THE POETICS OF AETHALIDES: SILENCE AND POIKILIA IN APOLLONIUS' ARGONAUTICA.
[GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]
His defence is based on context: it is necessary for the passage to be repeated for the sake of internal coherence. Clearly not all scholars believed all repetitions to be spurious padding.
Repeated passages demonstrate the importance of memory in an illiterate society; status is accorded those who traffic in spoken language. The accuracy with which messenger speeches were reported testifies to the messengers' memory as well as to the memory of the poet in whose poetry the messengers' speeches are reported, and suggests the important role of people who were able to transmit words by virtue of their superior memories.(2) In this way the poet aligns the messenger with himself: both are charged with making exact reproductions of strings of authoritative words. Apollonius finds new expression of these ideas in his messenger-figures, most notably Aethalides, a herald who does not speak. Composing in a literate age, he did not have the same need for formulaic repetitions as the poets who orally composed their works. As one would expect, Apollonius typically avoids the Homeric oral style of repeating messages altogether. Whether or not he approved of such athetizations, he studiously avoids the use of repetition in the Argonautica. The Hellenistic fondness for variety, and for unexpected variations on traditional themes, was antithetical to Homeric repetition.(3) In the Argonautica, the preference for poikilia means that messages are sometimes so severely abbreviated that the narrator only gives them in summary. In doing so, Apollonius negotiates between conventional characters and contemporary aesthetics and questions the long-standing connection between memory and the commemorative function of poetry. The appearance of a herald in the Argonautica demonstrates Apollonius' response to a Homeric phenomenon. Although avoiding verbatim repetition, the passage introducing Aethalides is infused with the language of memory and re-presentation, characterizing him as a privileged figure with the ability to look forwards and backwards in time. Aethalides embodies the Hellenistic interest in and uneasiness with the poetic legacy. His silence, as well as the variations on Homeric messenger conventions throughout the Argonautica, suggests a tension between past and present that becomes manifest in the figures most associated with memory.(4)
Aethalides, the herald of the Argonauts, first appears in the catalogue when he is introduced along with his two half-brothers (1.51-5). They are unusual only in that their immortal father, Hermes, is named, whereas the majority of the other Argonauts are linked to mortal fathers.(5) The paternity of Aethalides is again emphasized in the digression that introduces him into the action of the poem (1.640-9):(6)
[GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]
Aethalides is presented as a conventional herald with a traditional epithet ([GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], 641) and the sort of lineage one might expect for a herald. The emphasis on the gifts from his father establishes his credentials; Hermes is, after all, the premier messenger of the Odyssey. Nevertheless, Aethalides' name does not indicate his abilities, while in the Iliad the names of the heralds reflect their line of work and particular abilities.(7) The ostensibly patronymic ending, in fact, points to an unknown father and clashes with the alleged paternity of Hermes.(8) The digressive account of his Underworld experiences, together with the self-conscious abruptness of the narrator's break-off, highlights Aethalides, inviting further examination of the passage.(9) In the following sections, I will examine the digression in three ways: the story itself, the language within the digression, and its immediate context, before going on to discuss it in the larger context of the Argonautica.
At first glance it appears that Apollonius' narrator has finished the story already, and thus the meta-narrative question that closes the digression--why am I telling this story?--shows off his rhetorical abilities with the figure of praeteritio. An educated audience, however, would recognize that the self-censoring question is not truly a case of praeteritio.(10) The narrator does not in fact tell the facts while pretending to pass over them; instead he leaves out some facts by stopping himself. The outline of the story is complete, however, and the essential matters of the myth have been told. A scholium cites Pherecydes as confirmation: he, too, told a story in which Aethalides split his time between upper and lower worlds. When the narrator tells of Aethalides' alternations, however, he alludes to the well-known theory of metempsychosis promulgated by Pythagoras.(11) According to this theory, souls undergo successive lives, constantly returning through the cycles of upper and lower worlds. Apollonius omits a crucial bit of information in his version: he speaks of Aethalides alternating between worlds, but does not specify that these are cycles of reincarnation. Thus he omits the fact that Aethalides was said to have been an earlier incarnation of the soul that became Pythagoras himself. The words [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (644), elsewhere markers of aetia, are not linked to a recognizable aetiological story and thus are left hanging.(12) They should project the cycle of reincarnation from the mythical world of Aethalides into Apollonius' present. The narrator's question cuts off the reach into the time of Apollonius, and thus omits Pythagoras, who would have been the point of the action: as a later incarnation of Aethalides, Pythagoras would have linked the mythical past with Apollonius' contemporary world.
The incomplete action creates a puzzle for the audience of the Argonautica. Their knowledge of the Nachleben of Aethalides invites them to fill in the missing name, while his silence allows Apollonius to preserve the norms observed elsewhere in the poem: he never mentions non-fictional persons by name.(13) In truth, the abrupt termination of the story saves the narrator from offering specifics about Aethalides' lives, thus allowing multiple interpretations of his tale. Pythagoras is not named, but neither is anyone else; the fact that Orphic doctrine embraced a theory of purificatory reincarnation as well is allowed to colour the episode.(14) Orpheus was, unlike Pythagoras, a fictional character, and so he could have been named in connection with the cycles of reincarnation. Such an identification, however, might have caused a jarring anachronism because of his presence on the Argo as one of Aethalides' shipmates.
The words used to describe Aethalides' experiences signal a self-conscious understanding of poetics. His ability to remember (even in unusual circumstances) triggers the digression; the narrator includes this story in order to emphasize Aethalides' authority as a messenger. In this way, memory and re-presentation are highlighted. The herald does not simply descend to the Underworld and return; unlike other souls, he specifically remembers what he sees in the lower world.(15) Forgetfulness becomes an antagonist that Aethalides is able to defeat ([GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], 1.644-5) because of his superior abilities. Apollonius finishes the digression with a meta-narrative question, punctuating the self-conscious literariness of the passage with a conspicuously self-conscious thought.
Aethalides' ability to remember throughout cycles of death and rebirth suggests that memory is linked to immortality. Indeed, Goldhill has noticed the parallels between the [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] of Aethalides and the [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] sought by Achilles (Il. 9.413).(16) An imperishable memory is the means to an imperishable fame since memory allows poetry to be remembered and repeated. Finally, poetry is a means of immortality, both for the poet and his subject. Aethalides' memory, being imperishable, both parallels and commemorates the [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] of others. He can retain and repeat tales, as an aoidos does, thus ensuring a poetic continuity. At the same time, his memory is his [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]; it is the reason that his story is given in the digression. It is ironic that he can ensure the [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] of others, but not his own: the narrator stops himself, depriving Aethalides of part of his [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] by refusing to tell more of the tale. The poet consciously decides what to include and what to exclude from a particular poem. His choices have serious consequences for a character's chance at immortality.
The forces that oppose memory are not merely those of suppression, but also the failure of memory. The opposition between remembrance and forgetfulness can be seen in the words ending lines 642 and 645: `[GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] and [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Aethalides is said to be protected from [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] by the gift of memory from his father, Hermes. This is not the first time these two entities were opposed; in the Iliadic theomachy, Hermes battles with Leto (Il. 20.72). The scholia, and also later the work of `Heraclitus', associate Hermes with [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] and memory on the one hand, and Leto with her near-homonym [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] on the other.(17) With the juxtaposition of `[GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] and [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], Apollonius appears to nod to such allegorical interpretations of the Homeric theomachy. Aethalides received his memory from the god who is most emblematic of the power of memory, and thus is least likely to succumb to the forgetfulness that most mortals must face--even in that part of the Underworld called [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII].
Such meta-poetic language in the Aethalides digression mirrors issues of repetition and continuity that are found throughout the Argonautica. The ideas of memory and return that inform this passage reflect the continuity of poetic tradition, a constant concern of Hellenistic poetry with its self-conscious relationship with the literary past. For Apollonius, the story is not to be presented as an immutable truth; instead, he offers a palimpsestic experience with glimpses of the many alternate paths through the story.(18) The meta-narrative break-off line calls attention to his act of narrating and opens up the possibility of other narrative strands.
Apollonius had a number of literary models for the self-censorship, including Homer, Pindar, and perhaps Callimachus.(19) The Homeric heroes occasionally engage in inner struggles that are represented by monologues addressed to the hero's [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII].(20) In the Iliad, there are five times when a hero stops himself mid-monologue to ask the question:
[GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]
Odysseus (11.407), Menelaus (17.97), Agenor (21.562), and Hector (22.122) all ask themselves this question when they are tempted to flee a particularly dangerous rival. In this way they remind themselves of the honour of bravery, and all but Menelaus hold their ground. The fifth instance inverts this theme: Achilles asks himself the same question when vaunting over Hector's body (22.385). The question reminds him that Patroclus' corpse remains to be buried and for that reason Achilles turns from battle. The result of these questions is that the possibility of an alternative outcome is raised: if these individuals decided differently, the Trojan War might not have continued as it did. Achilles' question in particular directs his actions and therefore the course of the Iliad. It points towards the poem's closure with burial and lament, rather than warfare, which makes the Iliad an Iliad and not an Iliupersis.(21)
Apollonius' narrator follows a similar pattern. He also halts the flow of a narrative with a question. In doing so, he admits to two (or more) possible paths for his act of narration, just as the Homeric figures admit to multiple courses of action. Pindar's narrator likewise redirects the course of some of his poems in order to avoid certain topics for religious or moral reasons.(22) By Pindar's time, such protestations had already lost much of their original religious force and appeared instead to be more of a literary commonplace. The Hellenistic period saw the continued blurring between the religious and the literary.(23) Their pious exclamations of horror can never be wholly devoid of the religious beliefs that shaped the tradition, no matter how self-conscious the context. Thus Callimachus' admonishment to himself during the Acontius and Cydippe story (fr. 75.4-7), while ostensibly motivated by religious awe, is strongly flavoured by allusion to the literary topos. Such self-censorships interject the poet's personality into the poem; they characterize him as a pious figure, one ostensibly unwilling to blaspheme.(24) However, by mentioning these blasphemous ideas he flirts with them, expressing them even while disclaiming. This topos informs Apollonius' self-censorship, and so it seems that Apollonius is applying the traditional idea of propriety to narrative technique. The narrator apologizes for his breach of poetic code. In this way he raises his aesthetic sensibility to the level of a religion (or, alternatively, secularizes religion to the status of his aesthetic preferences).
The way in which the narrator stops the digression is significant. He does not merely stop; instead, he asks a question (1.648-9):
[GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]
The story itself does not cause offence. It is the narration of the story in a continuous manner ([GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]) that is problematic. The adverb suggests that the narrator is avoiding a detailed, blow-by-blow description of the entire Aethalides myth; however, an intertext with Callimachus offers an extra meta-narrative layer. Callimachus famously rejected [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (Aetia 1.1.3), presumably a repudiation of overblown epic.(25) Although Callimachus may have been signalling his departure from Homeric style, he did not altogether reject it; in fact, his recusatio and particularly his use of the word [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] borrows a Homeric usage since Odysseus says much the same thing when he speaks to the Phaeacians (Odyssey 7.241-2):(26)
[GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]
Apollonius' refusal to continue the story about Aethalides, then, although perhaps a declaration of allegiance to Callimachean aesthetics, cannot be a snub against Homer. Apollonius was not faced with an either-or situation in which he had to choose one, and only one, model for his epic. He was free to borrow, modify, and innovate as he wished. His self-censoring comment about the Aethalides story takes both Callimachean and Homeric language as inspiration, thus creating a meta-narrative moment that boldly shows off the mental processes behind his composition.
Context plays a further role in our understanding of the digression and its abrupt ending. Immediately after the narrator's question, and still in the spirit of wishing to hurry on, Aethalides' embassy to the Lemnian women is summed up in one word: [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] `he persuaded' (1.650). The brevity of this statement offers a striking contrast with the Homeric convention of messenger speeches. Not only are we missing Aethalides' speech, but the message instructing him what to say is also omitted.(27) The choice of words, furthermore, calls to mind the metaphorical use of honey ([GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]) to describe the production of poetry. Hellenistic aesthetics preferred poetry that was [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] and [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], and thus it became a literary topos to attribute honey-like sweetness to poetry in order to praise it.(28) Aethalides appears the perfect Hellenistic herald: he avoids the tedium of repeating a long speech while couching his words in the honeyed manner preferred by Hellenistic poetics. Unfortunately, the two techniques are not mutually compatible. The deletion of the speech means that his honeyed words, too, are erased, not even summarized in indirect speech for the audience.
The extremely abbreviated account of Aethalides' message on Lemnos is striking because of its proximity to the self-censoring statement about the Aethalides story. The narrator declares there that extended stories are not desirable; in the next line he quietly avoids the traditional (and rather unwieldy) device of the messenger speech. It would appear that the narrator is not content with wielding editorial power over his own narrative, and so he extends his censorship over speech-narrative as well. In this way he displays his control over the text. The text is the result of narration, and the fabula (along with the characters inside it) has no existence apart from the act of narrating.(29)
Apollonius may have been adapting a specific Homeric episode in his creation of a silent herald. The first time we see heralds at work in the Iliad is when Agamemnon sends Talthybius and Eurybates to fetch Briseis from Achilles' tent. He prepares them with a command-speech; they go reluctantly, and when they reach Achilles they are struck dumb (Iliad 1.329-33):
[GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]
Many elements of this scene are traditional. The heralds work in pairs, a fact that is emphasized by the repeated use of duals. The names of the heralds are generic and appropriate to their work.(30) Once they reach their destination, however, they break from tradition. Contrary to normal etiquette, Achilles (perhaps taking pity on the hapless heralds) speaks first, thereby establishing the extreme irregularity of the heralds' unhappy task.(31) The prominent placement of this episode, along with the heralds' almost exact reversal of their traditional actions, would have piqued Apollonius' interest. He turns this brief episode of speechlessness into a silence that stretches throughout his epic.
Shortly after our introduction to Aethalides, we meet a second herald. All the women on Lemnos have killed all the men, and so the Lemnian ruler, Hypsipyle, is a woman, as is her herald, Iphinoe. The narrator seems to relent and allows her a near-verbatim repetition of Hypsipyle's message, the most exact repetition of its kind in the Argonautica (1.703-8, 1.712-16):(32)
[GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]
Besides the changes of personal endings necessary to retain sense, the only alteration occurs in the adverb in the last line, through which the messenger reveals her personal view.(33) By subtly changing the original message, Iphinoe shows herself to be a good ambassador. While [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] may have suggested to the Argonauts that they would face a reception that required boldness, the substitution of [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] offers a more neutral encouragement.(34)
Although her repetition is relatively brief, the fact that it is the only one of' its kind in the Argonautica connects Iphinoe with the Homeric tradition of verbatim messenger speeches. Her editing is the mark of a good messenger; Odysseus, too, tactfully emends Agamemnon's orders when he speaks to
Achilles.(35) Iphinoe's emphasis on haste, furthermore, links her to Iris, another female herald, since Iris' epithets in the Iliad typically mention her quickness.(36) Perhaps most importantly, her verbatim repetition demonstrates to Aethalides how the job of herald should be fulfilled.
Apollonius' use of this Homeric convention is not a statement that the Homeric convention is preferable to poikilia, however. The single usage of this device, coupled with its context, suggests otherwise. The role reversals on Lemnos undermine Iphinoe's apparent superiority. Actually, the events on the island have rendered gender roles obsolete rather than simply reversed. The women have continued to do their own work, presumably, while taking over traditionally male jobs as well. Thus they are seen arming for battle (635), and their agricultural work is mentioned by the narrator (628-30). Hypsipyle presides over an assembly of women from the king's stone seat, advised by an aged counsellor, Polyxo. That this counsellor happens to be her old nurse contributes to the humour of an episode that is already predisposed to comedy, having strong echoes of Aristophanes' Ecclesiazusae.(37) In this topsy-turvy world, it is not surprising (at least to the audience) that a woman acts as a herald for the Lemnians. What is surprising, and therefore funny, is that the Argonauts appear not to notice the unusual appearance of a female herald even before they learn of the events that have taken place on Lemnos.
The extreme proximity of Hypsipyle's command and Iphinoe's message, furthermore, is noteworthy. Not only does her quick repetition depart from Homeric norms,(38) but it may indicate that Iphinoe had to blurt out the message quickly before she forgot it--exactly counter to the memory so necessary for Homeric messengers and for Aethalides in particular. The comparison of Iphinoe and Aethalides, however, does not create a neat dichotomy of messenger-types; both owe their livelihood to the Homeric tradition, but neither follow the pattern exactly.(39) Aethalides is a male herald who is carefully connected to the heroic tradition. Despite his impeccable credentials, however, his message receives a brief synopsis, while Iphinoe, his female counterpart, is the one allowed to speak with a Homeric repetition.(40)
Such variations offer a glimpse at Apollonius' debt to and distance from the Homeric poems. Apollonius may prefer poikilia to Homeric style, but he cannot show his innovation without evoking the aesthetics from which he was departing. Thus the Homeric poems are still the touchstone of his narrative. Iphinoe's message both reflects Homeric repetition and contrasts the Homeric and Hellenistic treatments of messenger-speeches. Apollonius problematizes the conventions of message-relaying by juxtaposing different styles and by placing the messages in the mouths of widely divergent characters. The fact that Iphinoe may be a more Homeric herald than Aethalides, then, does not suggest that Apollonius is celebrating the Homeric pattern; rather he uses Iphinoe to demonstrate the gap between the Homeric conception of the mythical past and his own view. The Lemnian women are not very good in their unfamiliar roles. Apollonius depicts Hypsipyle as a woman whose uncertainty in ruling leaves her easily swayed by Polyxo's advice. Fortunately for the Lemnian women, Polyxo offers sound advice and Hypsipyle admirably accomplishes her plan. Likewise, the women swiftly arm for battle but then hesitate in fear and [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (1.633-9); they are lucky that the Argonauts are not hostile. It appears that they know their new roles because they have read their Homer, but their reading gave them too few practical details. Despite this lack of knowledge and lack of practice, however, their city is recognizable as a re-creation of a Homeric society. Iphinoe is perhaps the most successful of the women, repeating the message faithfully because that is how Homer depicts the transmission of messages. However, the poet lets her stumble: he depicts her repeating it too soon after the original speech to fit the exact Homeric mode, although she does a good job of suggesting Homeric communication. The scene cannot reject Homeric norms since it is based on them. Instead Apollonius offers a picture of a contemporary rendering of archaic ideas, with all its inexactitudes and misinterpretations. In this way, he reveals the discontinuity between past and present and suggests that the new style of message-relaying reflects Hellenistic aesthetics.
The depiction of heraldic action is not limited to Aethalides and Iphinoe; Jason, too, appears in the role of the messenger on Lemnos. The juxtaposition of these episodes invites a comparison of their abilities. After Hypsipyle and Jason meet, Hypsipyle sends Jason off to tell the other Argonauts what they have decided. Her words echo those with which she sent off Iphinoe at 1.705, placing Jason in the role of the herald (1.832-3):
[GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]
In response, he promises to relay her decision faithfully, according to proper form ([GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]). Jason is not a professional herald, so he specifies that he will repeat the message verbatim.(41) In contrast, Aethalides is expected to speak [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] and so it is not necessary for it to be mentioned. The narrator does not give Jason the chance to repeat the message, however; the content of the message is mentioned only allusively (847-8):(42)
[GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]
Nevertheless, Jason's thoroughness cannot be in doubt. The narrator, although blocking our access to his speech, nonetheless signals that Jason follows the traditional heraldic pattern by including the phrase [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII].(43)
This same adverb links Jason with the narrator's self-censoring comment after the Aethalides story.(44) The phrase [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] echoes the narrator's [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (1.648-9), the only two occurrences of this phrase in the poem, and the adverb [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] appears in the same metrical position in both phrases. The verbal echoes suggest that within the fabula Jason is making a verbatim repetition of Hypsipyle's decision, or rather the modified plan that he suggests to her (1.840-1). The narrator's synopsis of Jason's speech both criticizes Jason's verbosity and edits out the offending speech. The echo of the Aethalides self-censorship appears to be something of a tease: the narrator comments upon Jason's style of presentation without subjecting the audience to it, thereby calling attention to his own act of editing.
The audience has a chance to observe Jason's ability as a narrator later in the poem. In the land of the Mariandynoi, Jason offers a synopsis of their adventures so far. While this is not a message per se, it nonetheless offers a glimpse of Jason's narrative gifts and elides the distinction between messenger and bard (2.762-71):
[GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]
He faithfully narrates the events of the Argonautica in miniature, but in fact we do not hear Jason's account. Although the internal audience is learning about their adventures for the first time, the external audience has been involved in the narrative from the beginning. Thus the narrator avoids redundancy by presenting Jason's summary in a summary of his own. He signals Lycus' pleasure in the narration by using the word `enchant' ([GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]), the traditional response to a talented bard ([GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], 2.771-2).(45) It appears that whatever Jason said in oratio recta within the fabula was pleasing; his narration does its job by provoking enchantment.(46)
Jason once again plays the herald upon reaching Colchis. He takes the [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (3.197-8) when he visits Aeetes, presumably to signal his sacrosanct status as herald.(47) This also reminds us of Aethalides, since he too carried the [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (1.642-3). Once again Jason speaks in oratio recta (3.386-95), as he did when he addressed Hypsipyle (1.836-41). This time his speech is both instruction-speech and relaying-speech rolled into one, since he is acting as herald for himself; it is striking that he casts himself as a messenger again when he promises to broadcast the story of Aeetes' generosity throughout Hellas (3.391-2). Aeetes' response is not what he might have wished, however; after deciding not to attack them on the spot, the Colchian king asks (3.401):
[GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]
thereby indicating that, in his view at least, Jason has been speaking as a Homeric herald does--that is to say, more repetitiously and verbosely than either he or the narrator would care for: when the narrator caught himself speaking in such a manner, he censored himself (1.648-9); when Jason spoke thus, the narrator suppressed his speech (1.847). Now a character within the fabula directly criticizes Jason for speaking at length, [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], reminding us of the Hellenistic preference for poikilia.(48)
Aethalides, the traditional herald, never obtains either criticism or approbation from the narrator. Nor does he ever say a word anywhere in the Argonautica. In the two instances in which he is depicted doing his job, his language is omitted. For a herald, one who traffics in language, this silence is a peculiar but logical result of Apollonius' decidedly Hellenistic spin on the heroic world. Aethalides is undistinguished in the catalogue; he is the third of three sons of Hermes who join the quest. On Lemnos, Apollonius omits the opening message of command as well as the messenger speech: there is a sense that the message is doubly censored. The audience learns the result of the speech (that Hypsipyle received the travellers), but not its content. In Colchis, his final appearance in the poem,(49) there is no indication that he speaks at all; there again only the result--the transfer of the dragon's teeth from Aeetes to Jason--is told. His paternity is affirmed for the third time when he is called [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (3.1175). Hunter's observation that Apollonius generally applies the adjective [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] only to immortals is a valuable insight.(50) The adjective [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] recalls the undying fame--[GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]--that Aethalides received because of his [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. A subject cannot be famed without a poetic memory that preserves the deeds that provoked the fame. For Aethalides, this is doubly true: without his (poetic) memory he would have no fame. Nonetheless, the audience does not have the opportunity to observe this memory because of the exclusion of Aethalides' speech.
Aethalides is a traditional herald at the mercy of the literate, self-conscious poetics that are at work in the Argonautica. Apollonius depicts heralds in situations wherein their specific talents are not used to their fullest potential. He does this by limiting their appearances in his epic and then by undercutting their effectiveness. As a result, the narrator's role is foregrounded since he, not the messenger, controls the passage of messages. The messenger's memory, earlier so significant for oral technique, becomes less important than Hellenistic poikilia; this signals a self-conscious selection of variation over repetition. Aethalides thus is presented as a marginalized figure who is far less significant than his Homeric counterparts. At the same time, as a herald he is an important symbol for the disjunction between the styles of Homeric oral composition and of the literate epic that adapts it. In an illiterate society, heralds are one of the few means of communication between distant areas; the exactitude of their memory preserves the accuracy of transmission. Thus they, like bards, are repositories of the spoken word. Such figures become functionally obsolete with the rise of literacy; their abilities may be entertaining or amazing but ultimately are not necessary for the retention of information.
There is a tension between Apollonius' rejection of heraldic conventions, in particular verbatim repetition, and his engagement with traditional epic forms. Not content with a wholesale absorption of the Homeric poems, Apollonius sifts through his models, selecting and rejecting certain techniques and ideas. The digression about Aethalides is infused with the language of poetic continuity and the ideas of memory and return. Its abrupt recta-narrative ending serves as a link to the poetic past while expressing impatience with the conventions of ancient epic, calling attention to his act of composition and therefore to his choices for inclusion and exclusion. Aethalides, a herald by birth and by gift, is a casualty of the narrator's choices.
(1) The general acceptance of the Parry-Lord theory of oral composition has saved many Homeric repetitions from athetization. As B. Fenik remarks in Studies in the Odyssey (Wiesbaden, 1974), p. 145, `The repeated use of larger narrative units, like the smaller dictional formulae themselves, is part and parcel of the poet's technique. He repeats larger units just as he repeats the smaller phrase and sentence formulae.' I. J. F. De Jong, Narrators and Focalizers.' The Presentation of the Story in the Iliad (Amsterdam, 1987), p. 180 offers a set of norms for the transmission of messages.
(2) For the status conceded to those who can recall past events accurately, see R. P. Martin, The Language of Heroes: Speech and Performance in the Iliad (Ithaca, 1989), pp. 77-88.
(3) Apollonius and his contemporaries show no signs of being aware that the Homeric poems were the result of oral composition. The Hellenistic avoidance of repetition, therefore, is not a conscious affirmation of literary composition but rather the reflection of Hellenistic aesthetic preferences. For the infrequency of Apollonian repetition, see G. W. Elderkin, `Repetition in the Argonautica of Apollonius', AJP 34 (1913), 198-201; L. Deubner, `Ein Stilprinzip hellenistischer Dichtkunst', NJbb 47 (1921), 361-78; W. Moskalew, Formular Language and Poetic Design in the Aeneid (Leiden, 1982), pp. 60-72. For the response of Alexandrian scholarship to Homeric repetition, see R. Janko's commentary on Iliad 13-16 (Cambridge, 1992), pp. 22-9.
(4) I will not discuss poet-figures such as Orpheus and Phineus in this article. See S. Goldhill, The Poet's Voice (Cambridge, 1991); R. L. Hunter, The Argonautica of Apollonius: Literary Studies (Cambridge, 1993); and, most recently, R. V. Albis, Poet and Audience in the Argonautica of Apollonius Rhodius (Boulder, 1996), pp. 28-31 on the affinities between poets and the bards whom they depict.
(5) A point noted by F. Vian at Argonautiques I (Paris, 1976), p. 7; comparison with Pindar's approach makes it clear that Apollonius emphasizes the mortality of his heroes. Pindar groups the Argonauts according to divine parentage, and at the end of his catalogue names Mopsus as the only non-divine participant (Pyth. 4.172-90). Apollonius, in contrast, chooses a mortal parent for as many heroes as possible. Castor and Polydeuces, for instance, are called the sons of Leda who grew up in Tyndareus' home. Zeus is mentioned briefly but not as their father (1.146-50). The impact of having an immortal father may be lessened because, as D. N. Levin comments in Apollonius' Argonautica Re-examined.' The Neglected First and Second Books (Leiden, 1971), p. 63, Erytus and Echion are introduced first as sons of Hermes while Aethalides is called their [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (1.53).
(6) All quotes from the Argonautica follow the text established by F. Vian and E. Delage (Paris, 1974-81).
(7) For instance, Odius, Eurybates, and Thootes. The name Talthybius may signify his relationship with the Talthybiadae, a family or guild of heralds; G. S. Kirk in his commentary on Iliad 1-4 (Cambridge, 1985), at Il. 1.320, presumes that the guild existed from pre-Homeric times on. The generic nature of Eurybates' name is shown by the appearance of a second Eurybates in the Iliad, a herald attached to Odysseus (Il. 2.184). Aristonicus at 1.320a makes it clear that these are separate characters.
(8) It may be that this name arises from a mortal father; unfortunately, Aethalides is so little attested that this hypothesis is impossible to prove. The only other source for the myth of Aethalides is Pherecydes as quoted in the scholia to Apollonius at 1.645. In this version, Hermes allowed Aethalides to live half of his time in Hades and half in the world above.
(9) G. Genette, Narrative Discourse: An Essay in Method (Ithaca, 1980), pp. 194-8 discusses the change in focalization that occurs when less information than necessary is given. Such paralipses break the poetic code without destroying it; instead, they call attention to its existence. See also M. Bal, Narratology: Introduction to the Theory of Narrative (Toronto, 1985), pp. 142-9 on the relationship of primary and embedded texts.
(10) Pace Goldhill (n. 4), pp. 290-2.
(11) The allusion to Pythagoreanism was recognized in antiquity; the scholia at 1.643-8e state that the Pythagoreans believed that Aethalides was reborn as Euphorbus in Trojan times, then Pyrrus the Cretan, followed by an unknown Elian and then Pythagoras. Their belief formed a direct link with the mythic past.
(12) H. Frankel, Noten zu den Argonautika des Apollonios (Munich, 1968) at pp. 641-9 considers this to be an inverted action since it explains the origin of something in the past rather than something in the author's present. The latter is the normal pattern of usage. Both the narrator and characters within the narrative employ the phrase [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], as well as variations such as [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. In six out of seven occurrences of the original phrase in the Argonautica, it appears as part of an action (1.644, 825, 1061; 2.1214; 3.312; 4.480, 599). The seventh instance occurs when Hypsipyle gives her half-truthful version of the events on Lemnos. At 1.825, she claims that [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] the Lemnian men live in Thrace, covering her lie with a false action and perhaps attempting to give her story the illusion of credibility.
(13) The avoidance of non-fictional characters may have distinguished Apollonius' work from historical and panegyric epics of this period. Whether or not Alexandrian scholars differentiated between historical and mythological epic, however, remains debatable. The long-standing belief that the Hellenistic period saw an explosion of historical epics gained much of its momentum from K. Ziegler's book, Das Hellenistische Epos (Leipzig, 1934). This view has fallen into disfavour of late; see S. M. Goldberg, Epic in Republican Rome (Oxford, 1995), p. 53 and especially A. Cameron, Callimachus and his Critics (Princeton, 1995), pp. 263-302. I prefer the broader definition of epic used by D. C. Feeney, The Gods in Epic (Oxford, 1991), p. 266, where he has collected convincing evidence for historical and panegyric epic of the Hellenistic period by expanding his field of vision to include shorter poems. These works were perhaps not `full' epics, but they undoubtedly existed and most likely were known by Apollonius.
(14) For the association of Pythagoras with Orpheus and Orphic writings, see Ion of Chios, Triagmoi DK 36 B 2; Herodotus 2.81; Plato, Cratylus 400c, and Phaedo 62b. Many fantastic stories became attached to the name of Pythagoras in later times; see G. S. Kirk et al., The Presocratic [Philosophers.sup.2] (Cambridge, 1983), pp. 228-9; M. L. West, The Orphic Poems (Oxford, 1983), pp. 1-38; and H. S. Schibli, Pherekydes of Syros (Oxford, 1990), pp. 10-13 for some of the far-fetched tales connected to Pythagoras and his conflation with Orpheus and Pherecydes.
(15) Apollonius appears to have conflated two Homeric accounts to describe Aethalides' experience. The Dioscuri alternate between upper and lower worlds (Od. 11.302-4) and Teiresias was allowed to retain his [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (Od 10.491-5). The Dioscuri return, and Teiresias has the ability to remember, but none of them do both in the way that Aethalides can; for a closer parallel, see the myth of Er in Plato, Rep. 614d.
(16) Goldhill (n. 4), p. 291. Not surprisingly, the adjective [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] is normally used to describe immortals and their world. However, it also describes the fame attained through poetry as at Theognis 246, [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII].
(17) See F. Buffiere, Les Mythes d'Homere et la Pensee [Grecque.sup.2] (Paris, 1973), pp. 290f. This interpretation is expressed by Plutarch in Vit. Hom. 102: [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII].
(18) For an excellent discussion of poetic paths through the Argonautica, see Albis (n. 4), pp. 43-66.
(19) He may also have been thinking of the cryptic question that ends the proem of Hesiod's Theogony: [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]; (Th. 35). The self-conscious question ends one narrative, thereby allowing the narrator to begin again, in this case with a second invocation to the Muses.
(20) See S. Scully, `The language of Achilles: the [MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] formulas', TAPA 114 (1984), 11-27 for discussion of the formulaic opening phrase [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. For the deliberation between two choices as a `type-scene' of Homeric poetry, see W. Arend, Die Typischen Scenen bei Homer (Berlin, 1933), pp. 108f; also W. Schadewalt, Monolog und Selbstgesprach (Berlin, 1926), especially pp. 189ff, and B. Fenik, Typical Battle Scenes in the Iliad: Studies in the Narrative Technique of Homeric Battle Description (Wiesbaden, 1968), pp. 96-8.
(21) My thanks to Denis Feeney for pointing out this Homeric self-referentiality.
(22) For instance, he avoids the story of Pelops' being eaten ([GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] Ol. 1.52) as well as other stories that show the gods in a negative light ([GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] Ol. 9.35-9). On the Abbruchsformel in Pindar, see W. H. Race, `Some digressions and returns in Greek authors', CJ 76 (1980), 1-8; N. J. Richardson, `Pindar and later literary criticism in antiquity', PLLS 5 (1985), 383-401, at pp. 395f; M. A. Harder, `Untrodden paths: where do they lead?', HSPh 93 (1990), 287-309, at p. 296; and P. Kyriakou, `A variation of the Pindaric break-off in Nemean 4', AJP 117.1 (1996), 17-35. See also the comments of Feeney (n. 13), pp. 17-19 regarding Pindar's collapse of religious and literary distinctions.
(23) A. W. Bulloch in his commentary on Callimachus' fifth hymn (Cambridge, 1985) on pp. 55-6 calls such protestations `a stylistic topos in Hellenistic poetry', while T. Fuhrer, `A Pindaric feature in the poems of Callimachus', AJP 109 (1988), 53-68, at p. 53 finds Callimachus' use of them to be [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] borrowed from Pindar. Neither interpretation attributes much religious motivation to them.
(24) N. Hopkinson, A Hellenistic Anthology (Cambridge, 1988), p. 105; see also A. Cameron, `Genre and style in Callimachus', TAPA 122 (1992), 305-12.
(25) Much ink has been spilled over the meaning of Callimachus' words. Hopkinson (n. 24), p. 87 and ad loc. suggests that Callimachus was against `a single theme treated with smooth narrative progression'. Cameron (nn. 13 and 24) is much more specific, arguing forcefully that Callimachus was taking a stance against narrative elegy such as Antimachus' Lyde. I find that Hunter (n. 4), pp. 190-5 offers the most persuasive interpretation of this passage when he suggests that Callimachus alludes to Aristotle's theories of epic. My thanks to Stephen Heyworth for drawing my attention to Callimachus fr. 26.8, in which the poet explains his composition of the Aetia with the words [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]; see S. J. Heyworth, `Some allusions to Callimachus in Latin poetry', MD 33 (1994), 51-79 at pp. 72-5.
(26) Despite the repetitions and thoroughness of speech elsewhere in the Homeric poems (as evidenced by Nestor's assurance [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], Il. 9.61), Circe and the dream that comes to Penelope both use this adverb in describing the kind of prophecy they refuse to give (Od. 4.836, 12.56).
(27) J. J. Clauss, The Best of the Argonauts: The Redefinition of the Epic Hero in Book 1 of Apollonius's Argonautica (Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1993), pp. 114f suggests that the story about Aethalides' imperishable memory serves as a replacement for the traditional messenger repetition; the fact that the narrator dwells so long on the source and abilities of mental agility suggests that his report must be verbatim. This is a neat explanation; however, the meta-narrative language of the digression suggests to me that the omission of Aethalides' speech is more significant than Clauss allows. Furthermore, his explanation does not account for the absence of the original speech as well.
(28) Callimachus fr. 11 singles out these qualities as desirable for poetry, a topos from lyric poetry that H. White, New Essays in Hellenistic Poetry (Amsterdam, 1985), pp. 20-3 and 69-75 traces to a Hellenistic epigrammatic tradition. Levin (n. 5), p. 63 notes that the connotations of this word are appropriate for the herald of Jason, a hero who uses `honeyed words' to get his way with Medea (see 3.985, 3.1102, 4.394).
(29) My separation of the story and the act of narrating derives from Genette's (n. 9), p. 27 division of histoire, narrative, and narration. I translate histoire using Bal's (n. 9), p. 5 term fabula to describe `a series of logically and chronologically related events that are caused or experienced by actors'. I prefer fabula because of its etymological association with the English word `fable', thus acting as a reminder that the subject of Apollonius' poem is in fact a myth lacking a definitive account; our reception of the story is filtered through the narrator's narration. The characters within the fabula still repeat messages, for example, but the narrator generally chooses not to include such repetitions in the text.
(30) On the use of the dual to describe the actions of heralds, see J. B. Hainsworth's commentary on Iliad 9-12 (Cambridge, 1993), at Il. 9.170. For significant names of heralds see n. 7 above.
(31) Heralds are supposed to go right up to the recipient and deliver the message. The incongruity of Talthybius' and Eurybates' action is noted by the scholiast, who comments ad 1.332b: [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Although silence can be a rhetorical tool (see O. C. Cramer, `Speech and silence in the Iliad', CJ 71 , 300-4), the narrator's specific mention of the heralds' fear and awe make rhetoric an unlikely source for their silence. Talthybius gives an appropriate repetition of a message a little later in the epic (Il. 4.193-7 ~ 204-7), showing that this initial silence was anomalous: he does in fact know what he is supposed to do.
(32) The only other speech that is near its length is Jason's two-line repetition of Aeetes' description of the bulls (3.09-10 ~ 3.495-6). Nevertheless, Iphinoe's speech, although by far the longest piece of text that is repeated verbatim in the Argonautica, is far shorter than many of the Homeric repeated speeches. Apollonius perhaps prepares for Iphinoe's feat with his repetition of her name at the beginning of two successive lines, 1.702-3.
(33) De Jong (n. 1), p. 185 explains that such adjustments are common in repeated speech: `Like all speaking characters, messengers are (secondary) focalizers and as such they often select, add to and interpret the information they have to convey.'
(34) The change in adverb has been explained in various ways. F. Stossl, Apollonios Rhodios: Interpretationen zur Erzahlungskunst und Quellenverwertung (Leipzig, 1941), p. 40 posits that her haste is an element remaining from a proecdosis. E. V. George, `Poet and characters in Apollonius Rhodius' Lemnian episode,' Hermes 100 (1972), 47-63, at pp. 60f claims that [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] may show her emotional agitation, contrasting with Aethalides who is emblematic of the traditional objective herald. Two more recent readings support my interpretation. Clauss (n. 27), p. 116 suggests that it reflects Iphinoe's ability to speak with [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] as her mistress does (1.792), while R. Hunter, Jason and the Golden Fleece (Oxford, 1993), ad loc. believes that it is a significant variation that demonstrates Iphinoe's sensitivity to the women's desires.
(35) Odysseus repeats Agamemnon's offer (9.122-57 ~ 9.264-99), but by changing and expanding the final verses (9.158-61 ~ 9.300-6) he demonstrates his awareness of Achilles' emotional state.
(36) Of course, in this case Iphinoe is urging the Argonauts to hurry, not herself. This represents a transferral of the messenger's epithet onto the people for whom she works. In 40 appearances in the Iliad, Iris is named with an epithet or some sort of qualifier 34 times. Of these, 24 refer to speed: [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] ten times, [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] nine times [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] once (following Monro and Allen's text which reads [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], not [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], at 23.198), [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], four times. Eight of her other epithets have to do with message-carrying: [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (which may also carry connotations of speed) three times, [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] twice, [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] once and [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] twice. In contrast, in both the Iliad and Odyssey Hermes' epithets emphasize his lineage ([GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]) and his past deeds ([GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]). When he does receive epithets that refer to his work as a herald, they do not specifically signify rapidity ([GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]).
(37) Discussed by Stossl (n. 34), p. 40.
(38) In the Iliad, De Jong (n. 1), pp. 241-2 counts 24 instances of repeated messages. The shortest pause between initial and relaying speeches is three lines (Iliad 4.65-67 ~ 4.70-73), with the second shortest being six lines (Iliad 12.343-350 ~ 12.356-63). The separations range from three to 2782 lines, with an average separation of 202.8 lines. Thus Iphinoe's six-line pause, although not anomalous, is comparatively brief.
(39) This is why I do not agree with the assertion of M. M. DeForest, Apollonius' Argonautica: A Callimachean Epic (Leiden, 1994), pp. 86-90 that the quick repetition mocks Homeric naivete or her suggestion that Apollonius describes Iphinoe in such a way as to denigrate Jason's abilities. While I agree that Iphinoe's repetition emphasizes Aethalides' silence, I find DeForest's argument untenable because it posits the Homeric pattern as the only `correct' one. Apollonius clearly used the Homeric poems as models, but they certainly were not his only sources of inspiration, and he certainly sought to rework the originals.
(40) B. Pavlock, Eros, Imitation, and the Epic Tradition (Ithaca, 1990), pp. 45-51 has been very influential for my reading of the Lemnian episode. The ongoing dialogue between the sexes that she sees can, I believe, be applied to Iphinoe and Aethalides.
(41) The ability to repeat messages verbatim was not limited to professional heralds in the Homeric epics; any hero should be able to remember and repeat messages. See Martin (n. 2) for a discussion of heroes as performers, with memory as a heroic characteristic.
(42) Stossl (n. 34), p. 44 notes that this is an odd omission, since the parallel scenes of arrival and departure suggest that Apollonius was not adverse to writing doublet scenes, while George (n. 34), p. 60 reads Jason's speech as a parody of a herald speaking verbatim.
(43) Jason is not the only one whose words are edited by the narrator. When Medea pours out her troubles to her aunt Circe, the narrator states that she tells her everything ([GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], 4.730), and yet he only gives a brief summary of her speech (4.730-6). He further demonstrates his dominance over the narrative by mentioning a subject that Medea leaves out: Apsyrtus' murder ([GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], 4.736-7).
(44) DeForest (n. 39), p. 89 notes these similarities, but draws a different conclusion: she sees the juxtaposition of these phrases as further evidence for Jason's failure as a hero.
(45) Within the Argonautica, Orpheus soothes the quarrel of Idas and Idmon with his cosmogonical song, with the result that [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (1.515); see E. Schwartz, Aspects of Orpheus in Classical Literature and Mythology (Harvard diss., 1984), pp. 63-90 for a broader perspective on Orpheus' powers, Albis (n. 4), pp. 81-7 draws a connection between the [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] of Apollonius' poetry and Medea's sorcery in Book 3; also see G. B. Walsh, The Varieties of Enchantment: Early Greek Views of the Nature and Function of Poetry (Chapel Hill, 1984), pp. 3-21 and especially pp. 14-19 on [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] as the goal of Homeric bards.
(46) Albis (n. 4), pp. 52-3 sees the use of the verb [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] as a sign of Apollonius' self-approbation rather than praise of Jason's abilities.
(47) See R. Mondi, `[GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]: an argument for divine kingship in early Greece', Arethusa 13 (1980), 203-16 for a discussion of the sceptre as a twofold symbol, that of kingship and of the authority of the speaker holding it.
(48) The only other character to use this word is Phineus, who is shown to be wise in refusing to speak [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] because it is a sin against Zeus (2.390-1).
(49) When Medea suggests luring Apsyrtus to his death, she mentions sending heralds [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] plural) to persuade him to come alone (4.417). A few lines later at 4.435, the narrator reiterates that Medea sent heralds ([GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], following Vian's text). In neither case do the heralds speak, but their action is summarized at 436 by [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. It is unclear who these heralds are, since Aethalides and Iphinoe were the only named heralds, and surely Iphinoe remained on Lemnos. Thus, there must have been at least one unheralded herald who accompanied the Argonauts on their voyage, and who also was denied the opportunity to speak verbatim.
(50) R. L. Hunter's commentary on Argonautica 3 (Cambridge, 1989), at 3.1175. The only other instance of [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] applied to a mortal occurs when Jason asks Argos his background, [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (2.1139).
email@example.com Arizona State University
|Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback|
|Publication:||The Classical Quarterly|
|Date:||Jul 1, 1998|
|Previous Article:||ARISTOTLE ON THE PHILOSOPHICAL NATURE OF POETRY.|
|Next Article:||TERENCE, ADELPHOE: PROBLEMS OF DRAMATIC SPACE AND TIME(*).|