers
have wished to deny 'heroic' status to Apollonius' characters and to
his poem.2 This is not just the result of a consideration of the differ-
ence between oral and written epic - that is, the belief (in my view
mistaken) that only the former can be truly 'heroic' - but also
arises from various specific contrasts between the Argonautica and the
Homeric poems.
One is the centrality of death in the Iliad, most famously expressed
in the great speeches of Achilles and the haunting words of Sarpedon
to Glaukos in Iliad 12:
'Dear friend, if we were going to live for ever, ageless and immortal, if we
survived this war, then I would not befightingin the front ranks myself or
urging you into the battle where men win glory. But as it is, whatever we
do the fates of death stand over us in a thousand forms, and no mortal can
run from them or escape them - so let us go, and either give his triumph to
another man, or he to us.' (//. 12. 322-8, trans. Hammond)
1
Cf. below pp. 128-9.
2
Cf., most recently, Hainsworth 1991.67, 'the first epic that we know of in which the heroic
element is not dominant'.

8
 Epic character 9
It is the Iliad which has most crucially shaped western notions of
epic 'heroism', and in that poem the struggle with death on the battle-
field seems decisive. In the Argonautica, however, not only do battles
play only a small part in the narrative, 3 but many of the most
important Argonauts - Heracles, Orpheus, the Dioskouroi, the sons
of Boreas - are too far removed from 'ordinary humanity' to qualify
as 'heroes' in this secondary, Iliadic sense. However nuanced the
moral and social issues fought out in the Iliad might be, the simple
fact of the ever present danger of death in combat gives Iliadic
'heroism' a stark clarity which every listener or reader can readily
grasp. In the Argonautica, however, though the threat of death con-
stantly attends the heroes, the danger is usually of being over-
whelmed pathetically by natural and irresistible forces - the sea,
fire, hunger. An Achilles or a Diomedes can fight against rivers or
divinities - they are to this extent larger than their environment -
but, as I hope this book will demonstrate, actions in the Argonautica
are too often morally layered and ambivalent for any simple con-
struction of'heroism'. Moreover, the tone and style of Apollonius'
epic are, in comparison with Homer, too various and inconsistent to
conform with the pattern derived from Homer; the jarring juxtaposi-
tions with which the poem abounds inevitably threaten to under-
mine this pattern. Further, as we shall see,4 Apollonius appears to
engage in some stylistic parody of the archaic epic, and this too
obviously affects the presentation of'heroism'.
Related to these issues of character and style is the fact that much
of the Hellenistic epic is devoted to adventures which are 'fantastic'
or 'magical' in a way which, modern scholars have argued, works
against any deeper sense of the human condition. In the Odyssey, it is
claimed, the elements of fantasy are set off against and help to define
the 'reality' of the social structures on Ithaca; they are not themselves
at the centre of the epic's poetic concerns. In the Argonautica, how-
ever, there is no such 'reality' to set against, say, Jason's magical
victory over the Earthborn, the eerie world of Circe, the terrible
landscapes of Libya, or the victory over Talos; these scenes are at the
heart of the epic, and as such destroy the assumptions upon which
epic heroism is based. Finally, there is the problem of Apollonius'
central character, Jason. The heroes of epic should be, if not idealised
or 'perfect' figures, at least admirable ones who inspire in listeners
3
Cf. below pp. 41-5.
4
Cf. below p. 108.
 io Modes of heroism

and readers an awe and a desire, however misplaced or unreal-

isable, to imitate them; heroes should be exemplars of moral and
physical action. It is on this count above all that Apollonius' Jason
is held to fail. Jason has not chosen to undertake the expedition for
heroic kleos, as a demonstration of arete, but rather the deadly task
has been imposed upon him by Pelias (i. 15-17) and its beginnings
are marked by gloom and foreboding.5
Many responses to criticism of this kind are possible. At one level
we must note ancient and modern warnings 6 against the assumption
that an epic must have a single 'hero' of extraordinary skills at its
centre. Moreover, we must be clear what precisely is at stake in
trying to decide whether Apollonius' characters are 'heroic'. If this
label is used as a heuristic device in order to help to define how
Apollonius exploits the epic tradition, then it may be positively
useful. If, however, the label is used — as it too often has been — merely
in an attempt to decry the characters of Apollonius in comparison
with those of Homer, then it is an obstacle to understanding; here,
as commonly in the literary criticism of classical texts, the analysis of
difference soon slides into the assertion of qualitative hierarchies. 7
More concretely, Apollonius did not inherit from Homer a mono-
lithic and fixed picture of'heroism', but rather a series of contesting
models in which 'heroic values' were always matters for dispute. 8
Even when allowance is made for the fact that, for their own literary
purposes, poets regularly present their predecessors as more inter-
nally consistent, less problematic, than they really are, 9 there are
clear affinities between the behaviour of heroes in both epics. Thus,
for example, the doubts and even despair to which Jason seems prone
have close parallels in the Homeric epics. Iliadic heroes are affected
by fears and anguish just as strong as those which trouble the
Argonauts, and the feeling of helplessness (amechanie) which strikes
Odysseus and his comrades after the Cyclops' first bloody meal (Od.
9.295) matches closely the various shocks which the collective of
Argonauts receives (cf. 2.408-10, 3.502-5, 4.1278-9). Despite these
obvious similarities, the figure of Jason remains for many critics a
curious puzzle, and it is to this which I now turn.
5
Cf. below p. 84. Contrast the 'simple heroism' of Theocritus 13 in which Pelias is not
mentioned; vv. 25-6 suggest that the expedition is a normal event following the start of
the new sailing season.
6
Cf, e.g., D. C. Feeney, 'Epic hero and epic fable', Comparative Literature 38 (1986) 137-58.
7
For a similar instance with Apollonius and Virgil cf. below p. 171.
8
Cf, e.g., Goldhill 1991.313.
9
Apollonius does this to Homer, and Virgil does it to Apollonius, cf. below pp. 174-5.
 Epic character 11
Apollonius' Jason has received a mixed response from modern
readers. Carspecken's destructive summary - 'Jason ... chosen leader
because his superior declines the honour, subordinate to his com-
rades, except once, in every trial of strength, skill, or courage, a great
warrior only with the help of magical charms, jealous of honour but
incapable of asserting it, passive in the face of crisis, timid and con-
fused before trouble, tearful at insult, easily despondent, gracefully
treacherous in his dealings with the love-sick Medea but cowering
before her later threats and curses, coldly efficient in the time-serving
murder of an unsuspecting child,10 reluctant even in marriage'- 11
finds many echoes throughout the critical literature. Scholars have
often differed only about whether poetic design or incompetence is
responsible for this apparent travesty of an epic hero. Where design
has been admitted, Jason has been classified in a variety of ways: he is
the quiet diplomat who works through consensus rather than force,12
his is a heroism of sex-appeal,13 he is an anti-hero,14 the embodiment of
Sceptic 'suspension of judgement', 15 °r he is 'one of us', credible and
lifelike.16 There is value in these approaches, particularly where they
appeal to previous representations of Jason which Apollonius has
exploited. Thus, for example, the Pindaric Jason deals with Pelias in
the 'diplomatic' manner commonly ascribed to Apollonius' Jason,
'letting drip the soft words in his gentle voice, he laid a foundation
of wise speech' (Pyth. 4.136-8). So too in Euripides' Medea, Jason's
opening words are a rejection of inflexibilty (vv. 446-7, cf. 621-2),
and he claims to have tried to soothe the rulers' anger (vv. 455-6),
just as in the Argonautica he has to calm Aietes down 'with gentle
(lieiAixioiai) words' (3.385-96); in both works alliance with a prin-
cess provides Jason with a solution to 'many irremediable (amecha-
nous) disasters' (TTOAAOCS . . . au|i<J>opas &|jrixowous, Med. 551-4). To
anticipate somewhat, the very literariness of Jason's character, its
overt debt to and dependence upon previous representations of this
10
This of course quite misrepresents Apollonius' treatment of Apsyrtus, although the poet does
use our knowledge of versions in which the prince was indeed a small boy, cf. below p. 21.
11
Carspecken 1952.101.
12
E.g. Herter, RE Suppl. 13.36; Vian 1978; Zanker 1987.202-3.
13
Hiibscher 1940.22-3; Beye 1969.
14
Lawall 1966; Fusillo 1985.
15
T. M. Klein, 'Apollonius'Jason: hero and scoundrel', QUCC \<$ (1983) 115-26; on this view
cf. Hunter 1988. 436 n. 6.
16
E.g. Frankel i960.1; Beye 1982.79; Zanker 1987.201; Hainsworth 1991.73, 'a person, not a
paragon'. For a more subtle version of such approaches, linking Jason to the presentation
of the divine in the epic, cf. A. Henrichs' contribution to A. Bulloch, E. Gruen, A. Long and
A. Stewart (eds.), Self-definition in the Hellenistic World (Berkeley 1992).
 12 Modes of heroism
'hero' ought to have warned against any appeals to a simple 'realism'
of character presentation. It has not done so.
Most modern criticism (in both senses) of Apollonius' Jason has
some basis, acknowledged or implicit, in the Aristotelian approach
to tragic - and, by implication, epic - character. In Chapter 15
of the Poetics Aristotle prescribes that characters should be 'morally
good' (xpr|<rrd), 'appropriate' (apMorrovTa),17 'like [us]' (6|ioia),18
and 'consistent' (oiaaAa), or at least consistently inconsistent. The
last three qualities in particular define a type of representation which
has been called 'the realist tradition'. 19 Whether or not the central
characters of Apollonius' poem conform to such a pattern is at best
doubtful. The case of Medea, who charms terrible dragons but is
frightened of a snake(4.i52i-2), is perhaps the clearest example,
and the apparently contradictory elements in her character have
long been recognised. Such a fracturing of 'good' poetic practice,
as sanctioned by Aristotle, would not surprise in this epic.20 On
the other hand, there is much in Jason's speech and action which
does form coherent patterns, when judged by 'Aristotelian' stan-
dards, and some of the other features which modern criticism has
found most puzzling can be seen as appropriate to the mythic and
ephebic pattern which Jason acts out (cf. below). Apollonius thus
breaks with the past while taking over much that the past offered.
This same tension is seen in the virtual effacement ofJason from the
central action of Book 4,21 which is very different from Achilles'
'disappearance' from long stretches of the Iliad. Achilles' 'absence'
hangs over the action with determinative force; it is a crucial orga-
nising and unifying poetic stratagem, as Homer exploits our know-
ledge and desire that Achilles must return. The organisation of
Argonautica 4 is entirely different; Medea, Peleus, Orpheus and others
take leading roles in a narrative which relies on variety and surprise.
Aristotle's combined treatment of the characters of epic and tra-
17
Young men should behave like young men etc.
18
Cf. Halliwell 1986.160-1, 'the characters should not stand at an ethical extreme, but should
be such that an audience can experience a sympathetic moral affinity with them'. Halliwell
notes that this affinity does not imply 'moral mediocrity . . . but it does impose a kind of
ethical upper limit'.
19
Cf. M. Silk in Pelling 1990.154-6.
20
Cf. below pp. 193-5. I n Christopher Gill's terminology, the 'personality-viewpoint' would
predominate over the 'character-viewpoint', cf. 'The question of character and personality
in Greek tragedy', Poetics Today 7.2 (1986) 251-73, 'The character-personality distinction'
in Pelling 1990.1-31.
21
Particularly telling is the absence of specific mention ofJason at 4.1126-7.
 Epic character 13
gedy must to some extent be dependent upon shared performative
elements - in epic, characters can speak Tor themselves', and drama
gives an important place to narrative (particularly in the messenger-
speeches);22 Plato's Ion, however humorously exaggerated the por-
trayal of Ion may be, bears eloquent witness to the importance of
'acting' in rhapsodic practice. The much greater stress in Alexandria
upon reading and upon the book as the transmitter of literature 23
may well have contributed to a less 'representational' mode of char-
acter portrayal. The change, if change there was, will again have
been a gradual one - poems were, after all, still recited. Nevertheless,
reading, silent or otherwise, may suggest a quite different concep-
tion of human character, and this factor must not be overlooked.
Moreover, two aspects of the Argonautica actively promote a non-
Aristotelian conception of character. One is the greatly reduced
prominence from Homer of direct speech; characters in fact speak
'for themselves' much less than in Homer. 24 The epic has become
much less 'dramatic'. Secondly, the world in which the Argonauts
move is very overtly and deliberately an 'unreal', fractured one in
which different times and different material cultures compete for
space. In jettisoning the stable Homeric setting, the poet creates
characters which are also less stable, more 'textual'.
A second, related, assumption of much modern discussion of Jason
is - to put it simply - that he is 'a real person' with a past and a
present and a recoverable psychology, and that his words and be-
haviour are explicable by reference to that psychology.25 The inade-
quacy of this approach to the study of character in classical drama is
now generally acknowledged,26 and it is a fortiori likely that this will
hold good for Hellenistic epic also. To our reading ofJason's charac-
ter we bring our knowledge of previous representations of him —
particularly those of Pindar and Euripides — but what he says and
does in the Argonautica is an inseparable function of the concerns of
the poem as a whole. This is to deny neither the 'natural' desire to
vivify the characters of ancient epic in accordance with our own ex-
22
I am, of course, using 'narrative' here in a loose, but common, way. Whether and how
'dramas' are 'narratives' is a different, and more difficult, question.
23
Cf. B i n g 1988 passim.
24
Gf. below pp. 138-51.
25
Cf, e.g., Beye 1982.24.
26
Cf., e.g., the contributions of Easterling and Goldhill in Pelling 1990. For the general
issues raised see the surveys by Chatman 1978.116-38, Rimmon-Kenan 1983.29-42, Bal
I985-79-93-
 14 Modes of heroism
perience and/or our imaginative reconstruction of the ancient world,
nor the fact that ancient critics tended to apply the same standards
and stereotypes to the characters of epic that they did to, say, speak-
ers in the lawcourts. Nevertheless, our first guide in this matter must
be the text of the poem itself. I choose two examples here from the
relations of Jason and Medea, not because they are 'typical', but
because the questions they raise illustrate what is at issue in the
current discussion.
In pleading for Medea's help Jason appeals to the precedent of
Ariadne and Theseus:
'Once upon a time too a kindly maiden, Ariadne daughter of Minos, res-
cued Theseus from terrible challenges; her mother was Pasiphae, daugh-
ter of Helios. She too, when Minos had laid aside his anger, embarked upon
his ship and left her homeland; the very immortals loved her, and as her
sign in the middle of the sky a crown of stars, which men call "Ariadne's
Crown", revolves all night among the heavenly constellations. Thus will the
gods show gratitude to you also, if you save so great an expedition of
excellent men . . . ' (3.997-1006)
This brilliant passage27 may well be a result of the grace which Hera
has bestowed upon Jason's words (cf. 3.920-3), for his use of the
exemplum of Ariadne seems really 'inspired'. He finds a closely
analogous situation in which a young girl, a relation of Medea,
helped a Greek hero and was rewarded by the gods. Pointed ambigu-
ity28 allows him to gloss over the fact that the hero abandoned the
girl on the way home. Ariadne is also an exemplary figure in other
parts of the poem, and so this passage fits a recurrent poetic pattern; 29
moreover, the immediately preceding verses in which Jason urges
upon Medea the image of the heroes' wives and mothers 'sitting in
lamentation upon the shore' seem in retrospect to point forward to
the image of the abandoned Ariadne. We know that Jason speaks
UTToaaaivcov, 'flattering [Medea]' (3.974), and his stress upon the
need to speak 'openly' (3.982) has alerted us to the likelihood of
deceit,30 but are we to say that Jason, like (?) Odysseus with
Nausicaa, is merely allowing Medea to hope for more than he, for
the moment, is prepared to offer? Or that he has already formulated
27
For a recent discussion cf. Goldhill 1991.301-6.
28
4>iAocvTO, ' l o v e d ' ( 1 0 0 2 ) , is t h e c l e a r e s t c a s e .
29
Cf. my note on 3.997-1004.
30
Cf. below p. 50.
 The heroism of Jason 15
a plan to 'elope' with her and then abandon her? Or that the
appropriateness, at a deep level, of the example was unknown to
him, and his words — as words in real life often are — are merely truer
than he knows? We cannot reconstruct Jason's mind beyond the
recurrent concerns of the narrative, among which deceit, persuasion
and memory are prominent. 31 Jason says nothing which makes it
literally impossible to 'believe in' him as a 'real person', but what he
does say directs us away from such belief.
A second example may be drawn from the fourth book. When
Jason seeks to calm Medea's fury by assuring her that the pact with
the Colchians 'will accomplish a trick (SoAos) by which we shall
bring Apsyrtus to destruction' (4.404—5), we can be no more sure
than Medea whether we are to understand that the plan to kill the
prince had been part of Jason's strategy all along, or whether the
idea suddenly occurs to him as an ad hoc way of calming Medea
down. Similar uncertainties are, of course, familiar from our every-
day dealings with other people. To this extent, then, Apollonius'
presentation in this scene may even be thought 'novelistic', but for
the guiding presence of the narrator's clues as to how to read the
speech, cf. 4.394 'fearful Jason spoke soothing (ueiArxiois) words',
4.410 'he spoke calming her (uTrocraaivcov)'. Time and again, then,
we see that Jason's character is presented to us not as an authorial
given, but rather through the perceptions of others, and it is this
unstable perspective which is perhaps the principal reason for mod-
ern dissatisfaction. Medea, however, is a different case: we 'know' far
more about her than we do about Jason because of the poet's lengthy
third-person descriptions of her suffering.

(11) THE HEROISM OF JASON

Jason's story is one of a number of Greek myths concerning young

heroes who undergo terrible ordeals before claiming their rightful
place in adult society; generational passage is secured by the success-
ful accomplishment of difficult tasks. Orestes and Theseus are two of
the most prominent examples, and the most relevant for Apollonius'
Jason. 32 The recent work of Pierre Vidal-Naquet and others has es-
31
Cf. below pp. 59-60.
32
Cf. Hunter 1988.448-50.
 16 Modes of heroism
tablished in new detail the connection of such myths with Greek in-
stitutions and rituals of adulthood, such as the Athenian ephebate. 33
That the Argonauts as a whole pass through some kind of'initiation 5
has long been recognised, and is clear in the repeated designation of
the heroes as 'young men', veoi,34 and in the stress throughout the
work on the weapons of guile and cunning, typical hallmarks of the
'ephebe'. The marks of this inherited pattern in the presentation of
Jason are clear to see, and this is one further reason why we cannot
abstract his 'character' from the events of which he is a part. From
one perspective at least, he is playing a role in a traditional mythic
'performance', and his words and actions must be considered in this
light. Thus, for example, the much discussed amechanie ('lack of
resource'), the doubts and occasional despair to which he and most
of the other Argonauts are prone, is strongly reminiscent of the
ambivalent insecurity of the tragic Orestes, another young man who
requires support and encouragement to accomplish difficult tasks
imposed by oracular command.
The central challenges of the expedition are presented in ways
which make their initiatory aspects clear. The information and advice
which the Argonauts receive from Phineus is structured as the help
of an 'old man' (2.411) to a 'child' (2.420). The ploughing of the field
with bronze bulls and the slaying of the Earthborn are complemen-
tary acts: the first requires heroic strength, aided by Medea's drugs,
the second relies on metis and cunning (3.1057, 1369). This comple-
mentarity points to Jason's intermediate position on the threshold of
manhood, and his preparations for the contest (3.1256—64) recall the
pyrrhiche, the armed dance particularly associated with young men in
their training for war.35 Half-way between Apollo, the model kouros,
and the warrior Ares (3.1282-3), Jason prepares to meet the great
test of his 'manhood'. The only previous killing which Jason had
done in the poem was that of the young prince Cyzicus (1.1026—35),
33
P. Vidal-Naquet, The Black Hunter (Baltimore 1986); id., ' T h e Black H u n t e r revisited',
PCPS 32 (1986) 126-44. M a n y other relevant publications m a y be traced through these
two works.
34
This seems to have special significance at 1.341 (contrast with Heracles), 458 and 1134 (cf.
Vian, Note complementaire to 1.1139), and perhaps also at 3.194 and 555 (the young asso-
ciated with metis rather than bie?). More general seem to be 1.382, 4.184, 503. There are, of
course, also age-divisions within the group (cf. 1.408, 1107, 2.263, 495). It has frequently
been remarked that roughly fifty is a standard number for initiatory groups of various kinds,
cf. Sergent 1984.174.
35
For further discussion and bibliography cf. Hunter 1988.450-1, adding J. Winkler in J.
Winkler and F. Zeitlin (eds.), Nothing to do with Dionysos? (Princeton 1990), pp. 54-7.
 The heroism of Jason 17
and that was a ghastly mistake committed in the confusion of night,
in a scene more reminiscent of the 'ephebic' Doloneia of Iliad 10 than
of the open duels of Homeric heroes.36
The main object of the expedition, the acquisition of the Golden
Fleece, is also achieved with the aid of Medea's magical powers. She
and Jason leave the Argo in the early hours, at the time when hunters
who begin while it is still dark get up (4.109-17); the significance of
this indication of the time of deceit and concealment is obvious in the
light of Vidal-Naquet's work on the 'Black Hunter'. After the Fleece
has been won, Jason's delight in it is compared to that of a parthenos
who sees the full moon caught on her fine dress (4.167-73).37 I* c a n
hardly be irrelevant that rites de passage are often characterised by
games or ritual involving sexual reversal; at the moment of Jason's
greatest success - the acquisition of both the Fleece and Medea - the
simile of the young girl marks his readiness to enter upon 'manhood'.
Thus, when he comes to exhort the crew at their departure (4.190-
205), he speaks as both 'hero' and 'hoplite', and he dons the armour
of war (4.206) to mark his new status.
The patterns considered here operate for the most part at the level
of the individual episode, and we should not expect to find a linear,
chronological, progression through a transitional rite from beginning
to end. Thus, although the victory over the Earthborn and the
acquisition of the Fleece may seem to mark Jason's successful com-
pletion of his rite, the deceitful killing of Apsyrtus clearly restages it
with frightening urgency. It is tempting to see here a further refusal
by the poet to impose neatly ordering patterns upon the poem: there
is rather a constant tension between the many such patterns visible
in the work and the striving for variety, poikilia, of both theme and
treatment. Jason's 'character' is a very striking manifestation of this
tension.
A number of scenes from the outward voyage have always been at
the heart of discussions ofJason's leadership and his 'character', and
it is in these scenes that the general account of Jason which I have
offered must find support.

36
There is an obvious temptation to label the scene 'the Dolioneia'.
37
J. M. Bremer, 'Full moon and marriage in Apollonius' Argonautica\ CQ^j (1987) 423-6,
rightly points to the erotic and nuptial associations of the full moon. The young girl of the
simile is to cross a crucial life-barrier, just as Jason does. For further resonances in this
passage - looking forward to the destruction of Jason's second bride - cf. V. Knight,
'Apollonius, Argonautica 4.167-70 and Euripides' Medea\ CQ4.1 (1991) 248-50.
 18 Modes of heroism

When the Argonauts come to select their leader (1.331-62),

Jason, 'wishing what was best for them (kKppovscov)',38 stresses the
common task ahead and urges them to choose 'the best man (6
apioros)' to lead them, regardless of anything else.39 Heracles is the
immediate (and obvious) choice - who else could be 'the best'? - but
he refuses and imposes the election ofJason, who is given the epithet
'warlike' (apfjios) and accepts 'joyfully'. Vian's interpretation of this
scene is not untypical of modern reactions: 'Jason . . . knows that,
whether he likes it or not, the leadership falls to him, but he is at the
same time aware of his inferiority to Heracles' and '[he offers Heracles
the leadership] through sincere deference and diplomacy, in the
hope that Heracles will refuse it'. 40 Of importance here is the critic's
appeal to what the poet does not say and to an explanation for action
which is based upon the concealed workings of the mind. An alterna-
tive to this approach has been to see penetrating irony at work: Jason
enters in a blaze of heroic glory - the Apollo simile of 1.307-11 - but
is immediately shown up and embarrassed, as the parodic epithet
'warlike' reveals.41 It is, however, hard to think of any Greek hero
who would not be 'shown up' when matched against Heracles. A
more fruitful approach to this scene may thus be, as so often, from
Homer.
Jason's speech, with its stress on the responsibilities of the leader
to the group as a whole, makes clear why the expedition could not
be led by Heracles, a hero of notoriously solitary and idiosyncratic
virtue (cf. section (iii) below). Jason is indeed 'the best man' (ho
aristos), if arete consists in the possession of appropriate qualities for a
particular task and involves notions of what is fitting in a particular
context. His speech both gestures towards Heracles (6 apioros) and
away from him (the closing references to communality and 'agree-
ments'). To ask whether Jason understood all this in speaking as he
does would be to make the naive assumptions about literary charac-
ter which have already been laid aside. Be that as it may, both Jason
and Heracles, like Nestor when he seeks to calm tempers in Iliad 1,
do in fact base their appeals not on a strict hierarchy of absolute
worth, but rather on a recognition of what is fitting and appropriate;
38
For other views of this word cf. Vian 1978.1029, Fantuzzi 1988.72-4.
39
C h o i c e i n 1.339 b e t w e e n ujjefcov a n d t h e m u c h less well a t t e s t e d f)|ieicov is n o t easy; those
who adopt the former are split as to whether to take it with otpiorov or with opxotpov. I am
not convinced that Frankel was wrong to plump for
40
Gnomon 46 (1974) 349, and Vian 1978.1028-9.
41
Cf. Beye 1982.31,82-3.
 The heroism of Jason 19
in so doing, Apollonius' characters both replay and resolve the issues
of the Iliadic quarrel, a quarrel which is also about the meaning of
and rights to the label 'the best'. 42 Homer's opening quarrel becomes
the opening harmony of the Argonauts. Nevertheless, in the very act
of imposing a leader, Heracles takes the lead. To the essential dis-
sonance which his presence brings to the expedition I shall return
presently,43 but I would note here that this ambiguity in his status
is marked by the ambiguity of the phrase with which the poet
characterises his decisive intervention, ueya cf)pov£cov (1.348) — 'high-
mindedly' or 'arrogantly'? 44 Probably both, as his high-minded con-
cern for what is proper is matched by his knowledge that he can
impose his will.
Before setting out, the Argonauts pass the night in feasting on
the shore (1.450-9). Not all is happy, however, as Idmon has just
prophesied not only their successful return after 'countless trials' but
also his own death. During the symposium 'the son of Aison, quite
self-absorbed ('amechanos in himself, djifjxocvos eiv eof),45 was ponder-
ing on everything, looking like one depressed (KOCTr|<pi6covTi eoiKcos)'.
Idas, presumably influenced by his appearance, accuses him of being
afraid and delivers a proud and blasphemous speech which leads to
a nasty quarrel with Idmon. What is most important here is the stress
on appearances and the conclusions drawn from them. Appearances
give no access to any simple, unmediated 'truth': you cannot tell with
any certainty what someone is thinking or what their mood is from
their facial expression.46 The description of Jason in fact recalls
literary descriptions of representations in works of art which both
invite interpretation and withhold certainty: 47 we and the Argonauts
must try to 'read' Jason, and we must therefore confront not only
the fragile basis upon which interpretations of mood and motive are
made, but also one of the differences between the usual practice of
looking at art and 'looking at' literature. Jason's 'pondering on
everything' picks up his earlier speech on the duties of a leader
42
Clauss 1983.49-51 recognises the i m p o r t a n c e of the reconciliation of Achilles a n d
A g a m e m n o n in Iliad 19 for this scene, b u t draws different conclusions.
43
Cf. below p. 26.
44
Cf. 2.19 of the arrogant Amycus, and 3.517 of Idas, at the very least a problematic
character.
45
So Frankel 1968.74-5, 'in sich selbst versunken'; contrast Vian 1978.1037. For further
discussion cf. Hunter 1988.443.
46
Cf. Hypereides fr. 196 Blass-Jensen 'men's faces carry no mark (character) of their mind
(dianoiay.
47
Cf. below pp. 56-7 on Jason's cloak.
 20 Modes of heroism
(1.339-40) and this allows us a 'favourable5 interpretation of his
silence; his comrades, however, are not lucky enough to have such
privileged, authorial information, and must therefore draw their
own conclusions.48 Here the poet's discretion exposes a fundamental
truth about the presentation of character in narrative literature.
Such an overt concern with the problems of literary character will
also call in question any attempt to construct a coherent 'human
intelligibility' for Jason.
Two further crucial scenes on the outward voyage also display
'character' as a reworking of Iliadic motifs. When the Argonauts
discover that they have left Heracles behind, a fierce argument
breaks out on board (1.1280-6). Jason, 'helpless and despairing
(&|jirixavir|i(Tiv cxT\j\Qeis) said neither one thing nor the other, but sat
deeply crushed by the grim disaster, eating his heart' (1.1286-9).
This despair after the loss of the greatest hero ought to require no
special explanation, but the abuse which Telamon heaps upon Jason
and their subsequent reconciliation clearly draw upon the quarrel
and reconciliation of Achilles and Agamemnon in the Iliad*9 The re-
working, however, stresses the Argonautic virtues of loyalty and
solidarity (cf. 1.1339-43) rather than the Iliadic pursuit of individual
honour. Gone is the Iliadic stress upon gifts of compensation which
constitute a visible and permanent sign of apology and acknowledge-
ment of wrong: Argonautic society is not like that. Jason's 'character'
is thus again at the service of the poem's broad concerns, expressed
through similarity to and difference from the Homeric poems.
Jason's 'testing' of the crew after the Clashing Rocks have been
safely passed has proved a notorious critical problem (2.607—49). To
Tiphys' up-beat and optimistic speech50 Jason replies that he should
have refused to come on the expedition, that he is weighed down by
the cares and responsibilities of leadership and that they are sur-
rounded by hostile forces.51 The poet then tells us that Jason had
48
I t m i g h t be t e m p t i n g to explain (away) ocurixocvos as 'focalised' b y I d a s , i.e. this is h o w I d a s
saw h i m , not necessarily h o w we should. Such a n interpretation, however, precisely smooths
out w h a t t h e poet h a s chosen to highlight b y m a k i n g problematic; <5cnr)x<xvos is carefully
placed before t h e explicit reference to a p p e a r a n c e s .
49
Details in Hunter 1988.444; cf. also Clauss 1983.159-61.
50 Of Tiphys' speech, vv. 611-14 are addressed to the crew at large, and vv. 615-18 specifi-
cally to Jason. Schwinge 1986.98 concludes from this that Jason needed more encourage-
ment than the others; maybe, but the most important thing is that it is his expedition and
he upon whom Pelias' charge rests.
51
For the problems posed by HEIAIXIOIS eiTEeaai 7rapapAr)6r|V in 2.621 cf. Hunter 1988.446-7.
At 3.687 a rather similar 'testing' speech is introduced specifically by the poet as 'guileful'
(SoAcoi).
 The heroism of Jason 21
spoken 'testing (peiromenos) the heroes'. The crew in fact shouts
encouragement, 'Jason's heart within him warmed', and he now
echoes Tiphys' optimism; no more is said. Just as Agamemnon's
near disastrous testing of the troops comes immediately before the
real fighting of the Iliad, so Jason's peira follows the passing of the
Clashing Rocks which marks the end of the major dangers of
the outward journey and the beginning of the Colchian section of the
poem. The scene is a vital confirmation of the Argonauts' willingness
to press on with the task they have begun, and it takes the form of a
reprise of the scene ofJason's election. Here, as there, he stresses the
responsibilities of power (1.339, 2.631 -7); here he laments its loneli-
ness, as there he had declared the solidarity of the group; the affir-
mation of loyalty and support which he receives here renews the
command which was entrusted to him then.
It is not, however, merely the situation and context which recalls
the Homeric peira; so too does Jason's confession of ate (2.623, cf. //.
2.111). On the other hand, his statement that he should have refused
to accede to Pelias' command 'even if it meant a pitiless death, my
body broken limb from limb' suggests to us a famous dismember-
ment in the Argonautic story — the butchering of the young Apsyrtus
which allowed the Greeks to escape from the pursuing Colchians.
The safe return for which Jason craves was, in most versions of
the myth, bought at a price like that for which he claims to have
been prepared to pass up the whole expedition. In the Argonautica
Apsyrtus is a young man killed far from Colchis, but his death
contains clear resonances of the 'butchering' version.52 Here, then, is
a further clear instance where Jason's words cannot simply be ex-
plained by appeal to his 'character' or his 'psychology'; they are
determined rather by a whole series of overlapping poetic concerns.
In stressing the contrast between the personal worries of an individ-
ual and the greater anxieties on behalf of the collective which weigh
upon a leader, Jason strikes a pose we associate with Agamemnon
(cf. //. 10.iff.) or Odysseus, but by directing this appeal to the
helmsman, who is responsible for everybody's safe voyage and who
is the very last person who should be charged with such selfishness,
the element of provocation or testing in the words is laid bare. Very
soon afterwards, in fact, Tiphys' death leads the crew to despair that
they will ever return safely (2.862-3). As with the quarrel with Idas
52
Gf. 4.460, Apsyrtus is like a 'tender child'; 4.477, ritual mutilation recalling the dismember-
ment of the young child.
 22 Modes of heroism

in Book i, therefore, this scene has been shaped to lay emphasis upon
the nature of literary story-telling, upon the extent to which we are
dependent on the poet's 'generosity' for the interpretation of events.
The classic model for such a scene was the peira of Agamemnon in
Iliad 2, and that is why that scene provides the framework here. This,
much more than a unitary or developing view of Jason's character,
was at the heart of Apollonius' poetic concerns.
It is a function of Apollonius' difference from Homer that the
familiar 'heroic' language of arete and time is not nearly so prominent
in the Argonautica as in the Homeric epics or in Attic tragedy. At a
key moment, however, the old language re-emerges, and in a way
which well illustrates the layered effect of Apollonius' text.
Aietes decides to test his visitors' might, their |3ir|, to make sure - as
he alleges - that he will be giving the fleece to good (eaOAoi) men,
rather than to men worse (xepties) than himself (3-399-406). He
concludes by observing that this is only what one would expect:
'8T) yap
avSp' ayaOov yeyacoTa KOCKcoTEpcoi avepi eT£ai.'
'For it would not be seemly (lit."not eikos") for a man of good
(agathos) birth to yield to an inferior (lit. "one more kakos").'
(3.420-1 ) 53
What follows has surprised many critics:
So Aietes spoke. Jason sat where he was, his eyes fixed in silence on
the ground before his feet, unable to speak, at a loss as to how to deal
with his wretched situation (durixavecov KOK6TT|TI) . For a long time he
turned over and over what he should do: it was impossible to accept
with confidence as the challenge seemed extraordinary. At last he
replied [with crafty words]54:
'Aietes, you have every right (8iKT|i) to place this hard constraint
upon me. Therefore I shall risk the challenge, terrible (CnT6p<|>iaAov)
though it is, even if I am fated to die; for there is nothing worse for
mankind than the cruel (KOKfjs) necessity which forces me to come
here at the behest of a king.' (3.422-31)
Here is another silence which invites interpretation: Jason is amecha-
neon kakoteti, 'helpless in his wretched plight' or 'helpless because of
his cowardice', with an ironic echo of Aietes' kakos language. (There
is a closely parallel ambivalence in this phrase again at 2.410 in the
description of the Argonauts' stunned response to Phineus' account
53
Cf. 3.437-8 'so that another man may shrink from attacking a better hero (dpeiovoc (fxxrra)'.
54
The transmitted KepSaAsoiaiv seems impossible, but cf. n. 57 below.
 The heroism of Jason 23
of the dangers they must face.) Here even authorial interpretation
offers no sure guide to 'character.' 55 The ambivalence also serves to
point again to the different interpretations of the principals involved.
Jason's silence may well indicate to Aietes a different form ofkakotes
than it will to us or to his fellow Argonauts; no authorial guidance
can control such multiple reactions, whether of the characters or the
readers.
Aietes' final observation (3.420-1, quoted above) also mocks tra-
ditional heroic values; this tyrant knows how the dice are loaded.
There is, however, also a much more subtle use of the traditional
language here. The language of arete and kakia is particularly at
home in the context of apeira or test. In Odyssey 21, for example, one
of the suitors explains to Penelope why the disguised Odysseus should
not be allowed to attempt to string the bow:
'Wise Penelope, daughter of Icarius, we have no fear that this man will wed
you - that would indeed be past all reason (lit. "not eikos"). But we feel
shame at what might be said by Achaean men and women - the common
talk of the baser ones (lit. "the more kakos"): "See these men who are
wooing a hero's wife! What feeble creatures they are to him (lit. 'much
worse', xsipoves), quite unable to string his bow! Yet a man from nowhere,
a roving beggar, has come and strung the bow easily and shot through the
iron." So all the gossips' tongues will wag, and that would mean our
humiliation.' (Od. 21.321-9, trans. Shewring)
Penelope answers that the stranger looks well built and (21.335)
'claims to be the son of an agathos father'. This passage shows clearly
how Aietes presents the challenge of the bulls in very traditional
terms. When Jason finally replies, he seems to acknowledge the
fairness of the king's procedure. Huperphialos, however, a word asso-
ciated with the arrogance of Amycus and Aietes,56 clearly hints that
the test goes beyond what an agathos should require or be expected
to do. It thus unmasks the hollowness of Aietes' appeal to traditional
heroic values. Moreover, it also colours Jason's acknowledgement of
the fairness of Aietes' demand: Jason answers in the same 'code'
which the king has used, but makes it clear that the test is neither
fair nor agathon.57 He has, however, no choice in the matter: he is
helpless in the face of necessity.
55
Elsewhere KOKOTTIS is n o w h e r e u n a m b i g u o u s l y ' c o w a r d i c e ' , b u t this is h a r d l y decisive.
56
Cf. 2.54, 129, 758, 3.15, 4.1083; elsewhere only 1.1334 (Telamon's words) and 2.1243 (the
Sapeires).
57
If this reading is correct, then KEpSocAeoicri in 426 might just conceivably be sound, but I
remain unconfident about it.
24 Modes of heroism
In considering the epic as a whole, a very striking difference from
the Homeric poems lies in the relationship between Jason and the
other Argonauts. Whereas Odysseus' cunning and capacity for en-
durance strongly differentiate him from his largely anonymous crew,
Jason, often amechanos rather than polumechanos, is marked by the
absence of extraordinary intelligence and the supernatural skills pos-
sessed by some of the most prominent Argonauts. The difference
between Jason and his comrades is also one of freedom of action.
When Jason seeks to calm Aietes' anger, he pleads lack of free choice:
'ou TI yap auTcos
&OTU T6OV KOCl ScbliOcO' lKdvO|i8V, &S TTOU
OUSE UEV IEUEVOI. TIS 8' av Tocjov
TAairi EKCOV oOveTov ETTI KTspas; aAAa pie Saiiacov
Kai KpuepT] (3aaiA*nos drraaOaAou cbpaev 6<|>eT|jif).5
'We have not come to your city and palace for the reason you no
doubt suppose; we did not even wish to come here. Who would be so
reckless as to choose to cross so great a stretch of sea to take another
man's possession? But I have been sent by a god and the chilling
command of a wicked king.' (3.386-90)

The answer to the question 'Who would be so reckless etc.?' is,

of course, 'Every Argonaut except Jason', as the change from the
plurals of 387-8 to the singular of 389 clearly hints. To this extent at
least, Jason's position resembles that of Agamemnon in the Iliad.
During the quarrel in Book 1, Achilles tells Agamemnon that he and
the other Greeks have come, not because the Trojans have harmed
them, but 'so that you may rejoice, bringing honour to you and
Menelaos' (//. 1.158-9).
Jason's difference from Odysseus is matched by the prominence
given to ideas of communal solidarity and mutual interdependence,
solemnified by the building of a shrine to Homonoia ('Likeness of
Mind') and an oath 'always to help one another in solidarity of mind
(6|iO9poauvr|iai vooio)' (2.715-16). Jason's words to his comrades as
they sit concealed in the Colchian marshes are virtually a program-
matic rejection of Odyssean behaviour:
'GO <|>IAOI, fJToi syob UEV 6 |ioi EmavSavEi auTcoi
o, TOO 8' uuui TSAOS Kpr|f]vai EOIKE.
y a p XP6lc^» ^uvoi 6E TE UOOOI Eaai
Tiaaiv opicos* 6 8E aTya voov |3ouAf|v T ' oaTEpuKcov
Kai VOOTOU TOV8ECTTOAOVOTOS ocrroupas.'
 Heracles 25
'Friends, I shall tell you the plan which I myself favour, but it is for
you to give it your assent; for common is our need, and common to all
the right to speak. Let him who holds back his view and counsel in
silence know that he alone deprives this expedition of its safe return.'

Jason's subsequent praise ofmuthos, however, does associate him with

familiar Odyssean virtues, and we must not see this as further evi-
dence of Jason's lack of martial 'heroism'. There is no suggestion
in this passage that he has anything against the use of force if
more peaceful methods prove fruitless.58 Indeed the plan which he
proposes — first to test Aietes by asking for the Fleece back — does not
seem too different from what we are told of the action of the archaic
epic Cypria in which, after an initial engagement, 'the Greeks sent an
embassy to the Trojans, demanding back Helen and her property'. 59
My analysis ofJason has stressed that such discussion cannot take
place in isolation both from Apollonius' general concerns and from
detailed textual analysis, as it is clear that the episodic character of
the work gives an independence to individual scenes of a kind gener-
ally unfamiliar from Homer. In different scenes Apollonius experi-
ments with his heritage in different ways, and through an aesthetic
which can appear strange when viewed with classicising eyes. Misun-
derstanding is too often the result of an assumption that Apollonius
wanted to be like Homer (or, rather, certain visions of Homer), but
somehow (probably through lack of talent) failed in the attempt.

(Hi) HERACLES

The greatest hero among the Argonauts is Heracles, the greatest of

all Greek heroes; the crew is in no doubt how things would have
turned out differently had he not been lost to them in Mysia. 60 With
58
For a quite different view cf. Schwinge 1986.106-8. A n instructive case is 4.338-41 where
the 'few Minyans' avoid a battle in which they would be o u t n u m b e r e d by coming to a
bargain with the Colchians; Vian ad loc. properly cites the Homeric verbal model of//.
13.739 (Polydamas to Hector) a n d comments 'cette conduite heroique n'est pas celle des
Argonautes d' Apollonios'. I n the Iliad, however, Polydamas precisely urges that a battle
in which you are o u t n u m b e r e d is not a good idea, a n d Hector accepts this wise advice. This
is a good instance of where a n over-simplified view of Homeric 'heroism' can lead to mis-
readings of Apollonius.
59
Cf. Proclus' s u m m a r y p r i n t e d o n p . 105 of Vol. v of the O C T H o m e r [ = Epicorum Graecorum
Fragmenta p . 32 Davies].
60
Cf. 2.145-50, 774-95, 3.1232-4. His loss is marked at the very opening of Book 2 by
Amycus' challenge to fight 'the best man' (2.15, cf. above p. 18); Heracles was, of course,
also the divine patron of boxers. Cf. //. 7.50-1 where Helenus' instruction to Hector to
challenge 'the best of the Achaeans' points to Achilles' absence; Margolies 1981.140.
 26 Modes of heroism

his greatness came a protean versatility. As many recent studies have

emphasised, Heracles, the civiliser of mankind, is also wild and
brutish, long-suffering, given to fits of violent temper, deeply tragic
and grotesquely comic, the hero who returned from the Underworld
to become a god; as Walter Burkert puts it, he 'contains his own
antithesis. The glorious hero is also a slave, a woman, and a mad-
man.' 61 From the divine Heracles the Ptolemaic dynasty claimed
descent, and Heracles figures prominently in the literature written
under Ptolemaic patronage. 62 A comparison, however, of his amus-
ing appearance in Callimachus' Hymn to Artemis (vv. 145-61), where
the needs of his stomach determine the low cunning with which he
greets the goddess as she returns from the hunt, and the picture of
him in Theocritus' Encomium of Ptolemy (17.26-33), accompanied
to bed after a symposium on Olympus by Ptolemy Soter and Alex-
ander, shows that poets were not straitjacketed in the ways in which
they could present the great hero; considerations of genre and liter-
ary purpose were as important as ever.
Heracles is anomalous among the Argonauts. The expedition
takes place under the protection of Hera, but from Homer onwards 63
Hera's persecution of Heracles is a familiar fact, and Apollonius does
not seek to hide it (cf. 1.996-7); his very presence, therefore, is a
dissonant element in the expedition. Moreover, no theme is more
insistent throughout the poem than that of 'the common good',
'mutual assistance', 'collective virtues', but Heracles is traditionally
a figure of solitary virtue and suffering - he is ill at ease in the
socialised community. When he joins the expedition he is in the
midst of his labours (1.122-32), and in his last appearance in
the poem he is on his way to Olympus; he is not a young man like
the others, and the expedition does not carry the same meaning for
him as for them. Some versions of the story indeed omitted him from
the crew, or made the Argo refuse to carry him because he was too
heavy;64 this latter version is a physical embodiment of his difference
- he unbalances what is most important in the boat.
The expedition follows in Heracles' tracks, visiting some of the
61
Burkert 1985.210.
62
Cf. Gow's note on Theocr. 17.26; Griffiths 1979, Index s.v. Heracles. For a statuette of
Philadelphus as Heracles cf. C. C. Edgar, JHS 26 (1906) 281-2.
63
Cf. //. 18.119, Hes. Theog. 315.
64
Cf. 1.532-3, I 1.1289-91. Arist. Pol. 3.i284a22~5 reports that the Argonauts left him
behind because the Argo did not wish to take him 'because he far surpassed (CnreppdAAovTa
TTOAU) the sailors'; this is perhaps best taken as a further reference to his weight.
 Heracles 27
places he visited and doing some of the things he did; he acts as an
inimitable exemplar, 65 a fact which Valerius Flaccus' poem makes
explicit (Arg. 1.33-6). Thus, for example, he shoots down the
Earthborn giants as they hurl boulders (1.992-7) in a foreshadow-
ing, with significant differences, of Jason's battle with the other
Earthborn. In Book 2 Lycus tells the crew how Heracles visited his
country, won a boxing match, and subdued various neighbouring
peoples for his father the king; this latter feat foreshadows Jason's
offer to Aietes to assist him in his frontier wars (3.352-3, 392-5).
Most striking of all is the parallel and contrast between Jason's
acquisition of the Fleece and Heracles' successful theft of the Golden
Apples of the Hesperides.66
In Homer, Heracles is generally represented as a violent and
successful mortal hero of an earlier generation. Various stories sug-
gest both his temper and his greed for possessions,67 and he was quite
prepared to challenge the gods, if need be.68 In the Underworld,
however, Odysseus sees a different Heracles:
'TOV 5e IJIEV €ic7sv6r|aa
6i8coAov auTos 6e |J£T' dOavocToiai deolai
ev OaAir)is KCU ex ei KaAAioxpupov "H(3r|v'
'Then I saw the mighty Heracles, a phantom; he himself enjoys
delightful banquets among the immortal gods and has as wife fair-
ankledHebe' (Od. 11.601-3)
Verses 602-3 were athetised in later antiquity and modern scholars
have argued that they rely upon post-Homeric notions of the after-
life.69 There is, however, no good reason to doubt that Apollonius
knew them in this place in Homer, and we shall see that they are
probably echoed as Heracles leaves the poem in Book 4.70 When
65
S t a n d a r d n o w is Feeney 1986 (summarised in Feeney 1 9 9 1 . 9 5 - 8 ) ; cf. also H a n d e l 1 9 5 4 . 2 8 -
9, Galinsky 1972.111-12, Beye 1982.117, Fusillo 1985.51, Goldhill 1 9 9 1 . 3 1 4 - 1 5 .
66
Cf. below p. 29. Valerius compares Jason carrying the Fleece to Hercules putting on the
lion-skin for the first time (Arg. 8.125-6). He probably took his cue from 4.179-80, where
Jason throws the fleece over his left shoulder and it reaches the ground (7ro8r)V6K6s);
7ro5r|veKr)s is used of a lion-skin at //. 10.24 ( = 10.178) and again by Apollonius of a
bull-hide cloak at 1.324.
67
Cf. //. 5.638-42, Od. 21.20-30.
68
Cf. //. 5.392-404, Od. 8.224-5.
69
Cf. I Od. 11.385; E. Rohde, Psyche2 (Freiburg 1898) 1 6 0 - 1 ; J. Bremmer, The Early Greek
Concept of the Soul (Princeton 1983) 81-2; Heubeck ad loc. Verse 604 seems to be post-
Aristarchean, cf. G. M. Boiling, The External Evidencefor Interpolation in Homer (Oxford 1925)
212.
70
Cf. below pp. 31-2.
 28 Modes of heroism

Heracles speaks to Odysseus in the Underworld, he recognises a

similarity between them:
'Son of Laertes, subtle Odysseus - you too, then, it seems, are trailing with
you some such evil fortune as I endured while I saw the sunlight. My father
was Zeus the son of Cronos, yet I suffered measureless misery. I was made
to serve a man much beneath me who forced upon me some fearsome tasks.
Indeed he once sent me even here to fetch away the hound of Hades, for he
thought that no task could be more fearsome for me than that. But I
brought the hound out of Hades' house and up to earth, because Hermes
helped me on my way, and gleaming-eyed Athene.' (Od. 11.617-26, trans.
Shewring)
Odysseus is following in Heracles' footsteps, just as Jason is to do; 71
both are forced by 'lesser men' to grievous challenges.
The passages which follow the two occasions when the Argonauts
'lose' Heracles — in Mysia when he disappears in search of Hylas, and
in North Africa when he makes a ghostly reappearance - emphasise
the extent of the loss by presenting other Argonauts acting out
'Heraclean' roles.
The fight between Amycus and Polydeuces with which Book 2
opens is presented as a clash between the forces of Olympian fairness
and justice and dark, pre-Olympian chthonic forces, or as a kind of
Gigantomachy, as suggested by the comparison of Amycus to 'a son
of Typhoeus or a Giant' (2.38-40); 72 as a 'sporting contest' won by
skill and cleverness over brute force (2.70—6) it foreshadows Jason's
'Gigantomachy' which concludes Book 3. Typhoeus and the Giants
were among the pests against which the great civiliser Heracles had
fought;73 Polydeuces therefore here replays the struggles of the hero
whom the Argonauts have just lost. Polydeuces' gleaming erotic
power, 'like the star in the heavens, whose rays are the most beautiful
when it appears in the dark evening sky' (2.40-2), and the clear
foreshadowing in the episode of his divine status (cf. 2.161-3) do not
merely replay the epinician themes, most familiar from Pindar, of the
immortality and divine grace conferred on the athletic victor by his
71
For the Argonautic voyage as a katabasis cf. below pp. 182-8.
72
Cf. Valerius Flaccus 4.236-8; Frankel 1968.157-8. The great noise of the fight (2.83-4)
may be seen as a humorous reworking of the great noise of cosmic battles (cf. Hes. Theog.
678-83,858).
73
Typhoeus: Bond on Eur. HF 1271-2; A. Loyen, 'Hercule et Typhee' in Melanges . . . Alfred
Ernout (Paris 1940) 237-45. Giants: Pind. Nem 1.67; F. Vian, REG 65 (1952) 11 —15.
 Heracles 29
victory and the poems which celebrate it,74 but are also a further
Heraclean motif: like Heracles, Polydeuces wins divine status for
ridding the earth of a pestilential monster.
The second site where Heracles is lost is around Lake Triton, near
the town of Euhesperides (modern Benghazi). 75 Here the Argonauts
arrive thirsty and exhausted after having carried the Argo on their
shoulders for twelve days and nights, and are saved by the fact that
just previously Heracles had been there to gather the golden apples
of the Hesperides. The Argonauts come upon the already rotting
body of the serpent, Ladon, which guarded the apples and which
Heracles had killed, and they drink from a spring which had been
caused to well up from the earth by a savage kick from the great
hero.
The Argonauts' difference from and dependence upon Heracles is
underlined by the contrast between the latter's brutal method of
winning the apples (lifjAa) and the magic powers upon which Jason
relied to gain the fleece of a sheep (|if)Aov) by overcoming the
Colchian dragon; both dragons were the children of Earth. 76 That
the site of the golden apples is imagined to be a shrine with the
Hesperides as sacral attendants reinforces the parallelism between
the Colchian Grove and the Libyan scene.77 The Argonauts, who
arrived parched and looked for a spring 'like mad dogs' (4.1393), are
saved by Heracles, the 'most dog-like' (6 KUVTCCTOS, 4.1433).78 This
is Heracles' last action. He is already on his way to Olympus as
the divine dAe£iKaKos, 'averter of evil', and saviour.79 This is what
Lynceus' report that 'no searcher would come across [Heracles]
again' (4.1481-2) means: he has disappeared from the poem, leaving
only visible signs (4.1445-6) and aitia behind him.80 A particularly
74
F o r further discussion cf. H u n t e r 1 9 9 1 b . 8 7 - 90, a n d for t h e ' P t o l e m a i c ' aspect of this scene
below p p . 1 6 0 - 1 .
75
Gf. Pliny, 7 / ^ 5 . 5 . 3 1 , D e l a g e 1 9 3 0 . 2 6 1 - 7 0 , V i a n 111 5 7 - 6 4 a n d Note complementaire t o 4.1399,
S. Ferri, Quaderni di archeologia della Libia 8 (1976) 1 1 - 1 7 ; cf. further below p p . 1 5 2 - 3 .
76
Cf. 2 . 1 2 0 9 - 1 3 , 4 . 1 3 9 8 x ^ o v i o s 6<{>is.
77
4 . 1 3 9 6 iepov TTESOV, 1 3 9 9 'EoTTEpiSes TTOITTVUOV, cf. P l i n y , HN 5.5.31 lucus sacer. F o r t h e
C o l c h i a n g r o v e cf. 2 . 1 2 6 8 - 9 , 4 . 1 0 0 , 123 iepov OCACTOS.
78
Dog imagery is also operative at 4.1442 614/ni KocpxotAeos, cf. my note on 3.1057-60.
79
Cf. Feeney 1986.63, Herter 1955.286. IcoTf)p is found as a title of Heracles on second-
century Thasos (AESuppl. 3.1004).
80
Whatever the origin of the serpent's name, Ladon must be an implicit aition for the river
Lathon or Lethon which flowed in the area (cf. below p. 31). At 4.1397, EICTETI TTOU X ^ O V
KTA., the standard language of aetiology (EICTETI VOV etc.) is perverted to show how Heracles
has changed the very course of the poem.
 30 Modes of heroism

pointed marker of this is the poem's complete silence about Heracles'

wrestling with Triton. The hero was said to have wrestled with this
god, or his double Nereus, to force out of him directions as to how to
get to the apples;81 by the time the poet introduces Triton, however,
both Heracles and all memory of this encounter have gone from the
poem.
Very striking in this scene is the ignorance of the Hesperides,
divine beings who apparently do not even know Heracles when they
see him and seem to know nothing of the Argonauts. 82 That they are
unsure of the origin of Heracles' creation of the spring, 6Tri<|>pa<76eis
fj Kai 6eoO evvecririiai, 'either because he had thought of it or because
a god planted the idea in his mind' (4.1445) - a verse which presents
Heracles as like the savage Cyclops - 83 assigns to them the same
uncertainties as mortals endure and stresses the ambiguities of their
being. Aigle's speech in which she describes Heracles' Visit' is in
fact reminiscent of the rude welcome which Dionysus, dressed as
Heracles, receives in the Underworld in Aristophanes' Frogs.M There
Heracles was best remembered for his theft of the watch-dog
Cerberus, and the word-order at 4.1433-4, 6s TIS dTTOupas | 9poupov
691V ^cof^s, 'who took away the guardian snake from life', plays with
the idea that Heracles has in fact stolen the Hesperides' beloved
snake.85 An echo of comedy itself reflects Heracles' many-sidedness,
a hero as comic as he is epic.
If we are indeed to think of Heracles in the Underworld at this
point, this would not be the only indication that this part of Libya,
like the Syrtis, is a kind of Hades. Only Lynceus is able to catch a
very distant glimpse of Heracles, and he could see beneath the earth
(1.153-5). When Odysseus was in the Underworld he saw the eidolon
of Heracles, whereas the hero himself was already in heaven. Apol-

81
Sources vary betwen Triton and Nereus as Heracles' opponent (cf. RE JA.257-61, Suppl.
3.1070-1, Bond on Eur. HF 400-2), but this is not significant; in the context we cannot
fail to connect Heracles and Triton.
82
Cf. Ibscher 1939.163. Their total ignorance is uncertain in view of 4.1432-3, but those
verses may merely take up Orpheus' plea. The echo of the heroines (cf. 4.1320) can mark
contrast as well as similarity.
83
Cf. Od. 9.339 (the Cyclops b r i n g i n g all his sheep into t h e cave), f\ T I oicr&uevos, f\ Kai 6eos
a>S EKeAeuaEV 'either because of some t h o u g h t , o r a t this instruction of a god'.
84
Cf. e s p . Frogs 5 4 9 6 Trocvoupyos, 5 7 1 uiccpd <}>&puy£.
85
N o t e also Frogs 4 6 8 . . . w i x o u Aa(3cov ~ 4 . 1 4 3 5 . . . OIXET' asipauevos. I w o u l d like t o
believe that the second half of that verse, oruyepov 6' &xos ocuui A&Enrrai, echoes Frogs 1353
(from the 'Euripidean' monody about the lost cock) epoi 5* axe' &X6a KOTEAnre.
 Heracles 31
lonius has elaborated this Odyssean scene into the marvellous simile
describing Lynceus' vision of Heracles:
ocTdcp T O T E y ' '

liouvos 8 6 dTTeipeairis T T | A O U X ^ O V O S STCTCCTO AuyKsOs

TCOS l6S8lV, COS T I S TE V6COI 6VI fjliCCTl |if|VT|V
f\ T6EV f\

At that time only Lynceus thought that he saw Heracles far off across
the endless land, as one sees or thinks he sees the moon shrouded in
mist on the first day of a new month. (4.1477-80)

Virgil caught this history and resonance of the simile when he trans-
ferred it to Aeneas' sight of the ghost of Dido in the Underworld (Aen.
6.451-4). Moreover, the serpent Ladon must be connected with the
river Lathon or Lethon which flowed, perhaps underground, at
Euhesperides. This name inevitably recalls Lethe, the great river or
lake of the Underworld;87 here then, at the limits of life and death,
Heracles and the Argonauts finally part company.
It is hardly surprising in the present connection that two Ar-
gonauts should meet their death in such a setting. Of particular
interest is the death of Mopsus from snakebite.88 Heracles had killed
a 'chthonic serpent', a xQovnos 691s (4.1398); Mopsus is killed by a
'dread serpent' (Seivos 691s, 4.1506), one of the brood which arose
spontaneously from drops of Gorgon's blood which fell on the land
(4.1513-17). There is a justice to the revenge perpetrated by the
'race of snakes' (4.1517) which perhaps recalls the poison motif in
Sophocles' Trachiniae. Heracles killed the hydra and used its poison
to kill Ladon; now one of the Argonauts — for Heracles himself has
passed beyond revenge — is killed as recompense by a poisonous snake
whose origin is traced to the blood of another murdered snaky hor-
ror. The Colchian snake which lost its precious fleece is also in part
revenged, as its creation too was traced by the poet to the bloody

86
noOvov is the r e a d i n g of nearly all witnesses. Beye 1982.97 finds it 'so typical' t h a t Heracles
was all b y himself, b u t the nominative stresses t h a t Lynceus' magical powers were necessary
in order to catch a final glimpse of the hero.
87
Lucan at least connected the two (BC 9.355-6), cf. RE 12.2144. Lethon is also connected
with the Underworld by Iulius Solinus, a writer of memorabilia of the third or fourth century
A.D. (27.54 Mommsen). He did not find this in Pliny, his usual source; he may be drawing
on Lucan (so Housman), but there may also have been a wider tradition now lost to us.
88
On the identification of the snake cf. Herter 1955.398, Vian, Note complimentaire to 4.1531;
Dickie 1990.283-4.
 32 Modes of heroism

death of a monster (2.1209-15). Here again the point is made by

contrast. Ladon was ever-watchful (4.1434), but Mopsus' snake was
normally drowsy and passive (4.1505-7); when the Argonauts ar-
rived, Ladon was lifeless but for the tip of his tail, whereas Mopsus
treads precisely on the snake's back,89 in a fatal action which recalls
and reverses Heracles' life-giving creation of the spring. Ladon's
wounds are rotting before he is quite dead (4.1405), and Mopsus rots
instantly and completely; the Hesperides mourn for their serpent as
the Argonauts mourn for Mopsus (4.1532-6). More uncertain per-
haps is a further consideration. Later tradition, but perhaps going
back to Eratosthenes, catasterised the serpent of the Hesperides as
the constellation Drakon and identified the figure in the sky 'above'
Drakon, the engonasin or 'man on his knees' - also called eidolon, imago
- as Heracles stepping on the serpent in the act of killing it.90 It
is tempting to believe that Mopsus re-enacts this version of the
death of the serpent; his death would then, in a sense, be Heracles'
death. The relevant astronomical interpretation cannot certainly be
traced as early as Apollonius, but only an excess of scepticism would
deny that it is likely to have been known; Aratus' description of the
eidolon (cf. Od. 11.602 of Heracles) indeed suggests the suffering hero,
uoyeovTi . . . 6cv8pi eoiKos | ei8coAov, 'a phantom resembling a man
labouring hard' {Phaen. 63-4) .91
Apollonius' Heracles is not, as so much recent criticism would
have it, Jason's polar opposite, a straight-talking, unsubtle hero who
throws Jason's shortcomings into relief. In refusing the leadership of
the expedition he had shown a sensible realisation of what is re-
quired, as well as exuding the menace of physical threat.92 Moreover,
as the Argonauts approach their meeting with the sons of Phrixos,
the metis by which Heracles drove off the Stymphalian birds is
recalled (2.1052-7), and thus the use of guile is sanctioned by the
memory of Heracles just as that part of the epic where 'guile' is most
important begins. The contrast between the two heroes is, of course,

89
N o t e 1403 OCKVT)CTTIV ~ 1518 OKOVOOCV.
90
Cf. A r a t u s , Phaen. 6 3 - 7 0 , Eratosthenes, Catast. i i i - i v R o b e r t .
91
N o t e also Phaen. 65 o u 8 ' OTIVI KpeuccTai KEIVOS TTOVCOI which also suggests Heracles. A t
4 . 1 4 0 1 - 2 OKpr|i I oupr|i of L a d o n m a y echo Phaen. 5 0 - 1 OKpr) | oupr) of Drakon, b u t coinci-
dence c a n n o t , I suppose, be ruled out. A r a t u s , following E u d o x u s , makes the enponasin tread
with his right foot o n the d r a g o n ' s h e a d {Phaen. 70, E u d o x u s fr. 17 Lasserre), n d ancient
critics t h o u g h t t h a t this should h a v e been t h e left, cf. Z A r a t u s , Phaen. 69, H i p p a r c h u s i.e.6
M a n i t i u s ; does 4.1519 'correct' Aratus?
92
Cf. above pp. 18-19.
 Heracles 33
real enough. The different methods of dealing with the Colchian
and African serpents speak volumes, as does the contrast between
the designs on Jason's cloak and the bloody scenes portrayed on
Heracles' belt in Homer (Od. 11.609-12) and on his shield in the
Hesiodic Scutum (Shield of Heracles). Just before Heracles' reappear-
ance in North Africa, Jason is compared to a lion in a famous
'non-simile' (4.1337-43); 93 Heracles, by contrast, is the very anthro-
pomorphic manifestation of the lion.
When the Argonauts leave the ship to enjoy themselves with the
women of Lemnos, Heracles remains behind with a few comrades to
guard the ship (1.992-3, cf. 1.1111). Many modern critics have seen
here disapproval by Heracles of what happens on Lemnos;94 on this
reading, Heracles reveals himself either as spurning heterosexual
love-making95 or as the virtuous ascetic of a tradition which begins
for us in earnest with Prodicus' fable of the young Heracles choosing
between the paths of Virtue and Vice.96 Support for this is sought in
the speech which Heracles delivers as the delay at Lemnos becomes
lengthy:

'5aiii6vioi,
fjliEas; f)6 yducov ETTI8EUEES £v6d8' i|3r||jev
KETOEV, ovoo-aduEvoi TroAir)Ti8as; aOdi 5* i a 8 s
vaiovTas Ai7rapf]v dpoaiv Afjuvoio TOCUEOOOU;
ou udv EUKAEIETS y e o v v 66veir|ic7i yuvai^iv
8 ' £7ri 6r|p6v EEAUEVOI* O 0 8 E TI KCOOCS
SCOCTEI TIS EACOV OEOS
TOUEV a f r n s EKOCCTTOI ETTI ac|>Eor TOV 8 S EVI
c
Yvf ITTUATIS EISTE TravfmEpov, EICTOKE Af]|ivov
Traiaiv ETrav8pcbar|i HEydAr| TE E

'Poor fools, does the shedding of kindred blood prevent us from

returning home? Have we left our homes to come here in search of
brides, scorning the women of our own cities? Do we want to live here
and cut up the rich plough-land of Lemnos? We will not win glory
(lit. "have good kleos") by shutting ourselves up here interminably
with foreign women. No god is going to hand over the fleece to us in

93
Cf. below p . 133.
94
F o r these critics (e.g. F r a n k e l , V i a n a n d P a d u a n o ) 8iccKpiv0£vT6S in 8 5 6 m e a n s n o t 'chosen',
but 'remaining aloof.
95
The cult of Heracles niaoywns at Phocis is of doubtful relevance; on thistf. N. Loraux in
D. M. Halperin,J. J. Winkler and F. I. Zeitlin (eds.), Before Sexuality (Princeton 1990) 25-6.
96
Xen. Mem. 2.1.21-34, cf. R. Hoistad, Cynic Hero and Cynic King (Uppsala 1948) 22-50,
Galinsky 1972.105-8, Feeney 1986.54-5.
 34 Modes of heroism
answer to our prayers; we will have to work for it. Let us all return to
our own countries and leave him to wallow all day in Hypsipyle's bed
until he has won great renown by filling Lemnos with his sons!'
(1.865-74)

Elements of the 'virtuous' Heracles are clear enough: in Prodicus'

fable, Virtue stresses that the gods give men nothing without hard
work (ponos, epimeleia), so that someone who wishes to win kleos
must strive to work on Greece's behalf.97 We may, moreover, also
detect resonances of moralistic readings of the Odyssey which viewed
Odysseus' time with Calypso and Circe as examples of unheroic
lust.98 Nevertheless, it is the delay to the expedition, not the fact of
casual love-making, which upsets Heracles; the expedition itself rep-
resents for him an interruption to his Labours and to the kleos which
accrues from them. Apollonius' Heracles is allowed intimations of his
own fate and future status: he is in a hurry to get there.
Heracles' speech is not the simple rant which much criticism
has made it. The opening reference to 'kindred bloodshed' suggests
recent events on Lemnos,99 and the sarcastic question about scorn-
ing the women of their own cities hints at an equation between
the Argonauts and the dead Lemnians. Moreover, much of what
Heracles has to say suggests familiar incidents from his own legends.
He himself killed his own children, and we can hardly doubt the
existence of a version in which the Labours, and hence a long absence
from his homeland, were the direct result of this murder; 100 at any
event, we are later told of a trip by Heracles to Corfu to purify
himself (4.539-41). Heracles was also notorious for his 'brides' all
over the Mediterranean, and we might well think in particular of Iole
and Omphale. 101 No Greek hero was more fertile than Heracles, and
'descendants of Heracles' populated large areas of Greece. In staying
with Hypsipyle, then, and rousing Heracles' anger, Jason is in fact
merely following in Heracles' footsteps; this complex irony cannot be

97
The fact that Heracles joined the expedition 'of his own free will' (1.130) may reflect poetic
and philosophical discussions of the role of fate and necessity in his labours, cf. Galinsky
1972.101-2.
98
Cf. E. Kaiser, MH 21 (1964) 210-13; below pp. 178-9. Note the context of the Virgilian
'version' of Heracles' speech: Mercury's reproof to Aeneas at Aen. 4.265-76.
99
Cf. Margolies 1981.50.
100
The sources are uncertain (cf. Bond's edition of Eur. HF, pp. xxviii-xxx), but excessive
scepticism is unwarranted.
101
Note that the sexual resonances of 867-8 - ploughing being a familiar image of intercourse
- also occur in the language of Deianeira at Soph. Track. 31-3.
 Heracles 35
accommodated by the simplistic readings of the Apollonian Heracles
which are currently fashionable.
A further factor to be considered is the echoes in this speech of
Thersites' abuse of Agamemnon before the Greek army in the Iliad:

'GO TreTroves, KCCK' eAeyxs', 'AxouiSes, OUKET' '

OlKa66 TTEpCTUVVT|UC7l V£C0|i£6a, T O V S E 8 ' 8CO|iEV
auTou Ivi Tporni y s p a TT6CJCTE|JI8V, 6<))pa TSrjToa
f\ p a TI oi X'HM^S TTpoaapiuvoMEV, fJE Kai OUKI*'

'My poor weak friends, you sorry disgraces, mere women of Achaia
now, no longer men - yes, let us go back home with our ships, and
leave this man here in Troy to brood on his prizes, so that he can see
whether the rest of us are of some help to him or not.' (//. 2.235-8,
trans. Hammond)

Thersites also tells Agamemnon that there are lots of women ready
and waiting (2.226—8), accuses him of being lustful (2.232) and of
failing in his duty as a leader (2.236). These accusations echo those
of Achilles in Book 1, but Thersites is at best an ambivalent figure in
the Iliad, and he is generally treated with contempt in the higher
literature of antiquity.102 On one reading, then, these echoes may
seem to invite us to laugh at Heracles, but Thersites' arguments were
right, it was his person which was wrong. Moreover, Thersites'
speech reopens the questions of leadership and hierarchy over which
Achilles and Agamemnon had quarrelled. Whereas the dispute in
Iliad 1 closed with the disastrous split between the basileis, Odysseus'
intervention against Thersites brings a firm restatement, both from
Odysseus (2.247-51) and from the watching soldiery (2.276-7), of
the established hierarchy under the basileis; the problems of Book 1
are temporarily effaced by the rough treatment handed out to an
Ersatz — Achilles. In the Argonautica, however, there is no 'resolution'
or reassertion, even temporarily. Nothing is said (1.876), and the
scene moves straight to farewells; it is as if Thersites had carried the
day. The scenes of Jason's election and the loss of Heracles concluded
with suggestions of Argonautic harmony which left much unspoken
and unresolved.103 Here at Lemnos it is the silence which predomi-

102
Cf. Gebhard, RE 5A.2455-71; F. Cairns, JHS 102 (1982) 203-4; W. G. Thalmann,
'Thersites: comedy, scapegoats and heroic ideology in the Iliad', TAP A 118 (1988) 1-28
(with full bibliography).
103
Cf. above pp. 18-20.
 36 Modes of heroism

nates. The point is not that we should laugh at the 'heroism' of either
Jason or Heracles; rather, Apollonius' poem proves to be a medita-
tion upon the problems of 'epic' leadership, within the parameters
bequeathed by Homer. This was a meditation which Virgil was to
carry further and in new, specifically Augustan, directions. Again
then, any simple construction of Heracles' 'character' and function
in the epic is inevitably blocked: to speak like Thersites is no un-
ambivalent sign of 'heroic' status.

(IV) HYLAS
Many of the themes of the last two sections come together in the
narrative of how Heracles and his squire Hylas were lost to the
expedition in Mysia (1.1153—1357)- This episode is both a represen-
tation of the larger 'initiation epic' in microcosm, and a contrasting
image, set off in opposition to the fuller surrounding narrative.
After leaving Cyzicus the crew compete with each other to see who
can row the longest, as there is no wind at all. 104 When everyone else
is exhausted, Heracles rows alone until the effort of it causes his oar
to break. Upon reaching land, he goes off to look for wood for a
new oar, leaving the others to prepare dinner. These verses stress
the communality and mutual co-operation of the crew (1.1182-6);
Heracles is always a bit apart - he wants to get on with things
and detests enforced idleness (1.1170-1) ,105 This difference has been
made clear in the episode immediately preceding: the celebration of
the rites of the Great Mother on Mt Dindymum emphasises that
the Argonauts are a single group acting together, with very little
prominence for named individuals. The Hylas episode, however, is
introduced by the word eris, 'contesting' (1.1153), ominous in the
Argonautica even in the weak sense of'sporting rivalry'. 106 This is the
closest Apollonius comes to including a scene of sports on the pattern
104
Collins 1967.88 suggests that we a r e tempted to see H e r a behind the calm weather, a n d he
notes (p. 94) that 'the son of Zeus' (1.1188) points to t h e role of Zeus in t h e Hylas episode
(cf. 1.1315, Feeney 1991.71). W h a t is clear is that Glaukos' speech (1.1315-22) suggests in
retrospect that divine forces were a t work every step of the way - t h e breaking of the oar,
Hylas' trip, the sudden rising of the wind, cf. V i a n 1 43, W h i t e 1979.75. T h e absence of
earlier explicit reference to divine action is a good illustration of Apollonius' difference
from H o m e r in this m a t t e r (cf. below p p . 7 8 - 9 ) .
105
TrocTrraivcov (1.1171) recalls Od. 11.608 w h e r e H e r a c l e s is c o n s t a n t l y active even i n d e a t h ,
SEIVOV Trcarraivcov, aiei paXfiovri EOIKCOS.
106
Elsewhere only 1.773 a n d 4.446, on both occasions in connection with eros.
 Hylas 37
of Iliad 23;107 it is not consonant with central themes of the epic that
the heroes should compete with each other, and when they do so it
leads to disaster. Heracles, however, lived a life devoted to eris, to
struggle and competition, and presided as tutelary deity over the
gymnasia in Alexandria. 108 Even his rowing threatens to break up a
settled order of parts united into a functioning unit - 'he shook the
fitted planks of the ship' (1.1163); so the rest of the crew form a single
unit in which no individual is named and from which Heracles alone
stands out (1.1161).
The Hylas episode relies on our knowledge of the story of Heracles'
acquisition of the young boy, which is briefly alluded to at 1.1211 -14
and which was also used by Callimachus in Book 1 of the Aitia (frr.
24-5). When Heracles on his wanderings met Theiodamas, king of
the Dryopes, the hero had with him his young son Hyllos, and he
asked the king to give the boy something to eat. When the request
was refused, Heracles killed and ate one of the king's oxen with
which he had been ploughing. War followed, and after his victory
Heracles took away Theiodamas' orphan son Hylas and forced the
whole people to seek a new home in the Peloponnese. 109 Callimachus
seems to have presented Theiodamas as a nasty brute who got what
he deserved (fr. 24.13-20); we do not know what, if any, capital
Callimachus made of Heracles' fabulous appetite, although else-
where he did allude to it in the context of this incident (h. 3.159-61).
Moreover, in the Aitia this story is juxtaposed to a rather similar one
in which Heracles took and ate the ox of a Lindian peasant, and
in which the hero's capacity for food did play an important role
(frr. 22—3). Apollonius' version apears to give conflicting signals:
Theiodamas is 8Tos, 'goodly', and is killed 'pitilessly' while ploughing
'in his misery'; the whole business was merely a pretext for Heracles
to start a war to cure the Dryopes of their penchant for injustice
(1.1218-19), a detail which fits the story to Heracles' role as cleanser
107
The point was taken by Virgil, who uses this scene in the games ofAeneid 5: note 1.1157-8
~ Aen. 5.144-7, 1.1167 ~ Aen. 5.158, and the broken oars of Aen. 5.209, 222. As often,
an echo from another part of Arg. confirms the Apollonian resonances: 4.1541-5 ~ Aen.
5.273-81.
108 Qf Fraser 1972.11 353 n. 149.
109
For the various versions cf. Eichgriin 1961.133-7, Vian 1 46-8 and note on 1.1354-5.
There can be little doubt that some interchange between Hyllos and Hylas has taken place
in the details of various versions. Thus, for example, Socrates of Argos (? 2nd cent, B.C.)
made Hylas Heracles' son (FGrHist 310 F 10), and he may well have had earlier sources for
this; I suspect in fact that Theocr. 13.8 alludes to just such a version.
 38 Modes of heroism

and 'averter of evil'. Frankel sought to remove these apparent con-

tradictions by stressing that Apollonius has suppressed Heracles'
eating of the ox and by emending the text, and some problems may
indeed be variously explained away;110 this whole critical exercise is,
however, misguided. Apollonius has left the detail and interpretation
of the story as ambiguous as the placing of vr|Aeicos, 'pitilessly', at the
head of v. 1214 where it could refer to the behaviour of either
Heracles or Theiodamas. 111 Far from 'suppressing' Heracles' appe-
tite, the reference to the ox in 1214 activates our knowledge of it, and
the placing of this story within a narrative in which, for once, food is
not uppermost in Heracles' mind, and his squire aims to prepare an
'orderly' evening meal for him (KOCTCX KOCTUOV, 1.1210), highlights
the contradictions inherent both in this story and in the figure of
Heracles. He is hungry for both food and justice.
The Hylas episode 'replays' some of the events of the story of
Theiodamas. Hylas' search for water suggests Heracles' hungry
search which led to him acquiring the young boy; now he will lose
him. The quarrel with Theiodamas was over an ox; in his distress
Heracles will be compared to a bull (1.1265-9).112 Just as Heracles
took Hylas and forced the Dryopes to leave their home, so after losing
Hylas he took some young boys of the local area and settled them as
hostages in Thessaly (1.1354-7). Heracles loses Hylas because of a
nymph's love for the boy, and Heracles himself had taken Hylas from
his father. When Polyphemus fears that Hylas has been carried away
by strangers (1.1251—2), we think of what Heracles did to the boy.
In Theocritus 13 and in Valerius Flaccus113 Heracles is explicitly
presented as an erastes, subject to a violent passion for Hylas. This has
been denied for Apollonius, but it is in fact obvious both from the
general shape of the story and from the details which Apollonius
highlights.114
The myth tells of a young115 boy who passes from the protection
and education (1.1211) of an older man into adulthood. That the
110
Thus Ardizzoni notes that 6Tos is a word of social, not moral, status.
111
To be taken with ETTE<|>VE or OCVTIOGOVTCC? Cf. Kohnken 1965.54-5. Clauss 1983.147-52
rightly recognises the elements of the traditionally violent and hungry Heracles here, but
strangely sees only these.
112
Note also (3e|3oAr|UEVos of both Theiodamas and Heracles (1.1216, 1269).
113
Cf. Arg. 3.573, 736, 4.36-7 etc.
114
For a correct assessment of the situation in Apollonius cf, e.g., Faerber 1932.64, White
1979.65-70, Palombi 1985.75-83. Sergent 1984.185-94 recognises the nature of the rela-
tionship, but misses the specifically erotic features of Apollonius' account.
115
Trpco©f)pr|s, 'showing his first beard', at 1.132 is a clear 'erotic' signpost.
 Hylas 39
older man in such a relationship acted under the sign of eros was
universally assumed in classical antiquity (however variously that
sign was interpreted). Moreover, Heracles' demand for young boys
as hostages for the return of Hylas shows clearly how the latter's
disappearance 'reverses' a pattern of transitional homoerotic rape
familiar from the mythology of a number of Greek states and attested
for the historical period in Crete;116 Hylas is captured by a female,
rather than a male, admirer. We do not, however, have to rely on
the shape of the myth to identify eros at work. Heracles' reaction to
the news of Hylas' disappearance inevitably suggests it,117
TCOl 8 ' dlOVTl KOCTCX KpOT&<|>G0V OcAlS l8pCOS
Kf|Kiev, sv Se KeAocivdv OTTO aTrXdyxvois £6EV al|ia.

When Heracles heard this, sweat poured down over his temples and
deep in his body the dark blood boiled, ( i . 1261-2)
and the simile of the bull bitten by the oistros (1.1265-9) points
clearly in the same direction.118
Heracles' loss is emphasised by the fact that he does not even hear
Hylas cry out as he falls into the water; he must be told of the boy's
fate by Polyphemus, just as Antilochus tells Achilles of the fate of
his dear Patroclus.119 Polyphemus' reaction to Hylas' cry no doubt
alludes to a version of the story in which Hylas was his, not Heracles',
eromenos,120 and the irony by which Polyphemus is compared to a
116
Ephorus, FGrHist 70 F 149, cf. Sergent 1984.15-71 with reference to earlier work (particu-
larly that of Vidal-Naquet). For a challenging alternative to the now standard view cf. K. J.
Dover, 'Greek homosexuality and initiation', in The Greeks and Their Legacy 11 (Oxford
1988) 115-34.
117
Cf. White 1979.64-5, Nisbet and Hubbard on Hor. C. 1.13.4; the hesitations of R.
Pretagostini, Ricerche sulla poesia alessandrina (Rome 1984) 93-4 are unnecessary. I wonder
if descriptions of Heracles' suffering in the poisoned robe are also relevant, cf. Soph. Trach.
767.
118
Cf. my note on 3.276-7.
119
//. 18.15-21, esp. 17 4>dro 8' dyyeAiriv aAeyeivrjv ~ 1.1255-6 OOTIKCC 6' orrrjV | SK<J>OCTO
AsuyaAeriv (an assonantal echo?). In Valerius' narrative, Hylas' dream appearance to
Heracles (4.22ff.) is strongly reminiscent of Patroclus' appearance to Achilles (//. 23.626°.,
esp. 4.39-40 ~ 23.99-100). For Hylas as a 'Patroclus', with obvious consequences for the
role of eros, cf. Margolies 1981.124, Palombi 1985.
120
Cf. Palombi 1985.84-5. There is no certain pre-Apollonian attestion for this version, but
Theocritus may provide some indirect confirmation. Idylls 11 and 13 form an obvious pair,
both addressed to Nicias and both on the subject of eros; their respective central characters
are Polyphemus the Cyclops and Heracles. So too Apollonius presents first his Polyphemus
and then Heracles reacting to the loss of a beloved boy; both Socrates of Argos (FGrHist
310 F 18) and Euphorion (fr. 76 Powell) in fact made the Argonaut Polyphemus a son of
Poseidon. Apollonius' Heracles indeed contains hints of the Homeric Polyphemus (e.g.
1.1193 ~ Od. 9.321-4), cf. Clauss 1983.149-50.
 4O Modes of heroism
'wild animal5 (i. 1243-9) and then worries that Hylas may have
fallen prey to wild animals suggests that Hylas is 'safer' with the
nymph than with Polyphemus and Heracles. 121 The 'equation'
through this simile of the loving nymph with the caring herdsmen
confirms the ritual passage of Hylas. He moves from a life of'wild-
ness' to a new 'civilised', communal state; the same point is made by
the fact that the bull to which Heracles is compared in his passion
'has no thought for the herdsmen or the herd'. Heracles' complete
loss of control and his loss to the expedition is marked by the role of
Polyphemus who acts as Heracles should have acted to protect the
boy; instead Hylas cried out, but Heracles is left to 'shout' in futile
rampage (1.1272). The transference to Polyphemus through the
simile of the wild beast of what are obviously Heraclean motifs - cf.
the corresponding lion simile in Theocritus 13 - must be seen within
the whole pattern of 'imitation of Heracles' which we have been
considering;122 here, however, Polyphemus' vain search precedes,
rather than follows, Heracles'.
Hylas' fate is characterised by many reversals. The nymphs are
said constantly to perform ritual dances in honour of the virgin
Artemis (1.1222-5), a context very familiar from many stories of the
abduction of young girls.123 Here it is one of the young girls who will
do the abducting. The intrusion of Kypris into the rite (1.1233)
marks the event as transitional for the nymph as well as for Hylas -
it is her 'wedding' (cf. 1.1324-5). An elaborate and detailed set
of parallelisms and contrasts between the story of the rape of
Persephone in the Homeric Hymn to Demeter and the abduction of
Hylas in both Theocritus 124 and Apollonius125 confirms this reading.

121
The irony would be weakened by Frankel's transposition of 1250-2 before 1243; this
intelligent suggestion remains unproved, cf. H. Erbse, RhM 106 (1963) 230-4.
122
The simile has caused endless trouble to critics, cf, e.g., Dover 1971.179-80.
123
Cf. my note on 3.897-9.
124
Cf. Richardson 1974.19, Gutzwiller 1981.26-7.
125 j gj v e n e r e a s i m p i e list of similarities which vary greatly in importance, but which, in my
view, reveal an affinity going beyond the general influence exerted by the Hymn on virtually
all subsequent rape narratives, (i) Zeus 'consents' to both rapes, (ii) Persephone is carried
off when away from her mother, Hylas when away from his 'father', (iii) Theocritus' flower
list (13.40-2) corresponds to h.Dem. 6-8. (iv) Persphone bends to take a flower, Hylas to
get water, (v) The victim weeps and cries out. (vi) The cry is at first heard by someone
other than the parent (h.Dem. 24-6, 1.1240-1). (vii) Demeter's reaction of tearing her veil
and throwing it off (v. 42) is perhaps echoed humorously in Heracles throwing away the
tree (1.1263). (viii) Demeter is compared to a bird in hurried flight, Heracles to a bull (note
44 uaiouevri ~ 1270 uaiucocov). (ix) Polyphemus and Hecate play similar messenger - roles.
(x) Demeter, Polyphemus and Heracles all react very swiftly (note 61 ~ 1243). (x*) The
 Death and some deaths 41
The stories of Persephone and Hylas are both narratives of sexual
transition, of the founding of cult, and of boundaries and margins.
Unlike Demeter, however, Heracles himself acquired his 'child' by
rape. The use of the Homeric Hymn brings the contradictions inherent
in Heracles sharply into focus. In this episode we see the hero in his
quintessence - club, bow and arrows, and lion-skin; like Polyphemus
(1.1254), we recognise Heracles at once - who else could this be?
Civiliser and glutton, educator and violent brute, weighed down 126
by continual labours and eventually elevated to heaven. Hylas passes
from young boy to young man, parting company from his older
protector, whose protection was deeply ambivalent; the Argonauts
too lose their greatest hero and main exemplar, but Heracles un-
dergoes a transition where no one may follow him.

(Vj DEATH AND SOME DEATHS

The Iliad is full of death, both real and prospective. It is the reality
of death which gives meaning to the hero's life. Although it is nor-
mally the great heroes who do the killing and the lesser who are
killed, all are caught in the web of the same humanity, as Achilles
eventually comes to learn. In the great variety of death and battle,
some deaths are treated at great length, others occupy a mere half-
line, but the recording of the name is a guarantee ofkleos, a sign that
the struggle was not entirely in vain. In the Argonautica there are only
five 'battle-scenes', and two of those hardly count.
The clash with the Earthborn Giants (1.989-1011) pits the heroes
not against ordinary opponents but against Hesiodic marvels, though
unlike their Hesiodic models (Theog. 147-53), the Earthborn die
nameless and as undifferentiated as a set of planks (1.1003-5, cited
below). Moreover, their main destroyer is none other than Heracles
with his pitiless bow, and the poet equates this deed with the hero's
other labours. The other Argonauts who take part in the battle are
daughters of Keleos find Demeter sitting beside a well when they come 'to fetch fair -
flowing water in order to carry it in bronze pitchers to the dear home of their father'
(106-7). (xii) The girls do not recognise Demeter, whereas Polyphemus knows Heracles at
once ( m ~ 1254). (xii) Demeter pretends to have been carried off, a fate which Poly-
phemus fears Hylas has suffered.
That both Theocritus and Apollonius use the Hymn is of course significant for their
mutual relationship.
126 N o te the tree selected by Heracles, 'weighed down (&)(9ou£VT|v) by not many branches'
(1.1190-1); the verb only here in Arg., and the literal use is very rare. Heracles' <X)(QT\ are
notorious.
 42 Modes of heroism

consigned to anonymity - they are 'the younger men' (992), 'the

others' (998), 'warlike heroes' (1000), and there is no individual
kleos. The Earthborn, however, are like many Homeric victims in
that their appearance in death is described through simile:
As when carpenters place long planks, which have recently been cut with
the axe, in a line along the shore so that strong bolts may be driven into
them when they have been soaked, so the Giants were stretched out in a
line at the narrow point of the harbour which was white with foam. A
group lay with their heads and chests in the salt sea and their lower limbs
stretched out on the dry land; others had their heads on the sands of the
shore and their feet out in the sea. Both were a prey for the birds and fish
simultaneously. (1.1003-11)
The attention in this simile to the novel and the paradoxical, perhaps
appropriate for such unusual victims and reminiscent of very many
Hellenistic and imperial literary epitaphs, creates a weird pathos
which is quite un-Homeric. Here it is not so much death which seems
significant, but rather the intellectual contemplation of death.
Similar considerations apply to the final scene of the third book in
which Jason, fortified by Medea's drugs and good advice, slays the
warriors who rise up from the sowing of the dragon's teeth. An
extraordinary concentration of similes of Homeric type assimilates
the deaths of these creatures of the brutal Aietes to the terrible
beauty of young death in the Iliad, but this is a marker of distance,
rather than of closeness, between the archaic and the Hellenistic
epic.127
On three occasions the Argonauts confront purely human adver-
saries, the Doliones (1.1018-52), the Bebrycians (2.98-136), and
the Colchians who had been commanded by the now dead Apsyrtus
(4.482-91). This last battle is the briefest - the Colchians are wiped
out in five verses by three brief similes (hawks attacking doves,
lions attacking sheep, fire), and no one on either side is named
until Jason arrives after the killing is finished.128 This anonymity
contrasts pointedly with the death of their leader Apsyrtus, whose
name will be perpetuated in that of the inhabitants of the area where
he is buried. Like Cyzicus, Apsyrtus dies by night and in ignorance.
Both die in silence; no words are exchanged between killer and
127
Cf. Carspecken 1952.91-5; my notes on 3.1278-1407, 1374-6.
128
Rose 1984.134 sees the anonymity as significant for the evaluation of the killing: 'The
assault . . . names no single warrior . . . since there is nothing worthy of celebration in this
gratuitous act of violence.'
 Death and some deaths 43
killed. The battle between the Argonauts and the Doliones is a tragic
case of mistaken identity at night, almost a paradigm of failure of
communication. Warfare and killing are blind, unreasoned action,
and there are only a few instances of this in a poem which rather
stresses logos and metis. The point is reinforced by the description of
the other deaths which occurred on that terrible night:
Many of the king's helpers were also killed. Heracles slew Telekles and
Megabrontes. Sphodris was slaughtered by Akastos; Peleus destroyed Zelys
and the bold Gephyros, while Telamon of the strong spear killed Basileus.
Promeus was Idas' victim, and Hyakinthos Klytios', while Megalossakes
and Phlogios fell to the two sons of Tyndareus. Next to them the son of
Oineus destroyed bold Itymoneus and Artakes, leader of men. All of these
are still glorified by the inhabitants with the honours due to heroes. The
Doliones who survived yielded their position and fled, as flocks of doves
before swift hawks. In a disordered mass they rushed inside the city gates,
and straightaway the city was full of lamentation because the men had
returned in flight from this grievous war. (1.1039-52)
The basic technique is Iliadic: many brief deaths set off a more elabo-
rate treatment of one death (here Cyzicus). The translation aims to
reproduce the verbal variety of the Greek, itself a trick learned from
Homer.129 Such lists are, however, only a very small part of Iliadic
fighting; Apollonius imitates the driest kind of Homeric catalogue to
represent killing without meaning, a confused nocturnal slaughter
possible only within the safe boundaries of martial epic. The names
of the dead do live on - indeed are honoured as heroes - 1 3 0 but the
Argonauts are killing names without substance. The 'biographies'
which adorn the dead in the Iliad are important for the killers as well
as the killed: they increase the killers' kleos by showing how their deed
has ramifications far beyond the battlefield. A whole chain of social
life is ended by the prowess of the victor.131 The catalogue style is
here used to subvert the whole ethos of Homeric fighting. Similar
considerations apply to the battle with the Bebrycians which follows
upon the elaborately described death of their king Amycus. The
pattern of the battle description is again Homeric,132 though some-

129
Cf., e.g., //. 6.29-36, 14.511 —15; M. G. Ciani, 'Poesia come enigma', in Scritti in onore di
Carlo Diano (Bologna 1975) 91-5.
130 p o r t n e problem of these names cf. Goldhill 1991.317-19.
131
Cf. Griffin 1980.140-3.
132
I d o not believe avepoc in 2.102; Campbell's 'Avepoc is better t h a n Frankel's lacuna, a n d
2.798 might then be brilliantly ambiguous, Tuv5ccpi6r| [which one?] . . . 6 T ' ocvepcc [?'Avepcc]
KETVOV 6Tre<f>v£s.
 44 Modes of heroism
what changed by the rustic weapons and the mixture of warfare and
boxing in vv. 105-9.
No Argonaut is killed in battle. The expedition does lose eight
members - four by death (Idmon, Tiphys, Mopsus and Can thus),
two by something more than death (Hylas, Boutes) and two who
'miss the boat' (Heracles and Polyphemus). The four deaths occur in
two groups of two, one in the 'infernal landscape' 133 of the voyage
along the southern coast of the Black Sea in Book 2, and the other in
the wastes of the Libyan desert.
The seer Idmon is killed by a savage boar as he walks along the
river-bank (2.815-34). He had known that he would not return from
the expedition (1.139-41, 436-47), but did not apparently know the
hour or the means of his death. 134 The description of his tomb at
2.842-4 reworks motifs from the death of Elpenor (cf. Od. 11.75-8,
12.15), but unlike Elpenor who went to sleep 'apart from his com-
rades' {Od. 10.554) and who dies unremarked, Idmon dies in his
comrades' arms, literally framed by them (vv. 833-4 eTapoi . . .
ETaipcov) as his life ebbs away.135 In archaic epic, boars attack those
who hunt them; thus Idmon's death both recalls and does not recall
Homeric situations. His ignorance of unsought dangers is perfectly
in keeping with the terrifying journey which the poem recounts. The
boar is killed by Idas who had quarrelled drunkenly with Idmon in
the first book (1.475-91); in death the Argonautic virtues of solidar-
ity and mutual support are seen in their starkest colours. The death
from snakebite in Libya of the other seer, Mopsus, 136 also uses a mode
of death hinted at in Homer only in simile (cf. //. 3.30-7); it must
have been very familiar in third-century Alexandria.
The steersman Tiphys dies 'of a brief illness' during the same stop
as accounts for Idmon. The familiar pathos of'death far from home'
(2.856) is here combined with a manner of death not associated with
any Homeric hero.137 Given the conditions of ancient travel, there is
clearly a kind of realism here, a realism constructed out of its differ-
ence from death in the Homeric poems. Both [iivuvQaSiT], 'brief, and
euvaae, 'put to sleep' - the verb only here of death in Arg. - soften
133
Beye 1982.113.
134
The irony of his name ('the Knower') is obvious (cf. esp. 2.821-2).
135
Contrast the Homeric warriors whose friends can merely watch them die at a distance: //.
4.522-4, 13.548-9, 15.650-2, Griffin 1980.112-13.
136
Cf. above pp. 31-2. For the parallelism between the deaths note 2.816-17 ~ 4.1503-4,
2.818 ~ 41505.
137
Cf. Frankel 1968.605. The elimination of sickness is part of the stylisation of Homer's world.
 Death and some deaths 45
Tiphys' suffering and emphasise the contrast between his 'easy'
death and the grief which attends it, a grief which recalls the grief of
both Achilles and Priam. 138 Relevant also is the death of Phrontis,
Menelaos' steersman, who is killed, rudder in hand, by 'Apollo's
gentle arrows'(Od. 3.279-80). Like Virgil's Palinurus, 139 Phrontis
dies on the job, but this satisfaction is denied to Tiphys; his death has
no causal link or accidental connection to his special skill. This epic
has no room for 'poetic justice'; such an organising harmony is one
of many rejected by Apollonius.
138
2.861-2 ~ //. 24.129-30,163.
139
Cf. below pp. 183-4.
 CHAPTER 3

Images of love

In giving eros a central role in his epic, Apollonius was not innovating
radically in perceptions of the epic tradition: Calypso and Nausicaa
were for later antiquity 'classic' erotic paradigms, and the relation-
ship of Achilles and Patroclus was after Homer regularly under-
stood as an erotic one. Moreover, the portrayal in literature of those
affected by erotic desire had a very long history. 1 Sappho had cre-
ated a representation of female desire which was to be revalidated
by echo throughout antiquity, and the vocabulary and imagery of
erotic suffering was already fully developed in the poetry of the
archaic period. Attic tragedy also was clearly an important forerun-
ner: even from our small number of surviving plays we can see that
Apollonius' Medea owes a debt not merely to her tragic namesake,
but also to Euripides' Phaedra, who provided a crucial model of a
woman seeking to fight against a desire which she knows to be
wrong.2 From New Comedy, to which it is often claimed Apollonius,
in Book 3 particularly, owed much, less seems in fact to have been
drawn. In the plays of Menander which survive at all extensively in
Greek it is male desire and the effect of eros on men that is regularly
cited and which has an important plot function; silence about female
eros may be unsurprising in plays which tend to reflect and confirm
the dominant male ideology of the polls — and where the women
concerned are often the unmarried daughters of citizens — but the
contrast between Menander and Hellenistic poetry and romance in
this regard is not always properly appreciated. 3 It is indeed tempting
to see changing social structures as an important factor in the greater
1
Cf. (briefly) Hunter 1989.26-7.
2
Cf. my notes on 3.766-9, 811-16.
3
I regard Roman comedy as a very dangerous 'source' for information about how social mores
were represented in Greek comedy; for this reason I have left it out of account. The
prominence of female eros in some extant tragedies must, in part at least, be a function of
tragedy's transgressive, questioning role.

46
 Lemnos and Colchis 47
freedom with which literature represents female eros in the Hellenis-
tic period, for it is simply not true that '[the absence of] heterosexual
love, romance, conjugal love, and tender sentiments . . . clearly
marks Greek culture prior [to the Hellenistic period]'. 4 As both
eros and its representation in literature are highly culture-specific,5
changes in the social order and in the nature of literary production
might be expected to bring with them changes in the representation
of eros. As also, however, with the subject of'character' discussed in
the last chapter, it is important to recognise that the highly literary
nature of the Argonautica, the depth of its 'textuality', means that
there can be no simple move from the representation of Medea's eros
to the real erotic practices and experiences of the third century, any
more than this is possible with the Simaitha of Theocritus' Second
Idyll. In the prism of Medea's eros we see reflected many previous
written experiences of desire, and it is against those earlier, written
experiences that we must read her suffering.6 Moreover, it must not
be forgotten that, at least in the poetry which survives from the high
Alexandrian period, it is women of 'marginal' status - Simaitha
(what is her status?),7 Medea (a barbarian princess) - whose suffer-
ing is fully explored. Cydippe experiences symptoms which the
knowing reader can interpret (Callimachus fr. 75.12-19), but it is
Akontios' voice we hear.8

(l) LEMNOS AND COLCHIS

Hypsipyle and Medea have much in common beyond their shared

debt to the figure of Nausicaa: they resonate against each other, and
we learn to read each scene in the light of the other, constantly
looking both forward and back, creating meaning from similarity
and difference. If, broadly speaking, Hypsipyle plays the role of
Calypso,9 while Medea has obvious affinities with her aunt Circe,

4
Beye 1982.73. It is still not true even if Beye meant to write 'Greek (? Attic) literature'.
5
For a good illustration cf. Goldhill in Pelling 1990.102-5 o n Antigone.
6
I am not, of course, asserting that any reader (ancient or modern, male or female) can really
read the 'love story' of the Argonautica without reference to his or her own experience. A more
interesting problem in fact is the extent to which our experience is indeed shaped by existing
written descriptions of analogous events.
7
Cf. Dover 1971.95-6.
8
Cydippe's silence is particularly marked at fr. 75.38-9, where she is not named and her
interview with her father is narrated in a verse and a half.
9
For the related debt of Hypsipyle to Circe cf. Knight 1990.89-95.
 48 Images of love
the events on Lemnos act as a microcosmic foreshadowing of the
much larger 'Medea plot', both as it is played out within the epic
and in the catastrophic aftermath which is always in our minds. The
murder of the entire male population (except Thoas) looks forward
to Medea's murder of the children of herself and Jason; the Lemnian
women killed their husbands ducp' E\JVT\\ (1.618), a phrase which may
mean 'in bed' or 'on account of [the violation of their] beds' or
both,10 and thus looks to one of the reasons - adduced by both
Medea (vv. 265-6, 1367-8) and Jason (vv. 568-73) - for Medea's
anguish in Euripides' tragedy. Conversely, Medea's singular gentle-
ness towards Jason and his comrades, when the rest of the Colchian
population is against them, is foreshadowed by Hypsipyle's sparing
of her father.
In preparing to meet both Hypsipyle and Medea Jason 'arms'
himself with gleaming beauty (1.721-73, cloak and spear; 3.919-26,
wondrous grace bestowed upon him by Hera), in an erotic rewriting
of a Homeric warrior's preparations for a duel. The two approaches
are also joined by matching star similes. At 1.774—81 J a s o n is com-
pared to the bright evening star which portends marriage and which,
like Jason himself, catches the eye of married and unmarried women
alike. At 3.956-61, however, he is the burning Sirius, an explicitly
dangerous star, an echo of Achilles about to wreak terrible ven-
geance upon Hector. The poet of the Odyssey had already done
something similar with Iliadic conventions in describing Odysseus'
approach to Nausicaa in Odyssey 6.11 There a small branch is the
hero's 'armour', and a lion-simile, very redolent of the Iliad (cf. esp.
//. 12.299-308), marks his approach to young ladies who, with
the exception of Nausicaa, react very differently from the Lemnian
women at the sight of Jason. There too the Iliad is rewritten in
amatory mode to mark the changed circumstances of the hero.12
Jason's meeting with Medea at the temple of Hecate is particu-
larly indebted to the climactic clash of Achilles and Hector.13 That
10
'In bed' is the standard translation, but Seaton follows the scholiast in preferring the other
sense.
11
Cf, e.g., Beye 1982.122; P. Pucci, Odysseus Polutropos (Cornell 1987) 157-61.
12 Virgil re-inscribes the scene into a martial context in the description of Pallas at Aen.
8.587-93, while retaining the amatory flavour from Apollonius; this operates separately
from the main verbal model, Diomedes at //. 5.4-8. The terrified Latin matrons of vv.
592—3 recall both Hector's parents in Iliad 22 and the admiring Lemnian women of Arg.
1.783.
13
Cf. my notes on 3.956-61, 964-5, 1105.
 Lemnos and Colchis 49
deadly fight becomes what Hector said it could not be (//. 22.126-8),
an exchange of words of love (6api£eiv) between a young man and a
girl. To reach this rendezvous Medea must leave behind the city with
its 'well-built streets' (3.887) and ordered social conventions; the
comparison of her to Artemis of the countryside (3.876—86) here
marks in part the abandonment of those conventions. At Lemnos,
however, Jason must move into a city of women, away from the
world of men, to a place where the erotic and the domestic domi-
nate. Here it is echoes of the Troy of Iliad 3 and 6 which resonate and
give meaning.14 In Iliad 6 Hector returns to Troy to arrange cult
offerings and to see his family. When he appears at the gates, the
women - married and unmarried - flock around him with anxious
questions about their male relatives (//. 6.237-41). In the Argonautica
these worried cares become a different kind of interest in men. Jason
willingly accepts Hypsipyle's hospitality, but refuses her offer of
kingship; Hector refuses both Helen's hospitality (//. 6.354—68) and
the pleas of his wife to stay (//. 6.429-39).
Jason and Hector are alike in the burdens they carry on behalf of
others, but Jason comes to suggest also Paris who must be roused
from the chamber he shares with Helen (//. 6.321-41), just as
Heracles' abuse ofJason leads to the departure from Lemnos. 15 It is
indeed a sequence involving Paris in Iliad 3 which is uppermost in
Apollonius' mind here.16 At 3.4216°. Aphrodite leads the reluctant
Helen to Paris' chamber and sets a chair for her opposite Paris;
just so, Iphinoe leads Jason - his eyes coyly lowered like a young
girl's (1.784)17 - to Hypsipyle and sets a chair for him opposite her
mistress.18 The ultimate conclusion of both scenes is love-making,
as indeed both scenes illustrate the power of Aphrodite, and on
Lemnos the goddess 'had roused sweet desire in them, for the sake of
Hephaistos, the god of many wiles, so that once again his island of
Lemnos might be duly populated by men' (1.850-2); in the lan-

14
Clauss 1983.105-13 stresses rather the role of Odysseus' visit to Circe (with Heracles
playing the Eurylochus role); those scenes are indeed important, though secondary.
15
Cf. above pp. 33-6.
16
Cf. Margolies 1981.61-2 (with n. 74).
17
For this gesture cf. my note on 3.22. Hypsipyle's coyness at 1.790 picks up Helen's gesture
at //. 3.427.
18
It has often been noted in connection with this passage that Zenodotus athetised //. 3.423-6
because - according to I A - it was drrrpETres, 'unseemly', for Aphrodite to perform a menial
task for a mortal; Apollonius may have half an eye on Zenodotus in giving this task to
Iphinoe.
 50 Images of love

guage of Greek poetry and iconography, it would in fact be true

to say that Jason was 'led' to his 'marriage' with Hypsipyle by
Aphrodite or Eros.19 There are, however, also striking reversals.
Whereas it is the male Paris who is eager for love-making, Hypsipyle,
in common with the other Lemnian women, has made what amounts
to a public decision to sleep with Jason. Her opening words to him -
'Why do you wait so long without entering our city?' (1.793-4) -
reverse the motif of the 'locked-out lover': here there is no need for
the man to lament the lack of an invitation. Thus Jason's meetings
with both Hypsipyle and Medea are set in a matrix of Iliadic associa-
tions, but in Book 1 these are domestic and erotic, in Book 3 full of
the menace of imminent death.
The similarities and contrasts between the two episodes extend to
many details.20 Hypsipyle encourages Jason 'with winning words'
(1.792) and takes the lead in the conversation, whereas in Book 3
it is Jason, UTroaaaivcov, 'with flattering speech' (3.974), who speaks
first and tries to take Medea's fear away. Both Hypsipyle and Jason
begin with questions which gently reprove the hesitant behaviour of,
respectively, Jason and Medea; both establish at once the 'sexual
possibilities' inherent in the meeting - Hypsipyle by noting that there
are no men in the city,21 Jason by his repeated address to Medea as
'maiden', TrapOevucr), Koupr| (3.975, 978), an address which, despite
his reassuring words and pleas of dependence, marks the superiority
of his (male) position. Medea finds herself in a position where rape
is a frequent event.22 Whereas Hypsipyle, with unmaidenly deceit-
fulness, offers to speak 'frankly' (vrmepTes, 1.797), Jason m u s t urge
Medea to speak 'openly' (d^aSiriv, 3.982), when of course it is he,
rather than she, who uses the language of concealment. Hypsipyle's
'frankness' centres around her suppression of the murder of all the
males on the island. When Hypsipyle offers to tell Jason KaKOTT|Ta
. . . Traaav (1.796), 'the whole misery', we are warned of her suppres-
sion of 'the whole wickedness' (as the Greek phrase could equally
19
Cf. the passage of Xenophon of Ephesus cited in n. 39 below.
20
Cf. m y n o t e o n 3 . 1 0 6 1 - 2 , a d d i n g t h e significantly v a r i e d TTp6<f>pcov a t 1.898 a n d 3.1071.
21
The usual observations (above pp. 13-15) apply to attempts to ask whether Hypsipyle
'intends' the sexual suggestions of her references to 'towers' and 'ploughing' (1.793-6).
22
Cf. my note on 3.897-9 citing Campbell 1983.61. Note too the implications ofJason's plea
at 3.982-3 that Medea 'not deceive [him] with sweet words'. The irony is apparent, but we
may also wonder what kind of sweet words Medea might utter. The phrase clearly suggests
a seduction scene such as that of Archilochus' Cologne Epode (SLG 478) or Theocritus 27
(note especially 27.12 KOCI irpiv \xe TraprjTra^ES &8EI |i06coi).
 Lemnos and Colchis 51
well mean); in fact neither their 'misery' nor their 'wickedness' will
be told in full. 'Finally', she says, 'some god gave us the strength and
courage' (u7T£p|3iov Sdpaos, 1.820), and we are teased with the poss-
ibility that she will tell the truth; in fact, this act of boldness turns
out to be turning their husbands away at the gates.23 Whereas
Hypsipyle, like Alcinous (Od. 7.311-15), offers the Greek stranger
the chance to settle down with a royal marriage, in Book 3 it is Jason
who exploits Medea's unformed thoughts of escape back to Greece;
Hypsipyle's praise of Lemnos (1.830-1) matches that ofJason for his
homeland (3-1085-93).
Blushes, the shyness of eyes, the appeal to Jason's grievous chal-
lenges, the touching of hands, the deceptive use of gifts and the regret
of the one left behind are all common to both scenes. These parallels
help us to read the second scene against the first to see what has
changed. Particularly important is the motif of'remembering' which
Hypsipyle introduces in her final words:
'UVCOEO |ifjV, &7T6COV 7T6p OUCOS KOCl VOOTIUOS f)8r|,
c
Yv|/iTruAr|S' AITTE 8s f)uiv ETTOS, TO K6V
TTpo9pcov, f\v apa 8f| us Oeoi Scococn

'On your voyage and when you have returned, please remember
Hypsipyle, and leave me now some instructions which I shall happily
carry out, should the gods grant me a child'. (1.896-8)

So too M e d e a asks for m u t u a l remembering:

'UVCOEO 8', f\v dpa 8rj TTOOS UTTOTPOTTOS O!KOC8' ncnai,

ouvoua Mr|86ir|s* <*>s 8' OCUT' eyco aucpis EOVTOS
uvf|aouai.'

'If ever you return home safely, remember the name of Medea, as I
too shall remember you, though you are far away.' (3.1069-71)

The exemplum of Ariadne, however, has forewarned us that, in the

end, Jason will not be sufficiently mindful of his debt.24 The theme
reverberates bitterly through Medea's distress in the fourth book. At
4.356 she accuses Jason of'forgetfulness' now that he has achieved
his ends, and she hopes that he will 'remember' her as he is 'wracked
with troubles', hopes of a safe return gone for ever (4.383-4). More-
over, our memory of Hypsipyle, our 'remembering', means that her
23
Cf. Levin 1971.77. For the style of Hypsipyle's narration cf. below pp. 111-12.
24
Gf. my note on 3.1069.
 52 Images of love

request for advice in the event of having a child reverberates as

Medea and Jason say their farewells in Book 3. The ultimate fate of
their children is something known to every reader.

(ii) J A S O N ' S CLOAK

For his journey to Hypsipyle's palace, Jason puts on a splendid

purple cloak made by Athena and given to him at the time of the
building of the Argo. The border of this brilliant garment - 'you
would cast your eyes more easily at the rising sun than at its red
gleam' (1.725-6) - is decorated with seven distinct (SiotKpiSov,
1.729) scenes: the Kyklopes making Zeus's thunderbolt, 25 Amphion
and Zethus building Thebes, Aphrodite admiring herself in Ares'
shield, the battle between the Teleboans and the sons of Electryon,
the chariot race in which Pelops won the hand of Hippodameia and
her father, Oinomaos, was killed, Apollo killing Tityos as the giant
tried to rape Leto, and finally the scene which is explicitly part of the
poem's story, Phrixos with the magic ram. 26 The whole description
is framed by two addresses to the reader, 1.725-6 cited above and
I-765-7-
Keivous KS eiaopocov OCKEOIS ysuSoio T6 0u|i6v,
6ATT6|J6VOS TTUKlVTjV TIV* OCTTO a<j>8lCOV eCTaKOUCXai
v, 6T6U Kai Sr|p6v ETT' EATTISI 6r|f|cxaio.
As you looked on [Phrixos and the ram], you would be struck dumb
with amazement and deceived, for you would expect to hear some
wise utterance from them. With this hope you would gaze long upon
them.
Although the scene as a whole is obviously a rewriting in amatory
mode of an Iliadic arming-scene,27 the main situational model is
rather to be found in the Odyssey. In Book 19 the disguised hero tells
25
Lemnos was identified as the place where weapons were first forged (Hellanicus, FGrHist 4
F 71), a n d it is thus tempting to place the scene of the Kyklopes o n the island where J a s o n
now finds himself; so too the A p h r o d i t e scene on the cloak suggests Hephaistos lurking on
Lemnos (cf. Od. 8.283). Nevertheless, the Kyklopes were normally placed either u n d e r E t n a
or the islands of the Lipari chain (cf. Roscher s.v. Kyklopen 1679, m y note o n 3 . 3 8 - 4 2 ) .
Some link between this passage a n d Call. h. 3.466°. seems likely enough, b u t the detailed
arguments of Eichgriin 1961.116 are unconvincing.
26
For the potential importance of the final position in such ekphraseis cf. J. T. Kakridis, Homer
Revisited (Lund 1971) Chap. 6, Hardie 1986.68. The first six scenes on the cloak are bounded
by ring-composition: both the Kyklopes and Tityos are children of Gaia (cf. Hes. Theog. 139).
27
Cf. above p. 48.
 Jason's cloak 53
his wife about a meeting with her husband when the latter came to
Crete on his way to Troy:
'King Odysseus wore a thick double mantle; it was crimson, and had a clasp
of gold with two sheaths. In front was a cunning piece of work - a hound
had a dappled fawn between its forepaws, holding it firm as it struggled.
Everyone was amazed to see how the hound and the fawn both were gold,
yet the one was gripping and throttling the fawn, and the other striving to
break away and writhing with its feet. I noted also the shining tunic
Odysseus wore about him; it gleamed like the skin of a dried onion - it had
that softness and sunlike sheen. I tell you, this was a thing many women
gazed at with admiration.' (Od. 19.225-35, trans. Shewring)
The stranger-hero, dressed in a cloak 'bright like the sun', has the
same attraction for the Cretan women (and for the woman listening
to the tale) as Jason has for the women of Lemnos; the Odyssean
Penelope suggests how we too should react to this sensual garment -
with recognition and longing (Od. 19.249-50). Like Penelope also,
we are being challenged to read the signs displayed in an elaborate
ekphrasis.
For the description of the cloak itself Apollonius has drawn on
many sources beyond the cloak of Odyssey 19, in particular the Hom-
eric Shield of Achilles and the Hesiodic Scutum (Shield).2* While
replacing archaic generality with specific scenes and named char-
acters, Apollonius nevertheless directs our attention to the Homeric
shield in both detail and broad conception. The repetitive introduc-
tion to each scene imitates Homer's structuring; the description of
the cloak as SiTrAocKa Trop<puper|V, 'a double cloak of purple', not only
picks up Odysseus' cloak and the cloak into which Helen weaves
scenes of the Trojan war (//. 3.125-8), but also varies Tpi-rrAocKa
uapuaperiv, 'triple and brilliant', of the rim of Achilles' shield (//.
18.480); SociSaAoc TTOAAOC, 'many skilfully wrought designs' (1.729),
echoes the same phrase at //. 18.482. More broadly, both the Hom-
eric shield and the cloak move from cosmological phenomena to
the world of cities. A 'cosmological' interpretation of the Kyklopes'
work29 is confirmed by the fact that this scene begins at the next stage
in world history after the point at which the cosmogonical song of

28
Relevant also are the lovely veil and headband, the work of Athena and Hephaistos, worn
by Pandora (Hes. Theog. 573-84); they too will help to inspire a dangerous desire.
29
Note also the implications of <5K|)0ITCOI, 'eternal', in 1.730; formally there may be an echo of
the description of Hephaistos' palace at //. 18.370 or of <5n<d|iavTa, 'unwearying', of the sun
at the opening of the shield description (//. 18.484).
 54 Images of love
Orpheus concluded (1.511), and thus continues that song. A cosmo-
gonical interpretation of the Homeric shield was standard in later
antiquity, 30 and is in fact imitated by the scholiast on Jason's cloak.
After the creation of cosmological phenomena and the rule of Zeus
comes the creation of cities and the civilising role of poets such as
Amphion;31 after that come love, war and deceit. The cloak is closely
linked to Orpheus' song not only by the figures of Zeus and the
Kyklopes, but also by juxtaposition on it of scenes oiphilia and neikos
and by the depiction of scenes involving both (Aphrodite and Ares,
Pelops and Oinomaos). 32 Moreover, the scene of Aphrodite admir-
ing herself in Ares' shield looks to the song of Demodocus concerning
the love of the two gods (Od 8.266-366); the opening image of the
Kyklopes suggests that, as in Homer, Hephaistos is working at his
forge while his wife enjoys herself, and this counterpoint is mediated
through the image of Amphion and Zethos, who represent a similar
opposition between hard work and sensual ease. Demodocus' song
was in fact commonly allegorised as the opposition of philia and
neikos™
Other details of the cloak also recall and revise the Homeric shield.
The 'cities of peace and war' are replaced by one particular city
(Thebes) with two founders whose skills and interests were notori-
ously opposite; the cattle-raid of the Teleboans stains with blood a
quiet bucolic scene of happy animals, 34 as does the attack on the
unsuspecting rustics on the shield (//. 18.523-9). Whereas the cloak
is presented to us as a finished product, like Virgil's shield,35 Homer
describes the actual making of the shield. Apollonius points to this
difference by having his first two scenes, the Kyklopes and the build-
ing of Thebes, represent 'work in progress'.36 Amphion's music corre-
sponds to the celebratory wedding music on the shield (//. 18.491-5),

30
Cf. P. R. H a r d i e , ' I m a g o m u n d i : cosmological and ideological aspects of the shield of
Achilles', JHS 105 (1985) 11—31.
31
Gf. Hor. AP 39iff. with Brink's c o m m e n t a r y (pp. 3 8 4 - 6 ) .
32
Cf. Beye 1969.44, 5 3 . F o r further discussion of the significance of these themes cf. below
pp. 163-8.
33
Cf. Hardie 1986.61-6.
34
Cf. 2.1004. 'Dewy' in 1.751 need not be proleptic, despite Virg. Aen. 8.645 (Aeneas' shield)
sparsi rorabant sanguine uepres.
35 Virgil acknowledges the place of Apollonius in the ecphrastic tradition by reworking
3.291-8 at the opening of the passage describing the making of Aeneas' shield (Aen.
8.407-15).
36
Formally, those scenes pick up the description of Hephaistos' unfinished tripods (//.
I8.373-9)-
 Jason's cloak 55
but the actual feasting and marriages and the admiring women
whom Homer includes are moved by Apollonius out of the ekphrasis
and into the narrative which follows it (1.782-4). Such a variation,
which, like the links between Orpheus' song and the cloak,37 serves
to break down the apparent boundaries between ekphrasis and frame
by denying discreteness to the description, is an important example
of the narrative experimentation which we shall see is crucial in this
scene. This particular example depends upon our expectation of a
meaningful relationship between what is depicted on the cloak and
the narrative which surrounds it.38 Apollonius uses Homeric echo to
suggest ways of reading his own text. Finally, Ares appears on the
cloak as a lover, rather than as a warrior (contrast //. 18.516),39 but
it is the image of Aphrodite in his shield which is the most telling
detail in this respect. What is depicted is 'an exact representation in
a shield' (1.745-6); as the goddess is reflected in the shield, so we
examine the shield of Homer and find reflections in our text. How
'exact' our impressions are will be considered presently.
Direct echoes of the Hesiodic Scutum (Shield), a poem whose au-
thenticity Apollonius discussed in his scholarly works,40 are fewer.
The history of the cloak (1.721-4) reworks the history of Heracles'
breastplate (Scutum 124-7), a n d the battle description of 1.749-51
seems indebted to Scutum 239-42; more importantly, the Scutum (vv.
270-2) replaces Homer's 'city at peace' with a seven-gated city
of strong towers (evhrupyos) and the construction of seven-gated
Thebes ('still without its towers', ocTrupycoTos STI) on the cloak must
reflect this.41 On Hesiod's Shield Apollonius also found archaic au-
thority for a chariot race in ekphrasis (Scutum 305-13). Most striking

37
Cf. above p. 54.
38
Cf. below p p . 5 6 - 7 .
39
An interesting parallel (cf. Fusillo 1989.84) is the description of the decoration on the
marriage coverlet of Anthia and Habrokomes in the romance of X e n o p h o n of Ephesus:
'Cupids were playing, some attending Aphrodite, who was also represented, some riding
on... [text uncertain], some weaving garlands, others bringing flowers. These were on one
half of the canopy; on the other was Ares, not in a r m o u r , but dressed in a cloak and wearing
a garland, adorned for his lover Aphrodite. Eros was leading the way, with a lighted torch'
(1.8, trans. G r a h a m Anderson). K. Burger, Hermes 27 (1892) 64, plausibly deduces that the
excerptor has omitted a more detailed description of Aphrodite, and it is not difficult to
guess that any such description would have featured (at least) partial nudity, as on Jason's
cloak; indeed Anthia's efforts to catch Habrokomes' eye (1.3.2) strongly suggest that this
was the case.
40
Cf. Pfeiffer 1968.144.
41
The Hesiodic scholiast notes 'perhaps, as a Boeotian, Hesiod means Thebes', and Thebes
would certainly be relevant as Heracles' city.
 56 Images of love
of all, the scene of the Teleboan raid directs our attention not merely
to the similar scene on the Homeric shield (//. 18.520-9) but also to
the Scutum, which begins with Amphitryon's duty to take vengeance
on the Taphians and the Teleboans for having killed the brothers of
his wife Alcmena, the daughter of Electryon. 42 The juxtaposition on
the cloak of this scene, which recalls the circumstances of Heracles'
conception, to the picture of Aphrodite anticipates Heracles' objec-
tions to the prolonged dalliance on Lemnos. 43
The state of our evidence doubtless causes us to miss much that
has gone into Apollonius' description ofJason's cloak: contemporary
poetry,44 aesthetics,45 historical tradition. Editors refer to Demetrius
Poliorcetes who was alleged to have worn cloaks decorated with stars
and the signs of the zodiac.46 More interesting perhaps are stories
about Alcibiades, whose purple cloak, which he wore as choregos, was
admired by both men and women, and who, when general, is said to
have carried a shield of gold and ivory depicting Eros armed with
the thunderbolt. 47 In Alcibiades, as in Jason, erotic and political
power were fatefully combined.
Apollonius activates and manipulates our expectation of 'mean-
ing' in the interpretation of the ekphrasis,*8 as is particularly clear
from the final verses of the passage (cited above); this expectation has
been fostered both by knowledge of other poetic ekphraseis and by
familiarity with 'weaving' as a metaphor for poetry.49 The implicit
comparison between the cloak and the well-ordered sequence of the
Argo's timbers (1.721-4), both the work of Athena, suggests the
42
I t is a pity t h a t we d o not know more of Call. SH 257 (Molorchus) where Heracles seems
to be telling Molorchus of his life and Ai"|iTioci TOC<|>IO[ stands a t the head of a hexameter. T h e
phrase is, however, a c o m m o n one, cf. Od. 15.427, Eur.fr. incert. p . 84 Austin.
43
Cf. above p p . 3 3 - 6 . Bulloch 1985.594-5 (and cf. Clauss 1983.103-4) argues that the sequence
of scenes on the cloak is ominously modelled on the Odyssey's C a t a l o g u e of Heroines {Od.
11.225-330). T h e r e a r e certainly points of contact, b u t Bulloch overstates t h e case.
44
S h a p i r o 1980.270 attractively suggests t h a t Call. Hecale fr. 2 5 3 . 8 - 1 2 ( = SH285 = Hecale fr.
42 Hollis) was followed b y a m o r e detailed ekphrasis of t h e cloak H e c a l e ' s h u s b a n d w o r e a t
their w e d d i n g , if indeed h e w a s ' t h e m a n from A p h i d n a ' ; this suggestion m a d e Peter Parsons
wonder whether SH949 belongs here (private communication).
45
Cf. S h a p i r o 1980 passim.
46
D u r i s , FGrHist 76 F 14; cf. P l u t . Demetr. 4 1 . 4 .
47
Cf. Plut. Alcib. 16.1-2, Ath. 12.534C-C
48
Cf, e.g., Collins 1967.78; Newman 1986.80; Goldhill 1991.310-11. For a similar phenome-
non in a related genre cf. S. Bartsch, Decoding the Ancient Novel (Princeton 1989), esp. 37-8.
Bartsch is surprisingly silent about the poetic precedents of the novelists' technique.
49
For poetic ekphrasis cf. S. D. Goldhill and R. G. Osborne (eds.), Art and Text (Cambridge,
forthcoming); A.S. Becker, 'Reading poetry through a distant lens: ecphrasis, Greek rhetori-
cians, and the pseudo-Hesiodic "Shield of Herakles"', AJP 113 (1992) 5-24.
 Jason's cloak 57
importance of order in the description, and this is reinforced both by
the patterning, according to introductory phrase, of the scenes into
groups of 2-3-2, and by the framing of the first six scenes by Zeus
and Apollo. On the other hand, the opening address to the reader,
'you would more easily cast your eyes on the rising sun than look
upon the cloak's redness' (1.725-6), suggests a blinding unity which
defies close or clear analysis. The Kyklopes seem to offer a 'natural',
chronological beginning,50 but in the description and viewing of such
a cloak one could presumably begin anywhere; descriptions of works
of art in fiction always impose an order which dramatises this tension
between 'static' material art and narrative, in which chronological
sequence is crucial. So too the image of Aphrodite in Ares' shield
invites our interpretation by calling up the whole notion of artistic
mimesis. How can an image be &TpeK6S, 'exact', let alone our readings
of that image? Appeal to the actual practices of contemporary art 51
and to contemporary interest in the science of optics52 makes clear
that Apollonius is here interested in the nature of 'realism', in the
'representability' of the images on the cloak. Though the case has
often been overstated, it is clear that the scenes are much more
plausible as decorative images than are the elaborate narratives of
the Homeric shield.53 The apparent archaic unconcern with verisi-
militude has been replaced by an apparent Hellenistic 'realism'.
Appearances deceive, however, and this very 'realism' paradoxically
clouds meaning by denying the detailed narratives which Homer
offers. It is the very simplicity of the images which poses the major
interpretative problem.
It is no surprise (or scandal) that modern critics are far from
agreed on how to 'read' the cloak.54 There is an obvious parallel
between the image of Pelops escaping with Hippodameia and the
50
Cf. above pp. 5 3 - 4 .
51
Cf., e.g., T . Gelzer, 'Mimus u n d Kunsttheorie bei Herondas, Mimiambus 4', in Catalepton.
Festschrift fur Bernhard Wyss zum8o. Geburtstag (Basel 1985) 96-116, Zanker 1987.47, 69-70,
Fowler 1989. Chapter 1.
52
Cf., e.g., Fowler 1989.113.
53
For the ancient view cf. ZbT //. 18.511. The genealogy of Tityos is always adduced as the
'unrepresentable' exception; the point is not to be pressed, however, as it can be argued that
to represent 'a person' is to represent their genealogy - Tityos and 'the child of Elare, the
nursling of Earth' are, in this sense, synonymous. The narrative of the chariot race and
perhaps the details in iepiEvoi and Aiyaivcov (738, 740) may be thought to stretch the bounds
of'representability'. For 'dewy' cf. above n. 34.
54
Cf, e.g., Lawall 1966. 154-8, Collins 1967.55-85. It will be clear that I have sympathy
with the caution of Fusillo (n. on 1.725-9 and 1985.301), but not with the nihilism of
Shapiro 1980.275.
 58 Images of love

subsequent history ofJason and Medea. Like Aietes, Oinomaos had

a disturbing oracle — that he would be killed by a son-in-law — and,
like Aietes, his evil plans are thwarted by his daughter's love for a
stranger. The union of Pelops and Hippodameia led to grief in the
next generation with the killing of Thyestes' children by their uncle
Atreus; so too the children ofJason and Medea were to meet a grisly
fate.55 Oinomaos' charioteer, Myrtilos, was later thrown into the sea
and killed by Pelops, a fate which suggests the usual version of the
death of Apsyrtus, whom Apollonius makes Aietes' charioteer; both
Jason and Pelops had to be purified for these crimes.56 The scene of
the building of Thebes suggests the power of music, prominent in
Books 1 and 4 through the figure of Orpheus; many critics have also
wanted to see in Zethos a paradigmatic illustration of the purpose-
lessness of'brawn' without 'brain', a theme most obvious elsewhere
in the character of Idas. The image of Aphrodite has clear relevance
both to events on Lemnos and to the later narrative of Medea's love;
specifically, it looks forward to the goddess's toilet-scene at 3.43-50.
The Teleboan raid, on the other hand, suggests bloody conflict of a
type directly opposed to the subtlety of the love-goddess, conflict
whose grim consequences are soon seen in the disastrous events at
Cyzicus, where love and war are tragically intermingled. Sand-
wiched between Aphrodite and Pelops, this scene also points to the
real differences between Heracles and Jason. Finally, Apollo (under
whose protection the Argonauts sail) and Tityos introduce the clash
of Olympian and chthonic powers which resonates through such
major scenes as the boxing-match in Book 2 and the slaughter at the
end of Book 3.57
The cloak thus presents scenes which are partial analogues of
elements of the epic, with correspondences which are both oblique
and polyvalent; we may in fact see here a genuine Hellenistic de-
55
I do not know whether or not it is relevant that Atreus and Thyestes quarrelled over a
golden lamb which served as a mark of a rightful claim to the kingship.
56
For these myths cf. Apollodorus, Epitome 2.8-10 with Frazer's notes. Some ancient writers
even made Myrtilos the son of Hermes and Phaethousa, a mother who inevitably suggests
'Phaethon', Apsyrtus' nickname (3.245-6), cf. 1 i«752-8a.
57
Virgil may have been influenced by this scene in his use of gigantomachic themes in the
description of Actium on Aeneas' shield, cf. P. R. Hardie, Hermes i n (1983) 320-4.
The juxtaposition to Pelops makes noteworthy Tityos' later role as the exemplum of destruc-
tive erotic torments, cf. Lucretius 3.992-4 (with Kenney's note), Newman 1986.80. Rose
1985.35 suggests that Leto's veil links 'Medea's initial and tentative sensation of love with
the abusive sexuality of Leto's attacker, a connection that prefigures the sinister develop-
ment of Medea's passion in Book 4'.
 Suffering for love 59
velopment from archaic and classical technique in ekphrasis.58 The
scenes suggest doubt, conflict, deceit and the problematic of choice;
the small number of the scenes emphasises how partial and un-
clarified a cosmos we are being offered, in contrast to the shield of
Achilles which was thought to convey a complete and unified cos-
mos. Between the description of the cloak and the powerfully erotic
simile which describes Jason's movement to the palace is the account
of Jason's refusal to allow Atalante to join the expedition, 'because
he feared the terrible strife which love causes'. The irony could not
be more pointed.

(iii) SUFFERING FOR LOVE

At the opening of Book 3 Medea and eros enter the poem together.59
A few lines later Hera suggests to Athena that they ask Aphrodite to
ask her son 'to bewitch (8eA£ou) the daughter of Aietes, mistress
of drugs (TroAu9dp|jiaKov), with eros for Jason'. Eros, bewitchment,
powerful potions - here are the main themes of the Medea narrative.
Subject to the magical power (6eA£is) of eros, Medea offers Jason the
magical power of her drugs. Upon her in turn Jason exercises the
magical power oipeitho, persuasion and rhetoric (3.975-1145), and
receives in return the pharmaka with which he may triumph in the
tests imposed by Aietes.60 The murder of Apsyrtus is blamed by the
poet on the destructive power of eros (4.445), but its success depends
upon the magical power of words (4.435-6) and drugs (4.442).
In the future - which is both known and unknown - lies Euripides'
Medea, in which the Colchian princess will use her powerful drugs to
exact revenge for the spurning of her love by a husband who seeks
refuge in the weapons of rhetoric.
When set against these narrative imperatives, the worries of mod-
ern critics about the 'consistency' and 'credibility' of Apollonius'
Medea seem increasingly misguided.61 It might be tempting simply
to accept that Medea has two quite distinct aspects - the impression-
able virgin and the dangerous handler of potions - and leave it at
58
Cf. A. Perutelli, La narrazione commentata. Studi suWepillio latino (Pisa 1979) 3 6 - 8 ; Fusillo
1983. 83-96.
59
The word epcos does not occur in the first two books. This is, of course, not to say that the
theme is absent; cf. the foregoing discussion of the scenes on Lemnos.
60
For the general background cf. J. De Romilly, Magic and Rhetoric in Ancient Greece (Cam-
bridge, Mass. 1975).
61
Cf. above pp. 12-15; for a fuller account of Medea's 'character' cf. Hunter 1987.
60 Images of love
that.62 On the other hand, it is crucially important that the apparent
paradoxes of Medea's character are determined by the narrative
themes just described; Medea is very deliberately drawn as she is in
order to explore the inter-relations between magic, eros and rhetoric.
Here Helen acts as a powerful exemplum of the agent and victim of
eros,63 and the themes themselves are taken over by Apollonius from
Pindar's narrative of the same events:
After that
they came to the Phasis, where
they pitted their might against the grim Colchians in the
presence of Aietes himself. But the mistress of the swiftest
darts, Cyprogeneia,
yoking the dappled wryneck, four-spoked,
to an indissoluble wheel,
brought for the first time the maddening bird from Olympus
to men and thus taught the son of Aison to be skilled in
supplications and incantations,
so that he might take away from Medea her awe-filled
reverence for her parents, and that Hellas, passionately
longed for,
might with the whip of Persuasion set her awhirl (5ov£oi) as
she was ablaze in her heart.
And at once she revealed to him the outcome of her father's
trials.
Then she prepared (c)>apuaKcbaaias) with oil the sap of cut
roots as a remedy against harsh pain
and gave it to him for anointing himself, and thus they agreed
to enter in common a sweet union between themselves.
(Pindar, Pyth. 4.211-23, trans. B. K. Braswell)
In both poets there is an exchange of 'magic', though Apollonius
omits the erotic magic of the iynx while preserving the divinely-aided
power ofpeitho. After the exchange of Book 3, the grim events of Book
4 explore the bitterness of eros, in culmination of the theme which has
dominated the text since Medea's heart first 'flooded with sweet
pain' (3.290). With the grimmest of these events, the murder of
Apsyrtus, I begin.
The trick which lures Apsyrtus to his death — deceitful words64 and
62
So, e.g., Dyck 1989.456.
63
Cf. below p. 67.
64
Cf. below pp. 144-5.
 Suffering for love 61
gifts of lovely robes - recalls the deceit which killed Creon and his
daughter in Euripides' Medea, just as Medea's preceding speech of
reproof to Jason (4.355-90) is clearly a reworking of the parallel
speech in the tragedy (Med. 465-519). The tragic Medea does not
dissemble what is likely to happen when a woman's bed is wronged
(cf. 265—6, 1367—8), and the chorus of the play sing of the dangerous
excesses to which love can lead (627-43); the curse on 'reckless Eros'
(4.445-9) 65 which introduces the killing of Apsyrtus has often been
compared to a choral song. Here then Medea takes the only way out
of a desperate situation, but it is a solution predicated upon our
knowledge of her terrible powers. What hangs over her is not merely
the abandonment of an Ariadne, but also being handed over to her
father whose taste for cruelty she well knows (cf. 3.378-9). Her desire
to burn the Argo (4.392) in fact echoes an intention of Aietes himself
(3.582, cf. 4.223); in her anger she is her father's daughter, 66 and
Jason must resort to the same tactics with her as he used to calm
Aietes.67 The horror of the murder of Apsyrtus, even if epic legend
knew more horrible versions,68 is real enough - echoes of the murder
of Agamemnon and the whole shaping of the scene as a terrible
sacrifice before a shrine69 are designed to shock — but it comes as a
climax in a pattern of events and not as an isolated and inexplicable
catastrophe. Moreover, the deception and killing of Apsyrtus is a
sinister and perverted reprise of the meeting ofJason and Medea at
the temple of Hecate; it is thus a particular instance of how the
meaning of much of Book 4 is created out of a 'rewriting' of earlier
events. Apsyrtus is told to come alone (4.418, cf. 3.908) to a temple

65
Quoted below pp. 116-17.
66
Note 3.368 ~ 4.391, 740.
67
Note 3.386-8 ~ 4.395-8; 3.396 ~ 4.410.
68
Apollonius avoids any butchery by Medea herself. The dismemberment (maschalismos) of
Apsyrtus' corpse in part looks to the traditional version of the dismemberment of the child
Apsyrtus, cf above p. 21.
69
For echoes of the death of Agamemnon cf. 4.468 ~ Od. 4.535, 11.411, Vian 111 22. Through
Aeschylus' Agamemnon 'the language of sacrifical ritual runs like a leitmotiv' (W. Burkert,
GRBS 7 (1966) 119). It is tempting to seek some link between the purple tapestry of the
tragedy by which Agamemnon is 'lured' to his death and the purple robe of Dionysus which
was one of the treacherous gifts to Apsyrtus (4.423-34). Not only the position in front of
the temple and the explicit comparison of 4.468 mark the killing as 'sacrificial', but the
'willingness' of the victim is also important (for the ancient sources cf. W. Burkert, Homo
Necans (Eng. trans., Berkeley/Los Angeles 1983) 4 n. 10). The death of Clytemnestra in
Euripides' Electra may be compared, cf. J. R. Porter, 'Tiptoeing through the corpses:
Euripides' Electra, Apollonius, and the Bouphonia\ GRBS 31 (1990) 255-80.
 62 Images of love

to secure the Fleece and eventually to return home with Medea; the
talk of gifts with which Medea deceived her maids (3.909-10) be-
comes the bait with which Apsyrtus is lured (4.422—34). The dangers
of deceit are here revealed in violence and death, and the promise of
further deaths when agreements are broken again in Greece.
Thus Jason and Medea are bound together by killing, just as their
final separation will also be marked by deceitful killing. Before this,
however, it is the distance between them, the difference in their
emotional investment in their relationship, which dominates. When
they leave the temple after their first meeting, Jason goes back
'rejoicing' to his companions (3.1148) and tells them of Medea's
help, which causes them in turn to rejoice (3.1171); the group-
solidarity of the Argonauts is here stressed to mark the support which
Jason enjoys (cf. 3.1163, 1165-6). Medea, on the other hand, goes
back silent and aloof to fall into a gesture of lonely mourning and
despair (3.1159-62). This is the last we see of her until the opening
of the fourth book, where the terrified girl finds the heroes having an
all-night party (4.69). When she begs them to rescue her, offers to
secure the Fleece for them and reminds Jason of his promises, he
'rejoiced greatly' (4.92-3) and repeated his pledge to marry her in
Greece. Jason's motivating impulse - so different from Medea's - is
the need to complete the tasks imposed upon him by Pelias and
Aietes and the desire to get home. In securing the Fleece he must be
completely dependent upon her,70 and when we are told that the
dragon's roar causes mothers to fling their arms around their new-
born babies (4.136-8), we understand that Medea seeks to protect
Jason as a mother cares for her child.71 This gives bitter point to
Medea's exploitation of Andromache's famous plea to Hector (//.
6.429-30) in her desperation on the journey away from Colchis:
C
TCO 9rj|ii Tef) Koupr| TE 6auocp TE
auTOKaaiyvf)TT| T6 peO* cEAAd6a yaTav EireaOai.'
'Therefore I say that it is as your daughter and wife and very sister72
that I am travelling with you to Hellas.' (4.368-9)
These same Homeric verses had been echoed at 3.732—3 as Medea
stressed her devotion to Chalciope; there the verses had been part of
70
Note 4.149, 163.
71
Cf. my note on 3.747-8; for a different interpretation cf. Hurst 1967. 105-6.
72
This clearly foreshadows Medea's abandonment of her real brother to his fate, cf. Frankel
1968.481, Paduano 1972.219. There is a similar effect at Eur. Med. 257 (cf. Page on 231).
 Sufferingfor love 63

a nuanced (self-) deception. Their reprise in Book 4 marks how the

tables have been turned on Medea. In Colchis, moreover, Jason had
been thus dependent upon her; now she is helpless.
Medea's speeches in Book 4 are full of bitter echoes of the previous
book, just as the 'sharp pains' (4.351) which torment her are a
perversion and consequence of the amatory pain of Book 3. A partic-
ularly important theme is that of'agreements' and their betrayal. At
3.1105 Medea had remarked sadly that, although Greeks may keep
agreements (auvrjuoauvou) honourably, her father would not act like
the Minos of the Ariadne—Theseus story which Jason had just re-
lated to her. We do not have to rely on our knowledge of events
'outside the poem' to appreciate the irony here. On Drepane, Arete,
the Hellenophile queen, will circumvent an agreement by allowing
the Argonauts to anticipate the king's binding decision: there is thus
more than one way to 'honour' agreements. Moreover, in the fourth
book Medea entreats Jason not to keep his agreement (auvSgairi)
about her with Apsyrtus (4.340, 378, 390), because this would entail
the transgression of his agreement with her, an agreement made
through gestures and promises both at the temple of Hecate and on
the Argo itself. In fact, Apsyrtus is lured to his death by yet another
deceitful arrangement, and Jason's agreement with him amounts to
no more than dolos and ate (4.404). It was Medea herself who began
the catalogue of deceit when she told her maids that she had agreed
to meet Jason at the temple so that they could get the gifts he would
bring and give him in return a drug that would destroy him (3.907-
11); as we have seen, these motifs of deceptive agreements, gifts and
drugs reverberate through the rest of the myth and culminate in the
events of Euripides' Medea. In this speech to her maids Medea intro-
duces the theme of 'error, transgression', which is closely bound to
the theme of agreements:

'I have made a terrible mistake (-napr)AITOV) , dear friends, and I did not
realise that I should not go out among the foreign men who roam our land.'

Medea's words are, of course, truer than she knows; she is indeed
making a terrible mistake, and the verb she uses will return to haunt
her. Jason urges her to keep her agreement to help him, because
to do otherwise would be 'to commit a sin', ccAiTecrOai, 'in a sacred
place' (3.981). In the fourth book she must use this language again,
but this time to accuse Jason of breaking his agreements, udAa
 64 Images of love
yap ueyav f|AiT6s opKov, 'grievously have you broken a mighty oath'
(4.388).
In her accusations against Jason, the 'Nausicaa' figure of Book 3
gives way to darker and more sinister representations of the female.
She presents herself as a Helen 7 3 and a Clytemnestra who has
brought 'deadly shame upon women'. 7 4 In a position of complete de-
pendence - cf. the echo of Andromache's words at 4.367-9 discussed
above - Medea nevertheless carries the threat of a Clytemnestra. In
her speeches on Drepane, however, the old themes of agreement
and transgression return ever more desperately. T o Arete Medea
confesses her error in helping Jason (T]AITOV, 4.1023), and she re-
minds the crew again of their agreements (auvOecrias T6 KCU opKia,
4.1042) in a reversal of Jason's plea to her at the temple of Hecate
(cf. 3.985-9). Where Medea once had power, she is now powerless,
exposed to the dangers of a 'sinful verdict', 8IKT| &Arrf|Ucov (4.1057).
This last phrase points to a key aspect of the moral language I have
been tracing through these scenes. What would constitute a 'sinful'
verdict would, of course, depend upon whether you were Colchian
or Greek; there are no moral absolutes in this poem - moral language
is always a function of the rhetoric of a particular situation, even
when used by the poet's 'own voice'. 75 At one level the phrase may
be explained as the 'actual' words of reassurance spoken by the
Greeks to Medea and conveyed by the poet in indirect speech, 76 but
the recurrent lexical pattern which I have traced allows us to sense
other levels as well. 77
The tragic ironies of Medea's position have thus been carefully
laid out long before the poet's intervention at the moment of her
defloration:
aAAa yap ou TTOT€ <|>0Aa 6ur|Tra0ecov dvOpcoTrcov
TepmoAfjs 87T£|3r||jev oAcoi Tro5r ovv SE TIS ate!
aviT).

73
4.361-2 ~ Od. 4.263-4; cf. below p. 67.
74
4.367-8 ~ Od. 11.433-5; Dufner 1988.185-8 notes that Jason and Medea reflect both of
the contrasted pairs of the Odyssey: they are both Odysseus-Penelope and Agamemnon-
Cry temnestra (or Aigisthos-Clytemnestra).
78
Cf. below pp. 109-12.
76
Cf. below p. 144 for the theoretical issues involved.
77
For other views of the phrase cf. Wilamowitz 1924.11 203 n. 4, Frankel 1968.560 (but 2.1028
does not really help here). As for the choice of singular or plural verb in 4.1057, Vian (Mote
complementaire ad loc.) makes some fair points, but the singular is to be preferred: <5cpcoyfjs
distances the Greeks from Medea and the singular increases her psychological and physical
isolation.
 Suffering for love 65
Never do we tribes of suffering mortals tread with whole foot upon the
path of delight; always there is some better grief to accompany our
joys. (4.1165-7)
While she waits to hear Alcinous' decision, Medea's swirling emo-
tions are compared to the spindle turned by a grieving widow as her
children cry around her (4.1060—7). At the point where she is to
marry Jason, the grim future is marked by the figure of the woman
who has lost a husband. This simile picks up and completes the
comparison of the onset of Medea's passion to a fire blazing up when
a working woman puts on fresh sticks (3.291-7). The two similes
mark the progress of her suffering; neither suggests imminent release.
At the hinge of Medea's suffering stands her departure from
Colchis. The poet asks the Muse to take over the narrative because
he is unable to decide whether to call the force which caused Medea
to leave Colchis 'the wretched grief of destructive desire' (a*rns Tif\[X(x
Suaiuepov) or a 'terrible panic' (<pu£av a€iKeAir|v);78 in fact, it soon
becomes plain that this alleged dichotomy is illusory: love and fear
cannot be so easily separated.
Hera's responsibility for Medea's abandonment of Colchis and its
purpose — the punishment of Pelias — were foreshadowed by the poet
at
3-i i33~6 at the conclusion of her meeting with Jason. Here the
theme is picked up as we see Medea for the first time since her return
to the palace. As in Book 3 (cf. 3.818), Hera intervenes to cause
Medea to reject suicide in favour of a movement towards Jason and
the offering of help in the tasks he must confront. In both books the
movement takes the form of a journey. 79 In Book 3 the journey is
conducted in the light of day (3.823-4), whereas her flight requires
the cover of night; to meet Jason, she drove a wagon and was
accompanied by attendants through the broad road (3.872-4), but
now she flees alone, on bare feet, by the narrow back-streets; in
Book 3 the people looked away for fear of catching her eye, but in
Book 4 she must cover her face for fear of being seen; in Book 3 she
was compared to Artemis driving her deer-drawn chariot as the
wild animals fawn around her in fear, whereas in Book 4 she is her-
self terrified and is successively compared to a deer, startled by the
baying of hunting-dogs, and to a wretched slave-girl.
78
Text and interpretation are problematic. Hutchinson 1988.122 adopts Maas' \IEV for \\w,
and explains that the poet cannot choose whether to tell of Medea's grief or her flight. Cf.
further below pp. 105-6; Hunter 1987.134-9; Goldhill 1991.293.
79
Cf. Briggs 1981.964, Rose 1985.36-7.
 66 Images of love

The simile of the deer (4.12-13) is of a type common in the Iliad,

and thus suggests that Medea's struggle is like the rout of a soldier or
an army in battle. Her groans (v. 19) are expressed by a verb
(Ppuxaa0ai) which Homer uses of the groans of dying soldiers; here
again the Iliad is rewritten in a different mode. The comparison of
young girls to deer is, however, also common both in poetry gener-
ally and, specifically, in erotic contexts,80 and so the image here suits
the ambivalence of Medea's emotions to which the poet's opening
dilemma pointed. The over-determination of the simile, its layered
literariness, is of a piece with the whole presentation of Medea's
'character' which I have been considering. A second simile (4.35-
40)81 compares her to a girl from a rich family who has recently been
captured in war and entered slavery far from her home, but has not
yet become accustomed to hardship and the demands of a cruel
mistress. The simile again evokes the painful world of the Iliad - we
think particularly of the fate which hangs over Andromache — in a
domestic and private context. Medea is a 'prize of war', even if in
Apollonius' poem the Greeks and the Colchians do not at this point
come to blows. The Medea of Euripides too can assert that she was
'plundered from a barbarian land' (v.256). The slave-girl simile also
looks forward to Medea's future. As she leaves for a life of exile and
marriage, Apollonius exploits the similarities between Greek mar-
riage and funerary ritual:82 with gestures familiar from the prelude
to the death of women in tragedy - kissing her bed, cutting her hair
— Medea finally abandons the virginal chamber which had played
such a crucial role in the previous book (3.645-64) and opts for a
life with Jason. The simile, however, suggests not merely a grim view
of marriage in general,83 but offers little hope for Medea's future in
Greece where, like the slave-girl, she will lose the grand status she
enjoyed at home and become subordinate to a 'mistress' (avacrcra).
Unlike the slave-girl, however, she will exact a terrible revenge.
The apparent uncertainty about her flight continues through
the rest of the poem. At 4-355ff. she reproaches Jason bitterly:
she has brought disgrace upon women through her 'wantonness'
(liapyoauvT)), and left Colchis ou KOCTCX Koajjiov dvai8f)Tcoi 16TT|TI,
80
Cf. Anacreon, PMG 408; Sappho fr. 58.16 Voigt; Archilochus, SLG 478.47; Hor. C. 1.23;
A. P. Burnett, Three Archaic Poets (London 1983) 93-4.
81
Text and interpretation are again uncertain, cf. Hunter 1987.136.
82
Cf., e.g., J. M. Redfield, Arethusa 15 (1982) 188-91; R. Seaford, CQ35 (1985) 318-19.
83
Cf. Hunter 1987.137 citing Soph. fr. 583 R.
 Suffering for love 67
'through shameless, improper desire' (4.360), because she trusted his
promises of marriage. When she must plead before Arete, however,
she blames the ate to which all mortals are prone, denies that she left
Colchis willingly - contrast Jason's proud assertion at 4.194 'with her
consent shall I take her home as my bride' - 8 4 but rather through the
persuasion of hateful fear, and she denies 'wantonness'. These differ-
ences do not reflect merely the changing rhetorical needs of each
situation, but also changing perceptions in the context of only partial
knowledge. One of Apollonius' most innovative and influential con-
cerns is the frailty of explanation for human action within an epic
narrative: characters struggle to explain, while readers know more
than the characters (e.g. that Hera is at work), but still not enough.
In these concerns Apollonius was particularly influenced by the
figure of Helen, whose flight from Sparta with Paris provoked a war
and whose motives had been much discussed by poets, philosophers
and historians.85 In Euripides' Trojan Women Helen blames her be-
haviour on Aphrodite (vv. 940-50), whereas Hecuba blames Helen's
'wantonness' (uapyoown), and Gorgias' Helen too offers a range of
explanations for Helen's departure from Sparta which are not unlike
those canvassed for Medea's flight in the Argonautica. The power of
Helen's beauty was as dangerous as Medea's magic, 86 and Helen too
was a worker in drugs {Od. 4.219—34). In the Odyssey Helen claims
to have been the victim of ate from Aphrodite which caused her to
abandon her home and family (4.259-64, 23.218-24), and her bitter
regrets in the Iliad clearly look forward to Medea's complaints in
Euripides and Apollonius (cf. //. 3.171-80, 6.343-58, 24.761-75).
Helen and Penelope are, moreover, a very important structuring
opposition in the description of Medea's suffering in Book 3. 87
Finally, the story of Helen embodies the clash of Europe and Asia, a
theme with repeated echoes throughout the fourth book of the epic. 88
Helen's coming to Troy proved as disastrous to that city as Medea's
arrival in Greece was to prove.
84
This verse also reveals the dangerous elision of parental consent: it should be the bride's
father who is 'willing'. This ambivalence is reinforced by an echo of Od. 3.272 (the adulter-
ous liaison of Aigisthos and Clytemnestra !).
85
Cf, e.g., N. Zagagi, 'Helen of Troy; encomium and apology', WS 98 (1985) 63-88.
86
Cf. Eur. Tr. 892-3, 'she captures men's eyes, storms their cities, burns their homes: such are
the spells she casts (KT]Ar||iaTa)'.
87
Cf. Hunter 1989.29, adding Shumaker 1969.96-125.
88
Note that Herodotus makes the abduction of Medea the last in the series of actions which
inspired Paris to abduct Helen (1.2-3).
68 Images of love
Thus Medea embodies and exemplifies many of the central con-
cerns of the epic, and her representation through the rewriting of
Homeric characters illustrates one of Apollonius' primary strategies
for the production of meaning. The critical tendency to treat her in
isolation from the totality of the poem in which she appears is thus
as ruinous as it is understandable.

(iv) DREPANE

For Odysseus the island of the Phaeacians, Scherie, was the last stop
before Ithaca, a kind of half-way house between the fantasy world of
his adventures and the realities of home. Homer so devises his narra-
tive that, when Odysseus lands on the island, the worst is both
behind and in front of him, as it is on Scherie that he tells the
story of his adventures. For the Argonauts too, this island, called
by Apollonius by its earlier name Drepane ('Sickle') and assimilated
to the world outside myth by identification with Corcyra (Corfu),
should have marked the closing of a chapter. The island is reached
after the Argo has successfully negotiated the grim Planktai, an obsta-
cle as great for the return journey as the Symplegades were for the
outward trip; on the island Jason and Medea are married, though
they would have preferred to wait until they had returned to Iolkos
(4.1161-4), and the threat of the pursuing Colchians is finally
ended. The Argonauts' happy arrival on the island is actually
compared to a safe return home: the people of the island welcome
them as though they were 'their own children' and the crew rejoices
as though they had reached Thessaly (4.994-1000). In fact, how-
ever, the sufferings in Libya and the Cretan Sea lie in front of the
Argonauts: they have followed in Odysseus' footsteps, only to be
cheated of his consolations. As usual, the Homeric model is evoked
to mark difference.
Homer's Phaeacians had colonised the island from Hypereia un-
der the leadership of Nausithoos, Alcinous' father (Od. 6.4-12), but
Apollonius makes them the autochthonous products of the blood
spilled when Kronos castrated his father Ouranos. An etymological
resonance between haima, 'blood' (4.992) and Haimonia, i.e. Thessaly
(4.1000), suggests an affinity between the Phaeacians and the Ar-
gonauts, and seems to bode well for the help they will receive. 89 More
89
For this 'etymology' cf. my note on 3.1086.
 Drepane 69
ominous, however, are the rival explanations for the name of the
island given by the poet in a typically parenthetic style:
Buried in the island there lies, according to the story - be merciful, Muses!,
unwillingly do I relate the tale of earlier men - the sickle with which Kronos
pitilessly cut off his father's genitals (uf)6£a).90 (Others say that it is the
harvesting scythe of Demeter, the earth-goddess; for Deo once dwelled in
that land, and taught the Titans to reap the nourishing grain, out of love
for Macris). From that time the holy nurse of the Phaeacians has been
called Drepane, and likewise the Phaeacians themselves are born from the
blood of Ouranos. (4.984-92)
The castration myth is not told just for its own sake. There are here
faint, but disturbing, echoes of the murder of Apsyrtus, whose body
Jason mutilated on the island where he had killed him (4.477),
striking, like Kronos (Hes. Theog. i74fF.), from ambush; the history
of Drepane thus reinforces a direct link between that killing and the
marriage of Jason and Medea. The alternative aition also suggests
themes from the main narrative: 'Demeter the earth-goddess' recalls
the importance of Hecate-Persephone; Medea and her family are
Titans, and Medea taught Jason how to 'harvest a crop'; she too
acted out of 'love', though Demeter's love for Macris was not sex-
ual. 91 There is, of course, no exact correspondence between the main
narrative and these myths; rather, as with the scenes on Jason's
cloak,92 oblique analogues of the story introduce the coming narra-
tive and stand in tension with the apparently happy arrival -
Drepane, unlike the Homeric Scherie, is implicated in the grim past
of its Greek visitors. The 'digression' thus deepens the narrative in
ways comparable to the use of similes and pictorial descriptions.
The turbulent past and future ofJason and Medea are contrasted
not only with the 'normality' of the royal couple, Alcinous and Arete,
but also with the potential pairing of Odysseus and Nausicaa with
which Homer toys in Odyssey 6-8. Even the possibility that Medea
will be handed over to the Colchians is expressed in language which
90
This word is also used, in a different sense, in t h e corresponding passage of the Odyssey
(6.12), a n d t h e Hesiodic version of the castration h a d already used its polyvalence to good
effect (Theog, 166, 172, 1 8 0 - 1 ) : O u r a n o s lost his medea because h e mesato. W h e t h e r o r n o t
Apollonius is here indebted to Call. fr. 43.69-71 (Zancle) is not germane to the present
discussion.
91
For a similar equivocation with 4>IAETCT6OCI cf. 3.1002.
92
Cf. above pp. 58-9. The Drepane myths are well discussed (though to a different conclu-
sion) by Dufner I988.io6ff; Dyck 1989.465 is on the right track, though his discussion does
not point to detailed correspondences.
 70 Images of love

resonates with the vocabulary of a kind of 'perverted' marriage, 93

thus preparing for the solution which Alcinous imposes. The Colchian
demand seeks to impose an unwelcome 'marriage' of death upon
Medea, but paradoxically hastens her real marriage.
The Odyssean background is nowhere more striking than in the
figure of Queen Arete. When Medea wishes the queen 'children'
(4.1028) we reflect that Medea herself is cast in the role of an
unhappy Nausicaa, Arete's daughter, and that her speech to the
queen has an important model in Odysseus' plea to Nausicaa. That
Medea is already implicated in the murder of her own brother and
will go on to kill her own children is an irony that the poet does not
need to belabour. Frankel in fact emended this wish out of the text, 94
but it is, for a married woman, the equivalent of Odysseus' wish for
marriage for Nausicaa; children are seen as the natural fulfilment of
marriage, 95 just as marriage is the natural telos of a young girl's life.
The fusion of Medea and Nausicaa invests the wish with both liter-
ary playfulness and sinister foreboding. For the purposes of this wish
we are to imagine that Arete is still very young - the Odyssey lies a
long way in the future - but within her marriage she exercises artful
control (signalled by the epithet TroAinroTVia, 'grand mistress', at
1069).96 In the Odyssey Arete's role does not seem to correspond to the
importance which Nausicaa and the disguised Athena initially
ascribe to her,97 but Apollonius corrects this by making her truly
responsible for saving Medea by her speedy action in informing the
Argonauts of what Alcinous' decision would be. These 'parallel'
power structures on the island are marked by the contrast between
4.1111 —13 and 4.1176—81: Arete, accompanied by her maidser-
vants, operates in the secrecy of night and through the agency of a
93
Cf. 4 . 1 0 0 4 - 5 , 1015. 6§CCITOV (1004) is most plausibly associated with E^OCITECO, a verb which
can m e a n 'ask in m a r r i a g e from' (cf. Soph. Track. 10); cf. also L S J s.v. ocyco B2, a n d 4.441
w h e r e a similar play is in o p e r a t i o n . O n l y es splitting t h e genitive p h r a s e prevents a
complete ' m i s r e a d i n g ' of the verse. F o r EK8I6CO^I (1015) cf. L S J s.v. 2a.
94
F r a n k e l 1968.556.
95
Cf. (3ioTOV T6AECT(J>6pov in 1027. T h e scholiast glosses this adjective as TOV TrdvTa TEAEIOTTOI-
OUVTCC, a n d V i a n a n d P a d u a n o see a simple reference t o longevity; it is, h o w e v e r , a t t r a c t i v e
to t a k e it closely w i t h ' c h i l d r e n ' . Elsewhere, this w o r d h a s c o n n e c t i o n s with fertility a n d
fruitfulness (cf. L S J s.v. 11 2) a n d t h e c o r r e s p o n d i n g v e r b is used b y d o c t o r s of b r i n g i n g a
b a b y ' t o t e r m ' . C o m m e n t a t o r s rightly identify t h e e p i t h e t TEAEIOC for H e r a r e s o n a t i n g in
4.382, as M e d e a r e m i n d s J a s o n of his obligations.
96
Elsewhere only 1.1125, 1151 of the Asian mother-goddess. Livrea sees 'un pizzico di ironia'
in the epithet. For the Ptolemaic significance of this scene cf. below pp. 161-2.
97
Cf. Od. 6.303-15, 7.66-77; B. Fenik, Studies in the Odyssey (Wiesbaden 1974) 105-30.
 Drepane 71
go-between;98 Alcinous is accompanied by the leading men of the
state as he personally makes his public proclamation in the bright
dawn. Arete's skill brings it about that Alcinous' decision is both
respected and subverted.
The bedroom scene between Alcinous and Arete has a close paral-
lel in Herodotus," but probably takes its cue from the closing verses
of Odyssey 7:
There, then, patient Odysseus lay down to rest in the morticed bedstead
inside the echoing portico, while Alcinous slept in an inner room of the
lofty palace, and the queen his wife shared his bed. {Od. 7.344-7, trans.
Shewring)
What more natural than that the Homeric king and queen should
have discussed the remarkable stranger who had appeared miracu-
lously at their court? Apollonius 'writes' this missing scene for us.
Against Medea's tortured sleeplessness - a sleeplessness compared to
that of a poor widow (4.1064) — is set the peaceful 'normality' of the
marital bedroom where (at least in Greek epic) every night is like
every other.100 The speed with which Alcinous falls asleep as soon as
he has told his wife of his plans (4.1110) not merely contrasts with the
sleepless anguish of Medea, whose fate lies in his hands, but also
comes as a surprise, as the poet has led us to expect a rather different
conclusion to the conversation. Both the introduction to Arete's
speech, 'as a wife she addressed her lawful husband with affec-
tionate 101 words', and Medea's wish that the queen be blessed with
children have prepared us for marital love-making (if of a delicate
and epic kind). So too have faint echoes of the deception of Zeus by
Hera in Iliad 14.102 Alcinous and Arete are a kind of mortal substitute
for the Zeus and Hera of traditional myth: like these gods they are
both married to each other and, in some versions at least, brother
and sister,103 and they function in the Argonautica as the tools of their
divine counterparts (cf. 4.1100, 1200).104 Virgil, at any rate, seems
to have picked up this hint for the scene in which Venus wheedles
98
For the effective use of indirect speech here cf. below p. 145.
99
3.134 (Darius and Atossa).
100 N o t e <as before' (4.1068), and the formality of the titles in 1069-72.
101
OccAepoTcri; cf. my note on 3.656.
102 Qf V i a n , Note complementaire t o 4.1072, m o .
103
Cf. Hainsworth on Od. 7.54-5; below p. 161.
104
Note that, in acting to forestall the consequences of her husband's intended action, Arete
replays Hera's action at 4.576^
 72 Images of love
new armour for her son out of Vulcan (Aen. 8.370-406). Although
the sexual bribery is there much more explicit,105 the debt to
Apollonius is clear, and the contrast between the conclusions to the
two scenes pointedly amusing.
Arete's speech to her husband picks up many themes from
Medea's speech to her, but adds a powerful rhetoric of her own.106
She calls Aietes UTT6p<|>iaAos, 'excessive (in pride, violence etc.)'
(4.1083). How does she know? Has she extracted it from between
the lines of Medea's speech, or is it merely a rhetorical flourish?
Ancient critics were certainly aware that Homeric characters some-
times appear to have more knowledge than they really 'should'
have, 107 but Apollonius' concerns are here rather more than just
imitation of a Homeric technique. When Arete tells Alcinous that
Jason is bound by oath 'as I hear' (4.1084), we may wonder whether
she has had her own spies out. Perhaps, but we should recall again
the inappropriateness of a simple concept of'realism' in the discussion
of 'character' in an epic poem.108 Arete's speech picks up familiar
themes from the earlier part of the epic without too much concern
for modern standards of strict 'consistency'; 'as I hear' (? from a
reading of the Argonautica) may in part be an acknowledgement by
the poet of a familiar technique of narrative poetry. Arete's compari-
son of Medea's possible fate to those of Antiope, Danae and the
daughter of the infamous Echetos (Od. 18.84-7) 1S particularly nu-
anced. It picks up Medea's own outburst to Jason at an earlier crisis:

'TIVOC 6' ou TICTIV f|e |3apeTav

6nr|v ou anuyepcos 6EIVCOV O-rrep ola eopya
O, OV 6E KEV 0uiar|8£a VOOTOV IAOIO; '

'What punishment or grim and awful fate will not be mine for the
terrible things I have done! You, however, will get the return you
desire.' (4.379-81)
105
Cf. especially vv. 3 8 7 - 8 , verses which are themselves Apollonian (cf. 3 . 1 4 6 - 7 ) . T h e conceit
of Aen. 8-388ff. (the god of fire o n fire with love) m a y take its cue from iaivovro, ' w a r m e d ' ,
at 4.1096.
106 N o te the scornful repetition of'Aietes' at the head of vv. 1076-7. In v. 1077 Apollonius
may be suggesting a link between Air)Tr)S and dico, 'I hear'; this is not (as far as I know) an
attested ancient etymology, but the opposition in these verses between 'knowing' and
'hearing' would bring it readily to mind. There may also be something pointed in the
language of 4.1090, 'AVTIOTTT^V eucornSa.
107
F o r t h e so-called <7X*i ua KCXTOC T O mcombuevov see t h e b i b l i o g r a p h y cited b y E . R o b b i n s ,
EMC 9 (1990) 3-6.
108
Cf. above pp. 12-15.
 Drepane 73
Antiope and Danae were both seduced by Zeus - not a very close
parallel! - but Danae did, like Medea, 'suffer hardships on the sea';
here again Arete's words seem to pick up Medea's own complaints:
6' oir|
Auypfjiaiv Korra TTOVTOV CX\X aAKUoveoxji <))opE0|iai'

'Bereft, I am tossed over the sea, far from my home, with the sad
halcyons for companions . . . ' (4.362-3)
Antiope, like Medea, fled from her father, but her father died before
he could do much to punish her (cf. 4.1090 'Nukteus devised [terrible
things] against her'), although his name, with its suggestion of noc-
turnal gloom, is suitably sinister.109 The grim details of the fate of
Echetos' daughter, whose eyes were jabbed out with spikes, are
presumably not Apollonius' invention,110 but they do form a splen-
did contrast to Arete's earlier 'soft words'. This young wife under-
stands much of the nastier side of life, and her rhetorical 'victory'
over her husband is a triumph of mature persuasion.
The 'two-part' wedding of Jason and Medea — the first witnessed
only by the Argonauts and the local nymphs (4.1143-52), the second
a much more public occasion - 1 1 1 allows Alcinous to preserve his
dignity while he is presented with a fait accompli (4.1202-5). The
wedding itself blends familiar wedding-ritual with poetic fantasy,112
and probably owes more than a little to poetic accounts of the wed-
ding of Peleus and Thetis in the cave of Cheiron on Pelion.113 The
109 x h i s is accentuated by juxtaposition to eucomSa, 'fair-faced'. At 1.735 Apollonius h a d used
the other version which m a d e Antiope the d a u g h t e r of Asopus, cf. F.Vian, Les Origines de
Thebes (Paris 1963) 1 9 4 - 2 0 1 . T h e variation calls attention to the selectivity of Arete's
persuasive rhetoric.
110
This is suggested by the fact that later sources know of details not found in Arg. I t is
tempting to guess that 'recently' (4.1092) is not merely chronological - Echetos was still
going strong in the time of Odysseus' return - b u t refers also to a recent (from Apollonius'
point of view) poem on this subject: it certainly has m a n y features which would have
attracted Hellenistic poets.
111
Frankel's transposition of 4.1182-1200 to follow 4.1169 destroys this pointed effect. T h e
'double' wedding is a n i m p o r t a n t model for the union of Aeneas a n d Dido in Aeneid 4. I n
Virgil the sequence of 'cave - announced coniugium - Fame? (Aen. 4.160-97) partly r e p -
licates the Apollonian sequence of marriage in the cave followed by a 'true report' spread
by H e r a a n d then the validation of the marriage by Alcinous. H e r e , as elsewhere, we would
give m u c h to know more of A n t i m a c h u s ' version (cf. fr. 64 Wyss).
112
T h e attempt of C. Vatin, Recherches sur le manage et la condition de lajemme mariee a Vepoque
hellenistique (Paris 1970) 78-81, to use this scene as evidence for Ptolemaic court weddings
is attractive but highly uncertain.
113
Cf. Vian 111 49-50. Hera was behind both weddings, or at least claims to have been (cf.
4.807-8, below p. 97). Catullus freely used the Apollonian scene for his version of the
wedding on Pelion.
74 Images of love
most famous thing about that wedding was the result, namely the
birth of Achilles, and the implied contrast between Thetis' glorious
child and the fate of Medea's children is bitterly ironical.114 Even the
Dionysiac associations of the cave on Drepane foreshadow misery
ahead, given the known fates of Ariadne and Hypsipyle, the god's
granddaughter. We do not, however, have to rely on such hints to
capture the tone of foreboding. Alcinous' declaration to his wife
concludes as follows:
'Aeicrpov 8ECTUVccvepi Tropaaivouaav,
o u |iiv eou TTOCJIOS voa<()iCTCTO|iai, OU6E yev66Ar|v
si TIV' UTTO cTTrA&yxvoiai <f>£p£i 8T|IOICTIV OTidaaco.'

'If [Medea] is sharing a man's bed, I will not separate her from her
husband, and if she is carrying a child in her womb I will not hand it
over to its enemies.' (4.1107-9)
Who were the enemies of Medea's children? Our knowledge of the
future makes this question particularly insistent.

114
For Thetis' children cf. further below p. 98.
 CHAPTER 4

The gods and the divine

The authority of Homer secured for the Homeric gods a central

place in subsequent epic; epic poetry without these gods was almost
unthinkable (at any rate before Lucan). 1 Already in the Odyssey
itself'the doings of men and gods' is almost a definition of epic song
(Od. 1.338). Despite this, the nature and interpretative strategies
demanded by the gods of epic remain hotly disputed critical areas;
this is hardly surprising, as by their very nature such gods raise (and
are used by post-Homeric poets to raise) fundamental methodological
problems about writing and reading 'epic'.
In an influential discussion of Homer's gods, Jasper Griffin insisted
that they are (or often are) 'numinous' and 'to be taken seriously';
they are not in the poems merely for light relief or as narrative
'devices' or weapons of psychological explanation. Moreover, he
argues, Homeric characters react to their gods in ways which can be
paralleled from 'true' religious experience and which betray the
representation of'a world which contains real gods'.2 At one (fairly
banal) level, this is obviously true of the Argonautica, regardless of the
Homeric situation. The common motifs of the foundation of cult
after divine epiphany or intervention3 and the building of altars and
1
Cf. the (admittedly hardly impartial) description of Homeric poetry at PI. Ion 531c '[He
writes] concerning war and the intercourse of men with each other . . . and of the gods with
each other and with men, and what happens {pathemata) in heaven and in Hades and of the
descent of gods and heroes.' Theophrastus may be responsible for the later definition of epic
as concerned with 'divine, heroic and mortal affairs', cf. Koster 1970.86-92. Koster 89 notes
that Aristotle stands out from the mainstream of ancient tradition for his comparative
neglect of the divine element in epic (but cf. Poetics I46ob35).
The present chapter was largely written before the appearance of Feeney 1991, though I
had seen an early version of his chapter on Apollonius. I have pruned where possible in order
to avoid duplication. I hope that the two accounts will be read together as contributions to
a discussion which is really only beginning.
2
Griffin 1980.Chapter 5.
3
Cf. 1.io8yff., 2.686-719, 921-9, 4.650-7, 1713-20.

75
 76 The gods and the divine

shrines at stops along the way4 are not merely the actions of pious
heroes in a world full of gods, but also correspond to the real practice
of Greek religion, which was indeed centred around the observance
and propagation of cult. On the other hand, the world in which these
gods operate is very much a 'literary' world in which evocation of
other texts, particularly Homer, plays a crucial role it would not
play - at any rate, to this extent - outside the poem. The gods of
Apollonius are figured in the text in the same way as all characters
- through the rewriting of other texts and through the creative re-
assembly and dismantling of earlier literary culture. Thus, to take a
very simple example, Apollo's epiphany to the Argonauts at the
island of Thynias (2.669-719), an epiphany which stresses the god
as a figure of light and harmony, 5 must be read against his terrible
appearance at the opening of Iliad 1 where he comes 'like night'
(1.47) to wreak havoc on the Greek camp. 6 The texture of the
text thus thwarts any simplistic enquiry into the 'seriousness' of
these gods7 or into their possible relation with the belief-systems of
Apollonius' readers.
The real danger in 'Can the gods be taken seriously?' as a critical
point of departure lies in the ease with which this slips into being a
question about belief or cult in the world outside the poem. The
relationship between the 'religion' of an ancient epic and the 'reli-
gion' of its contemporary audience is an interesting and important
question - particularly when epic represents cult and ceremony
which we know to have taken place in analogous forms in the real
world of the audience — but in many respects it is separate from a
consideration of how a poet uses the gods and the divine in his poem.
Mutatis mutandis, the 'gods' of the Argonautica are no more or less 'real'
than are the human characters. 8 We are, for example, concerned in
the first instance not with whether Apollonius or his readers actually
believed that Eros was a little boy who shot arrows at people, but
4
Cf. 1.402-4,966, 1186,4.1620-2.
5
Cf. Hunter 1986.
6
Cf. Feeney 1991.75. Both scenes feature the god's weapons; the Homeric god's movement
(//. 1.47) is varied by the movement of the whole island at Apollo's appearance (2.680). The
Homeric emphasis on the noise of Apollo's attack (//. 1.46, 49) is replaced by the god's silent
remoteness.
7
Cf. Hainsworth 1991.74 'no one takes these gods seriously'. What he means by this is never
explained, though he is presumably operating with some version of Griffin's model.
8
For such problems cf. above pp. 13-14, and Feeney 1991.45-8 for the importance of the epic
 Gods as characters 77
rather with how the poet presents this incident within the epic world
he has created: does he, for example, signal in various ways that we
are dealing with an extended metaphor for psychological and emo-
tional disturbance? Is it presented so that our appreciation of it in
fact depends in part upon our understanding that it can be 'true'
only in epic, not in the world outside epic?9 The mistake which too
many critics have made is to move from the fact that the Apollonian
gods are presented in very similar ways to all other Apollonian
characters - with wit, ironic juxtaposition, pathos and so on - i.e.
that they are no less Apollonian than any other part of the epic, to a
view that they cannot, or cannot sometimes, be 'serious', in any of
the senses of that term. Moreover, Apollonius' audience was experi-
enced and skilled in understanding epic and its traditions. Hard as
it is to quantify, we must not underestimate the effect which familiar-
ity with 'the divine in epic' will have had on the third-century
audience. Their expectation of'divine machinery' is exploited by the
poet in making what is distinctive about his poem stand out. The
poem has gods because it is epic; part of Apollonius' project is to
renew the tradition precisely by highlighting what is difficult in what
had long since settled into this 'natural' state of affairs. In general
terms, our knowledge of the poem as a whole would in any event
have led us to expect a series of quite various self-conscious experi-
ments with the divine in narrative.

(l) GODS AS CHARACTERS

Two related differences from Homer's presentation of the divine

may be mentioned at once. First, the element of the miraculous and
the magical is far more important than in Homer generally, al-
though Odysseus' adventures form a partial exception; the austere
Iliadic presentation of the supernatural may in fact have already
been out of step with archaic epic in general.10 Be that as it may,
these features were present in the Argonautic legend long before
Apollonius and are firmly bound both to the whole structure of the
myth, as a journey towards 'the other', and to the exotic character
9
On the relation between gods in epic and 'real religion' cf. Feeney 1991.3-4, 46-7, 176-80.
It is fundamental that we must not assume that the ancients made any simple, or even
necessary, connection between the gods of epic and the gods of cult and 'belief. This is, of
course, very different from denying any such connection.
10
Cf. Griffin 1977.40-3.
 78 The gods and the divine
of Medea and her family. The concluding sections of Book 3 and
much of Book 4 stress the Argonauts' dependence upon and vulner-
ability to the supernatural and the uncanny. Again, however, this
feature of the poem must not be seen as determined merely by the
facts of the story as taken over by the poet. In the rewriting of
Homeric scenes and Homeric values the strange and the supernatu-
ral function as markers of change, as ways of distorting the model
texts so as to lay bare the suppressions upon which they are based.
Secondly, Apollonius greatly reduces the prominence of the
divine. Gone are the easy appearances of gods to mortals and the
conversations between them. Gone too are divine assemblies; the ad-
miring audience of'all the gods looking down from heaven' (1.547) as
the Argo sets sail is to this extent both unique and (deliberately) mis-
leading. Apollo (or his radiance) is seen twice (2.669— 719, 4.1706—
13), and divine voices may be heard (4.580—5, 640), but otherwise
the Argonauts' only direct contact is with minor divinities - Glaukos,
Thetis and the Nereids,11 the Libyan 'heroines', the Hesperides,
Triton. 12 Iris' intervention to prevent the Boreads from killing the
Harpies forms a partial exception. 13 The Olympian world is also
present in the aetiological stories with which the poem abounds,
and in similes which compare Jason to Apollo (1.307—9), Medea
to Artemis (3.876-85) and Aietes to Poseidon (3.1240-5). 14 The
Argonauts' protecting deity, Hera, works through silent action or
suggestion (3.250, 818, 4.11, 1184-5, ll99~l2OO)> through signs
(3.931 a talking crow, 4.294 a shooting star,15 510 lightning, 640-2
a scream) and through the words and actions of characters. 16 Her
11
It is a reasonable conclusion from 4.862 and 4.935 that the Nereids are visible to the
Argonauts, cf. Feeney 1991.86 for a rather different emphasis. Vian, however, rightly notes
(Note complementaire to 4.955) the poet's almost total silence about the sailors in this scene.
In narratological terms, the simile of 4.933-8 is 'focalised' by the crew, and the narrative
of 4.938-60 is in the voice of the primary narrator, with an additional specific divine
audience at 956-60; KOU in 956 will mean 'even'. The situation is mistakenly simplified by
D. M. Schenkeveld, Mnem. 42 (1989) 201. The two similes are verbally linked (eAiaoxoTOU
~ eiAi^aaou), but the second must be 'viewed' from outside the ship. We are momentarily
tempted to refer KCCI OCUTOS 6cva£ in 956 to Zeus, and 6p©6s in 957 is a puzzle until we realise
that this is the lame Hephaistos, cf. Faerber 1932.80.
12
For the minor divinities of the Libyan scenes cf. Livrea 1987. 184-6, N. E. Andrews, 'The
poetics of the Argonautica of Apollonius of Rhodes: a process of reorientation. The Libyan
Maidens', (diss. Harvard 1989).
13
For this scene cf. below pp. 81-2.
14
Cf. Carspecken 1952.79; Od. 6.102-9 is the starting-point for all these similes.
15
The identity of the goddess here is, however, disputed, cf. Feeney 1991.88.
16
Cf. Hunter 1989.25.
 Gods as characters 79
only 'personal appearances' in the poem are the scene on Olympus
which opens Book 3 and her appeal to Thetis in Book 4.17
The 'theology' of the Argonautica — i.e. the relation between human
action and divine motivation - does not differ substantially from that
of the Homeric poems, but the balance of the presentation has
altered to give a greater prominence to human decision-making. A
familiar and striking example is the account of how Medea over-
comes the temptation of suicide during her long night of suffering:
She longed to choose fatal drugs and to swallow them. Now she was undo-
ing the straps of the casket in her desire to take them out, unhappy girl, but
suddenly a deadly fear of hateful Hades came into her mind, and for a long
time she sat unmoving and speechless. All the delightful pleasures of life
danced before her eyes; she remembered all the joys which the living have,
she remembered her happy friends, as a young girl would, and the sun was
a sweeter sight than before, now that she really began to ponder everything
in her mind. She put the casket away from her knees; Hera caused her to
change her mind, and she now had no doubts as to how to act. (3.806-19)
The passage emphasises Medea's 'natural' hesitation about suicide
for the most 'human' of motives, a fear of death and a delight in the
pleasures that life offers a young girl. We know, however, that Hera
is working through those 'natural' emotions, and the mention of the
goddess at the end of the passage neither undermines its logic, nor is
it to be dismissed as a cynical wave to epic tradition. 18 What the
changed balance of presentation does mean is that, for the most part,
Apollonius' characters struggle in a cloud of ignorance and doubt,
broken only by occasional signs of divine favour or displeasure. The
total effect is quite different from Homer, even if the 'theology' is not,
and in some ways resembles the position in which the characters of
Attic tragedy often find themselves. The Argonauts are not always
allowed the consolation of knowing that what they do is of concern
to the gods. This diminution in the prominence of the divine was
an Apollonian experiment with significant consequences for the sub-
sequent epic tradition.
Perhaps the most remarkable example of this phenomenon is the
Apollonian Zeus. Zeus is the ultimate instigator of the voyage, as
Pelias has despatched Jason (at least allegedly) in order to appease
Zeus's anger for the attempted sacrifice of Phrixos at the god's altar
17
For this scene cf. below pp. 96-100.
18
Cf. Campbell 1983.50-6 and my note on 3.818.
 80 The gods and the divine

(2.1194-5, 3.336-9). All of this, however, remains obscure, and

Zeus's motives seem threateningly inscrutable.19 His name is con-
stantly invoked in the meeting of the Argonauts and Phrixos' sons on
the island of Ares; he is clearly of prime importance in the Phineus
episode, and we should probably see him working through the blind
prophet when the latter foretells that help will come to the Ar-
gonauts 'from the grim sea' (2.388, cf. 2.1135); finally, his anger at
the death of Apsyrtus (4.557—91) is the motive force of a central
part of the action in the final book. This last episode is the closest
Apollonius comes to the motif of'the hostile god', so familiar from
Homer's Poseidon and Virgil's Juno; it is indeed the anger of
Poseidon in the Odyssey which Apollonius has in mind here.20
Nevertheless, though Zeus watches and preserves the moral order,
he only rarely displays his hand. Nowhere is this remarkable indeter-
minacy more potently on show than in Hera's revelation to the
Argonauts of Zeus's anger about which she has - in some unspecified
way - 'learned' (e^pdaaTO, 4.577). Does Hera forestall Zeus or, in
her opposition, is she in fact his instrument? Apollonius denies Hom-
eric clarity both to us and to the Argonauts. Here again we may be
tempted to see the influence of the tragic mode.
Apollonius was also heir to a long tradition of interpretation of the
Homeric gods.21 Whether or not Homer's gods were 'real' or were
'metaphors' to be allegorised away had been an issue which sur-
faced in various forms throughout the preceding two centuries, and
Apollonius' text makes use of these uncertainties in an overt way
which, as often, shows his self-conscious concern with the problems
of writing epic. So, for example, Apollo's epiphany at Thynias may
(but need not) be interpreted as a poetic version of sunrise,22 the
appearance of the heroine nymphs to Jason may be seen as a version
of the familiar epic epiphany or as a poetic account of a mirage,23

19
Cf. Feeney 1 9 9 1 . 5 8 - 6 9 for a n excellent s t u d y of Zeus in t h e Argonautica.
20
At 4.559-61 we learn that Zeus has decided that the Argonauts must be purified by Circe
and suffer 'countless troubles' (uupia TrrjuavOEVTas) before returning home (cf. below pp.
145-6). This is a version of Polyphemus' prayer to Poseidon that, if Odysseus is fated
to return safely, he do so only 'late and in a miserable condition, having lost all his
companions, on a foreign ship, and may he find troubles (Trrmocra) at home' (Od. 9.534-5).
This echo gives point to 'none of the heroes knew this' (4.561); in the Odyssey the crew hear
Poseidon's prayer and Odysseus comments that Poseidon heard it (Od. 9.536).
21
Helpful survey in Feeney 1991. Chapter 1.
22
Cf. Hunter 1986.52-3, adding ££e<f>avn (2.676), a verb most appropriate to the sun (LSJ
s.v. 11). See also Feeney 1991.76.
23
Cf. Vian, Note complementaire to 4.1314.
 Gods as characters 81
and the application of the same language to the boy-god Eros and to
the eros in Medea's heart (3.281, 296) calls attention to the ambiva-
lent status of a divinity who can be (and was) read in more than one
way.24 A similar concern may be traced at greater length through the
presentation of the Harpies who plague Phineus.
Harpies were traditionally depicted in literature and art either as
winds or as birds.25 In Homer apm/iou are gusts of wind which snatch
mortals away, causing them to disappear without trace. Apollonius
adopts the wind image for his Harpies - explicitly at 2.267 f)UT'
oceAAoa, 'like storm-gusts'26 - to structure the race between them and
the sons of Boreas as a 'battle of the winds'; this structuring allows us
to see, without being forced to accept, the possibility of a 'rationalis-
ing' reading of the passage. Virgil in his turn pointedly empha-
sises the bird-nature of his Harpies to differentiate them from the
Apollonian model (Aen. 3.210—58). 27 Like winds, Apollonius' Harpies
'rush down' from the clouds (2.224,28 268); after the Boreads' suc-
cessful pursuit, the same verb is used of them (2.427) to mark how
the tables have been turned. 29 The fact that Apollonius does not
specify the number of the Harpies or assign names to them — 'failures'
which have surprised a number of critics - may be ascribed to the
desire to depict them as a natural force, and their eventual destina-
tion, a cave in Crete, recalls the Thracian cave-dwelling of Boreas
himself.30 So too, the islands where the Boreads almost catch up with
the Harpies (2.285) are 'the Floating Islands' (vqaoi rTAcoTai), a
name which takes us back to Odyssey 10 where Aeolus, the steward of
the winds, lives in a floating island (nAcoTf)i evi vfjcrcoi).
The association of Iris with winds was long established in Greek
poetry,31 and so it is not really surprising that she is here substi-
tuted for the Hesiodic Hermes as the divine agent who prevents

24
Cf. Feeney 1991.83. For Virgil's development of this idea cf. Aen. 9 . 1 8 4 - 5 .
25
Note Hes. Theog. 2 6 8 - 9 , 'on their swift wings they travel with the breath of winds a n d the
birds'.
26
This in fact alludes to Aello, the n a m e of one of the Harpies.
27
Behind Virgil's bird-harpies resonate also the birds of Ares with which the Argonauts do
battle at 2.1030-89 (cf. below p. 134).
28
Any consideration of the text of this verse must involve the Virgilian adaptation at Aen.
3.232 ex diuerso caeli caecisque latebris.
29
A similar example is 2.305-6 - Phineus ate dpTraAecos, once the"Apmnai had been chased
off.
30
S o p h . Ant. 9 8 3 , Call. h. 4.65, J . D . P. Bolton, Aristeas of Proconnesus (Oxford 1962) 9 3 - 6 ; for
Virgil's cave of the winds cf. Hardie 1986.90-7.
31
Cf. //. 15.170-2, 23.198-211, Roscher s.v. Iris 323-5, West on Hes. Theog. 266.
 82 The gods and the divine

the Boreads from killing the Harpies.32 More surprising perhaps is

Apollonius' failure to mention that Iris is in fact the Harpies' sister
(Hes. Theog. 265-9), but this information would dilute the stark
simplicity of her message. The Boreads are not to kill the Harpies
because it is 'not right' (ou Oeuis) and against Zeus's will (2.288-90);
Iris speaks as Zeus's agent, not out of sisterly concern.
Related to these scenes of 'near-allegory' are the epiphany scenes
of the outward voyage, that of the Great Mother (Rheia, Kybele) on
Mt Dindymon (1.1078-1152) and of Apollo at the island of Thynias
(2.669-719). In the former scene Mopsus deduces from the appear-
ance of a halcyon that the institution of cult honours to the Great
Mother will lead to the disappearance of the adverse winds which
were delaying the crew, as indeed it does.33 The goddess does not
herself appear, but she sends EOIKOTOC orjuaTa, 'plausible signs', from
which it may be deduced (TTOU) that she was well disposed towards
the sacrifices (1.1140-1); these signs are the abundance of nature, 34
the taming of wild animals and the appearance of water (the Spring
of Jason) on Dindymon.35 We witness the divine reaction as the
Argonauts do, and we know no more than they. Similarly in Book 3
the Argonauts see birds whose behaviour is obviously an omen, but
we are told only that it comes from 'gods who wish them well'
(3.540); thus, in a manner of speaking, we know that the omen is
favourable before the Argonauts do, as they must wait for Mopsus'
interpretation, but we are not given the full account of the sending
of the omen that we might have expected in Homer.36 The scene

32
F o r a n e l a b o r a t e a t t e m p t to associate H e r m e s with winds cf. W . H . Roscher, Hermes der
Windgott (Leipzig 1878).
33
Frankel 1968.137-9 rightly rejects the popular view that Rheia requires ritual atonement
for the death of Cyzicus (or, according to Glauss 1983.138, of the Earthborn); iAa^occrOai
(1.1093) does not necessarily imply that the god is angry, although, of course, all prayers
implicitly recognise the potential for divine anger.
34
Cf. Theocr. 7.143-6, also after a 'divine epiphany'. Both passages go back to the torments
of Tantalos at Od. 11.586-90.
35
This is one of a number of motifs shared between this scene and the account of Zeus's birth
in Call. h. 1 (cf. Clauss 1983.134-9): in the hymn, the birth from Rheia is marked by the
coming of water to Arcadia. In both poems there is an armed dance to drown out other
sounds (1.1134-9 ~ h. 1.52-4) which becomes an aition of cult; there are of course very
close links between the Couretes and the Corybantes, and between the Phrygian and Cretan
cults. N. Hopkinson, JHS 104 (1984) 176-7, suggests not only that Callimachus plays with
an etymology of Rheia from jbeco, but also that v. 29 of the hymn suggests a derivation of
the name from ipa and v. 32 one from x^co. Is it fanciful to see the same etymologies in Arg.
1.1142-3? If not, then EOIKOTOC <jf\ixcrc(x offers us a clue: these are very meaningful 'signs'
indeed.
36
Cf. Feeney 1991.88 on Apollonius' 'Odyssean' technique here.
 Gods as characters 83
on Dindymon as a whole is structured as a hymn transposed to
narrative: 37 Mopsus' speech has very clear elements of hymnal style
(1.1093-4, 1098-1102), the Argonauts play instruments and sing
around an altar, and the narrative of their song (vv. 1125—31)
adopts the style of hymns.38 Thus this scene, no less than the epiph-
any at Thynias, shows Apollonius' concern to experiment with dif-
ferent modes of religious discourse — the hymn and the epiphany
narrative — as part of his exploration of how to 'write the divine' in
epic poetry. It has been argued that a primary motive for the scene
on Dindymon was the fact that the Ptolemies actively favoured the
cult of Kybele and so Apollonius seized the chance to promote one
of his patron's causes.39 Be that as it may — and there seems in fact
no good reason to believe that the Ptolemies took a particular inter-
est in Kybele's widespread cult - 4 0 this scene has further links with
an important theme of the poem, namely the presentation of the
Argonauts as a group of young men undergoing a kind of initiation.
The armed dance they perform strongly suggests the ephebic pyr-
rhiche:*1 they perform as a group what Jason will later enact by
himself. The foundation of the cult, therefore, need not be explained
by historical circumstances outside the epic.
The epiphany of Apollo is very deliberately set in counterpoint to
that of the Great Mother. The prayers to the goddess were insti-
tuted by Mopsus after a divine sign and followed by indications of
the goddess's favour but not by the appearance of the goddess herself.
That scene came after a period of enforced idleness and is followed
by fierce rowing. Apollo, on the other hand, is seen by men already
exhausted by rowing, comes unannounced and his appearance is
followed by prayers and cult initiated by Orpheus. Whereas we saw
the goddess's favour from the point of view of the Argonauts them-
selves, on Thynias the narrative experiment is different: the narrator
blends his voice with the hymn-singer so that the experience and the
narrative of it become indistinguishable (2.701-12). 42
Variety is also a keynote of the deities who play the leading roles
in protecting the Argonauts. In Books 1 and 2 the primary role is
37
We may be specifically reminded of the extant hymn of the Cretan Couretes (CA 160-1).
38
For this technique in general cf. below p. 140.
39
D. A. van Krevelen, 'Der Kybelekult in den Argonautika des Apollonios von Rhodos 1
1078-1153', RhM 97 (1954) 75-82, approved by Vian 1 38.
40
Gf. Fraser 1972.1 227-9,11 432 n. 721.
41
Gf. above p. 16.
42
Cf. below pp. 150-1.
 84 The gods and the divine
played by Apollo. The poem literally begins with him (1. r) and the
oracle which he gave to Pelias to beware of the man with one sandal.
We learn from Jason's speech at 1.359-62 and his inaugurating
prayer at 1.411 —14 43 that the pious hero consulted Apollo's oracle
before setting out (cf. 4.530-2, 1747-8) and that Apollo promised
help or guidance along the way. Just as the very opening of the
poem 'begins from Apollo', so Jason reports Apollo as having pro-
mised guidance ifJason should 'begin with inaugurating sacrifices to
[Apollo]' (1.360-2); this echo reinforces the idea of the poem as itself
co-extensive with the voyage, establishes the piety of both Jason and
the narrator, 44 and points to a special dependence of Jason upon
Apollo and perhaps also a 'sympathy' between hero and god. Two
similes at the start of the voyage (1.307-11, 536-41) seem in fact
to identify hero and god, so that Carspecken even concluded that
'throughout the rest of the poem it is impossible to think of the one
without being in some measure reminded of the other'. 45 At one
level, of course, there is something importantly Apolline about the
ephebic Jason. Pindar had already exploited the likeness [Pyth. 4.87),
and the stress on the youth of the chorus in the simile of the young
men dancing in Apollo's honour at 1.536 certainly points towards
Apollo's role as archetypal kouros. Nevertheless, the nuanced com-
plexity of Apollonius' tone must not be missed. The first simile
stresses Jason's youth by being framed on one side by his parents'
misery at his departure, a misery which treats that departure as a
kind of death, 46 and on the other by his encounter with Iphias, the
aged priestess of Artemis:

yepaif)
'Ibices JApT8|jii5os TTOAIT|6XOU apfjTEipa,
Kai piiv Se^rrepiis X 8 l P°S KOCTEV ou8e T I (|>da0ai
EliTTTlS ie|i6VT| SUVCCTO TTpoOeOVTOS 6|ilAoU,
dAA' f\ [xsv AITTET' auOi TrapocKAi86v, o l a yepaif]
OTiAoTEpcov, 6 8e TTOAAOV orrTOTrAayxOeis 6Aida6r|.

43
I suspect that the reference to Apollo inhabiting ' t h e Aisonian city n a m e d for [Jason's]
p a r e n t ' (i .411 - 1 2 ) in the first prayer of the epic reflects Chryses' opening prayer in the Iliad
to Apollo, 'ruler of Chryse' (//. 1.37).
44
Cf., e.g., Dem. Epist. 1.1 'I take it that a man beginning any important speech or deed
should first begin from the gods'; Mikalson 1983.13-17. The echo of 1.1 and 1.360-2 is
discussed at length by Margolies 1981.826°.
45
Carspecken 1952.96-7, accepted by (e.g.) Paduano-Fusillo on 1.307-10, 536-41.
46
This works both through generalised echoes of the language of epitaphs for dead children
(1.278-9), and through specific echoes of the lamentation for Hector.
 Gods as characters 85

Iphias, the priestess of Artemis, protectress of the city, came up to

him, and kissed his right hand. Despite her strong desire she could say
nothing as the crowd pressed round him, but she was left behind at
the side of the path, as an old woman is left by the young, and he
moved off far into the distance. (1.311-16)

This vignette suggests both Jason's regal splendour — it is not unlike

Apollo's apparent ignoring of the Argonauts at Thynias 4 7 - and also
the sense of loss and desolation which his departure causes: Jason
leaves his family, Apollo leaves Artemis. 48 So too, the simile of the
rowers compared to a chorus in honour of Apollo follows immedi-
ately upon a passage which suggests a clear contrast between Jason
and the other Argonauts:

EIAKETO 5' f|6r|

TreicJuaTa KOCI UEOU AeTpov UTrepO' aAos* auTap 'Ifjacov
SccKpuoeis yociris ^TTO TrocTpiSos OUUCCT' EVEIKEV.

The ropes were now being drawn in and they were pouring libations
of wine into the sea; but Jason wept as he turned his eyes away from
his homeland. (1.533-5)
No simple equation between Jason and Apollo will account for the
stress here on Jason's difference, and on the grief which surrounds
him.
Apollo is celebrated with cult at various places on the outward
journey 4 9 and appears at Thynias, but then largely disappears from
the poem until the final scenes. At 4.1547-9 Orpheus realises that
the Argonauts have to offer one of the tripods of Apollo which they
are carrying to the gods of Lake Triton in order to secure a safe exit,
and in the final danger of the voyage the crew is saved from an
impenetrable darkness by the gleam of Apollo who reveals to them
the island of Anaphe ('The Revealed'); on this island they found the
cult of Apollo Aigletes ('the Gleamer'). Thus the poem and the
voyage both begin and end with Apollo. 50
The other deity who plays a major role on the outward voyage is

47
Note 1.316 ~ 2.683-4.
48
For an interesting discussion of this episode cf. D. P. Nelis, 'Iphias: Apollonius Rhodius,
Argonautica 1.311-16', CQ^i (1991) 96-105. Nelis sees the priestess of Artemis as marking
Jason's departure from the city as a crucial point on a rite de passage, parallel to Medea's
departure from her city in Book 3.
49
At 1.966, 1186, 2.686-719, 927-8.
50
Note 1.418-19 ~ 4.1704-5 (Jason's promises to the god).
 86 The gods and the divine

Athena, who directed the building of the Argo.51 As the ship ap-
proaches the Symplegades, Athena moves to a position where she
can help them:
They untied the double cables from the land, and their departure did not
go unnoticed by Athena. Without delay she quickly placed her feet on a
light cloud which could bear her swiftly, heavy though she was, and she
hastened to the Pontus with kindly intentions towards the rowers. As when
a man 52 roves far from his own land - as indeed we wretched men often do
wander, and no land seems distant, but all paths are visible before us - and
he can imagine his own home, and he sees in a flash the path over land and
sea, as his thoughts dart quickly his eyes grasp one place after another, just
so did the daughter of Zeus swiftly leap down and place her feet on the
Thynian coast of the Inhospitable Sea. (2.536-48)

Athena has apparently been watching their progress; in the parallel

scene in Book 4, by way of contrast, 53 Iris informs Hera of the crew's
movements. Athena's mode of transport is, at one level, a rewriting
of Iliad 5.838-9 where a chariot groans under the combined weight
of Athena and Diomedes. The contrast between the goddess's weight
and the insubstantial cloud which carries her as quickly as the flash-
ing thoughts of a homesick man establishes '[a] shifting tension
between the physicality and the immateriality of the goddess ...
Apollonius is now engaging directly with the practical narrative
problems of meshing a divinity into the action'. 54 The problems and
opportunities which the divine machinery of epic provides are thus
laid out in full view: is Athena a 'real', anthropomorphic god, or a
metaphor? To demand a simple answer, Apollonius suggests, may be
to misunderstand epic. Moreover, the very length of the simile,
which is much expanded from its Homeric model, 55 and the interpo-
lated parenthesis whose form both mimics the changing gaze of the
subject and demands from us a 'slow' unpacking of the syntax rein-
force this literary concern: the 'flashing speed' of the simile actually
delays the narrative. 56

51
Cf. 1.19,526-7,2.612-14, 1187-9,3.340,4.582-3.
52
Text and interpretation of this simile are very uncertain; my translation is therefore
tentative, but the main point is not, I hope, affected. Cf. further below pp. 137-8.
53
Cf. below p . 9 6 .
54
Feeney 1991.73.
55
//. 15.80-3: Hera's speed in travelling to Olympus compared to the shifting thoughts of a
well-travelled man.
56
For similar effects in other similes cf. below pp. 130-2.
 Gods as characters 87
It is important that Athena secures safe passage for the Argonauts
only after we have seen their own heroic efforts to get through. This
is quite in keeping with the theology of Phineus' advice to the crew:
'If [the dove] passes safely through the rocks and reaches the Pontus, then
hold back no longer from making the journey yourselves. Hold the oars in
the strong grip of your hands and cut through the narrow channel of the
sea, since success will depend not so much on your prayers as on the strength
of your arms. Therefore abandon all other concerns and exert yourselves to
the utmost, and with confidence. Up until this point I do not forbid you
from calling upon the gods.' (2.329-36)
'God helps those who help themselves' was an idea as familiar to the
Greeks as it is to us.57 Apollonius rejects the Homeric structure by
which gods intervene as soon as they arrive on earth, 58 in favour of
allowing the mortal struggle to be fully displayed before a saving
intervention. The contrast between human struggle and divine ease
need not undercut the effect of that struggle, but it rather deepens
the pathos of it.59 Athena's intervention rewards the Argonauts for
their efforts, but in epic of all periods human struggle is always
conducted against a background of other, easier, possibilities.
The second half of the poem is dominated by Hera. Pelias' neglect
of her stands prominently in the proem (1.14), Phineus recalls her
protection of the Argonauts (2.216-17) and she intervenes crucially
after the death of Tiphys (2.865); otherwise she seems notably absent
from the outward voyage. Her prominence in the second half is
closely linked to the role of Medea, who is to be Hera's weapon of
vengeance against Pelias. When Athena resigns to Hera the leading
role in their negotiations with Aphrodite (3.32—5), she is also resign-
ing her role in the poem. Thus, when the sacred beam which Athena
placed in the Argo calls out to the Argonauts in Book 4, it does so as
the servant of Hera (4.580-3). It might therefore seem strange that
Hera apparently disappears from the poem after Medea is safely
married to Jason on Drepane and the threat from the pursuing
Colchians is at an end. In part this may be ascribed to Apollonius'
resistance to patterns which would impose obvious unity and consis-
tency; in part too, it reinforces the sense of the landing on Drepane
57
Cf. Frankel 1968.173-4, Mikalson 1983.17. The Greeks did not, of course, believe that the
gods always help those who help themselves.
58
Gf. Klein 1931.217-19, though his explanation for Apollonius' variation is inadequate.
59
For a rather different view cf. Feeney 1991.74 ('climactic anticlimax').
 88 The gods and the divine
as a homecoming, a false end to the troubles.60 More significantly,
Hera's desire - that Medea should come to Greece to destroy Pelias
- now looks like being fulfilled.61 In the Argonautica, however, such
plans are rarely straightforward, and the expedition nearly comes
to grief in Africa. The African adventures are in fact linked into the
narrative in an apparently casual way:
aAAcc yap ou mo
aiai|jov fjv 67n|3f]vai 'AxouiSos rjpcbecraiv,
6(|>ps £Ti Kcci Ai(3ur|s eiri Treipaaiv oTAfjaeiav.
Not yet was it fated (aisimon) for the heroes to step upon the Achaean
land, until they had suffered further in the boundaries of Libya.
(4.1225-7)
This unique example of aiaiaov, 'fated',62 may be referred to Zeus's
angry plans for the Argonauts,63 but it also suggests 'fate' as a nar-
rative device for joining two separate parts of the Argonautic
legend. The controlling intelligence is that of the poet rather than
of Zeus.
In Africa the main saving role is taken by minor deities - the
'heroines', the Hesperides, Triton. Vian makes a brave attempt to
see Athena, Hera and Apollo as working through these agencies,64
but the attempt rests upon a misguided search for a consistent divine
presence through the poem. Rather, the presentation of the divine is
subject to the same Hellenistic aesthetic of fracture and difference as
all other parts of the poem. Just as the contrast between Heracles and
the other Argonauts was set off by an apparent similarity, so too a
very careful set of oppositions between the 'heroines' who save the
crew in the Syrtis and the Hesperides is pointed by a similarity:
three Hesperides pity the Argonauts, just as the three 'heroines' did.
There, however, the similarity ends,65 and Apollonius' concern for
variation is seen in all its force. Whereas the heroines appeared only
60
Cf. above p. 68.
61
Cf. Feeney 1991.63.
62
But cf. MOpai^ov at 2.294 and 2.605-6, both in contexts of divine dispensation.
63
4.560-1, cf. above p. 80; this is the view of Frankel 1968.587.
64
Vian in 56-7.
65
Unless oioTToAoi (4.1322) suggests 'guardians of ufiAa' at 4.1413. For the rationalisation of
the apples as sheep cf. Diod. Sic. 4.26.2, RE Suppl. 3.1068. Herodorus offered a very
interesting moralistic allegorisation of Heracles winning the apples (FGrHist 31 F 14), but
Apollonius does not seem to have made use of it. Virgil used the appearance of the 'heroines'
in his account of the Penates appearing to Aeneas at Aen. 3. i47ff. (note esp. 4.1282 ~ Aen.
3-137-9)-
 Gods as characters 89
to Jason, the Hesperides appear to all the Argonauts; the heroines
appeared 'voluntarily', whereas the Hesperides disappear at the Ar-
gonauts' approach and have to be won back by Orpheus; the hero-
ines identified themselves to Jason, but the identity of the Hesperides
remains a mystery (4.1411-14) and the poet refuses to tell us any-
thing about them, in contrast to his account of the history of the
heroines (4.1309—11). Most striking of all is the contrast between the
knowledge of the heroines (4.1319-21) and the ignorance of the
Hesperides.66
The Argonauts' subsequent encounter with Triton reworks closely
two 'encounter' scenes of the Odyssey. The first is the scene at the start
of Odyssey 7 where Athena, disguised as a young girl, shows Odysseus
the way to Alcinous' palace (an important step on the hero's return
home).67 The second is Athena's meeting with the hero on the shore
of Ithaca {Od. i3.22iff.). In that scene, Athena, like Triton, at first
disguised herself as a young man, and then appeared, again like
Triton, in her true form.68 In both cases the divine appearance is
prompted by a beautiful tripod (4.1547-50, Od. 13.217), and in both
cases it takes place in a spot connected with one of the sea-gods,
Phorkys in the Odyssey (13.345), and Triton in the Argonautica.69
Triton rescues the Argonauts from snake-infested territory, and
Apollonius instantiates the Argonauts' plight in the simile of the
winding70 snake which introduces the meeting with Triton (4.1541 —
7). The god's saving role is also reflected in the names of the episode.
Libyan snakes arose from the Gorgon's blood which dripped onto the
earth as Perseus flew over the land. Apollonius provides Perseus'
original name, Eurymedon (4.1514),71 to link it to Eurypylos, the
name which Triton gives himself when he meets the Argonauts
(4.1561). To reinforce the point, Triton is given his Hesiodic epithet
66
Cf. a b o v e p . 30 for Heracles a n d t h e Hesperides.
67
4.1551 ~ Od. 7.19-20, 4.1564-5 ~ Od. 7.22-3, 4.1566-70 ~ Od. 7.24-5. In making
Triton announce himself as a son of Poseidon (4.1558-9), Apollonius combines two of the
elements of Athena's speech, her 'father' and Poseidon (Od. 7.29, 35).
68
In Od. 13.222 the 'young man' looks like a shepherd, and Triton, according to Pindar
(Pyth.4..2S), is an OIOTTOAOS Saiucov (cf. above p. 30). Note also 4.1551 ~ Od. 13.229, 4.1559
~ Od. 13.223, 4.1560-1 ~ Od. 13.237, 248-9, 4.1565 ~ Od. 13.232, 4.1566-7 ~ Od.
13.276-8.
69
It may be worth noting that one tradition made Phorkys the father of the serpent of the
Hesperides (Hes. Theog. 333-6), and one of his brothers is called EupufMris (Hes. Theog.
239), cf. 4.1552 TpiTCov eupu(3ir|s.
70
EiAiyuevos (4.1541) picks up eAixQeis (4 I 52o) of the snake which killed Mopsus.
71
There is no earlier evidence for this name, but Apollonius is most unlikely to have invented
it, cf. Livrea ad loc.
 go The gods and the divine

of 6upu|3iris (4.1552).72 In contrast to the encounters with the hero-

ines and the Hesperides, the meeting with Triton is marked by a
light humour, which centres around the uncertainty concerning the
young man's status. Triton speaks with an irony which is lost on the
Argonauts: he is eTnioTcop TTOVTOU, 'one who knows about the sea'
(4.1558, with TOOS' delayed for surprise effect) and an avoc£, 'lord'
(4.1559), both of which leave unclear whether he is god or man. 73
He offers a clod as though this is all that he has to give, and
Euphemos, another son of Poseidon, receives it TTpO9pcov, 'in kindly
manner' (4.1562). This word is often used of a god's saving inter-
vention or of the party with the advantage or superiority in any
situation;74 here, like his address to the god as fipcos, 'hero' (4.1564),
it rather marks Euphemos' misunderstanding of the situation.75 Such
play with Triton's divine status is reinforced by uncertainties about
his physical form -just what does he look like (4.1610-12)?76
The final scenes of Book 4 also give a prominent place to Poseidon,
as befits his traditional role in the foundation myths of Cyrene.77 It
is Poseidon's horse which guides the Argonauts away from Syrtis
(4. i325ff.), his son Triton who receives the tripod of Apollo from
them, grants them the miraculous clod, which is received by another
son of Poseidon, Euphemos, and guides them out of the lake, and
Poseidon and Triton to whom they erect altars (4.1621—2). Al-
though some of the Argonauts are descended from this god, he has
otherwise figured in the epic largely in association with the heroes'
opponents, Pelias (1.13), Amycus (2.3), and Aietes (3.1240-5). 78 His
apparent benevolence is therefore a mark of closure as the Argonauts
approach their destination.

(11) PHINEUS AND PROPHECY

Gods speak to men through omens, signs and oracles, and men speak
to gods through prayer and cult. With the notable exception of the
72
Cf. Hes. Theog. 931. A further reinforcement will be given if 0r|poTp6<j>coi in 4.1561 refers to
snakes, as I 4.1515a seems to take it (followed by Vian).
73
The former phrase looks like a playful rewriting of an epithet for a sea-god, perhaps
TTOVTOMESCOV (cf. Eur. Hipp. 744 of Nereus or Triton).
Cf. 1.771, 2.257, S - ^ 1 (humorously), 1071, 4.121, 370, 919.
There is a reversal of Pind. Pyth. 4.36 where Euphemus is heros as he receives the clod.
6
Cf. Feeney 1991.79.
Cf. Calame 1990.
8
Cf. my note ad loc.
 Phineus and prophecy 91

blasphemous Idas, 7 9 the Argonauts are punctilious in their obedi-

ence to divine signs and pious in the performance and propagation
of cult. Their piety is matched by that of the narrator himself who,
adopting the conventional piety of the hymnal voice, ostentatiously
refuses to divulge secret rites (1.915-21, 4.248-9) 8 0 and apologises to
the Muses for an indecorous tale (4.984-5). T h e tone of such utter-
ances strongly recalls the familiar Callimachean persona of cynical
tease crossed with pious simpleton; like the gods themselves, piety is
subject to the typical devices of the Apollonian voice.
Piety of a more conventional kind seems to be on show in the
encounter with Phineus in Book 2. T h e stories of Paraibios and
Aristaios which follow Phineus' prophecy stress the rewards that
can arise from the pious observance of cult; they mark both the
beneficence and potential destructiveness of deity. Phineus himself
serves as an awful warning against the infringement of divine prerog-
atives and as an example of divine kindness in the prophecy which
he utters to guide the Argonauts on their way.
Phineus combines the roles of Circe and Teiresias from Odyssey
10-12. Just as in death Teiresias retains unimpaired noos andphrenes
(Od. 10.493-5), so Phineus'mind retains its powers (2.212—13, 311 —
16) though he has been reduced physically to a state of'living death'
(2.197-205). 8 1 His opening words (2.209-11),
'KAOTE, rTaveAAfjvcov Trpo<t>ep6OT0rroi, si ETEOV 8-q
016' uiaeis ous Br\ Kpuepfii |3acriAfjos £<|>£T|jfii
'Apycoiris em vr|6s ayei IJETOC KCOOCS 'Ifjacov . . . '
'Hear me, most glorious of the Panhellenes, if indeed you are the ones
who, at the chilling command of a king, are led by Jason on the ship
Argo in search of a fleece . . . '
rework the proem of the epic (1.3-4) t o establish the prophet's
omniscience: he knows the poem and what has happened in it. T h e
contrast between the strength of his intellect and the weakness of his
body is marked by the mannered rhetoric of his plea to the Ar-

79
Cf. my note on 3.515-20.
80
For an archaic precedent cf. h.Dem. 478-9.
81
Cf. Erbse 1953. 186-7 who notes that his condition is what the doctors called kataphora, in
which the patient slipped in and out of consciousness; here this condition has been caused
by lack of food. The description of Phineus recalls the language of death in the Iliad (cf. //.
20.417-18), the description of Odysseus disguised as a beggar {Od. 17.336-41), and Hes.
Theog. 795-8 (the disgraced god who has taken no nourishment). Note also Call. h. 6.93
(Margolies 1981.142).
 92 The gods and the divine

gonauts: in a state of near collapse his verbal power is in no way

diminished.82 The total effect has something in common with the
song of Proteus in Virgil's Fourth Georgic, a beautifully mannered
Hellenistic narrative delivered by an inspired uates whose appear-
ance suggests surrender of rational control. Virgil may indeed have
had Argonautica 2 in mind in composing the 'Aristaeus epyllion'. 83
Phineus was blinded as a punishment for 'misuse' of his mantic
skill, whereas in many versions of the Teiresias story the prophet is
given his skill as a recompense for blindness.84 Nevertheless, the
differences between the two ought not be exaggerated; the links
between mantic skill and blindness remain, however these links are
expressed in narrative. 85 Whereas Teiresias' blindness marks his
inner sight, that of Phineus is a perpetual reminder of man's inability
fully to understand. In his wretchedness Phineus is deprived even of
the chance to starve himself to death (2.232-3). 86
Phineus' knowledge is apparently limitless, but it remains unclear
whether we are to assume that he knew (at any level of conscious-
ness) the punishment which awaited him for giving men too full an
account of Zeus's purposes: &9pa5iai, 'lack of prudence' (2.246,
313), leaves the matter open.87 His repeated insistence that the Ar-
gonauts first test the passage through the Rocks with a dove, despite
82
Note X^P l v • • • ocvonrrTouai (2.213-14, cf. my note on 3.5), the prepositional variation in
2.215-16, a n d the rising dicolon of 2.218.
83
Aristaeus is common to both poems (cf. T h o m a s on Georg. 4 . 4 2 5 - 6 ) , b u t there a r e m a n y
other shared motifs. T h e story of Paraibios seems to illustrate m u c h the same moral as that
of Aristaeus': 'successful recovery through pious observance'. As speculations, I suggest that
Georg. 4 . 4 1 8 - 2 1 , est specus ingens etc., is indebted to Arg. 2 . 3 6 0 - 3 (note TTEpicrxi^ovTai ~
scindit sese), a n d that Georg. 4 . 4 3 8 - 9 , uix defessa senem passus componere membra \ cum clamore ruit
magno etc., a m u s i n g l y suggests t h a t Aristaeus a t t a c k e d P r o t e u s as t h e H a r p i e s a t t a c k e d
Phineus.
84
F o r a version of t h e Teiresias legend very close t o t h a t of Apollonius' P h i n e u s cf.
A p o l l o d o r u s , Bibl. 3.6.7.
85
Cf. R. G. A. Buxton, 'Blindness and limits: Sophokles and the logic of myth', JHS 100
(1980) 22-37, es P- 28-30.
86
Such an interpretation, i.e. it is part of the divine plan that he stay alive until the Boreads
liberate him, seems more forceful than referring the verses merely to the old topos of the
belly's tyranny; Phineus' words reuse, but do not just repeat, those of Odysseus at Od.
7.216-21. KOKfii (v. 233) suggests not just 'cursed', but also 'wretched', 'unlucky' (? because
of what it has to endure).
87
In Valerius, Phineus overstepped the mark out of pity for mankind (4.481). Contrast Virgil's
Helenus, who is obviously indebted to Phineus and who can neither know nor say every-
thing (Aen. 3379-80, where interpretation is difficult). Whether Zetes' words at 2.246-7
should be statements (Vian) or questions (most editors) is an interesting problem. (Paduano
has it both ways by printing statements but translating fj pa as 'forse'). If the former, is it
just a reasonable guess (cf. 2.250-1), or an imitation of related phenomena in Homer (cf.
above p. 72), or does it depend upon Zetes' special position as son of a god?
 Phineus and prophecy 93
our very clear impression that he knows that they will succeed
in passing the obstacle, manifests his concern to do nothing which
infringes the divine will or prerogatives. 88 Men should seek and act
upon signs of divine favour or disfavour. If his statement of Zeus's
strategy in giving men only incomplete information about the future
(2.314-16, cf. below) - a statement which ironically reveals what
ought perhaps to be concealed, the very thing he is striving to avoid
— stresses the disadvantages under which men labour, the episode of
the dove and the story of Paraibios exemplify the positive side. The
ideas that Zeus does not want men to know all of his noos and that
divine signs should be unclear and require interpretation are old —
they are of great importance, for example, in Attic tragedy - and so
there is no actual need to postulate here influence from contem-
porary speculative theology. Nevertheless, despite the menacing ob-
scurity of the Apollonian Zeus's motives, we may be reminded of the
later Stoic view that god sends men signs of some of what is to come
out of his love for them, 89 and we should be alive to the possibility
that what Phineus has to say reflects contemporary discussion about
signs and divination. It would be very much in Apollonius' manner
to have his blind seer speak the language of Hellenistic speculation. 90
The verses in question are not, however, unproblematic:

'GO5S yap OCUTOS

(3ouAeToa dvOpcoTrois ETTISEUEOC OEO^OCTCC 9aiveiv
| j a v T o o w r | s , 9 1 i v a KOCI TE OECOV x^TECoai v o o i o . '

Tor so Zeus himself wishes to reveal to men incomplete utterances of

prophecy,92 so that men lack knowledge of some part of the gods'
intentions.' (2.314-16).

Translators have largely followed the scholiast in taking Oecov . . .

vooio in 316 as 'the support/help of the gods', as though noos was here
used for eunoia. On this interpretation, the idea would be that if men

88
Good remarks in Lawall 1966. 144-6.
89
Gic. De Div. 1.82-3, I 2 75 c^- N . C. Denyer, ' T h e case against divination: a n examination of
Cicero's De Divinatione\ PCPS 31 (1985) 1-10. T h e r e is some evidence for visits to Alexan-
dria by mid-third-century Stoics (Fraser 1972. 1 481), b u t the case for seeing reflections of
theological speculation in Phineus' words does not depend on establishing any specific links.
90
T h u s Phineus' speech also bears familiar hallmarks of Hellenistic poetry - a n interest in
etymology (2.381) a n d a n emotional aposiopesis ( 2 . 3 9 0 - 1 ) .
91
T h e r e is a strong case for uocvTocruvocis; Oeacfxrra does not require t h e d e p e n d e n t genitive
(which could also h a r d l y d e p e n d u p o n EiriSsuea).
92
Or, better, 'to reveal by prophecy incomplete oracles'.
 94 The gods and the divine

knew all of what was to come, they would no longer seek divine help
(through sacrifices, temple building etc.) as they would know that
all such activity was useless. The phrase ought, however, to mean
'the will/intention of heaven', and Phineus is more probably saying,
somewhat redundantly, that oracles and prophecies must be incom-
plete so that men do not know everything.93 In practice, of course,
the two interpretations do not present wildly different views of the
divine strategy. Complete knowledge of the divine noos is reserved for
the gods themselves, who occasionaly bestow it upon a lucky mortal
such as Phineus; for a man to infringe this preserve by spreading it
further risks a terrible vengeance. As the Boreads put it, 'reproofs
delivered by the immortals are obvious to men' (2.250-1)*
Phineus' long account of Pontic geography and ethnography has
puzzled many critics.94 Every place and people which he mentions is
subsequently mentioned again as the crew confronts the voyage it-
self.95 His information is far from complete, however, and Apollonius
is clearly at pains to create variety between the speech and the
subsequent narrative. The instruments of that variation are the addi-
tion in the narrative of new geographical and ethnographical infor-
mation, the breaking-up of the narrative by 'static' episodes not
mentioned by the prophet -Jason's testing (the peira), the lengthy
stay with Lykos, the deaths of Idmon and Tiphys, the appearance
of Sthenelos - and much fuller treatment of peoples and places
merely mentioned by Phineus. Phineus begins by acknowledging his
speech's incompleteness (2.311 —12), and our expectation of this in-
completeness contributes importantly to the momentum of the sub-
sequent narrative. In this, as in much else, the figure of Phineus is
indebted to the Homeric Circe who refuses to give Odysseus explicit
instructions for getting past Scylla and Charybdis (Od. 12.55-8).
Phineus' speech also contrasts sharply with the corresponding speech
of Argos in Book 4 as the Argonauts begin the return journey; where
Argos is of necessity short on detail, as he recalls a quasi-mythical
journey from the mists of time,96 much of Phineus' speech resem-
bles a poetic periegesis, a geographic and ethnographic text.97 The
93
So, e.g., De La Ville de Mirmont 1894.206-7, Feeney 1991.60.
94
Cf. Frankel 1968.179-80, who contrasts the brief reference to Cyzicus' advice at 1.982-3.
95
For tables of correspondences cf. Blumberg 1931.36-7, Levin 1971.157-9, Vian 1 120-1.
Blumberg offers perhaps the fullest discussion.
96
Cf. below p. 164.
97
Cf. esp. Dionysius Perieg. 762-97 (the Pontic tribes); Miiller ad loc. sees Apollonius as
Dionysius' main source.
 Phineus and prophecy 95
Apollonian Phineus may be indebted to his Hesiodic counterpart
who 'gave Phrixos information about the journey' (fr. 157 MW)
and was blinded for his trouble, or to the geographical catalogue
with which Hesiod described the pursuit of the Harpies by the
Boreads (frr. 150-6 MW); 98 thus Apollonius carefully avoids any
geographical catalogue in his account of the pursuit (2.273ff.). Be
that as it may, once his advice about the Symplegades is out of the
way, Phineus speaks not in the riddling language of prophecy but in
the dry style of periegesis and Ionian ethnography;99 in reading both
his speech and the subsequent narrative we are constantly reminded
of Herodotus.100 In part this is a sophisticated literary joke: the
expected Apolline language of prophecy is replaced by another genre
under that god's control, the catalogue-style didactic poem, which,
like prophecy and oracles, claimed to be both true and useful. We
may perhaps compare the oracle of Apollo in Callimachus' tale of
Acontius and Cydippe which speaks with the voice of learned Hellenistic
poetry (fr. 75.22-37).
Just as an Alexandrian catalogue-poem in the mouth of a mythic
seer shatters the temporal distinctions of the poem,101 so too the
intrusion of the present time102 into the description of the Chalybes,
Tibareni and Mossynoikoi at 2.1000-29 is an important mode of
variation between Phineus' speech and the subsequent narrative.
The customs of these peoples are described as contemporary with the
poet and by reference to their difference from the customs of the poet
himself; those customs which will most starkly represent the strange
(from a Greek point of view) world which the Argonauts are entering
are clearly specially selected. Just as Circe gives Odysseus informa-
tion about a land of fantasy and adventure, so Phineus provides the
Alexandrian equivalent: lands and peoples known from books and
ethnographic theory.
98
Cf. M . L . W e s t , The Hesiodic Catalogue of Women ( O x f o r d 1985) 8 4 - 5 .
99
Cf. Pearson 1938.
100
There is even what looks like a good 'Herodotean' joke at 2.974-5: the Thermodon breaks
into ninety-six- channels (cf. Frankel 1968.256-61) 'if one were to count them', cf, e.g.,
Hdt. 2.127.1 '(on the pyramids). Frankel's denial that TrEiiird^Eiv here means 'count' is
unconvincing; at 4.350 and 1748 the addition of vocoi or ©VUGOI is decisive. There is also
play with TETpdcxis (or TETpdSos) ~ TTEUTT&^OI (from TTEVTE); cf. 2.373-4 (Phineus' speech)
AoiOCVTOS ~ TplCTCTOCl.
101
Cf. Fusillo 1985.101.
102
Cf. Frankel 1968.263. The qualifications suggested by Fusillo 1985.165 are unconvincing;
we do in fact have 'un'esplicita proiezione verso il tempo attuale del poeta'. Fusillo does,
however, have interesting observations on the influence of the Amazon myth on the Pontic
ethnographies.
 g6 The gods and the divine
(Hi) HERA AND THETIS

I have left until last the two passages which appear most closely
to evoke the divine world of Homer, namely the scenes of Hera,
Athena, and Aphrodite, of Eros and Ganymede, and of Eros and
Aphrodite which open Book 3, and the meeting of Hera and Thetis
and the latter's assistance to the Argonauts in Book 4. Of these, the
opening of Book 3 is perhaps the best-known episode of the entire
poem. The latent malice of Aphrodite's greeting, the virtuoso re-
working of famous Homeric scenes,103 the awfulness of Aphrodite's
son, her cunning in dealing with him and the contrast between his
'character' and the cosmic power he wields have all been widely
discussed and admired. Many of the same qualities and concerns
are found in the less familiar scenes of Book 4, with which I shall
conclude this chapter.
The Argonauts' departure from Circe's territory is noted by Iris,
who has been set to watch by Hera (4.753-6). This is an extension
of the Homeric situation where gods do their own watching of events
on earth,104 and is part of an amusing systematisation of the domes-
ticity of the Olympians. Why should they bother to watch when they
have servants to work for them? There is an interesting parallel in
Callimachus' Hymn to Delos. In that poem Hera sets Ares and Iris to
keep watch over the whole world so that Leto should find no haven
in which to bear her child (h. 4.61-9). When the island Asterie takes
Leto in, Iris, still panting from running and fearful of Hera's reaction,
reports to her mistress in a grovelling and provocative style suited to
a flatterer or a pet slave, and then settles down beside Hera's throne
to wait for her next instructions (h. 4.215-36). That passage makes
use of motifs associated with the messengers of drama — breath-
lessness and fear - 1 0 5 and is invested with a broad humour. Thetis,
like Asterie, had spurned Zeus's advances, and there is an effect
reminiscent of Callimachus in 4.757-69, where Hera despatches
poor Iris on a long, triple mission (to Thetis, Hephaistos and Aeolus)
which would be enough to make any messenger grumble. 106 Here the
spirit of the two Alexandrian poets is very close.

103
Cf. Lennox 1980; my note on 3.36-110; Feeney 1991.77-8.
104
Cf., e.g., //. 14.135, 153-6; Griffin 1980. Chapter 6.
105
Cf. esp. Soph. Ant. 223ff.
106
The Homeric model is Iris' multiple mission at //. 24.74ff. (to Thetis and Priam);
Apollonius goes one better.
 Hera and Thetis 97

When Thetis arrives on Olympus Hera begins by 'filling in the

background': 1 0 7

'olcrOa |J6V oaaov eufjiaiv evi <f>peo-i TUTOU f|pcos

Aiaovi6r|s r)
'You know how honoured in my heart is the hero, son of Aison, and
all of those who help him in his task ...' (4.784-5)
How does Thetis know this? We will soon learn that her interest in
her 'husband' Peleus and his comrades is virtually non-existent. Has
Thetis read Odyssey 12 with its reference to 'Apycb TraaiiJieAouaa, 'the
Argo known to all' (Od. 12.70), or has she read the Argonautica? Or is
the point precisely that she does not know, but Hera treats her as a
special confidante as part of a captatio beneuolentiae? We will see that
this is by no means the only example of Hera's shifting rhetoric and
of an ambivalent uncertainty which lingers over the whole speech.
Hera then recalls her past services to Thetis: she nursed her and
arranged her marriage to 'the best of mortals' after Thetis had
spurned Zeus and Zeus dropped his suit on learning that Thetis was
fated to bear a son greater than his father.108 Hera borrows from the
speech of her Homeric counterpart in which she pleads for special
treatment for Achilles:
'But Achilleus is child of a goddess, whom I myself brought up and reared
and gave as wife to a man, Peleus, who of all men was dearest to the hearts
of the immortals. All of you gods were there at the wedding: and you
[Apollo] were among them too with your lyre at the feast - you coward-
lover, you were always a traitor!' (//. 24.59-63, trans. Hammond)
This is, however, not the only Homeric account of the marriage of
Peleus and Thetis. In Iliad 18 Thetis, having come to ask Hephaistos
for new armour for her son, begins with a tale of woe:
'Hephaistos, is there any one of all the goddesses on Olympos who has
endured such misery in her heart as all the sorrows that Zeus, son of Kronos,
has given me beyond all others? Out of all the sea-goddesses he made me
subject to a man, Peleus son of Aiakos, and I had to (eTAr|v) serve a mortal's
107
To the horrendous textual problem of 4.786-91 I have nothing to contribute, except a
conviction that something is wrong with the text; Giangrande's solution, adopted by Vian,
of treating Ecrdcocja as l un irreel sans particule modale' is unconvincing. Frankel's lacuna
is as happy a solution as any. It would be nice to believe that Hera is being deliberately
deceitful, but this seems a cheap way out of the problem.
108
O n A p o l l o n i u s ' sources h e r e cf. V i a n , Note complimentaire t o 4.809.
 98 The gods and the divine

bed, though much against my will. Now he lies in his house broken by
painful old age, but there is more misery for me now.' (//. 18.429-35, trans.
Hammond)
These verses resonate in Hera's appeal to Thetis:
'dAAd - ere ydp 6f)
I^ETi vr|TTUTirjs OCUTT) Tpe<|>ov f|8* dy&7rn<Ta
i^oxov dAAdcov ai T3 EIV dAi vaiETaoucnv,
OUV6K6V OUK 6TAr|S £UVf]l AlOS l£|i6VOlO

'Ever since you were a baby I have nursed you and cherished you
above all other goddesses who live in the sea, because you were not
reckless enough (eTArjs) to sleep in Zeus's bed, though he wanted i t . . . '
(4.790-4)
Thus while Hera presents one view of the past, we sense another view
and another text and we wonder about Thetis' feelings. Would she
describe her marriage as 6uur|5f|S, 'pleasing to the heart' (4.806)?
Hera claims that part of her plan was that Thetis could have chil-
dren. The one child of whom much is known, Achilles, brought
Thetis nothing but grief- as she is soon to be reminded - and we are
to recall a version of the myth109 in which Thetis killed a number of
children born before Achilles by putting them in fire or boiling water
to test their mortality. The plural TEKVCC, 'children' (4.807), in fact
carries deep sadness for Thetis. Such a reading of the speech depends
upon the fact that we are here concerned not with the product of a
consistent psychology organised solely for the purposes of persuading
Thetis,110 but with a complex and multi-layered text.
There is a further Homeric model which flickers over the Apol-
lonian surface. In vv. 794-5 Hera bitterly refers to Zeus's constant
amours with both goddesses and mortal women. These verses key us
in to the 'Deception of Zeus' by Hera in Iliad 14, in the course of
which Zeus himself lists his amatory conquests, both mortal and
immortal (//. 14.315-28), in order to prove to Hera the strength of
his present desire. In the prelude to that deception, Hera had tricked
Aphrodite into giving her erotic power by inventing a bogus mission
109
Hes. fr. 300 MW (quoted by Z 4.816, cf. Livrea ad loc), Lycophron, Alex. 178-9. The
discussion by S. Jackson, 'Apollonius of Rhodes and the corn-goddess: a note on Arg.
4.869-76', LCM 15 (1990) 53-6, mistakenly alleges that Hera's speech 'omits' this element
of the myth; the omission he ascribes to 'a fear of offending Hellenistic society'.
110
Cf. above pp. 13-15. This is the basic flaw in the discussion of Herter 1959.
 Hera and Thetis 99
upon which she was embarked, (later repeated in part to Zeus in a
speech designed to turn his mind towards eros, vv. 301-6):
'I am going to the ends of the nourishing earth, to visit Ocean, the source
of the gods' creating, and mother Tethys. They took me from Rhea and
brought me up and reared me in kindness in their house, when wide-seeing
Zeus banished Kronos under the earth and the harvestless sea. So I am
going to visit them and settle their endless quarrelling. It is a long time now
that they have kept from sleeping together in love, after anger entered their
hearts. If I can win over their hearts with my persuasion, and bring them
to return to love's union in their bed, they will call me their honoured friend
forever.' (//. 14.200-10, trans. Hammond)
This speech shares a number of motifs with the Apollonian scene we
have been considering. Hera wishes to reconcile those who nursed
her - reversed in Apollonius - who have not slept together for a long
time because of anger. The suggestion of deception and stratagem
which this Homeric passage casts over Hera's speech to Thetis rein-
forces the shifting ambivalence which we have already detected. It is
perhaps unnecessary to add that the people whom the Homeric Hera
claims to wish to reconcile are Thetis' grandparents, Okeanos and
Tethys.
After the past, Hera turns to the future. After death Achilles, who
now feels the absence of his mother's milk,111 will go to the Elysian
plain and marry Medea, who, as Thetis' future daughter-in-law,
deserves her help; Thetis should therefore put aside her anger against
Peleus (4.810-17); this anger is a characteristic of the Homeric
Achilles which Apollonius has transferred to his mother in the previ-
ous generation.112 Again we wonder about Thetis' feelings as she
hears about the baby she has 'abandoned' and how he will marry the
much older Medea whom we have already seen take part in a rather
nasty killing; presumably the promise of the Elysian plain softens the
blow.113
When Hera has finished, Thetis makes no response to the details
111
Hera alludes to an etymology of Achilles' name from a-xsTAos, cf. Richardson on h. Dem.
236; vv. 866-8 seem to allude to the more common derivation from ocxos. For Catullus' use
of these verses cf. Hunter 1991 a.
112
Cf. 4.864-5, 868, 879.
113
The ambivalence of rap in 815 is rightly recognised by Hutchinson 1988.130 n. 75; such
ambivalence is, of course, in keeping with the style of the whole speech. My reading of
Hera's speech finds an interesting parallel, and perhaps some confirmation, in Juno's
speech to Iuturna at Aen. 12.1346°. which is clearly indebted to the Apollonian scene (cf.
Conington on 12.142). Iuturna was a water-nymph (cf. Thetis) who lost her virginity to
Jupiter (contrast Thetis) and was recompensed with immortality; she is destined to lose her
 i oo The gods and the divine
of her account of the past, but merely expresses assent to the request
and says that she must be on her way. Her own feelings about both
Peleus and Hera are suppressed. It is, however, probably not fanciful
to see bitterness or sarcasm in her description of the journey in front
of her as 8OAIXT| TE KOU acTTreTOS, 'unspeakably long' (4.838).114 This
is the same journey which Iris made without any word of complaint.
The first destination is the sea-floor, probably between Samothrace
and Imbros, from where Iris had fetched Thetis in the Iliad.115 From
there she travels west like the rays of the rising sun (4.847-8) all the
way to the west coast of Italy. Unlike Iris, however, Thetis travels
'through the water' (4.849), and we are specifically to think of her
travelling round the bottom of the Peloponnese and across to Italy.
Here again Apollonius adds 'realistic', physical detail to the Homeric
divine machinery. Her subsequent appearance to Peleus evokes her
appearances to Achilles through the Iliad, but the Argonaut is grief-
stricken and silent; even his subsequent report to his comrades
(4.880-1) is not given in direct speech.116 The scene is a powerful
manifestation of the gulf between man and god, between frightening
anger and unspeaking suffering. The narrative of what happened
between them in the past (4.869-79) 117 is sandwiched within the
description of Peleus' grief to suggest that Peleus recalls this now in
flashback. After his foolish action Thetis had left 'like a dream', and
indeed he had been woken from sleep to 'save' his child. Was the
whole thing a dream? 118 Thetis' threatening reappearance merely
deepens his amechanie, leaving them further apart than ever.

beloved brother, as Thetis will lose her son. Note: (i) animo gratissima nostro 12.142 (cf. Arg.
4.791-2) is part of a captatio beneuolentiae -Juno's interest is far from altruistic, (ii) sets ut te
etc. v. 143, cf. Arg. 4.784^ (iii) The sarcasm ofmagnanimi in v. 144, picked up by Iuturna
herself at 12.878. (iv) Verses 144-5 m n t a t Zeus's catalogue of his amours (cf. Knauer
1964.426). (v) ingratum v. 144 is not in one sense true (Jupiter made her immortal), but
Iuturna discovers it to be, in another sense, very true indeed (cf. vv. 878-9). Juno's speech
might suggest that Virgil too realised the ambivalence of the Apollonian Hera's rhetoric.
114
ocaTTETOS is a favourite Apollonian word (Livrea on 4.1001), but ao"TT6Tos oTuos is at least
odd.
115
//. 24.78; thus 4.842-3 reworks //. 24.79. The same Homeric verses lie behind the descrip-
tion of Iris at 4.770-2, thus helping to focus the contrast in the reactions of the two
goddesses to Hera's request.
116
For Apollonius' innovative use of indirect speech cf. below pp. 143-51.
117
For the debt to the Homeric Hymn to Demeter cf. Vian, Note compUmentaire to 4.879;
Richardson 1974.238.
118
Gf. Frankel 1968.540.
 CHAPTER 5

The poet and his poem

No feature of Alexandrian poetry has attracted more attention in

recent years than the self-conscious literariness of its presentation, the
constant demand of poet-narrators to be recognised as the control-
ling force behind the words of the text. 1 Here Apollonius has much
in common with Callimachus, perhaps most obviously in his invoca-
tions to the Muse and his loudly pious silences (1.919—21, 4.247—50).
More interestingly, the tension between the scheme of the epic which
parades the telling of all the Argonautic adventures — note the 'naive'
confidence of 4.1776—7, 'no other challenge confronted you as you
sailed up from Aegina' - and the open selectivity and imbalance of
the narrative 2 makes the process of narration itself an object of
interest: Apollonius wants the stitches in his rhapsodia, and who con-
trols them, to show. The whole epic puts on display what is prob-
lematic in the Aristotelian demand for 'oneness'; 3 at one level, the
Argonautica is a demonstration (an epideixis) of the techniques and
challenges of epic narration. The subjects with which I shall be
concerned in this chapter are thus to some extent arbitrary, as it will
become clear that many themes recur from earlier chapters; 'poetic
voice' is not a separable part of this epic (at least) - it pervades every
aspect.
(i) THE EPIC VOICE

'Epic objectivity' is a standard phrase of Homeric criticism.4 Homer

does not, so the argument goes, constantly tell us what his charac-
ters are feeling and thinking; rather, the characters reveal themselves
1
The bibliography is large; for Apollonius see esp. Beye 1982. Chapter 1, Fusillo 1985.360-96,
Goldhill 1991. Chapter 5.
2
For these as features of Alexandrian narrative cf, e.g., Cairns 1979.112-20, Lyne 1987.218-
20.
3
Cf. Appendix, below pp. 190-5.
4
For a useful summary of views and a statement of the standard position cf. Effe 1983. For
important modifications to the standard view cf. Frontisi - Ducroux 1986, De Jong 1987,

IOI
 102 The poet and his poem
in speech and in actions ranging from wholesale slaughter to the
smallest of gestures. The poet acts 'behind' his characters; he does not
overtly feel and suffer with them. An important corollary of this is
that it is largely the characters in their speeches, rather than the poet
in third-person narrative, who use the language of emotion and
moral judgement. 5 Moreover, the poet rarely intrudes explicitly into
the world of his poem; we are presented with a complete 'epic'
picture and left to make of it what we can. 6 At the other end, of the
scale, in the traditional account, stands Virgil's Aeneid where, on one
influential view, the involvement of the poet with his characters'
actions and emotions is overt and 'the narrative proper achieves a
psychological continuity which is really a blend of author's [better
would be "narrator's"] and character's feelings'7, or, in another
reading, the epic is 'polycentric' and presents a fractured image
contrasting with Homer's 'one and only point of view', which 'is a
relation of objective truth toward the world it displays'. 8 Moreover,
there is an absolute contrast between the 'sealed' world of Homer
and the 'open' world of the Aeneid, constructed of the constant inter-
play of mythic time and Augustan time.
That such an account of Homeric poetry is overly simplistic does
not require lengthy demonstration. For one thing, criticism of this
kind traditionally operates largely at the lexical level, and must
therefore do scant justice to non-lexical factors such as arrangement,
juxtaposition, displacement, echo and reversal, i.e. all the features
productive of meaning which operate above the level of individual
words. Many readers will feel that in selection and silence Homer
reveals himself and the process of narration quite as much as in what
he actually says. Moreover, 'epic objectivity' is clearly too vague a
phrase for the work it has often been asked to do. More recent
criticism, therefore, has turned to narratology, particularly the work
of Gerard Genette, to analyse the texts with the concept of'focalisa-
tion'.9 Here the critic asks through whose eyes events are witnessed
Lynn - George 1988, R. P. Martin, The Language of Heroes. Speech and Performance in the Iliad
(Ithaca/London 1989), Goldhill 1991.
5
See esp. Griffin 1986; below pp. 109-12.
6
Here the views of Bakhtin have been influential; see Bakhtin 1981.13-18.
7
B. Otis, Studies in Philology 73 (1976) 9. For further bibliography of such criticism cf. G. K.
Galinsky, ANRW n 31.2, 988-9.
8
Conte 1986.152-3.
9
Cf. De Jong 1987; helpful discussion and bibliography in Rimmon-Kenan 1983.71-85,
Bal 1985.100-15, and D. Fowler, 'Deviant focalisation in Virgil's Aeneid\ PCPS 36 (1990)
42-63.
 The epic voice 103
and expressed, regardless of whether the narrator-poet or one of the
characters is speaking. At the purely lexical level, such research has
in fact been used to confirm the prevailing view of Homeric 'objectiv-
ity'.10 It is, however, important not to allow terminology to blind us
to the ways in which Homer overtly shapes the material of his
narrative, 11 some of which are briefly summarised in what follows.
Moreover, in the context of a study of how Hellenistic epic differs
from Homer, it may also be fair to ignore possible differences - which
we could, in any case, hardly recover — between how an original
Homeric audience might have perceived 'the epic voice' and what a
Hellenistic scholar-poet (or even a modern critic) might find or
construct in the Iliad and the Odyssey. The 'literary criticism' which
poets in their poems practise upon their predecessors is not necessar-
ily intended to display truths about those predecessors. Rather, a
particular image of previous poetry is constructed in accordance
with the needs of the later poem, and such constructions may not be
true to the contours and nuances of the original.
Homeric characters are 'heroes' belonging to a different and
grander 'past'; the narrator's own day is important only in compari-
son to and through association with that epic past.12 On one occasion
at least, however, the poet looks beyond his poem in a way which is
highly suggestive for later epic. At the opening of Iliad 12 we are told
of the destruction of the Greek wall by Poseidon and Apollo after the
fall of Troy. Not only does this passage, uniquely for Homer, label
those who died at Troy 'a race of semi-divine men (f)ui6ecov yevos
dvSpcov, 12.23)',13 but it explains why it is no longer possible to see
the wall; the passage is thus an aition, but one explaining the absence
of traces, whereas we are most familiar, from Homer onwards,14 with
aetiological poetry that explains (real or alleged) visible material
remains. In a later poet we would have identified the opening of Iliad
12 as a deliberate reversal of the aetiological motif.15 Here, then, the
10
Cf. I. J. F. De Jong, 'Homeric words and speakers: an addendum', JHS 108 (1988) 188-9.
11
The Homeric position is overstated by, for example, Fusillo 1985.
12
Cf. //. 5.302-4, 12.380-3, 447-50, 20.285-7; Frontisi-Ducroux 1986.29-32; Bakhtin
1981.13-18.
13
Cf. G. Nagy, The Best of the Achaeans (Baltimore 1979) 160. For further discussion cf. R.
Scodel, 'The Achaean wall and the myth of destruction', HSCP 86 (1982) 33-50.
14
Cf. //. 7.81-91, Od. 11.74-8, 24.80-4; Fusillo 1985.137-8.
15
Note esp. how vv. 34-5 which conclude the passage, 'this was what Poseidon and Apollo
were to do in later times', look forward to Arg. 1.1309 (cf. Call. fr. 12.6), 'these things then
would be brought to accomplishment in later time', which follows upon an aition for a
modern marvel. Cf. further 4.1216, 1764.
 104 The poet and his poem
epic poet does seem openly to display a reflective consciousness of his
song and its characters; the passage is, at any rate, a very illumi-
nating example of Homer as the legitimising model of all poetic
technique. Moreover, a number of references to the fame which song
confers16 and to the preservation of memory within song17 reveal an
already developed poetic consciousness upon which later epic was to
build.
Beyond this more general aspect there are familiar phenomena of
Homeric style which might be considered limits on 'pure objectivity'.
These include the poet's invocations or requests for information to
the Muse, questions or pathetic apostrophes of a character (e.g. //.
16.692-3 'Whom then did you kill first, whom last, Patroclus, when
the gods summoned you to death?'), 18 and foreshadowing of future
events. Explicit authorial judgement on the actions or beliefs of
a character is largely limited to statements introduced by vr|Trios,
'poor fool', such as //. 2.37-8 '[Agamemnon] thought that he would
capture Priam's city on that day; poor fool (vf)TTios), he did not
know what Zeus was planning.' Occasionally such statements are
expanded into generalising observations on the human condition:

But Patroklos called to his horses and Automedon and went in pursuit of
the Trojans and Lycians, and this was a fatal error, poor fool - if he had
kept to the instruction of the son of Peleus, he would have escaped the vile
doom of black death. But Zeus' mind is always stronger than the mind of
men - he can bring terror on even the brave man and easily rob him of
victory: and then again he himself will spur a man to fight. And it was
Zeus then who put the urge in Patroklos' heart. (//. 16.684-91, trans.
Hammond)

The son of Peleus held the shield away from him with his massive hand -
he was frightened, thinking that the long-shadowed spear of great-hearted
Aineias would easily force through it: the fool, he did not realise in his heart
and mind that the glorious gifts of the gods are not easily overcome by
mortal men and will not fail before them. (//. 20.261-6, trans. Hammond)
16
Cf. //. 2.119, 3.287, 353-5, 22.305; Od. 1.302, 11.433-4, 2I-255> 2 4433-
17
Cf. //. 6.357-8, Od. 3.203-4, 8.579-80.
18
On apostrophe in Homer cf. G. W. Nitzsch, 'Die Apostrophe in Ilias und Odyssee',
Philologus 16 (i860) 151-4; A. Parry, 'Language and characterization in Homer', HSCP 76
(1972) 1-22 ( = The Language of Achilles and Other Papers, Oxford 1989, 301-26); E. Block,
'The narrator speaks: apostrophe in Homer and Vergil', TAP A 112 (1982) 7-22; Frontisi-
Ducroux 1986.17-27; N. Yamagata, 'The apostrophe in Homer as part of the oral tech-
nique', BICS 36 (1989) 91-103; Richardson 1990.170-4. Grillo 1988.9-67 offers little
more than a collection of relevant passages in Homer and Apollonius.
 The epic voice 105
Such gnomai about the world of gods and battle, however, are im-
parted by the Muse to the poet along with everything else, and they
speak of and define the poetic world of the Iliad, as much as the
present world of the poet and his audience. It is also important, in
the context of later epic, that the poet does not use the first person in
these observations, preferring to speak more generally of 'mortal
men', and that the majority of generalising gnomai in Homer are in
the mouth of characters, not the poet himself.
In the Argonautica, pervasive hymnal and aetiological concerns and
the fact that both proem and epilogue refer explicitly to the power
of song to preserve heroic deeds (1.18-19, 4.1773-5) stress the dis-
tance between the world of the heroes and the world of the poet's
performance.19 This distance, and the sense of loss which accom-
panies it, become part of our constant awareness that we are reading
or listening to a poetic recreation of events controlled by an ever-
present narrator. This is a story of the heroic past, but the barriers
between us and that past may be erected or dismantled as the poet
chooses. The terrain and the time of voyage may be that of the heroic
past, of contemporary experience or scientific theory, or a mixture of
these: the giant waves which the crew confronts in the Bosporus are
still there for us to face (2.169-74). 20 Not only is the epic past no
longer 'walled off absolutely from all subsequent times, and above all
from those times in which the singer and his listeners are located',21
but the poet clearly delights in mixing the temporal levels. The past
and the present are inextricably interwoven. The present, as we shall
come to see,22 in fact constructs the past.
Books 1, 3 and 4 open with addresses to the Muses or a Muse, and
the role assigned to them by the poet grows larger as the poem goes
on;23 whereas at the head of Book 3 the poet asks the Muse to stand
beside him, at the head of Book 4 he professes that he has lost control
of his narrative which must therefore be handed over completely to
the Muse. The brash, 'modern' self-confidence of the opening proem
now retreats for safety to an archaic dependence upon the Muse.
19
Contrast I . I , 'famous deeds of men of old', with the Homeric proems: //. 1.4 places us in a
'heroic' past, and Od. 1.2 fixes the time as after the fall of Troy, but neither is as explicit as
the Argonautica proem.
20
Cf. Beye 1982.26 and, for a related phenomenon, my note on 3.927-31.
21
Bakhtin 1981.15.
22
Cf. below pp. 162-9.
23
For the progression in the Muses' role through these three invocations cf. Hunter 1987.134;
Feeney 1991.90-1.
 106 The poet and his poem
The emphasis on the poet's mental effort, however, as he ponders,
opuccivovTi (4.3), shows how far we have come from the Homeric
conception of inspiration. Elsewhere too Apollonius follows Homeric
precedent in the use of invocations and questions within the narra-
tive, but goes well beyond Homer in the tone and style of these
authorial utterances. 24 There is in these passages — the majority of
which occur in the final book - a far greater prominence for the
poet's person, the narrating ego, than is found in Homer, and this is
true also for passages other than invocations. The first person is used
in the Catalogue to suggest the poet's reliance on other sources,25 to
halt a digression ('But why should I tell at length stories about
Aithalides?', 1.648-9),26 and for statements about the progress of the
poem and what prevents (or does not prevent) the poet from giving
a full account.27 None of these have real parallels in Homer. Differ-
ent too is the poet's explicit inclusion of himself in general statements
and gnomai in the first person.28 Most famous is his wistful observa-
tion at the marriage ofJason and Medea:
dAAoc y a p ou TTOTS c|>OAa 8ur|Tra6£cov avOpcoTrcov
TepmoAfjs £TT£(3r)|J6v oAcoi iroBv ovv 6e TIS aiei
su<|>poowni(Tiv avir|.

Never do we tribes of suffering mortals tread with whole foot upon the
path of delight; always there is some bitter grief to accompany our
joys. (4.1165-7)
More amusing perhaps is the way the poet - in his ethnographic
voice - aligns himself with his male readers in the account of the
Mossy noikoi:
The customs and ordinances which rule their lives are quite at variance
with the normal. Everything that it is proper to do openly, whether in
24
Cf. 2.851-4 (Hutchinson 1988.94), 1090-2 (a question about Phineus' intention is un-
Homeric), 4.445-9 (cf. below pp. 116-17), 450-1, 552-6, 984-5, 1673-5.
25
For 'we learn, we know e t c ' cf. 1.123, 135. The latter looks like a learned joke; the confident
'we know that . . . ' conceals genealogical fiddling, cf. Vian, Note complementaire to 1.138. A
related phenomenon is the use of'as the story is', cbs 4>orns, evfrroucri etc.; these markers may
indicate choice between mythic variants, but they make clear also the narrated status of the
text, cf. below p. 127. Homer uses (J>OKTI in the body of the narrative only of two mythic
locations (//. 2.783, Od. 6.42) and of the sharp sight of the eagle (//. 17.674), cf. De Jong
1987.238.
26
On this passage cf. Goldhill 1991.291-2; cf. 1.1220 'but these things would lead me far from
the path of my song'.
27
Cf. 1.919-21,2.844-5,4.248-9,451, 1381, 1511.
28
On 2.542-6 cf. below pp. 137-8.
 The epic voice 107

public assembly or in the market-place, all of this they carry out at home;
everything that we do in our houses, this they do outside in the middle of
the streets and incur no censure for it. There is no public shame about
love-making, but like grazing pigs, they enjoy general promiscuity and
mate with their women on the bare earth, paying not the slightest attention
to anyone nearby. (2.1018-25)
Third-person generalisation of the Homeric kind, for example on
the inevitability of death (1.1035-6, 4.1504), does occur in the Ar-
gonautica, but the action of characters is also often assimilated to 'what
is normal' or 'expected', although it remains delicately ambiguous
whether this is intended to be a normality within or without the
world of heroic poetry. 29 I n the case of Medea's decision not to kill
herself, there may be little doubt:

livrjcraT' 6|iT|AiKir|s TrepiynOEOs, old TE Koupiy

. . . She remembered her happy friends, as a young girl would (3.814)
More complex effects with similar wording are also possible. When
Aphrodite finds her son he is playing with Ganymede:
6c|ji<t>' aoTpaydAoicji 5E TCO ye
Xpuaeiois, d TE Koupoi 6|if)0eEs, svf IOCOVTO.
The two of them were amusing themselves with golden knucklebones,
in the way that young playmates do. (3.117-18)
Even if 'as young playmates do' goes primarily with the verbal idea
of'playing knucklebones', juxtaposition to 'golden' draws our atten-
tion to the difference of this scene from 'ordinary life'. T h e phrase is
not a naive encouragement to visualise the scene, but an invitation to
admire the audacity of the poet's recreation; it advertises the artific-
iality, the crucial unreality, of this 'realistic' scene.
Like Homer, Apollonius uses 'poor fool' statements with vfjTnos or
O"X£TAIOS to comment upon a character's actions; whereas vf)Trios
seems to carry an imputation of foolish ignorance, O"XSTAIOS suggests
rather the poet's pity. 30 Here again variation can produce the com-
plex effect which signals the controlling voice of the poet. In the

29
Cf. 1.315-16, 458-9, 2.541-3 (in a simile), 3.618, 4.52-3, 1071-2, 1189.
30
VT)TTIOS: 2.66, 137-8, 4.875; <7X^T^l°S- 1.1302 (the most marginal case), 2.1028, 3.1133,
4.916, 1524. Griffin 1986.40 notes that in the Homeric poemsCTX^TAIOSis used by the
narrator in this way only at Od. 21.28. A related instance is 8u<rauuopos at 3.808-9, where
we are not far from familiar aspects of Virgilian technique.
 108 The poet and his poem

account of the Mossynoikoi, the verses which immediately follow

those quoted above deal with the life of the king:
ocuTap £v uyiciTCOi paaiAeus UOCTCTUVI Oadaacov
iOeias TTOAEECTCTI Skas AaoTcn 5n<a£er
CTXETAIOS, f\v yap TTOU TI deiiioreucov
oual
AIUGOI uiv KETV' fjuap EviKAeiaavTES Ix -
The king sits in the highest 'mossune' and administers fair justice over
the large population. Poor chap (CTX£TAIOS)! If he makes a mistake in
his judgements, they lock him up and keep him hungry for that day.
(2.1026-9)
We are indeed invited to feel sorry for the poor king who goes hungry
for a day, but this is sorrow of a quite different order from that which
attends the imminent death of an epic warrior. Here we are close to
a kind of parody of epic style. At the very least, the poet draws on
our knowledge of standard epic contexts for this complex effect, thus
advertising his epic's literariness.
A particularly nuanced device is the narrator's use of the particle
TTOU, 'no doubt', 'I suppose', to modify the actions or beliefs of a
character:
8r| y a p TTOU KOCKEiva 06a Tp£<|>6v a i v d TreAcopa
f/
Hpr|, Zr|v6s OCKOITIS, aeSAiov 'HpaxAfji
No doubt (TTOU) those terrible monsters also had been reared by the
goddess Hera as a challenge for Heracles. (1.996-7)
6yf|0r|CTev
^ O ^ 6iaad|ievos TOC
The son of Ampykos rejoiced in the journey, no doubt (TTOU) already
guessing every detail of what would happen. (3.925-6)
At one level31 this seems to be a device for a kind of documentary
verisimilitude: the poet is not inventing the facts of his story, but
interpreting material for which he is not responsible, with the im-
plication that 'this really happened'. In an extended poetic fiction
of this kind, however, such explicit refusal to take responsibility
for what is reported merely advertises the poet's own role. It is a
marker of highly literary poetry, and as such may be used where
31
Cf. also 1.636, 1023, 1037, 1140, 2.607, 4.557 (of divine action), 1457. Other possible cases
are 1.972, 1222, 4.1397; Frankel 1968.124 labels this use 'impressionistisch', but it is unclear
quite what he means by that. For related phenomena in Heliodorus cf. J. Morgan, CA 1
(1982) 227-32.
 The epic voice 109
the poet actually has more responsibility than usual, i.e. where he
has changed received tradition. 32 Homer restricts this use of TTOU to
the speech of characters, where it is common in descriptions of the
actions or motives of gods;33 the overt uncertainties which it intro-
duces are not part of the Homeric authorial voice. A very striking
example of the device occurs at 3.1399 where TTOU TOICOS, 'in a similar
way, I imagine', introduces a simile; there the phrase calls attention
to the whole problematic of similarity and difference which the epic
simile uncovers.34
The phenomena considered so far are very unevenly distributed
through the poem, and the sum total of such occurrences might be
thought relatively small for an Alexandrian poem of this length.
Such an uneven texture was, however, fundamental to Apollonius'
conception of how epic should be written in the shadow of Homer;
it is after all the extraordinary continuity of voice and atmosphere
which is perhaps the most astonishing thing about the Homeric
poems. Apollonius has shattered this continuity, but refuses (unlike
Virgil) to put a new one in its place.
Homer's tendency to avoid the explicit language of emotion and
moral judgement except in the direct speech of his characters has
recently been studied by Jasper Griffin.35 Griffin's starting-point was
the earlier observation36 of Per Krarup that 'abstract' nouns of all
kinds are significantly more frequent in Homeric speeches37 than in
the narrative portions of the text, some five times as frequent in fact.
Here, for example, are Krarup's figures for some nouns of interest for
Arg., with the number of Homeric occurrences in speech first and
those in narrative second: &9pa8ir|, 'thoughtlessness' (8,3), <piAoTr|S,
'love', 'affection' (41,12), KaKOTris, 'wickedness', 'cowardice' (21,4),
ai8cos, 'shame', 'coyness' (24,1), 6vei8os, 'blame', 'reproach' (8,1),
6CTT|, 'folly', 'error' (20,4), VETKOS, 'strife' (16,3), Ti|jf), 'honour' (33,4),
'disgrace', 'shame' (8,0), Tr66os/Tro6f|, 'longing', 'desire'
32
Cf. F r a n k e l 1968.602.
33
Cf. Ebeling s.v. 2b. T h e a u t h o r i a l TTOU in Arg. differs from the 'indices of focalisation' such
as ' p e r h a p s ' , ' u n d o u b t e d l y ' a n d so on, which a r e discussed by G e n e t t e 1 9 8 0 . 2 0 2 - 3 , because
the poet is not focusing on the event t h r o u g h one of his characters.
34
Cf. below pp. 130-1.
35
Griffin 1986.
36
P. Krarup, 'Verwendung von Abstrakta in der direkten Rede bei Homer', C&M 10 (1948)
1-17.
37
Roughly 55% of Homer is direct speech, as opposed to 29% of Arg.; cf. further below
pp. 138-9.
 11 o The poet and his poem

(14,1). Griffin extended this observation to other classes of emotive

or judgemental words, such as adjectives and adverbs. Krarup had
already noted that the Homeric Hymns no longer seemed to observe
the strictness of the Homeric division and that, as far as abstract
nouns went, the system had completely broken down in the Ar-
gonautica. The following examples should therefore be treated merely
as indicative of a general trend and are intended to suggest what
could be illustrated at much greater length.
ai8cos, 'shame', overwhelmingly a speech-word in Homer, occurs
twelve times in the Argonautica38 of which ten are in the poet's narra-
tive.39 Apollonius, like Homer, keeps Air|v, 'too much', as a speech-
word,40 but also allows affective f), 'indeed', in narrative, even if it is
still much more common in speech (32,17); |iccAa, 'very', 'rather', on
the other hand, which Homer very strictly limits in narrative, 41 is in
the Argonautica much more common in narrative than in speech
(26,41). Another 'judgemental' category, the superlative adjective,
which Griffin identified as predominantly a speech-form in Homer,
is twice as common in the narrative of the Argonautica as in speech
(17,34, o n a r ough count). Given the relative proportions of speech
and narrative in the poem, these figures strongly suggest that very
strict stylistic distinctions between the two modes are no longer
valid, and this will have important consequences for considering 'the
poet's voice'. A particularly clear case is that of emotive adjectives. 42
Whereas, for example, Homer uses oAoos, 'deadly', predominantly
and ouAoiJievos exclusively in speech, Apollonius uses both indiscrimi-
nately and frequently (19,29).43 While retaining crruyepos, 'hateful',
as predominantly a speech-word, he nevertheless uses it quite fre-
quently in narrative (13,11, whereas Homer has 33,10), as he does
also aivos, 'terrible', and pejorative adjectives of excess, such as
U7T6p|3ios and inrepcpiaAos, 'haughty', 'overbearing'. A similar trend
is observable with nouns which carry an overt moral weight. Thus
86Aos, 'guile', and its cognates are very much speech-words in
38
Nine of the 12 are in Book 3.
39
dvcci8r)s a n d dvai8r|Tos, however, both a p p e a r only in speeches (both 2,0). T h e related verbs
are also p r e d o m i n a n t l y speech - words in H o m e r (34,8), b u t t h e Apollonian sample is too
small (1,2) to be significant.
40
The one exception, 2.669, seems to carry no emotional colour.
41
Gf. Griffin 1986.45.
42
In what follows I make no attempt to distinguish between adjectives in the narrative which
are 'focalised' by a character and those which are not.
43
Cf. Frankel 1968.107-8.
 The epic voice 111
Homer (35,7 for the simple noun), but are used freely in Apollonius'
narrative.
By themselves, of course, such statistics tell us little about how
Apollonius uses the different modes of narrative and speech. Never-
theless, a couple of general observations are already possible. It is
clear that the Homeric division between the lexicon of speech and
that of narrative is blurred and weakened, but not entirely aban-
doned. The much smaller percentage of direct speech in the Ar-
gonautica - itself an important indicator of the poet's narrative choices
- makes decisions in particular cases often problematic.44 Secondly,
these features are again distributed unevenly through the poem.
Nevertheless, the real shift towards an overt engagement by the poet
with the material of his song is unmistakable; in this, as often when
reading Alexandrian narrative poetry, we are right to be reminded
of Pindar.45 Homer's avoidance of 'moral judgement' is not, of
course, absolute. The proem to the Odyssey tells us that Odysseus'
crew perished 'by their own foolishness' (1.7); that, however, is an
exceptional case, and it is noteworthy that the narrator's 'judge-
ment' in the proem is almost immediately confirmed by the au-
thority of Zeus himself (Od. 1.34). Apollonius' practice extends far
beyond this, and three instances deserve particular notice. The poet
in his own voice makes very plain what kind of characters Amycus
and his people are;46 the murder of Apsyrtus - a 'great treachery'
(4.421) - is condemned outright;47 and the narrator's highly judge-
mental account of events at Lemnos is set in counterpoint to
Hypsipyle's account to Jason of the same events.48 This last in-
stance deserves closer examination as emblematic of many of the
phenomena under discussion here.
The narrator's opening is an emphatic statement (1.609—10),
IvO' djiuSis TTOCS 8*niJios UTrep|3acxir|icTi yuvaiKCOV
VT|AEICOS 665|jir|To Trapoixoiaevcoi AUK&(3OCVTI.

44
Cf. below pp. 1 3 8 - 5 1 .
45
H e r e again w e must b e w a r y of assuming that Apollonius a n d his contemporaries read
H o m e r in just the w a y w e d o ; for more positive views in later antiquity a b o u t H o m e r ' s
' e n g a g e m e n t ' with his material cf. M . - L . v o n F r a n z , Die aesthetischen Anschauungen der
Iliasscholien (diss. Zurich 1943) 3 5 - 6 , D e J o n g 1987.12-13.
46
Cf. 2 . 2 - 9 , I O O 54> I 2 9 -
47
Cf. 4.445-50, 456. For the descriptions of this killing by the Argo and by Circe cf. below
p. 146.
48
Cf., e.g., Blumberg 1931.15-16, Frankel 1968.111-12, George 1972.58-9, Margolies
1981.43-4.
 112 The poet and his poem
There, in the preceding year, the whole demos had been cruelly killed
by the crimes of the women,
a conception of the story reinforced by an emotional exclamation
within the narrative:
co HEAEOCI £r|Aoi6 T' ETriapiuyepcos &Kopr|Toi
O wretched women, whose terrible jealousy knew no bounds (i .616)49
Far, however, from increasing the horror of the deed, this arch cry
creates an ironic distance between the narrator and his tale, as also
does a parenthetic 'footnote' telling the history of King Thoas after
his escape from Lemnos (i .623-6); the irony is produced by a highly
mannered syntax and an elaborate aetiology which work in oppo-
sition to the poet's professed outrage. 50 The procreation of the
Lemnian line now takes place outside Lemnos, and the union of
the nymph Oinoie and Thoas looks forward with a smile to the union
of Hypsipyle and Jason. In contrast to the poet's version, Hypsipyle's
account to Jason is emotive and empathetic:
'Sf| yap KoupiSias taev drn-Eoruyov EK TE |i£AdOpcov
fji |iaTir|i Ei^avTEs ocTTEaaEuovTo yuvaiKas,
Ar|i&S£(7(ji 5opiKTr)Tai$ Trapiccuov,

'They rejected in loathing their lawful wives and, giving way to their
lust, chased them from their homes, preferring - poor fools! - to sleep
with slaves acquired in war.' (1.804-7)
6cTTr|vf]vavTO, 'they shunned' (1.611), in the poet's narrative is here
replaced by cnreaTuyov, 'they rejected in loathing', and the 'lustful
folly' (uaTir|) of the men is set against the women's tolerance while
all social and familial cohesion broke down (1.807—17). In the differ-
ences between the two accounts we can see how the avoidance of the
Homeric, formulaic style is not merely a matter of literary stance, but
is importantly productive of meaning. One part of Hypsipyle's tale
we know to be false; the rest of it seems emotionally true. 5 1 The
reverse is the case with the narrator's account.
49
dKopT^TOi, 'insatiate', suggests a-Koprj, 'whose b e h a v i o u r was not like t h a t of girls'. T h i s ' p u n '
reinforces the gender stereotyping which structures the narrative.
50
Cf. Frankel 1968.91. In using eirocKTfipes for 'fishermen' Apollonius must be etymologising
a s Ol 6TT* &KTf]l.
51
The narrator's version of events at Lemnos seems to have influenced Virgil's description of
the crime of the Danaids as depicted on Pallas' belt: rapiens immania pondera baltei \ impressumque
nefas: una sub node iugali \ caesa manus iuuenum foede thalamique cruenti (Aen. 10.496-8). T h e
 The epic voice 113
The cases of Hypsipyle, Amycus, and Apsyrtus stand out for the
intensity of the authorial voice, but it is again the unevenness of
the epic - the lack of consistent 'voice' - which is striking. This very
unevenness, however, is an invitation to read the poet's silences;
our knowledge of the 'freedom' which he enjoys means that we
observe both when he exercises that licence and when he does not.
Again, very nuanced effects are possible. One such instance is the
poet's apology for having to tell the story of Kronos' castration of
his father:
vfjcros
fji OTTO 6f) KeToOai Speiravov <|>aTis - TAorre, Mouaai,
OUK eOsAcOV SVETTCO TTpOTEpCOV 6TTOS - 001 OCTTO -TTCCTpOS
ur)5sa vnAeicos ITOCIJS Kpovos*

The story is that buried in this island lies the sickle - forgive me,
Muses, against my will I report the tale of earlier men - with which
Kronos pitilessly cut off his father's genitals ... (4.983-6)
The poet may well be 'unwilling' to tell this tale, but 'pitilessly' is
very much his own gloss on the tradition which he is 'forced' to tell;
the constraints upon him are not that tight. Moreover, he proceeds,
by way of parenthesis, to offer an alternative explanation for the
name of the island,52 which avoids the 'shocking' story of castration.
The structure of the passage, however, privileges the castration ex-
planation, whereas a truly reluctant poet might have reversed the
prominence given to the respective versions. This poet allows himself
to enjoy the object of his distaste.
Any attempt to place Apollonius within a general scheme of
change over time in the authorial voice of ancient epic is naturally
hindered by the lack of comparative material from the Hellenistic
period, to say nothing of our ignorance of non-Homeric, archaic
epic. On the other hand, we may take some comfort from the obvious
importance of the Argonautica to subsequent epic poetry — an impor-
tance which suggests that it would have a major place in this investi-
gation even if the ancient epic corpus had survived intact. Moreover,
we do have a few other scraps from the Hellenistic period. A passage
of twenty-one hexameters of the Cretan poet Rhianus (? contem-

crimes of the Danaids and the Lemnian women - and the heroisms of Hypermestra
and Hypsipyle - are obviously similar. The Apollonian model is overlooked by Gonte
1986.185-95.
52
Cf. above p. 69.
 114 The poet and his poem

porary with Apollonius) on the follies of mankind 53 begins with a

first-person gnome on the human condition:
fj d p a 5f] |idAa TTOCVTES diaapTivooi
dvOpco-TTOi, 96poii6v 5E OECOV STEpoppoTia Scopa
Kpa6iT]r

Very foolish indeed are all we mortals, and we take the ambiguous
gifts of the gods with unthinking heart . . .

The context is unknown, and we do not know who is speaking. 54 The

passage is far longer than any gnomic utterance in the Argonautica,
but the tone is not unlike that of 4.1165-7 (quoted above p. 106).
From the shorter hexameter poems - the so-called 'epyllia' - the
harvest is equally small. 55 A fragment of Euphorion (late third cen-
tury B.C.) perhaps belongs here:

TTopcpuper) O&KivOe, ae [xkv uia <p-q|Jiis doi6cov

ToiTernis d|idOoiai SESOVTTOTOS AiaKiSao
eiapos oanrsAAeiv yEypauueva KCOKUouaav.

Dark hyacinth, one report of poets says that, after the son of Aiakos
fell on the Rhoitean sands, you send up your painted letters in lamen-
tation in the springtime. 56 (Euphorion fr. 40 Powell)

The empathetic address and the reference to 'poets' make the verses
highly suggestive in the present context, but both provenance and
speaker are unknown. More important, however, than guesses about
isolated fragments is the almost total absence of the overt voice
of the ironic, insistent narrator from the hexameter narratives of
[Theocritus] 25, Moschus' Europa, and the Megara. Much in the
marvellous Europa, for example, reveals its period — 'small-scale,
Homeric in diction, unhomeric in treatment, ecphrastic, pictorial,

53
Fr. I Powell, cf. Hopkinson 1988.226-9.
54
This passage has often been assumed to be from a speech, b u t t h e a r g u m e n t s a r e inconclu-
sive; certainly fj apoc 6f| is n o t decisive, w h e n viewed in t h e light of Apollonius' usage. F o r
discussion cf. t h e reviews of Kokolakis' edition b y A. H . Griffiths, JHS 89 (1969) 135 a n d
G. Giangrande, CR 19 (1969) 373-4.
55
Possibly important are Rhianus fr. 25 Powell (a name aetiology), Philetas fr. 8 Powell (a
gnome about necessity, but most likely spoken by Odysseus or Aeolus) and Euphorion fr. 80
Powell ('we hear' of a myth, cf. above n. 25). The hexameter verses from a 'Foundation of
Lesbos' which appear as Apollonius fr. 12 Powell (cf. Hunter 1989. 11 n. 54) also have little
of interest to offer in this regard, except for the 'empathetic' Sucrduuopos in v. 20; this may
or may not be significant for the question of authorship.
56
Cf. van Groningen ad loc. for this interpretation.
 The epic voice 115
pseudo-naive'57 - but it also lacks the intrusive presence of the poet-
narrator, as we are familiar with this from Callimachus, Apollonius
and (later) Catullus 64. This absence must be given due weight
when considering the significance of the 'Callimachean' spirit within
Hellenistic Greek poetry as a whole.
It is, of course, Callimachus who is the crucial figure. The highly
individual and persistent voice of his poems requires no elaborate
exemplification, but two points should be noted. First, the voice is,
again, an uneven one through the extant corpus, in which - as is not
the case with Apollonius — generic differences play their part. Thus,
a comparison of the elegiac narratives of Acontius and Cydippe (fr. 75)58
and the Victoria Berenices (SH 254-69) reveals that, within the Aitia,
Callimachus very clearly used more than one mode of authorial
presentation (hardly surprising in so multifarious a poem). Secondly,
the hexameter narrative of the Hecale must occupy a special place in
the discussion. In his consideration of the origins of Ovid's elegiac
narrative style, Richard Heinze stated that 'Callimachus' elegiac
narrative never allows the reader to forget the presence of the narra-
tor' and noted that such a narrative mode would be 'monstrous' in
epic and that there is no sign of it in the Hecale.59 We now know more
than Heinze did about this poem,60 but his position remains basically
unrefuted, as the most tantalising of the fragments — as far as 'voice'
is concerned — cannot be positively assigned to the poet rather than
to one of the characters, although scholars have tended simply to
assume that they are spoken by someone other than the narrator. 61
This poem was manifestly shot through with humour, surprise,
pointed juxtaposition and learning. In one sense Callimachus as
narrator is omnipresent, but within the limited range of phenomena
under consideration here, the possibility that he observed some kind
of generic distinction in the handling of the authorial voice remains
a real one, and must be important for the continuing debate about
the differences between the epic and elegiac voice in Latin poetry. 62
57
Hopkinson 1988.202.
58
On the 'poetic voice' in this fragment see now Harder 1990.
59
Vom Geist des Romertums3 ( S t u t t g a r t i960) 3 7 5 - 6 .
60
See esp. the edition by A. Hollis (Oxford 1990).
61
Cf. frr. 263 = 80 Hollis (epitaphic farewell to Hecale), 267 = 75 Hollis (a prayer), 278 = 99
Hollis (an aition), 298 = 1 1 5 Hollis (a.gnome about the human condition), 299 = 116 Hollis
(an invocation to Nemesis).
62
For a recent re-consideration cf. S. Hinds, The Metamorphosis of Persephone. Ovid and the
Self-conscious Muse (Cambridge 1987) 99-134.
 116 The poet and his poem

Such a result would be in keeping with the observation that, in lin-

guistic style also, 'the Hecale approaches Homer much more closely
than do the hexameter Hymns'™ Be that as it may, it is clear that
the Callimachean hymnal voice is of particular importance for the
Argonautica, which begins and concludes with hymnal formulae.64
The personal, authorial conclusion to Theocritus 24, the Herakliskos,
also seems to have taken the form of a hymnal invocation to the
deified hero,65 and it is likely that there is a close connection between
the poet's direct address to the god in a hymn - a literary form in
which changes of mode and person are common - and the narrative
phenomena we have been considering.66 This is in any case already
observable in the Homeric Hymns. It is moreover clear that both
Callimachus and Apollonius are indebted to the personal voice of
archaic lyric, and particularly to Pindar, in whose poetry all of the
devices we have been examining may be readily identified.
If the poetic voice of the Argonautica is different from Homer's, it
differs also from what came afterwards in Rome. The style of Roman
neoteric poetry - 'subjective', emotional and empathetic - is stan-
dardly viewed as a specifically Roman development, Alexandrian
narrative being 'learned' and 'ironic'.67 The primary Latin texts
for this discussion - beyond the fragments of the lost neoterics -
are Catullus' longer poems, the Eclogues, the 'Aristaeus-epyllion' in
Georgic 4, and the Aeneid, particularly the story of Dido. The differ-
ence in style between these poems and Hellenistic narrative is indeed
palpable, but one instructive example might serve to show that
neither must the case be overstated nor precisely what is at issue in
the difference be blurred.
Perhaps the most famous of Apollonius' 'intrusions' into his narra-
tive is the apotropaic68 denuniation of eros before the murder of
Apsyrtus:
s, |ieya -nr^a, |aeya o r u y o s dvOpcoTroiaiv,
6K creOev ouA6|J6vai T ' £pi6es orovaxoci TE TTOVOI TE,

63
A . S. Hollis, Callimachus, Hecale (Oxford 1990) 12.
64
Cf. below pp. 119-29.
65
According to the scholium preserved on the papyrus text. For hymnal elements in the body
of the narrative cf. Gutzwiller 1981.14-16.
66
Noteworthy also are the hymnal verses of Antagoras on Eros (fr. 1 Powell).
67
Cf, e.g., Heinze 1915.371-2, Otis 1964.41-96, Effe 1983.
68
For the apopompe or apotrope cf. Fraenkel on Aesch. Ag. 1573. The hymnal flavour of the
verses is enhanced by an echo and reversal (pace Livrea) of the hymnal proem of Aratus'
Phainomena.
 The epic voice 117

dAyed T ' aXK ETTI TOKTIV crrrEipova T£Tpf)xocor

6ua|J6vecov STTI Traiai Kopuaaeo, Saijjov, aepdeis,
olos MriSeirji aTuyepf)v

Reckless Eros, great bane, greatly loathed by men, from you come
deadly strifes and grieving and troubles, and countless other pains on
top of these swirl up. Against my enemies' children, divine spirit, rear
up as you were when you threw hateful folly (ate) into Medea's heart.
(4445-9)
Both T6Tpf)xocai, 'swirl up', and Kopuaaeo . . . depOeis, 'rear up', are
images from storm-waves,69 and TTOVOI, 'troubles', leads into this
metaphor, as eu|3aAes, 'threw', continues it.70 Such images have a
general appropriateness for Medea, wandering over the sea in hasty
flight (cf. esp. 4.362-3). When Catullus (64.94-8) imitates this pas-
sage in his account of Ariadne's infatuation,
heu misere exagitans71 immiti corde furores
sancte puer, curis hominum qui gaudia misces,
quaeque regis Golgos quaeque Idalium frondosum,
qualibus incensam iactastis mente puellam
fluctibus, in flauo saepe hospite suspirantem,
the wave image is part of a recurrent pattern through the Ariadne
story in which the real waves on which Theseus departs and the
'waves of grief and love' (cf. v. 62) are constantly mingled.72 The
metaphor in Catullus is thus more clearly 'empathised', and the
Roman poet imposes a kind of 'unity' of imagery which Hellenistic
69
Cf. Livrea on 4.215, 447. Frankel, Vian a n d P a d u a n o all take KopOaaeo as ' a r m yourself,
despite //. 21.306-7. A t 4.215 the two basic senses of the verb (cf. LSJ s.v.) are both felt:
the context, evi Teuxecri, allows this linguistic depth. A n intriguing parallel for 4.448 is
Aristainetos 1.10.47-8 (Acontius a n d Cydippe) OUTE OaAdrrrns Tpixuuias OUTE TTOOOU Kop-
u<t>ovuevov adXov euuapes d(|>riyeTcr6ai, which may go back to Callimachus, cf. 'Callimachean
echoes in Catullus 65', £PE forthcoming.
70
Cf. H d t . 7.190 (TTOVOS of a storm), OLD s.v. laboro 3c. TTOVOI is the reading of a papyrus, yooi
that of all the M S S . T h e latter would be a n obvious pair with crrovaxorf a n d foreshadow the
coming death of Apsyrtus, b u t the former takes us back to KduaTOV in 4.1; yooi m a y have
arisen as a memory ofOd. 16.144. TTOVOI looks forward to 4.586 (cf. below p . 146), a n d need
not m e a n 'epreuves [qui attendent Medee et les Argonautes]' as Vian, citing Hes. Theog.
2 2 6 - 7 , takes it. I prefer 'emotional sufferings' (ueAeScovori), cf. Theognis 1323, Ar. Eccl. 975,
Nisbet a n d H u b b a r d on Hor. C. 1.17.19 (labor), a n d TTOVOV transmitted at Theocr. 2.164. I t
may be that the emphasis on curae in Catullus 64 (cf. vv. 62, 69, 95) indicates that he knew
the reading TTOVOI, a n d cf. also Theocr. 13.66 (Heracles the lover).
71
This perhaps picks u p T£TpT|xcxo'i (from TOcpdcrcTCo).
72
When Virgil came in turn to use the Apollonius passage {Am. 4.412), he studiously avoided
the wave-image, but placed the verses where Dido, recalling Ariadne, looks out at the
Trojan fleet upon the sea.
 118 The poet and his poem
poetry - very broadly speaking, of course - avoids, but it is also clear
that the difference between the two styles should not be exaggerated.
Relevant here is a fragment of Philetas' Hermes which told the story
of Odysseus' stay with Aeolus and his affair with one of the king's
daughters:
'fj uev y a p TroAeecrcri Treq>upr|aai
duue, yaAr|vair|i 5* ETnuioyeai o05* o a o v OCTCTOV,
pl 8e TOI veal aiev ocvTai T£Tpf|xof<Jiv.'

'Ah, my heart (thumos), you have been tossed amid many hardships,
and never have you found the tiniest bit of calm, but ever around you
swirl fresh griefs.' (Philetas fr. 7 Powell)
Here the wave and storm imagery is very clearly signalled by
the metaphor of 'calm weather'. The speaker is almost certainly
Odysseus, and the metaphors are perfectly matched to his sea-tossed
fate.73 But for the identity of the speaker, we are very close to
Catullus. The Roman narrator suffers as does the Greek 'character'.
There is, unsurprisingly, no real sign in the amused amatory
narratives of Theocritus 13 and Moschus' Europa of this familiar
Roman 'empathy'. Apollonius, however, can use emotive adjectives
in ways which do look forward to Catullus and Virgil. I have already
noted 8uaci|i|iopos at 3.809, and there is a similar example in the sad
story of Kleite:
TT)V 8 E KOCl OCUTOCl
vuu<|>ai diTo<|>0i|i6vr|v dAar|i5es coSupavTO*
Koci oi OCTTO pAg(|)dpcov o c a 8dKpua x^Oav epa£e,
irdvTcc Td ye Kpr|vnv TEU^OCV 0€oci, f\v KaAeouai
KAeirnv, 5U<TTTJVOIO irepiKAees o u v o u a vuu<}>r|S-

The very nymphs of the groves mourned her death, and from the tears
which dropped to the earth from their eyes the goddesses fashioned
the spring which men call Kleite, the ever-renowned name of the
unhappy (5uorf)voio) bride. (1.1065-9)
Thus Callimachus and Apollonius offered their Roman successors
a variety of potential voices, from which the neoterics chose one
in particular and elaborated features already associated with that
voice. In a different aspect of poetic technique, we may compare how
the elaborate structure of Catullus 64 and 68 and Virgil's 'Aristaeus-
73
The anagrammatic and assonantal pattern of veai aifcv AvTai perhaps enacts the swirling of
the verse's meaning; for such a technique cf. my note on 3.146-8.
 Framing the epic 119
epyllion' intensifies and carries further some structural patterns
merely adumbrated in Hellenistic narrative. These differences be-
tween Hellenistic Greek and neoteric Roman poetry must not be
minimised, however much the two poetic forms also share. What the
neoterics chose not to exploit fully in the voices of Alexandrian
poetry, Ovid did.

(ii) FRAMING THE EPIC

Like the Iliad, the Argonautica begins with Apollo. In both poems the
opening verses foreshadow later major events - what the epic is about
(1.1-4, //. 1.1-7) - and then a transitional passage fills in some of
the background up to the point at which the narrative proper begins
(1.5-17, //. 1.12-42). In adopting this structure, Apollonius imi-
tates features of Homeric technique which were much praised in
some branches of ancient literary scholarship, 74 and from the first he
directs our attention to the Homeric poems as the touchstone against
which to measure his epic. So too, the 'formulaic' style but non-
Homeric 'formulae' of the opening four verses announce a non-
Homeric work which is, nevertheless, like Homer. 75 The opening
verses both give the Argonautic story as a whole as the subject of the
poem and, in particular, look forward to the successful completion of
the outward voyage; the opening invocation to Book 3, which marks
the central division of the epic, then looks forward in particular to
the successful arrival of the fleece in Colchis.
The proem is framed not only by Apollo and the Muses (1.1, 1.22),
but also by the Iliad (Apollo) and the Odyssey (1.22 TrAoc£6uevoi, cf.
Od. 1.2 7rAayx9r|).76 So too is the poem as a whole. The final verse
of the Argonautica, daTraaicos OCKTOCS rTayaoT|i6as eiaa7re|3r|Te, 'gladly
you stepped onto the shores of Pagasae', seems to rework Od. 23.238,
dciTroccrioi S' eTrefiav yairis, KaKOTrjTa <puyovT6S, 'gladly they stepped
upon the land, having escaped from disaster'. That verse comes in a
simile comparing Penelope's joy at seeing her husband to the joy of
survivors of shipwreck when they finally reach the safety of dry land.
This Homeric context has an obvious relevance to the end of the
74
Cf. I b T //. 1.1, I b //. 1.8-9, [Plut.] De vita etpoesi Horn. 162, Brink on Hor. AP 148. For what
is 'un-Aristotelian' about Apollonius' arrangement cf. below pp. 192-5.
75
Cf. Fantuzzi 1988.22-3 for the greater number of'variazioni para-omeriche' in these verses
as opposed to 'riprese puntuali' of Homer.
76
Verse 21 begins fjpoxov, a verse-beginning found at //. 1.4.
 120 The poet and his poem

Argonautica, and of particular importance is the correction which

Odysseus' following speech makes to the implication of the simile
that potential disaster is now in the past:
'& yuvcci, ou y d p m o TT&VTCOV STTI Trsipcrr'
f\KQo[\ev, ccAA' I T ' OTTICTOEV d|i8Tpr|Tos TTOVOS e o r a i ,
TTOAAOS Kai XOCAETTOS, TOV k[xs xpT) TidcvTa TeAeaaai.'

'O wife, we have not yet reached the conclusion of all our trials, but
measureless struggle awaits in the future, great and difficult, which I
must accomplish to the end.' (Od. 23.248-50)
In his envoi to the heroes Apollonius asserts that he has reached the
'famed conclusion' (KAUTOC Treiporra) of their struggles (4.1775-6),
but the echo of these Odyssean verses casts a dark shadow over the
end of the poem - 'measureless struggle' and grief is indeed what
awaits Jason and Medea. Just as both the Iliad and the Odyssey look
forward to events lying beyond the narrative of the poems them-
selves, so too does the Argonautica. The end of the poem is no real
end.77
The proem thus establishes the Argonautica as a creative re-writing
of Homer. It also exploits the formal anonymity of the heroic epic
singer; we do not have, for example, the 'autobiographical frame'
which we often find in Pindar's epinicians or Callimachus' hymns.
On the other hand, Apollonius glorifies his role as poet in quite
non-Homeric ways. He begins78 with an acknowledgement of Apollo
(1.1), and so does the voyage (1.362, 411-25): the poet is, at one
level, like Jason, and the poem is the voyage.79 The presence of
Orpheus on the ship reinforces this sense that the poet is a 'fellow-

77
M o r e commonly, the final verse of the p o e m is associated with Od. 23.296, the famous TEAOS
or Trepas of the Odyssey identified b y Aristophanes of B y z a n t i u m a n d Aristarchus; cf. Erbse
1972.166-72, H e u b e c k o n Od. 23.247-24.548, S. West, 'Laertes revisited', PCPS 35 (1989)
113-43. I* ^s perfectly plausible that Apollonius should conclude his poem with an allusion
to a scholarly theory, but we must then assume without proof that this theory, whatever it
actually means, antedates Aristophanes of Byzantium; cf. the strictures (not all justified) of
M. Campbell, Mnem. 36 (1983) 155, against the arguments of L. Rossi, RFIC 96 (1968)
151-63. The literary arguments for an allusion to this verse are far weaker than for one to
23.238. For an attempt to steer a middle path and an excellent survey of the arguments cf.
Dufner 1988.147-222; for OCCTTTOCCTIOS as a mark of closure cf. SH 947.4 (which, pace Lloyd-
Jones and Parsons, need have nothing to do with Od. 23.296) and eeA6o|jevoic7i at 2.1285.
78
That dpxouevos is doing more than one job is recognised already in I 1.1 -4; it marks both
the hymnal form and Apollo's role in the story, while 'focus[ing] attention on the act of
narration' (Goldhill 1991.287).
79
Cf. above p. 84.
 Framing the epic 121
traveller5. Moreover, the poet is also like Apollo, god of poets -
responsible for bringing this hazardous journey to a safe conclusion
(1.21 (poet), 1.361 (Apollo)). Homer himself is not in fact the only
archaic bard conjured up in these opening verses. In the eighth
book of the Odyssey Odysseus praises the blind Phaeacian bard,
Demodocus, - often identified with Homer by later ages - as one who
must have been taught by either the Muse or Apollo himself (Od.
8.488), the inspirational pair who frame the proem of the Argonautica.
Odysseus asks Demodocus to sing of the wooden horse 'which Epeios
made with Athena's help' {Od. 8.493) a n d which brought about the
fall of Troy. This was clearly a familiar theme of epic poetry,80 and
Demodocus takes up the tale from the point where the Greeks have
left the horse at Troy and sailed away, omitting to sing of the
planning and building of this marvellous creation. The parallel with
the proem of the Argonautica is clear: Apollonius undertakes to tell the
story of a wooden marvel created jointly by Athena and a mortal
craftsman, but he explicitly refuses to tell of its building (1.18-19)
and moves straight into how it was used. This passage exploits the
idea of the wooden horse full of men as a ship under sail, a represen-
tation familiar from art, first found in extant literature in Euripides
(Troades 537), and a commonplace of later epic poetry.81 The open-
ing verses thus plainly look to Homer's description of Demodocus at
work:

cos q>6fi3, 6 6 ' 6pur|6eis Oeou ocpxETo, 9aTve 6 ' doi5r|v,

EVOEV eAcov cos oi uev euacreAiiGov e m vncov

So Odysseus spoke, and the bard began with the god,82 and showed
forth his song, taking up the story from the point where the Greeks
had climbed into their well-benched ships and sailed away . . . (Od.
8.499-501)

80
Cf. Hainsworth on Od. 8.492-3.
81
Both Quintus Smyrnaeus and Triphiodorus borrow from Apollonius' description of the
launching of the Argo in their accounts of how the horse was hauled into Troy, cf. Campbell
on Quint. Smyrn. 12.423-4, Austin on Virg. Aen. 2.16, 236. KOTAOV 86pu of the horse at Od.
8.507 shows how easily the image could arise. For comparison of the Argo to a live horse cf.
4.1604-10; a connected image, that of the Argo as a chariot, occurs at Cat. 64.9. On the
general affinity of horses and ships cf. Detienne-Vernant 1978.232-42.
82
Cf. Hainsworth ad loc. for the disputed interpretation of this phrase. Both the Homeric and
the Apollonian scholia offer the same range of interpretations for 'beginning the god'.
 12 2 The poet and his poem

Like the song which Odysseus asks Demodocus to sing, the Ar-
gonautic story was a much-worked vein for poets long before third-
century Alexandria. 83 The striking set of matched noun-epithet
phrases with which the Argonautica begins - 'men of old', 'dark
rocks', 'King Pelias', 'golden fleece', 'well-benched Argo' - suggests
both the familiarity of the material and the immortality conferred by
song: these objects 'exist' in a form already memorialised by epic
poetry.84 The theme is picked up at the very end of the poem by the
epithet KAUTOC, 'famed', to describe the Argonauts' deed: they are
famed because 'famed in song'. Thus both proem and epilogue ad-
vertise the kleos which poetry confers. Moreover, explicit reference to
earlier and extant poetry invites us to compare Apollonius directly
with his predecessors:
vr\a uev ouv oi irpocrOev £TI KAeiouaiv &0180I
"Apyov 'A6r|vair)s Kanesiv U7ro0r||joauvr|iai.
Earlier bards whose songs still live tell how Argos built the ship under
the guidance of Athena. (1.18-19)
Which (if any) particular poems Apollonius has in mind here we do
not know, but vf)a stands at the head of 1.18 as though a quotation
of the opening word of some epic on the subject (cf. jif^viv, avSpoc).85
Apollonius was presumably not the first epic poet to shape his proem
in this way, encompassing a shift from an opening invocation to an
allusion to the poet's place within the tradition. 86
A narrative must position itself: Homer asks his Muse to take up
the tale from a particular point. For Apollonius, the perfect linearity
of his tale — beginning when the voyage begins and ending when it
ends - suggests that 'the unavoidable difficulty of beginning'*1 is not a
83
Cf. Hunter 1989.14-20.
84
F o r this t e c h n i q u e cf., e.g., T h e o c r . 1 6 . 4 8 - 9 (KOUOCOVTCCS | TTpiauiSocs, OfjAuv . . . KUKVOV),
Virg. Georg. 3.4-8 [Eurysthea durum, Busiridis aras, Hylaspuer, Latonia Debs etc.). Fronto, Epist.
p. 151.17-24 van den Hout, contrasts 1.1-4 favourably with Lucan's proem: whereas Lucan
says one thing many times in the opening seven verses, Apollonius imparts five important
pieces of information in four verses. A further noteworthy stylistic feature of the opening
verses is the enjambment and delay of the verb - an effect which suggests the length and
circularity of both poem and voyage. (I owe this observation to Mark Becker.) Cf. also
Collins 1967.11-13.
85
It is tempting to think of the poem 'The building of the Argo and Jason's voyage to Colchis'
ascribed to Epimenides, cf. Hunter 1989.16 n. 71.
86
The proem to the Perska of Choirilos of Samos would be particularly interesting if it is true
that it began with SH 316 and included SH 317, but other orderings have also been
proposed, cf. W. Kranz, Studien zur antiken Literatur und ihrem Fortwirken (Heidelberg 196^7) 40.
87
Genette 1980.46 (his italics).
 Framing the epic 123
problem. In fact, however, the opening narrative - elliptical and
allusive in the lyric manner - reveals a whole host of other potential
beginnings: Pelias' seizure of the throne (note paaiAfps, 'king',
prominently in the third verse), Jason's upbringing, Pelias' neglect
of Hera, the story of the Golden Fleece. The poet glories in the harsh
selectivity that the process of narration imposes. So too at the end.
The poem ends as the voyage ends, but the poet does not let us forget
that it is he who is controlling that end (4.1776-7). It is indeed the
end frequently anticipated through the poem, the end imposed by
our expectations as they have been shaped both by the Odyssey and
by the nature of the story. There is, however, a potentially endless
sequence of adventures which could be related; within the closed
circle of the voyage limitless expansion is possible.88 Moreover, as we
have already noted, the 'famed end of your struggles' was not really
an end. The struggles went on, as does the song from year to year
(4.1773-4).
Another positioning is necessary for Apollonius also, this time
against other literary narratives; he must site his work within and
against a tradition. This he does by alluding to several important
predecessors and contemporaries. 89 Thus, Tefiv KOCTCX (3a£iv, 'in accor-
dance with your oracle' (1.8), probably reflects OTJV, 0OI|3E, KOCT'
aiCTi|iir|V 'in accordance with your apportionment' in Callimachus'
version of Apollo's saving of the Argonauts at Anaphe from the first
book of the Aitia (fr. 18.9). As Apollonius' version of events at
Anaphe is the final appearance of Apollo in the epic, it is tempting
to accept Callimachean priority here, as Apollonius would then
frame his epic with two references to the same passage of the Aitia.
Apollo and Callimachus are both the beginning and the end. The
two works of the classical period to which the proem most force-
fully calls our attention are Euripides' Medea and Pindar's Fourth
Pythian. The action of Euripides' tragedy hangs over the epic like a
cloud about to burst, so that the later poem becomes almost an
explanatory commentary on the terrible events of the drama. 90 The
88
Cf. Goldhill 1991.296-7.
89
My discussion here must inevitably be brief and selective. The arresting parallels in lan-
guage between the opening four verses and the conclusion of the introduction to Theocritus'
poem on the rape of Hylas, Idyll 13, a poem whose links with Arg. are familiar, would merit
a lengthy discussion; Kohnken 1965 virtually ignores Theocr. 13.16-22. So too the links
between the proem and Hesiod's Works and Days deserve attention (cf. E. Livrea, Helikon 6
(1966) 462-3).
90
Cf. Hunter 1989.18-19.
 124 The poet and his poem

opening verses of the epic are replete with echoes of the opening of
the tragedy, thereby conveying some of the sense of foreboding that
permeates the tragic prologue.91 Secondly, there is a clear structural
similarity with Pythians 4.68—72 where Pindar turns to the narrative
proper of the Argonautic expedition:
dTro 6' OCUTOV eyco Moiaaiai Scoaco
Kai TO TT&yxpucrov V&KOS KpioCr JJSTCX y a p
KSTVO TrAEuadvTcov Mivuav,
oxpiaiv

TIS yap dpx« SE^OCTO vauxiAias;

TIS 6e KIVSUVOS KpaTepoTs
Sfjasv dAois; OsoxpaTov fjv TTeAiav KTA.
To the Muses I shall give Arcesilas and the all-golden fleece of the
ram; for when the Minyans sailed in quest of the fleece, divinely
sent honours were planted for them. What beginning of the voyage
awaited them? What danger bound them with strong bonds of ada-
mant? It was divinely ordained that Pelias . . . (Pindar, Pyth. 4.68-72)
Apollonius' sketch of the background to the expedition (1.5-17)
transfers into epic hexameters this allusive Pindaric narrative. In
v. 76 Pindar tells how Pelias was warned to beware of the return
of 'the one-sandalled man from the lofty steadings (aiTreivcov oard
CTTOCGUGOV)'; this clearly lies behind 6r||i606V (1.7), but the meaning of
Apollonius' word is disputed. Platt and Frankel took it to be synony-
mous with Pindar's phrase, 'from the countryside',92 whereas other
commentators have understood 'coming from his own people, among
[Pelias'] subjects'. It is indeed the very uncertainty of meaning which
is crucial here. We must remember that we are presented with an
indirect report of an oracle, and oracles are notoriously ambiguous,
even in direct speech.93 Here 8r||j66ev replaces not only Pindar's
'from the lofty steadings' but also the immediately following 'whether
outsider (£eivos) or indeed citizen (doTos)' {Pyth. 4.78) ;94 Jason was
notoriously both. The linguistic ambivalence mirrors Jason's ambiv-
91
'Apyous . . .CTK6C<|>OS,KUOCVEOCS ZunTrA-ny&Socs, Tr&yxpucrov Sepos etc. are all picked up by
Apollonius. Obviously, two poets writing about the Argonauts will use similar vocabulary,
but in view of the tragedy's importance for the epic as a whole, deliberate reminiscence is
here certain.
92
A. Platt, JP 35 (1920) 72, adduced 2.1019-20, where, however, f| evi STJUGOI | r\ dyopfji
probably does not mean 'in the countryside or in the town', cf. Vian ad loc.
93
For Apollonius' use of indirect speech cf. below pp. 143-51.
94
Vian ad loc. sees the relevance of Pyth. 4.78, but thinks that this is the sole reference of
6r||i68ev.
 Framing the epic 125

alent status, and it is reference to the Pindaric text which points this
for us. Secondly, 'not long afterwards' (1.8) varies Pindar's 'in time'
(Pyth. 4.78) and intensifies the sense of menace: no wonder Pelias
took drastic action when the threat of the oracle was apparently
confirmed within a short space of time.
The meaning .of the poet's wish that the Muses should be the
U7TO9f)TOpes, 'interpreters' or 'inspirers', of his poem (1.22) has been
the source of considerable debate, but the former seems likely. The
Muses will, the poet hopes, turn what he has to say, the actual
material of the poem, what 'actually happened', into excellent po-
etry.95 This is a typically pointed reversal of the role assigned to the
Muses not only in Homer's invocation before the Catalogue of Ships
(II. 2. 484-93) and in Hesiod's Theogony (vv. 22-35) but also in
Theocritus' hymn to the Dioscuri:
Erne, 0e&, ov yap olaOcr eyco 6' exspcov CrTro<pf|Tr)S
6£ 6aa' eOsAeis ov KOU OTTTTCOS TOI 91A0V fj
Tell, goddess, for you know. I, interpreting for others, shall utter the
things you wish in a manner pleasing to you. (Theocr. 22.116-17)
Apollonius also exploits the related theme of the possibility of mis-
leading song and conflicting accounts. According to the usual ver-
sion, the Argo was built by Argos, the son of Phrixos, after he had
returned successfully from Colchis to Greece; Argos, the son of
Arestor, to whom Apollonius ascribes the building of the ship, has a
much less certain place in the tradition and never achieved the solid
identity of his namesake.96 Apollonius' reference to Argos in 1.18,
therefore, contains a puzzle which we cannot even recognise as such
until we have read further (cf. 1.111-12 echoing 1.19). Moreover,
it stands at the head of the poem as a marker of how Apollonius
will manipulate variant mythical traditions and as a programmatic
example of how 'truth' is to function in the poem.
A further passage of Hesiod which introduces a theme of consider-
able importance in the Argonautica is the praise of the power of poetry
contained in the proem to the Theogony (vv. 94-103). Hesiod says
that a bard's songs of the great deeds of earlier men (KAeToc irpoTepcov
95
Gf. Beye 1982.15. This interpretation may also be supported by appeal to the development
in the Muses' role through the three invocations introducing Books 1, 3 and 4, cf. above
n. 23.
96
Wilamowitz 1924. 11 246 believed that Apollonius invented this second Argos; this is
perhaps unlikely, although he may here have innovated with relative freedom within
existing traditions, cf. my note on 3.340-6.
 126 The poet and his poem

cf. 1.1) and of the gods can bring forgetfulness of grief

and sorrows (KT)5ea). The kleos granted through song to heroes long
dead is a particular instance of this gift which poetry can bestow. The
Argonauts set out on a 'voyage full of kedos' (1.16), and the end of
the voyage and the end of the poem marks the end of their 'labours'
or 'griefs' (K&|JiaTOi, 4.1776). It is the continuance of this poem, its
constant repetition 'from year to year' (4.1773-5), which guarantees
that the Argonauts are remembered and receive their due reward.
Without the epic there would be no 'forgetfulness of pain'. In the
fourth book, the crew is saved in the wastes of the Libyan Syrtis by
the 'heroine nymphs' who appear to Jason in his distress:
E, TITTT' £TTI TOCKTOV &|jrixocvir|i (3e(36Ar|(7ai;
i£vous xpvcreov 8epos* i6|ji6v SKaora
U|i£T£pCOV KajidTCOV, OC7J 8TTI X^OVOS OCXCTa T* S<p' \jypT)V
Kcrra TTOVTOV CnrepPia s p y a Kd

'Unhappy one, why are you so cast down in despair? We know of your
quest for the golden fleece; we know every detail of your labours
(kamatoi), all the extraordinary deeds on both land and sea which you
have struggled to accomplish (kamesthe) in your wanderings over the
waters.' (4.1318-21)
These verses suggest that the Argonauts are saved because their fame
is known, and hint that the source of the heroines' knowledge is itself
epic song; such a reading is supported by the fact that these verses
echo the alluring song which the Sirens sing to Odysseus in the
Odyssey. Those destructive goddesses tell the hero that they know all
that 'the Argives and the Trojans suffered (|i6yr|CTav) at broad Troy
through the will of the gods' [Od. 12.189-90), and it would have
been almost impossible for any later Greek not to see this as a way of
describing the Iliad. Here too, then, epic song may be a source of
knowledge, although in the Argonautica it is used to save, whereas in
the Odyssey it was used in an attempt to destroy. It is poetry which
secures the real 'success' of the voyage by saving the Argonauts and
retelling the story for each generation.97
Whereas the Iliad has a Catalogue of Ships, the Argonautica has a
catalogue of the crew of a single ship.98 The actual process of cata-
97
Cf. Feeney 1991.92.
98
For detailed comparison of the Homeric and Apollonian catalogues cf. Carspecken
1952.38-58, Vian 1 5-10. It is unsurprising that within a much smaller catalogue
Apollonius uses a more varied way of introducing the characters than the 'three basic
modes' of the Homeric model (for which see Kirk's edition, Vol. 1 pp. 170-1).
 Framing the epic 12 7
loguing was not unimportant, as far more 'Argonauts' were known
to antiquity than could fit in one fifty-oared vessel." Any writer of
an Argonautica was faced with various choices, unless the whole prob-
lem was to be avoided by refusing to give a complete list; this is not
Apollonius' way.100 Indeed he advertises this crucial process of selec-
tion by the phrase eviKpivOfjvoa opiiAcoi, 'to be included in the group',
which occurs twice in the Catalogue (1.48, 227), once as the very
final phrase where it refers to Akastos and Argos who only just made
it into the list and into the voyage (cf. 1.321—6). It is tempting to see
eyKpiveiv as a 'scholar's word' for the judgement required in drawing
up such lists.101 In tension with this overt process of contemporary,
scholarly selection is set the traditional memorialising function of
poetry as embodied in the figure of Memory's grandson, Orpheus,
who stands at the head of the Catalogue - as Heracles stands at
its centre - and by his magical power banishes the bad omen of
his Homeric analogue, Thamyris.102 <|>aTi£eTai, '[she] is reported'
(1.24), and evETTOucriv, 'men say' (1.27), in the account of Orpheus
are, as elsewhere in the Catalogue, both an acknowledgement of the
conserving power of popular tradition, as represented particularly
by epic poetry, and a mark of caution in the choosing between
variant sources. Apollonius constantly demands to be viewed as
both the traditional transmitter of a cultural heritage and as the
manipulative creator of a scholarly poem.
A particular example of those who have achieved the 'forgetfulness
of pain' brought by posthumous kleos are the heroes of Hesiod's
fourth race, dvSpcov fjpcbcov OeTov yevos, the race of f)ui0eoi, 'demi-
gods,'103 who fought in the Theban and Trojan wars, and the race
to which the Argonauts belong (cf. esp. 4.1641-2). This race, whose
99
Cf. Carspecken 1952.41-3.
100 Twenty-one Argonauts a p p e a r only in the Catalogue. Note h o w Theocr. 13.17-18 sum-
marises a n d avoids a catalogue, as a marker of its different 'genre'. Apollonius could, of
course, do this when he wanted to (cf. 2.762-3, 3347-8).
101 Qf Pfeiffer 1968.206-8 on 'canons' of poets. I also suspect that the mannered pedantry of
1.71-4 contains a joke about how easy it is to make mistakes with catalogue genealogy.
102
Whereas Homer seeks to distance himself from Thamyris by his overt reverence for the
Muses (//. 2.491-2, 597-8), the narrator of the Argonautica hugs Orpheus to himself, cf. below
pp. 148-51. The 'Thamyris' role in Apollonius' catalogue is actually taken by Eurytos who
wished to contest with Apollo in archery (1.86-9). For Thamyris and Eurytos cf. //. 2.596.
103
Literally, 'those with one divine parent', although poetry freely extends the word to cover
the warriors of the heroic age. It is striking that Homer uses the word to describe his heroes
only at //. 12.23, m a passage where they appear (uniquely for Homer) to be thought of as
a separate genos from later men, cf. above p. 103. It may be relevant to Arg. that 5!bT //.
12.23 suggests that Homer is referring to the generation of Heracles.
 128 The poet and his poem
fame derives, at least implicitly, from epic song (WD 161-5), was
rewarded for their lives of struggle and justice by an afterlife as 6A|3ioi
fipcoes, 'blessed heroes', free from kedos on the Islands of the Blessed
(WD 170— 1). Archaic poetry observes no clear distinction between
f|pcos and avrjp, and the former is often simply a poetic term for
'warrior', but it is in fact the case that many Argonauts were
honoured throughout Greek lands with 'hero-cult'; 104 the pervasive
aetiological interests of the Argonautica, which present us with tan-
gible, continuing evidence for past lives,105 make heroes (in the 'reli-
gious' sense) and their cult an obvious source of interest. The poem
celebrates the 'heroic' status of all the Argonauts, even if only a few
individuals are singled out for explicit mention in this respect (e.g.
Boutes, 4.912-19), and two of the Argonauts, Castor and his brother
Polydeuces, actually inhabit the marginal area between 'hero' and
'god'.106 Hero-cult was particularly associated with and performed
by young men entering upon manhood;107 Jason and his crew thus
become themselves role-models for those crossing over this genera-
tional barrier, just as they are following after such as Heracles,
Theseus and Orestes.108 It is tempting to associate the hoped-for
annual repetition of the epic (4.1774) by men (av9pcoiTOi), as distin-
guished from the laaxdpcov ysvos,109 with the annual performances
which characterised hero-cult.
Apollonius imitates Hesiodic language in describing the Argonauts
as a 'divine expedition of heroic men' (&v6pcov fjpcocov OETOS OTOAOS,
1.970, 2.1091) and a 'race of demi-god men' (fmiSecov dvSpcov yevos,
1.548), cf. Hesiod, WD 159-60 &v8pcov fjpcocov OETOV yevos, 01
KCcAeovTcci I f)|ii06Oi, 'a divine race of heroic men, who are called
demi-gods'. The distinctions between gods, 'heroes', and ordinary
mortals which could be constructed from such language became a
topos of later hymns and the encomiastic poetry which influenced
them (Cf., e.g., Pind. 01. 2.2, Theocr. 17.1-8). The 'religious' aspect
of this language and of Apollonius' chosen hymnic form is not to be
104
F o r J a s o n cf. 1.960, with L . R . Farnell, Greek Hero Cults and Ideas of Immortality (Oxford
1921) 410 n. 77.
105
Cf. 1.1047-8, 1058-62, 4.471-81 for 'heroic' survivals.
106
Cf. A . D . Nock, Essays on Religion and the Ancient World (Oxford 1972) 11 5 7 5 - 6 0 2 , esp.
577-8; Burkert 1985.203-8.
107
Cf. Burkert 1985.208.
108
Cf. above pp. 15-16.
109
Frankel is correct that the basic meaning is 'offspring of the gods', but the Hesiodic
background adds the resonance 'race of blessed heroes'.
 Similes 129
dismissed as a simple literary game: the 'heroic' status of the Ar-
gonauts, celebrated in the hymnic form, is precisely the reason why
they, and the poem which honours them, matter to us. 110

(iii) SIMILES

Similes are a narrative mode which Homer bequeathed to all subse-

quent epic poets,111 but some similes in the Argonautica show overt
multiple correspondences with what they illustrate in a way which
may seem non-Homeric. I examine below two prominent examples,
but it is important to be clear what is at stake in this discussion. As
always we must be wary of assuming that Apollonius read Homer in
the same way that we do, particularly as the Homeric scholia recog-
nise complete, as well as partial, correspondence between simile and
illustrandum as a standard Homeric technique. 112 To what extent the
examples I will cite do differ from Homeric similes will inevitably be
the subject of disagreement, but it is more important to observe how
Apollonius' similes reflect the broad concerns of his poetics than to
seek to measure precisely his difference from Homer. It may indeed
be the use to which the simile is put, rather than the simile itself,
which is most distinctive of the Hellenistic epic.
My first example is the description of the pursuit of the Harpies by
the Boreads:
110
In connection with the hymnic frame of Arg. editors regularly cite the conclusions of the
Homeric hymns to Helios (31) and to Selene (32). These hymns are of uncertain date
(quite possibly later than Arg.), but three details in common are of interest. First, 1.1, 4.361
and h. 32.18 all scan KAEOC as two shorts. Secondly, a hymn to the sun has an obvious
connection with Apollo whose solar identity is exploited by Apollonius when the Argonauts
see him in the Black Sea and again in his epiphany at Anaphe. Finally, the transmitted
opening of the Hymn to Selene, \xf\vr\v 6ce{8eiv TavudfTTTEpov EOTTETE MOUCTCCI, is obviously a
reworking of the opening verse of the Iliad, i.e. it transfers an epic opening to a hymnic
situation; the opening of Arg. reverses the process.
111
For similes as a type of narrative rather than 'ornamental' to narrative cf. already Clausing
1913.46; this simple idea is illustrated for Virgil by Lyne 1989.63-99. On Apollonius'
similes cf. Clausing 1913, Carspecken 1952.58-99, Fusillo 1985.327-45, Knight 1990.198-
231, Williams 1991.259-72. Whether or not the 'epic simile' was distinguished from other
types of comparison by the rhetorical criticism of Apollonius' day may be disputed, cf.
M. H. McCall, Ancient Rhetorical Theories of Simile and Comparison (Cambridge, Mass. 1969)
1-56, Heath 1989.103. It is precisely in such areas, however, that the implicit poetics found
in poetry itself is so crucial.
112
Cf., e.g., Heath 1989.103-7. I have not thought it worthwhile to discuss here the similes of
Homer, as any brief treatment is bound to distort. I hope, however, that what I have to
say about Apollonius' similes neither depends upon nor requires the reader to share a
particularly slanted view of the Homeric simile.
 130 The poet and his poem

cos 5 ' 6 T ' SVI Kvrmolcxi KUVES 6s6<xnu6voi ayprjs

f\ aTyas KEpaous f)£
Osicoaiv, TUTOOV 6S TITOCIVOIJSVOI
6n<pr|is EV yevuecjcri u6nr|v &pd|3r|aav
cos ZTJTTIS KdAais TE lidAa axeSov dfacrovTES
Tdcov dKpoTdTT|icnv ETTEXpaov f|AiOa XEP°"i-
Kai vu KE 5f) a<()' asKr|Ti OECOV 5ie8r|Ar|(TavTo,
TTOAAOV EKds vfjaoiaiv ETTI rTAcoTfjicri KIXOVTES,
£1 H-T| d p ' COKECC ^IpiS . . .

As when on mountain-sides dogs skilled in hunting race along as they

track horned goats or deer, a n d , straining just behind their prey,
gnash together the teeth at the front of their jaws, but without effect;
just so did Zetes a n d Kalais sprint very close to the Harpies, just
touching then vainly with the tips of their fingers. They would have
torn them apart against the gods' wishes when they caught them far
away at the Floating Islands, h a d not swift Iris . . . (2.278-86)

The second example is the final fall of Talos:

A* COS TIS T* EV OpECTCTl TTEAcOpiri UVfoOl TTEUKTI,
TT)V TE OooTs TTEAEKECTCXIV 18' fiiiiTrAfiya AITTOVTES
UAOTOIJOI 5puuoTo KCCTTJAUOOV, f) 6 s OTTO VUKTI
piTTfjicnv |i£V TrpcoTCc TivdaaETai, OoTEpov aC/T£
TTpu|jv66£v E^EayElaa KaTf|piTT£v cbs 6 yE TToaaiv
dxaiJidTois TEicos IJIEV ETTiaxaSov fjicopEtTO,
UCTTEpOV aCHr' djJIEVrjVOS dTTElpOVl KaTTTTECTE 6oUTTCOl.

Like a mighty pine-tree high up in the mountains which woodcutters

left half-chopped by their sharp axes when they went down from the
forest, and at night it first shakes in the wind-blasts, but then topples
over, broken off at the base; just so did he for a while sway from side
to side on his unwearying feet, but then collapsed strengthless with a
thunderous crash. (4.1682-8)

This very mannered concern for close parallelism 113 is deliberately

'naive' within the textured literariness of this epic. It calls our atten-
tion to the process of creating similes and to the difficulties inherent
in that process: every assertion of likeness implies also unlikeness, and
this is what the epic simile always struggles to control. 114 When the

113
In the first example note KUVES of the Boreads, but Aios Kuvas of the Harpies (2.289).
5ie8r|Ar|aavTO (2.284) is better suited to dogs ripping something up than to death by the
sword; Lyne would call this 'trespass'. In the second example there is very close verbal
matching: Tiv&acreToci ~ r)icopgTTO, OoTepov aCnre ~ Oorepov oChre, KorrripiTrev ~ KorrrTTECTE.
114
One modern discussion which has sought (in its own way) to come to terms with this is,P.
Damon, Modes of Analogy in Ancient and Medieval Verse (Berkeley/Los Angeles 1961).
 Similes 131
two parts are very closely matched structurally and/or verbally, the
parallelism (paradoxically) alerts us to the artificiality of the 'like-
ness' and to the very reality of difference that the purely linguistic
construct of the simile cannot contain. The over-determinedness
of the simile in fact emphasises its inadequacy. A similar result is
achieved by Callimachus through very different means in the Hymn
to Delos when he compares the clashing of Ares' shield which shakes
the cosmos to the roar of Hephaestus' furnace beneath Etna 'as
Briareus changes shoulders' (h. 4.141-7). The explanation of one
mythic sound in terms of another draws attention to both as purely
poetic constructs. In the example from Arg. 2, the multiple detailed
correspondences are not merely a literary game, but are mimetic of
the action described: as the Boreads stick very close to the Harpies,
tracking their every step but not quite closing with them, so the
simile and the narrative match each other point for point, but never
quite fuse. Such a conclusion is, however, held out as a real possibil-
ity by the fate awaiting the Harpies. The simile flies in relentless
pursuit of the narrative.
The main Homeric model for this simile is the description in Iliad
io 115 of the pursuit of Dolon by Odysseus and Diomedes:
As when two saw-toothed dogs, experienced hunters, keep pressing relent-
lessly on after a young deer or a hare across a wooded countryside, and it
runs squealing ahead of them, so the son of Tydeus and Odysseus, sacker of
cities, ran in relentless pursuit of Dolon and cut him off from his people. (//.
10.360-4, trans. Hammond)
A number of other motifs also derive from the Doloneia: Diomedes
catches Dolon because Athena gives him the necessary strength (cf.
2.275); t n e gnashing teeth of the dogs at 2.281 humorously recall
Dolon's chattering teeth at //. 10.375; Dolon, like the Harpies, is swift
and ugly (//. 10.316); the Boreads' tired panting at 2.430-1 echoes
the panting of Odysseus and Diomedes at //. 10.376,116 and both
scenes prominently involve oaths. The echoes of the Doloneia add
more than a touch of humour to the Boreads' pursuit; once again the
epic totters on the edge of parody. When the Boreads return, they

115
There are also elements from //. 22.189-93, D u t t n a t *s v e r v m uch a secondary model (pace,
e.g., Williams 1983.168-71, Cairns 1989.112).
116
Cf. Call. h. 4.217, the panting Iris reports to Hera and is compared to a faithful hunting-
dog. That hymn concerns a 'Floating Island' whose name was subsequently changed (cf.
2.296-7); it is tempting to believe that the description of Delos as rivenoEacra KOCI crrpOTros
(h. 4.11, where see Mineur's note) has some connection with Apollonius' 'Turning Islands'.
 13 2 The poet and his poem

tell Phineus and the Argonauts that the Harpies 'in fright entered
the cave of Mt Dicte' (2.433-4). The location of the Harpies'
cave cannot have been 'realistically' known to the Boreads,117 but
Apollonius strives for variety between narrative and report by dis-
tributing the details between the two. The specificity of 'in fright' is
something that the Boreads could presumably have seen or deduced,
but it is the simile of the hunting-dogs which is here recalled and
interpreted; the boundaries between simile and 'narrative' are fluid:
neither is privileged as the sole carrier of'information'.
Apollonius forces us to witness the process by which the epic simile
is created; the mechanism, the techne, of poetry is revealed. Thus as
the Colchians set out in pursuit of the Greeks, the launching of a vast
fleet is described:
ouSe K6 4>air|S
Toaaov vr|iTrjv oroAov guuEvai, aAA' oicovcov
iAa56v

You would not have said it was so vast a naval expedition, but rather
a great family of birds whirring over the sea in flocks. (4.238-40)

T h e poet offers us, as it were, a simile in the making, one still in his
head and not yet committed to the traditionally systematised lan-
guage of the epic simile. 118 'You would say' this, if you were an epic
poet. 119 T h e fact that this passage looks to a very similar passage of
H o m e r reinforces this literary depth. In Iliad 4 the Trojan and Greek
armies as they come together are contrasted in the noise they make.
T h e Greeks advance in silence:

ou6s K8 <paif\
TOCXCXOV Aocov 6TT6Cj6ai SXOVT' ev aTTjOeaiv au8f|v,
qi 8EI5I6T£S ar||idvTopas.
You would not have said so vast an army followed, with the power of
speech in their breast, in silent fear of their leaders. (//*<z</4.429-31)

117
For such phenomena cf. above p. 72.
118
Cf. Beye 1982.25.
119
For Homer's use of <|>ccir|s KEV etc. cf. De Jong 1987.57-60, Richardson 1990.174-8. An
interesting parallel to Apollonius' experimentation with the phrase is Theocr. 1.42 where
it occurs within the description of the fisherman in the ekphrasis of the cup; there too
there is a clear interest - as in any ekphrasis - with the viewer or reader as the producer of
meaning. For a different approach to such phrases in the Arg. cf. C. S. Byre, 'The narrator's
addresses to the narratee in Apollonius Rhodius' Argonautica\ TAPA 121 (1991) 215-27.
 Similes 133
The Trojans, however, make a terrible din which is conveyed by a
simile of bleating sheep (//. 4.433-6). A second example takes the
process even further. When the Argonauts arrive on Drepane, the
whole population welcomes them joyfully: 'you would say that they
were delighting over their own children' (4.997). Here Apollonius
directs us again towards a specific Homeric passage, this time in fact
a simile from the opening of Odyssey 16, the description of Eumaeus'
welcome for the returning Telemachus:
As a father embraces lovingly an only and darling son, one for whom he has
borne much sorrow, when after nine years away he returns home from a far
country, so now did the swineherd put his arms round the radiant prince,
covering him everywhere with kisses as one who had just escaped from
death. (Od. 18. 17-21, trans. Shewring)
T h e evocation of Homer is the revelation of epic techne. Perhaps the
clearest example of Apollonius' overt concern with the simile as a
literary form is a famous passage describing Jason in the wastes of
Libya:
&vocT£as 8T&pous ETTI uaKpov OCUTEI
auoraAsos Kovrnicri, AEGOV cos, os pa T' dv' 0Ar|v
auvvopiov r|v (JEOETTCOV cbpuETccr ai 8E (3apEir|i
<|>6oyyfii C/TToppoiiEouaiv dv' oupEa *rnA66i pfjaaar
6s ocypauAoi TE |36ES |JEya TT£<|)piKaai
TE pOCOV. TOIS 6 ' OU VU Tl yf]pUS £TUXOT|
piy£8avf] ETdpoio <J>iAois ETTIKEKAOUEVOIO . . .

He leapt up and, filthy with dust, called loudly to his comrades, like
a lion, which bellows through the forest as it seeks its mate; at its deep
roar the glens in the mountains far away echo like thunder, and the
cattle in the fields and the herdsmen of cattle are terribly afraid. To
his friends, however, the voice of their comrade calling them did not
seem terrifying. (4.i337~43)
Here the explicit absence of parallelism not only calls attention to the
artificiality of the simile form, but manages also to subvert a whole
Iliadic style.120
It will be clear that Apollonius expects us to recognise the simile
as a site of poetic experimentation, and that humour of various kinds
is likely to be an important ingredient of that experimentation. So it
is with the series of similes which describes how the Argonauts scared
120
Cf. Goldhill 1991.307-8.
 134 The poet and his poem
off the fierce birds from the Island of Ares (2.io68ff.).121 At 2.1077-9
the crew's screaming is compared to the din (KAayyf)) of two battle-
lines coming together. The whole passage is 'a witty pastiche of the
preliminaries to Homeric combat',122 but these particular verses look
to the opening of Iliad 3:
When the divisions on both sides had been marshalled under their leaders,
the Trojans came on with cries (KAayyf) 1) and shouting, like birds - as when
the cries (KAocyyr)) of cranes fill the sky, when they make their escape from
the huge downpours of winter, and with loud cries (KAccyyfji) they fly on
towards Ocean's stream, bringing death and destruction to the Pygmies;
and at early morning they launch their grim battle. But the Achaians came
on in silence, breathing boldness, their hearts intent on supporting each
other. (//. 3.1-9, trans. Hammond)

Momentarily we 'equate' the birds of which there is at first no sight

(2.1080) with the silent Achaeans of the Iliad, and the Argonauts
with the very birds they are seeking to defeat. Such narrative 'confu-
sion', effected through a Homeric model, is another way in which
Apollonius breaks down the barriers between narrative and simile.
The multiple similes in this passage link it to another battle narra-
tive, the struggle of Jason with the Earthborn at the conclusion of
Book 3. 123 In this latter passage, Apollonius succeeds in writing quite
unlike Homer precisely by imitating Homer with such intensity that
he packs a whole Iliad into the last scene of the book. In both passages
multiple similes are associated with important elements of fantasy.
At one level, such a technique suggests that what is being described
is so remarkable that it can only be indicated through simile, i.e.
the poet cannot in fact describe, only offer some kind of approximate
verbal sketch; at another level, similes, which are so often pro-
claimed by modern critics to be tools of verisimilitude and enargeia,
in fact call attention to the very fictionality, the literariness, of what
is being described. Here in Book 2, for example, we are encouraged
to read the scene in this way by Amphidamas' statement of the
model for their action, Heracles' scaring away of the Stymphalian
birds (2.1052-7): 'I saw it myself declares Amphidamas (2.1054)
with Herodotean enthusiasm, and immediately we are on our
guard.

121
On this passage see esp. Frankel 1968.264-73.
122
Vian 1 228 n. 2.
123
Cf. Fusillo 1985.330-3; my note on 3.1374-6.
 Similes 135
Similes are also an important weapon of emotional control. No-
where is this clearer than in the multiple similes which describe the
Argonauts' appalling plight in Libya. Here again the extensive use
of similes shows us a poet unable 'accurately' to depict the full horror
of his story. Similes, as we have already noted, deny the possibility of
accurate description by reliance upon likeness rather than identity,
and multiple similes (or a comparison within a simile, as here at
4.1280) present a poet helpless before the difficulties of his task; the
primary model and ancestor of all subsequent examples is the intro-
duction to the Iliadic Catalogue of Ships where an explicit admission
of helplessness by the poet (//. 2.484-92) follows upon a powerful
massing of similes (//. 2.455-83).
Whereas epic poetry normally draws upon the familiar natural
world for the material of similes,124 the first of the multiple 'Libyan'
similes disconcertingly appeals to supernatural terrors to describe the
fictional events. In these verses the Argonauts in their despair are
compared to men in a doomed city:
£v 6* dpa Tracri

olov 8 ' a\\)\jyp\o\v EOIKOTES £i8cbAoiaiv

ocvepes siAiaaovTai a v a TTTOAIV, f\ TTOAEUOIO
f\ Aoi|ioTo TEAOS TroTi8ey|JEVoi f\s TIV' 6u|3pov
aoTTETov, 6s T6 |3ocov KOCTCX |iupia EKAUCXEV i p y a ,
f\ 6 T S dv 1 2 5 auTouotTa £ 6 a v a pg-qi iSpcbovTOt
ai'iiocTi Kai liUKoa OTIKOTS EVI 9avTd£covTai,
r)£ Kai TJEAIOS (iEacoi -qijaTi VUKT' ETrdyr|iaiv
oupavoOEv, TCX 6E AaiiTTpd 61' fjEpos d a T p a ycxsivev
cos TOT' dpiorfJEs SoAixou Trpoirap aiyiaAoTo
T]AUOV EpTTU^OVTES- ETTTJAUOE 5 ' CCOTIK' Ep£|iVT]
EaTTEpOS-

Their hearts all went cold, and the blood left their cheeks. As when
men wander through a city like lifeless phantoms, awaiting the con-
clusion126 of war or pestilence or a fearful rainstorm such as washes
utterly away the fields where cattle work; it is the time when statues
124
Cf. De Jong 1987.94-
125
The text is uncertain. Wilamowitz's 6TT7T6T' av has been widely accepted. Verses 1280-3
ought not (I think) to represent a different situation from that of 1284-7, but rather one
that derives from it.
126
TeAos plus the genitive here is normally taken, by a common periphrasis, to be the same as
the simple noun. I doubt that this is correct. 'Lifeless phantoms' suggests people near the
end of a siege or about to die of plague; cf. Thucyd. 2.51.4 on the despair (dOupiia) of those
who realised that they had caught the plague.
 136 The poet and his poem
sweat andflowwith blood of their own accord, when phantom groans
are heard in sacred shrines, or when the sun draws night across
the heavens in the middle of the day and the stars shine brightly
in the sky. Like this did the heroes creep aimlessly along the long
shore throughout the day. Suddenly the dark evening came down.
(4.1278-90)
The most important127 Homeric model here is Theoclymenus' vision
of darkness, blood and phantoms (eTScoAoc) in the house of Odysseus
and the disappearance of the sun foretelling the death of the suitors
(Od. 20.350-7). Whereas, however, the suitors revel in arrogant
confidence and disdain, the Argonauts are certain that death is at
hand; it will, however, be a death unremarked and unmourned, in
contrast to the public disaster foreshadowed by the portents of the
simile.128 As regularly, therefore, the simile conveys meaning by
difference as well as by similarity. The awful terror facing the Ar-
gonauts is stressed by the frame of the simile which does not demar-
cate it strictly as a separate narrative element; just as the fearful
pallor of 4.1279 is picked up by 'lifeless phantoms' in the opening
verse of the simile, so the darkness and stars of 4.1286-7 lead into the
coming of evening (4.1289-90). The Argonauts in the text must
confront not only the terrors of Libya but also of the simile itself.
The second pair of similes compares Medea and her maids from
Drepane to birds:
cos 5' 6 T ' eprmocloi, TTETrrnoTEs IKTOOI
Xripocuou, ocTTTfives Aiyeoc KACC^OUCTI vEoacroi,
f\ 6 T £ KaAa vdovTos ETT' O9pucn TTaKTcoAoTo
KUKVOl KlvfjCTOUCTlV 6OV UEAoS, OCUCpl 6 E AEIUCOV
6par)Eis PPEUETOCI -rcoTauoTo TE KCCAOC p££0pcr
cos oil ETTI £av6as OEUEVCCI Kovir|iaiv iOEipas
EAEEIVOV ITJAEUOV coSupavTO.

As when parentless chicks, which have fallen out of their nest in the
rocks, cry pitifully because they cannot fly, or when on the banks of
the fair-flowing Pactolus swans raise their song, and the dewy meadow
all around and the fair streams of the river are alive with noise, so
did the girls place their fair hair in the dust and moaned aloud their
piteous lamentation all night long. (4.1298-1304)

127
Neither //. 10.5-8 nor 17.547-52 is central to the meaning of Apollonius' simile.
128
Commentators rightly cite the portents associated with Alexander's destruction of Thebes
(Diod. Sic. 17.10), cf. A. A. Donahue, Xoana and the Origins of Greek Sculpture (Atlanta ic
40-3.
 Similes 137

Again there is similarity and difference. The young birds are exposed
to death from predators and starvation.129 The defencelessness of the
girls is marked by an echo of another koure, Artemis, fleeing from the
battle of the gods in the Iliad (II. 21.493-6). Artemis was stripped of
her bow by Hera and is thus likewise defenceless, but she is compared
to a dove taking refuge from a hawk within a protecting rock;
Apollonius' birds, like Medea and her maids, have no hiding-place.
So too Artemis can return to heaven to be comforted on her father's
knee (//. 21.505-6); the Scherian maids are far from home and have
no one to comfort them. Moreover, the Homeric and Apollonian
hapax OCTTTTIS allows a resonance of Achilles' description, through
simile, of his own wearisome life:

'cos 5' opvis ccTrrqcTi veoaaoTai Trpo(p£pr|i(7i

|j&(7TaK\ ITTEI KE Aa|3r|iai, KOCKCOS 5 S a p a oi TreAei CXOTI^I,
cbs Kcci eyco TTOAAOCS (Jsv aChrvous VUKTCCS Tauov'

'Like a bird which offers any scrap it finds to its chicks which cannot
fly and itself goes without, so I have endured many sleepless nights
. . . ' (//. 9-323"5)
The birds of the Apollonian simile, however, are bereft of parental
support, unable to fend for themselves. It is difference which is also
most strongly marked in the comparison of the pitiful lamentation of
the girls to the singing of swans beside the gold-bearing Lydian river
Pactolus. 130 This fabulous paradise could not be further removed
from the wastes of the Syrtis; the suggestions of beauty and fertility
('the dewy meadow') highlight the pathetic wasting of young girls'
lives. By tradition, a swan's most beautiful song was its last before
death; here, therefore, the spectre of imminent death has spread from
narrative to simile.
Finally, I wish to note one of the most remarkable passages of the
whole poem, the simile which describes Athena's rapid descent to
help the Argonauts at the Symplegades (2.541-8, quoted above
p. 86). Athena's speed is compared to the flashing thoughts of a
homesick wanderer, and the simile is 'interrupted' by a gnome in the

129
The verses suggest an etymological link between TreTrrr|6T6s and drrrfives; they fall because
they cannot fly. For the link cf. Et. Mag. 673.4-12.
130
The repetition of KccAd which frames the simile (4.1300-2) points to Pactolan gold (RE
18.2439); cf- a ^ so Livrea on 4.1300. In the other poetic occurrence of Pactolan swans (Call.
h. 4.249-50) the river's gold is also relevant (cf. vv. 260-4).
 138 The poet and his poem

first person on how suffering mankind roams all over the world.131
Like the simile concerning the Boreads5 pursuit of the Harpies, this
simile 'enacts itself: the intrusive parenthesis, breaking open the
syntax of the sentence, imitates the flashing and shifting thoughts of
the homesick wanderer. Moreover, the position of the simile immedi-
ately before the passage through the Rocks is very significant. The
opening of the Rocks to human navigation which made the seas
passable is the most striking symbol of man's conquest of the oceans,
a conquest which ancient poetry presents in two different, though
intersecting, ways. On one hand, it is a triumph of Greek technology
and the human spirit; on the other, it marks the original hybristic
foolishness of men who refuse to accept divinely ordained limits, and
is the start of moral decay.132 Apollonius' Argo is not the first ship of
all, but such a tradition clearly existed before the epic and is indeed
utilised in it;133 the gloomy simile, therefore, which precedes the
great achievement, activates this ambivalent interpretation of that
achievement. The 'heroism' of the action is not subverted; rather, we
see that the action narrated in the text is multivalent and that
interpretations of it change over time. Time is indeed crucial to
Apollonius' technique here, as the simile also confronts us with the
continuing 'presence' of the heroic action, which becomes almost an
aetiology for our present condition.134

(iv) SPEECH AND SPEECHES

Whereas some 45% of the Iliad, 67% of the Odyssey and 47% of the
Aeneid135 are in the direct speech of characters - the high Odyssey
figure being largely due to Odysseus' narrative of his adventures in
Books 9-12 - only 29% of the Argonautica falls into this category.136
131
Such a parenthesis within a simile is very hard to parallel in epic, but cf. the apostrophe
within a simile at Aen. 12.451-5 ( a n 'empathising' version of//. 4.275-82) and, for the first
person in a simile, Aen. 12.910 (a 'Lucretian' passage).
132 Yor the 'optimistic' view cf. the evidence collected in M. Fantuzzi, 'La censura delle
Simplegadi: Ennio, Medea, fr. 1 Jocelyn', QJJCC 31 (1989) 119-29; for the other view cf.,
e.g., Virg. Georg. 2.503-12, Hor. C. 1.3 (with Nisbet and Hubbard's commentary), Sen.
Medea 30iff.
133
Cf. my note on 3.340-6.
134
For further instances of how Apollonius breaks down the chronological boundaries be-
tween us and the heroic past cf. below pp. 163-9.
135
Cf. Highet 1972.302.
136
The individual books range from 39% for Book 3, where there are many 'dramatic' scenes,
to 21 % for the largely narrative Book 1.
 Speech and speeches 139
These figures, though meaningless in themselves, do point towards
an important literary debate which almost certainly influenced
Apollonius.
In the Poetics Aristotle praises Homer for recognising that, as
poetry is mimetic, 'the poet himself must say as little as possible'
{Poetics I46oa5ff.).137 In wanting epic to be like drama, and indeed
seeing epic as the direct ancestor of its more 'complete' descendant,
Aristotle privileged the mode of 'letting characters speak for them-
selves'. Thus, after a brief introduction, Homer 'immediately' intro-
duced138 characters who spoke for themselves {Poetics I46oag-n).
In fact, characters speak the seventeenth verse of the Iliad (Chryses)
and the thirty-second verse of the Odyssey (Zeus). The Argonautica
presents a very different picture. The first two direct speeches follow
the Catalogue and are by anonymous members of crowds (i.24off,
i.25off.);139 there is no direct speech by a named character until
Alkimede's lamentation at i.2 78ff. Regardless of what view we
may take concerning the Argonautica3s relation to the tenets of the
Poetics,1*0 it is clear that Apollonius' procedure here is strikingly
un-Aristotelian. Moreover, immediately after the brief proem there
is a report in indirect speech of the dark words of an oracle (1.5—7);
it becomes harder to believe that we are not dealing with a deliberate
revision of the epic manner. It is further to be noted that the verb
Aristotle uses for the majority of poets who fall short of the mimetic
ideal is dycovi^saOai, 'take part in competition' (i46oag), another
metaphor from rhapsodic or theatrical competition. Here it is very
tempting to see at least the germ of the idea which the current
chapter has been tracing: the self-conscious presence of the narrator's
voice, always demanding our recognition and admiration, contrasted
with Homer's submerging of himself within his characters.
137
De J o n g 1987.7 prefers to refer Aristotle's c o m m e n t to the difference between the 'personal'
proems and the rest of the poems (cf. i46oao,-io), rather than to the difference between
'narrator-text' and 'character-text'. Many of her arguments against the traditional inter-
pretation have substance, but too strict a consistency of terminology should not be sought;
De Jong's view makes Aristotle's description of the practice of non-Homeric poets very
hard to understand. Moreover, the traditional interpretation better suits Aristotle's stress
in this passage on the ethos of Homer's characters (1460a n ) . For Aristotle ethos is revelatory
of proairesis (145008-10) and is displayed in speech; this is what Homer, like a good
tragedian, understood. Poor epic poets do not let their characters speak for themselves, thus
forcing them to be 'without ethos".
138
eicr&yei, a word from the theatre as most editors correctly note.
139
Cf. Feeney 1991.58.
140
Cf. below pp. 193-5.
 140 The poet and his poem
Behind these notions of Aristotle lies a famous passage of Plato's
Republic where a distinction is drawn between 'simple narrative'
(6if)yr|cris cnrAf]), 'mimetic narrative' (6if|yr|cris 61a uiufjcrecos) and
'mixed narrative', i.e. a mixture of'simple' and 'mimetic' (8if)yr)(Tis
61' ducpoTepcov).141 Epic poetry is the prime example of'mixed narra-
tive'; thus, Plato notes, in the early verses of the Iliad Homer speaks
both as himself, the narrating poet, and as the priest Chryses. T o
illustrate this distinction Plato turns the speeches of Chryses and
Agamemnon into indirect speech as examples of 'simple, non-
mimetic narrative' (393e~4b). These ideas have left surprisingly
little trace in subsequent rhetorical theory, 142 but it may have been
the poets who took them up, and it is not hard to believe that
Alexandrian poetry embodies a conscious rejection of this formal sys-
tem, or at least of the privileging of the mimetic mode. Callimachus'
Hymns mix the various modes in bewildering tonal shifts, and we
have already seen how Apollonius has mingled the discrete voca-
bularies of speech and narration found in Homer. 1 4 3 We may even
be able to identify a specific case where Plato's text has influenced a
poetic technique.
When Chryses prays to Apollo for revenge on the Greeks, he
begins as follows:
'Hear me, lord of the silver bow, protector of Chryse and holy Killa, and
mighty lord of Tenedos, Smintheus.' (//. 1.37-9, trans. Hammond)

Plato's 'indirect version' summarises this as 'calling upon the god's

titles' {Rep. 3, 394a). Alexandrian poets and their R o m a n successors,
however, are fond of reproducing such hymnal lists even in narra-
tion. A typical 144 example occurs in the account of how Medea
gathers the magic 'Prometheion':

ETTT&KISe Bpiuco KoupoTpo<|>ov ayKccAeaacra,

Bpiuco VUKTITTOAOV, X^OVITJV, evepoicriv ocvao-crav . . .
[She gathers the drug] having called seven times upon Brimo, the
nurse of children, Brimo the night wanderer, the chthonic, the queen
of the dead . . . (3.861-2)

141
Rep. 3, 392cff. Helpful discussions in Genette 1980.162-71; Rimmon-Kenan 1983.107-16;
S. Halliwell, The Poetics of Aristotle (London 1987) 171-4; Dejong 1987.2-5.
142
Cf., however, below p. 141 on //. 4.30iff., and note I b //. 2.494-877.
143
Cf. above pp. 109-12.
144
Cf. 1.1125-6, 4.147-8, 708-9; 4.1701-5 is related, though rather different.
 Speech and speeches 141
Such experiments with narrative form are typical of post-classical
poetry, but in this instance it may have been Plato who first issued
the challenge. Later scholars were indeed interested in those Hom-
eric passages where narrative suddenly becomes direct speech with-
out an explicit signal. Such a passage is //. 4.30iff.:
|iev irpcoT' 6TTETEAA6TO* TOUS y a p avcoysi
(7<f>ous ITTTTOUS exenev |ir|66 KAoviecrOca ojiiAcor
'(ir|5E TIS ITTTTOOWni T£ KOCl f|VOpST|(|>l 7T£7TOl6cbs
oTos irpocxO' aAAcov pie|jaTco Tpcoeaai |j&xec70ca . . . '

First he gave his instructions to the horsemen. He told them to hold

their horses and not charge wildly in among the mass: 'And do not let
pride in your skill and bravery tempt any of you to engage the Trojans
alone' (trans. Hammond)

Here, and in related cases, scholars spoke of a switch from a 'narra-

tive' (SrnyrmaTiKov) to a 'mimetic' (|Ji|ir|TiK6v) mode. 145 Recogni-
tion of such phenomena in archaic epic was clearly important for the
more complex experimentations with which we will be concerned.
The reduction in the amount of direct speech from its Homeric
levels will, of course, have more than one explanation; the change
from oral to written epic is only a partial answer. Whereas the
'Achilles plot' of the Iliad works itself out largely through speech,
because of the hero's withdrawal from the field of action, the
Argonautic quest ensures a constant movement forward through ac-
tion. Nevertheless, the sparing use of direct speech must also be
viewed in the context of the insistent authorial voice which never
allows us to imagine for long that the characters are 'speaking for
themselves'. The relative 'non-mimeticness' (in an Aristotelian sense)
of the Hellenistic epic emphasises the presence and control of the
narrating poet. This may be illustrated from many features of speech
in the Argonautica, but I here single out three for particular attention:
the introduction of direct speech, the suppression of speech, and — at
rather greater length - the use of indirect speech.
Homer is at least sparing with overt guidance as to how we are
to interpret the words of his characters.146 When, for example, a
speech is introduced by the common verse 'prudent (TTETrvu|ievos)
145
Cf. [Longinus] 27.1; F. De Martino, 'Omero fra narrazione e mimesi (Dal poeta ai
personaggi)', Belfagor 32 (1977) 1-6; Dejong 1987.10-12; Fantuzzi 1988.47-59.
146
Cf. M. W. Edwards, 'Homeric speech introductions', HSCP 74 (1970) 1-36.
 142 The poet and his poem

Telemachos answered him', oralists still disagree over what weight

(Psometimes, Palways) should be attached to such a formulaic usage:
how does our knowledge of Telemachos' 'prudence' affect our inter-
pretation of what he says? O n the other hand, it is hard (even for the
most ardent oralist) to deny all specific meaning to the explicit
indication that a character's speech is delivered when he or she is
'angry', 'weeping' or whatever. Some cases, of course, defy dispute:
three times, for example, during the 'Deception of Zeus' speeches of
Hera are introduced with the words 'Hera spoke planning deception
(6oAo9pov6Ouaa)'. 147 Nevertheless, the sense that Homer is rather
reticent in this direction may be supported again by very bare statis-
tics: in Books 1, 8, and 16 (chosen at random) of the Odyssey, only
half as many speeches are introduced by such authorial guidance as
lack it, and in the same books of the Iliad the figures are roughly even;
in those books of both poems the number of speeches which are
followed by explicit authorial guidance is insignificant. In the Ar-
gonautica, however, twice as many speeches are preceded by authorial
guidance as not, and roughly one-quarter are followed by some such
marker. These unsurprising figures are in line with the general ten-
dencies of the poem which we have been considering. Here again
Apollonius performs a delicate balancing act: the Homeric mould is
reshaped, not entirely discarded. 148
Avoidance of repetition is a familiar and fundamental principle of
Apollonian style, just as repetition of various kinds is an inescapable
fact of Homeric style. 149 In broad terms, in the Argonautica speeches
are not repeated and scene-types occur only once. A particular
instance is the references in the text to speeches which are alleged to
have occurred 'off-camera'. Argos tells Aietes that Jason is willing to
do battle with the Sarmatians in return for the handing over of the
Fleece (3.351-3), though we have heard nothing of this before; he
also mentions to Jason their earlier discussions, of which we know
nothing, concerning Medea:
4
Koupr|v 6f] Tiva TrpoaOev ETTEKAUES OCUTOS eiaelo
<J>ap|jidCTCT£iv 'EKOCTTIS n £ p a r | i 8 o s £vv£ornicn.'

'I have mentioned to you before a certain young girl whom Hecate,
daughter of Perses, has taught to work in drugs.' (3.477-8)
147
//. 14.197, 300,329.
148
Cf. Fantuzzi 1988.61-5.
149
3-493~4 *s ^ e programmatic example, cf. Hunter 1989.40.
 Speech and speeches 143
Such passages call attention to the role of the poet as controller and
selector of the material of the poem. It is important that this tech-
nique is restricted to these instances in the third book;150 a hallmark
of Apollonian experimentation is its limitation in scope. Apollonius
refuses to replace standard Homeric techniques with new, but equal-
ly standard and consistently present, ones. (The concentration of
these features in Book 3 may in fact be one further marker of the
influence of drama on that book, for it is drama, particularly New
Comedy, which has constant occasion to refer to events 'off-stage'.)
Moreover, this technique itself may well derive, as do so many
Apollonian experiments, from Homer. At Od. 12.374-88 Odysseus
gives the Phaeacians an account of reaction among the gods to the
killing of the cattle of the Sun, and he adds 'I heard these things from
lovely-tressed Calypso; she said that she heard them from Hermes
the messenger.' There is no sign elsewhere in the poem of these
conversations, and indeed Calypso does not even tell Odysseus that
Hermes has visited her. Ancient scholars were puzzled by the episode,
and Aristarchus deleted the whole narrative; 151 Apollonius may have
turned it to his own use.
Indirect speech152 is a standard feature of narrative poetry, at
home as much in Homer as in Apollonius. This mode may be used
to reveal a character's intention, 153 desire,154 belief,155 or fear,156 or as
a form of variation for direct address. Thus, for example, Mopsus'
advice to the crew after the appearance of the ghost of Sthenelos is
given in a brief indirect report (2.922-3), whereas Orpheus' similar
instructions after the epiphany of Apollo shortly before are given in
a fuller, direct form.157 Apollonius has, however, also extended the
use of indirect speech far beyond Homeric technique, and quite
lengthy 'speeches' are presented indirectly. Homer has no real paral-
lel for this syntactic phenomenon, 158 nor would we expect such sub-

150
Cf. Fusillo 1985.26-7.
151
See the scholia to //. 3.277, Od. 5.79; for modern discussion cf. Heubeck ad loc, Erbse
1972.12-16, Suerbaum 1968.158-61.
152
Cf. Ibscher 1939.177-81 for an analysis into various categories.
153
Cf. 1.16-17 (Pelias), 2.190 (? Zeus), 3.211-12 (Hera), 4.242-3 (Hera).
154
Cf. 1.175,3.806-7.
155
Cf. 3.1189-90, 4.9-10, 317-18.
156
Cf. 3.613-15.
157
2.686-93, cf. below pp. 150-1; the two passages are bound together by Aoipfjiai TE
neiAi^acrSai (2.692, 923).
158
Cf. Dejong 1987.114-18; Richardson 1990.70-7, 222.
 144 The poet and his poem
ordination within the contours of 'oral' style.159 Before considering
the most prominent examples of indirect speech in Apollonius, it is
necessary first to note some general characteristics of indirect speech.
The indirect mode does not seek to present a kind of fictive reality
in the way that direct speech does. Between 'what was said' and what
is in the text stands the mediating poet. In his analysis of Proust,
Genette helpfully distinguished between 'narratized, or narrated,
speech' (narrativise, ou raconte) and 'transposed speech' {transpose). In
this latter type, the indirect mode reproduces some of the features
and language of what would have been the direct speech and is, to
that extent, 'a little more mimetic than narrated speech'; neverthe-
less, 'this form never gives the reader any guarantee - or above all
any feeling - of literal fidelity to the words "really" uttered: the
narrator's presence is still too perceptible in the very syntax of the
sentence for the speech to impose itself with the documentary auto-
nomy of a quotation'. 160 This mode of 'transposed speech' is not
unlike an Apollonian form that has apparently inherited little from
Homer and bequeathed little to Virgil.
I turn now to Apollonius' text.

(a) 4.435-44. Medea lures Apsyrtus to his death with a false message
delivered by heralds:
She gave her message to the heralds, to lure (OeAyeuev) him to come, as soon
as she reached the goddess's temple according to the pact (auvOeair)) and
the dark gloom of night was spread around; he would help her devise a trick
by which she might take the great golden fleece and return again to Aietes'
house, for the sons of Phrixos had compelled her when they handed her
over to the strangers. With this deceitful message, she sprinkled alluring
(OeAKTripia) drugs through the air and breezes; they could attract a wild
animal down from a steep mountain, far away though it was.
The text is in places uncertain, and the construction certainly curi-
ous, but the atmosphere of deceit here is palpable. The reference to
the 'pact' (auv6ecrir|) ironically hints at Medea's plan with Jason
(4.421), as well as at his agreement with the pursuing Colchians.161
Medea holds out to her brother the promise of a trick (56Aos), but it
159
Comparable is the more extensive use of necessary enjambment in the Hellenistic epic, cf.
Hunter 1989.41.
160
Genette 1980.171-3.
161
For this theme as a whole cf. above pp. 63-4.
 Speech and speeches 145
is not of the kind he expects, and 'the dark gloom of night' is an
appropriate context for such treachery. Here then indirect speech is
associated with deceit; heralds are used as the trustworthy trans-
porters of untrustworthy words. Indirectness of speech points to the
possible gap between 'what is said' and 'what is meant'. Apsyrtus is
lured to his death by gifts, words and drugs: the 'charm' of words is
picked up by the 'charm' of Medea's drugs. We have already seen
how this network of associations is crucial to an understanding of the
Apollonian Medea.162

(b) 4.1114-20. After her conversation with her husband, Arete

secretly tells a herald to convey the gist of what was said to the
Argonauts and to tell Jason to marry Medea at once:
In silence she summoned her herald. Her message was that, in her wisdom,
she urged the son of Aison to have intercourse with the girl, and not to
beseech King Alcinous; he himself would go to give his judgement before
the Colchians, that if she were a virgin he would return her to her father's
house, but that if she were sharing a husband's bed, he would not remove
her from a legitimate union.
Indirect speech within indirect speech makes this a most unusual
'messenger-scene'. Instead of a herald repeating his message in the
text, we are given a quite close version, in a speech to a messenger, of
what Arete herself has just heard from Alcinous. Omitted, how-
ever, from Arete's message is Alcinous' observation about any child
Medea might be carrying (4.1108—9), an<^ particular attention is
thereby drawn to it; I have noted before its bitter irony.163 Here
again, then, indirect speech is associated with secrecy and planning.

(c) 4.584-91. The sacred plank in the Argo warns the Argonauts of
what lies ahead:
Deadly fear seized them at once as they heard the voice and the grim anger
of Zeus. For [the plank] said that they would not escape the troubles on the
wide sea nor bitter storms, unless Circe purified them for the pitiless murder
of Apsyrtus. It ordered Polydeuces and Castor to pray to the immortal gods
to provide a route into the Ausonian sea, where they would find Circe, the
daughter of Perse and Helios.
162
Cf. above pp. 59-60.
163
Cf. above p. 74.
 146 The poet and his poem
This passage raises the problem of the relation betwen the words of
the indirect report and the hypothetical 'direct' speech, the problem
considered in Genette's discussion cited earlier. As we have just
been told that Hera has learned of Zeus's 'plans and great anger'
(4.576-7), it is reasonable to ascribe the intervention of the plank to
Hera or Hera's assistant, Athena. What the plank says is an interpre-
tation of Zeus's desires as expressed in vv. 559—61:
Aiociris 6' oAoov T£K|jf|paTO Srjvecri Kipicris
aT|iJ d-n-ovivf apievous Tipo TE piupia Trr||jiav0evTas
voorrjcTeiv.

He devised that they should be cleansed of the deadly blood by the

skill of Aiaian Circe, and should return home after first suffering
countless troubles.
How did Zeus intend to enact his plan? Perhaps through Hera and
the plank. We cannot be sure, because the Apollonian Zeus does not
speak but rather ordains silently (T6K|if)paTO, 4.559), and the uncer-
tainty of the origin of the message - an uncertainty shared by the
Argonauts and ourselves - is indicated by the indirect mode. 164
Moreover, the change from narrative to indirect speech leaves delib-
erately unclear whether or not the plank included Zeus's role in what
it actually said. The indirect mode thus reinforces the obscurity of
divine action and the uncertainty and fear with which the Argonauts
are filled. The language of the indirect speech does pick up elements
of the earlier statement of Zeus's plan: TTOVOUS, 'troubles' (4.586),
picks up TrrmavGevTas, 'troubled', 'afflicted' (4.560),165 and vr|Aea,
'pitiless' (4.588), corresponds to oAoov, 'deadly' (4.559), but the
attitude to the murder in the plank's words is clearly as much the
poet's as it is Zeus's (cf. 4.445-51, 476, 541), and 6oAixf)S, 'wide
[sea]' (4.586), and apyaAeas, 'bitter' (4.587), although in keeping
with Zeus's intentions, may (or may not) be the poet's gloss on 'what
the plank said'. Here we are very close to Genette's 'transposed
speech'.

(d) 4.720-37. The interview between Circe and Medea. As Medea,

at least, spoke in Colchian, direct speech was not a practical possibil-
ity here; indirectness, which places a barrier between us and 'what
164
N o t e also t h a t t h e w o r d - o r d e r of 4.585 <J>0oyyr|v TE Zr|v6s TE pocpuv yphov leaves u n c e r t a i n
the relationship between 'voice' and 'Zeus'.
165
This is an important reason for preferring TTOVOUS to iropous in v. 586.
 Speech and speeches 147
was actually said', suggests the linguistic barrier placed in front of
Jason.166 Circe's direct speech of dismissal (4.739-48) then comes
with great force after what has preceded; somewhat similar is the
pattern of Jason's conversation with Lycus, where the summary of
the voyage is in indirect speech (2.762—71) and Lycus' reflections
upon Heracles, which are new to us, are given in direct speech
(2.774—810). When in the report of Medea's speech Aietes is called
'grim-minded' (|3apu9pcov, 4.731), Frankel and Vian take this to be
Medea's own term, as she seeks to present her situation in the most
favourable light. This seems unlikely. Elsewhere authorial labels are
readily attached to Aietes, and the context here is decisive: 'the
daughter of grim-minded Aietes spoke gently (pieiAixicos)'. Two im-
portant aspects of Medea - the Colchian inheritance and the vulner-
able maiden - vie for priority. For the rest, there seems no reason to
doubt that TTOAUKT|5£OS, 'with many cares' (v. 734), T|AITE, 'sinned' (v.
734),167 and U7Tep|3ia, 'terrible' (v. 735), are intended to be under-
stood as Medea's own words.

(e) 3.579-605. Aietes' address to the Colchian assembly and his

private reflections168 is an extraordinary passage of extended indirect
speech, possibly without real parallel in high Greek poetry. The
indirect mode places Aietes in strong contrast with the immediately
preceding scene of the Greek assembly where openness (including
the freedom to protest) and solidarity were much in evidence. Aietes,
the absolute and terrible tyrant, embodies deceit and fear: his words
can only be heard through the mediation of the narrator. 169 Some of
the account of what Aietes said and thought cannot be assigned with
confidence to either the poet or his character,170 but most of it bears
the hallmarks of the violence and cruelty we associate with him.
Much the same can be said of his threats to his people, again re-
ported in indirect speech, at 4.231-5. Here not only the violence of
language, but also a curiously frantic syntax,171 express the ter-
rorising rage of the king. In the fourth book, too, this indirect mode
166
Cf. Knight 1990.116.
167
For this word in the poem cf. above pp. 63-4.
168
Cf. my note on 3.594.
169
Cf. Paduano 1972.151-3, Fusillo 1985.231-2, Hutchinson 1988.91-2.
170
Under this category I would include |3apuv (580), the whole of 581, and probably 601-2.
AevyaA6T|V (598) and crruyEpf|V (604) may be focalised through Aietes, rather than being
the words we are to imagine that he used.
171
Cf. M. Campbell, CQ,2i (1971) 419.
 148 The poet and his poem

is set against an open and 'democratic' speech from Jason (4.190—

205). Like other frightened tyrants, Aietes is associated with an
oracle which he has misunderstood. Oracles speak in riddling lan-
guage which requires interpretation and invites misconstruction. In
a rather similar way, indirect speech places barriers in front of any
simple decoding of'what is/was said'; it creates uncertainty and calls
attention to gaps in understanding. It thus fits very well with central
concerns of the Argonautica.

Before leaving passages of this type, it may be valuable briefly to cast

an eye forward to the Aeneid, which is in general less experimental
with narrative technique than is the Argonautica. Indirect speech of
the kind I have been considering is in fact far less prominent there
than in the Argonautica; this is in keeping with the more traditional,
more 'Homeric' design of the Roman epic. The indirect mode is,
however, used to suggest the furtiveness of the spread of Fama
(4.190—5) and the difficulty in distinguishing truth from fiction in
the reports it carries (cf. 4.188, tarn ficti prauique tenax quam nuntia
ueri); it may be significant that Virgil clearly has Apollonius in
mind here.172 More striking perhaps is the use of indirect speech
for Aeneas' instructions to his men at 4.288—94; here the atmos-
phere is one of furtive secrecy and potential deceit - Dido at least
has no doubt that Aeneas intended to deceive - and we have
learned from the Argonautica that indirect speech is often found in
such contexts.173
To conclude this survey, I wish to consider the two songs of
Orpheus which are described at 1.496-511 and 2.705-13.
The first cosmogonical song is narrated in a series of indirect
statements which are very deliberately, almost monotonously, artic-
ulated: 'he sang how . . . and how . . . and how . . . ' This form is not
merely a familiar marker of didactic style,174 but also stresses the
poet's control of Orpheus' song: Orpheus can only utter through our
poet. It has been suggested that Apollonius uses this indirect form
because Orpheus' poetry is 'an unattainable ideal' which cannot be

172 Virgil's Fama evokes the |3d£is spread by Hera after the cave-wedding on Drepane
(4.1184-5).
173
This, of course, is not the place for any lengthy discussion of 'free indirect speech' in the
Aeneid; that form is fundamentally different from the phenomena considered here.
174
Cf. Brown 1990.316-20.
 Speech and speeches 149
directly reproduced. 175 Both the other song of Orpheus, and the
Homeric form which Apollonius is imitating (cf. below), make this
very unlikely. Moreover, the poet's quasi-identification with Orpheus
has been established in the Catalogue, 176 and is here reinforced by
the fact that the end of the song is picked up by the beginning of the
description ofJason's cloak (1.730-4) 177 and by the close integration
of the song into its narrative context: 'strife' in the narrative and
'strife' in the song, the power of Zeus in the narrative (cf. 1.516) and
also in the song (1.509-11). 178 In the final six verses of the song, our
uncertainty as to whether the words are those of Orpheus or of the
poet increases; the mingling of voices, our uncertainty as to 'who
speaks', is crucial. Orpheus and the poet have become one.
The Homeric models for Orpheus' song are the songs of Demodocus
in Odyssey 8. In his narrative of Ares and Aphrodite, allegorical
interpretations of which are evoked by Orpheus' song,179 there is,
after the initial introduction (8.268), no further formal indication
that we are listening to an inset song until the concluding 'this was
the famous singer's song' (8.367); Demodocus' voice is here largely
indistinguishable from 'Homer's'. 180 In his song of the fall of Troy
(8.499-520), however, the initial indirect marker is repeated (8.514),
and the concluding verses are in indirect speech (the accusative and
infinitive construction). The song of Orpheus varies this by changing
to direct speech for its final five verses, whereas the Homeric song
changes from one indirect mode to another. Orpheus' song is thus
indebted to all three of Demodocus' songs: to his song of the quarrel
of Odysseus and Achilles (Od. 8.73-82) for the theme of neikos be-
tween allies (cf. Idmon and Idas), an example of an included Hom-
eric song becoming part of the Apollonian narrative, 181 to the song
of Ares and Aphrodite for the cosmological theme, and to the 'Fall

175
Cf. P. E. Knox, Ovid's Metamorphoses and the Traditions of Augustan Poetry (PCPS Suppl. 11,
C a m b r i d g e 1986) 12.
176
Cf. above p . 127.
177
Cf. above pp. 53-4.
178
Cf. Brown 1990.324, 'the progression of the song, from elemental strife to the reign of Zeus,
parallels - and promotes - the alteration in the mood of its audience, from contentiousness
to peacefulness and piety'.
179
Cf. above p. 54.
180
Cf. Richardson 1990.84-7. Noteworthy, however, are two occurrences of 56Aos (8.276,
282) and 5oA6evTa in 8.281. This word and its cognates are predominantly speech - words
in Homer.
181
Cf. Clauss 1983.55-65.
 150 The poet and his poem
of Troy' for its structural starting-point. Such a tour deforce of Hom-
eric allusion and conflation makes very strong the identification
between Apollonius and the 'ideal poet', whether this be Orpheus
or Demodocus. It is also worthy of note that 'like Ares' at Od.
8.518 must reproduce a comparison or allude to a simile in 'what
Demodocus really said'. Here is one seed of Apollonius' experiments
with indirect speech.
The mixture of voices in Orpheus' 'Hymn to Apollo' (2,703-13)
has long been held to be the model for similar phenomena in the
'Hymn to Hercules' at Aeneid 8.285-302. The passage is singularly
complex in its interplay between poet and character:
CTUV 6E acpiv eus TT&IS Oiaypoio
Bi<7Tovir|i 9Op|iiyyi Aiy£ir|s ?ipX£V &oi8fjs*
cos TTOTE TT6Tpair|i UTTO 6eipoc6i napvncroTo
AeAq>uvr|v TO^OICTI TrsAcopiov E^Evapi^E,
Koupos icbv ITI yuuvos, ETI TTAOK&IJOKJI yeyr|0cbs -
iAf|Kois* aiei TOI, a v a £ , aTur|Toi eOsipai,
aiev d5f)Ar|Tor TCOS y a p OEUIS' 01661 5' OCUTT)
Ar|Tco Koioygveia 91ACCIS evi yspaw c^aacrEi -
TTOAAOC 6E KcopuKiai N 0 | i 9 a i fTAsiaToTo OOyaTpes
OapauveoKov lireo-cnv, irj i£ K£KAr|yuTai,
IVOEV Sf) T 6 6 E KaAov ky\j\xv\ov ITTAETO Ooi|3coi.

With them the noble son of Oiagros sang a clear song to the accom-
paniment of his Bistonian lyre. He sang how once at the foot of the
rocky ridge of Parnassos the god killed the monstrous Delphyne with
his bow, when a young boy still in his nakedness, still rejoicing in long
curls - be gracious, please! Eternally, lord, your hair is uncut, eter-
nally it remains unravaged. Thus does holy law proclaim: only Leto
herself, daughter of Koios, may hold it in her dear hands — the
Corycian nymphs, daughters of Pleistos, gave much encouragement,
shouting 'Hie, Hie!'; this is the source of Phoebus' lovely title.
The hymn begins in the now familiar indirect mode, and the narra-
tive of vv. 705-6 seems to be in the poet's voice, although the excited
style of the following verse then suggests rather Orpheus' hymnal
voice.182 Verses 708-10 correct the ambiguity of 707 - for 'still' may
imply 'still at that time (though it later changed)' or 'still (to this
day)' - and are normally thought to be in the mouth of the poet.183
On the other hand, the repeated 'eternally' corrects the repeated

182
Cf. 1.508, 4.1384, Call. h. 1.2.
183
So Frankel, Vian, and myself at Hunter 1986.57.
 Speech and speeches 151
'still', and such jocularity would well suit an Alexandrian Orpheus;
it is over-solemn to object that Apollonius could not attribute theo-
logical error to his Orpheus. 184 In fact it is not possible to distinguish
the voices here,185 as both etymology and aetiology, which are prom-
inent in these verses,186 are familiar markers both of the poetic voice
of the Argonautica and of the voice of hymns. Reading (or hearing)
Orpheus' hymn thus presents, in concentrated form, the same expe-
rience as reading (or hearing) the Argonautica as a whole; at the cen-
tre of both stands the powerful poet, controlling a complex pattern
of competing voices.

184
So Frankel 1968.227-8, Vian on 2.713.
185 T(f,5e) however, in 713 is addressed to the reader by the poet.
186
In Hunter 1986 I failed to point to nXeicrroTo as continuing the suggestion of Apollo's name
being derived from TTOAUS.
 CHAPTER 6

The Argonautica and its Ptolemaic context

As Librarian of the Royal Library, l Apollonius occupied what was

probably the principal position of academic patronage available to
a Greek intellectual at Alexandria, and it is this social and academic
context in which his epic must always be read, even if we cannot be
completely certain of the circumstances of the poem's production.
His lost poems of which we know something (though often only the
title) - works on 'foundations' and on local history - fit well with a
central area of the scholarly activity which centred on the Museum
and Library;2 his prose works on archaic poetry (Homer, Hesiod,
Archilochus) are also of a type very familiar in the history of third-
century Alexandrian scholarship. In writing the Argonautica, Apol-
lonius chose to deal with an area of the world - Colchis and the
Black Sea - which was believed to have traditional racial and
cultural links with Egypt,3 and which we know to have been of
interest to the Ptolemies.4 Moreover, the epic is presented as a rewrit-
ing of Pindar's Fourth Pythian, a poem composed (like Pythian 5)
for the victory of Arcesilas IV of Cyrene, who is said to have re-
organised the colony at Euhesperides, the site of which Apollonius
celebrates in Book 4;5 echoes of Pythian 4 open Books 1 and 3,6 and
the last great sequence of Apollonius' poem closes with the founda-
tion myth of Cyrene, with which Pindar had begun his poem.7 Rela-
1
Cf. Hunter 1989.1-4 for the evidence; Goldhill 1991.272-3 rightly stresses our comparative
ignorance of the institutions and organisation of Ptolemaic artistic patronage. Parts of the
present chapter rework material from Hunter 1991b.
2
For these poems cf. Hunter 1989.9-12.
3
Cf. Argos' speech at 4.257-93 (below p. 164); Hdt. 2.103-5.
4
Cf. the papers (in Russian with English summaries) of N. L. Grach, Vestnik Drevnei Historii,
1984, 81-8, and M. Y. Treister, ibid., 1985, 126-39.
5
Cf. I Pind. Pyth. 5.34 (26) = Theotimos, FGrHist 470 F 1; F. Chamoux, Cyrene sous la
monarchie des Battiades (Paris 1953) 174-5.
6
Cf. above p. 124, my note on 3.1, and Braswell's note on Pyth. 4.1.
7
Cf. below pp. 167-8. For the various myths cf. Chamoux op. cit. 69-127, Jackson 1987, Livrea
 The Argonautica and its Ptolemaic context 153
tions between Alexandria and Cyrene ranged from the cool to the
openly hostile for nearly a quarter of a century after Soter's death, 8
but even before the crucial marriage of Ptolemy III Euergetes to the
Cyrenean princess Berenice was finally accomplished in 247/6, it
would have been difficult for any reader not to understand that
Apollonius was constructing some kind of analogy between himself
and 'the ruler of Cyrene5 on one side and Pindar and Arcesilas on
the other.9 The identity of the 'ruler of Cyrene' - Magas or Ptolemy?
— was indeed at issue at various times throughout the middle of the
century, and Apollonius' clear, if implicit, answer is 'Ptolemy, my
patron'. This interpretation must, of course, remain at the level of
speculation, but it can hardly be doubted that Apollonius evokes
an explicitly 'political' frame of reference for his epic. The current
chapter is thus an attempt to read the Argonautica as a Ptolemaic
poem within the context of what we can learn about the courtly
aspects of Alexandrian poetry from the work of Callimachus and
Theocritus; this will also serve as an introduction to a consideration
of how Virgil read and used the Argonautica in writing a poem which
manipulates its special relationship to the prevailing ideology much
more openly than does the Greek epic.
Apollonius' decision to write epic must not in fact be viewed solely
from a literary perspective, as something of an oddity in the general
context of Hellenistic (and specifically Alexandrian) poetics. It also
has a much wider, sociological, importance. Both the nature of epic
itself and the peculiarly important status which the Homeric texts
had for Greeks of all ages mean that any epic rewriting of Homer was
inevitably bound to the culture and values which gave rise to that
rewriting. The epic 'code' has been well described as 'the medium
through which society takes possession of its past and gives that past
the matrix value of a model... the preliminary level of that elabora-
1987, Calame 1990, and P. Giannini, 'Cirene nella poesia greca: tra mito e storia', in Cirene.
Storia, mito, letteratura (Atti del Convegno della S.I.S.A.C. 4, Urbino 1990) 51-95. Vian m
54-5 notes Apollonius' apparent silence about Cyrene as an example oiarte allusive In fact,
however, Cyrene is in Apollonius' text, if only allusively. Pindar {Pyth. 4.8) calls the original
site of the city a 'white breast', one ancient interpretation of which (cf. Z citing Aristarchus)
saw this as a reference to the nurturing richness of the land. Euphemos' dream in Arg. thus
resonates against the Pindaric phrase. At 4.1734, 6ai|iovir| (3coAa£ eTniidorios not only echoes
Pyth. 4.37, but also suggests 'clod in the shape of a breast'.
8
Cf. Will 1966.125-7, 216-17; Laronde 1987.349-417.
9
Pindar's Arcesilas was to have rather an unhappy time of it (Hdt. 4.162-4), and was
eventually driven out by a democracy, thus bringing the dynasty to an end. How closely
Apollonius would wish us to press the parallel we can hardly know, but biographically-
oriented criticism of Arg. might make more of this fact than it has.
 154 The Argonautica and its Ptolemaic context

tion whose purpose is the literary organisation, in narrative form, of

collective cultural values', 10 a n d the Argonautica has particular inter-
est as coming from a society which was very concerned, in a quite
overt way, with its past, with 'where it came from', and with as-
serting the presence and importance of'collective cultural values'.
The decision to write epic in such a society, even (or particularly) an
epic which constantly sets out to explore the cracks in what are set
up as Homeric certainties, carries special weight. This weight cannot
be minimised by appeal to the undeniable difference between oral
and literary epic.11 Rather, the status of epic as embodiment and
transmitter of traditional values is in constant tension with the nov-
elty and the literariness of Apollonius' project. Where Virgil must
create by pretending to re-create, must see the present as the exten-
sion or 'logical outcome' of the past, Apollonius must emphasise
fracture and discontinuity both within the 'heroic' age itself and
between the past and the present, as well as the unbroken chain
which bound his readers to the pre-Homeric heroes of his story. The
Alexandrian epic, no less than the Alexandrian Greeks themselves,
is overtly concerned with 'where it came from', with its relation to
the cultural icon that was Homer, and to the process by which that
icon is assimilated.

(l) THE ARGONAUTICA AND COURT POETRY

The intellectual life and outlook of privileged Greeks in third-century

Alexandria is a fascinating source for speculation. In particular, the
pressures allegedly produced by 'deracination', by life in a new city
perched precariously on the edge of a 'barbarian wasteland', far
from the traditional seats of Greek culture and without the ties
binding ordinary colonies to their mother-cities, have been held
responsible for certain prominent features of Alexandrian poetry -
the importance of aetiology, and the highly literary and allusive
quality of the writing, for example.12 It would be both easy and
attractive to read the Argonauts' Libyan adventures in Book 4 as a
kind of allegory of the Alexandrian Greeks lost in the cultural desert
of North Africa, saved only when they reach Euhesperides 13 and then
10
Conte 1986.142-3.
11
Such an appeal is a leitmotif (and fatal flaw) in Hainsworth 1991.
12
Cf. particularly Bing 1988 and Goldhill 1991 for both of these aspects.
13
Cf. above p. 152.
 The Argonautica and court poetry 155
the open sea, which had always been a crucial presence in definitions
of 'Greekness';14 the decisive, saving encounter with Triton is indeed
structured by two exchanges which are crucial markers of Greek
'civilisation' in the epic tradition - the giving of guest-gifts (4.1547-
55) and pious sacrifice (4.1593-1602). After this, there is only one
more obstacle - Talos, the last survivor of the Bronze Age - before
the Argonauts reach the Greek mainland and, with it, truly heroic
status.15 Moreover, certain other passages of Alexandrian poetry
may be adduced in support of this notion of cultural unease. One
example must here suffice to illustrate a wider phenomenon.
In his poem in honour of the courtier Sosibios, Callimachus
imagines the aftermath of Sosibios' athletic victories:
6<|>pa K6 Zcocri|3i6v TIS 'AAe^&vSpou TE Tru6r|Tai
yfjv ETTi Kcci vaicov Kivuc|>i 8iOTE<|>Ea
d|i<|)OT6pooi Trapa Trai8i, KaaiyvfjTcoi TE AE&PXOU
KCCI TO Mupivalov TCOI y&Aa 6r|arauEvcoi,
OTIAUTOCTOV Ka! NETAOS aycov iviauaiov 05cop
GO8S Enrnr KaAd uoi OpETrros ETEICJE y £ p a
ou] y a p TTcb TIS £TT! TTTOAIV f | y a y ' CXEOAOV
] Ta<J>icov TCOV6E Travnyupicov
K]ai TTOUAUS, 6v 0O8' 60EV OT8EV 68EUCO
0VT|T6S dvf)p, EVI y o u v TCOI8' l a AiTOTEpos
] ous ajioyr|Ti 81a ac()upd AEUKOC yuvaiKcov
Ka! TraJTs dPpEKTCOi youvaTi TTE^OS E(3r| . . .

. . . so that the people of Alexandria and those living on the banks of

the river Kinyps may learn that Sosibios received two crowns near-by
the two sons - the brother of Learchus and the child that the woman
of Myrina suckled — and so that the Nile may say as it brings each
year its most fertilising water: 'A beautiful reward has my nursling
paid back to me . . . for till now no one had brought a . . . trophy from
these sepulchral festivals . . . and, great though I am, I, whose sources
no mortal man knows, in this one thing alone was more insignificant
than those streams which the white ankles of women cross without
difficulty, and children pass over on foot without wetting their knees
. . . ' (Callimachus, fr. 384.23-34, trans. Trypanis)

In this passage we hear resonate the famous words of Sarpedon to

Glaucus in Iliad 12:

Most memorably expressed, of course, in the story of Xenophon's mercenaries (Anab.

4.7.24).
Cf. below pp. 166-7.
 156 The Argonautica and its Ptolemaic context

'Glaukos, why is it that we two are held in the highest honour in Lycia, with
pride of place, the best of the meat, the wine-cup always full, and all look
on us like gods, and we have for our own use a great cut of the finest land
by the banks of the Xanthos, rich in vineyard and wheat-bearing plough-
land? That is why we should now be taking our stand at the front of
the Lycian lines and facing the sear of battle, so that among the heavy-
armoured Lycians people will say: "These are no worthless men who rule
over us in Lycia, these kings we have who eat our fat sheep and drink the
choice of our honey-sweet wine. No, they have strength too and courage,
since they fight at the front of the Lycian lines.'" {Iliad 12.310—21, trans.
Hammond)
Callimachus has borrowed the traditional association between a
martial or athletic victor and his people in order, through Homeric
allusion, to set Sosibios and his city within the mainstream of the
'heroic' Greek world, just as a few verses later the new Ptolemaia have
apparently joined the list of great Greek festivals (v. 40). 16 The Nile's
proud boast, however, if that is the correct interpretation of vv.
31-4, 17 certainly suggests the enthusiasm of the newly arrived; at the
very least, the placing of this boast - with its Homeric referent - in
the mouth of the great Egyptian river creates a distance of irony
which will be lengthened or shortened for different readers, partly
perhaps in accordance with the weight each attaches to the Homeric
allusion. The new context for traditional language thus produces a
new range of encomiastic effects. It is also worth noting that such
multi-layered effects allow (perhaps indeed assume) a wider audi-
ence for this poetry than scholars are often inclined to imagine.
It is indeed the encomiastic aspect of Alexandrian court poetry,
and the representation in it of Egyptian ideas, which has been the
subject of the most fruitful recent discussion.18 The overtly enco-
miastic passages of Callimachus' Hymns and of Theocritus range
brilliantly from the playful to the solemn, and often rely upon a
16
Cf. Pfeiffer ad loc, Fraser 1972. 11 1004-5. For the Ptolemaia cf. Will 1966.179-81.
17
I follow Trypanis; Pfeiffer proposes an alternative view.
18
Cf. Griffiths 1979; R. Merkelbach, 'Das Konigtum der Ptolemaer und die hellenistischen
Dichter', in N. Hinske (ed.), Alexandrien (Mainz am Rhein 1981) 27-35; T. Gelzer,
'Kallimachos und das Zeremoniell des ptolemaischen Konigshauses', in J. Stagl (ed.),
Aspekte der Kultursoziologie. Aufsdtze ... Mohammed Rassem (Berlin 1982) 13-30; L. Koenen,
'Die Adaptation agyptischer Konigsideologie am PtolemaerhoP, in Egypt and the Hellenistic
World (Studia Hellenistica 27, Leuven 1983) 143-90; Bing 1988. W. Meincke, Unter-
suchungen zu den enkomiastischen Gedichten Theokrits (diss. Kiel 1965) and Goldhill 1991.272-83
discuss only the Greek heritage. The standard view of Alexandrian art, by way of contrast,
is of 'distinct Alexandrian and Pharaonic traditions ... substantially impervious to one
another' (J. J. Pollitt, Art in the Hellenistic Age (Cambridge 1986) 250).
 The Argonau tica and court poetry 15 7

productive tension between inherited Greek notions and language

and the new ideological situation. Two small examples must suffice
here. In the 'Hymn to Adonis' which concludes Idyll 15, the singer
refers to the apotheosised Berenice:
'Kuirpi Aicovocioc, TU JJIEV ocOocvorrav airo Ovcrras,
dvOpcoTrcov cos |i06os, 6Troir|aas BspsviKav,
duppoaiav ES orfjOos dTroord^aaa yuvaiKos.'
'Cyprian, daughter of Dione, it is the tale of men that you changed
Berenice from mortal to immortal, by letting ambrosia drip into her
woman's breast.' (Theocritus 15.106-8)
Of dv6pcb7TCOv cos piOOos Gow notes 'a common qualification of state-
ments concerning matters outside the speaker's personal knowledge
. . . and [the phrase] contain [s] no implication of disbelief, and
Dover rightly adds that such a phrase can 'strengthen a story, not
weaken it' and that 'the dissemination of a story which increases
the kleos of a deity or hero is important'. T h e phrase is, however,
not merely an item in a lexicon, but occurs in a particular hymn
delivered by a particular character in a particular poem, and 'the
mythos of men' concerns not just any story, but a representation
which, while having familiar Greek analogues, nevertheless leaves
traditional Greek ideas and praise far behind. Just as the whole
hymn implies (or creates for itself) at least two 'readerships', the
'common folk' of Alexandria who come to marvel at the palace and
its festival and a learned elite who see themselves as standing some-
what aloof, so this phrase carries more than one resonance. There is,
at the very least, an amusing dissonance in the singer's banal phrase,
'used' by the character no doubt as Gow and Dover interpret it, but
which can also be seen as a splendid piece of honest, innocent tact-
lessness. This effect of nuanced layering is typical of the style of
Alexandrian poetic encomium.
A further instructive case is a famous passage from Callimachus'
second Hymn:
if] it) (|>6eyy€CT6e- KCCKOV uocK&p£crcnv ipi£eiv.
6s lidxEToa uocKdpEcxcJiv, i|jcbi
ocrns eucoi (3aaiAf]i, KCCI 'ATTOAACOVI
TOV x o p o v COTTOAACOV, o TI oi Korrd Ouudv dei5ei,
Tiuf)aer SUVOCTOCI y d p , tirel Aii

Cry 'Hie, Hie!' It is a bad thing to strive with the blessed ones. He
who fights with the blessed ones would fight with my king; he who
 158 The Argonautica and its Ptolemaic context
fights with my king would fight with Apollo too. Apollo will honour
the choir, because its song is pleasing to him; he has the power, since
he sits at Zeus's right hand. (Callimachus, h. 2.25-9)
Scholarly interest in these verses is now largely concentrated upon
seeking the identity of'my king' - Ptolemy or Magas of Cyrene? - 1 9
but the style of the verses is at least as interesting. Like the poem as
a whole, this passage both invites an association between king and
god,20 and refuses anything as obvious as an 'identification'.21 At one
level the verses say no more than that Apollo is the poet's king, and
that Apollo is one of the blessed immortals; the repetition of 'my
king' and the theme of fighting, however, invite the further associa-
tion. At another level, therefore, the verses explore and exploit the
range of nuances that could be borne by the optative mood. Once
the polyvalent association between god and king has been con-
structed, poet and reader are involved in a complex struggle to
control the use to which it is put.22 Even this 'association' is, of
course, more direct and overt than anything comparable we may
hope to find in the Argonautica. Nevertheless, the style of Alexandrian
encomium is a necessary background to any consideration of the epic
as a 'court poem', for it is knowledge of this style which may enable
us to sense layers in the poem which would otherwise remain hidden.
Certain passages of Alexandrian poetry directly discuss Egypt's
place in the Greek world. In Theocritus 14, for example, Egypt
is presented as set apart from the mainstream Greek world, which
is defined by the many adjectives of place throughout the poem,
but ruled by a king of quintessential Greek virtues (vv. 61-5).
19
For a bibliography cf. Williams ad loc. and K. Bassi, TAP A 119 (1989) 225.
20
Every Ptolemy was also Horus, the Egyptian god long identified by the Greeks with Apollo.
21
Thus the situation is misrepresented not only by Williams, but also by Merkelbach art. cit.
34: 'Wenn von Apollon gesprochen wird, ist immer gleichzeitig auch Ptolemaios gemeint

22
It is a version of this same phenomenon which is visible in the association in the Aeneid
between Aeneas and Augustus, whose links with Apollo require no justification; cf. J.
Griffin, 'The creation of characters in the Aeneid\ in B. K. Gold (ed.), Literary and Artistic
Patronage in Ancient Rome (Austin 1982) 118-34, P- I 2 2 - ^ would in fact be nice to believe
that there is some connection between Propertius' report (2.31) of the scenes on the doors
of the temple of Palatine Apollo - the driving of the Gauls from Delphi and the killing of
the Niobids, scenes untypical 'of the bulk of public Augustan visual iconography' (Hardie
1986.124) - and the fact that Callimachus uses both of these exempla in Apolline-
Ptolemaic contexts (h. 2.22-4, 4 I 7 I ~ 4 ) - I* might be worth noting that Propertius 2.32, a
poem joined in our MSS to 2.31 and very variously treated in modern editions, begins with
a verse which almost looks like a reworking of Call. h. 2.10, qui uidet is peccat: qui te non uiderit
ergo I non cupiet. udpuocpov at h. 2.24 perhaps suggests that Callimachus too wants us to think
of an artistic representation of Niobe, cf. Fowler 1989.40-2.
 The Argonautica and court poetry 159
Not dissimilar is the old bawd's list of the pleasures of Egypt in
Herondas 1:

'There is the goddess's house; everything that is and exists anywhere, all this
is in Egypt: wealth, wrestling-schools, power (8uva|iis), peace, reputation,
festivals, philosophers, money, young men, the shrine of the Brother Gods,
the king's a good chap, the Museum, wine . . . ' (Herondas 1.26-31)

In the first part of the list, one word — 8uvauis, 'power' — shows how
the world has changed since the first formulation of such lists of the
delights of Greek city life. In the exercise of that power the Ptolemies
not only depended upon native Egyptian wealth, but also adopted
Egyptian religious and institutional customs; the whole question of
Egypt and the native Egyptians was likely to have been one where
court poets trod cautiously. The Ptolemaic court was not the right
place for strident 'public' assertions of Greek cultural and racial
superiority, or too much loose talk about barbaroi.23 Writing an Ar-
gonautica presents these problems in a particularly sharp way; it is my
contention that this is no accident.
The story of the Golden Fleece might almost have been designed
as a narrative of cultural and racial difference and interaction: a
journey to the ends of the earth,24 a terrible confrontation with the
unknown and 'the other', and the ultimate triumph of a Panhellenic
crusade and of Greek technology and daring. Scholars of Hellenistic
and later antiquity indeed rationalised the story as an account of
early Greek colonisation and the quest for gold.25 It is clear that in
the second half of Book 2, as the Argonauts approach Colchis, there
is in the peoples they pass a steady movement away from Greek
customs and towards inversion of Greek norms (explicitly of the
Mossynoikoi at 2.1016—25).26 Here Apollonius' (and Phineus') eth-
nography works within a Hellenocentric framework most familiar
from Herodotus. The persistent and, broadly speaking, un-Homeric
and un-Callimachean27 presentation throughout the Argonautica of
an undifferentiated 'Hellas'28 would seem on the surface to fit both

23
Cf. further Hunter 1991^83-7; on Theocritus 15.46-50 cf. also Goldhill 1991.276.
24
For Phasis as the world's eastern boundary cf. my note on 3.678-80.
25
Cf. Strabo 1.2.39.
26
Cf. Fusillo 1985.162-7.
27
Cf. Hunter 1991D.85.
28
It is noteworthy that this usage is much more common in the mouth of characters than in
the voice of the narrator (4.349; 2.459 a n ( ^ 3 1 r 34 a r e special cases).
 160 The Argonautica and its Ptolemaic context
a simple version of the traditional Greek/barbarian opposition, and
the Ptolemies' concern - evidenced in many surviving public texts -
to present themselves as the successors of Alexander and protectors
of'the Greeks'.29 Within the complexities of the epic, however, this
simple opposition is repeatedly broken down, particularly by the
figure of Medea, as Apollonius borrows and rewrites a crucial feature
of Euripides' Medea, in which the behaviour of both Medea and
Jason sets at risk the complacently secure definition of what is 'Greek'
and what 'barbarian', 30 or at least the valuation which is to be
placed upon each category. The last book, and the ever-present
intimations of Euripides' tragedy, show clearly how 'Greek' promises
and 'Greek' values are not necessarily all they seem.
If there is no simple, monovalent, presentation of the superiority
of Greek values through the epic, there is nevertheless a constant
concern with Hellenic culture and virtues. One scene in which this
is very clear is the boxing-match between Polydeuces, 'the best'
(2.15) of the Argonauts after the loss of Heracles, and Amycus,
the brutal king of the Bebrycians, who is characterised by both
Apollonius and Theocritus with echoes of another son of Poseidon,
the Homeric Cyclops.31 Amycus foreshadows Aietes in his abuse of
the rules of hospitality - explicitly condemned by the narrator as
deiKeoc Oeapiov (2.5) - and, as we have already seen,32 his contest with
Polydeuces suggests a familiar pattern of Greek aristocratic ethics,
validated by the Pindaric tradition; this is not at all what Amycus
had in mind, but like the Cyclops he must pay the price for his lack
of 'social grace' and thereby serve to define and endorse 'Greek'
norms. Heracles, the divine ancestor of the Ptolemies, and the
Dioscuri both had an important place in royal cult, and recur
frequently in the poetry associated with the court. The contest be-
tween Polydeuces and Amycus would thus find a place within the
public ideology of the Ptolemies, without the necessity of anything
so obvious as an 'identification' between Ptolemy and the Greek
hero or even a parallelism between this fight and the struggle for

29
Cf., e.g., Rice 1983.106-7.
30
Cf. H u n t e r 1 9 9 1 ^ 9 2 - 4 . I n that article I have also considered the character of Aietes from
this perspective. For the various 'competing' aspects of Medea's character cf. above p p .
5 9 - 6 0 , a n d for the ironies of the stress upon how Greeks keep their word (3.1105) cf. m y
note ad loc.
31
Gf. m y note on 3 . 1 7 6 - 8 1 . Valerius Flaccus (Arg. 4.104-343) makes the similarity to the
Cyclops explicit, a n d his Amycus narrative borrows freely from Virgil's Cyclops episode
(Am. 3.588-691).
32
Cf. above pp. 28-9.
 The Argonautica and court poetry 161
supremacy between Horus/Apollo and his enemy Seth/Typhon, the
chthonic power of chaos and confusion.33 Apollonius is more re-
served than, say, Callimachus in his Hymns (or indeed Virgil in the
Aeneid) in openly displaying his patrons in the mythic time of his
poem, and for this reason we are in danger of missing what the
Ptolemaic context would have allowed contemporary readers to
understand. Such generic difference is of a piece with the stylistic
phenomena considered in the last chapter, and here again we can see
how Apollonius' revision of epic norms sways between tradition and
innovation.
A related example may be found in the scenes set on Drepane in
Book 4.34 It has often been noted that domestic themes - the position
of royal women and the role of dynastic marriage - figure promi-
nently in Alexandrian court poetry; brother-sister marriage, a very
obvious borrowing by the Ptolemies from Egyptian practice (but
'Hellenised' by the paradigm of Zeus and Hera), has an important
place in this poetry.35 Alcinous and Arete formed such a brother-
sister pair (at least according to some accounts), 36 but Apollonius is
remarkably silent about this aspect of their marriage, preferring to
concentrate upon the young queen's role as a skilful controller of
events with an instinctive sympathy for things Greek (cf. 4.1074—6)
and upon the king's concern with justice and, like Amphitryon in
Theocritus 24, getting a good night's sleep. More than one reason for
Apollonius' silence may be imagined, but it is hard to believe that
any readers associated with the Ptolemaic court would not have
been tempted to see some kind of analogue between the Phaeacian
royal couple and their own ruling family. In particular, it is to be
noted that Arete works in this episode not only as Hera's mortal
instrument but almost in concert with her, and Alcinous is expressly
linked to Zeus's 'straight justice' (4.1100, cf. 1177-9, 1201-2); the
Alexandrian analogues of Zeus and Hera required no elaborate
identification. Moreover, the light humour of this exploration of
'how power really works' - Alcinous both preserves the formalities
and makes sure that 'the right side' wins - 3 7 is perfectly in keep-
33
Cf. J . G. Griffiths, The Conflict of Horus and Seth (Liverpool i960); H . T e Velde, Seth, God
of Confusion (Leiden 1967). T h e comparison of Amycus to a child o f ' d e a d l y T y p h o n ' is
particularly suggestive; for the identification of Seth and Typhon cf. below p. 163.
34
Cf. above pp. 68-74.
35
Cf. especially Griffiths 1979.
36
For the problems created by Od. 7.54-68 cf. Hainsworth ad loc.
37
Cf. Vian, Note complementaire to 4.1110. When Alcinous tells his wife that his decision will
be based on Medea's marital status, he already knows what this is (4.1074, 1083-5).
 162 The Argonautica and its Ptolemaic context
ing with the tone of much Alexandrian 'court poetry'. 38 When the
Argonauts reach Drepane it is almost as though they have arrived
'home'; 39 in fact it proves to be the last stop before they nearly
perish in the wastes of Libya. In the imaginative world of the poem
Drepane can thus 'suggest' Alexandria, as its rulers 'suggest' the
Ptolemies. Here again the Hellenistic forerunners of Virgil's epic
transformations become clear.

(ii) CREATING A NEW ORDER

The Argonauts' voyage is preceded by the cosmological song of

Orpheus (i.496-511). Framed by echoes of Hesiod's Theogony,*0 this
song brings the history of the world down to Zeus's childhood:
T^EISEV 8' cos yaTa Kai oupavos T)8E OdAaaaa,
TO Trpiv ETT' dAArjAoiai pufji cxuvapripOTa |jop<|>fji,
VEIKEOS E^ 6A00T0 8l£Kpl0£V d|iCJ)is EKaCXTa*
f)8' cos EIJTTESOV aisv EV aiOEpi TEKiaap £xc
d o r p a QEAr|vair|s TE Kai TJEAIOIO KEAEUOOI*
oupEa 6 s cos dvETEiAE, Kai cos "nroTaiioi 1
auTTJicriv Nu|i<J>r|iai Kai EpiTETa TrdvT* lyEVovTO.
' 8' cos TTpcoTov 'Oc^icov Eupuv6|irj TE
; VIC[>6EVTOS EXOV KpaTos OuA0|iTroio*
cbs TE pir|i Kai x e p o w 6 [xkv Kpovcoi EIKOOE TIHTJS,
f] 8E C PET|I, ETTEaov 8 ' ivi Kuiiaaiv 'QKEavoTo*
oi 8 E TECOS |JiaKdpECTai 0EOTS TITT^CTIV dvacrcTov,
6c))pa ZEUS ETI Koupos, ETI <(>pEai v f i m a Ei8cbs,
AlKTaToV VaiECTKEV UTTO aTTEOS, OI 8£ (ilV OU TTCO
yriyEVEES KUKACOTTES EKapTUvavTo KEpauvcoi
PpOVTfjl TE aTEpOTTTJl TE* TO y d p A l l KU80S OTld^El.

He sang of how the earth, the heavens and the sea - once upon a time
united with each other in a single form - were sundered into their
separate beings by deadly strife; and how a position fixed for eternity
in the sky is held by the stars and the paths of the moon and the sun;
how the mountains rose up, and the origin of sounding rivers with
their own nymphs, and all creatures on the ground. He sang how first
Ophion and Eurynome, daughter of Ocean, held power over snowy

38
Cf. J. Griffin, 'Augustus and the poets: "Caesar qui cogere posset'", in F. Millar and E.
Segal (eds.), Caesar Augustus, Seven Aspects (Oxford 1984) 189-219.
39
At 4.994-1000, cf. above p. 133.
40
Note 1.496-502 ~ Theog. 108-13, 1.509-11 ~ Theog. 139ff. For further discussion of the
form of this song cf. above pp. 148-50, and see now D. P. Nelis, 'Demodocus and the song of
Orpheus (Ap. Rhod. 1.496-511)', M / / 4 9 (1992) forthcoming.
 Creating a new order 163
Olympus, and how a violent struggle caused them to yield their
positions of honour, he to Kronos and she to Rhea, and to fall into the
waves of Ocean. Kronos and Rhea then ruled over the blessed Titan
gods, while Zeus was still a young boy, still with the thoughts of an
infant, and lived in the Diktaian cave; the earthborn Kyklopes had
not yet armed him with his blazing bolts, his thunder and lightning —
the weapons which guarantee Zeus his glory.
The history of the world is then continued by the scenes on the cloak
Jason wears to Hypsipyle's palace on Lemnos (1.730-67) which
'begin' with the Kyklopes fashioning Zeus's weapons; as the song
tells of philia and neikos, in language which is clearly intended to
suggest the doctrines of Empedocles, so on the cloak scenes of philia
and neikos are combined and juxtaposed.41 This thematic insistence
points to an association between the Argonauts' voyage and the
history of the world.42
The separation of earth, heaven and the sea of which Orpheus
sings would be familiar in many ancient cultures other than the
Greek.43 In particular, it would sit easily in an Egyptian context, in
which 'separation' of all kinds is a central notion; heaven and earth
are separated as Horus and Seth, the latter being identified with the
monstrous Typhon of Greek mythology. Plutarch indeed, in associ-
ating Seth with what is 'imperious and violent' (TO KorraSuvaoTsOov
Kcci KaTapia£6|jevov), connects Greek dualities, such as that of Em-
pedocles, with Egyptian ideas.44 We cannot be certain whether or
not the Egyptian ideas are relevant here, but it is clear that there is
a danger that the very familiarity of this cosmogonical material
within a purely Greek context may blind us to what it may have
suggested within the new Ptolemaic situation.
As the history of the world moves towards the establishment of
Zeus and his justice - a justice seen in the fourth book both in its
sternness after the murder of Apsyrtus and in its 'humanity' through
the ruling of Alcinous — so the voyage moves towards its apparently
successful conclusion on the Greek mainland; we are, however, well

41
Cf. above p. 54. IUTTSSOV ociev in 1.489 may, as David Sider points out, be an echo of
Empedocles' punning on his own name, cf. frr. 17.11 ( = 26.10), 77.1 DK. For other
allusions to Empedocles in Arg. cf. Livrea on 4.672, Campbell 1983.129.
42
Cf. Detienne-Vernant 1978.149, an interesting discussion marred only by the assumption
that for Apollonius the Argo was the first ship (cf. my note on 3.340-6).
43
For the Greek traditions reflected in the song cf. Vian, Note complementaire ad loc, RE Suppl.
9.1469-71, Dickie 1990.278-9.
44
De Is. 48-9 = Mor. 370c-ic.
 164 The Argonautica and its Ptolemaic context

aware that no final telos has been reached.45 The voyage stages a
partial, constantly interrupted, movement towards 'order'. In the
Alexandrian aesthetic of this poem, we should not expect to find
a consistent, steady progression; rather, we must trace a thread
through the epic which is sometimes visible, but more often con-
cealed. A central structuring of the work does, however, guide both
our voyage and that of the Argonauts. It has long been recognised
that the journey out and the journey back are set off against each
other; the poet takes constant pains with the correspondences and
tensions between the two.46 The return journey not only operates at
a level of fantasy quite beyond the outward trip, as it rewrites the
central books of the Odyssey, but it also explicitly retraces the jour-
ney of an Egyptian civiliser, Sesostris, the legendary forerunner of
Alexander and the Ptolemies themselves, a journey that took place
not only before Greek culture, but before the universe reached its
finished state (4.261-6); 47 the outward voyage, on the other hand, is
guided by the dry, quintessentially 'Greek' ethnography of Phineus.
This contrast replays, in a different mode, a progression similar to
that of which Orpheus sings. These ideas are also explored in a series
of scenes which, as we have come to expect in the Argonautica, reuse
a group of motifs in a variety of registers to create widely differing
effects.
The first such scene is that of the 'animals' which accompany their
mistress Circe as she goes down to the sea to cleanse herself after the
ill-omened dream which precedes the Argonaut's arrival:
Her beasts — which were not uniformly likeflesh-devouringbeasts, nor like
men, but were a jumble of different limbs - all came with her, like a large
flock of sheep which follow the shepherd out of the stalls. Like these were
the creatures which in earlier times the earth itself had created out of the
mud, pieced together from a jumble of limbs, before it had been properly
solidified by the thirsty air or the rays of the parching sun had eliminated
sufficient moisture. Time then sorted these out by grouping them into
proper categories. Similarly unidentifiable were the forms which followed
after Circe and caused the heroes amazed astonishment. (4.672-82)
Whereas in Homer Circe's animals were tame wolves and lions,
which were assumed already in antiquity to be men who had been
45
Cf. above p. 120.
46
For a useful overview cf. Hutchinson 1988.121-41, Williams 1991.273-94.
47
On the similarities between Argos' speech and the agon between Hellas and Egypt in the
opening of Plato's Timaeus cf. Hunter 1991^97-8.
 Creating a new order 165
metamorphosed by her magic powers, here she is accompanied by
strange 'mixtures', which resemble the weird, primeval monstrosities
posited by Empedocles, the same philosopher to whom Apollonius'
Orpheus is indebted. 48 Here the poet has taken our constant sense of
witnessing events 'before Homer' almost to its logical conclusion.
Just as the journey of their Egyptian model took place before the
cosmos was fully fashioned (4.26iff.), so the murder of Apsyrtus
forces the Argonauts to confront the very beginning of time, as
expressed in the extraordinary conceptions of an archaic wise-man.
It is important, however, that the poet's commentary on the amaz-
ing sight which greets the Argonauts 49 tells us that Circe's creatures
were 'like' Empedocles' primeval creations, and it is stated explicitly
that the Apollonian Circe regularly did bewitch her visitors (4.666-
7). It is left tantalisingly unclear whether in fact the 'mixed' crea-
tures were once men, but if so we can see how this Circe outdoes her
Homeric self by changing men not to beasts but to the primeval
ancestors of beasts.50 There is, on one hand, an important literary
pattern here. The murder of Apsyrtus, a murder carried out by
deceit and with the aid of bewitching drugs (4.442), 51 culminated in
the rites ofmaschalismos, in which the victim's extremities were cut off,
and blood-tasting (4.477-9); 52 the meeting with Circe then hints at
an outcome in which this murder is avenged by the victim's aunt,
who uses deceit (cf. 4.687) and bewitching drugs to turn Jason and
Medea into a sub-human jumble of limbs. 53 Zeus, however, had
other plans.
At another level, this episode, like so many in the poem, enacts
that fracturing of time which is so central to Apollonius' poetic
project. Not only are the animals merely 'like' primeval creatures,
but the self-conscious concern with variation from the Homeric Circe,
who was 'really' later in time, and with a family drama conducted
in a language other than Greek (4.731), creates a strong sense of both
the distant past and the 'learned' present, or rather of the former as
48
Cf. Frankel 1968.521-4, Livrea o n 4.672, V i a n , Note complementaire to 4.681. F o r the
H o m e r i c elements in this scene cf. K n i g h t 1990.108-19.
49
Verses 672-5 are presumably 'focalised' by the Argonauts.
50
Frankel 1968.524 notes h o w Circe's cruel magic reduces m e n to t h e same absurdities as
random chance produced in the beginning.
51
Cf. above pp. 144-5.
52
For the evidence on these rites cf. Livrea on 4.478 and Vian, Note complimentaire to 4.477 and
to 478.
53
The parallelism of'blood for blood' is made explicit at 4.668-9.
 166 The Argonautica and its Ptolemaic context
a product of the latter. The 'creation of history5 is indeed a prime
concern of Ptolemaic poetry, as it must have been of the Ptolemies
themselves.
In the final section of the poem, visions from and of the past come
thick and fast. After leaving Africa, the Argonauts are first nearly
prevented from stopping on Crete by Talos, the survivor of Hesiod's
violent Bronze Age, which preceded the age of heroes and of the
Argonauts themselves;54 Talos is destroyed by the powers of Medea's
malevolent eyes, in a scene which, not unlike that of Circe, mixes rich
poetic fantasy with pre-Socratic science55 in a deliberate shattering
of time-frames. What was accomplished in the former scene by the
highly literary reworking of a Homeric model, namely a strong sense
of the past as a creative invention of the present, is here reflected in
a direct authorial intrusion which brings the scene out of the past
into the present:56
ZEU TT&TEp, fj u e y a 8r| uoi evi <|)pE<ji 66cu(3os driTai,
EI 5f| [ir\ vouaoicri T\Jirr\i(ji TE UOUVOV
& V T I & E I , KOU 6 f ) T I S OCTTOTTpoOEV OC|JI|JIE

cos o y £ , X^AKEIOS TTEp ECOV, UTTOEI^E

TroAu<))ap|idKou.

Father Zeus, my mind is all aflutter with amazement, if it is true that

death comes to us not only from disease and wounds, but someone far
off can harm us, as that man, bronze though he was, yielded to
destruction through the grim power of Medea, mistress of drugs.
(4.1673-7)
By writing this clash of Titan magic with the last remnant of the
Bronze Age as a kind of inversion of a Homeric duel — it very
deliberately takes place outside throwing distance and closes with an
'Iliadic' simile in which Talos crashes to the ground like a great
fir-tree - 5 7 Apollonius again uses the technique of what may be
54
Cf. above pp. 127-8.
55
Cf. Dickie 1990 citing Democritus fr. 123 DK. Dickie argues that 'Apollonius has integrated
his borrowings from Democritus fully into his account'; maybe, but 'integration' is not
necessarily a desirable goal in the Apollonian aesthetic. For another such case (the tears of
the Heliades) cf. Dufner 1988.231-2.
56
For the technique in general cf. above p. 105. In the present example, the obvious view that
a mannered expression of amazement actually reveals disbelief is too simple.
57
Medea's opening words 'I believe that by myself I can destroy that man . . . ' also suggest
the Homeric tradition of single combat. There is, of course, also inversion of the Homeric
Cyclops who throws massive boulders in an attempt to prevent his visitors from leaving,
rather than from ever arriving. Like Polyphemus, it is through his eyes that Talos is
attacked.
 Creating a new order 167
called 'literary anachronism' in order to create effects of time dis-
junction, which strongly suggest that, though the events narrated
may have 'happened' long ago, the poet's concerns are very much of
the present.
The second primal terror which confronts the Argonauts - imme-
diately after they have left Crete - is the black chaos which envelops
them and from which they are saved by Apollo in response to Jason's
urgent prayers. The gleam from Apollo's bow reveals to their eyes a
tiny island, which they call Anaphe ('The Revealed') and where
they found a cult of Apollo Aigletes ('the Gleamer'). Chaos is familiar
from Hesiod (Theog. 116) as the 'nothingness' which preceded the
various stages of creation, and it is significantly juxtaposed by Hesiod
to the joy that Apollo brings on Olympus. As with Talos on Crete,
the Argonauts can here only claim one of the traditional sites asso-
ciated with them after overcoming an earlier level of the cosmic
order.58 Thus, whereas the final stages of the outward journey to
Colchis were marked by ethnographies which moved gradually
away from the Greek pattern, the Argonauts' final approach to the
Greek mainland becomes a series of cosmic progressions towards the
'present' — and indeed the future, promised to them by the continu-
ing renown of the epic (4.1773-4). This closing section of the poem
thus forms a ring with the song Orpheus sang before they set out, and
confirms our impression of the expedition as a 'voyage through time';
it is the very literariness of the epic, its dependence upon our know-
ing co-operation, that establishes the 'present', not as a generation
or so before the action of the Iliad, but as third-century Alexandria.
The final scene in this series is Euphemos' prophetic dream about
the clod of earth which he received from Triton in North Africa:
After they had untied their ropes from that island also, blessed with fair
weather, Euphemos then remembered a dream he had had in the night, as
he paid honour to the glorious son of Maia. He dreamed that the divine
clod was in his arms at his breast and was nourished by white drops of milk,
and from the clod, small though it was, came a woman looking like a young
virgin. Overcome by irresistible desire he made love to her, but lamented
as though he had bedded his own daughter whom he had nursed with his
own milk. She, however, consoled him with gentle words:
'I am of the race of Triton, I, my friend, am your children's nurse, not
your daughter, for my parents are Triton and Libya. Entrust me to the
maiden daughters of Nereus so that I may dwell in the sea near Anaphe.
58
On Apollonius' chaos cf. Detienne-Vernant 1978.154-7, Livrea 1987.189-90.
 168 The Argonautica and its Ptolemaic context
Later I shall go towards the sun's rays, when I am ready for your descen-
dants.' (4.1731 -45)
Jason correctly interprets this dream as an instruction to cast the clod
into the sea; from it arises an island, Kalliste ('the most beautiful'),
which subsequently became Thera from where (though we are not
explicitly told this) Cyrene was settled.59 The possible Ptolemaic
relevance of such a myth has already been noted, but here I wish to
call attention to it as the culmination of the 'cosmogonical' series
under discussion. Whereas the conquest of Talos apparently re-
moved the last vestiges of violent brutalism, and rescue from the chaos
proved the gracious power of Apollo, as representative of the 'new'
Olympian order, so the story of the clod projects the Argonauts
themselves into the future through their descendants, while placing
them at the mythic scene of the creation of the Aegean islands.
Euphemos' dream shows clearly that philia has replaced neikos as the
creative impulse (cf. 4.1737 ev <piA6TnTi, 1741 GO <piAe).
In considering the hymnic coda to the poem, I have already noted
that the 'heroic' status of the Argonauts and the annual repetition in
song of their deeds are central to an understanding of that passage.60
The achievement of that status is indissolubly linked both to Jason's
progress (and that of the young heroes as a group) from young man
to adult warrior, and to the material development of Greek culture
as told in the aitia and foundation legends with which the poem
abounds. Both these strands in the poem and the cosmogonic ele-
ments I have traced represent various sorts of change, and indeed
progress, towards a positively evaluated Greek culture. The argu-
ment of this section has been that these developments would assume
particular significance in the context of the Ptolemies' self-projection
as the heirs and transmitters of traditional Greek culture in a changed
world. This is not, of course, to say that the Argonautica is part of any
'organisation of opinion' by the Ptolemies. No reading of this epic as
'simple panegyric' is possible, and not only because of its mythic
subject-matter. Jason is far too problematic a figure, the 'aesthetics
of fracture' too all-pervasive, and the story of the last two books too
troubled and troubling to allow a simple representation of any kind
59
Cf. above Chap. 6 n. 7. The various motifs of the dream are all readily identifiable in
the surviving oneirocritical literature; cf. esp. Artemidorus 1.16 (man with lactating
breasts signifying children), 1.78 (sleeping with a daughter). For the cosmogonic aspect of
Apollonius' narrative cf. also Calame 1990.321.
60
Cf. above pp. 128-9.
 Creating a new order 169
of values, Hellenic, Ptolemaic, or whatever. There is nothing like
Virgil's Jupiter with his cosmic plan for the greatness of a chosen
people; nor should we expect this. On the other hand, I hope that it
is now clear that a reading which encompasses a form of'panegyric'
is not only possible, but perhaps inevitable. Such a reading will, of
course, always be a partial one, and may therefore be deemed un-
satisfactory. Nevertheless, one reader at least has understood that the
Argonautica is not simply a private scholarly exercise, quite remote
from the social and political setting in which it was created. That
reader was Virgil.
 CHAPTER 7

Argonautica and Aeneid

The study of how the Argonautica is exploited in the Aeneid has a long,
and occasionally distinguished, history. 1 That it has not advanced
further than it has is due to a number of factors, most notably the
relative paucity of serious literary critical work on Apollonius' epic;
until we have learned to appreciate the Argonautica, we can hardly
expect to understand how Virgil read it and used it. Moreover, too
much of what has been written on this subject - particularly by
critics whose primary interest is in the Aeneid - betrays a depressing
unwillingness to take the Greek poem seriously, indeed often to read
all of it, as Virgil manifestly did, 2 with care and attention, let alone
with the same critical awareness that is taken for granted in the
reading of Virgil. Until very recently, the working assumption of
1
Riitten 1912 is a much criticised (cf. P. Jahn, BPhW 34 (1914) 171-3; Hiigi 1952.14-15),
but very suggestive collection of material; it is certainly more interesting than Conrardy 1904
which is safer and less adventurous. Riitten's brand of Quellenforschung is now unfashionable,
but such work was an inevitable and necessary first step; the fact that he was unable or
unwilling to separate the gold from the dross does not diminish the value of the gold. Hiigi
1952 now properly holds the field, but it is due for replacement; much of what is generally
agreed is usefully summarised by Briggs 1981. A breakthrough was promised by the title of
W. Clausen's Virgil's Aeneid and the Tradition of Hellenistic Poetry (Berkeley/Los Angeles 1987),
but no overall view of Virgil's strategy emerges beyond the individual detail, cf. P. Hardie,
CP 84 (1989) 3 5 4 - 8 . F. Mehmel, Virgil und Apollonios Rhodios, Untersuchungen iiber die £eitvor-
stellung in der antiken epischen Erzdhlung (Hamburg 1940) is a specialised monograph on one
aspect of epic technique. Of smaller-scale work, J. D. M. Preshous, 'Apollonius Rhodius and
Virgil', PVS 4 (1965) 1 -17, contains a number of perceptive observations, particularly about
Aen. 4, and is only marred because Preshous felt compelled to enter the pointless debate
about the relative merits of the two poets; Feeney 1986 is an excellent example of a detailed
study of one theme. The entry 'Apollonio Rodio' in the Enciclopedia Virgiliana (1 224-6) is
desperately inadequate. Comprehensive treatments of this subject by Damien Nelis and
Charles Beye are awaited. Through the kindness of Dr Nelis, I was able to see a copy of Nelis
1988, but only after the completion of my own work; where possible, I have added references
to this dissertation.
2
Presumably both in Greek and in the Latin version of Varro Atacinus; the evidence does
not, I think, allow us to go beyond 'presumably', cf. Riitten 1912. 12-15. It is an easy guess
that, had Varro's poem survived, we would find passages where Virgil has 'conflated' an
echo of Varro's version of Apollonius with one of his own.

170
 Argonautica and Aeneid 171
much criticism, whether openly admitted or not, was the great supe-
riority of Virgil as an epic poet, and the purpose of that criticism was
to demonstrate the assumption; most surprising of all, this remained
largely true even where it was acknowledged that we are dealing
with two radically different poetic projects requiring very different
approaches.3 A belief in the superiority of one or the other poet, if
based on close study, is harmless enough, and indeed appears to
answer a 'natural' desire to create hierarchies of merit; if used,
however, to block off interpretation such a belief (or assumption)
becomes a form of pernicious philistinism.
Even one of the major preliminary tasks, the collection of material,
remains uncompleted; in 1952 Hiigi felt able to assert that 'it is by
and large clear where Virgil imitated Apollonius',4 but this was
certainly premature. It is true that 'the profundities of poetic influ-
ence cannot be reduced to source-study, to the history of ideas, to the
patterning of images',5 but these are necessary stages of criticism,
particularly when we are concerned in general with a poetic and
rhetorical culture which placed heavy emphasis on creative mime-
sis jimitatio of one's predecessors,6 and, in particular, with two poems
in which allusion is so obviously an important constructor of mean-
ing; both epics have a clear 'historical self-consciousness'7 expressed
through allusion. The study of Virgil's use of Homer has been well
served in this century;8 Apollonius and Virgil present different prob-
lems, requiring different solutions, because of the varying weight
Virgil attached to his two Greek forerunners. Homer has an un-
challenged importance for Virgil, carrying in the Aeneid, to quote
Thomas Greene, 'the special status of that root the work privileges
3
The extremely influential discussion of Otis 1964, particularly 62ff., almost falls into this
category. Otis realised that Apollonius was not trying to be monolithically 'Homeric', and
he has many good things to say about discontinuities in the narrative; his analysis is spoiled,
however, because an ideefixeabout Apollonius' interests and methods led him to almost
incredibly banal interpretations (p. 89 on similes and ekphraseis in Arg. is a good example).
4
Hiigi 1952.3.
5
Bloom 1973.7. Bloom's powerful and attractive reading of'the anxiety of influence' has had
a mixed reception in classical studies. It is, I believe, broadly helpful for understanding
Alexandrian poetry, provided that it is remembered that Bloom is resolutely modern in his
interests and sees this particular 'anxiety' as a specifically modern phenomenon (1973.8,11),
while of course acknowledging the still potent 'paternity' of Homer for all western literature
(cf. A Map of Misreading (Oxford 1975) 33-5).
6
For helpful surveys cf. D. A. Russell, 'De imitatione', in D. A. West and T. Woodman
(eds.), Creative Imitation and Latin Literature (Cambridge 1979) 1-16, Greene 1982.54-80.
7
For this phrase cf. Greene 1982.17.
8
Landmarks are, of course, Heinze 1915 and Knauer 1964. The work of Gian Biagio Gonte
has been important in forcing classicists to address the theoretical issues.
 172 Argonautica and Aeneid
by its self-constructed myth of origins'. 9 Hiigi rightly followed a
traditional path of scholarship in distinguishing between Virgilian
aemulatio of Homer, which he saw as the Roman poet's principal
artistic motivation, and the constant reflection of Apollonian motifs
and passages throughout the Aeneid, which amounted not so much to
aemulatio as to a way of writing which was thoroughly 'Hellenistic'
and 'neoteric'. Such a distinction must, however, be placed in the
context of how each of the later poets uses Homer; it will emerge that
Virgil uses the Argonautica in a more systematic way than Hiigi's
analysis may suggest.
Apollonius and Virgil share many techniques of Homeric mime-
sis,10 although it is misleading to assert that 'Vergil imitates Homer
... as a Hellenistic poet would, as Apollonius did.' 11 It is misleading
in part because of the fundamental difference in the poetic project of
the two poets. The Aeneid displays a staggering stylistic and tonal
unity which is quite un-Alexandrian in its effect; this is not, of course,
to say that the Roman epic is monolithic in either style or subject,
but the contrast with, say, the stylistic uariatio of Ovid's Metamorphoses
will strike any reader. This overt imposition by the poet of an all-
encompassing vision and control, a feature which the Aeneid shares
with the Homeric poems and which indeed is part of Virgil's recrea-
tion of Homer, has been an important element in modern notions of
what constitutes epic, and its absence from the Argonautica is not the
least cause of the poor critical reception of that poem. The Argonautica
is a constantly experimental text, which rejoices in its stylistic and
material unevennesses. Whereas the opening of Virgil's poem an-
nounces a 'Roman Homer', the opening of the Argonautica announces
that 'this is not Homer', 12 and it is clear that Virgil understood this
and used it for his own purposes.
Apollonius' use of Homer, Virgil's use of Apollonius, and Virgil's
use of Homer are inter-related studies. While the Argonautica is a
voyage through the Homeric texts,13 Virgil voyages past and beyond
both Greek epics. Whereas Apollonius had paradoxically shown us
a world constructed from Homer but crucially 'before Homer', Virgil
9
Greene 1982.19. Cf. also G. B. Conte, Virgilio. II genere e i suoi confini (Milan 1984) 150-3.
10
Helpful summary of such techniques in the fifth chapter of Knauer 1964.
11
Clausen 1987. p. x. For an excellent appreciation of what is un-Alexandrian in Virgil's
reworking of Homer cf. A. Barchiesi, La traccia del modello (Pisa 1984); more briefly,
Hutchinson 1988.328-9.
12
Cf. above p. 119.
13
Cf. above pp. 119-29.
 Aeneid 3 and the 'idea? of the Argonautica 173
presents a world already visited and marked by both Homer and
Apollonius, and he structures an opposition between his two prede-
cessors which bears a heavy weight of meaning. Nowhere is this prior
marking of the world clearer than in Aeneas' account in Aeneid 3 of
the Trojans'journey from Troy to Carthage, and a brief look at this
narrative sequence will illustrate one way in which Virgil uses the
opposition of allusion which he creates.

(i) AENEID 3 AND THE 'iDEA' OF THE ARGONAUTICA

It is broadly true that in the first half of Aeneid 3 rewriting of the

Argonautica is particularly prominent, whereas 'Homer' dominates
the second half. The strange encounter with the corpse of Polydorus
with which the book opens reworks quite closely elements of the
account in Arg. 3 of how Medea gathers sap from the root of the
Trometheion' plant (3.846-66). 14 I shall return shortly to the im-
portance of the fact that it is to Apollonius whom Virgil turns for the
mysterious, the magical, the 'gruesome', but we may note here how
what brings safety in the Argonautica (Medea's potion) is rejected
in the Aeneid: the new Troy is not to be founded in the style or
the aesthetics of the Hellenistic epic - from such a vision Aeneas
and his men must flee (3.44).15 A rather similar conclusion may be
drawn from Anchises' misinterpretation of Apollo's instruction to the
Trojans to 'seek [their] ancient mother' (3.96). Anchises' speech, in
which he interprets this advice to mean that they should make for
Crete, draws upon Argos' narrative to the Argonauts of the 'different
route' by which to return to Greece (4.256-93). 16 The Argonauts'
route has divine approval (4.294-7), but the Trojans travel on
the basis of an erroneous reading of the divine voice. Here the
Apollonian model is a false trail which defers the telos of the voyage,
but a false trail which is finally ended by another Apollonian motif.
14
Note especially Aen. 3.26-33 ~ Arg. 3.856-8 ('dark gore' as the roots are cut), Aen. 3.39-40
~ Arg. 3.865-6 (the groans of the victim). Virgil's version exploits Apollonius' comparison
of the root to 'new-cut flesh' (3.875, cf. my note ad loc). An important effect of Virgil's
scene is the contrast between Aeneas' horror and Medea's control of such appalling drugs,
cf. above pp. 59-60.
15
The echo of v. 44 in Achaemenides' words at the end of the book (3.639) points to another
rejected 'culture'. Just as Odysseus' wanderings confront him with a succession of societies
which define by contrast the ideal, settled society of Ithaca, so Aeneid 3 presents a series of
potential 'Romes', none of which is to be fulfilled; Carthage is, of course, the most important
such site.
16
I have discussed this in detail in Hunter 1991b.94-9.
 174 Argonautica and Aeneid
Stranded in parched and plague-ridden Crete, like the Argonauts in
burning Libya,17 Aeneas and his men are saved by the nocturnal
appearance of the Penates to Aeneas, just as the 'heroines' appear to
Jason in the mid-day heat.18 The replacement of Apollonius' local
divinities by effigies sacrae diuum Phrygiiquepenates, with all the nationa-
list religious resonance they carry and which echoes through the
whole poem, is a good illustration of Virgil's different conception of
the 'unity' of epic. Apollonius rather looks to variety and fracture.
After leaving Crete the Trojans are overtaken by a storm (which
owes much to the black chaos at the end of Arg. 4), and then encoun-
ter the Harpies on the islands of the Strophades. Here the Apollonian
texture is very obvious and has long been acknowledged;19 so too the
prophecy and advice of Helenus explicitly replays the advice of
Phineus to the Argonauts, as well, of course, as its obvious debt
to Phineus' model, the Homeric Circe.20 As the voyage continues,
motifs and echoes of Apollonius' poem constantly remind us that this
is a voyage past and away from an Argonautic landscape,21 and a
voyage which will nearly come to a disastrous and premature conclu-
sion at the court of Dido, a character who is Virgil's most famous
rewriting of Apollonius.
Aeneid 3 thus shows how the Argonautica is important for Virgil, not
merely as a source of motifs and as a major Hellenistic text to be
echoed as part of the usual process of exploiting and acknowledging
one's literary heritage, but also as an 'idea' which represents much
more than the import of any particular borrowed passage. In cre-
ating his own poetic space, Virgil was both interrupting and going
beyond the interplay which Apollonius had set up between his epic
and those of Homer. When Virgil came to create something entirely
new, the Argonautica was there, as was Catullus 64, as a challenge
to Homer, as a text that could be set up as 'other', and used to
17
Virgil seems to have in mind particularly the simile of Arg. 4.1280-9 ('... like men waiting
to be finished off by plague . . . ' ) ; aegra trahebant \ corpora (3.140-1) may reflect f|Auov
6pTru£ovTes of the Argonauts at 4.1289.
18
Cf. above p. 126.
19
Cf. Briggs 1981. 973-4 for bibliography.
20
Like Phineus, Helenus is careful only to reveal what the Trojans may know (3.379-80), and
his urgent warnings to Aeneas to supplicate Juno (3.433-40) replay Phineus' advice con-
cerning Kypris (Arg. 2.423-4).
21
Note that in avoiding Ithaca (3.272-3) the Trojans not only avoid 'the old enemy', but
also mark their difference from the Argonauts; Ithaca is not mentioned in the Argonautica,
close though it is, because in a literary sense it does not 'exist' before Homer made it
famous. So too Aeneas races past Phaeacia (3.291), the scene of a lengthy section of
Arg. 4.
 Circe, Medea, Dido 175
evoke areas of poetic experimentation and emotion that the Homeric
poems (and the heroic 'idea' that 'Homer' embodied) 22 either
blocked off or could be represented as having done so. Allusion to a
specific passage of the Argonautica may thus also direct us more gener-
ally, to a different, un-Homeric, aesthetic. It is also worth noting that
the obvious importance of the Argonautica for Catullus 64 and the fact
that it was translated by the neoteric Varro of Atax suggest that
Virgil took over and developed a view of Apollonius' epic which was
already current in Roman poetic practice.
This way of using the Argonautica is not, of course, limited to Aeneid
3, but an attempt at an exhaustive treatment is not my intention
here. In the next section I shall explore how Virgil uses this poetic
technique across a large body of text and in connection with some of
his most central concerns. One further small-scale example may,
however, clarify the issue. In Aeneid 9 the Trojan ships escape, when
threatened with fire, by diving into the depths 'like dolphins' to
re-emerge as sea-nymphs, for so had Jupiter agreed with the Great
Mother at the time the trees were felled to make the fleet (Aen.
9.77-122); in Book 10 the metamorphosed ships reappear to warn
Aeneas of the danger (10.215-59). It is well understood that these
passages make important use of both the Argonautica and Catullus
64,23 but Virgil's overall strategy deserves comment in the present
context. The striking uniqueness of this fantastic event within the
narrative of the Aeneid clearly creates a contrast between the easy
saving of the ships and the grim realities of war which loom before
the human participants. 24 This miraculous 'other' which obeys
different laws is portrayed through extensive reminiscence of the
Argonautica; Apollonius is here used again to signal the operation of a
quite different, almost un-epic, aesthetic.

(H) CIRCE, MEDEA, DIDO

It is, of course, a great simplification to suggest, as I have, that
Virgil uses Homer and Apollonius as two opposed 'ideas' or ends of
22
It will, I hope, be obvious that my present concern is not with an interpretation of the
Homeric poems, but with 'Homer' and 'Apollonius' as meaningful ideas which Virgil could
play off against each other.
23
Cf. Hiigi 1952.67-9; P. Hardie, 'Ships and ship-names in the Aeneid\ in M. Whitby, P.
Hardie and M. Whitby (eds.), Homo Viator. Classical Essays for John Bramble (Bristol 1987)
163-71; Nelis 1988.376-8; E. Fantham, 'Mymphas ... e nauibus esse: decorum and poetic
fiction in Aeneid 9.77-122 and 10.215-59', CP85 (1990) 102-19.
24
Cf. R. D. Williams in Harrison 1990.35.
 176 Argonautica and Aeneid
an epic spectrum. Virgil, of all poets, does not operate with un-
problematic dichotomies or simple moral absolutes. In section (iii)
of this chapter I will consider a case where Virgil has in fact 'read'
the Argonautica as foreshadowing some of his own central concerns,
where, to put it crudely, the Argonautica is treated as more 'same'
than 'other'. On the other hand, the oppositional framework which
I have described may be helpful in considering briefly the most
notorious case of a close textual relation between the two poems. The
details of the rewriting of Medea in Dido are generally familiar
enough to allow discussion to remain at the level of overall poetic
strategy;25 I begin with a famous passage which is in many ways
emblematic of the kinds of literary relations with which I am
concerned.
At the end of Aeneid 1 the bard Iopas entertains Dido and her
guests with a cosmological song:
turn Bitiae dedit increpitans; ille impiger hausit
spumantem pateram et pleno se proluit auro;
post alii proceres. cithara crinitus Iopas
personat aurata, docuit quem maximus Atlas.
hie canit errantem lunam solisque labores,
unde hominum genus et pecudes, unde imber et ignes,
Arcturum pluuiasque Hyadas geminosque Triones,
quid tantum Oceano properent se tingere soles
hiberni, uel quae tardis mora noctibus obstet;
ingeminant plausu Tyrii, Troesque sequuntur.
nee non et uario noctem sermone trahebat
infelix Dido longumque bibebat amorem,
multa super Priamo rogitans, super Hectore multa . . .
(Aen. 1.738-50)
Virgil has here replaced Demodocus' song of Ares and Aphrodite
in Odyssey 8 with a song which, while nodding to rationalising inter-
pretations of Demodocus' song, draws its main poetic inspiration
from Lucretius and from the song of the Apollonian Orpheus which
calms the quarrel between Idmon and Idas. 26 The Argonautic song
25
For the details cf., e.g., Pease's notes on Aen. 4passim, Hiigi 1952.79ff., Briggs 1981.959-69.
On the 'Romanisation' of Dido see especially Monti 1981.
26
For the song cf. above pp. 162-3. There is a large bibliography on Iopas' song: see esp. C.
Segal, 'The song of Iopas in the AeneicT, Hermes 99 (1971) 336-49; Hardie 1986.52-66;
Brown 1990. The debt to the song of Silenus in Eclogue 6 and to Virgil's own poetic prayer
at Georg. 2.475-82 means that in one sense Dido and Aeneas are entertained by Virgil
himself, an amusing idea that owes not a little to the special place of Orpheus in the
Argonautica, and to ancient identifications of Demodocus as Homer.
 Circe, Medea, Dido 177
is a prelude to the journey, the song of Iopas (like the songs of
Demodocus) to the narration of a journey just past. 27 Orpheus' song
is closely tied to its context: the Empedoclean neikos theme clearly
refers to the dispute between Idmon and Idas which has just oc-
curred, and in telling of the origins of the present Olympian order
Orpheus foreshadows the inevitable retribution which one day will
fall upon the blasphemous Idas. 28 Iopas' song, on the other hand,
framed and set off by the two contrasted references to drinking (vv.
738-9, 749), seems remote from the poetic concerns around it, but
the very clear allusion to Idas (cf. Arg. 1.472-4) in the account of
Bitias' greedy drinking suggests that the Apollonian context is im-
portant in the Aeneid also. In Virgil's narrative, rather than Iopas'
song, Dido is falling in love, but it is a love which will lead to
'deadly strife' both between Dido and Aeneas and eventually be-
tween Carthage and Rome. The memory of Orpheus' song reinforces
the pathos oiinfelix (v. 749) in foreshadowing the 'separation' which
lies ahead; in as much as Dido and Aeneas represent two worlds, this
is in one sense truly a cosmic separation, which one day will lead to
the creation of the new Roman order. The book that began with a
'Homeric' proem closes with an 'Argonautic' epilogue, thus marking
out the ground over which Virgil's epic will be written. The struc-
tural framework which I have sketched makes it clear why it is with
Dido's court - the site of danger which imperils the whole Roman
undertaking - that the 'Argonautic' elements are primarily asso-
ciated. Before pursuing these threads in Book 4 I wish to pick them
up in the opening of Book 7, as Aeneas arrives in Latium, in order
to show how this creative reuse of the Argonautica is by no means
confined to one particular area of the poem.
Aeneas' arrival in Latium reworks and varies his earlier arrival at
Carthage, 29 and with it the primary Greek models of that arrival —
not only Odysseus' arrivals at the court of Alcinous and then Ithaca 30
but also the close of Book 2 of the Argonautica, in which the crew
arrives at the Phasis, and the invocation to Erato which opens Book
3. Subsequent events of Aeneid 7 indeed follow quite closely the
27
On the cosmic theme as appropriate to epic travelling cf.D. M. Gaunt, 'The creation-theme
in epic poetry', Comp. Lit. 29 (1977) 213-20.
28
Kepocuvcoi i n 1.510 is p a r t i c u l a r l y m e n a c i n g , cf. T h e o c r . 22.211 OCUTOV 6e 4>Xoyecoi owe(f>Xefe
[sc. 6 Zeus] Kepocuvcoi. Cf. f u r t h e r a b o v e p p . 1 6 2 - 3 .
29
Cf., e.g., Knauer 1964.229-31; Fordyce on 7.1946°.; W. Gorier, 'Aeneas' Ankunft in
Latium', WJA 2 (1976) 165-79.
30
Cf, e.g., Knauer 1964.227-8.
 178 Argonautica and Aeneid
scheme of the opening scenes of Arg. 3: 31 to Aietes and Medea corre-
spond Latinus and Lavinia; the ekphrasis of the temple-palace at
Aen. 7.170-91 corresponds to that of the fabulous palace of Aietes
(3.215-46);32 Latinus' speech of welcome and enquiry follows that
of Aietes at 3.304-16, and Ilioneus' reply has important features in
common with Argos' speech at 3.320-66. 33 The Apollonian texture
hereabouts is very thick, and it will be worth considering in rather
more detail one character shared by all three epic poets, namely
Medea's aunt Circe.
In order to reach the Tiber, the Trojans sail safely past the domain
of Circe which Virgil, like Apollonius, places on the coast of Italy
between Rome and Naples. In sailing past Circe with Poseidon/
Neptune's help, Virgil is obviously bidding farewell to the world of
the Odyssey, in which Poseidon was anything but 'helpful', but it is a
particular vision of that world. This Circe is diues, 'rich' (7.11), an
epithet which points towards a special view of her. 34 The Homeric
'witch' was commonly allegorised in antiquity as the embodiment of
that irrational pursuit of pleasure which turns men into animals; in
particular, Circe was interpreted as the harlot after whom men
lusted, thus reducing themselves to the level of beasts. 35 In this
interpretation she represents luxury and riches (which men lose in
their senseless pursuit of gratification). Virgil points us towards this
view of her by the echo in vv. 15-16, hinc exaudiri gemitus iraeque leonum
I uincla recusantum, of the description of Tartarus at 6.557-8, hinc
31
Cf. Riitten 1912.78-9; Nelis 1988.305-32.
32
T h e 'realism' of the Virgilian description (cf. Fordyce ad loc.) is in significant contrast to
the luxurious fantasy of Aietes' palace.
33
Ilioneus' denial of a storm reverses both Argos' opening a n d his own speech to Dido at Aen.
1.535-8; note also 3.333-4 ~ Aen. 7.217, 3.363-4 ~ Aen. 7.219-20, 3.352-4 ~ Aen.
7-234-5-
34
diues is normally referred merely to the a p p a r e n t g r a n d e u r of Circe's lifestyle in t h e Odyssey,
cf. Od. 10.210—11, 2 5 2 - 3 , 348ff., 3 6 5 - 7 0 ; for O v i d ' s expansion of this motif cf. Met.
14.261-3 (and 2. iff. for the Palace of the Sun). Two other resonances in the epithet are
worth considering: (i) diues, suggesting Plouton, the Greek king of the Underworld. For the
chthonic associations of the Virgilian Circe see P. R. Hardie, 'Augustan poets and the
mutability of Rome', in A. Powell (ed.), Roman Poetry and Propaganda in the Age of Augustus
(London 1992) 59-82. (ii) Varro derives diues from diuus (LL 5.92, cf. TLLv 1.1587.33-6),
and both Circe and Calypso, whom Virgil conflates with Circe, are commonly called in
Homer 6Toc Oedcov.
35
Cf. Hor. Epist. 1.2.23-6; Kaiser 1964.200-13. For Circe and riches see esp. Palladas, AP
10.50. The significance of the moralising view of Circe to Aeneid 7 was seen by K. J.
Reckford, AJP82 (1961) 255. In the Circe-episode in Arg. the substitution of'Empedoclean
mixtures' (above pp. 164-5) prevents us from activating the moralising reading of Circe;
Apollonius thereby concentrates the moral force of the scene exclusively upon the ''sinful'
state of Circe's visitors.
 Circe, Medea, Dido 179
exaudiri gemitus et saeua sonare \ uerbera, turn stridorferri tractaeque catenae)
according to a view very widespread in ancient literature, 36 excessive
indulgence in the world above is punished in the afterlife, and in the
Virgilian Tartarus it is precisely the greedy and avaricious who form
the largest group (Aen. 6.610-11). This is the moral degradation
which pius ... Aeneas leaves behind as he heads for a Latium where
more primitive and respectable virtues and values are prominent.
It is, of course, Dido who is the 'Circe' in Aeneas' past,37 and the
picture of the weaving diues ... So Us jilia ... arguto tennis percurrens
pectine telas (Aen. 7.11-14) seems specifically to echo the description
of Aeneas as Mercury finds him in Carthage:
atque illi stellatus iaspide fulua
ensis erat Tyrioque ardebat murice laena
demissa ex umeris, diues quae munera Dido
fecerat, et tenui telas discreuerat auro.
(Aen. 4.261-4)

The 'moral message' of the Mercury scene as a whole seems partic-

ularly clear. The explicit reference to the god's role as psychopompos
(4.242-3) directs our attention to Hermes' only such appearance in
Homer, at the opening of Odyssey 24: Odysseus had returned, killed
the suitors and been reunited with his lawful wife; Aeneas, however,
has not reached the 'home' where a regia coniunx awaits him, but is
dallying in North Africa with his 'Circe/Calypso'. Mercury's descent
to earth (Aen. 4.246-58) reworks Eros' descent in Arg. 3;38 whereas
Eros flew down to make Medea fall in love, Mercury descends to
separate Aeneas from his 'Medea'.
diues . . . Dido (4.263) is one of many references to the wealth of
Tyre and Carthage, 39 and his splendid robe shows that Aeneas has
accommodated himself to that wealth. The literary ancestry of the
cloak is a rich one also: the 'double cloak of purple' in which the
Apollonian Jason visits Hypsipyle is the most immediate forerunner;40

36
See esp. PI. Gorgias 5 2 5 a , a n d L u c i a n ' s M e n i p p e a n writings.
37
For Circe and Dido cf. Knauer 1964.209-18; C. Segal, 'Circean temptations: Homer,
Vergil, Ovid', TAP A 99 (1968) 419-42, at 428-36.
38
Atlas in Virgil replaces the great eastern mountains of Arg. 3.161-3. For discussion of
Virgil's scene cf. J. H. W. Morwood, 'Aeneas and Mount Atlas', JRS 75 (1985) 51-9
(which, however, ignores the use of Apollonius).
39 Programmatically placed is 1.14, and note too Dido's final appearance in the poem,
11.72-5, echoing 4.261-4. For other passages cf. Pease on 4.75 (opes).
40
Cf. above pp. 52-3 for the Homeric model (Od. i9.22iff.). Servius on 4.262 notes that laena
est... proprie toga duplex.
 180 Argonautica and Aeneid
Jason's cloak was like the sun (1.725-6), Aeneas' 'burned bright'
(ardebat). Hypsipyle and Dido are both hindrances to the fulfilment
of heroic missions; Aeneas' cloak, demissa ex umeris*1 recalls not only
Jason's cloak as a whole, but also the depiction on it of Aphrodite
with Ares' shield, the clasp of her dress undone to reveal her breast.
Like this scene, Aeneas' current behaviour is both delaying the war,
the negotium (cf. 4.271), which lies ahead, and also 'adulterous' in
that, though Dido considers herself'married' to Aeneas, it threatens
to deny the regia coniunx who awaits in Italy. This paradox, pointed
by Mercury's use of uxorius (v.266), marks the inversion of what is
proper which Carthage represents, and it is echoes of the Argonautica
which characterise the twin dangers of amor and aurum, dangers
which Aeneas finally skirts as he sails up the Latin coast in the
opening of Book 7«42
The choice of Erato (7.37) as the Muse under whose aegis the poet
is to tell oihorrida bella, | . . . acies actosque animis infunera reges has always
posed a critical puzzle. This is the Muse whose name signifies eros and
under whose patronage Apollonius told the story of Medea (3.1-5).
Many modern interpretations are variants of the view found in
Servius that Erato stands for any Muse; we are thus not to think
particularly of her association with eros as the proposed match with
Lavinia has nothing to do with eros.*3 Such a view is, however, based
on too modern, perhaps too romantic, a conception of the spheres in
which eros operates; public and political marriages are also presided
over by this power. Any doubt that we are to think of the Virgilian
Erato as specifically 'erotic' ought to be removed by the description
of Lavinia as iam matura uiro, iam plenis nubilis annis (7.53). Rather, it
is the very contrast between the consuming and destructive loves of
Medea and Dido, here negatively evaluated, and the political bond
- positively evaluated - which Lavinia represents that is highlighted
41
Commentators are divided between 'hanging from the shoulders' and 'let down off the
shoulders'; choice between these does not affect the presence of the Apollonian echo.
42
Cf. the parallel curses of 3.56-7 and 4.412.
43
Cf, e.g., F. Klingner, Virgil: Bucolica Georgica Aeneis (Zurich 1967) 497; I. Mariotti, 'II
secondo proemio dell' Eneide', in Letterature comparate, problemi e metodo. Studi in onore di Ettore
Paratore (Bologna 1981) 1 459-66; R. F. Thomas, 'From recusatio to commitment: the
evolution of the Virgilian programme', Papers of the Liverpool Latin Seminar 5 (1985) 61-73,
at 64 n . n . For more complex views cf. K. J. Reckford, AJP 82 (1961) 256-7; M. C. J.
Putnam, AJP 91 (1970) 417-18; Nelis 1988.299-304. The proposed match (and mutual
feelings) between Lavinia and Turnus must also not be left out of account. The invocation
is set within the framework of normal Virgilian practice by G. B. Conte, 'Proems in the
middle', TCS 29 (1992) 147-59.
 Circe, Medea, Dido 181
by the echo of the opening of Argonautica 3. The juxtaposition of
Erato to a 'new Iliad' marks the Argonautica as a crucial text by which
the poet defines his difference. Just as the opening and closing of
Aeneid 1 mapped out an opposition between the two Greek epics
which Virgil will use to mark the significance of his own poem, so this
close juxtaposition at the start of the second half of the poem renews
that creative tension. To what extent the adoption of the Argonautica
and, specifically, of the many-layered relationship of Jason and
Medea must inevitably destabilise a 'new Iliad" is something to which
I shall return briefly at the end of the chapter.
In turning back now to the debt of Dido to Medea, we can see that
in the area of the definition and interaction of public and private the
Argonautica was a crucial text for Virgil. Already in the Odyssey,
Nausicaa had raised the possibility - in claiming to be horrified at it
- of her choice of husband being contrary to the wishes and perceived
interests of the people of Phaeacia (Od. 6.273-88); it is one of the
ironies of that text that Alcinous has no sooner seen Odysseus than he
desires him as a son-in-law (Od. 7.311-16). The Odyssey, therefore,
both lays the foundation for the later development of the motif
through Medea and Dido, and presents a situation where 'political'
interest and the personal desires of the princess match. Indeed, when
Nausicaa is unable openly to reveal to her father her true motives
in wanting to wash her clothes after Athena has planted 'erotic5
thoughts in her head, her father sees through her 'deceit' and grants
her her wish. In reworking the character and situation of Nausicaa
in his presentation of Medea, Apollonius stresses that she acts with-
out her parents' knowledge and consent, a consent which would
never be given, and against the interests and desires of the people.44
Medea's actions shatter the familial and 'political' solidarity evident
on Homer's Phaeacia. The marriage of Jason and Medea on Drepane
is, in one sense, a public matter celebrated with due ceremony,
but it is conducted at night in an atmosphere of secrecy and decep-
tion,45 in a scene which highlights the discrepancies between public
policy and private position. Moreover, the constant imminence of
Euripides' Medea, a play in which Medea is abandoned for prag-
matic 'reasons of state' and in which her revenge destroys the royal
family, reinforces this disastrous clash of'private' and 'public'.

44
Cf. my note on 3.1236-9.
45
Cf. above pp. 70-1, 145.
 182 Argonautica and Aeneid
Unlike Medea, Dido holds real power in a position of public
responsibility: Anna's arguments for giving in to amor are precisely
based upon the matter of public, political advantage (4.39-49) -
alliance with Aeneas will bring urbs and regnum, the very things that
her unsatisfied desire is in fact presently putting at risk (cf. 4.86-9).
The potential chasm which may be opened between a princess's
personal desires and the good of her father's people, a chasm hinted
at in the Odyssey and fully explored in the Argonautica, is here given a
new urgency as the 'princess' actually rules her people; it is this fact,
no less than the iron rule offatum, which turns the imminent 'trag-
edy' of Apollonius' Medea into the present 'tragedy' of Dido. 46 The
'marriage-scene', in the Argonautica a nuanced mixture of the public
and the private, the open and the covert,47 becomes in Aeneid 4 an
unwitnessed - except by the immortals - act in a storm-tossed cave
which one partner at least will be able to deny ever constituted a
formal marriage (Aen. 4.338-9). Whereas in the Argonautica the re-
port (|3a£is) spread by Hera on the morning after the wedding brings
the citizens of Drepane to admire and witness the marriage as a
public spectacle (4.1182-1200), in the Aeneid fama gossips of pariter
facta atque infecta (Aen. 4.190); covert malice is what is involved. Here
then Virgil has moved a further stage beyond Apollonius and used
the Argonautica as a kind of yardstick by which Dido's suffering, and
the dangers posed by her, may be measured. Having established an
association between the Alexandrian epic and the 'private', the 'non-
Homeric', he outdoes it on its own terms in depicting the catastrophe
that occurs when the 'private' and the 'public' become inextricably
tangled.

(iii) UNDERWORLDS

We have so far considered areas of the Aeneid in which Virgil uses the
Argonautica in representations of what is dangerous and 'other' to the

46
It has long been observed that the extensive debt of Arg. 3 to Attic tragedy (cf, e.g., H u n t e r
1989.18-19) must have been very influential in the shaping of Aen. 4 as a tragedy; the latter
theme has a large bibliography, cf, e.g., A. Konig, Die Aeneis und die griechische Tragodie:
Studien zur imitatio-Technik Vergils (diss. Berlin 1970), N. R u d d in Harrison 1990.145-66, F.
Muecke, 'Foreshadowing and dramatic irony in the story of Dido', AJP 104 (1983) 134-55.
Both Apollonius and Virgil reflect ancient observation (largely, but not wholly, dependent
upon Aristotle) of the shared features of epic a n d tragedy; for a collection of important
statements cf. R . B. Rutherford, JHS 102 (1982) 145 n. 3.
47
Cf. above pp. 71-4.
 Underworlds 183
founding of the Roman state which his poem narrates. He can,
however, also impose his vision upon the Greek poem in such a way
that it is read as a prior text which authenticates, rather than threat-
ens. Such a case is his use of Apollonian material in the description
of Aeneas' visit to the Underworld.
The deaths of Palinurus48 at the end o£ Aeneid 5 and of Misenus in
Aeneid 6 are both indebted to Homer's Elpenor, killed when he fell
off the roof of Circe's house, and to the paired deaths of Idmon and
Tiphys in Argonautica 2. Palinurus, unlike Odysseus (Od. 5.270-81),
is unable to prevent sleep overtaking him as he steers Aeneas' ship,
and the soporific bough which Sleep shakes over him (5.854-61)
clearly derives from the juniper spray with which Medea sprinkles
her drugs over the Colchian dragon's eyes (Arg. 4.156-8). 49 In the
Argonautica, the linking of Hypnos with infernal Hecate (4.146-8)
creates a powerful ambivalence in the fate of the dragon: modern
critics should not be so certain that he is going to wake up. 50 Be that
as it may, it is not remarkable that - like Elpenor - Palinurus was not
at first missed, given the calm weather and the fact that every-
body else was asleep. The loss of Heracles to the Argonautic expedi-
tion51 also, however, resonates here, and Palinurus' fall from the
ship, liquidas . . . in undas \ praecipitem ac socios nequiquam saepe uocantem
(5.859-60), can hardly fail to recall the disappearance of Hylas as
described by both Apollonius and Theocritus.52 In the Argonautica it
is the steersman Tiphys whose instructions cause the crew to leave
Heracles behind; in the Aeneid it is the steersman himself who is
48
F o r recent discussion of P a l i n u r u s cf. W . S. M . Nicoll, ' T h e sacrifice of P a l i n u r u s ' , CQ38
(1988) 4 5 9 - 7 2 ; G. Laudizi, ' P a l i n u r o ' , Maia 4 0 (1988) 5 7 - 7 3 .
49
V a l e r i u s Flaccus acknowledges Virgil's d e b t by, in t u r n , using t h e sleep of P a l i n u r u s in his
description of M e d e a e n c h a n t i n g t h e d r a g o n ( 8 . 6 8 - 9 1 ) , cf. H . O f f e r m a n n , Hermes 99 (1971)
1 6 7 - 8 . Valerius uses t h e 'sleeping s t e e r s m a n ' motif a t 3-37ff. ( T i p h y s a t Gyzicus).
50
The meaning of ocKripcrra (4.157) remains problematic: Livrea's solution, 'which do not
bring death', is unconvincing. In Valerius, Medea explicitly foretells the dragon's awak-
ening (8.92-104).
51
Cf. above pp. 36-41.
52
Note 6.859 ~ Arg. 1.1239; 860 ~ 1.1240, Theocr. 13.59-60. praecipitem, enjambed at the
head of v. 860, echoes the repeated dcdpoos at the head of Theocr. 13.50-1. The evocation
of the Apollonian Hylas is also noted by Nelis 1988.168 n. 20. The designation of Aeneas in
v. 867 as pater, used absolutely without any accompanying name, in a context where his
status as 'father' is not obviously relevant, may be unique. It may, as Dr Neil Wright has
suggested to me, look forward to the story of Daedalus and Icarus at the head of the next
book, or we may feel the 'ship of state' metaphor resonate: the pater patriae brings the vessel
safely to shore. It is, however, noteworthy that both Apollonius and Theocritus play with
the similarities and differences in the relationship of Heracles and Hylas to that of a father
and son; some versions indeed seem actually to have made them father and son, cf. above
p. 37 n. 109.
 184 Argonautica and Aeneid
abandoned. There is a deep pathos in the contrast between Hylas'
mysterious future as lover-husband beneath the waves and the cruel
realities of death at sea faced by Palinurus.
In visiting the Underworld, Aeneas will of course take on the true
mantle of Heracles, and Virgil has used echoes of the Hylas-episode
to bridge the break between books, for the verses which describe the
Trojans' preparations upon landing {Aen. 6.5-10) rewrite the fateful
Argonautic landing in Mysia on the occasion of Heracles' abandon-
ment (1.1182-8). 53 So too, Heracles' search for a tree from which to
make a new oar is the immediate forerunner of Aeneas' trip into the
forest to acquire the golden bough; the typically Virgilian revolution
in tone between 'model' and 'imitation' confirms, rather than denies,
the echo.54
The concentration of Apollonian material in the introduction to
the Virgilian katabasis might be thought surprising in view of the
absence of an Underworld scene from the Argonautica. That absence
may be ascribed to many causes. Perhaps the whole journey to the
land of the Sun was itself too like a katabasis to give the poet room for
a special descent; it is, in any event, a familiar conjecture of compara-
tive mythography that the Clashing Rocks represent an entrance to
the Underworld,55 and the repeated Apollonian motif of 'even if
the Argo should sail to Hades' (2.642-3, 3.61) does suggest that at
some level the expedition is conceived as an infernal one. The de-
scription of the cave entrance to Hades on the Acherousian headland
(2.729—51), which Virgil twice reworks, 56 invites us to expect a
descent by the Argonauts, but we do so in vain. The scenes in the
wastes of Libya are, as we have seen,57 a further substitute for an
explicit descent to Hades. If the Argonauts never actually visit the
Underworld, Jason at least has considerable contact with Hecate
and infernal powers, and it is worth collecting the Apollonian mate-
rial in Virgil's Underworld in an attempt to discover how Virgil
'read' these elements in the Greek epic. 58

53
Hiigi 1952.127 interestingly linked the opening of Aeneid 6 with Theocr. 2 2 . 3 2 - 8 , a passage
with clear Apollonian links.
54
Catullus 6 6 . 3 9 - 4 0 ~ Aen. 6.460 is the most famous example of such a revolution.
55
Cf., e.g., Meuli 1921.102-4; J . Fontenrose, Python (Berkeley/Los Angeles 1959) 4 7 7 - 8 7 ; J .
Lindsay, The Clashing Rocks (London 1965) passim; Clark 1979.34-6; Beye 1982.45,113.
56
Cf. Aen. 6.237-41 (the cave of the Underworld), 7563-71 (another Italian entrance
to Hades). Relevant also is Arg. 4.599-603, the fiery emanations from the remains of
Phaethon.
57
Cf. above pp. 30-1.
58
For a comprehensive survey cf. Nelis 1988.189-224.
 Underworlds 185
Medea's drugging of the Colchian dragon (4.149-55) has very
clearly influenced Virgil's description of how Cerberus is drugged
by the Sibyl with a 'doctored' cake (Aen. 6.417-25). 59 Moreover,
Aeneas' first encounter in the Underworld is with the spirits of those
who have died as babies (6.426-9); relevant here is the fact that
the Colchian dragon's roar terrifies the protective mothers of
new-born babies (Arg. 4.136-8). The juxtaposition of the snake-
haired Cerberus to the crying of dead babies creates the same kind
of horror as the possibility that the dragon is looking for children
to devour. There is a very clear parallelism between Medea's
magical protection of Jason and the Sibyl's protection of Aeneas.
Both women are priestesses of Hecate, 60 but whereas Jason follows
his guide in fear (4.149), Aeneas shows himself quite equal to the
task:
ille ducem haud timidis uadentem passibus aequat.
(Aen. 6.263)

So too there is an obvious correspondence between the golden fleece,

hanging on an oak tree in the shady (4.166) grove of Ares, and the
golden bough, plucked from an oak tree in the middle of a dark,
shady grove (Aen. 6.138-9). As the Argonauts make their escape
down the Phasis, the Colchians gather on the river-bank, as number-
less as waves or leaves:
£S 5' dyopfjv dyspovx' svi TEUXSCJIV, OCTCTCC TE TTOVTOU
KU|iccTa xeinepioio KopuacreTai e£ dveiioio
•q oora <|)uAAa xan&£e TrepiKAa6eos Treaev OAris
c|)uAAox6coi evi |ir)vi - TIS dv TdSs T6K|jfipaiTo; -
a>s oi diTSipeaioi TTOTOCIJOO TrapaiaeTpeov

They gathered under arms in their meeting-place, as numberless

as the waves of the sea raised high by a winter wind or the leaves
in a dense forest which drop to the ground in the leaf-shedding
month - who could count them? - like this were the vast hordes
who thronged the river-banks, yelling with enthusiasm for the fray.
(4.214-19)

Cf. Hiigi 1952.63-4. Both collapses are followed by swift action from the heroes (4.162, Aen.
6.424-5).
Cf. the parallel invocations at 4.147-8 and Aen. 6.247. For the Sibyl and Hecate cf.
Norden's edition of Aeneid 6 (2nd edn) p. 118; Clark 1979.204-11; H. W. Parke, Sibyls and
Sibylline Prophecy in Classical Antiquity (London/New York 1988) 92-4; further bibliography
in Knauer 1964.130 n. 2.
 186 Argonautica and Aeneid
Virgil reworked this passage very carefully to describe the ghosts
waiting to cross a different river.61
quam multa in siluis autumni frigore primo
lapsa cadunt folia, aut ad terrain gurgite ab alto
quam multae glomerantur aues, ubi frigidus annus
trans pontum fugat et terris immittit apricis.
[Aen. 6.309-12)
Where Apollonius has waves and then leaves, Virgil has leaves and
then birds, but the correspondences are so close that the later poet
clearly wants us to think of this passage of Arg. 4;62 a recently pub-
lished fragment of an archaic lyric poem in which the number of
ghosts in the Underworld was very likely compared to the waves of
the sea helps to confirm that Virgil drew inspiration from Apollonius'
description of the Colchians for his Underworld scenes.63
The amount of material from the early part of Arg. 4 which has
been reworked in Aeneid 6 makes it not unlikely that Virgil himself
read the securing of the Golden Fleece from a dread land ruled over
by a terrible child of the sun as a kind of katabasis.%A In seeking to
understand this reading we can turn back to Homer, as well as
forwards to Virgil's own epic.
Like Odysseus (and Aeneas) in the Underworld, Jason draws his
sword as the Argonauts leave Colchis, initially to cut the mooring
ropes.65 The opening words of his speech to the crew as they depart
echo Odysseus' words to his crew as they leave Circe's house for the
voyage to Hades (4.190, Od. 10.548), and the din of the countless
Colchians may remind us of the din made by the ghosts in the
Homeric Underworld. 66 It perhaps does not matter greatly whether
we see these echoes as merely emphasising the terror endured by the
Argonauts, or as actually inviting us to see these scenes as indeed a
katabasis. For what it is worth, in the later Orphic Argonautica the grove
01
For Virgil's other sources here (including Arg. 4.239-40) cf. Austin ad loc; G. Thaniel,
'Vergil's leaf- and bird-similes of ghosts', Phoenix 25 (1971) 237-45.
82
I n brief: quam multa ... quam multa ~ OCJCTCC . . . r\ ocrcc; siluis ~ OArjs; autumni frigore primo ~
4>IAAOX6GOI evi urivi; cadunt folia ~ <J>uAAoc . . . Treaev; ad terram ~ ya\xalfe\ glomerantur ~
KOpOCTCTETai; frigidus annus ~ yz\\xzp\o\o; pontum ~ TTOVTOU.
63
POxy. 2622a. 12-15 = Pindar, fr. dub. 346.12-15 Maehler; cf. R. J. Clark, 'Two Virgilian
similes and the HPAKAEOYZ KATABAZIZ', Phoenix 24 (1970) 244-55. For ghosts and leaves
cf. particularly Bacchylides 5.63-7.
64
Note that the effect of the infernal Allecto's blast is described in terms borrowed from the
effects of the Colchian dragon's roar (4.i29ff., Aen. 7.5i4ff.).
65
Cf. Od. 10.535-6, 11.24, 48-9, Arg. 4.207-8, Aen. 6.260; Hunter 1988.440 n. 22.
66
4.219; Od. 11.42-3, 605, 633.
 Underworlds 187
of the Fleece lies behind a sanctuary of Artemis—Hecate which can
only be approached by a n initiate, a n d the scene in which Orpheus
sings the dragon to sleep is preceded by chthonic sacrifice a n d the
appearance of creatures such as Tisiphone and Allecto; that poem at
least, therefore, makes explicit that securing the Fleece involves con-
verse with the Underworld. 6 7
It has long been observed 68 that the gleam of the Golden Fleece
(4.125-6):
v6<(>6Ar)i IvccAiyKiov f\ T' OCVIOVTOS
fjsAiou c^Aoyepfjicnv ep6u06Toa dcKTiveaaiv.
. . . like a cloud which blushes red in the flaming rays of the rising sun

is reworked in the description of the fiery gleam of the new breast-

plate which Vulcan makes for Aeneas:
loricam ex aere rigentem
sanguineam, ingentem, qualis cum caerula nubes
solis inardescit radiis longeque refulget. (Aen. 8.621-3)
A number of other echoes also69 show that Virgil drew a deliberate
parallel between the acquisition of the Fleece and the new armour
for Aeneas, and there is clearly more at stake than merely a common
ancestry in Thetis' bringing of new arms for Achilles.70 All three
marvels mark out their heroes as special and give confidence for
the future: cf. 4.190 'no longer hold back, my friends . . . ' , Aen.
8.613-14 ne mox aut Laurentis, nate, superbos \ aut acrem dubites in proelia
poscere Turnum. The shield of Aeneas is a reprise and confirmation of
what the hero saw in the Underworld, and one of the devices which
link Book 6 to Book 8 is the shared reworking of Jason's acquisition
of the fleece. By associating the Fleece with the non enarrabile textum
(8.625) ° f t n e shield, Virgil acknowledges the special power of the
Fleece to confer the gift of song (Arg. 4.1143). It was important to
Virgil to read the quest for the Golden Fleece as a katabasis, because
what Aeneas receives in the Underworld — a vision of the future
greatness of Rome - is, like the Golden Fleece, a prize which justifies
67
For the debt in these scenes to Apollonius cf. Vian on Orph. Arg. 988-1021.
68
Cf. Hiigi 1952.31; Clausen 1987.156 n. 49.
69
Note 4.171-2 ~ Aen. 8.617, 730; the fact that the new arms are placed under an oak {Aen.
8.616); 4.184 ~ Aen. 8.619, 730; 4.181, 185-6 ~ Aen. 8.619; 4.179 ~ Aen. 8.731.
70
In Homer too, a gleaming marvel is brought to a ship as dawn breaks, and the hero's
comrades react with fear or wonderment (//. 19.1, 15 ~ Arg. 4.183-4).
 188 Argonautica and Aeneid
the struggle. When Jason has secured the Fleece he exhorts the crew:
'Now we hold in our hands the fate of our children, our dear home-
land, and our venerable parents. Upon our expedition rests the
future of Hellas, whether it is to suffer depression or win great glory'
(4.202-5). Such an exhortation - whatever its nuances and ironies -
fits easily into the nationalist strain of the Aeneid; nothing comparable
had occurred in the Odyssey. The fractured suggestions of the Helle-
nistic epic are now to be integrated to the service of the new order.

(iv) APOLLONIUS AND VIRGIL: AN OVERVIEW

The purpose of this chapter, and of the various references to the

Aeneid scattered through the earlier part of this book, has been merely
to sketch what I take to be Virgil's strategy in his incorporation of
the Argonautica, and to illustrate that strategy in a small, but exempli-
ficatory, way. What I hope, however, is clear is that, at a deep level,
Virgil exploits the Argonautica in more than one way, and that the
'idea' of this Greek poem is an important and significant strain
within the array of textual voices that the Aeneid harnesses to its task.
The Argonautica is given particular burdens to carry within Virgil's
poetic project, and each successive major use of it builds upon the
significance of what has gone before and is integrated into larger
poetic patterns. The deployment of the Argonautica is in fact a very
good example of Virgil's architectonic structures - and of his differ-
ence from Apollonius.
It will also, I hope, be clear that the complex relationship between
the past and the present which the Argonautica explores and which I
have traced in the two previous chapters has an obvious relationship
to central features of the Aeneid. In both poems the past is constructed
out of the present, though the form of that construction differs
widely. The ideology of the Argonautica seems far removed from that
of the Aeneid, and yet it now stands revealed as pointing towards the
Roman epic in many interesting ways. This is not because of any
inherent teleological pattern in the history of ancient epic, but be-
cause Virgil deliberately read the Argonautica in a particular way
and developed particular aspects of it. The inscription into the Ar-
gonautica of what - in an unsatisfactory shorthand - we may call 'the
Ptolemaic idea', and perhaps too of the Ptolemies themselves, 71 be-

71
Cf. above p. 161.
 Apollonius and Virgil: an overview 189
comes in Virgil's poem the explicit inscription of Augustus into the
epic. The Argonautic voyage which at one level establishes Greek
culture through the world72 becomes a cultural and imperial pro-
gression towards the Augustan age. Virgil's reading of the Argonautica
is thus part of the whole history of how Augustan Rome adopted and
refashioned the culture and ideology of Ptolemaic Alexandria, a
history which remains very far from written.
The Argonautic myth was, in classical times and texts, told for the
most diverse reasons and, as we have seen,73 Apollonius himself
incorporates different 'readings' of the myth into his poem. Virgil's
'myth of Rome' is constructed in a dialogic way which both allows
and indeed invites multiple readings. The similarity may not be
fortuitous, regardless of any historical reconstruction of what Virgil
may have learned from Apollonius. In adopting and displaying the
Argonautica within the Aeneid, Virgil placed near the centre of his
work a nuanced and ironised poem which invited readings which
could threaten to disturb, if not in fact subvert, the nationalist pro-
ject upon which he was engaged. Whether or not this is what has
happened is, of course, precisely what rends modern criticism of the
Aeneid. Here is not the place to pursue the matter, but future work
on the relationship of the two poems can surely no longer assume
that the incorporation of the Argonautica can be without ideological
significance. To do so would be to assume that Virgil's understand-
ing of the Greek poem was simplistic and defective. That, surely, is
one assumption too many.

72
Cf. above pp. 163-9.
73
Cf. above pp. 137-8.
 APPENDIX

sv cxeicrijcx 8ir\veKss: Aristotle, Callimachus,

Apollonius

] i |ioi TeAxTvss eiriTpu^oucnv aoiS-qi,

vr)i5es 01 MOUOTIIS1 OUK eyevovTo <f>iAoi,
oux ev 6c£ia|ia 5ir|VEK£s f\ |3cccnA[
] as £v TTOAAOCIS fjvucra y\h\6n\v
]ous f|pcoas, iiros 5' em TI/T66V 4A[I
OCT6, TCOV 6* 6T6COV T) 86KCCS OUK 6 A i y T | .
]Kai

[...] the Telchines mutter at my song - they who are ignorant and were not
born dear to the Muses - because I have not accomplished one continuous
song in many thousands of verses about kings [...] heroes, but like a child I
roll out my verse, little by little, while the decades of my years are not few.
[...] to the Telchines this is my reply ... (Callimachus, fr. 1.1-7)
Few, if any, passages of ancient literature have accumulated so large a body
of critical discussion as has grown up around the fragmentary remains of
Callimachus' Reply to the Telchines since its publication in 1927.2 This is
perhaps only just, as these verses were written to tease, to say both more and
less than they appear to say. Callimachus' strategy - and its implications
for the Argonautica - has, however, not always been well understood, and I
hope that the passage will bear one further (brief) look.
The complaints of the Telchines are not given directly: the direct speech
of the poet's reply to them (vv. 76°.) is opposed to their indistinct muttering.3
'Their own words' cannot be reported because they vent their spite in a
whispering campaign of malicious hypocrisy; the use of indirect speech
advertises the control of the poet over what we learn of the views of the
Telchines.4 It is left deliberately unclear whether these views are to be
understood as 'unfair' criticism, or as programmatic badges which the poet
Wilamowitz: -T|S pap.
2
Here, as elsewhere, L. Lehnus, Bibliografia Callimachea I48g-ig88 (Genoa 1989) is invaluable;
cf. also L. Torraca, II prologo dei Telchini e I'inizio degli Aitia di Callimaco (Naples 1969).
A major new discussion by Alan Cameron is keenly awaited.
3
Commentators rightly note the reference in this verb to the 'magic incantations' of Telchines,
cf. Theocr. 2.62. It is noteworthy that, in its only appearance in Homer (//. 9.311), Tpu£eiv
is opposed (by Achilles) to the straightforward and undeceitful speaking of the truth.
4
It should not be necessary to stress that I am here concerned not with any autobiographical
reality which these verses may reflect, but with Callimachus' poetic strategy.

190
 Appendix 191

wears with pride. Certainly, it is not hard to believe that vv. 5-6, the
complaint that 'old' Callimachus writes 'like a child', contain a charge to
which the poet would readily assent. Soon we are to learn that he preserves
the poetic principles handed down to him by Apollo when he was a child,
and elsewhere in the Aitia he amusingly refers to himself as 'this child' (fr.
75.9); Theocritus too introduces the figure of the child as an analogue of the
poet in an overtly programmatic passage (1.45-54 concerning oAiyos TIS
Kcopos). Thus Callimachus here appropriates the voice of the complaining
Telchines to advertise the virtues of his poetry, leaving unclear the status
and substance of their complaints. Such experimentation with voice and
indirect speech — itself presumably an enactment of the poetic style for
which the Reply pleads - may well remind us of the Argonautica.5
In turning to the substance of the Telchines' charge, the key phrase for
our present purpose is iv aEiaua 6iT)V6K6S. I shall consider in a moment
whether or not the Argonautica could be so described, but I wish first to
examine the case for believing that this phrase reflects formal poetic theory,
specifically that of Aristotle in the Poetics.
On purely general grounds we may observe that it would be very much
in Callimachus' manner to place in the mouth of the Telchines a phrase
redolent of scholastic theorising.6 This would carry with it the implication
that the Telchines, 'who are no friends of the Muses', know poetry only as
a set of stylistic criteria and not as a creative act, as the Aitia prologue very
clearly demonstrates it to be. If this is correct, then the two most likely
'critics' evoked by the phrase are Plato and Aristotle. Before pursuing this
possibility, it is important to note that this question is separate from a
determination of whether in vv. 3—5 Callimachus is referring to his failure
to write epic or - as Alan Cameron will argue forcefully - to the style of the
Aitia which he has written and at the head of which this passage stands. In
either case, Callimachus may be twitting his (real or alleged) critics with
their devotion to theory.
In the Phaedrus Plato makes Socrates assert - as something to which the
naive Phaedrus would readily assent - that 'every speech (Aoyos) must be
put together (ovveordvai) like a living creature with its own body, so that
it neither lacks head nor feet, but has both middle parts and extremities, all
of which are composed in a manner appropriate both to each other and to
the whole' (264c). The immediate context suggests that 'appropriateness'
will lie, at least in part, in a due ordering of parts of the speech in accor-
dance with some dvayicn, so that one part will properly follow another and
the reverse possibility be excluded (cf. 264b, d-e). The extent of Socratic or
Platonic irony in this passage is not crucial to the present argument. Plato
does not in this text specifically speak of 'unity', 'oneness', 7 but this idea is

5
For Apollonius' innovations with indirect speech cf. above pp. 143-51.
6
Cf. the ironically pompous 'I hate the cyclic poem' (Epigram 28) which is deflated by the
ending of the poem (cf. Hunter 1989.37).
7
Cf. Heath 1989.17-22; A. Ford, Arion 1.3 (1991) 130-5.
 192 Appendix
clearly not far away. In a subsequent part of the prologue, Callimachus will
allude both to the Phaedrus and to the Ion (vv. 29-34), 8 an<^ s o allusion to
Plato here would be contextually fitting. On the other hand, the brief
remarks of Plato were subsumed into a large-scale theoretical discussion
by Aristotle, who thus has the better claim to be primary here. That
Aristotelian ideas are relevant to Callimachus fr. 1.3 is an old idea, but one
that deserves to be considered again.
An initial problem, of course, is whether or not Callimachus could have
been familiar with Aristotelian doctrine as we know it from the Poetics.
The extent of the Alexandrian holdings of Aristotle is a difficult problem,
but the Poetics does appear in Diogenes Laertius' Aristotelian catalogue
(5.22—7) which has often been held to derive from the Ptolemaic library.9
It is, moreover, very likely that Aristotelian doctrine (in some form) was
promulgated through the large body of peripatetic work on literary sub-
jects,10 even if that work owed more in style to Aristotle's lost three-book
dialogue On Poets (frr. 70-7 Rose) and to the works of Theophrastus than
to our Poetics. There is certainly no good reason to doubt that the Alexan-
drian library possessed a copy of On Poets. What is more, if iv aeicrua 8ir|V£K6S
is intended to evoke theoretical discussion, it does so in a non-obscurantist
way; we can hardly doubt that Callimachus knew this much at least about
Aristotle.
Aristotle prescribed for the best tragedy and epic that they should be
mimeseis of a 'single (liioc) praxis\ which was whole and complete in itself.11
For Aristotle, a poem (and the praxis which it 'imitated') was not 'one' if the
events in it followed each other, not because of a close causal nexus of
necessity or probability, but for some other reason, such as that they hap-
pened to follow each other in time while being otherwise unrelated. The
telling of such sequences was the job of history, not poetry,12 a thing not
understood by the 'cyclic' poets and those who wrote 'Heracleids' and
'Theseids' which related all the experiences of the hero, but singularly
failed to be 'a mimesis of a single praxis'. Before considering whether or not
Callimachus' iv resonates against these Aristotelian ideas, we should note
that the playful opposition of 'one song' to 'many thousands of verses'13
suggests a quasi-philosophical paradox: 'How could you write "the one"
in "the many"?' This paradox must strengthen the suspicion that ev

9
Gf. I. During, Aristoteles (Heidelberg 1966) 36-7; id., RE Suppl. 11. 190-4; R. Blum,
Kallimachos und die Literaturverzeichnung bei den Griechen (Frankfurt 1977) 121-32.
10
For a useful orientation cf. A. J. Podlecki, 'The peripatetics as literary critics', Phoenix 23
(1969) 114-37. Despite its title, C. Gallavotti, Tracce della Poetica di Aristotele negli scolii
omerici', Maia 21 (1969) 203-14, deals only with the ancient debates over the Doloneia and
the end of the Odyssey, and is of limited value.
11
Cf. Poetics 145^16-35; 1459a 1 7 - 5 9 ^ 6; Hunter 1989.33.
12
Cf. Poetics i459a2i-4.
13
It is tempting to connect \\K\6XJ\V with Euphorion's poem XIAI&8ES, but chronology (at
least) makes this doubtful.
 Appendix 193

is an important carrier of meaning, and alert us to the possibility that

Callimachus presents the Telchines' complaints as incoherent - they con-
demn themselves from their own mouths. A consideration of SrnvsK^s will, 1
believe, confirm these suspicions.
Like so many of the value-terms in the Reply, 6ir|V6K6S leaves room for
difference of opinion, for disagreement about what sort of poetry might
satisfy the requirements. The word does not appear to occur in our extant
corpus of genuine Aristotelian works, but at On Plants i.8i7b39 it is paired
with 6AoTeAf)s and must connote 'constant', 'completed'. A positive reading
(in Aristotelian terms) of £v aeiauoc 5ir|V6K6S would therefore be something
like 'a unified and consistent [i.e. non-episodic] poem'.14 Such a meaning
would well describe what the Aitia is not, and so must be considered a real
possibility for the meaning of the disputed phrase. It is, however, not the
only possibility.
8iT|V6KES, 'continuous', 'unbroken', might also suggest, in Aristotelian
terms, the rejected 'Heracleids' and 'Theseids' rather than the exemplary
Homeric poems.15 It seems to imply the absence of what is crucial for
Aristotle, namely the process of selection by which the poet creates the
'imitation of a single praxis' and avoids the artlessness of tedious, ab ouo
narration. If this is correct, and if ev dsicjua 5ir)VEK8S is to be given a single,
coherent meaning, then iv cannot carry Aristotelian resonances, but will
mean something like 'solid', 'monotonous',16 or simply 'one' (as opposed to
'two'... ). Given our state of uncertainty regarding the text and interpreta-
tion of these verses, this possibility cannot be ruled out. Nevertheless, I hope
that the preceding discussion has suggested that a different route is attrac-
tive. If iv and Sir)V6KES represent opposed styles of composition, respectively
an Aristotelian 'good' and an Aristotelian 'bad', the criticism by the
Telchines becomes incoherent; being 'ignorant and not born friends of the
Muses' they do not understand that it is not possible, in Aristotelian terms,
to write a poem which is both iv and 5rnv£K£s, both 'one' and 'continuous'.
Such a reading, which is admittedly speculative, would well suit the playful
and tendentious argument of these verses. The combination of the two
words allows Callimachus to 'deconstruct' the assumptions upon which
they are based, at the head of a long poem which is to show how this is to
be done in practice. Were the four books of Aitia iv or 5ir|V8K6S? With tongue
firmly in cheek, Callimachus suggests that his poem is both and neither.
In turning to the Argonautica, we may first note the complete absence of
scholarly agreement about the epic's 'unity', of an Aristotelian or any other

14
Cf., e.g., Koster 1970.117-18; G. Serrao in R. Bianchi Bandinelli (ed.), Storia e civilta dei
Greciv. 9 (Milan 1977) 223-4.
15
This is, of course, an old interpretation; cf., e.g., L. Adam, Die aristotelische Theorie vom Epos
nach ihrer Entwicklung bei Griechen und Rb'mern (Wiesbaden 1889) 74~5-
18
So, e.g., Newman 1974.355, 1986.44. Appeal to Hor. C. 1.7.5-6 settles nothing; note Hor.
AP 23 simplex dumtaxat et unum, where Brink notes that the opposite of this would be TTOIKIAOS
(cf. Arist. Poetics
 194 Appendix

kind.17 I hope that this book has made clear that the cause is not to be
sought solely in the difficulty of identifying Aristotelian 'oneness' - in the
unavoidable fact that difference of opinion with regard to extant works of
Greek literature is inevitable — but is a result of the very way in which the
work is conceived and executed. The poem tells 'without omissions' (cf.
4.1776-8) the story of a voyage, beginning and ending at the same place,
and, but for a few 'flashbacks' to events 'before the epic',18 recounting what
happened in strict chronological sequence - quite unlike the Odyssey and
not, at least not obviously, in accordance with Aristotle's prescriptions, but
giving 'unity' and 'oneness' of a kind. As we have come to expect, the epic
is in this, as in all matters, uneven. Sometimes sequences of action seem to
flaunt their randomness, their lack of'causal nexus'. The matched pairs of
deaths at 2.8158*. and 4.14858*. seem striking in this regard; the appeals to
uoTpoc (2.815, 855) and the reliance upon <t>d*ns (2.854) a r e particularly
noteworthy in this respect. At other times - perhaps most famously in the
narrative of the loss of Heracles at the end of Book 1 - Apollonius seems
concerned to tie everything together in a very close nexus. More important
than these details is the overall conception of the poem. In Chapter 23 of
the Poetics Aristotle praises Homer in the following terms:
Most epic poets do make plots like histories. So in this respect too Homer is
marvellous in the way already described, in that he did not undertake to make a
whole poem of the war either, even though it had a beginning and an end. For the
plot would have been too large and not easy to see as a whole, or if it had been kept
to moderate length it would have been tangled because of the variety of the events.
As it is he takes one part and uses many others as episodes, for example, the
catalogue of the ships and the other episodes with which he breaks the uniformity
of his poem. {Poetics 1459^29-37, trans. Hubbard)
A voyage is analogous to a war in having beginning and end and many
episodes, but whereas 'Homer selected episodes from the whole course of the
war and incorporated them into a story which, chronologically speaking, is
incompatible with them', 19 Apollonius never allows us to forget the strict
chronological progression of events. It is noteworthy that Aristotle singles
out Homer's ship-catalogue as an episode from those parts of the war which
are not Homer's concern but which are used to 'break up' (5iocAau|3ocveiv)
the poem; it is surely tempting to believe that Apollonius' decision to begin

17
For a recent assertion of its Aristotelian 'oneness' cf. Heath 1989.65. Heath notes that, in
Aristotelian terms, the Argonautica would be [iia irpa^is iroAu|j£pr|s, 'a single action consisting
of many parts' (Poetics I459a38), like the Cypria and the Little Iliad. It is tempting to take
uia TTpa^iS in that passage in a looser sense than elsewhere: would Aristotle have considered
the events of the Cypria bound by a strong causal nexus (cf. Lucas ad loc.)? For this
reason Margaret Hubbard deletes the phrase in her translation (D. A. Russell and
M. Winterbottom (eds.), Ancient Literary Criticism (Oxford 1972) 123). (Jf. also Halliwell
1986.261.
18
For this organisation of time see Fusillo 1985, especially Chapter 1.
19
G. Else, Aristotle's Poetics: the Argument (Cambridge, Mass. 1957) 585-6.
 Appendix 195

with the Catalogue of Argonauts was not merely to be different from

Homer, but was also prompted to some extent by critical discussion of
Homer's practice. It is moreover difficult not to think that Aristotle would
have regarded the Argonautica as 'tangled because of the variety of events',
KaTaTreirAeyiJievov ir\\ TTOIKIAICCI. On the other hand, this continuous, poten-
tially 'open-ended' narrative20 is set in tension with the insistent voice of the
controlling narrator; both poet himself (1.649) a n d his characters (2.391,
3.401) in fact deprecate the telling of stories 6ir|VSKSCOS.21 The epic is thus
both ev and 6ir|veK6S. Like the Aitia prologue, the Argonautica too breaks
down the Aristotelian dichotomy in a spirit of literary experimentation.
Throughout this book we have seen how, in all the main areas of poetic
creation, the Argonautica is radically at odds with the precepts of the Poetics,
but also utterly unlike the rejected 'cyclic' epics. We cannot say that it was
written to be 'anti-Aristotelian', but the balance of probabilities does seem
to me to incline in that direction.

20
Cf. above pp. 122-3.
21
Cf. Newman 1974.355, Margolies 1981.45-9, Beye 1982.15-16.
 Bibliography

Bakhtin, M. M. 1981. The Dialogic Imagination: Four Essays (ed. M. Holquist).

Austin.
Bal, M. 1985. Narratology. Introduction to the Theory of Narrative. Toronto/
Buffalo/London.
Beye, C. R. 1969. 'Jason as love-hero in Apollonios' Argonautika.' Greek,
Roman and Byzantine Studies 10: 31-55.
1982. Epic and Romance in the Argonautica of Apollonius. Carbondale.
Bing, P. 1988. The Well-Read Muse. Present and Past in Callimachus and the
Hellenistic Poets. (Hypomnemata 90) Gottingen.
Bloom, H. 1973. The Anxiety of Influence. Oxford.
Blumberg, K. W. 1931. Untersuchungen zur epischen Technik des Apollonios von
Rhodos. Dissertation, Leipzig.
Briggs, W. W. 1981. 'Virgil and the Hellenistic epic' H. Temporini and
W. Haase (eds.), Aufstieg und Niedergang der rb'mischen Welt 11 31.2
(Berlin/New York) 948-84.
Brown, R. D. 1990. The structural function of the song of Iopas.' Harvard
Studies in Classical Philology 93: 315-34.
Bulloch, A. W. 1985. 'Hellenistic poetry.5 P. E. Easterling and B. M. W.
Knox (eds.), The Cambridge History of Classical Literature 1: Greek Litera-
ture (Cambridge) 541-621.
Burkert, W. 1985. Greek Religion. Oxford.
Cairns, F. 1979. Tibullus: a Hellenistic Poet at Rome. Cambridge.
1989. Virgil's Augustan Epic. Cambridge.
Calame, C. 1990. 'Narrating the foundation of a city: the symbolic birth of
Cyrene.' L. Edmunds (ed.), Approaches to Greek Myth (Baltimore) 277-
34i-
Campbell, M. 1983. Studies in the Third Book of Apollonius Rhodius3 Argonautica.
Hildesheim.
Carspecken, J. F. 1952. 'Apollonius Rhodius and the Homeric epic' Tale
Classical Studies 13: 33—143.
Chatman, S. 1978. Story and Discourse. Narrative Structure in Fiction and Film.
Ithaca/London.
Clark, R. J. 1979. Catabasis: Vergil and the Wisdom-Tradition. Amsterdam.
196
 Bibliography 197

Clausen, W. 1987. Virgil's Aeneid and the Tradition of Hellenistic Poetry.

Berkeley /Los Angeles.
Clausing, A. 1913. Kritik und Exegese der homerischen Gleichnisse im Altertum.
Dissertation, Freiburg.
Clauss, J. J. 1983. 'Allusion and the narrative style of Apollonius Rhodius
(a detailed study of Book 1 of the Argonautica).' Dissertation, Berkeley.
Collins, J. F. 1967. 'Studies in Book One of the Argonautica of Apollonius
Rhodius.' Dissertation, Columbia.
Conrardy, C. 1904. De Vergilio Apollonii Rhodii imitatore. Dissertation,
Fribourg.
Conte, G. B. 1986. The Rhetoric of Imitation: Genre and Poetic Memory in Virgil
and Other Latin Poets. Ithaca/London.
De Jong, I. J. F. 1987. Narrators and Focalizers: the Presentation of the Story in
the Iliad. Amsterdam.
Delage, E. 1930. La Geographie dans les Argonautiques d3 Apollonios de Rhodes.
Bordeaux.
Detienne, M. and Vernant, J.-P. 1978. Cunning Intelligence in Greek Culture and
Society. Hassocks.
Dickie, M. 1990. 'Talos bewitched. Magic, atomic theory and paradoxo-
graphy in Apollonius Argonautica 4.1638-88.' Papers of the Leeds Interna-
tional Latin Seminar 6: 267-96.
Dover, K. J. 1971. Theocritus, Select Poems. Basingstoke/London.
Dufner, C. M. 1988. 'The "Odyssey" in the "Argonautica": reminiscence,
revision, reconstruction.' Dissertation, Princeton.
Dyck, A. R. 1989. 'On the way from Colchis to Corinth: Medea in Book 4
of the "Argonautica".' Hermes 117: 455-70.
Effe, B. 1983. 'Epische Objektivitat und auktoriales Erzahlen.' Gymnasium
90: 171-86.
Eichgriin, E. 1961. Kallimachos und Apollonios Rhodios. Dissertation, Berlin.
Erbse, H. 1953. 'Homerscholien und hellenistische Glossare bei Apollonios
Rhodios.' Hermes 81: 163-96.
1972. Beitrdge zum Verstdndnis der Odyssee. Berlin/New York.
Faerber, H. 1932. Zur dichterischen Kunst in Apollonios Rhodios' Argonautika (Die
Gleichnisse). Dissertation, Berlin.
Fantuzzi, M. 1988. Ricerche su Apollonio Rodio. Rome.
Feeney, D. C. 1986. 'Following after Hercules, in Virgil and Apollonius.'
Proceedings of the Virgil Society 18: 47-85.
1991. The Gods in Epic. Oxford.
Fowler, B. H. 1989. The Hellenistic Aesthetic. Bristol.
Frankel, H. i960. 'Ein Don Quijote unter den Argonauten des Apollonios.'
Museum HeIveticum 17: 1-20.
1968. Noten zu den Argonautika des Apollonios. Munich.
Fraser, P. M. 1972. Ptolemaic Alexandria. Oxford.
Frontisi-Ducroux, F. 1986. La Cithare a" Achille: essai sur lapoetique de Vlliade.
Rome.
 198 Bibliography

Fusillo, M. 1983. 'Descrizione e racconto: sulla "retorica dell5 oggetto" in

Apollonio Rodio.' Materiali e discussioniper I'analisi dei testi classici 10/11:
65-103.
1985. / / tempo delle Argonautiche. Rome.
1989. // romanzo greco: polifonia ed eros. Venice.
Galinsky, G. K. 1972. The Herakles Theme. Oxford.
Genette, G. 1980. Narrative Discourse. Ithaca, N.Y.
George, E. V. 1972. 'Poet and characters in Apollonius Rhodius' Lemnian
episode.' Hermes 100: 47-63.
Goldhill, S. 1991. The Poet's Voice. Cambridge.
Greene, T. M. 1982. The Light in Troy. Imitation and Discovery in Renaissance
Poetry. New Haven/London.
Griffin, J. 1977. 'The epic cycle and the uniqueness of Homer.' Journal of
Hellenic Studies 97: 39-53-
1980. Homer on Life and Death. Oxford.
1986. 'Words and speakers in Homer.' Journal of Hellenic Studies 106:
36-57-
Griffiths, F. T. 1979. Theocritus at Court. Leiden.
Grillo, A. 1988. Trajilologia e narratologia. Rome.
Gutzwiller, K. J. 1981. Studies in the Hellenistic Epyllion. Konigstein.
Hainsworth, J. B. 1991. The Idea of Epic. Berkeley/Los Angeles /Oxford.
Halliwell, S. 1986. Aristotle's Poetics. London.
Handel, P. 1954. Beobachtungen zur epischen Technik des Apollonios Rhodios.
Munich.
Harder, M. A. 1990. 'Untrodden paths: where do they lead?' Harvard Studies
in Classical Philology 93: 287-309.
Hardie, P. 1986. Virgil's Aeneid. Cosmos and Imperium. Oxford.
Harrison, S.J. (ed.). 1990. Oxford Readings in Virgil's Aeneid. Oxford.
Haslam, M. W. 1978. 'Apollonius Rhodius and the papyri.' Illinois Classical
Studies 3: 47-73.
Heath, M. 1989. Unity in Greek Poetics. Oxford.
Heinze, R. 1915. Virgils epische Technik?. Leipzig/Berlin.
Herter, H. 1955. 'Bericht iiber die Literatur zur hellenistischen Dichtung
seit dem Jahre 1921, 11 Teil: Apollonios von Rhodos.' Bursian's Jahres-
bericht 285: 213-410.
1959. 'Hera spricht mit Thetis. Eine Szene des Apollonios von Rhodos.'
Symbolae Osloenses 35: 40-54 ( = Kleine Schriften, Munich 1975, 4 3 3 -
44)-
Highet, G. 1972. The Speeches in Vergil's Aeneid. Princeton.
Hopkinson, N. 1988. A Hellenistic Anthology. Cambridge.
Hiibscher, A. 1940. Die Charakteristik der Personen in Apollonios' Argonautika.
Dissertation, Freiburg i.d. Schweiz.
Hiigi, M. 1952. Vergils Aeneis und die hellenistische Dichtung. Bern.
Hunter, R. L. 1986. 'Apollo and the Argonauts: two notes on Ap. Rhod. 2,
669-719.' Museum Helveticum 43: 50-60.
 Bibliography 199

1987. 'Medea's flight: the fourth book of the Argonautica' Classical Quar-
terly 37: 129-39.
1988. ' "Short on heroics": Jason in the Argonautica.' Classical Quarterly 38:

1989. Apollonius of Rhodes, Argonautica Book HI. Cambridge.

1991a. '"Breast is best": Catullus 64. 18.' Classical Quarterly 41: 254-5.
1991b. 'Greek and non-Greek in the Argonautica of Apollonius.' S. Said
(ed.)3 EAAHNIZMOE. Quelques jalonspour une histoire de Videntite grecque.
Strasbourg. 81-99.
Hurst, A. 1967. Apollonios de Rhodes, maniere et coherence. Rome.
Hutchinson, G. 1988. Hellenistic Poetry. Oxford.
Ibscher, R. 1939. Gestalt der Szene und Form der Rede in den Argonautika des
Apollonios Rhodios. Dissertation, Berlin.
Jackson, S. 1987. 'Apollonius' Argonautica: Euphemus, a clod and a tripod.'
Illinois Classical Studies 12: 23-30.
Kaiser, E. 1964. 'Odyssee-Szenen als Topoi.' Museum Helveticum 21: 109-36,
197-224.
Klein, L. 1931. 'Die Gottertechnik in den Argonautika des Apollonios
Rhodios.' Philologus 86: 18-51, 215-57.
Knauer, G. N. 1964. Die Aeneis und Homer. (Hypomnemata 7) Gottingen.
Knight, V. H. 1990. 'TrpoaOev STI KAEIOVCTIV 6coi6oi: Types of response to
Homer in the Argonautica of Apollonius.' Dissertation, Cambridge.
Kohnken, A. 1965. Apollonios Rhodios und Theokrit. Gottingen.
Koster, S. 1970. Antike Epostheorien. (Palingenesia 5) Wiesbaden.
Laronde, A. 1987. Cyrene et la Libye hellenistique. Paris.
Lawall, G. 1966. 'Apollonius' Argonautica: Jason as anti-hero.' Tale Classical
Studies 19: 119-69.
Lennox, P. G. 1980. 'Apollonius, Argonautica 3, iff. and Homer.' Hermes
108:45-73.
Levin, D. N. 1971. Apollonius3 Argonautica Re-examined, 1 The Neglected First
and Second Books. Leiden.
Livrea, E. 1987. 'L'episodio libyco nel quarto libro delle "Argonautiche"
di Apollonio Rodio.' Cirene e i Libyi, Quaderni di Archeologia della Libya
12: 175-90.
Lyne, R. O. A. M. 1987. Further Voices in Vergil's Aeneid. Oxford.
1989. Words and the Poet. Characteristic Techniques of Style in Vergil's Aeneid.
Oxford.
Lynn-George, M. 1988. Epos: Word, Narrative, and the Iliad. London.
Margolies, M. J. M. 1981. 'Apollonius' Argonautica: a Callimachean epic'
Dissertation, Colorado.
Meuli, K. 1921. Odyssee und Argonautika. Berlin.
Mikalson, J. D. 1983. Athenian Popular Religion. Chapel Hill/London.
Mirmont, H. de la Ville de. 1894. Apollonios de Rhodes et Virgile. La mythologie
et les dieux dans les Argonautiques et dans FEneide. Paris.
Monti, R. C. 1981. The Dido Episode and the Aeneid. Leiden.
 200 Bibliography

Nelis, D. P. 1988. 'The Aeneid and the Argonautica of Apollonius Rhodius.'

Dissertation, Belfast.
Newman, J. K. 1974. 'Callimachus and the e p i c ' J . L. Heller (ed.), Serta
Turyniana. Urbana/Chicago/London. 342-60.
1986. The Classical Epic Tradition. Madison.
Otis, B. 1964. Virgil. A Study in Civilized Poetry. Oxford.
Paduano, G. 1972. Studi su Apollonio Rodio. Rome.
Palombi, M. G. 1985. 'Eracle e Ila nelle Argonautiche di Apollonio Rodio.'
Studi Classici e Orientali 35: 71-92.
Pearson, L. 1938. 'Apollonius of Rhodes and the old geographers.' American
Journal of Philology 59: 443-59.
Pelling, C. (ed.). 1990. Characterization and Individuality in Greek Literature.
Oxford.
Pfeiffer, R. 1955. 'The future of studies in the field of Hellenistic poetry.'
Journal of Hellenic Studies 75: 69-73.
1968. History of Classical Scholarship from the Beginnings to the End of the
Hellenistic Age. Oxford.
Rice, E. E. 1983. The Grand Procession of Ptolemy Philadelphus. Oxford.
Richardson, N. J. 1974. The Homeric Hymn to Demeter. Oxford.
Richardson, S. 1990. The Homeric Narrator. Nashville.
Rimmon-Kenan, S. 1983. Narrative Fiction: Contemporary Poetics. London/
New York.
Rose, A. R. 1984. 'Three narrative themes in Apollonios' Bebrykian episode
(Argonautika 2, 1-163).' Wiener Studien 97: 115-35.
1985. 'Clothing imagery in Apollonius's Argonautika.' Quaderni Urbinati di
Cultura Classica 49: 29-44.
Riitten, F. 1912. De Vergilii studiis Apollonianis. Dissertation, Minister.
Schwinge, E.-R. 1986. Kunstlichkeit von Kunst: zur Geschichtlichkeit der alexan-
drinischen Poesie. Munich.
Sergent, B. 1984. UHomosexualite dans la mythologie grecque. Paris.
Shapiro, H. A. 1980. 'Jason's cloak.' Transactions of the American Philological
Association n o : 263-86.
Shumaker, J. W. 1969. 'Homeric transformations in the Argonautica of
Apollonius of Rhodes.' Dissertation, Pennsylvania.
Suerbaum, W. 1968. 'Die Ich-Erzahlungen des Odysseus.' Poetica 2: 150-
77-
Vian, F. 1978. 'IHIQN AMHXANEQN.' Studi in onore di Anthos Ardizzoni.
Rome. 11 1025-41.
White, H. 1979. Studies in Theocritus and Other Hellenistic Poets. Amsterdam.
Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, U. von. 1924. Hellenistische Dichtung. Berlin.
Will, E. 1966. Histoire politique du monde hellenistique {323-30 av. J.-C.) 1.
Nancy.
Williams, G. 1983. Technique and Ideas in the Aeneid. New Haven/London.
Williams, M. F. 1991. Landscape in the Argonautica of Apollonius Rhodius.
Frankfurt.
Zanker, G. 1987. Realism in Alexandrian Poetry. London.
 General index

Bold page numbers indicate a major discussion. There are no entries for Homer, Jason, or
Medea, as these occur throughout the book.

Achilles, 12, 20, 24, 25 n. 60, 35, 48-9, 74, Bebrycians, 43-4
98-9, 141, 187 Boreas, sons of, 9, 81-2, 130-2
Aeneas, 173-89 bough, the golden, 184, 185
Agamemnon, 20-2, 24, 35, 61 Boutes, 44, 128
Aietes, 22-3, 58, 61, 72, 147-8, 178
Alcibiades, 56 Callimachus, 3-4, 101, 115-16, 123, 190—5;
Alcinous, 51, 68—74, 145, 161-2, 181 Hymn 1, 82 n. 35; Hecale, 115-16; see
Alexandria, 1-4, 152-62 also Index of Passages Discussed
Amphion, 54 Calypso, 34, 46, 47, 143
Amycus, 23, 28, 111, 160 Canthus, 44
Anaphe, 85, 123, 167 Castor, 128
Aphrodite, 49, 54-8, 67, 96 catalogue, of Argonauts, 126-7
Apollo, 16, 58, 76, 78, 80, 82-3, 84-5, 119, Catullus, 73 n. 113, 116-18, 174-5
120-1, 123, 158, 167 chaos, 167, 174
Apollonius, career of, 2, 152 character, in epic, 8—15, 18-20, 59-60,
apostrophe, in epic, 104 72
Apsyrtus, 11, 15, 21, 42, 59, 60-3, 69, Choirilos of Samos, 122 n. 86
144-5, 165 Circe, 9, 34, 91, 94, 146-7, 164-5,
Arcesilas IV, King of Cyrene, 152-3 178 n. 35; in Aeneid, 175-82
Ares, 16, 55 cloak, ekphrasis of, 52-9, 163, 179-80
arete, in Argonautica, 18, 22-3 Clytemnestra, 61 n. 69, 64
Arete, 63, 64, 68—74, 145, 161-2 Comedy, New, 46, 143
Argo, 121-2, 138, 146; compared to a horse, cosmogony, 53-4, 148-50, 162—9
121 Cyrene, foundation of, 90, 152, 168;
Argonautica passim; critical reception of, 1—7, relations with Ptolemies, 153
172; date of, 2; circulation of, 4; see also Cyzicus, 16, 42-3
Index of Passages Discussed
Argos, son of Arestor, 125 death, in Argonautica, 41—5; in Iliad, 8-9, 41,
Argos, son of Phrixos, 94, 173 43
Ariadne, 14, 51, 61, 74, 117 Demeter, Homeric Hymn to, 40-1
Aristaeus, 91; in Georgics 4, 92, 116 Demetrius Poliorcetes, 56
Aristophanes, Frogs, 30 Demodocus, 54, 121-2, 149-50, 176-7
Aristotle, Poetics, 5, 139, 191-5; character Dido, 116, 174, 175-82
in, 12-13; survival of, 192; unity in, Dioskouroi, 9, 128, 160; see also Castor,
192-5; and Argonautica, 139, 193-5; see Polydeuces
also Index of Passages Discussed Doliones, 42-3
Artemis, 40, 49, 65, 78, 84-5, 137 Drakon, constellation, 32
Athena, 52, 56, 86-7, 89, 121 Drepane, 64, 68-74, 87-8, 161-2

201
 202 General index
Earthborn, the, 27, 41-2; in Colchis, 9, 16, Ladon, 29, 31-2
134 Lavinia, 178, 180
Elpenor, 44, 183 Lemnos, 33-6, 47-59, 111-12
Empedocles, 163, 165, 177 Library, Alexandrian, 2-3, 152, 192
engonasin, constellation, 32 Lynceus, 30
enjambment, 122 n. 84, 144 n. 159
ephebe, Jason as, 12, 16-17 Megara, 114
Erato, 177, 180-1 Mopsus, 31-2, 44, 82
eros, 38-40, 46-74, 81, 116-18, 179-80 Moschus, Europa, 114-15, 118
ethnography, 94-5, 159 Mother, the Great, 36, 82-3
Euhesperides, 29, 31, 152 Muses, 91, 105, 125
Euphemos, 90, 167-8 Myrtilos, 58
Euripides, 46, 67; Medea, 11, 59, 61, 63,
123-4, I ^°j ! 8 i Nausicaa, 14, 46, 47, 48, 64, 69-70, 181

fate, 88 objectivity, epic, 101-5

focalisation, 102-3 Odysseus, 14, 21, 24-5, 27-8, 35, 68, 118
Oinomaos, 54, 58
Ganymede, 96, 107 oracles, 124, 148
Glaucus, 78 Orestes, 15-16
gnomai, 104-5, IO^> I X 4 Orpheus, 9, 12, 54, 58, 83, 85, 120-1, 127,
gods, in Argonautica, 36 n. 104, 75—100 148-51, 162-3, I 7 ^ - 7 , 187
Gorgias, Helen, 67 Orphic Argonautica, 186-7

Harpies, 78, 81-2, 95, 130-2; in Aeneid, 81, Palinurus, 45, 183-4
174 Paraibios, 91, 93
Hecate, 69, 183-4, l&7 Paris, 49-50
Hector, 48-9 parody, 9, 108, 131
Helen, 49, 60, 64, 67 Patroclus, 39, 46
Hephaestus, 54, 78 n. 11 patronage, 2-3
Hera, 14, 26, 65, 71, 78-9, 80, 87-8, Peleus, 12, 73, 100
96—100 Pelias, 79, 87-8, 123
Heracles, 9, 18-19, 25-41, 56, 58, 160, Pelops, 54, 57-8
183-4 Penelope, 23, 53, 67
Herodotus, 71, 95, 159 Phineus, 16, 80, 87, 90—5
heroes, cult of, 8, 128 Phrixos, 32
heroines, Libyan nymphs, 78, 80, 88-9, 126 Pindar, imitation of, 60, 116, 124-5, I52~3»
heroism, 8-11, 25, 36 Jason in, 11
Hesiod, 41, 95, 123 n. 89, 127-8, 166-7; Plato, analysis of narrative in, 140-1; Ion, 13
Scutum, 33, 55-6 Polydeuces, 28-9, 128, 160
Hesperides, 27, 29-30, 78, 88-9 Polyphemus, Argonaut, 38-41
Horus, 158 n. 20, 161, 163 Polyphemus, Cyclops, 39 n. 120, 160,
Hylas, 36-41, 183-4 166 n. 57
hymnal style, 83, 116, 140, 150-1 Poseidon, 78, 80, 90, 178
Hypsipyle, 34, 47-52, 74, 111-12, 179-80 Prodicus, 33-4
Ptolemies, 2, 26, 83, 152-69, 188-9
Idas, 19,44,58,91, 176-7 pyrrhiche, 16, 83
Idmon, 19, 44, 176-7
Iopas, 176-7 realism, nature of, 12, 44, 57
Iris, 78, 81-2, 96, 100 repetition, avoidance of, 112, 142
Ithaca, 174 n. 21 Rocks, Clashing, 20, 138, 184
Iuturna, 99 n. 113 Rome, reception of Alexandrian poetry in,
116-19, 175, 189
katabasis, in Argonautica, 1 8 4 - 8 ; in Aeneid,
183-8 Sappho, 46
Kyklopes, 52-4, 57 scholarship, in poetry, 3, 119, 120 n. 77, 127
 General index 203

Sesostris, 164 Theseus, 15

Seth, 161, 163 Thetis, 73, 96-100
Silver Latin, 6 Tiphys, 20-1, 44-5, 183
similes, 40, 42, 66, 78, 84-5, 86, 129—38, Tityos, 58
185-6 tragedy, 3, 22, 46, 79, 80, 93, 182
speech, direct, 13, i n , 138-43; indirect, Triton, Lake, 29, 85
100, 143—51, 190-1; style of, 109-12 Triton, sea god, 30, 78, 88-90, 155
Syrtis, 30, 137 Typhon, 161, 163

Talos, 9, 130-1, 155, 166 Varro, 'Atacinus', 170 n. 2, 175

Teiresias, 91-2 Virgil: use of Argonautica, 31, 36, 37 n. 107,
Telamon, 20 54 n. 35, 58 n. 57, 71-2, 92, 148, 170-89;
Thamyris, 127 indirect speech in, 148; Am. 3, 173-5;
Theiodamas, 37-8 Aen. 6, 184-8; Am. 7, 177-81; see also
Theocritus, Idyll 2, 47; Idyll 11, 39 n. 120; Index of Passages Discussed
Idyll 13, 10 n. 5, 39 n. 120, 40, 118, voice, poetic, 101-19, 141, 150-1
123 n. 89; Idyll 14, 158; Idyll 24, 116;
see also Index of Passages Discussed Zethos, 54, 58
Thersites, 35-6 Zeus, 54, 71, 79-80, 88, 93, 146, 163
 Index ofpassages discussed

APOLLONIUS OF RHODES 1.1078-1152 82-3

Argonautica 1.1-22 119-29 i-H53"I357 36-41
1.1 8,84, 10511. 19 1.1163 37
1.23-227 126-7 1.1171 36 n. 105
1.71-4 127 n. 101 1.1190-1 41 n. 126
1.130 34 n - 97 1.1212-19 37-8
1.132 38 n. 115 1.1233 40
106 n. 25 1.1243-52 40
1.307-11 18,84 1.1255-6 39 n. 119
1.311-16 84-5 1.1261-2 39
1.331-62 18-19 1.1280-9 20
i-339 18 n. 39, 21 1.1315-22 36 n. 104
1.341 16 n. 34 2.15 25 n. 60
1.348 19 2.38-42 28
1.411-12 84 n. 43 2.83-4 28 n. 72
1.450-9 19-20 2.102 43 n. 132
1.489 163 n. 41 2.169-74 105
1.496-511 148-50, 1 6 2 - 3 , J 7 7 2.197-205 91 n. 81
1 2.209-39
-533-5 85 91-2
i-547 78 2.209-11 9i
1.609-30 111-12 2.224 81
1.618 48 2.232-3 92
1.648-9 106 2.246-7 92 n. 87
1.721-73 48, 52-9 2.262-300 81-2
54 n. 34 2.278-86 130-2
1.774-81 48 2.305-6 81 n. 29
1.784 49 2.311-407 94-5
1.788-90 49 n. 17 2.314-16 93-4
1.791-841 50-1 2.329-36 87
1-793-4 50 2-433-4 132
1.796 50-1 2.444-5 2 n. 6
1.804-7 112 2.536-48 86
1.820 5i 2.541-8 86, 137-8
1.856 33 n - 94 2.607-49 20-2
1.865-74 33-6 2.669-719 76, 80, 83
1.896-8 50 n. 20, 51 2.705-13 150-1
1.989-1011 41-2 2.729-51 184
I-996-7 108 2.798 43 n. 132
1.1003-11 42 2.833-4 44
1.1026-35 16-17 2.856 44
1.1039-52 43 2.974-5 95 n. 100
1.1065-9 118 2.1000-29 95

204
 Index ofpassages 205

2.1018-25 106-7 4-577 80

2.1026-9 108 4.584-91 145-6
2.1052-7 32, 134 4.672-82 164-5
2.1068-89 i34 4.720-37 146-7, 165
3-25-9 59 4-753-85O 96-100
3.117-18 107 4.770-2 100 n. 115
3-I7I-5 24-5 4.786-9 97 n. 107
3-194 16 n. 34 4869-79 100
3.351-3 142 4-93O-67 78 n. 11
3.386-90 24 4.983-6 113
3-399-4O6 22 4.984-92 69,91
3.420-31 22-3 4.994-1000 68
3-477-8 142-3 4-997 133
3-540 82 4.1004-5 70 n. 93
3-555 16 n. 34 4.1014-28 64
3-579-6O5 147-8 4.1027 7O n. 95
3.806-19 79 4.1028
3-8i4 107 4.1057 64
3.871-86 49,65 4.1060-7 65
3-891-3 63 4.1068-1120 71-4
3.925-6 108 4.1111-13 70-1
3.956-61 48 4.1114-20 H5
3-974-1145 50-1 4.1165-7 64-5, 106
3-982-3 14,50 4.1176-81 70-1
3.997-IO°6 14-15 4.1182-1200 73 n. i n , 182
3.1069-71 50 n. 20,51 4.1225-7 88
3- I I O 5 63 4.1278-90 135-6
3.1146-62 62 4.1280 135
3-1399 109 4.1298-1304 136-7
4.1-5 6, 65, 105-6 4.1318-21 126
4.6-65 65-6 4.1322 88 n. 65
4-109-17 17 4-I337-43 33, 133
4.136-8 62, 185 4-1397 29 n. 80
4.146-8 183 4.1401-2 32 n. 91
4-157 183 n. 50 4H32-3 30 n. 82
4.167-73 17 4.1433-4 29-30
4.190-206 17 4-H35 3° n - 85
4.190 186 4.1442 29 n. 78
4.194 67 4.1445 29-30
4.202-5 188 4.1477-80 31
4-214-19 185-6 4.1481-2 29
4.215 117 n. 69 4.1513-17 31,89
4-23I-5 147-8 4-I5J9 32 n. 91
4.238-40 132-3 4.1541 89 n. 70
4.338-41 25 n. 58 4-1547-55 85,155
4-355-90 51, 61, 66-7 4.1551-1619 89-90
4.368-9 62-3 4.1593-1602 155
4-392 61 4.1673-7 166
4.404-5 15 4.1682-8 130-1
4.421-44 61-2 4.1694-1718 167
4.435-44 144-5 4-1731 "45 167-8
4.441 70 n. 93 4.1734 152 n. 7
4-445-9 61, 116-18 4.1773-81 119-29
4.477 21 n. 52, 69 4.1776-7 101, 123
4.482-91 42 4.1781 119-20
4-559-6i 80 n. 20, 146 fr. 12 Powell 11411.55
 2O6 Index ofpassages

ARATUS THEOCRITUS
Phainomena 6 3 - 5 32 Idylls 1.42 132 n. 119
138 37 n. 109
ARISTOTLE 13.17-18 127 n. 100
Poetics I454ai6ff. 12-13 13.25-6 10 n. 5
15.106-8 157
H6oa5ff. 37 I9 16.48-9 122 n. 84
^39
VALERIUS FLAGCUS
GALLIMACHUS Argonautica 1.33-6 27
Hymn 2.25-9 157-8 4-22ff. 39 n.119
4.11 131 n. 116 8.68-91 183 n. 49
4.141-7 8.125-6 27 n. 66
4.215-36 96, 131 n. 116
5.103 2 n. 6 VIRGIL
fr. 1.1-7 190-5 Georgics 3.4-8 122 n. 84
fr. 18.9 123 4.418-21 92 n. 83
fr. 24.13-20 37 4.438-9 92 n. 83
fr. 75-22-37 95 Aeneid 1.738-50 176-7
fr- 75-38-9 4711.8 3.24-68 173
fr. 253.8-12 56 n. 44 3.96 173
fr. 384.23-34 155-6 3.140-1 174 n. 17
3.i47ff. 88 n. 65, 174
CATULLUS 3.272-3 174 n. 21
64.94-8 117-18 3.639 !73 n - J 5
4.160-97 73 n. 111
EUPHORION 4.190-5 148
fr. 40 Powell 114 4.190 182
4.246-58 179
HERONDAS 4.261-4 179
1.26-3I 4.288-94 148
!59
4.412 117 n. 72
5.833ff. 183-4
HOMER 5.867 183 n. 52
Iliad 12.10-35 103-4 6.5-10 184
Odyssey 6.i27ff. 48 6.263 185
8.268ff. 149 6.309-12 185-6
11.601-3 27 6.426-9 185
12.374-88 143 6.451-4 31
7.iff. 177-81
INGERTA 7-37 180-1
SH 949 56 n. 44 7-2I2ff. 178
7.5II-18 186 n. 64
PHILETAS 8.370-406 71-2
fr. 7 Powell 118 8.587-93 48 n. 12
8.613-I4 187
PLATO 8.621-3 187
Phaedrus 264c 191-2 8.645 54 n - 34
9.77-122 175
IO.215-59 175
PROPERTIUS IO.496-8 112 n. 51
2.31-2 158 n. 22 I2.i34ff. 99 n. 113

RHIANUS XENOPHON OF EPHESUS

fr. 1 Powell 113-14 Ephesiaca 1.8 55 n. 39