Valerius Flaccus: Argonautica, Book 8: Edited with Introduction, Translation, and Commentary 0192865897, 9780192865892

Citation preview

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

OX F O R D C OM M E N TA R I E S O N F L AV IA N P O E T RY General Ed i to rs a n ton y aug ous ta ki s fed e r i c a b e sso n e ch ris t er h en ri ks én r. j oy l i t t l ewo o d g es i n e ma n uwa ld ru t h pa rk e s ch ri s t ia n e re i t z

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

OX F OR D C OMM E NTAR I E S ON FL AVIAN POET RY The Oxford Commentaries on Flavian Poetry series makes available authoritative yet accessible scholarly editions of Flavian literature, including the works of such authors as Statius, Valerius Flaccus, Silius Italicus, and Martial. Through publishing traditional philological commentaries on individual poetic books it aims to promote and stimulate further scholarship on this key epoch in the history of Roman literature.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

Valerius Flaccus Argonautica Book 8

Edited with Introduction, Translation, and Commentary by C R I S T IA N O C A ST E L L E T T I Edited by A N T O N Y AU G O U STA K I S, M A R C O F U C E C C H I, and G E SI N E M A N U WA L D

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

Great Clarendon Street, Oxford, OX2 6DP, United Kingdom Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide. Oxford is a registered trade mark of Oxford University Press in the UK and in certain other countries © Oxford University Press 2022 The moral rights of the author have been asserted First Edition published in 2022 Impression: 1 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted by law, by licence or under terms agreed with the appropriate reprographics rights organization. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope of the above should be sent to the Rights Department, Oxford University Press, at the address above You must not circulate this work in any other form and you must impose this same condition on any acquirer Published in the United States of America by Oxford University Press 198 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10016, United States of America British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data Data available Library of Congress Control Number: 2022931925 ISBN 978–0–19–286589–2 Printed and bound by CPI Group (UK) Ltd, Croydon, CR0 4YY

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

Preface Cristiano Castelletti, our dear friend and colleague, died unexpectedly on 4 October 2017 in Lugano, Switzerland, at the age of 46. Cristiano was a talented Classicist, who had just finished his Habilitation at the University of Fribourg in Switzerland, with a commentary on Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica 8 in Italian (2015), and was in the process of translating and publishing the study in English. Cristiano had already published a book on Porphyry (Porfirio. Sullo Stige, 2006) and a number of important articles on Valerius Flaccus in the last few years before his premature death. Honouring Cristiano’s memory, we bring his commentary to publication, as he would have wished, in the Oxford Commentaries on Flavian Poetry series, adding to the growing bibliography and existing commentaries on the last book of Valerius Flaccus’ poem. First and foremost, we would like to thank the doctoral student Nicholas Rudman who undertook the difficult task of translating the manuscript from Italian, providing a superb first draft to the editors. We have supplemented and slightly edited further (mainly with additional bibliographical references) various parts of this work to bring it in line with the conventions of this series. The substance of the original work has remained unchanged and displays the hallmarks of Cristiano’s approach to Valerius Flaccus. We are grateful to Cristiano’s family and, particularly, to his wife Beatrice for giving us access to Cristiano’s unpublished Habilitation thesis. We also wish to thank the editors of the Oxford series and Charlotte Loveridge at OUP for embracing this project and helping us bring it to completion. AA, MF, GM November 2020

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

Contents List of Abbreviations

ix

INTRODUCTION1 1. Context and Aim of this Commentary

1

2. The Poem’s Ideology in a sphragis

1

3. The Eighth Book and the End of the Poem

6

4. Text, Sigla, Editions, and Textual Abbreviations

9

TEXT AND TRANSLATION

15

COMMENTARY49 Bibliography 255 1. Editions, Commentaries, Translations of Valerius Flaccus255 2. Other Works256 Indexes 1. Index Locorum269 2. General Index272

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

List of Abbreviations A-­G

Greenough, J. B., Kittredge, G. L., Howard, A. A., and D’Ooge, B. L. (1931). Allen and Greenough’s New Latin Grammar. New York.

AR

Apollonius Rhodius

Chantraine

Chantraine, P. (1968). Dictionnaire étymologique de la langue grecque. Paris.

CLE

Buecheler, F. (1837–1908). Carmina Latina Epigraphica, 2 vols. Leipzig.

D-­S

Daremberg, C., and Saglio, E. (1875–1912). Dictionnaire des antiquités grecques et romaines. Paris.

Ernout-­Meillet

Ernout, A., and Meillet, A. (1959). Dictionnaire étymologique de la langue latine. Paris.

EV

Enciclopedia Virgiliana (1984–91). Rome.

FGrHist

Jacoby, F. (1923–58). Die Fragmente der griechischen Historiker, 15 vols. Berlin.

K-­S

Kühner, R., and Stegmann, C. (1955). Ausführliche Grammatik der lateinischen Sprache. Zweiter Band: Satzlehre, 2 vols. Leverkusen.

L-­H-­Sz

Leumann, M., Hofmann, J. B., and Szantyr, A. (1977 / 1972). Lateinische Grammatik, I: Laut- und Formenlehre; II: Syntax und Stylistik, 2nd ed. Munich.

LIMC

Lexicon Iconographicum Mythologiae Classicae (1981–99), 8 vols. Zurich.

OLD

Glare, P. G. W. (2012). Oxford Latin Dictionary, 2nd ed. Oxford.

RE

Wissowa, G. et al. (1894–1980). Real-­Encyclopädie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft. Stuttgart.

Roscher

Roscher, W. H. (1884–1937). Ausführliches Lexikon der griechischen und römischen Mythologie. Leipzig.

TLL

Thesaurus Linguae Latinae (1900–). Munich.

TrRF

Tragicorum Romanorum Fragmenta (2012–), 2 vols. Göttingen.

Vahlen2

Vahlen, I. (1903). Ennianae poesis reliquiae, 2nd ed. Leipzig.

VF

Valerius Flaccus

Walde-­Hofmann Walde, A., and Hofmann, J. B. (1982). Lateinisches etymologisches Wörterbuch. Heidelberg.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

Introduction 1.  CONTEXT AND AIM OF THIS COMMENTARY The amount of work dedicated to Valerius Flaccus’ (henceforth VF) Argonautica in recent decades is indicative of the scholarly interest in imperial epic poets. Concerning VF, in addition to the commentaries, which now cover all eight books, one can add D. Hershkowitz’s 1998 and T. Stover’s 2012 books. Hershkowitz’s monograph was groundbreaking and at that time practically the only modern work to offer a comprehensive analysis of the poem, addressing both literary issues and those related to the ideological and sociopolitical context in which the poet wrote. Stover offered an intriguing reading of the poem in its literary context with regard to the epic predecessors, especially Lucan, and argued for a Vespasianic date for the Argonautica, making it the predecessor of the other three Flavian epic poems, Statius’ Thebaid and Achilleid and Silius Italicus’ Punica. In addition to the commentary on the whole poem by F. Spaltenstein (2002–5) and Brill’s Companion to Valerius Flaccus (co-­edited by G. Manuwald and M. Heerink in 2014), in 2012 no fewer than two commentaries on VF’s eighth book came out by C. Lazzarini and T. Pellucchi, respectively. The former (first conceived nearly twenty years earlier) covers the poem’s first 287 lines, whereas Pellucchi commented on the whole book. Since these rather recent works offer a solid starting point,1 in the following sections of the Introduction, I would like to dwell upon aspects of the poem that are not treated by my predecessors, offering a new interpretation not only for the eighth book, but also for the entire poem. I shall, however, return to and further develop other aspects at the beginning of the various sections of the commentary, and, where necessary, also in comments on individual lines.

2.  THE POEM’S IDEOLO GY IN A SPHR AGIS Let us start with the poet’s sphragis in order to examine the most significant components of the poem’s ideology. VF returns and completes these themes in the eighth book. 1  See esp. Pellucchi (2012) v–lviii.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

2 Introduction We know little about our poet, except that he wrote the Argonautica in Latin during the Flavian dynasty,2 that his tria nomina were probably Gaius Valerius Flaccus,3 and that he was a member of the priestly college of the quindecimviri sacris faciundis.4 Apollonius Rhodius’ (henceforth AP) and Virgil’s influence on VF’s poem has long been recognized, but in addition to these models (and also others such as Euripides, Ovid, and Seneca) critics have only recently begun to study the influence of Aratus and his tradition, finding it remarkably relevant for understanding the Argonautica.5 The dominance of astronomy is clear from the poem’s first lines, in which the author mentions the Argo’s catasterism (and not the capture of the Golden Fleece) as the crucial event of the epic: prima deum magnis canimus freta pervia natis | fatidicamque ratem, Scythici quae Phasidis oras | ausa sequi mediosque inter iuga concita cursus | rumpere flammifero tandem consedit Olympo (VF 1.1–4). The ship is not only the medium that brings the Greek heroes to Colchis and allows them to return to Thessaly, nor is it the only one that can still be admired as a constellation, but it is above all a metaphor for the poem itself.6 Members of the imperial family would ascend to the heavens (as VF states shortly after this prooemium, cf. 1.15–20), but the sky is also the final reward that Jupiter promises to the heroes, as he declares at the end of the Weltenplan (1.531–67).7 By adopting a (Roman) Stoic conception of heroism, Jupiter addresses Hercules and the Dioscuri, asking them to ‘aim towards the sky’ (tendite in astra viri, 1.563) through difficult labours. And this is precisely what VF’s elaborate sphragis appears to show us. The poet creates this sphragis in the second book while the Argonauts stop at Lemnos. Just as in AR’s poem, the heroes allow themselves to be seduced by the pleasures of female company, until Hercules (one of the few who do not give in to the lure of leisure and love) scolds Jason; the company then returns to its voyage towards Colchis. At this critical moment in the narrative, in which the epic has been threatened by the invasion of elegiac elements, Hercules’ intervention also serves a metaliterary function, since it allows the author to bring the poem back to tracks more suited to the epic genre, a point that VF underscores with a clear allusion to arma virumque in two lines at the end of the episode (2.391–2). VF exploits this critical moment in order to introduce his own sphragis with an elaborately crafted composition, producing a genuine conflation between his Virgilian model (the sphragis MAro VErgilius PVblius in 2  For the question of dating the work, see most recently Stover (2012) 7–26, Davis (2020) 3–4. On VF’s life, see most recently Manuwald (2015) 1–2 and Davis (2020) 1–3. 3  Cf. Zissos (2008), xiii. 4  For a discussion of VF’s presumed affiliation with the priestly college of the quindecimviri sacris faciundis, see Zissos (2008) xiii–xiv; Stover (2012) 155–7; Deremetz (2014) 54; Bernstein (2014) 157; Tatum (2016); Cairns (2019). 5  For Aratus’ presence in VF, see especially Castelletti (2012a) and (2014a). See also Krasne (2014a). 6  See Stover (2010).    7  On Jupiter’s plan, see Ganiban (2014).

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



2.  The Poem’s Ideology in a Sphragis

3

G. 1.429–33)8 and the Aratean one (the technopaignion based upon the word λεπτή inserted in the passage describing the phases of the moon at 783);9 in fact, Aratus also served as the source for Virgil’s composition (VF 2.357–77 Ehlers):10 PLIADA LEGE POLI NIMBOSO MOVERAT ASTRO IVPPITER AETERNVM VOLVENS OPVS ET SIMVL VNDIS CVNCTA RVVNT VNOQVE DEI PANGAEA SVB ICTV GARGARAQVE ET MAESTI STETERANT FORMIDINE LVCI SAEVIOR HAVD ALIO MORTALES TEMPORE GENTES TERROR AGIT TVNC VRGET ENIM TVNC FLAGITAT IRAS IN POPVLOS ASTRAEA IOVEM TERRISQVE RELICTIS INVOCAT ADSIDVO SATVRNIA SIDERA QVESTV INSEQVITVR NIGER ET MAGNIS CVM FRATRIBVS EVRVS INTONAT AEGAEO TENDITQVE AD LITORA PONTUS ET LUNAM QVARTO DENSAM VIDET IMBRIBUS ORTV THESPIADES LONGVS COEPTIS ET FLVCTIBUS ARCET QVI METVS VSQVE NOVOS DIVAE MELIORIS AD IGNES VRBE SEDENT LAETI MINYAE VIDVISQVE VACANTES INDVLGENT THALAMIS NIMBOSQVE EDVCERE LVXV NEC IAM VELLE VIAS ZEPHYROSQVE AVDIRE VOCANTES DISSIMVLANT DONEC RESIDES TIRYNTHIVS HEROS NON TVLIT IPSE RATI INVIGILANS ATQVE INTEGER VRBIS INVIDISSE DEOS TANTVM MARIS AEQVOR ADORTIS DESERTASQVE DOMOS FRAVDATAQVE TEMPORE SEGNI VOTA PATRVM QVID ET IPSE VIRIS CUNCTANTIBVS ADSIT?

357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377

In order to trap the Argonauts on the island of Lemnos, the Pleiades and Saturn unleash bad weather following Jupiter’s order. In this context, in which VF also mentions the movement of Astraea (or rather Dike, the Maiden), the 8  Virgil signals the presence of the acrostic sphragis by employing key words such as sequentis | ordine respicies (G. 1.424–5) that draw the reader’s attention to what follows, revertentis cum primum (427), indicating the necessity to read backwards (a fact that explains the inversion of the tria nomina), virgineum (430, a reference to the nickname Parthenias), and namque is certissimus auctor (432). See Somerville (2010). 9  Λεπτὴ µὲν καθαρή τε περὶ τρίτον ἦµαρ ἐοῦσα εὔδιός | κ’ εἴη λεπτὴ δὲ καὶ εὖ µάλ’ ἐρευθὴς | πνευµατίη παχίων δὲ καὶ ἀµβλείῃσι κεραίαις | τέταρτον ἐκ τριτάτοιο φόως ἀµενηνὸν ἔχουσα | ἠὲ νότῳ ἀµβλυωνετ’ ἢ ὕδατος ἐγγὺς ἐόντος (Arat. Phaen. 783–7 Martin). The word λεπτή is found twice horizontally and once vertically while it can also be read diagonally. See Hanses (2014). 10  For a detailed discussion of VF’s sphragis, see Castelletti (2016).

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

4 Introduction references to Aratus become clear in lines 367–8, in which the Thespian helmsman of the Argo, Tiphys, ‘sees the moon at her fourth rising gathering clouds, a frightful omen that keeps the sailors far from their maritime enterprise for a long time’. The observation concerning the moon’s phase immediately brings us back not only to the corresponding passage in Aratus (Phaen. 778–87), but also in Virgil (G. 1.424–35). It may be added that the Tirynthius heros (VF 2.373), Hercules, is called invigilans rati (374). Hercules, therefore, ‘keeps watch over the ship’, but in such a context, the word invigilare alludes to the ἀγρυπνίαι, the sleepless nights spent revising and editing poems, as Cinna’s famous epigram demonstrates (fr. 11 Courtney). Considering that ratis can refer metaphorically to the poem itself, Hercules’ deed accordingly also possesses a remarkable metaliterary significance. In order to decipher the sphragis, one must follow the directions provided by the poet, as Aratus and Virgil did in their passages. First of all, we notice the appearance of the acrostic ET QVI, which can be read vertically from 367 to 371.11 The acronym LENTI, which we can read in line 371 by taking the first letter of each word, starting from the last (luxu) and returning to the first (indulgent), completes the phrase. The keywords audiRE VOCAntes (372) provide the clue that one should read this sequence backwards. This will also help the reader understand how to locate the poet’s tria nomina. LENTI is significant: the spelling recalls Aratus’ ΛΕΠΤΗ (both are five letters long, three of which are the same, while the last two are very similar), and, furthermore, in this particular predicament, the Argonauts are lenti (‘slothful, idle’). Tityrus is also lentus when he honours the musa tenuis (by composing acrostics!) in Virgil’s Eclogue 1,12 and, above all, so are the Rutulians, whom Juturna rebukes in the final book of the Aeneid, in a situation that closely recalls the Argonauts’ present circumstances (in both cases, the reprimand directed towards the lenti provokes an immediate reaction).13 The complete technopaignion ET QUI LENTI (which alludes to Aratus and Virgil) is therefore composed of an acrostic and an acronym, both containing five letters. This technopaignion serves first of all to direct the reader’s attention to line 371, to which VF has given special attention. In fact, the poet has inserted other valuable clues in addition to the acronym LENTI, since that is the central line of the section in which the sphragis is found. The poet provides signs in lines 367–8 that direct the reader’s attention to line 371, namely by stating that the Argo’s helmsman et lunam quarto densam videt imbribus ortu. Accordingly, if we follow Tiphys’ (Thespiades, 368) 11  On acrostics in Latin epic, see also Kersten (2013). 12  Virg. Ecl. 1.4–5: tu, Tityre, lentus in umbra | formosam resonare doces Amaryllida silvas. For a discussion of the acrostic FONS that appears in the first eclogue, see Castelletti (2012a) 90–2. 13  Virg. A. 12.236–7: nos patria amissa dominis parere superbis | cogemur, qui nunc lenti ­consedimus arvis.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



2.  The Poem’s Ideology in a Sphragis

5

example,14 we should direct our attention four lines lower (quarto ortu). Counting inclusively from line 368, luna densa appears in line 371. If Aratus had suggested that his readers look ‘to the tips of the moon’s horns’ (σκέπτεο δὲ πρῶτον κεράων ἑκάτερθε σελήνην, Phaen. 778), thus alluding to the ends of his lines (where the acrostic ΛΕΠΤΗ appears), in VF’s case, the poet hints that the entire line is particularly packed with information. In fact, if we start from the beginning of line 369 (the Q of qui), we find the five-­letter sequence QUIND, written vertically. The same sequence can also be read by transitioning from the vertical reading back to a horizontal one in line 371 (QV—the first letters respectively of line 369 and 370—and the first letters of 371 INDulgent).15 Finally, by continuing our reading in this direction all the way to the end of the line, we observe that its final letters are XV (from luXV), another possible a­ llusion to the word QUINDecim. All of this could be coincidental, but the meticulous triple repetition (cum variatione) alluding to the number 15 can, I believe, be read in connection with the fact that VF was a QVINDecimvir. This suspicion becomes more credible when we consider that the beginnings of the poet’s tria nomina lie hidden within the same passage. In order to find them, one must again follow the clues provided by certain keywords and recall the earlier tradition. By conflating the Aratean and Virgilian models, the Flavian poet conceals his tria nomina, Caius Valerius Flaccus, in CA (372), VA (370), and FL (368). Just like in Virgil’s Georgics (1.424–34), VF’s tria nomina must be read backwards and on alternate lines. Their arrangement, however, is diagonal, as was that of Aratus’ fourth ΛΕΠΤΗ. The syllable CA appears in the keywords of line 372, audiRE VOCAntes, which follow the trail blazed by Virgil’s revertentis (G. 1.427) in suggesting that one should read backwards. We may also add as a keyword the following term, dissimulant (the first word of line 373), which just so happens to provide the final D in the acrostic QVIND (369–73). Taking into account the diagonal orientation of CA, VA, and FL, as well as the centrality of line 371, the ancient reader’s trained eye would not have had difficulty in recognizing also the pronoun is in urbIS (the final word of line 374), adding this to the poet’s tria nomina on the basis of the model provided by the is certissimus auctor of Virgil’s G. 1.432. The completed sphragis, therefore, reads IS CAius VAlerius FLaccus, QVINDecimvir. If this reading is correct, the

14  Like any good helmsman, Tiphys orients himself at sea through observing the stars, as explicitly stated at 1.481–3 and 2.64–5, for example. VF also seems to have entrusted a metapoetic function to the figure of Tiphys, given that he not only serves as the Argo’s helmsman, but also embodies the poet’s Aratean model. For this point, see Krasne (2014b). 15  The construction of the sequence QVIND within the line as well (that is, moving from left to right) echoes the phrase δεξιὰ σημαίνει of Arat. Phaen. 6 (see Castelletti [2012a] 85–8), given that it prompts the reader to look towards the right side not only of the line itself (the final letters of which are XV), but also of the entire passage, since the sphragis develops on the right side of it.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

6 Introduction composition accordingly extends from line 368 to 374, with line 371 (the one packed with meaning) exactly in the middle.16 One consideration comes to mind. The orientation of IS CAius VAlerius FLaccus suggests an ascending motion beginning from the end of line 374 and proceeding towards the beginning of line 358. In a thoroughly Aratean context in which Hercules plays a decisive role in the success of the voyage by following the instructions of his divine father, VF’s sphragis seems to hide far more than merely a signature. As we know well, Hercules is fated to become a god after completing his labours, in accordance with the will of Jupiter, as expressed in the Weltenplan in the poem’s first book. This is precisely what VF’s complete sphragis seems to indicate. In a perfectly ‘ascending line’ (as in catasterism) stretching from the end of 374 towards Iuppiter of 358, Valerius has absorbed the Tirynthius heros (373) and inserted his own tria nomina in order to secure a place in the heavens and undying fame for both his poetry and his name. Various clues seem to support this reading, including novos . . . ad ignes in line 369, and above all the verbal repetition of tendit(e) in astra that one can read in the words TENDITquE (366) and ASTRAea (363), which appear in the perfectly ascending line extending from the end of 374 up to Iuppiter at the beginning of 358. This perhaps explains the curious fact that the syllable inbegins four consecutive lines (IN, INvocat, INsequitur, INtonat, 363–6), as if to prompt the reader to connect the lines in which the salient words (tendit and astra) appear. Even if this composition appears complicated, its meaning is, at its core, very simple. VF literally enacts two well-­known Virgilian techniques, conflation and window allusion.17 In addition to providing a remarkable example of the poet’s compositional skills and deep engagement with his predecessors (among whom Aratus in particular stands out), the sphragis allows us to confirm that VF was a member of the quindecimviri. This evidence is extremely useful for understanding what the poet develops in the eighth book by employing Aratean themes.

3.  THE EIGHTH B O OK AND THE END OF THE POEM As we have just seen, one critical element of the poem’s ideology becomes clear from the poet’s sphragis: the fulfilment of Jupiter’s will through virtus and labores (which lead to apotheosis). After the Gigantomachy and the Titanomachy, Jupiter himself held power over the heavens. Not by accident did 16  Note that in the composition of an acrostic, a poet often directs more attention to the central line, placing information important to the construction as a whole within it. For examples and analysis, see Castelletti (2014a) 60. 17  For the usage of these techniques in constructing technopaignia, see Somerville (2010) 208–9.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



3.  The Eighth Book and the End of the Poem

7

the poet insert the sphragis in the passage describing the stop at Lemnos, in which Hercules’ intervention, essential for the voyage to succeed, is motivated by amor rerum (VF 2.381). The relationship between Hercules, Jason, and the heroism of the latter is one of the most discussed topics in Valerian scholarship. The eighth book is of critical importance for resolving such a debate.18 In particular, during the episode describing the taking of the Fleece (VF 8.54–133), which should represent the final piece of evidence supporting Jason’s consecration as a hero, the poet turns to the Aratean tradition in order to compare an unheroic deed (as Jason takes possession of the Fleece through Medea’s action to incapacitate the dragon) to a heroic one (Hercules’ final labour, i.e. retrieving the golden apples of the Hesperides, an enterprise here mirrored by Medea’s actions). The eighth book, therefore, sees the fulfilment of what was declared in Jupiter’s Weltenplan and reflected in the poet’s sphragis, that is, the apotheosis of Hercules, who earned a place in the heavens through his labores. But Jason’s fate seems sealed, both due to the weight of tradition and the fact that he is the son of a mere mortal, not a god. The gradual deterioration of his relationship with Medea and the conflict between his duties as a leader and as a husband already begin to draw him towards the future tragedy at Corinth, which the poet adumbrates with particular force in this book. Nevertheless, although the poem is ­incomplete, it seems to show that VF does not intend to condemn (or lionize) Jason entirely, since Jason appears to be a victim of circumstances and the mythic tradition.19 When the Fleece and Medea depart from Colchis, other events prophesied in Jupiter’s Weltenplan are set in motion. In fact, the decline of Asia signals the rise of Greece; Greece will later lose Jupiter’s favour (as the Romans rise to power). According to Herodotus’ account, Medea’s departure fits into a series of kidnappings that produce clashes between East and West, the first of which is the Trojan War, a topic that will persistently recur within the book, beginning especially with the arrival of the Colchian fleet at Peuce, which interrupts the wedding of Jason and Medea (8.217–317). One of the certainly original features of this book is the presence of Medea’s suitor, Styrus, who will later perish when Juno rouses a storm at sea (8.318–84). As we shall see, Styrus’ character is not only reminiscent of two Virgilian suitors, Turnus and Iarbas, but his failed attempt to retake the virgo also represents a destructive Gigantomachy (the poet presents Styrus as Orion, both a giant and a constellation at the same time). The author’s deployment of the astronomical context again serves as an important component of the ideology underlying Jupiter’s Weltenplan. The decline of Aeetes’ kingdom and household also symbolizes the decline of Sol 18  On this topic and the character of Jason within the poem, see most recently Castelletti (2014b). 19  Cf. Castelletti (2014b) 188–9.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

8 Introduction (Aeetes’ father), to whom Jupiter’s programmatic speech is addressed in the first book. Certainly, Apollo will inherit the Sun’s importance for the Romans (and in fact his name is the last word of the Weltenplan at 1.567), and Sun is one of the Titans. But given that the myth of the Argo is deeply connected to astronomy,20 one might nevertheless ask (in light of the number of astronomical references in the poem) whether VF also considers the capture of the ram’s fleece as a seizing of astronomical knowledge, especially if we consider that, because of the precession of the equinoxes, Aries had ousted Taurus as a sign announcing the spring equinox. In this sense, in addition to the technological knowledge needed for sailing (both a symbol of progress and a cause of nefas), the Argonauts also take possession of the astronomical knowledge of Eastern cultures (with the Colchians serving as a stand-­in for the Babylonians). Medea, therefore, as a keeper of magical arts that include control over the natural elem­ ents and the stars,21 would also participate in this transfer of knowledge and power. In any case, Medea is a complex character in the eighth book, in whom all the Medeas of past traditions merge, including the ill-­fated figure we find in tragedy.22 But even so, the poet’s gaze always remains compassionate, since she, too, like Jason, is a victim of circumstances. Medea also performs an important function for the quindecimvir poet (as this priesthood, in addition to watching over the Sibylline Books, oversaw the worship of foreign deities). In fact, as she departs from Colchis, Medea is assimilated with both the Palladium and Magna Mater (cf. 8.134–74 and 462–3). The translatio imperii of Jupiter’s Weltenplan, therefore, also entails a translatio of divinities, which reaches its conclusion in the Roman world of the poet’s day.23 Medea has already appeared as a powerful goddess in the scene detailing the taking of the Fleece, in which she takes on the role of Hercules by effectively saving the Argonauts as an ἀλεξίκακος, thanks to a potent magical spell. VF also calls to mind this double nature, as both helpful and frightening at the same time, of a mighty god through references to the bloody rites of Magna Mater (cf. 8.239–42), perhaps inserted here with po­lem­ic­al intent. The poem stops at line 467, most likely due to the death of the poet rather than a failure in transmission (the various inconsistencies, lacunae, and textual problems found in the final remaining lines suggest a lack of labor limae). The hypothesis that it ended (based on the model of the Aeneid) with the murder of Absyrtus seems to me quite persuasive.24 In any case, the abundance of ‘closural 20  On this point, see, for example, Sesti (1987) 241–8. 21  Consider the deductio of the moon and also the power she exerts over the dragon/Draco; see the comments on lines 56–91. 22  On Medea’s character in VF, see most recently Davis (2014) and (2020) 9–22. 23  On allusions to the evocatio or translatio of foreign cults in VF and the other Flavian poets, see Fucecchi (2014). 24  This hypothesis, formed independently in Nesselrath (1998) and Hershkowitz (1998) 9, also convinces Pellucchi (2012) xvii.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



4. Text, Sigla, Editions, and Textual Abbreviations

9

gestures’ related to Jupiter’s Weltenplan, as discussed here, together with those already highlighted by various scholars and discussed at the appropriate moments in this commentary, support the idea that the eighth book was the poem’s last.25

4. TEXT, SIGLA, EDITIONS, AND TEXTUAL ABBREVIATIONS VF’s manuscript tradition has been studied extensively.26 For the present ­edition, I have compared all previously published major editions, beginning with the editio princeps (Bon. 1474) up to G. Liberman (2002), as well as the sources used by Lazzarini’s and Pellucchi’s 2012 commentaries with their ­critical observations. I have also examined the principal manuscripts myself. For the ap­par­atus criticus, I reproduce the abbreviations used by Liberman, with some additions. Sigla ω: consensus of γ and C. ω does not mean that a reading appears in all attested manuscripts of VF. γ: consensus of L and V L: Laurentianus Plut. 39, 38, before November 1429 V: Vaticanus Latinus 3277, second quarter of the ninth century

Manuscripts derived from L and produced after 1429: D: Laurentianus Plut. 39, 35 Ha: Codex Harlesii deperditus M: Monacensis latinus 802 Olis: Olisiponiensis Bibl. da Ajuda 49-­III-­40 R: Vaticanus Reginensis 1831 Reg: Vaticanus Reginensis 1869 T: Neapolitanus Bibl. Oratoriana dei Gerolamini CF 2.20 (Codex Vallettae) 25  On the various theories concerning the total number of planned books, see Pellucchi (2012) xiii–xviii. 26  See Liberman (1997–2002), Taylor-­Briggs (2014), and Manuwald (2015) 31–4.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

10 Introduction Vat: Vaticanus Ottobonianus 1515 Δ: fragment of a manuscript of Carrion, containing lines 8.46–105 C: codex Carrionis (according to Carrion’s declaration in his two editions) C1: testimony from Carrion in his first edition C2: testimony from Carrion in his second edition c: text of VF published in both of Carrion’s editions c1: text of VF printed in Carrion’s first edition c2: text of VF printed in Carrion’s second edition c*: text of VF printed in Carrion’s two editions and already present in at least one earlier edition Superscript annotations (for example, L): L1: correction by the copyist L2: correction by a second hand (and so on for L3, L4, etc.) Lac: reading found prior to a correction Lpc: reading found after a correction Lac1: reading found prior to a correction carried out in L1 R marg. dext. L: the word require appears in the right margin of manuscript L

The section of text covered by C includes the readings Carrion attributed to his manuscript, which, considered sound and not diverging from γ, are not mentioned in my apparatus criticus.

Early modern editions: Bon. 1474 (editio princeps, Bologna, 1474) Bon. 1498 (Bologna, 1498) Flor. 1481 (Florence, without date explicitly given) Flor. 1503 (Giuntine edition, Florence, 1503) Ven. 1500 (Venice, 1500) Ven. 1523 (Aldine edition, Venice, 1523)

Other works abbreviated in the apparatus criticus: Baehrens Balbus Barth

critical edition (Leipzig, 1875) annotated edition (Alcala, 1524) C. von Barth, Adversaria (Frankfurt, 1624)

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



4. Text, Sigla, Editions, and Textual Abbreviations

11

Bosscha H. Bosscha in Schenkl2 Burman edition cum notis variorum (Leiden, 1724) Burman Sec. P. Burmannus Secundus, Anthologia veterum Latinorum epigrammatum et poematum I (Amsterdam, 1759) Bury critical edition 1 Bury ‘Critical Notes on Valerius Flaccus’, Hermathena 8 (1893), 392–419 Caussin J. J. A. Caussin de Perceval, Novi editoris notae in Lemaire’s edition (Paris, 1824–5) Clerq E. de Clerq, Selectarum observationum in M. Annei Lucani Pharsaliam specimen alterum (Leiden, 1772) Columbus J. Columbus in P. Burman, Sylloge Epistolarum (Leiden, 1727) Courtney critical edition (Leipzig, 1970) 1 Courtney ‘More on Valerius’, CR 12 (1962), 115–18 D’Orville J. P. D’Orville, Commentarii ad Charitonis Aphrodisiensis de Chaerea et Callirrhoe amatoriarum narrationum libris VIII (Amsterdam, 1750) Ehlers critical edition (Stuttgart, 1980) 1 Ehlers review of Courtney’s (1970) edition, Gnomon 48 (1976), 255–60 Fontius annotations of B. Fontius in a copy of Bon. 1474 preserved at Florence, Bibl. Riccardiana (ed. rare 431) Frassinetti P. Frassinetti, ‘Chiose a Valerio Flacco’, in Mélanges G. Tarditi, 1.299–317 (Milan, 1995) Giarratano critical edition (Milan-­Palermo-­Naples, 1904) Hardie* per litteras communication with Philip Hardie 3 Heinsius Animadversiones, published in Burman’s edition (1702), with the latter’s additions in the variorum edition (1724) 1 Koestlin H. Köstlin, ‘Zur Erklärung und Kritik des Valerius Flaccus’, Philologus 48 (1889), 647–73 2 Koestlin H. Köstlin, ‘Zur Erklärung und Kritik des Valerius Flaccus’, Philologus 50 (1891), 731–42 Kramer critical edition (Leipzig, 1912) Langen commented edition (Berlin, 1896–7) 1 Leo F. Leo, Ausgewählte Kleine Schriften, Vol. II, 223–48 (Rome, 1960) (review of Langen’s commented edition, Gött. gel. Anz. 159 [1897], 953–76)

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

12 Introduction F. Leo, ‘Coniectanea’, Hermes 38 (1903), 308 Leo2 Liberman critical edition (Paris, 2002) Loehbach R. Loehbach, Studien zu Valerius Flaccus (Neuwied, 1872) Madvig N. Madvig, Adversaria critica II (Copenhagen, 1873) Maserius critical edition (Paris, 1517 and 1519) 1 Meyncke G. Meyncke, Quaestiones Valerianae (Bonn, 1865) Meyncke2 G. Meyncke, ‘Beiträge zur Kritik des V. Fl.’, RhM 22 (1867), 362–76 Mueller L. Mueller, De re metrica poetarum Latinorum (Leipzig, 1861) Peerlkamp edition of Virgil’s Aeneid (Leiden, 1843) Pius commented edition (Bologna, 1519) Politianus Angeli Politiani operum tomus primus: Epistolarum lib. XII & Miscellaneorum Centuriam unam complectens (Lyons, 1528) Postgate J. P. Postgate, ‘Critical Notes on Valerius Flaccus’ and ‘Emendations of Valerius Flaccus’, Journal of Philology 27 (1899–1900), 100–2 and 253–66 Renkema E. H. Renkema, Observationes criticae et exegeticae ad C. Valerii Flacci Argonautica (Utrecht, 1906) Reuss E. H. F. Reuss, Observationes Valerianae (Diss. University of Marburg, 1871) Sabellicus Observationes M. Antonii Sabellici ex varia auctorum lectione, in Opera (Venice, 1502, f. 104v–105v) Samuelsson J. Samuelsson, Studia in Valerium Flaccum (Uppsala, 1899) Sandstroem C. E. Sandstroem, Emendationes in Propertium, Lucanum, Valerium Flaccum (Uppsala, 1878) Schenkl critical edition (Berlin, 1871) 1 Schenkl C. Schenkl, ‘Studien zu den Argonautica des Valerius Flaccus’, Sitzungsber. der Philos. hist. Classe der kaiserl. Akad. der Wiss. zu Wien 68.3 (1871), 271–382 2 Schenkl C. Schenkl, ‘Grammaticorum Batavorum in C. V. Fl. Arg. coniecturae ineditae’, WS 5 (1883), 139–43 Schrader J. Schrader in M. Haupt, ‘Johannis Schraderi emendationes Argonauticarum Valerii Flacci’, Hermes 2 (1867), 142 Shackleton Bailey D. R. Shackleton Bailey, Selected Classical Papers (Ann Arbor, 1997)

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



4. Text, Sigla, Editions, and Textual Abbreviations

13

Sudhaus S. Sudhaus in Kramer’s edition (1912) Thilo critical edition (Halle, 1863) Turnebus A. Turnebus, Adversariorum tomi I–III (Paris, 1564–73) I. A. Wagner Commentarius perpetuus in V. Fl. Setini Balbi Argonauticon libros VIII (Göttingen, 1805) 1 Ph. Wagner Ph. Wagner, ‘Emendationes Valerianae’, Philologus 20 (1863), 617–47 Ph. Wagner2 Ph. Wagner, Review of Thilo’s (1863) edition, Jahrbücher für klassische Philologie 89 (1864), 382–408 Walker critical edition (London, 1827) Watt W. S. Watt, ‘Notes on Latin Epic Poetry’, BICS 31 (1984), 153–70 Watt* Watt’s observations communicated to Liberman Weichert A. Weichert, Epistola critica de C. Valerii Flacci Argonauticis ad virum illustrissimum et doctissimum H.C.A. (Leipzig, 1812)

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

Text and Translation

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

C. Valeri Flacci Argonauticon Liber Octavus At trepidam in thalamis et iam sua facta paventem Colchida circa omnes pariter furiaeque minaeque patris habent, nec caerulei timor aequoris ultra nec miserae terra ulla procul: quascumque per undas ferre fugam, quamcumque cupit iam scandere puppem. Ultima virgineis tunc flens dedit oscula vittis quosque fugit complexa toros crinemque genasque ungue per antiqui carpsit vestigia somni atque haec impresso gemuit miseranda cubili: ‘o mihi si profugae genitor nunc ille supremos amplexus, Aeeta, dares fletusque videres ecce meos! ne crede, pater, non carior ille est quem sequimur. Tumidis utinam simul obruar undis! Tu precor haec longa placidus mox sceptra senecta tuta geras meliorque tibi sit cetera proles!’ Dixit et Haemonio numquam spernenda marito condita letiferis promit medicamina cistis virgineosque sinus ipsumque monile venenis implicat ac saevum super omnibus addidit ensem. Inde velut torto Furiarum erecta flagello prosilit, attonito qualis pede prosilit Ino in freta nec parvi meminit conterrita nati quem tenet; extremum coniunx ferit inritus Isthmon.

5

10

15

20

γ = LV (hic desunt vv. 88–125, 136–53, 366–85) Test C : 14  ut supra citatur || 17  medicamina cistis dum de profert agitur || 23  quem tenet extremum coniunx ferit irritus Isthmon 1 facta γ : fata Bon. 1474 || 8  ungue Burman : ante γ c* || antiqui L c* : anti V || superstantis Somni Leo2 || carpsit Lpc1 (cf. D carpit) c* : carsit γ || 10  ille γ c* : ipse Schenkl || 11  Aeeta Fontius Bon. 1498 c : aeta γ || 14  senecta V : -ae L || 17  promit Turnebus : prodit γ : profert C || cistis Lpc1 (cf. D cistis) c* : cistris γ || 20  erecta Bon. 1474 : eiecta ω || 23  extremum ω : extremo Heinsius3 || ferit ω : furit Balbus : terit Schrader : petit Columbus : premit Baehrens || Isthmon C : sihmo γ

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

Gaius Valerius Flaccus: Argonautica, Book 8 Meanwhile Medea, trembling in her room and now terrified at her own actions, is overcome by the threats and rage of her father, and she no longer fears to travel beyond the blue sea, and no land seems distant for the poor girl. Now she desires to flee over any waves, to climb aboard any ship she can find. But then, weeping, she gives her final kisses to her maidenly ribbons, and, embracing the bed which she was now about to flee, she shreds her cheeks and hair with her fingernails in the place where she used to sleep, and, with her face pressed to the bed, she sadly utters these laments: ‘If only, O father, you could now yourself give me, your fugitive daughter, a final hug, and see, Aeetes, these tears—here they are—of mine! Do not believe, father, that the man I follow is dearer to me than you. Ah, if only I were crushed by the stormy waves with him! I pray that you, at peace, will soon be able to hold your sceptre throughout your long old age, and that the rest of your descendants may be kinder to you!’ So she spoke. Then, taking her hidden potions, potions that her Thessalian husband should not have scorned, out from their deathly baskets, she hides them in the folds of her maidenly clothing and in her famous necklace, and, in addition to all of these, she adds a cruel sword. Then, as though roused by the twisted whip of the Furies, she leapt up, just as Ino, bewildered, leapt into the sea, forgetting in her anguish the small child she held in her arms; her husband reaches the end of the Isthmus in vain.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

18

C. Valeri Flacci Argonauticon Liber Octavus   Iam prior in lucos curis urgentibus heros venerat et nemoris sacra se nocte tegebat tum quoque siderea clarus procul ora iuventa. Qualis adhuc sparsis comitum per lustra catervis Latmius aestiva residet venator in umbra dignus amore deae, velatis cornibus et iam Luna venit, roseo talis per nubila ductor implet honore nemus talemque exspectat amantem. Ecce autem pavidae virgo de more columbae quae super ingenti circumdata praepetis umbra in quemcumque tremens hominem cadit, haud secus illa acta timore gravi mediam se misit; at ille excepit blandoque prior sic ore locutus: ‘o decus in nostros magnum ventura penates solaque tantarum virgo haud indigna viarum causa reperta mihi, iamiam non ulla requiro vellera teque meae satis est quaesisse carinae. Verum age et hoc etiam, quando potes, adice tantis muneribus meritisque tuis: namque aurea iussi terga referre sumus, socios ea gloria tangit’. Sic ait et primis supplex dedit oscula palmis.   Contra virgo novis iterum singultibus orsa est: ‘linquo domos patrias te propter opesque meorum nec iam nunc regina loquor sceptrisque relictis vota sequor; serva hanc profugae, prior ipse dedisti quam (scis nempe) fidem. Di nostris vocibus adsunt sidera et haec te meque vident. Tecum aequora, tecum experiar quascumque vias, modo nequis abactam

25

30

35

40

45

50

Test. C : 35  timori gravi dum de icta agitur || 40  satis est dum de quaesisse agitur || 45  virgo novis iterum || 46–105  propter Δ hic servatum verba a Carrione adlata enotare supersedi; post v. 105 deest codex Carrionis 24 curis M1 Reg c* : curiis L : curiit V || 31  talemque γ c* : talisque Baehrens || 35  acta γ : icta C || gravi praeceps Liberman || 38  solaque M2 Reg Bon. 1474 c : sola qui γ || haud Reg Bon. 1474 c : aut γ || 39  iamiam Lpc1 (cf. D iamiam) : iam γ : iam nunc C : mihi iam Leo1 || non ulla C : non nulla γ || 40  vellera teque Lpc1 (cf. D teque) c* : vellerat aeque V : vellera aeque Lac, unde vellerat eque habu­ isse credit Liberman || meae satis est Lpc1 (cf. D meae satis) C : meaesatis est γ || quaesisse ω : vexisse Lpc1 (cf. D vexisse) || 45  novis C : nobis γ || 46–105  exstat codicis a Carrione usurpati folium ulti­ mum (Δ) || 47  loquor γ Δ c* : vocor Sabellicus (cf. 5.653) || 49  adsunt γ c* : assunt Δ || 51 ­abactam γ c* : ab actam Δ : adactam Heinsius3 || -que Lpc1 (cf. D oculisque) Δ c* : om. γ

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Gaius Valerius Flaccus: Argonautica, Book 8

19

First, the hero, harassed by worries, had entered the forest of Mars and was hidden in the woods by the sacred night, but even then his brilliant handsomeness made his face shine from afar. Just as when Endymion sits in the summer shade while his companions are still scattered in the hunt, Endymion who was worthy of a goddess’s love, and now the moon comes with its horns concealed, so does Jason fill the woods with his youthful beauty through the darkness, and he waits for so great a lover. But Medea, like a frightened dove that, enveloped by the shadow of a large bird of prey looming over it, falls trembling into the hands of the first person it comes across, in the same way Medea goes to meet Jason, stirred by a deep fear. But he understood the situation and spoke first, addressing her as follows with a soothing voice: ‘You shall come as a great prize to our lands, O maiden, you, I know now, are the only worthwhile reason for my long voyage. In fact, I no longer seek the Fleece, and it is enough for my ship to have won you. But now, since you have the power to do so, add this also to the great gifts and services you have already given. In fact, we have been ordered to bring back the Golden Fleece, but only my companions gain glory from this task.’ Thus he spoke, and he kissed her fingers as a sign of supplication. In reply, the maiden, now sobbing again, begins to speak: ‘I forsake my father’s house and the riches of my family for your sake, and now, now I am no longer called a queen, but I give up my sceptre and indulge your desires. Keep that promise which you first (surely you know it!), which you first spoke to me, now a runaway. The gods are present with us, they hear our speech, and those stars watch both of us. I will attempt a sea voyage with you, with you will attempt any route, as long as no day

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

20

C. Valeri Flacci Argonauticon Liber Octavus huc referat me forte dies oculisque parentis ingerar. Hoc superos, hoc te quoque deprecor, hospes.’   Haec ait atque furens rapido per devia passu tollitur. Ille haeret comes et miseratur euntem cum subito ingentem media inter nubila flammam conspicit et saeva vibrantes luce tenebras. ‘Quis rubor iste poli? quod tam lugubre refulsit sidus?’ ait, reddit trepido cui talia virgo: ‘ipsius en oculos et lumina torva draconis aspicis. Ille suis haec vibrat fulgura cristis meque pavens contra solam videt ac vocat ultro, ceu solet, et blanda poscit me pabula lingua. Dic age nunc utrum vigilanti hostemque videnti exuvias auferre velis an lumina somno mergimus et domitum potius tibi tradimus anguem.’ Ille silet, tantus subiit tum virginis horror.   Iamque manus Colchis lumenque intenderat astris carmina barbarico fundens pede teque ciebat, Somne pater: ‘Somne omnipotens, te Colchis ab omni orbe voco inque unum iubeo nunc ire draconem, quae freta saepe tuo domui, quae nubila cornu fulminaque et toto quicquid micat aethere, sed nunc, nunc age maior ades fratrique simillime Leto. Te quoque, Phrixeae pecudis fidissime custos, tempus ab hac oculos tandem deflectere cura. Quem metuis me adstante dolum? servabo parumper ipsa nemus; longum interea tu pone laborem.’   Ille haud Aeolio discedere fessus ab auro nec dare permissae, quamvis iuvet, ora quieti sustinet ac primi percussus nube soporis

55

60

65

70

75

80

53 ingerar γ : -at Δ c*|| superos L Δ c* : -as V : socios Burman || 55  miseratur euntem Lpc1 (cf. D -ur euntem) Δ c* : miserat urentem γ || 60  torva draconis L Δ c* : torba traconis V || 61  arrectis haec Liberman || 62  contra γ Δ c* : non iam Reuss || ac vocat Δ C : advocat γ : haud vocat Baehrens || ultro L Δ C (dum de ac vocat agitur) : -a V || 66  mergimus Reg. Bon. 1498 : mergitur γ Δ c* : vergitur Heinsius3 || 67  tantus Δ c* : tantos V Lpc1 (cf. D tantos) : tantis Lac : tacitus Heinsius3 || tum virginis Bon. 1474 : ut virginis γ Δ c* : et virginis Madvig (tacitus subiit) discriminis Ph. Wagner2 || 68 lumen Heinsius3 : crinem γ Δ c* || 70  Colchis Lpc1 (cf. D Colchis) Δ c* : colchidis γ || 73  fulmReg Bon. 1474 c* : flum- γ Δ || 75  teque o Meyncke1 || 76  oculos L Δ c* : -is V || 77  me adstante Heinsius3 : me stante Δ (ut vid., nam in rasura stat) C : meis tande γ || 80  iuvet Ha : iubet γ Δ c* || 81  permulsus nube Hardie*

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Gaius Valerius Flaccus: Argonautica, Book 8

21

ever brings me back here, I, hunted down and thrown before my father’s eyes. For this do I pray to the gods, and for this I pray to you, too, foreigner.’ Having said this, she, frantic, departs with a swift gait and along hidden pathways. Jason accompanies her, clinging to her side, and he admires her as she runs forward, when suddenly he sees a huge fire in the middle of the clouds and that the shadows shine with an aggressive light. ‘What is this reddening of the sky? What star has flashed so mournfully?’ He spoke, and the girl replied to the trembling hero thus: ‘Behold! What you see is the dragon’s eyes and his terrifying fire. He makes these lights flash from the crest of his head, and, fearing only me, he sees me standing before him and calls to me of his own accord, as he is accustomed to do, and he tamely uses his tongue to ask me for something to eat. Come on! Tell me whether you wish to try to carry off the Fleece while he keeps watch and can see his enemy, or rather do you prefer that I plunge his eyes into sleep and deliver a tamed dragon to you?’ The dragon himself is silent, since the girl strikes so much fear into him. And now Medea had directed her hands and her gaze up to the sky, uttering an incantation in barbarian metre, and she began to call upon you, father Sleep, ‘All-­powerful Sleep, I, the lady of Colchis, summon you from every part of the world, and I order you to pour yourself over this serpent alone, I who, using your horn, have often subdued the waves and the clouds, the lightning, and all that flashes in the sky. But now, now aid me more powerfully, Sleep, you who are entirely like your brother Death. And you, too, most loyal guardian of Phrixus’ ram, it is now time to divert your eyes from this job. What trick do you fear if I am present? I myself will look after the sacred forest for a while. During that time, set aside your long-­lasting labour.’ The dragon, although tired, did not remove himself from the gold of Aeolus’ descendants, nor did he surrender his mind to the sleep now granted, although he would have liked to do so, but instead he, struck by the first clouds of sleep,

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

22

C. Valeri Flacci Argonauticon Liber Octavus horruit et dulces excussit ab arbore somnos. Contra Tartareis Colchis spumare venenis cunctaque Lethaei quassare silentia rami perstat et adverso luctantia lumina cantu obruit atque omnem linguaque manuque fatigat vim Stygiam ardentes donec sopor occupet iras. Iamque altae cecidere iubae nutatque coactum iam caput itque ingens extra sua vellera cervix ceu refluens Padus aut septem proiectus in amnes Nilus et Hesperium veniens Alpheos in orbem. Ipsa caput cari postquam Medea draconis vidit humi, fusis circum proiecta lacertis seque suumque simul flevit crudelis alumnum: ‘non ego te sera talem sub nocte videbam sacra ferens epulasque tibi nec talis hianti mella dabam ac nostris nutribam fida venenis. Quam gravida nunc mole iaces, quam segnis inertem flatus habet! nec te saltem, miserande, peremi, heu saevum passure diem! iam nulla videbis vellera, nulla tua fulgentia dona sub umbra. Cede adeo inque aliis senium nunc digere lucis immemor, oro, mei nec me tua sibila toto exagitent infesta mari. Sed tu quoque cunctas, Aesonide, dimitte moras atque effuge raptis velleribus. Patrios exstinxi noxia tauros, terrigenas in fata dedi: fusum ecce draconis corpus habes! iamque omne nefas, iam, spero, peregi.’ Quaerenti tunc deinde viam, qua se arduus heros ferret ad aurigerae caput arboris, ‘heia per ipsum scande age et adverso gressus’ ait ‘imprime dorso.’ Nec mora fit. Dictis fidens Cretheia proles

85

90

95

100

105

110

82  ab arbore γ Δ c* : corpore vel pectore Heinsius3 || somnos Δ c* : -us γ || 83  venenis Lpc1 (habet D) Δ c* : om. γ || 84  tinctaque Liberman || 86  obruit Δ c* : orruit V : horruit L || 87  occupet γ : -at Δ c* || 88–125  folio amisso in V desunt || 89  itque ingens Liberman : atque ingens L Δ c* : ac vergens (extra sua tergora) Heinsius3 || 90  proiectus γ Δ c* : porrectus Heinsius3, proiecta v. 93 legens || 93  proiecta L Δ c* : porrecta Heinsius3, proiectus v. 90 legens || 94  seque Δ c* : sed L || 97  mella Δ c* : -e L || 100  heu Δ c* : ne L || passure Δ c* : -a L || 102  cede Bon. 1474 c : caede L Δ || adeo L Δ : deo c cum edd. a Carrione usurp. parte maiore || digere Δ c* : de genere L : egere Renkema : degere Heinsius3 || 105  dimitte Δ c* : de- L || 107  in fata Pius in adn. : infesta L

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Gaius Valerius Flaccus: Argonautica, Book 8

23

held up his head, steeled himself, and drove sweet rest away from the tree. Faced with this, the lady of Colchis persists in frothing with underworldly poisons and in shaking the branch soaked with all the silences of Lethe, and she overcomes the resistance of his eyes as they try to fight against her hostile spell, and she makes full use of all her Stygian power of word and gesture, until sleep seizes the dragon’s blazing fury. But now his lofty crests droop, and his head, compelled by force, already wavers, and its huge neck now moves away from the Fleece, just as when the Po ebbs or the Nile gushes into the seven rivers and Alphaeus reaches the land of Hesperia. Medea, after she sees her dear dragon’s head on the ground, stretching out her arms around him, lamented both for herself, her cruelty, and her pet at the same time. ‘I did not see you like this late at night when I was bringing you the sacred offerings and food, and not like this did I, a trustworthy mistress, give the honey to your wide-­open mouth and nurture you with my potions. Now, how big is your bulk as it lies on the ground, and how lifeless is what little breath you have! At least I have not killed you, poor serpent, you who will suffer an awful day! Now you shall no longer see a Fleece, you shall no longer see a prize shining under your shadow. Now, leave this place and go spend your old age in different forests! Forget about me, I implore you, and do not torment me across all the seas with your hostile hissing! But you, son of Aeson, dispense with all delays and escape with the stolen Fleece. I, a guilty woman, have destroyed my father’s bulls, and I have sent the men born from the earth to their doom: here is the exhausted body of the dragon for you! I hope that by now I have finished committing the last of my crimes.’ Then, when the hero asked her through what method he could lift himself up to the top of the gold-­bearing tree, she said: ‘Come on! Climb on top of the dragon and walk on the back that lies before you!’ There were no delays. Trusting in her words, Jason

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

24

C. Valeri Flacci Argonauticon Liber Octavus calcat et aeriam squamis perfertur ad ornum, cuius adhuc rutilam servabant bracchia pellem, nubibus accensis similem aut cum veste recincta labitur ardenti Thaumantias obvia Phoebo. Corripit optatum decus extremumque laborem Aesonides longosque sibi gestata per annos Phrixeae monumenta fugae vix reddidit arbor cum gemitu tristesque super coiere tenebrae. Egressi relegunt campos et fluminis ora summa petunt. Micat omnis ager villisque comantem sidereis totos pellem nunc fundit in artus, nunc in colla refert, nunc implicat ille sinistrae: talis ab Inachiis Nemeae Tirynthius antris ibat adhuc aptans umeris capitique leonem. Ut vero sociis, qui tunc praedicta tenebant ostia, per longas apparuit aureus umbras, clamor ab Haemonio surgit grege. Se quoque gaudens promovet ad primas iuveni ratis obvia ripas. Praecipites agit ille gradus atque aurea misit terga prius, mox attonita cum virgine puppem insilit ac rapta victor consistit in hasta. Interea patrias saevus venit horror ad aures fata domus luctumque ferens fraudemque fugamque virginis. Hinc subitis †inflexit† frater in armis, urbs etiam mox tota coit, volat ipse senectae immemor Aeetes, complentur litora bello nequiquam: fugit immissis iam puppis habenis.   Mater Idyia ambas tendebat in aequora palmas et soror atque omnes aliae matresque nurusque Colchides aequalesque tibi, Medea, puellae.

115

120

125

130

135

140

113 squamis Ha Ven. 1523 : quamis Lac : quamvis Lpc1 (cf. D quamvis) || 115  aut del. Heinsius3 || 117 laborum Heinsius3 || 120  coiere Lpc1 (cf. D coi-) : coire Lac || 126  aptans Reg Bon. 1474 : captans γ || 129  ab M2 Reg Bon. 1474 : ad γ || 130  ratis M2 Reg Bon. 1474 : -es γ || 131  agit L : ait V || an utque (Barth) aut mittit legendum? Liberman || 134  aures Fontius M2 Flor. 1481 : auras γ || 136–85  huc revocavit Politianus : post v. 385 habuit γ || 136–53  folio, quod recta pagina 366–85 continuit, amisso desunt in V || 136  inflexit L : insurgit Ven. 1523 : vindex it Heinsius3 : infelix Schenkl : surrexit Liberman || 137  ipse Vat Bon. 1474 : -a L || 139  iam Heinsius3 : nam L || 140  Idyia I. A. Wagner : adhuc L : ad hanc Baehrens : ad hoc Burman : ad haec I. A. Wagner

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Gaius Valerius Flaccus: Argonautica, Book 8

25

makes his way over the dragon’s scales and reaches the top of the great ash tree, whose branches still guarded the shining Fleece, like illuminated clouds or Thaumas’ daughter when, after untying her robe, she glides away to meet blazing Phoebus. The son of Aeson grabs the coveted decoration—his final challenge—and the tree, groaning, gave up with difficulty the remains of Phrixus’ flight, which it had kept for itself throughout the long years, and gloomy darkness gathered above it. After leaving, they travel back over the fields and reach the edge of the river’s mouth. The whole countryside shines, and Jason now throws the sparkling Fleece over all of his limbs or puts it around his neck or wraps it around his left arm. So the Tirynthian Hercules left the Argive valleys of Nemea, while he was still arranging the lion on his head and shoulders. Then, when Jason, enveloped in gold, appeared before his companions, who were waiting at the mouths of the river as they had planned earlier, a cry arose from the group of Thessalians. The ship, also rejoicing itself, moves towards the hero standing on the nearby riverbanks. Jason quickens his pace and first arranges the pelt, then he shocks Medea by jumping onto the ship and standing up, triumphant and leaning upon his spear. Meanwhile, the terrible and horrifying news announcing the death and doom of his family and the deception and flight of his daughter reaches the ears of Medea’s father. And then her ill-­fated brother immediately equips himself with his weapons and armour, and straightaway even the entire city assembles, and Aeetes himself flies about, forgetting his old age. The armed populace fills the shore, but in vain. The ship is already escaping at full sail. Medea’s mother Idyia was still stretching her arms towards the sea, just like her sister and all the other ladies and wives of Colchis, in addition to the girls about your age, Medea.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

26

C. Valeri Flacci Argonauticon Liber Octavus exstat sola parens impletque ululatibus auras: ‘siste fugam, medio refer huc ex aequore puppem, nata, potes! quo’ clamat ‘abis? Hic turba tuorum omnis et iratus nondum pater, haec tua tellus sceptraque: quid terris solam te credis Achaeis? Quis locus Inachias inter tibi, barbara, natas? Istane vota domus exspectatique hymenaei? Hunc petii grandaeva diem? Vellem unguibus uncis ut volucris possem praedonis in ipsius ora ire ratemque supra claroque reposcere cantu quam genui. Albano fuit haec promissa tyranno, non tibi. Nil tecum miseri pepigere parentes, Aesonide, non hoc Pelias evadere furto te iubet aut ullas Colchis abducere natas: vellus habe et nostris siquid super accipe templis! Sed quid ego quemquam immeritis incuso querellis? Ipsa fugit tantoque (nefas) ipsa ardet amore. Hoc erat, infelix (redeunt nam singula menti), ex quo Thessalici subierunt †nam singula† quod nullae te, nata, dapes, non ulla iuvabant tempora. Non ullus tibi tum color aegraque membra errantesque genae atque alieno gaudia vultu semper erant. Cur tanta mihi non prodita pestis? Aut gener Aesonides nostra consideret aula nec talem paterere fugam, commune fuisset aut certe nunc omne nefas iremus et ambae in quascumque vias. Pariter petiisse iuvaret Thessaliam et saevi, quaecumque est, hospitis urbem.’ Sic genetrix similique implet soror omnia questu exululans, famulae pariter clamore supremo in vacuos dant verba notos dominamque reclamant nomine; te venti procul et tua fata ferebant.

145

150

155

160

165

170

144 fugam Reg Bon. 1474 : -a L || 145  nata Reg Bon. 1474 : nota L || 148  natas L : nuptas Postgate || 150 petii Reg Bon. 1474 : peti L || 158  et addidi (cf. Prop. 4.2.3) : om. γ : o add. Mueller : ago quemve Columbus : ago quemque Courtney || 161  nam singula γ : Colchida reges (reges iam Koestlin2) Sudhaus : aequora remi Reg Bon. 1474 : litora remi Heinsius3 || 163  tempora γ : pocula D’Orville || aegra L : aetra V || membra Courtney : verba γ || 164  arentesque Burman || 165  semper erant Bon. 1474 : semper erat γ || 166  aut Koestlin1 : ut γ : tum Samuelsson || 167  nec Bon. 1474 : ne γ || 170  est L : om. V || 174  sed venti procul et sua fata Peerlkamp ad A. 2.34, I, p. 85

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Gaius Valerius Flaccus: Argonautica, Book 8

27

The mother alone stands out among the crowd, filling the air with shrill wailings. ‘Stop your flight! O daughter, bring the ship back here from the middle of the sea; you have the power to do it! Where are you going?’ she shouts. ‘All of your relatives and your father—not yet mad at you—are here. This is your land and your kingdom. Why do you, alone, entrust yourself to the Achaean lands? What will be your position there, you, a barbarian woman among Argive ladies? Is this the home you desire, the wedding you were waiting for? Is this the day that I, now an old woman, longed for? I wish that just like a bird I could attack the face of that bandit with curved talons, and fly over the ship, demanding back the girl whom I birthed. She had been betrothed to an Albanian king, not to you. Her miserable parents agreed to nothing with you, O son of Aeson. Pelias is not ordering you to flee with this prize or to snatch some daughter of Colchis! Keep the Fleece for yourself, and if anything is left in our temples, take it! But what am I doing? Am I blaming and hurling reprimands at some man who does not deserve it? She is the one who fled, and she (what a tragedy!) is the one who burns with such great love. It was because of this that, unfortunate girl (now it all returns to my mind), from the time when the Thessalians showed up . . . no food, no moment brought you joy. Then you had no colour, your body was sick, your gaze wandered, and your joy always came from the foreigner’s face. Why was this disaster not revealed to me? Jason could have settled in our palace as a son-­in-­law, and you would not have experienced such a flight, or now all the crimes would certainly have been shared between us, and we both would be travelling on any path you chose. It would have been pleasant for me to go together with you to Thessaly and the city of that cruel foreigner, whatever city it is.’ So spoke the mother, and her sister, screaming aloud, fills the place with equal wailing, and in the same way the slave girls waste empty words on the wind with shrill cries, and they call out the name of their mistress. But the winds and your fate, Medea, were already carrying you far away.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

28

C. Valeri Flacci Argonauticon Liber Octavus   Inde diem noctemque volant. Redeuntibus aura gratior et notae Minyis transcurrere terrae, cum subito Erginus puppi sic fatur ab alta: ‘vos’, ait ‘Aesonide, contenti vellere capto nec via quae superet nec quae fortuna videtis. Crastina namque dies trucis ad confinia Ponti Cyaneasque vocat meminique, o Tiphy, tuorum saxa per illa, pater, memini, venerande, laborum. Mutandum, o socii, nobis iter: altera Ponti eluctanda via et cursu quem fabor eundum est. Haud procul hinc ingens Scythici ruit exitus Histri, fundere non uno tantum quem flumina cornu accipimus. Septem exit aquis, septem ostia pandit. Illius adversi nunc ora petamus et undam quae latus in laevum Ponti cadit; inde sequemur ipsius amnis iter donec nos flumine certo perferat inque aliud reddat mare. Sint age tanti, Aesonide, quaecumque morae quam saeva subire saxa iterum, quam Cyaneos perrumpere montes. Sat mihi, non totis Argo redit, ecce, corymbis’. Haec ait ignarus fixas iam numine rupes stare neque adversis ultra concurrere saxis. Reddidit Aesonides: ‘et te, fidissime rector, haud vani tetigere metus nec me ire recuso longius et cunctis redeuntem ostendere terris.’ Protinus inde alios flectunt regesque locosque adsuetumque petunt plaustris migrantibus aequor.   Puppe procul summa vigilis post terga magistri haeserat auratae genibus Medea Minervae atque ibi deiecta residens in lumina palla flebat adhuc, quamquam Haemoniis cum regibus iret sola tamen nec coniugii secura futuri. Illam Sarmatici miserantur litora ponti, illa Thoanteae transit defleta Dianae,

175

180

185

190

195

200

205

178 aesonide M Flor. 1481 : -ae γ || 180  crastina L : crasti V || 181  meminique Reg Bon. 1474 : -itque γ || 184  fabor M2 Reg Bon. 1474 : favor γ || 186  fando quem Burman || 189  quae L : quaem V : qua M2 , coni. Heinsius3 || 190  recto dub. Liberman || 191  perferat Bon. 1474 : pro- γ || 192  aesonide Bon. 1474 : -ae γ || 194  redit ecce γ : rediisse Heinsius3 || 200  inde γ : inque Watt || flectunt γ : flexu Ph. Wagner1 || 202  vigilis M2 Reg Bon. 1474 : -liis γ || 206  coniugii M2 Bon. 1474 : -giis Lpc1 (cf. D -iis) -gis γ || 208  illa γ : templa Liberman || defleta R Pius : deflexa γ

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Gaius Valerius Flaccus: Argonautica, Book 8

29

Then, the Argonauts sped along for one day and one night. The wind was more welcome to them as they returned, and the Minyans see lands already known to them pass by, when, behold, Erginus spoke thus from the lofty stern: ‘You, O son of Aeson,’ he said, ‘are satisfied with the Fleece that you have won, and you see neither the journey that we still must make nor the lot that awaits us. Tomorrow calls us to the threatening confines of Pontus and to the Symplegades. And I remember, O venerable father Tiphys, your toils as you sailed through those rocks. We must change course, companions. We should make our way with difficulty along another path through Pontus and travel the path that I shall say to you all. Not far from here is the large mouth of the Scythian Ister, which, we know, does not pour its waters into a single branch. In fact, it flows into seven channels and opens up into seven mouths. Now let us aim directly towards the entrance and towards the section which falls on the left side of Pontus. Then we will follow the path of the river itself until its safe current brings and transfers us to another sea. Let us undergo, O son of Aeson, whatever long delay might happen, rather than suffer the horrible crags again and pass through the Cyanean Rocks. I am stopping here; the Argo does not return with all of its decorations.’ He said that, not knowing that now by the will of the gods the rocks were not moving, and no longer was one crag colliding with the other. The son of Aeson replied to him: ‘Most loyal helmsman, the fears that have seized you are not unfounded, and I do not refuse to travel a longer course and to show myself to all the lands as I return.’ From there, they bend their path directly towards other kings and other places and wheel around towards the sea that was accustomed to the migrations of wagons. High up on the stern, a little way off from the rest and behind the skilled helmsman, Medea was clinging to the knees of the golden statue of Minerva, and, lying prostrate there and with her mantle pulled down over her eyes, she was still weeping. And even though she travelled with the kings of Thessaly, nevertheless she was alone and was not certain that the marriage she hoped for would happen in the future. The shores of the Sarmatian sea pity her, and she, mournful, passes through the shores of the goddess Diana of the land of Thoas.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

30

C. Valeri Flacci Argonauticon Liber Octavus nulla palus, nullus Scythiae non maeret euntem amnis. Hyperboreas movit conspecta pruinas tot modo regna tenens; ipsi quoque murmura ponti iam Minyae, iam ferre volunt. Vix adlevat ora ad seras siquando dapes, quas carus Iason ipse dabat. Iam nubiferam transire Carambin significans, iam regna Lyci, totiensque gementem fallit ad Haemonios hortatus surgere montes.   Insula Sarmaticae Peuce stat nomine nymphae torvus ubi et ripa semper metuendus utraque in freta per saevos Hister descendit alumnos. Solvere in hoc tandem resides dux litore curas ac primum socios ausus sua pacta docere promissamque fidem thalami foedusque iugale. Ultro omnes laeti instigant meritamque fatentur. Ipse autem invitae iam Pallados erigit aras, incipit Idaliae numen nec spernere divae praecipueque sui siquando in tempore pulcher coniugii Minyas numquam magis eminet inter, qualis sanguineo victor Gradivus ab Hebro Idalium furto subit aut dilecta Cythera, seu cum caelestes Alcidae invisere mensas iam vacat et fessum Iunonia sustinet Hebe. Adnuit unanimis Venus hortatorque Cupido suscitat adfixam maestis Aeetida curis; ipsa suas illi croceo subtegmine vestes induit, ipsa suam duplicem Cytherea coronam donat et arsuras alia cum virgine gemmas. Tum novus implevit vultus honor ac sua flavis reddita cura comis graditurque oblita malorum. Sic, ubi Mygdonios planctus sacer abluit Almo laetaque iam Cybele festaeque per oppida taedae,

210

215

220

225

230

235

240

211 ipsi Reg Bon. 1474 : ipse γ || murmura Reg Bon. 1498 : -e γ || ponti L : ponunt V || 214  dabat iam Reg Bon. 1474 : dabam γ || Carambin Bon. 1474 : -ymbin γ || 216  hortatus V : -ur L || 217  sarmaticae L : sarmitice V || peuce V : -ae L || 218  utraque M2 Reg Bon. 1474 : -asque γ || 224  ipse Balbus : -a γ || invitae γ : innuptae Bon. 1498 : invictae noluit Loehbach || erigere commate post aras deleto Heinsius3 || 227  coniugii L : -iugi V || 228  victor L : om. V || 231  sustinet Lac : sistinet Lpc1 : stistinet V : distinet Heinsius3 : destinat Baehrens, Iuno iam d. Hebae legens || 232 adnuit unanimis Meyncke2 : adsunt unanimes γ || 239  planctus Fontius Bon. 1498 : -u γ || 240  Cybele Lac : -ae Lpc1 (cf. D -ae) V

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Gaius Valerius Flaccus: Argonautica, Book 8

31

Every swamp, every river in Scythia grieves for her on the journey. She moves the Hyperborean snows that see her to pity, she who just a little bit earl­ier ruled over many lands. Now the Argonauts themselves, too, agree to endure the threatening roaring of the sea. Medea occasionally lifts her gaze slowly and with difficulty, when her dear Jason brings her food. He tells her that they have now passed cloudy Carambis and the kingdoms of Lycus, and he deceives her crying by encouraging her to stand up so as to see the mountains of Thessaly. There is an island that gets its name, Peuce, from a Sarmatian nymph, where the Ister, always threatening and dreadful on both sides, rushes between the savage peoples and into the sea. The commander stops on this shore in order to finally solve his problems, and for the first time he dares to reveal to his companions the agreements that he made, that is, his promise of faithfulness and the marital bond. Everyone happily encourages him from the bottom of their hearts, and they declare Medea a worthy bride. Then he raises altars to Pallas, who now opposes him, and he begins to stop scorning the will of the Idalian goddess, and, above all, he, more beautiful than ever at the moment of his wedding, stands out from among the Minyans, just as when triumphant Mars secretly goes from the bloody Ebro to Idalia or to his beloved Cythera, or when it was now permitted to Hercules to visit the heavenly banquets, and Hebe, daughter of Juno, supports the tired hero. Venus approves and consents, while Cupid was relieving the daughter of Aeetes of her sad worries with encouragement. And the goddess herself makes Medea put on her own saffron-­dyed clothes, and, furthermore, Venus gives her own double crown and the gemstones that were destined to burn with Jason’s other bride. A new beauty il­lu­min­ates Medea’s face then, her blonde hair receives the attention it deserves, and she advances, forgetful of her misfortunes. Just as when the sacred Almo cleanses the Mygdonian weeping and Cybele is now happy, and in the city there are festive torches,

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

32

C. Valeri Flacci Argonauticon Liber Octavus quis modo tam saevos adytis fluxisse cruores cogitet aut ipsi qui iam meminere ministri? Inde ubi sacrificas cum coniuge venit ad aras Aesonides unaque adeunt pariterque precari incipiunt, ignem Pollux undamque iugalem praetulit et dextrum pariter vertuntur in orbem. Sed neque se pingues tum candida flamma per auras explicuit nec tura videt concordia Mopsus promissam nec stare fidem, breve tempus amorum. Odit utrumque simul, simul et miseratur utrumque et tibi tum nullos optavit, barbara, natos. Mox epulas et sacra parant. silvestria laetis praemia venatu facili quaesita supersunt; pars veribus, pars undanti despumat aeno. Gramineis ast inde toris discumbitur, olim Hister anhelantem Peucen quo presserat antro. Ipsi inter medios rosea radiante iuventa altius inque sui sternuntur velleris auro.   Quis novus inceptos timor impediit hymenaeos turbavitque toros et sacra calentia rupit? Absyrtus subita praeceps cum classe parentis advehitur profugis infestam lampada Grais concutiens diramque premens clamore sororem atque ‘hanc, o siquis vobis dolor iraque, Colchi, accelerate viam, neque enim fugit aequore raptor Iuppiter aut falsi sequimur vestigia tauri. Puppe (nefas!) una praedo Phrixea reportat vellera, qua libuit remeat cum virgine; nobis (o pudor!) et muros et stantia tecta reliquit. Quid mihi deinde satis? Nec quaero vellera nec te accipio, germana, datam nec foederis ulla spes erit aut irae quisquam modus. Inde reverti patris ad ora mei tam parvo in tempore fas sit?

245

250

255

260

265

270

241 tam Fontius Pius in adn. : iam γ || 242 aut ipsi qui γ : haut ipsi quin Heinsius3 || 243  sacrificas L : -ans V || 247  aras Maserius || 249  fidem Lpc1 (cf. D -em) : fides γ || fidem et breve Heinsius3 || 251 iam Reg Bon. 1474 || 258  sternuntur Lpc1 (cf. D -stern) V : stennuntur Lac || 259  impediit Lpc1 (cf. D impediat) : impendit (in- V) γ || hymenaeos Bon. 1474 : -eos γ || 263  diramque γ : diroque Baehrens || sororem Lpc1 (cf. D sor-) : son- γ || 264  atque hanc L : adque h. V : hanc ait Liberman : usque hanc Caussin : atque haec (: o si quis . . .) Heinsius3 : atque ait Watt* : heia agite Baehrens || 268 remeat Reg Bon. 1474 : tremeat γ || 272  inde γ : unde Heinsius3 : an immo?

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Gaius Valerius Flaccus: Argonautica, Book 8

33

who would ever think that so much bitter blood had recently dripped in the inner chambers of the temples, or who even among the very priests remembers it any longer? Next, when Jason reaches the sacrificial altars with his bride, they approach them together, and together they begin to pray. Pollux offers the fire and the water for the wedding ritual, and together they turn towards the right side. But the flame did not soar, shining into the thick air, and Mopsus does not see harmony foretold in the incense, but foresees that not even the promised loyalty will last, and there will only be a brief period of love. He hates and pities them both at the same time, and then he wished that you, O barbarian woman, would have no children. Next they prepare the banquet and the sacrifices. Woodland game abound for the couple’s pleasure, and they catch the animals with easy hunting. Part of the meat was put on skewers, and the rest boils in a foaming cauldron. Then they lie down on grassy beds inside the cave in which Ister once pressed the gasping Peuce. Those two, beaming with fresh youth, lie down on a tall bed in the middle of the group, reclining upon their Golden Fleece. What new terror obstructed the wedding that was just begun, disturbed the beds, and stopped the still-­hot sacrifices? Hurrying with his father’s makeshift fleet, Absyrtus approaches the fleeing Greeks, and, shaking a threatening torch, he rages against his poor sister, screaming: ‘You, too, O Colchians, if you feel grief or anger, make haste! In fact, Jupiter is not the kidnapper who flees over the sea, and we are not following the tracks of a pretend bull. Does the bandit carry off Phrixus’ Fleece on only a single ship (what an insult!) and does he return with the maiden that he wanted, and has he (what a disgrace!) left our walls and houses undamaged? What satisfaction can I get after that? I do not want the Fleece, and I no longer accept you, sister, not even if they give you back, and there will be no hope of an agreement between us nor a limit to my wrath. Would it be allowed for me to return before the eyes of my father after so short a time?

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

34

C. Valeri Flacci Argonauticon Liber Octavus Quinquaginta animae me scilicet unaque mersa sufficiet placare ratis? Te, Graecia fallax, persequor atque tuis hunc quasso moenibus ignem. Nec tibi digna, soror, desum ad conubia frater, primus et ecce fero quatioque hanc lampada vestro coniugio, primus celebro dotalia sacra, qui potui: patriae veniam da, quaeso, senectae. Quin omnes alii pariter populique patresque mecum adsunt. Magni virgo ne regia Solis Haemonii thalamos adeas despecta mariti tot decuit coiisse rates, tot fulgere taedas.’   Dixerat atque orans iterum ventosque virosque perque ratis supplex et remigis vexilla magistris. Illi autem intorquent truncis frondentibus undam quaeque die fuerat raptim formata sub uno et tantum deiecta suis a montibus arbor (quid dolor et veterum potuit non ira virorum?), haud longis iam distat aquis sequiturque volantem barbara Palladiam puppem ratis, ostia donec Danuvii viridemque vident ante ostia Peucen ultimaque agnoscunt Argoi cornua mali. Tum vero clamorem omnes inimicaque tollunt gaudia, tum gravior remis fragor, ut procul Argo visa viris, unamque petunt rostra omnia puppem. Princeps navalem nodosi roboris uncum arripit et longa Styrus prospectat ab unda, coniugio atque iterum sponsae flammatus amore. Iamque alii clipeos et tela trabalia dextris expediunt, armant alii picis unguine flammas. Impatiens tremit hasta morae nec longius inter quam quod tela vetet superest mare. Vocibus urguent interea et pedibus pulsant tabulata frementes.

275

280

285 286a 286b

290

295

300

305

274 unaque L : una V || 276  spargo Clerq || 277  frater Reg Bon. 1474 : pater γ || 278  pronubus ecce Clerq || 279  dotalia L : da- V || 280  da L : de V || 281  alii Bon. 1498 : alti γ || 284  coiisse Bon. 1498 : coire γ || fulgere M2 Reg Bon. 1474 : fulgore L : fulgure V || 286a–286b  locum constituit Leo || 287 frondentibus Lpc1 (cf. D frondent-) : frondibus γ || 288  fuerat L : furat V || 293  danuvii V : -bii L || viridemque M2 Reg Bon. 1474 : virilemque L : virilegemque V || 302  armant M : amant γ || picis unguine Reg Bon. 1474 : pici sanguine γ

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Gaius Valerius Flaccus: Argonautica, Book 8

35

‘Will fifty dead men and a single sunken ship be enough to satisfy me? And you, deceitful Greece, are the one I pursue, and I wave this fire towards your walls! And for you, sister, I, as your brother, do not miss your proper wedding. Here! I am the first to carry and shake this torch for your marriage, I am the first to celebrate your wedding rites, I who could, that is. Please forgive my father’s old age. Everyone else, however, both commoners and elites, are here together with me, so that you, royal maiden, daughter of the great Sun, are not looked down upon when you go to the marriage bed of your Thessalian husband. It was only fitting that so many ships assemble and so many torches shine for you!’ So he spoke, and entreating the winds and the men again, he comes suppliant along the ships . . . the flags to the helmsmen. These men churn the waves with leafy branches, and each tree had been shaped in a single day and had just now been cut down from its mountains (what could the anger and wrath of ancient men not accomplish?). Now the barbarian ship, travelling on the sea, is no longer very far away, and it follows the speeding boat of Minerva until the Colchians spot the mouths of the Danube and green Peuce in front of said mouths, and identify the tip of the Argo’s main mast. Then, as soon as they spot the Argo from afar, they all raise a threatening cry of triumph and the din of their oars grows louder, and all the boats’ bows turn towards the single ship. Leading, Styrus grabs a hook made of gnarled oak wood and peers from the open sea, inflamed anew by the hope of marriage and by love for his fiancée. Now some make ready their shields and missiles, heavy and as big as ceiling beams, in their right hands, while others prepare torches using pitch. The impatient spear quivers due to the delay, and now not much time is left before they can throw their javelins over the sea. Meanwhile, the Thessalians shout and roar, and they stamp their feet upon the decks.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

36

C. Valeri Flacci Argonauticon Liber Octavus   Cum subitas videre rates vibrataque flammis aequora non una Minyae formidine surgunt, primus et in puppem deserta virgine ductor prosilit et summa galeam rapit altus ab hasta, ense simul clipeoque micat nec cetera pubes segnius arreptis in litore constitit armis. At tibi quae scelerum facies, Medea, tuorum quisve pudor Colchos iterum fratremque videnti quidquid et abscisum vasto iam tuta profundo credideras! Ergo infausto sese occulit antro, non aliud quam certa mori seu carus Iason seu frater Graia victus cecidisset ab hasta.   Haud ita sed summo segnis sedet aethere Iuno aut sinit extrema Minyas decernere pugna nec numero quoniam Colchis nec puppibus aequos. Ergo ubi diva rates hostemque accedere cernit, ipsa subit terras tempestatumque refringit ventorumque domos. Volucrum gens turbida fratrum erumpit, classem dextra Saturnia monstrat. Videre inque unum pariter mare protinus omnes infesto clamore ruunt inimicaque Colchis aequora et adversos statuunt a litore fluctus.   Tollitur atque infra Minyas Argoaque vela Styrus habet, vasto rursus desidit hiatu abrupta revolutus aqua. Iamque omnis in astra itque reditque ratis lapsoque reciproca fluctu descendit. Vorat hos vertex, hos agmine toto gurges agit. Simul in vultus micat undique terror; crebra ruina poli caelestia limina laxat. Non tamen ardentis Styri violentia cedit, hortatur socios media inter proelia divum: ‘transferet ergo meas in quae volet oppida dotes Colchis et Haemonius nobis succedet adulter, nec mihi tot magnos inter regesque procosque

310

315

320

325

330

335

307  non minima Bury1 : non parva dub. Liberman : non ulla Bosscha || 318  segnis summo Baehrens || sedet Bon. 1474 : sed γ || 319  aut V : haud L || 320  aequos Lpc1 (cf. D equos) V : aequor Lac || 321  accedere Lpc1 (cf. D acced-) : accend- γ || 322  ipsa subit Reg Bon. 1474 : ipsas ubi γ || 328 infra Giarratano (alio contextu; locum intellexit Courtney1) : intra γ || minyas L : minias V || 329 Styrus M2 Reg Ven. 1500 (Sti-) : styrys V : styris L || habet V : abit Bon. 1474 : adest Baehrens || desidit L Vpc : -et Vac || 331  ratis M2 Bon. 1474 : -es γ || 333  agit L : ait V || in γ : ob Liberman || 334 limina Olis : lumina γ || 338  Colchis M2 Reg Bon. 1474 : -ius γ || succedet L : -deret V

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Gaius Valerius Flaccus: Argonautica, Book 8

37

As soon as they suddenly see the ships and the sea sparkling with torches, the Minyans stand up, all of them caught in the grip of various fears. Their leader stands up first, leaves the girl, and leaps onto the stern to take his helmet from the top of his spear, and at once he gleams, wearing his sword and shield. After grabbing their weapons without delay, the rest of the young men stand still on the shore. But you, Medea, what look did you have on your face because of your crimes, and what shame did you feel at seeing again the Colchians, your brother, and all that you, supposedly now safe, had thought was separated from you by the depths of the sea’s abyss? And so she hid herself in the unlucky cave, resolved only to die, whether her dear Jason fell or her brother did, defeated by a Greek lance. But Juno does not sit idle upon Mount Olympus, nor does she allow the Minyans to fight a decisive battle, since they had fewer men and ships than the Colchians. Therefore, as soon as the goddess sees the enemy ships approaching, she herself goes down to the earth and breaks open the gates of the home of the winds and storms. The stormy family of winged brothers bursts forth, and Juno points out the fleet with her hand. They see it, and immediately they all rush together at a single section of the sea with a threatening yell, and, blowing from the shore, they make the sea and the waves unfavourable for the Colchians. Styrus is lifted up and flies over the Minyans and the sails of the Argo. Then he plunges again into a great whirlpool and is suddenly swept away by the water. And now every ship was constantly tossed up to the stars, only to come back down again due to the undercurrent of the waves. A vortex swallows up some of the men, others are overwhelmed by the full mass of a whirlpool. Everywhere terror flashes upon their faces, and the unending heavenly disaster loosens the gates of the sky. But even so, hot-­tempered Styrus’ aggression persists, and in the middle of a battle of gods, he encourages his companions: ‘So then, will the lady of Colchis bring my dowry to whatever city she likes, and will a Thessalian adulterer take my place? And will it be no benefit to me that, out of so many and such powerful kings and suitors,

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

38

C. Valeri Flacci Argonauticon Liber Octavus profuerit prona haud dubii sententia patris? An virtus praelata viri est et fortior ille quem sequitur? Iungam igniferos sine carmine tauros saevaque Echionii ferro sata persequar hydri. Hoc adeo interea specta de litore pugnas amborum: victoris eris. Iam digna videbis proelia iamque illud carum caput ire cruenta sub freta, semiviri nec murra corpus Achivi sed pice, sed flammis et olentes sulphure crines. Vos modo vel solum hoc, fluctus, expellite corpus: non te, Aeeta pater, generi aut, Sol magne, pudebit. Fallor, an hos nobis magico nunc carmine ventos ipsa movet diraque levat maria ardua lingua atque iterum Aesonides, iterum defenditur arte qua solet? Haud illi cantus et futtile murmur proderit. Ite, rates, et frangite virginis undam!’ Dixit et intortis socio cum milite remis prosilit. At fluctu puppis labefacta reverso solvitur effunditque viros ipsumque minantem tum quoque et elata quaerentem litora dextra. Ibat et arma ferens et strictum naufragus ensem incipit et remos et quaerere transtra solutae sparsa ratis maestasque aliis intendere voces puppibus. Ast inter tantos succurrere fluctus nulla potest †aut ille velit† quotiensque propinquat, tunc aliud rursus dirimit mare. Iam tamen enat iamque abiit fundoque iterum violentus ab imo erigitur, sed fluctus adest magnoque sub altis turbine mergit aquis et tandem virgine cessit.   Absyrtus visu maeret defixus acerbo: heu quid agat? Qua vi portus et prima capessat ostia, qua possit Minyas invadere clausos, quos videt agnoscitque fremens? Maria obvia contra saevaque pugnat hiems totusque in vertice pontus.

340

345

350

355

360

365

370

348  flammis et olentis sulphure crines L : flammise tollentis sulphore crines V : flammis redolens et sulphure cernes (cernes M2) Frassinetti || 359  tum Courtney : tunc γ || 362  maestasque Thilo : maestas γ || aliis Heinsius3 : altis (ma est asaltis V) || 364  nulla potest, non ulla audet (audet iam Sandstroem) Liberman || 365  enat Sandstroem : errat γ : extat Ven. 1523 || 366–85  folio, quod versa pagina 136–53 continuit, amisso desunt in V || 368  mergit Liberman : figit L || 370  heu Heinsius3 : nec L || 372  fremens Sabellicus : tremens L

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Gaius Valerius Flaccus: Argonautica, Book 8

39

her father ruled firmly in my favour? And perhaps she preferred that man’s virtue, and the man Medea follows is stronger than I? I, too, shall tame the fire-­spitting bulls, and I will not need spells to do it, and I will defeat the savage sons of Echion’s hydra with my sword. In the meantime, then, watch our battle from this shore; you will belong to the winner. Now you shall see battles worthy of you, and that head which is dear to you—now you will see it sink beneath a sea of blood, and you will not see the body of that Achaean fake man sprinkled with myrrh, but rather with pitch and flames, and his hair will smell of sulphur. But you, waves, just throw my body onto the shore. You, father Aeetes, will not be ashamed of your son-­in-­law, nor will you be ashamed, great Sun. Am I wrong, or is she herself the one who stirs these winds against us with a magic spell and who raises the violent seas with an evil word and who yet again protects the son of Aeson with her customary skill? But the magic spell and her useless murmuring will not help him at all. Go, ships, and break through the wave that the maiden has raised!’ He spoke and came forward, taking his own turn at the oars with one of his companions in arms. But the ship, jolted by an opposing wave, breaks apart and loses its cargo of men along with Styrus himself, even as he was hurling his threats and seeking the shore with his hand raised. The castaway, brandishing his weapons and unsheathed sword, was wandering about, and he began to look for the oars and the now-­missing rowers’ benches from the demolished ship, and to shout desperately to the other ships. But amid such waves, no ship is able nor dared to rescue him (?). Every time he comes near a ship, another wave pushes him away again. Now he floats for a moment, but then he disappears, and then he is violently lifted again out of the depths of the sea, but a wave approaches and traps him beneath the depths of the water. Finally he gave up on the maiden. Absyrtus, petrified, feels sorrow at the painful sight. But what can he do? With what power can he try to reach the port and the entrance to the river’s mouths, from which he could attack the protected Minyans, whom he sees and recognizes but cannot reach, and, therefore, he rages. Before him stands the u ­ nfavourable sea, a terrible storm opposes him, and now the whole ocean is a whirlpool.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

40

C. Valeri Flacci Argonauticon Liber Octavus abscessit tandem vanaque resedit ab ira et tanta de clade †rates†. Latus inde sinistrum adversamque procul Peucae defertur in oram cum sociis; gemino nam scinditur insula flexu Danuvii. Hac dudum Minyae Pagasaeaque puppis in statione manent, illinc Aeetius heros obsidet adversa tentoria Thessala classe impatiens pugnaeque datur non ulla potestas. Noctes atque dies vastis mare fluctibus inter perfurit, expediant donec Iunonia sese consilia atque aliquem bello ferat anxia finem.   At Minyae tanti reputantes ultima belli urguent et precibus cuncti fremituque fatigant Aesoniden: quid se externa pro virgine clausos obiciat quidve illa pati discrimina cogat? Respiceret pluresque animas maioraque fata tot comitum, qui non furiis nec amore nefando per freta, sed sola sese virtute sequantur. An vero ut thalamis raptisque indulgeat unus coniugiis? Id tempus enim? Sat vellera Grais et posse oblata componere virgine bellum. Quemque suas sinat ire domos nec Marte cruento Europam atque Asiam prima haec committat Erinys. Namque datum hoc fatis trepidus supplexque canebat Mopsus, ut in seros irent magis ista nepotes atque alius lueret tam dira incendia raptor. Ille trahens gemitum tantis ac vocibus impar quamquam iura deum et sacri sibi conscia pacti religio dulcisque movent primordia taedae, cunctatur †mortemque cupit sociamque pericli cogitat. Haut ultra sociis obsistere pergit†. Haec ubi fixa viris, tempus fluctusque quietos expectant. Ipsam interea quid restet amantem

375

380

385

390

395

400

405

374 resedit Caussin : recedit L || 375  rates L : ruit Watt* : fugit malit Liberman : querens Courtney || 376 Peucae Courtney : Peuces γ || 378  Danuvii Courtney : danubii L || hac Fontius R3 Flor. 1503 : ac L || 381  ulla M2 Reg Bon. 1474 : nulla L || 384  bello susp. Liberman : Pallas Loehbach || 387  quid se M2 Reg Bon. 1474 : quid de se L : quidese V || clausos Bon. 1498 : -as γ || 389  maioraque L : maiora V || 390  amore Fontius Bon. 1498 : more γ || 396  Erinys Bon. 1474 : aerinis γ || 397  nempe Bury || 398  magis ista Bon. 1498 : magis ipsa γ || 401  deum Lpc1 (cf. D deum) : adeum γ || et sacri sibi ex V scripsit Pius (sacri sibi iam R3) : estacri sibi V : est acris ibi Lac (ubi Lpc1, cf. D ubi) || 402  religio V : relligio L

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Gaius Valerius Flaccus: Argonautica, Book 8

41

At last he gives up, calming his powerless wrath, and he departs from the disaster afflicting the fleet (?). Then, he and his companions wheel to the left and towards the faraway shore facing Peuce; in fact, the island is separated from the mainland by a double fork in the Danube. The Minyans and the ship from Pagasae have been lying at anchor on this side for a long time. But on the other, the impatient hero son of Aeetes and his hostile fleet block the path to the Thessalian camp, but no opportunity for battle is given. By day and by night the sea rages with high waves until Juno’s plans come to fruition, and the worried goddess puts an end to the conflict. But the Minyans estimate the likely outcome of such a clash, and they all hound Jason and exhaust him with requests and complaints. Why does he expose his besieged comrades to danger for a foreign woman, and why does he force them to suffer these toils? He should take thought for the many lives and the greater destinies of so many companions who travel across the sea not out of madness or wicked love; they follow him solely due to their virtue. Or perhaps they did this so that only one man could reap the benefits of the marriage bed and a stolen wedding? In fact, is this precisely the right moment he was waiting for? The Fleece is enough for the Greeks, and they can resolve the conflict by handing over the girl. Jason should allow everyone to return to his own home, and Medea should not be the first Fury to drive Europe and Asia into a mutually bloody war. In fact, Mopsus, trembling and praying, was prophesying that fate had decided that it would be their descendants who would later deal with these events, and that another kidnapper would pay for these events with so frightful a blaze. Jason, standing alone before so many voices, hesitates with a sigh, despite the divine laws. His conscious devotion to the sacred wedding bond and the sweet beginnings of his marriage move him. And he desires death and thinks of his partner throughout the dangers. But he does not oppose his companions any further (?). As soon as the men establish this, they await a moment of calm and quiet seas. They agree that Medea, enamoured with Jason,

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

42

C. Valeri Flacci Argonauticon Liber Octavus ignorare sinunt decretaque tristia servant.   Sed miser ut vanos, veros ita saepe timores versat amor fallique sinit nec virginis annos. Ac prior ipsa dolos et quamlibet intima sensit non fidi iam signa viri nimiumque silentes una omnes. Haud illa sui tamen immemor umquam nec subitis turbata minis prior occupat unum Aesoniden longeque trahit, mox talibus infit: ‘me quoque, quid tecum Minyae, fortissima pubes, nocte dieque movent, liceat cognoscere tandem, si modo Peliacae non sum captiva carinae nec dominos decepta sequor consultaque vestra fas audire mihi. Vereor, fidissime coniunx, nil equidem; miserere tamen promissaque serva usque ad Thessalicos saltem conubia portus inque tua me sperne domo. Scis te mihi certe, non socios iurasse tuos. Hi reddere forsan fas habeant, tibi non eadem permissa potestas teque simul mecum ipsa traham: non sola reposcor virgo nocens atque hac pariter rate fugimus omnes. An fratris te bella mei patriaeque biremes terrificant magnoque impar urgueris ab hoste? Finge rates alias et adhuc maiora coire agmina: nulla fides, nullis ego digna periclis? Non merui mortemque tuam comitumque tuorum? Vellem equidem nostri tetigissent litora patris te sine duxque illis alius quicumque fuisset. Nunc remeant meque ecce (nefas) et reddere possunt nec spes ulla super. Quin tu mea respice saltem consilia et nimio comitum ne cede timori. Credidit ardentes quis te tunc iungere tauros posse, quis ad saevi venturum templa draconis?

410

415

420

425

430

435

409 falli Lpc1 (cf. D -i) : fallit γ || 411 signa L : -i V || 412  iam comites Baehrens || illa M : ulla γ || 415  quid tecum Heinsius3 (fuerat quittecum) : vitte (vittae V) cum γ : vir tecum Lpc1 (cf. D vir tecum) : quin tecum Baehrens || minyae L : myniae V || 416  novent Thilo || 419  merear Shackleton Bailey || 423  hi priscis codd. suis tribuere videtur Pius : his γ || 424  permissa Reg Fontius Bon. 1498 : pro- γ || 426  fugimus ambo Burman || 427  an γ : at Ven. 1523 || tela vel vela Heinsius3 || 431  mortemque tuam γ : Martemque tuum Heinsius3 || 434  et γ : te Schenkl1 || possunt γ : poscunt Rac et R3 T1 || 436  nimio L : -a V || cede M2 Reg Bon. 1474 : ce γ || 437  credidit Fontius R3 Bon. 1498 : reddidit γ || quis te Heinsius3 : quise γ

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Gaius Valerius Flaccus: Argonautica, Book 8

43

should be kept unaware of their plan, and they keep their sad intentions to themselves. But a sorrowful love, just as it leads to false ones, often also stirs genuine fears, and it does not allow Medea to be tricked, even though she is young. She first detected the tricks and the signs, although they were hidden, of a now treacherous husband, and she recognized the meaning behind the excessive silence shared among all the Argonauts. However, she never forgets who she is, and, not at all disturbed by the sudden dangers, she first takes Jason aside by himself, and suddenly she begins to speak: ‘May it finally be granted for me, too, to learn what the Minyans, those most valiant men, are plotting day and night with your help. Grant it, if I am not a slave on your Thessalian ship, and I do not, deceived, follow my masters, and if it is allowed for me to hear your decisions. Really, O husband most loyal, I fear nothing. But have pity and keep your marriage vows at least until we reach the ports of Thessaly. Then, reject me indeed, but do so in your house! Certainly, you know this, that you were the one who swore loyalty to me, not your comrades. Perhaps they have the right to hand me over, but you do not have the same opportunity, and I myself shall drag you also away with me. I, guilty maiden though I am, am not the only one they are pursuing; all of us on this ship are fugitives alike. But perhaps my brother’s army and my father’s biremes scare you, and you feel helpless, you, chased by too powerful an enemy? Imagine if more ships should assemble and armies still larger than this one now. Is your loyalty no longer worth anything? Am I not a worthy reason to run towards danger? Do I not deserve that you would die for me, and that your companions would, too? How I wish that they had come to my father’s shores without you, or that their commander had been someone else, anyone else at all! But now they come back, and look! They can give me back (what a disgrace!). No hope is left for them besides this. But you, at least recall my counsels and do not yield to your companions’ excessive terror. Who would have ever believed then that you could have yoked the fiery bulls or that you would go to the sacred forest of the frightful dragon?

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

44

C. Valeri Flacci Argonauticon Liber Octavus O utinam ergo meus pro te non omnia posset atque aliquid dubitaret amor! Quin nunc quoque quaero quid iubeas. Heu, dure, siles magnumque minatur nescioquid tuus iste pudor. Mene, optime quondam Aesonide, me ferre preces et supplicis ora fas erat? Haud hoc nunc genitor putat aut dare poenas iam sceleris dominumque pati.’ Sic fata parantem reddere dicta virum furiata mente refugit vociferans. Qualem Ogygias cum tollit in arces Bacchus et Aoniis inlidit Thyiada truncis, talis erat talemque iugis se virgo ferebat [cuncta pavens fugit infestos vibrantibus hastis terrigenas, fugit ardentes exterrita tauros] si Pagasas vel Peliacas hinc denique nubes cerneret et Tempe lucentia fumo, hoc visu contenta mori. Tunc tota querellis egeritur questuque dies eademque sub astris sola movet, maestis veluti nox illa sonaret plena lupis quaterentque truces ieiuna leones ora vel orbatae traherent suspiria vaccae. Procedit, non gentis honos, non Solis avi, non barbaricae decor ille iuventae, qualis erat cum Chaonio radiantia trunco vellera vexit ovans interque ingentia Graium nomina Palladia virgo stetit altera prora.

440 460 441

445

450

455

459 461 463

440 quaero Bon. 1498 : -e γ || 460  huc transtulit Lemaire || iubeas V : dubitas L || 442  aesonide V : -dae L || 444  parantem Bon. 1474 : -entem L : -entum V || 445  reddere M2 Reg Bon. 1474 : redde γ || 446  pellit Weichert : compellit R. D. Williams ap. Courtney (contollit iam Langen) frustra || 447 incendit Burman Sec. || Thyiada (Thyada iam Heinsius3) Thilo : tyana γ : tympana Lpc1 (cf. D tympana) || 449–50  a loco alienos esse vidit Schenkl1 || 452  tenui add. Baehrens post Tempe (ante hanc vocem Ehlers) : om. γ || R marg. sin. L || 454  gemituque vel fletuque Burman : planctuque Liberman || 455  sola dolet Liberman || moestis L || nox ipsa Watt* : nox alta Liberman || 456  plena Reg Bon. 1474 : plana γ || 457  vaccae M2 Reg Bon. 1474 : bacchae γ || 458  ante hunc versum lacu­ nam statuit Ph. Wagner2 : post procedit dist. Kramer || versus mancus in γ : Flor. 1481 : vel Sudhaus || R marg. dext. L || 461  chaonio L : ca- V

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Gaius Valerius Flaccus: Argonautica, Book 8

45

O, if only my love could not have done everything for you, and if only it had hesitated to do something! But even now I ask what you command. But you, cruel one, are silent, and this reserve of yours is making some big threat. O Jason, once the best of men, was it therefore possible that I, I indeed, had to beg you with the look of a suppliant? My father does not believe this now, nor does he think that I have already paid the penalty for my misdeed, and that I must suffer having a master.’ So she spoke. She, enraged in her heart and yelling, ran away from the man as he was preparing to answer her. Just like a Maenad driven by Bacchus up to the mountains of Boeotia and struck by the Ionian branches, so acted Medea, and thus she went up to the heights, [fearing everything. She fled from the terrible sons of the earth who were brandishing their spears, she fled, terrified, from the fiery bulls] if she could finally glimpse Pagasae or the clouds of Pelion and the valley of Tempe, brilliant with mist, from there, satisfied with dying after seeing this sight. Then she passes the whole day in pain and with lamentations, and Medea, alone under the stars, broods over the same things, and the night was resounding as though it were full of howling wolves and fierce lions were roaring with starving mouths, or cows, deprived of their young, bellowed out their lamentations. She advances. No longer does she display the honour of her lineage, nor the glory of her grandfather, the great Sun, nor the radiance of the barbarian youth, as she had when she, triumphant, brought the sparkling Fleece to the Chaonian beam, and she stood upright on Pallas’ ship and among the grandiose names of the Greeks, just like a second Minerva.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

46

C. Valeri Flacci Argonauticon Liber Octavus   Maestus at ille minis et mota Colchidos ira haeret, et hinc praesens pudor, hinc decreta suorum dura premunt. Utcumque tamen mulcere gementem temptat et ipse gemens et dictis temperat iras: ‘mene aliquid meruisse putas, me talia velle

463bis 464 465

* * * 463bis  habet L : om. V || moestus L || at Fontius M2 Flor. 1503 : ait L || mota (nota M2 Reg Bon. 1474) Ehlers1 : noto L || 466  dictis temperat iras M2 : tempera dictis V || 467  mene L : mane V

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Gaius Valerius Flaccus: Argonautica, Book 8

47

But Jason, saddened by Medea’s threats and anger, hesitates. On the one hand, his present shame hounds him, but on the other hand, so do the stern decisions of his comrades. Nevertheless, he tries to calm the weeping woman in some way, and, weeping himself, he soothes her with his words: ‘Do you think that I bear any blame, that I want this . . .’

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

Commentary 1–23.  MEDEA DECIDES TO LEAVE COLCHIS The opening scene takes place in the evening of the day on which Jason overcame the trials of the bulls and the Spartoi, as narrated in the previous book; just as the seventh book had opened on the evening of the day of the battle that was described in the sixth book. In this prologue to the eighth book, which condenses AR 4.1–66 (by omitting the invocation of the Muses), VF also repeats a diminished version of what he had told in the seventh book (cf. 7.103–372), that is, Medea’s agony because of her father’s treachery. Furthermore, in order to announce the dark colours that mark this book, the poet uses Medea’s mental state to encapsulate the main features of a tragedy, which opens with the painful situation in the bedroom and culminates in the murder of her children and Jason’s frustration. In addition to epic models (namely AR’s Medea and the depiction of Dido in Aeneid 4; see Heerink [2020] on Dido in the epic and in the final book in particular), VF adds extradiegetic tragic elements, which direct the reader to the later events at Corinth. For an in-­depth analysis of VF and his models, in addition to the commentary on individual lines, see Pellucchi (2012) 31–45. 1–5  In the first five lines of his fourth book AR addresses the Muse, asking her to explain whether Medea’s decision to leave Colchis is due to the sad anguish of love or to deathly fear of her father (the conflict between love and terror ­dominates the third book). In the same number of lines VF seems to answer this question (AR starts at 4.6) by showing a Medea ready to cross the sea on any ship because of the fear she feels towards her father. In VF Medea’s terror derives directly from her relationship with her father (which will cause the repeated description of her in­tern­al conflict in the beginning of this book) whereas in AR it is Hera who inspires the troublesome terror in her heart (cf. AR 4.11). 1  at trepidam: The beginning is Virgilian, reminiscent of A. 4.642 (at trepida et coeptis immanibus effera Dido). VF establishes a close connection with Aeneid 4, which also opens with at (at regina gravi iamdudum saucia cura). Furthermore, the poet also opens the sixth book with at, confirming that he deliberately chose to link Aeneid 4 to Argonautica 8, with two women united by a love destined to end tra­gic­al­ly. From a narrative point of view, at introduces this scene of psychological introspection after the activities described at the end of the preceding book (the trial of the bulls and the fight with the Spartoi), which

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

50

Commentary, lines 1–2

closes with the image of Jason and Aeetes walking away from each other, ambo truces, ambo . . . minantes (7.653). According to Bessone (1998) 170, the beginning of this book also echoes the opening of Ov. Her. 12 (at tibi Colchorum, memini, regina vocavi). At trepida also opens 7.103 (at trepida et medios inter deserta parentes), and the stylistic similarity to 8.1 can already be found in the clausula paventem / parentes. The two passages have strong similarities from a narrative point of view, given that in both cases the respective authors put their spotlights on Medea as she finds herself alone in her parents’ house. Sil. 6.497 (at trepida et subito ceu stans in funere coniunx) and Stat. Theb. 4.406 (at trepido monstro) also follow the Virgilian model. After Virgil, beginning a book with at becomes widespread in Latin epic (Ov. Met. 4.1; Luc. 4.1 and 9.1; Stat. Theb. 3.1 and 7.1; Sil. 15.1). Cf. Smolenaars on Theb. 7.1; Fucecchi on VF 6.1. Compare also the Homeric practice of beginning with αὐτάρ at Il. 3.1 and 15.1 and Od. 11.1; 12.1; 14.1; 19.1; 20.1; 22.1. sua facta paventem: Heinsius and Pius accept the reading fata found in the editio princeps, as does Weichert, who justifies it by noting nam pavemus futura, non praeterita. All modern editors accept facta. The clausula facta paventem does not occur elsewhere, but fata paventem appears in Luc. 4.474. As noted by Liberman (2.344), paveo serves more to indicate fear of the consequences for the deed she has already done (cf. TLL x/1.810.14–19 and Tac. Hist. 3.56). Without underestimating the Lucanian parallel, I prefer to keep facta, which describes what Medea has done (that is, helping Jason during the trials of the bulls and the Spartoi in the previous book); it is less convincing to believe, as Pius does, that sua fata alludes to the death of Jason. For the joining of trepidam with paventem, a lexical combination first attested in VF (1.699 and 4.9), which signifies both the physical and the psy­cho­logic­al state of Medea’s spirit, see Pellucchi (2012) 46–7. 2 Colchida: A common appellation for Medea in Latin poetry (beginning with Hor. Epod. 16.58; cf. Bömer on Ov. Met. 7.296) and one that reproduces the Greek Κόλχις, first attested at Eur. Med. 133. In VF, beginning from 5.349, it seems to recur in contexts in which Medea’s relationship to her native land is emphasized (cf. 7.181, 190, 369, 389, 575, 625; 8.68, 83, 463, and Perutelli on 7.153). Here Colchida is at the beginning of the verse like Κόλχις of AR 4.2. The epithet Colchida, in addition to representing a stylistic alternative to using the name Medea, also fits into a well-­established literary tradition that immediately categorizes the protagonist as a magician. Colchis and Thessaly are famous lands where magic is practised (cf. Plin. Nat. 30.6; Prop. 2.1.54; Ov. Am. 2.14.29; Met. 7.331 and 348; Germ. 534; Sen. Med. 871; Luc. 6.441). Medea’s story follows ‘the geography of magic’ because it takes place in large part between Colchis, Medea’s homeland, and Thessaly, to which she comes as Jason’s new bride. Egypt and Persia are also considered such places, especially since magic allegedly originated there (Plin. Nat. 30.3). In Italy, the Marsi and the Samnites are associated

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 2–5

51

with magic; cf. Tupet (1976) 61–2 and 158–62; Elice (2003–4) 155 n. 140; Baldini-­ Moscadi (2005) 145. omnes pariter: The combination of omnes and pariter occurs frequently in VF, especially in the eighth book (cf. 2.31 and 202; 6.32 and 616; 8.281, 325, and 426). Note the alliterative link that joins pariter with paventem in line 1 and patris in the following line. Cf. 2.247: pariter nataeque nurusque and the following note. Pellucchi (2012) 47–8 understands circa omnes pariter as a com­bin­ ation of two distinct and independently used expressions (circa + omnis and omnis + pariter). furiaeque minaeque: The preceding book closes with the participle minantes (referring to Jason and Aeetes). Wagner (followed by Pellucchi) interprets furiaeque minaeque as a hendiadys (for irae furibundae), whereas Gebbing (1878) 77 sees it as a ple­on­asm, and Contino (1973) 64 as repeated synonyms. In this case it is possible to see a difference and wonder (as Lazzarini does) whether one might even print the two nouns with capital letters, as personifications of the Furies and Threats (a habit not uncommon in post-­Virgilian epic). Cf. also AR 4.8–10, in which Aeetes, thinking that his daughters are accomplices of the Greeks, nurses an unceasing rage in his chest (Αἰήτης ἄμοτον κεχολωμένος). From a metrical point of view, the polysyndetic link -que . . . -que at the end of the hexameter is very common in VF (in the eighth book it appears at 135, 141, 200, 281, 285, and 339); for a full list, see Contino (1973) 97. As pointed out by Zissos (on 1.150), the correlative use of -que . . . -que is a mannerism characteristic of high epic style, which is not normally found in prose and is generally used to connect two elements alike in form or meaning (often for terms that denote family relationships, as at, e.g., Ov. Fast 2.437: pariter nuptaeque virique, VF 1.150: natosque patresque or 8.141: matresque nurusque; see also Poortvliet on 2.247 and Bömer on Ov. Met. 5.267). The use of this structure goes back to Ennius, who probably introduced -que . . . -que following the Homeric τε . . . τε. See also Austin on Virg. A. 4.483; Williams on A. 5.802; Norden on A. 6.33; Palmer (1954) 113–14; L-­H-­Sz 2.515. 3 habent: A similar use of habeo also appears at 98–9 (for which see Heinsius on Ov. Her. 12.170). For the use of habet as urget, see Langen’s note on 5.283 (with, e.g., Ov. Met. 9.291 and 10.81; Fast. 3.288, 6.572). For this polysemous use of habeo (cf. TLL vi/3.2430.77–8: notio aliquem in potestate tenendi and TLL vi/3.2431.45: in notionem vexandi), see also Lazzarini (2012) 61–2 and Pellucchi (2012) 49. 4–5  The three phrases nec . . . procul, quascumque . . . fugam and quamcumque . . .  puppem express the thought of reaching distant lands by fleeing across the sea, dividing lines 4 and 5 into 3 hemistichs of equal length. See also 47–8 and 106–8. quascumque per undas . . . quamcumque . . . scandere puppem paraphrases Hor. Epod. 16.21: ire pedes quocumque ferent, quocumque per undas (with a similar expression at verse end). The Horatian expression ‘to go on foot or by sea’ is quite common (cf. Pind. Pyth. 10.46–7), and ire pedes quocumque te ferent is a

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

52

Commentary, lines 5–6

proverbial phrase (cf. Watson on Hor. Epod. 16.21). The parallel is important, since, as Baldini-­Moscadi (2005) 98–9 observes, in Epode 16 Horace links Medea the sorceress and fratricide to civil wars for the first time. 5  ferre fugam . . . scandere puppem: ferre fugam with the sense of fugere is a Valerian expression (it also appears at 4.644 and 7.297); see Langen’s note on 2.282 (ferre cum obiecto coniungitur pro simplici verbi notione), with further examples of the construction, as well as Perutelli on 7.297. scandere is often used to refer to ‘climbing aboard a ship’ (first attested use at Hor. Carm. 2.16.21), but the collocation scandere puppem is rare and alludes to Sen. Her. F. 775: scanditque puppem. The parallel is noteworthy, both because in Seneca it is used to describe Hercules as he boards Charon’s boat (in the context of death) and because Medea will play Hercules’ role in the scene as she seizes the Fleece. Note also that VF uses scandere only here and at line 111, where the word strongly recalls the technical meaning ‘to ascend to heaven’: this may be a veiled allusion to the poem’s astrological context and perhaps a prolepsis for Medea’s tragic finale as we know it from Euripides and Seneca; on the influence of Seneca on VF, see Buckley (2014). 6–9  After introducing Medea by describing her state of mind, VF narrates her heart-­rending farewell to her father’s house. To bid farewell to beloved locations is a topos. VF’s model is AR 4.26–34, which he had already adopted at 2.168 (the women of Lesbos) and which Virgil had followed in A. 2.490 (Servius ad loc. cites AR 4.26 as the model); cf. Ov. Met. 13.420. Lazzarini (2012) 65 also compares Ovid’s departure into exile, described in Ov. Tr. 1.3. 6  ultima virgineis tunc flens dedit oscula vittis: VF employs a similar expression at 4.373 (ultima tum patriae cedens dedit osculae ripae). ultima and dedit oscula are in the same metrical position, but instead of cedens we have flens (in the same pos­ition), which takes up flevit used anaphorically in the following two lines (4.374–5: flevit Amymone . . . | flevit et effusis . . .); and in place of tum we have tunc. It is Medea who gives a final kiss to her beloved places, whereas in book 4 it was Io saying goodbye to her fatherland. Medea has already been compared to Io in a famous simile in the seventh book (111–14), on which see Ricci (1977) 176–85, but also Gärtner (1994) 175–9 and Perutelli ad loc. For the collocation ultima . . . oscula, introduced to poetry by VF, cf. Pellucchi (2012) 51–2. dedit oscula, which appears also at 44 (in the same clausula), is Ovidian (cf. Ars 2.69; Met. 1.376; 3.427; 4.117 and 222; 8.211; 11.738; Fast. 2.719, always appearing in the same clausula). According to some critics, vittis refers to the virginal vittae, which Medea would be about to lose quia nuptura (cf. Turneb. ap. Weitz ad loc. and OLD s.v. 1). For the ceremony, cf. Prop. 4.11.33–4: ubi iam facibus cessit praetexta maritis, | vinxit et acceptas altera vitta comas (see Fedeli, Ciccarelli, and Dimundo ad loc. and Liberman 2.344 n. 4 for further bibliography). Others (e.g., Caussin, Langen, and Spaltenstein) think these vittae

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 7–8

53

describe priestly bandages, since Medea was a priestess of Hecate. The only other time that VF uses vittae with reference to Medea, the term seems to have the priestly connotation (cf. 5.348–9: talis et in vittis geminae cum lumine taedae | Colchis erat). Liberman observes that these interpretations are not mutually exclusive, given that in order to be a priestess of Hecate, Medea also had to be a virgin. The interpretation that the bands are those of maidenhood is problematic, however, since in Ov. Met. 7 Medea is labelled as a priestess despite already having two sons. In any case, if these are the vittae virginum, VF (as he often does in the poem) applies a Roman custom to the Colchian Medea. 7  quosque fugit complexa toros crimenque genasque: In AR 4.18–19 Medea often brings her hands to her throat, pulling out tufts of her hair, and cries over her hopeless pain. Then, after she has kissed the bed and the doors and caresses the walls, Medea tears out a long lock of hair and leaves it as a keepsake for her mother (4.26–9). VF condenses the poignant gesture of leaving a lock of hair behind and Medea’s self-­harming agony into the phrase crinemque genasque . . .  carpsit. The words crinemque genasque are already linked in Tib. 1.1.68 (crinibus et teneris, Delia, parce genis) and Luc. 6.178–9 (dissipat; alterius flamma crinesque genasque | succendit . . .). Cf. also Sil. 4.774 (foedata genas laceratque crinis), Stat. Theb. 7.336 (crine genisque); Silv. 5.1.219–20 (is dolor in vultu, tantum crinesque genaeque | noctis habent) and Ach. 1.179–80 (flumina fumantisque genas crinemque novatur | fontibus). One would expect to see fugiebat instead of fugit, but the present tense gives the scene a sense of visual immediacy. 8  ungue per antiqui carpsit vestigia somni: The reading found in the codices, ante per antiqui (ante per anti in V), had caused suspicion already among ancient editors. In place of ante (which Courtney kept), Delz (1976) 99 suggested aegra (which Ehlers accepted), using 7.5 (contigit aegra toros) as a point of comparison. However, as Spaltenstein notes, it is strange that the tradition did not preserve a lemma that seems obvious to us. ungue is Burman’s emend­ ation, who quotes Ov. Her. 5.141 (rupi tamen ungue capillos) as a parallel; in the Ovidian passage Heinsius had restored ungue in place of the erroneous ante. Liberman (like Langen) accepts ungue, explaining its corruption into ante as Antizipationsfehler in front of antiqui (cf. Sommer [1914] 188), and, following Burman, cites various parallels in which ungue is used to clarify what action is evoked by crinemque genasque . . . carpsit (cf. Ov. Am. 3.6.48: ungue notata comas, ungue notata genas; Am. 1.7.49–50; 2.6.4; 2.7.7; Her. 5.72; Ars 2.453; 3.568, 708; Stat. Theb. 3.135–6, 513–14; 6.624–5; 10.817–18). Other passages in which women tear their hair and cheeks (capillos, genas, or ora) with the fingernails (ungue or unguibus) are cited by Soubiran ad loc. Courtney keeps ante and attributes the crux to peranti, but it is difficult to relate ante to fugit as Caussin does (which, like Wagner, he interprets as antequam fugeret). Still less persuasive is Koestlin’s hypothesis (adopted by Leo1) that Medea was in front of

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

54

Commentary, line 8

a statue of Somnus, which she had in her bedroom (Leo1 proposes the res­tor­ ation ante peranti carpsit vestigia Somni). On the phrase per antiqui vestigia somni Langen notes: ‘haec verba obscura et certe insolenter dicta explicantur sic: per memoriam, memor antiqui somni, quod narratum est 5.333 sqq.’ For a long time (cf. Burman, Langen, Wagner) it was believed that vestigia antiqui somni referred to Medea’s dream, described at 5.329–40 (and perhaps also to the one narrated at 7.141–52). But somni is the genitive of somnus, not  somnium, and some modern critics (Soubiran, Liberman, Spaltenstein, Pellucchi) accept Strand’s in­ter­pret­ation, according to which antiqui vestigia somni simply means ‘the place where she used to sleep’; cf. Strand (1972) 93–4 with the parallels at 1.711: sparsisque legens vestigia canis; 3.721: tanti . . . vestigia transtri, and Sil. 6.459 for an analogous use of vestigia. Lazzarini rightly criticizes Strand’s hypothesis, since the construction per vestigia is difficult to fit with the phrase’s proposed meaning; she suggests obelizing peranti, speculating on whether a possible solution may lie in the substitution of an adjective or participle in the genitive case and modifying somni. I venture a different hypothesis. The conjecture ungue (or aegra, on the model of aegra animo in Enn. Med. 89.9 Goldberg/Manuwald, on which see Bessone [1998] 170) and Strand’s interpretation could be satisfactory, but vestigia nevertheless has the sense of ‘traces’, and Mozley renders it well in his translation with ‘the traces of her former slumbers’. crinemque genasque | ante per antiqui carpsit vestigia somni could be taken, therefore, as parenthetical, translated as ‘previously (ante) she had torn her hair and face on account of the signs she received from the dream which she had had before’, in which antiquus somnus refers to Medea’s dream, narrated ante (but if one accepts ungue, ­nothing changes) not by VF, but by AR 3.617–32 (which in any case inspired this passage in VF). In fact, as soon as Chalciope goes to her sister’s chamber, she finds Medea sprawled on her bed while tearing her cheeks (cf. AR 3.671–2). In lines 37–40 VF will again allusively make a reference to Medea’s dream in AR, presenting as a real fact (namely that Jason came to Colchis only for Medea and not for the Fleece) that which had only been a dream in his epic model (for these frequent metaliterary allusions, see note on 37–40). Furthermore, an Ovidian passage seems to act as an intermediary between the two poets: in Her. 12.62–4 Ovid condenses (while setting it in the morning instead of at night) the sequence at AR 3.669–73 in which Chalciope finds a hopeless Medea: mane erat, et thalamo cara recepta soror | disiectamque comas adversaque in ora iacentem | invenit, et lacrimis omnia plena meis (cf. Bessone [1997] 128–30). Of these three lines VF seems to adopt the ideas disiectamque comas, adversaque in ora iacentem (cf. impresso . . . cubili in 9), and lacrimis . . . meis (gemuit in 9). For this use of carpere, the TLL iii.493.33 cites this and other examples, including Luc. 9.741–2: carpitque medullas | ignis (with the meaning ‘to shred’ and ‘to tear apart’).

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 9–11

55

9  impresso gemuit miseranda cubili: VF is inspired by the famous passage at Virg. A. 4.659–60: dixit et os impressa toro ‘moriemur inultae | sed moriamur’ ait . . . (the traces of which can also be seen in toros of 7). For this idea, one can also compare Prop. 1.3.12: molliter impresso conor adire toro and 2.29.35: apparent non ulla toro vestigia presso. Although Peerlkamp (1861) 141–2 and Liberman 2.345 n. 7 express the suspicion (along with related conjectures) that the text might be corrupt, I find such concerns excessive. miseranda is in the nominative case (and therefore refers to Medea and not haec) as at 6.688 and 7.121, always in the same clausula. 10–15  This is the first of Medea’s two monologues in the book (the second occurs at 95–104) and the fifth in the poem. Medea addresses her (absent) father poignantly, expressing wishes that will not come true. On the contrary, the prayers at 14 and 15 are marked by tragic irony. The monologue echoes AR 4.30–3 (Medea’s final in AR), in which Medea, as she says goodbye to her house, addresses her mother and sister (in VF only her father), bidding them farewell and wishing them happiness. The final point is a forceful curse against Jason, echoing the beginning of Euripides’ Medea. Medea addresses her father as in other passages of the poem in which she recalls her feelings for her family (usually concerning her father’s role); cf. 5.336; 7.123, 140, 309; 8.52, 134. In this case, Medea’s conflicted feelings, provoked by a sense of guilt towards Aeetes that she has felt from the beginning of the book, dictate the apostrophe, but so, too, does the intertextual dialogue with AR. On the bond between Aeetes and Medea, see Stocks (2016) 52–6. 10–11  si . . . genitor nunc ille supremos | amplexus, Aeeta, dares: The reading in the codices, ille, has been suspected many times because of the difficult connection ille . . . Aeeta dares. Among the proposed conjectures, Heinsius’ mille (accepted by Baehrens) on the model of Catull. 5 seems out of place since the context is not erotic, whereas ipse proposed by Schenkl (and accepted by Courtney, Soubiran, and Liberman) appears to be more plausible (Langen also suggested mite). Those who defend ille produce various explanations (cf. Dureau de Lamalle, Wagner2, Weichert, Weber, Leo1), but the most convincing seems to be that which interprets Medea’s words as saying ‘if only you could hug me and see my weeping like that parent’, in other words, ‘the one who you were before my betrayal’ (Strand, Caviglia, Spaltenstein, and Lazzarini). For this particular use of ille, cf. 2.485–6: verum o iam redeunt Phrygibus si numina tuque | ille ades, auguriis promisse et sorte deorum, Virg. A. 9.481–2: tune ille senectae | sera meae requies, and the other examples cited by Morel (1938) 73, Strand (1972) 69–70, and Spaltenstein ad loc. ille . . . tu can be used both emphatically and to refer to the past, as it does here; cf. TLL vii/1.360.17. amplexus dare instead of amplecti (appearing also at 1.333 and 4.635) is used almost exclusively in poetry (TLL i.1998.23). Other similar constructions of dare occur also at 3.106 (sonum dare) and 681 (funera dare), 4.64 (finem dare); cf. TLL v/1.1686.33 for further examples.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

56

Commentary, lines 12–13

Weichert (whose interpretation was repeated by Leo) praises the passage’s stylishness, pointing out how the turmoil in Medea’s mind leads her to confuse her syntax, saying dares instead of daret. But if this were the case, we would expect to see Aeetes instead of Aeeta. In my opinion (Dureau de Lamalle adopts a similar position) the elegance can be found in the shift in perspective, which, beginning from far away with genitor . . . ille (in the third person), comes closer in the next line with dares . . . videres (in the second person), before arriving directly at the narrating character with the theatrical exclamation ecce meos (on which see note on 12), highlighted by enjambment. 12  ecce meos: According to Burman, ‘offendit illud ecce hoc loco positum post videres, quare Heinsius maluerat hosce, ego, fletusque videres ire meos, ut Ov. Ep. 4. 62’. After Burman and Heinsius, no other editor corrects ecce, and even editors as early as Langen note ‘ecce interiectio saepius sententiae interponitur, imprimis apud Ovidium, ut Her. 12.101; 14.110; Amor. 1.4.46 et al.’. Liberman cites 5.212–13: promittis ut ecce | utque voca, revehemur, Mart. 11.36.1–2: Gaius hanc lucem gemma mihi Iulius alba | signat, io, votis redditus ecce meis, and above all Ov. Met. 2.92–4 (in which Sol addresses Phaethon): adspice vultus | ecce meos, utinamque oculos in pectora posses | inserere et patrias intus deprendere curas. ne crede, pater, non carior ille est: The reverse of the situation at 2.404, where Hypsipyle says to Jason: carius o mihi patre caput (o mihi also appears at the beginning of line 10). 13  tumidis utinam simul obruar undis: The most interesting parallel is with AR 4.32–3, in which Medea says about Jason: αἴθε σε πόντος, | ξεῖνε, διέρραισεν, πρὶν Κολχίδα γαῖαν ἱκέσθαι. In AR, Medea dumps the blame for her flight onto Jason, addressing him violently, whereas in VF, although prepared to leave, she still gives voice to conflicting feelings, as if she had not yet resolved the conflict between pudor and furor. She is enamoured with Jason, but she also feels love for her father (with pietas added to pudor) and tormented by guilt over her betrayal. Citing AR, Leo interprets the line as: ‘ “et ille, et ego obruamur undis,” ergo Iasoni mortem quidem imprecatur sed ut pariter inimicum significet ac perdite amatum’. Most critics follow him (cf. also Ov. Met. 11.441: me quoque tolle simul). But Wagner (followed by Lüthje and Soubiran) interprets it differently, as ‘non aeque amo Iasonem, ac te, pater optime, in quo, si metiar, tumidis simul obruar undis, fluctus me cum ipso Iasone hauriant!’ In this case Medea would not express the desire to die with Jason, but rather this would be the punishment if the declaration that her affection for her father was greater than her love for Jason proved false. 14–15  This passage is rife with tragic irony. The reader knows that matters will turn out differently from Medea’s anticipation. Jupiter had already revealed Aeetes’ fate at 5.683–7: mox . . . | . . . aderit [sc. Perses] victorque domos et scepta

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 14–15

57

tenebit | donec et Aeeten inopis post longa senectae | exilia, heu magnis quantum licet, impia, fatis, | nata iuvet Graiusque nepos in regna reponat (note the repetition of mox . . . sceptra . . . senectae). It should be said, however, that it will be Medea (described as impia nata) who helps the elderly Aeetes return to his throne (but VF follows the version told by Hyginus and Diodorus Siculus, according to which it was not Medea who killed Perses, but Medus, Medea’s son by Aegeus, accordingly identified as the Graius nepos). Lazzarini (2012) 71 emphasizes the affinity that these words share with the language of funerary epigram (precor at 14; the insistence on quiet; the optative tibi sit, expressing a wish for a better fate for the reader), which underscores the scene’s similarity to a farewell for the dead. Medea also expresses the hope that Aeetes will spend his old age in peace (cf. 102–4). VF frequently uses tragic irony, given the different levels of narrative know­ ledge between the well-­informed figures (the gods, the author, and the readers) and the others who are less so (the Argonauts, Medea, and other characters); on the epi­stem­ic differences between mortals and gods, cf. Schönberger (1965) 130–1. For the ironic episodes in the poem, cf. Garson (1965) 109; for their frequent use as anti-­Virgilian devices and for the irony caused by the Argonauts’ ignorance, cf. Zissos (2004b); for the irony caused by Medea’s ignorance, cf. Hershkowitz (1998) 15. 14–15  haec longa placidus mox sceptra senecta | tuta geras: The Monacensis reads longae (and the editio princeps prints this reading), whereas the Codex Vallettae has longe (printed by editors until Carrion, who instead followed his manuscript in printing longa). senecta was taken from V, whereas L and the Codex Vallettae have senectae (printed by all editors until Carrion, who follows the reading senecta from his codex). Barth and Weichert prefer longae . . . senectae (which Barth understands as meaning in longam senectam), which Burman also considers possible. All other editors print longa . . . senecta, which seems correct to me. longa placidus echoes Virg. A. 7.45–6: rex arva Latinus et urbes | iam senior longa placidas in pace regebat (note the same metrical position). Metri causa VF (like the other imperial epic poets) follows Virgil in using the archaic term senecta in oblique cases instead of senectus in a clausula (cf. Bednara [1906] 346). The metonymy sceptra gerere appears also at 2.396 and abstractly denotes kingship (as also at 5.483). See also Virg. A. 1.653 and TLL vi/2.1931.34. Given the presence of senecta nearby, the simi­lar­ities between the dragon and Aeetes in lines 98–104 (cf. notes ad loc.) and the remarks on senium (102), it is not completely unreasonable to see in geras also a joke on the word γῆρας (even if the vowel quantities are reversed). 15  cetera proles: Liberman takes this as a reference to Chalciope and Absyrtus, but proles can also be used for a single person (e.g., 1.12; 4.459), and the in­ter­ pret­ation that VF only means Absyrtus (whose fate the reader already knows) gives greater impact to tragic irony. The death of Absyrtus is foreshadowed in

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

58

Commentary, line 16

several places, mostly through ironic hints that it will not happen, rather than explicit declarations affirming that it shall (cf. 7.339–40; 8.106–8 and 136). If proles is understood more broadly, one can see in it a reference to AR 3.594–605, in which the poet quotes the Sun’s oracle, telling his son Aeetes to be on guard against subtle tricks brought about by the designs of his own progeny. Aeetes is not afraid that his daughters would harbour hateful thoughts towards him, and even less so that his son Absyrtus would, but he is afraid of being ruined by Chalciope’s sons (whom he had sent to Greece): νόσφι δὲ οἷ αὐτῷ φάτ᾿ ἐοικότα μείλια τίσειν | υἱῆας Φρίξοιο, κακορρέκτῃσιν ὀπηδοὺς | ἀνδράσι νοστήσαντας ὁμιλαδόν, ὄφρα ἑ τιμῆς | καὶ σκήπτρων ἐλάσειαν ἀκηδέες, ὥς ποτε βάξιν | λευγαλέην οὗ πατρὸς ἐπέκλυεν Ἠελίοιο (3.594–8). 16–19  After she has spoken, Medea prepares herself for action, gathering her equipment. The scene’s model is AR 4.24–5, but VF chooses his words carefully (especially those at the end of the lines, like marito, venenis, and ensem) and makes allusive references again, hinting at the tragedy to come, particularly in Corinth. On the anticipation of tragic events, which are especially concentrated in the second part of the poem (books 5–8), see Garson (1965) 108–9; Hersh­ kowitz (1998) 15; Ripoll (2004) 202–3; Zissos (2004a) 338–44. 16  dixit et Haemonio numquam spernenda marito: dixit et is a recurring formula in epic used to emphasize the end of a monologue (cf. Pease on Virg. A. 4.30: sic effata). In poetic vocabulary the adjective Haemonius usually refers to Thessaly (see AR 3.1090 [and the corresponding scholion] and Pind. Nem. 4.56, who already identifies the inhabitants of this land as Ἁιμόνεσσιν). The name is derived from Haemon (the son of Pelasgus or of Mars and belonging to the mythical lineage of the Haemonii), whose son Thessalus gave the more common name, Thessaly, to the region. In Latin the adjective appears with Tib. 1.5.45 (the substantive Haemonia first appears in Hor. Carm. 1.37.20); cf., among others, Fedeli on Prop. 1.13.21. Jason is also identified as the Haemonius maritus at 2.245: sic ait Haemonii labens in colla mariti (as Hypsipyle falls into Jason’s arms) and at 8.283. Apart from these three cases, all of which refer to Jason, the only other occurrence of the expression Haemonius maritus in Latin literature is found at Stat. Silv. 5.3.78–9 (referring to Pyrrhus): at te post funera magni | Hectoris Haemonio pudor est servisse marito (in which we find the same leonine arrangement as here). In this case, the choice of the patronymic serves to recall Thessaly, a land well known for magicians and spells (cf., e.g., Hor. Carm. 1.27.21–2; Ov. Met. 7.264–5). The majority of commentators connect spernenda with medicamina, but it could also be meant as a nominative singular, referring, therefore, to Medea (as Maserius takes it). Perhaps VF plays with the two pos­ sible meanings. In any case, the reference is directed towards the future: Jason never should have scorned (or perhaps divorced, cf. line 422) Medea or her medicamina (both because he was able to overcome the trial of the bulls and will be able to defeat the dragon with them and because Medea would use them

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 17–19

59

to kill Creusa). Other allusions to Medea as a woman scorned (or divorced) by Jason occur at 6.500–1: spernere nec usquam | mendaci captiva viro (on which see Fucecchi ad loc.) and 8.422. Perhaps there are echoes of Eur. Med. 20: Μήδεια δ’ ἡ δύστηνος ἠτιμασμένη, 33 (and at 1354): ἀτιμάσας. 17  condita letiferis promit medicamina cistis: medicamen is a poetic variant for medicamentum and can be used to refer both to medicine, or (as in this case) to a drug, potions, or poison (cf. TLL viii.531.47). The one other appearance of the word in VF is at 7.458–60: . . . iuveni medicamina . . . obicit, that is, in the famous passage in which Medea, by tossing her potions to Jason, confirms the defeat of her pudor as fact. letiferis modifies cistis, but the m ­ edicamina can also be deadly. According to AR 3.802–3 Medea had a box (φωριαμός) with all her potions (φάρμακα), both the helpful and the fatal ones (τὰ μὲν ἐσθλὰ, τὰ δὲ ῥαιστήρια). Medea is also often depicted in the icon­og­raphy related to the Golden Fleece as holding a box in her hand, probably the one containing her potions; cf. LIMC 6.1, s.v. Medea 37 and 38. The adjective letifer (first attested at Catull. 64.394) is specific to poetic vocabulary and elevated style. All modern editors, except for Giarratano, adopt Turnebus’s conjecture promit (Adv. XXIX.4: ‘Nam prodit, ut vere dicam quod sentio, non placet’) in place of the transmitted prodit (only the codex Carrionis transmits profert, already labelled a gloss by Weichert). prodit is defended by Barth, Weitz (‘prodere est proferre’), Heinsius, Burman, Weichert, and Langen (‘fere idem ac promit, cf. Ov. Met. 4. 656 ipse retro versus squalentia prodidit ora’). VF uses promit also at 2.409 and 7.357: Caucaseum [florem] promit. In terms of sense, promit fits the meaning better (‘to send out’ or ‘to reveal’, rather than ‘to pull out’). For examples in support of promit, cf. Liberman 2.346 n. 12, to which one may add Hor. Ep. 1.1.12: condo et compono quae mox depromere possim. See also 7.450, where Medea pulls out from her bosom the herbs that were nourished by the Titan’s blood. Pellucchi (2012) 62 also compares Sen. Med. 678. 18–19  virgineosque sinus ipsumque monile venenis | implicat: For virgineos sinus, Liberman compares Anth. Lat. 133.1–2 Shackleton Bailey: mentitus taurum Europam Iuppiter aufert | virgineos ardens pandere fraude sinus. The expression sinus . . . implicat reproduces AR. 4.24–5: κόλπῳ | . . . κατεχεύατο (Lazzarini compares Eur. Med. 789) and is cited by TLL vii/1.641.17 with the special meaning immiscere. Just as the Greeks use κόλπος, so the Romans employ sinus of their clothing as a pocket (compare cingitur sinus at 7.355). According to Langen, ipsumque monile refers to the poisoned necklace that Medea would give to Creusa in Corinth. The deadly crown made of gold and pearls (duplicem . . . coronam) is mentioned at 235–6, where the poet explains that it is a gift from Venus. Rather than seeing this inconsistency as evidence of a lack of labor limae due to the poem’s incomplete status, it seems better to me (as it also did to Pellucchi) to assign a proleptic value to its appearance here, counting it among the many insistent allusions to the future tragedy at Corinth.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

60

Commentary, line 19

The prolepsis is underscored by the word ipsum, which various translators render as ‘hers’ (cf. ‘sur son collier’, Soubiran and Liberman), but which seems instead to strengthen the allusion to ‘that (famous) crown’, the one that will later be given to Creusa. The ancient sources do not agree on the gifts that were brought to Creusa. Euripides mentions a robe and an engraved golden crown (cf. Med. 786: πέπλον καὶ πλόκον χρυσήλατον), but VF may be thinking of Sen. Med. 568–74 (especially 572–3: est et auro textili | monile fulgens) or of other writers. In book 6 it is Medea who wears and experiences the effects of the jewellery that was enchanted by Venus (blandae derepta monilia divae), which she put on her own neck, foreshadowing the Corinthian tragedy as well (see Fucecchi ad loc.). 19  ac saevum super omnibus addidit ensem: saevus is commonly applied to weapons, at least as far back as Ovid (VF already used it at 6.616). In this case, it perhaps recalls the phrase at 7.507–8: siquid tu saevius, istis | adicias (the murder of the children) and, more generally, the motif of saevus amor from the poetic tradition (specifically from Ennius and Seneca, whom VF also uses at 7.307; cf. Davis ad loc.), on which see Baldini-­Moscadi (2005) 114. On addere super, cf. 1.129; 3.203 and 427 (superaddit or super addit). As Schulte notes, omnibus, when used with super, is dative and not ablative (one could also say super omnia, as Spaltenstein observes), but Liberman’s proposed artibus seems unwarranted to me. Pellucchi (2012) 63 also compares Virg. A. 4.507–8: super exuvias ensemque relictum | effigiemque toro locat (as Dido prepares to commit suicide). For the use of addidit after the two historical presents promit and implicat (the shift accentuates the energy of Medea’s actions), cf. Contino (1973) 22. According to the majority of commentators, ensem is the sword Medea uses to kill her children (cf. Eur. Med. 1244 and 1325; Sen. Med. 970), to which VF already alluded at 1.225 (quos ense ferit?; see Zissos ad loc.). Soubiran (followed by Lazzarini) thinks that this is instead the sword that Medea will use to kill her brother (cf. Ov. Tr. 3.9.26; Luc. 10.464–7). Perhaps the poet is playing with different narrative levels. In the surviving lines of book 8 the sword will not be used, and Medea will put the dragon guarding the Fleece to sleep. In some versions of the myth Jason kills the dragon, and we have various pieces of iconographical evidence in which one finds him confronting the monster with a sword in hand (cf. LIMC 5.2, s.v. Iason 33, 35, 37, 38, 42, 43). Should we see here already a prolepsis of a rejected version of the myth? There are also many images of Medea with sword in hand as she prepares to kill her children (cf. LIMC 6.1, s.v. Medeia 9, 10, and 11). The choice to close the scene in lines 16–19 with ensem gives the word great prominence, which proves to be particularly evocative. The allusions to the events at Corinth will continue in the following lines (20–3). 20–3  In order to close this introduction focusing on Medea, VF puts forward a simile likening Medea to Ino, which Euripides (cf. Med. 1282–9) and Ovid

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, line 20

61

(whose influence on this scene is clear, cf. Met. 3.40; Fast. 3.849–76 and 6.495–503) had already used. Such a simile is absent from AR, who at this same point in the narrative creates a comparison between Medea, who is running out of the palace, and a war captive, someone recently enslaved to a wealthy mistress and who has not yet experienced the labours that await her (cf. AR 4.35–9). The Valerian simile, although simpler than AR’s, nevertheless preserves its prophetic and allusive character as it both continues and concludes the references to the events at Corinth in the preceding lines (16–19). This simile echoes that of the third book (cf. 3.67–9), in which Circe is compared (in the same number of lines) to Athamas, Ino’s unfortunate husband, who in his frenzy tore apart his own son Learchus, as though he were prey caught in the hunt. In both passages, VF follows the version of the story from Ps-­Apollodorus (1.9.1–2). Out of the various mythological figures in such similes, Ino and Athamas are among the few directly connected to the Argonautic saga. This is important, since VF looks back to 1.280, where he had invoked the same myth to explain how the Fleece came to arrive in Colchis; here he presents the Fleece’s impending departure from Colchis to Greece. As critics have noted (Ricci [1977] 175–6; Gärtner [1994] 219), Ino is one of the figures mentioned in the Ars Poetica (123–4), where Horace gives the tragedians advice on how they should make their characters talk: sit Medea ferox invictaque, flebilis Ino, | perfidus Ixion, Io vaga, tristis Orestes (beginning with Ixion, VF uses all these characters, and in the case of Io he seems to follow the Horatian passage to the letter at 7.111: Io vaga). For ­additional in-­depth studies of the simile, see Ricci (1977) 185–91; Salemme (1991) 9–14; Gärtner (1994) 215–19. 20  inde velut torto Furiarum erecta flagello: tortus can be a formulaic epithet (cf., e.g., Catull. 64.235; Virg. A. 4.575; Ov. Met. 3.679), but in this case one may think (as Spaltenstein does) of the real movement of a curving whip and perhaps also of the shape of the serpent being used as the whip (cf. 7.149 and Perutelli’s note), for which the verb torqueo is attested (cf. OLD s.v. 7b; Ov. Met. 2.138: tortum . . . anguem). VF is inspired by Sen. Med. 961–2: ingens anguis excusso sonat | tortus flagello (on the whips of the Furiae, see, e.g., Sen. Thy. 96–7: quid tortos ferox | minaris angues?), but perhaps also by Ov. Met. 4.483–4: induitur pallam tortoque incingitur angue | egrediturque domo. For the ablative absolute (torto flagello) + velut (its only at­test­ation in this poem, on the model of Virg. A. 1.82), cf. Pellucchi (2012) 64. The reference Furiarum alludes to Ov. Met. 4.481–511, in which Tisiphone (one of the Furiae or Erinyai) appears before the house of Ino and Athamas, frightening and driving them mad, as she throws two snakes torn from her own hair at them and pours a monstrous potion into their hearts. More generally, one can see how the parallel pair of Ino and Medea also develops through the influence of Hera/Juno on their characters. Instead of the transmitted eiecta, nearly all editors accept the reading erecta from the editio princeps, which is also found in the Codex Vallettae. On the other hand,

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

62

Commentary, line 21

Pius, Dureau de Lamalle, Schenkl, Baehrens, Bury, and Giarratano keep eiecta. Burman understands the double meaning of erecta (both physical, cf. 1.257, and psychological, cf. 3.631–2), but he then makes a mistake in interpreting it to mean prosilit lecto rather than prosilit domo, since Medea had already left her bed in order to prepare her potions (as Wagner notes); after all, Medea runs outside the palace in AR 4.40 (δόμων ἐξέσσυτο κούρη). 21  prosilit, attonito qualis pede prosilit: The verb prosilit (which imitates ἐξέσσυτο in AR 4.40; see Pellucchi [2012] 65) occurs twelve times in the poem, although two of those occur in the same line here (the first of which is in enjambment) and with the same ictus. The repetition places greater emphasis on the simile, which presents two different situations (in the first case, the verb refers to Medea, and in the second, to Ino) of two characters who share a similar fate (namely the loss of their children). On the use of repetition in VF, see Gebbing (1878) 40–50, and, more generally, Wills (1996). VF employs insilit and attonita at 132–3, when Medea jumps onto the Argo for the first time (contrary to what befalls Io, who leaps into the sea). Here, prosilit is inspired by Ov. Fast. 6.494: prosilit et cunis te, Melicerta rapit, but VF has adapted the passage. In fact, Ovid’s prosilit is used to indicate the manner in which Ino (seized by a Fury) rushes to snatch Melicertes from his cradle whereas, to describe her leap into the sea, Ovid uses mittit (Fast. 6.498: et secum e celso mittit in alta iugo; Met. 4.529–30: seque super pontum . . . | mittit onusque suum). According to Gärtner (1994) 216, the double use of prosilit helps express the idea that Medea no longer has the time to make lengthy goodbyes to her favourite places. attonito . . . pede echoes the vague phrase ἀκτῆς ὑπερτείνασα ποντίας πόδα (Eur. Med. 1288), with the adjective attonitus indicating Ino’s madness. The same adjective is used in 132 (attonita virgine) to describe Medea’s state of mind. The boldness with which VF applies this adjective to the foot (as a transferred epithet) has been noted (cf. Salemme [1991] 11; Spaltenstein ad loc.); however, similar passages in which attonitus refers to individual parts of the body are found in other poets: cf. Ov. Met. 3.40: attonitos subitus tremor occupat artus; Sen. Med. 675–6: attonito gradu | evasit, and especially Ov. Fast. 3.864: et ferit attonita pectora nuda manu, in which attonita . . . manu refers to Nephele, as she intervenes to aid Phrixus and Helle. According to Ricci (1977) 190, this Ovidian echo in VF is evident, as in the four lines of the simile the poet conflates different works of Ovid, who had treated the same myth three times. To attribute feelings to a single part of the body is a poetic technique, and this is not the only example of it in VF; cf., e.g., gressus avidus at 1.183 (with Zissos’s note). Ino: Ino, the daughter of Cadmus and Harmonia, was jealous of her stepchildren Phrixus and Helle, whom Athamas had from his first marriage to Nephele. Wishing to get rid of them, she devised a trick to ensure that they would be sacrificed, under the pretext of saving Boeotia from drought and famine. Phrixus and Helle managed to escape on a golden ram, but only Phrixus reached Colchis,

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 22–3

63

whereas Helle fell into the sea. Athamas, driven mad by Hera (since he had welcomed the young Dionysus into his house), killed Learchus, one of his two children by Ino. Ino hurled herself into the sea with her other son, Melicertes, and was transformed into the marine goddess Leucothea (identified with the Mater Matuta in Rome). Cf. Hyg. Fab. 1–2; Ps-­Apollod. 1.9.1–2; LIMC 5.1, s.v. Ino 657–61; Gantz (1993) 176–80. VF also alludes to Ino at 1.280–93 and 521; 2.607; 5.188. 22  in freta: Note the repetition of in, which connects Ino (21) to the following in freta (and to inde at the beginning of the simile) in order to highlight the continuity between the lines, in addition to the emphasis the enjambment provides. parvi meminit conterrita nati: conterrita is mainly used in prose (cf. Bömer on Met. 6.287) and in poetry, beginning with Virgil (see Perutelli on 7.397). VF evokes the only other attestation of the adjective conterrita (virgo) at 7.397 (which in turn is an echo of Luc. 5.161); VF uses conterret at 7.515. On the conterrita virgo, cf. Baldini-­Moscadi (2005) 145 and 149–62. In Ov. Met. 4.529, before she hurls herself into the sea from a cliff, Ino is nullo tardata timore, whereas earlier she is exterrita (488), when Tisiphone arrives at Athamas’ palace. parvi . . . nati refers to Melicertes, who, after falling into the sea with his mother Ino, was transformed into the marine god Palaemon (Portumnus for the Romans); cf. Hyg. Fab. 2; Ov. Fast. 6.485–547. Ovid also characterizes Melicertes as small in the same metrical position at Met. 4.522: teque ferens parvum nudis, Melicerta, lacertis. 23  quem tenet: According to Ricci (1977) 189, this represents a change from teque ferens and onusque suum of Ov. Met. 4.522 and 530. The metrical structure of the phrase in enjambment expresses agility, quickness, and a sense of agitation until quem tenet, which is followed by a strong trithemimeral caesura and a conclusion that is dramatic, weighty, and solemn, introduced by a rhythmic shift brought about by the spondee in extremum. The alliteration of dental sounds, especially in meminit conterrita nati | quem tenet serves to increase the scene’s pathos. extremum coniunx ferit inritus Isthmon  This scene does not appear in the parallel Ovidian passages (Met. 4.525–62; Fast. 6.493–8), but is introduced by VF to create a simile between Athamas’ rage towards Ino and Jason’s towards Medea, as the children of both couples are tragically murdered. The connection between Medea and Ino as infanticides had already been expressed plainly in Eur. Med. 1279–89. It is important to note that the mention of Ino occurs right in the final passage (the nurse’s speech) before Medea departs. VF therefore seems to reproduce the culminating moment in Medea’s tragedy (and in both cases the events occur at Corinth). The phrase has been variously emended. Nearly all modern editors (Giarratano, Courtney, Ehlers, and Spaltenstein) follow Carrion’s reading of extremum coniunx ferit inritus Isthmon, while Liberman (taking Heinsius as a

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

64

Commentary, line 23

starting point) proposes the reading extremo (Heinsius) coniunx furit (Balbus) inritus Isthmo (reconstructed from the reading sihmo found in L and V). extremum is recorded in all codices, as is ferit, in place of which Schrader, Columbus, and Baehrens have conjectured terit, petit, and permit, respectively. According to Burman, Athamas stomps the ground with his foot ut mos est furibundis, but Wagner’s theory (adopted by Langen) is more convincing. According to Wagner, Athamas misses Ino and strikes the edge of the rock with his sword (some sources mention him having a skewer), since she had already fallen into the sea. To support Wagner’s interpretation, Ricci (1977) cites Eust. ad Hom. Il. 8.86 (II, p. 409.16 Van der Valk): ξιφήρη (Athamas) διώκειν αὐτήν (Ino). Liberman argues that it is more likely that Athamas strikes empty air, hence the decision to read extremo . . . ferit . . . Isthmo (with ferit used as an absolute, as in Virg. A. 12.729–30); Liberman then emends this reading to extremo . . . furit inritus Isthmo for stylistic reasons. He rightly observes that the verb furere is appropriate for characterizing Athamas’ mental state and offers various Valerian and Virgilian parallels. According to Spaltenstein, Liberman’s decision to revise ferit into furit trivializes the scene. Salemme (1991) 10–11 compares this scene to 7.366–9, in which a pained Prometheus watches as Medea collects the flower born from his blood and groans unable to stop her (gemit inritus ille | Colchidos ora tuens). Ricci (1977) 190 observes that the exemplum as a whole seems to be inspired by artistic representations of the myth. Unfortunately, the only surviving images depict Ino as she is about to jump from the rock with Melicertes in her arms (cf. LIMC 5.1, s.v. Ino 16 and 18), without Athamas present. But we know from Callistratus’ Stat. 14 (cf. LIMC 5.1, s.v. Ino 14) that one lost painting depicted Athamas caught in the grip of frenzy and leaping towards Ino, so that he could kill her, while she was preparing to throw herself into the sea with Melicertes in her arms. In any case, the tradition of Athamas pursuing Ino is well attested among myth­og­raph­ers and commentators (cf. Serv. ad Virg. A. 5.241; Lactant. ad Stat. Theb. 7.421), and the events that befell the two characters accordingly offered various sources of inspiration both for Greek tragedies (consider Aeschylus’ Athamas, Sophocles’ Athamas and Phrixus, and Euripides’ Ino and Phrixus), and also for the archaic Latin poets (as for the Ino of Livius Andronicus, the Athamas of Ennius and of Accius), on which see Ricci (1977) 191. The reading ex­tremum . . . ferit . . . Isthmon is quite intense, with Athamas arriving at the moment after Ino leapt into the sea and striking (with his sword) the edge of the Isthmus in vain. VF focuses on a single moment in this drama (and gemit inritus ille of 7.368 in the same clausula suggests that we should keep ferit inritus). Liberman’s proposal is nevertheless interesting. The collocation extremus + Isthmus appears only in Plin. Nat. 4.87.8: ab extremo Isthmo. For the connection between the Corinthian Isthmus and Ino, see, e.g., Stat. Silv. 4.3.60 (Inous freta miscuisset Isthmos). For the iconography of Jason and Medea depicted in a similar manner, see, e.g., LIMC 5.2, s.v. Iason 70.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 24–5

65

24–53.  THE MEETING BET WEEN JASON AND MEDEA This section treats the third meeting between Jason and Medea, after those described at 5.341–98 and 7.400–538. The scene is highly innovative in regard to its atmosphere and method when compared to its Apollonian model, above all thanks to a more detailed psychological study of the characters. See Pellucchi (2012) 69–78. 24–33  After the introduction provided by the preceding lines, VF moves to the scene depicting the meeting between Jason and Medea in the woods sacred to Mars, adopting some of the elements from their meeting described in the previous book, which took place in the forest of Hecate. The development of the corresponding passage in AR 4.40–126 is different, as there Medea passes through the city until she reaches the Argo, so that the ship may bring her and its crew to the place where the dragon is. A chiaroscuro effect pervades the scene, as does a dynamic contrast between the two characters, noticeable also in the two similes that introduce the figures (Endymion as Jason, Luna as Medea; frightened dove as Medea), which expand upon their outer (Jason’s beauty) and inner (Medea’s anguish) features. On the parallels between the two meetings in books 7 and 8, see Venini (1971b) 616–17. 24–5  iam prior in lucos curis urgentibus heros | venerat: Jason is at the meeting place before Medea arrives, whereas at 7.396–7 he reveals himself suddenly, and it is Medea who unexpectedly sees him first (as also happens in AR 3.956 and Ov. Met. 7.83): nondum speratus Iason | emicuit viditque prior conterrita virgo. The collocation iam prior does not appear elsewhere in VF, but it does in Stat. Theb. 6.445: iam prior Oeclides. lucos refers to the sacred grove of Mars, where the Fleece and the guarding dragon are located, on which see AR 4.166 and VF 7.519. As Lazzarini (2012) 78–9 rightly observes, AR lays out the topography of Aeetes’ city in a consistent manner (the sacred grove of Mars is on the opposite bank of the river Phasis compared to Aeetes’ palace and the temple of Hecate), whereas in VF there are a few inconsistencies. I do not think it is ne­ces­ sary to resort to the hypothesis that the poet’s lack of revision explains such inconsistencies, but I rather believe that the lack of precision is owed to the construction of an allusive network in which a corresponding astrological dimension alternates with a real, terrestrial, and geo­graph­ic­al location. This aim is particularly clear in the evocations of the dragon, which is sim­ul­tan­eous­ly both that in Corinth and the celestial one (cf. below). Lazzarini, following Langen, rightly hypothesizes that there is only one wooded place in which one could find both the area consecrated to Hecate and frequented by Medea (who manages her cult, cf. 5.335; 6.495; 7.179) and the oak tree sacred to Mars, which houses the Fleece and the serpent. It is precisely this mysterious area that allows VF to allude to the astrological context (we should not forget that Hecate is the moon and Mars the corresponding planet). The plural form curis suggests that

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

66

Commentary, lines 25–6

we should not restrict its meaning to the torments of love (on which see Pease on Virg. A. 4.1), but that we should understand it in the broader sense of concerns, anxieties. heros is always found in a clausula in all its other attestations within the poem (2.373 Hercules; 4.311 Pollux; 7.410, 614; 8.109, 379 Jason). 25  sacra . . . nocte: An example of enallage (cf. AR 4.100: ἱερὸν ἄλσος). nocte could certainly mean ‘shadow’ (as almost all commentators interpret it) as it does in 1.774 (on which see Zissos ad loc.), but I believe that the entire scene happens at night (cf. 50: sidera et haec te meque vident and 95: sera sub nocte). By contrast to siderea and clarus of the following line, the noun contributes to the chiaroscuro effect per­me­ating the whole scene. For the various meanings of the word nox, see Perkins (1974) 305 and n. 32: ‘Nox in various contexts is used to refer to the time of night, a storm, the shade of trees, or death. Night, passim; a storm, 1.617; shade, 8.25; death, 3.291.’ For VF’s interest in scenes at night, see Venini (1972) 14; Bardon (1962) 737; Salemme (1991) 13. 26  tum quoque siderea clarus procul ora iuventa: This is not the first time (hence the phrase tum quoque) that Jason shines on account of his beauty. At 7.397 Jason emicuit in the darkness, and at 5.369–72 he is compared to Sirius, the most brilliant dog star. sidereus indicates the radiance of a star and, by extension, beauty (OLD s.v. 2). VF also uses it in this sense at 4.190 and 331 (sidereo ore and siderea fronte, Pollux) and 8.123 (the lustre of the Fleece); see also the phrase sideris ora ferens at 5.466 (and sidereos sinus at 2.104). In this case the adjective (by far the most common derivative of sidus, cf. Le Boeuffle [1977] 21–3 and Pellucchi [2012] 80 on its use in VF and the equivalent terms in Greek) clearly alludes also to the astrological context developed later (though the astrological undertones are also present in its earlier appearances, especially those regarding Pollux, who is destined to ascend to the heavens). clarus used with a Greek accusative is a poeticism that also appears in Sil. 2.557 and 17.631 (cf. Spaltenstein ad loc.). For the accusative of respect, see Harrison on Virg. A. 10.290–1 and L-­H-­Sz 37b; for its occurrences in VF, see Spaltenstein on 1.298. On the difference between iuventa (a mostly poetic term, used for met­ric­al ­reasons) and iuventus, see Servius’ comment on Virg. A. 1.590. Jason’s youthful beauty, therefore, shines in the dark night just as if it were a star. VF further develops the play between light and darkness, already expressed in the previous book (7.395–7: in umbram | hinc subito ante oculos nondum speratus Iason | emicuit viditque prior conterrita virgo). Note that at 7.413 Jason asked Medea if she had come to bring him hope of light (fersne aliquam spem lucis?). See also 58–9 on lugubre sidus. 27–31  Jason as Endymion: The technique of comparing the protagonists of epic poems to gods goes back to Homer (e.g., Nausicaa is likened to Artemis at Od. 6.102–9) and appears in both AR and Virgil (Aeneas is compared to Apollo in A. 4.141–50 and Dido to Diana in A. 1.498–504). The inspiration for the

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 27–8

67

c­ omparison with Endymion without doubt derives from AR 4.54–65, in which Selene recalls her love affair with Endymion, speaking to Medea (foreshadowing the unfortunate consequences of her own love affair with Jason). VF has already used this Apollonian passage as a model for Hecate’s monologue as she sees Medea heading towards the walls in 6.497–502 (on which see Eigler [1988] 77; Venini [1989] 274–5). In this case, he particularly strengthens its rationalizing aspect. The poet takes advantage of the belief that eclipses of the moon are caused by Selene’s visits to Endymion (on which see Livrea on AR 4.57; Le Boeuffle [1977] 263 and [1989] 43–5) in order to produce the image of a total lunar eclipse, developing it progressively. By doing so, VF creates a prelude to Medea’s imminent magical act upon the dragon, simultaneously exploiting the other common ancient explanation for eclipses due to witchcraft (as Lazzarini [2012] 85 also notes). Among the authors who treat the love between Selene and Endymion, see Sapph. fr. 199 Lobel/Page; Theocr. 3.49; Ps-­Theocr. 20.37; Catull. 66.5; Prop. 2.15.15; Ov. Her. 18.31 and Ars 3.83; Sen. Phaed. 785–94. For the icon­ og­raphy of the story, see LIMC 3.1, s.v. Endymion. On the simile, see Ricci (1977) 192–6; Lewis (1984); Bessone (1991) 42–6; Salemme (1991) 14–17; Gärtner (1994) 219–22; Lazzarini and Pellucchi ad loc. 27  qualis . . . catervis: Endymion is usually portrayed as a shepherd, but in some sources and iconography he appears as a hunter (for those references, see note on 28). In AR 4.109–17 Medea and Jason come ashore to the site where Phrixus arrived at the time when hunters wake up at dawn; according to Spaltenstein, this may have inspired VF’s decision to identify Endymion as a hunter. The inspiration could also derive from the hunting scene in Aeneid 4. In that scene, too, Aeneas finds himself (together with Dido) separated from his companions because of a storm (4.123: diffugient comites et nocte tegetur opaca; 162–4: comites passim . . . | . . . diversa per agros | tecta metu petiere), and the poet praises Aeneas’ beauty and compares the hero to Apollo (4.141–9; 150: tantum egregio decus enitet ore). Furthermore, at 4.68–73, Dido is likened to a doe that has been pierced by a shepherd’s arrows (71: pastor agens telis), and VF’s Endymion is also a shepherd-­hunter. In any case, images such as those in LIMC 3.2, s.v. Endymion 19, 24, 25, 28, and 29 seem to fit perfectly with the description found in VF (especially no. 25, in which Endymion is depicted as a hunter and Selene comes to visit him in his sleep, with a veil covering her face and horns). per lustra: This collocation appears only in VF (1.104 and 3.593). In high poetry lustra almost exclusively refers to uninhabited places (TLL vii/2.1886.59– 1887.13), especially those used for hunting wild animals (as at 3.593 and 4.370). catervis: caterva is a high-­register synonym for turba or multitudo (cf. Virg. A. 2.40: magna comitante caterva and Harrison on A. 10.194). 28  Latmius aestiva residet venator in umbra: Mount Latmus in Caria is the traditional location for the encounter between Endymion and the Moon (AR

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

68

Commentary, line 29

4.57: Λάτμιον ἄντρον ἁλύσκω and the corresponding scholion; Cic. Tusc. 1.92: Endymion . . . in Latmo obdormivit, qui est mons Cariae; Catull. 66.5: sub Latmia saxa); there are numerous attestations of the word Latmius used to denote Endymion (Ov. Ars 3.83: Latmius Endymion; Tr. 2.299: Latmius heros). Endymion is usually described as a shepherd, but in some passages he is ­depicted wearing a hunter’s attire (hence the word venator here); cf. Luc. Dial. Deor. 11.2; Heracl. De Incredibil. 38 and Schol. ad Theocr. 3.49. See also Σ AR 4.57–8: φιλοκύνηγον γὰρ αὐτὸν γενόμενον. On Endymion as a venator, see also Ricci (1977) 195 n. 1 and Bessone (1991) 42–5. For aestiva . . . umbra, compare Ov. Met. 13.793: aestiva gratior umbra; Calp. Ecl. 5.20, Petr. Sat. 131.8.1. The scholion on AR 4.58 (p. 265.6–10 Wendel) says that Endymion, who had become a hunting enthusiast, was going to hunt at night when the moon rose, because this is the moment when wild animals leave their dens to search for food, and that he was resting in a cave during the day. Jupiter grants Endymion the sleep of eternal youth, during which the moon comes to sleep with him. In light of the astronomical allusions, I wonder how likely it is that the anagram SIDEREA (at 26), readable in aestivA RESIDEt, is accidental (this would repeat the ­connection between Jason and a star, continuing to develop the passage’s chiaroscuro effect through the oxymoron siderea . . . umbra). For the topos of a hero resting in a locus amoenus before a crucial love scene, cf. Lazzarini (2012) 84. 29  dignus amore deae: This idea is expressed in Ps-­Theocr. 20.37 and also appears in Ov. Ars. 3.83: Latmius Endymion non est tibi, Luna, rubori and Her. 18.65: tu dea mortalem caelo delapsa petebas. See Ricci (1977) 195. velatis cornibus et iam: This expression has been interpreted in various ways. It could be a reference to the moon as she veils her face in a sign of modesty (as Heinsius, Caussin, Huguet, Langen, Giarratano, and Pellucchi understand it), a charming gesture (see, e.g., LIMC 3.2, s.v. Endymion 25), or a gesture symbolizing the secrecy of the meeting. Liberman also compares the parallel of Helen going to Paris in Hom. Il. 3.419–20 from Val. Max. 6.3.10. According to Spaltenstein, the expression adapts the idea of hiding (also strengthened by the phrase per nubila at 30) to the moon, a concept typically associated with gods who visit mortals. At any rate, Selene’s visits to Endymion are also a mythical explanation for eclipses, and I think that the detail that the moon’s horns are now (et iam) hidden is meant to allude to this phenomenon. The eclipse, therefore, begins in this line (at first only a part is covered) and is completed in what follows by the simile of a dove completely obscured by the shadow of a bird of prey. implet (31) contributes to this allusion, which, though it grammatically governs only nemus, is applied by zeugma to talemque . . . amantem. Lazzarini (2012) 85–6 supports the fact that velatis cornibus can refer to a lunar eclipse, and she also proposes the interesting hypothesis (on the model of Stat. Theb. 2.137–9) that VF associates Jason with Lucifer, the star trad­ition­al­ly connected

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, line 30

69

to Venus and therefore suited for an amorous context. In that case, the image would instead suggest a gradual fading of the moon’s outline at dawn. See also Salemme (1991) 15 for references to the numerous poetic images related to the moon’s horns (e.g., Prop. 3.5.27; Sen. Phaed. 419 and 745–7; Stat. Ach. 1.644). et iam also appears at the end of a line at 5.71 and 427. For clausulae with two final monosyllabic words, see Kösters (1893) 53. Note, finally, the alliteration in venator . . . velatis . . . venit (28–30). 30 Luna: See LIMC 7.1, s.v. Selene, Luna. In addition, one can see that Selene is also the protector of sorceresses. For the dealings between her and Medea, cf. Roscher 2.2.2498–9 and Lesky (1931) 48, 51. See Elice (2003–4) 141 for the krater from Ruvo showing Selene. On this figure’s role on the vase from Naples, cf. Séchan (1926) 405; Page (1938) lxiv; Moret (1975) 1.182–3. 30–1  roseo . . . | . . . honore: roseus was employed quite frequently to refer to the beauty of youth since the archaic age (VF also employs it in 5.365: roseae perfudit luce iuventae), but here it could be used to indicate the colour of the sunset in a poetic fashion (as Spaltenstein interprets it) or perhaps the colour of dawn (as Lazzarini understands it). Compare the roseus . . . Phoebus of Virg. A. 11.913 (on which see Horsfall ad loc., who compares A. 7.26 and comments on the strange application of the colour of sunrise to sunset) and VF 6.527: qualis roseis it Lucifer alis. Note that the various shades of red are also typical of lunar eclipses (cf. Le Boeuffle [1989] 43–4). honor is often used to refer to beauty in poetry (TLL vi/3.2930.49 passim and VF 6.494; 8.237), but VF innovates by associating it with the adjective roseus. honor and iuventa (26) also distinguish Aeneas in Virg. A. 1.590–1: . . . lumenque iuventae | purpureum et lateos oculis adflarat honores. 30  per nubila: This indicates the darkness of the forest, cf. OLD s.v. nubilus 3b, which cites VF as the first example of the noun used with this sense, but (as Spaltenstein notes) nubilus for ‘dark’ (cf. OLD s.v. 3a) already appears in Prop. 4.4.27: primo Capitolia nubila fumo. See also 56 (media inter nubila flammam), which perhaps should be understood in the same way (Langen also understands nubila at 3.238 in this way). ductor: ductor refers to Jason in as many as sixteen of its nineteen total occurrences in VF (in 1.835 it is used generally; in 2.468 it refers to Hercules; in 6.48 to Colaxes), often to indicate his authority as the leader of the expedition (in this regard Jason is more like Virgil’s Aeneas than AR’s Jason); see Hull (1979) 383 and Hershkowitz (1998) 112–14. ductor, mainly used in poetry (TLL v/1.2168.19–49), serves as a loftier synonym for dux (in his comment on Virg. A. 2.14, Servius remarks that ductores sonantius est quam duces). Its first attestation in poetry goes back to Acc. 197 Dangel: Achivis classibus ductor; although it seems plaus­ible that Ennius might have used it, the term’s oldest attestation in epic poetry appears at Lucr. 1.86 ductores. The singular does not appear in Latin

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

70

Commentary, lines 31–2

epic until Virgil, and the Flavian epicists use it frequently; see Zissos on 1.164; Poortvliet on 2.468; Korn on 4.133. 31 talemque: Instead of the transmitted talem, Baehrens proposed the ­reading talis, a conjecture accepted by Schenkl, Liberman, and Spaltenstein. The correction talis would serve to focus the entire simile only upon Jason/ Endymion, preserving the balance with the simile in the following lines, in which Medea is likened to a dove (as discussed by Liberman). This qualm is only partially justified, since, if Jason is compared to Endymion waiting for his  lover, that is, for the moon, Medea is im­pli­cit­ly likened to the moon. Furthermore, the preceding simile linking Medea and Ino in lines 20–3 also ends with an implicit association between Jason and Athamas. But the double comparison (implicitly with the moon and explicitly with a dove) can be explained through the references both to the various phases of an eclipse and to Medea’s position (as priestess of Hecate and a sorceress) and psychological state (a terrified dove). Moreover, a simile featuring a widening of the comparandum (qualis . . . talis . . . talemque) fits the Virgilian pattern (cf. A. 1.498, 503: qualis . . . talis erat Dido, talem se laeta ferebat, said of Dido as she appears before Aeneas), which VF also uses at 446–8. See also talem . . . talis at 95–6 and Damsté (1921) 402. 32–5  Medea as a dove. By introducing the comparison with a dove, VF returns to discussing Medea’s terror (pavidae . . . tremens . . . acta timore) and Jason’s dangerousness, a recurring theme in the poem (5.368–75 and 6.604–8). The reader, therefore, feels a sense of tragic irony, since the person to whom the dove looks for refuge will turn out to be the cause of her ruin. The irony appears even subtler if one considers that the inspiration for this simile comes from AR 3.541–3, a passage in which a trembling dove, in the midst of fleeing from a sparrowhawk, falls, terrified, into Jason’s lap, while the sparrowhawk impales itself on the stern-­ornament, a good omen according to Mopsus (the dove is a bird sacred to Aphrodite). The image of a bird of prey chasing a dove is quite common in poetry (Hom. Il. 22.136–44; Od. 15.525–8; Virg. A. 11.721–3; Hor. Carm. 1.37.17–20 with Nisbet and Hubbard’s comment for further references; TLL iii.1731.57); the closest Latin parallel is found at Ov. Pont. 2.2.35–6: accipitrem timens pennis trepidantibus ales | audit ad humanos fessa venire sinus. On the theme of a conflict between the dove and birds of prey, cf. Bömer on Ov. Met. 1.505 and Rosati on Ov. Met. 6.527–30. On this Valerian simile, see also Lewis (1984); Salemme (1991) 17–24; Gärtner (1994) 223–4. 32  ecce autem: This phrase (which always appears at the beginning of a line) is also found at 1.686; 2.587; 5.618; 6.575. The expression occurs rather frequently in poetry, beginning with Ennius (Hect. Lytr. 167 Jocelyn), and also appears in elevated prose (especially in Cic. Verr. 1.1.17, 21; 2.4.148; De or. 2.203, but also Sall. Iug. 14.11) and in the playwrights (e.g., Plaut. Cas. 969; Men. 784; Ter. Eun.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 33–4

71

297, 927). Virgil uses it to mark a change in scene, often to break away from the advancement of the action and typically imparting a sense of movement (see Austin on A. 2.203; Norden on A. 6.255; Jocelyn on Enn. Hect. Lytr. 167). In VF, there is usually continuity with what precedes the phrase (see Zissos on 1.686), and here the expression is also used to mark the passing from the Jason/ Endymion simile to the Medea/dove one. See also Fucecchi on 6.575. pavidae: Strangely, Heinsius judges pavidae to be redundant, given tremens that follows, and he proposes to correct it to Paphiae. But terror is a conventional feature for doves (Ov. Ars 1.117: timidissima turba columbae; cf. TLL iii.1731.53; Otto [1890] s.v. columba 1 and Spaltenstein ad loc.); and it is supported by tremens (as it is by timori gravi) in order to emphasize Medea’s expected feelings of fear. Salemme (1991) 21–2 refers to VF 6.505–6 (quales . . . pavore volucres) and 7.375–84 for Medea’s pavor being compared to a bird (Medea is also pavens in 5.335) as well as Medea as a trembling fawn in AR 4.11–13. de more: This is a rather poetic phrase (though it does appear in Cic. Orat. 118; Petr. Sat. 14.7; Plin. Nat. 7.112), compared to more used in prose (TLL viii.1527.83). 33  ingenti circumdata . . . umbra: Langen argues that the inspiration for this image comes from Stat. Theb. 8.675–6: flammiger ales olori | imminet et magna trepidum circumligat umbra (but if we accept VF’s anteriority, the opposite may be true). VF often turns to the term umbra and to the contexts in which a shadow is present (on this feature, cf. Novakova [1964] 124–36). In this case, the image is frightening, not because of the bird of prey itself, but rather because of the size of its shadow, which seems to represent the distressing shadow of Medea’s father (for which cf. lines 2–3). The expression ingens umbra is common among poets (Virg. G. 2.19; A. 10.541; Stat. Theb. 2.42) and VF uses it also in 2.519, 3.99, 5.175 (et simul ingentem moribundae desuper umbram), and 6.235. The image conveyed is that of a dove completely covered by a shadow. The course of the lunar eclipse (Luna = Medea) that began in line 29 comes to its conclusion here (dove = Medea = Luna). 34  in quemcumque tremens hominem cadit: In view of the cited parallel of Ov. Pont. 2.2.35–6 (see note on 32–5), the difference between Ovid’s audet and VF’s cadit stands out, as the first describes a voluntary action, however paradoxical it may be (as Spaltenstein notes ad loc.), whereas the second indicates an involuntary action, one that is almost inevitable (as Salemme observes), which tragically alludes to Medea’s fate, as she herself is ensnared by chance in someone else’s plans. On the syntactic modification of the corresponding Apollonian model phrase, cf. Pellucchi ad loc. haud secus illa: Following Fränkel, Liberman adds a dash before haud secus illa in order to highlight the anacoluthon (virgo . . . haud secus illa). In fact, haud secus illa is an epanalepsis for virgo, serving as the grammatical subject of

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

72

Commentary, lines 35–6

a phrase that ends with mediam se misit. On the complexity of the syntax in this simile, cf. note on 90. Jortin (1734) 191 notes VF’s imitation of Stat. Theb. 8.675–6 (but again, if we accept VF’s anteriority, the opposite may be true). 35  acta timore gravi: All modern editors except for Lemaire, who prefers the variant icta from the Codex Carrionis, print the reading acta timore gravi, on the model of Virg. A. 10.63: acta furore gravi. Liberman also compares 2.247: inruerant actae. mediam se misit: This phrase has been variously interpreted. According to Wagner, it means toto corpore in amplexus eius ruit. Langen adopts Wagner’s explanation and compares Ter. An. 133: mediam mulierem complectitur and Ad. 316: sublimem medium arriperem, explaining the phrase as Medeam in amplexum Iasonis ruisse. Spaltenstein states that phrases like in medios hostes or in mediam turbam ruere express the idea ‘en plein dans’ and therefore must mean ‘elle se jette en plein contre Jason’. Liberman, though with reservations, follows the interpretation voiced by Delz, namely ‘sie stürzte sich in den Zwischenraum (zwischen sich und Jason)’, but he thinks that the text could be corrupted and proposes correcting the reading to totam or praeceps (see his note 27 for parallel passages). mediam se also appears (in the same metrical position) in Virg. A. 5.622: ac sic Dardanidum mediam se matribus infert and Stat. Theb. 9.826: virginitate vides mediam se ferre virorum, and in both cases it means ‘in the middle (of a group)’. Heinsius (followed by Burman) edits the phrase into mediam se inmisit, citing 7.756: seseque inmisit Iason, but for se misit, see Ov. Her. 15.167–8, Am. 3.6.80, Ib. 499; Virg. A. 4.253–4, 10, 633–4. Assuming that there is no need to correct the text, I am inclined to interpret the line as saying that Medea (who, just like the dove, finds herself between the bird of prey and the man onto whom she will fall) flings herself (both physically and meta­phor­ic­al­ly) between what she fears (i.e. her father’s wrath) and Jason. The fact that she comes between them emphasizes again the imagery of an eclipse. 35–44  Jason’s speech. According to Hull (1979) 402, Jason addresses Medea with tenderness and kindness, displaying a sincere interest in her (note that her fears have been underlined by the preceding comparison to a dove); he is a genuine hero, a man of deep sensitivity. Lewis (1984) 196 holds the opposite opinion, arguing that VF intends to create irony by showing that Medea trusts in Jason (whose words are completely false). 36 excepit: Jason and Medea’s roles in the typical system of hospitality are about to switch. In AR 4.93–4 Jason gently helps Medea stand up and then comforts her with his speech, and the use of the word excepit (employed only here and in 1.817, whereas recepit appears eighteen times) implies a sense of refuge and shelter (OLD s.v. 7). blandoque prior sic ore locutus: Jason arrived at the grove first (cf. line 24), and he also speaks first (prior), as he did in the earlier encounter (7.410–30). In

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, line 37

73

the cor­res­pond­ing passage in AR (4.83–91), Medea is the one to speak first. Burman and Langen provide a reference to Ov. Her. 12.72, where the phrase orsus es infido sic prior ore loqui seems relevant here (on which see Bessone [1997] ad loc.), especially since the line precedes the speech in which Jason begs  Medea for assistance by promising to marry her. VF’s adoption of the phrase is nearly exact, with variatio found in the substitution of blandoque . . . ore for infido . . . ore (highlighting the disillusioned Medea’s different state of mind from the one who had not yet experienced her fate). blandoque . . . ore is in any case an Ovidian phrase (Met. 13.555: tum blando callidus ore), and VF, therefore, presents yet another blending of Ovid with Ovid (as in the case of the Medea/ Ino simile, on which see the note on 20–3). It should be emphasized, however, that the primary source for this line is Virg. A. 9.319: prior Hyrtacides sic ore locutus and 1.614: sic ore locuta est (on which Servius provided the annotation et sic ore locuta est pleonasmos). The ambiguity that the adjective blandus (often used in romantic contexts, but also to connote the deceptiveness of a speaker, cf. Catull. 64.139–40; Ov. Her. 2.49 and Met. 13.555) can produce has allowed for various and often contradictory interpretations of Jason’s plea (e.g., Lewis [1984] 99: ‘these words imply no more than Jason’s glib tongue’; pace Hull [1979] 404). 37–40  In this speech, Jason reassures Medea by promising that he will marry her, and he even goes so far as to say that he has realized that Medea, not the Fleece, is the only reward for the voyage. According to Zissos (1999) 298–9 and (2012a) 123–4, this passage is a striking reworking of the frightening and deceitful dream that Medea has in AR 3.617–23 (she imagined that Jason would confront the trial not because of his desire for the Fleece, but in order to bring her home as his lawful wife). VF essentially transforms what had been the fantasy of a dream in AR into a real fact. Furthermore, according to Zissos (n. 39) the phrase tantarum . . . viarum increases the sense that VF is recapitulating and rewriting the Apollonian passage to which he refers. For the Argonautica as a story abounding in potential metanarratives, see also Davis (1989) and (2016). As often happens, there is also an internal link within VF’s own poem, since at the beginning of the preceding book an agonized Medea fears that Jason is only interested in winning Phrixus’ Fleece. Jason’s words, therefore, sound like a reply to that concern, and sola . . . causa echoes quae sola petit quaeque una laborum | causa viro of 7.15–16 (but see also 7.223–4: tu nunc mihi causa viarum | sola; the words of Venus, in the disguise of Circe, to Medea). Line 117 will discredit these designs of Jason’s, as it reveals the optatum decus to be the Fleece. On Jason’s manipulation, see Buckley (2016) 84. 37  o decus . . . magnum: Turnus addresses Camilla in this way at Virg. A. 11.508 (o decus Italiae virgo), but Sextus Pompeius also does so when speaking to the witch Erichtho in Luc. 6.590 (o decus Haemonidum). Perhaps VF is playing with the intertext and the ambiguity of Jason’s words. This formula appears at the start of lines beginning from Catull. 64.323. In VF i decus also appears at 1.56

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

74

Commentary, lines 38–40

(Pelias speaking to Jason), and decus is employed in other places as well (2.243, Hypsipyle; 2.611, Jason; 4.630, Phineus). For the entire formula of decus magnum with a future participle, the model is Virg. A. 10.507: o dolor atque decus magnum rediture parenti, which VF reverses (Pallas’ dead body was being returned to his father’s house). Lazzarini also considers Sen. Med. 130: inclitum regni decus raptum and the use of decus in a military setting, namely with the sense of ‘spoils, plunder’, which would anticipate Medea’s fate as ‘spoils of war’. Spaltenstein compares Sil. 10.307–8: mors additur urbi | pulchra decus. in nostros . . . penates: This is an anachronism common in Latin poetry. The penates, household gods responsible for protecting the hearth, the home, and the family, are fundamentally Roman, despite the tradition that Aeneas brought them to Italy from Troy (Virg. A. 1.68). Here, as at, e.g., 1.721, the word has the sense of ‘family, household’. 38  solaque . . . viarum: Wagner (unsettled by a sequence of hyperbata) orders the lines as sola haud indigna causa tantarum viarum reperta mihi, interpreting haud indigna as litotes. I prefer the following: virgo, sola causa (reperta mihi) haud indigna tantarum viarum. For the collocation haud + indignus, already found in Plaut. Stich. 205 (haud indignos iudico), see Virg. A. 12.649: haud umquam indignus avorum. 39  causa reperta mihi: causam reperire is an expression used in legal l­ anguage, indicating one’s motive (see Lazzarini [2012] 94, according to whom this legalism imparts a detached tone to Jason’s words). 39–40  non ulla requiro | vellera teque meae: Note the enjambment in vellera, followed by caesura, which serves to accentuate the notion that Jason is now interested only in Medea and no longer cares about the Fleece. The two pronouns are adjacent; between meae and vellera, there now stands te (in addition to the caesura), or, rather, Medea now stands between Jason and the Fleece. Furthermore, the caesura reinforces the separation, whereas -que strengthens the link between Jason and Medea. 40 quaesisse: Among modern editors, only Ehlers returned to Niccoli’s ­reading vexisse (a correction made by the copyist of L), which the older editors had used in place of the transmitted quaesisse. In fact, the resumption of the simple verb after the use of the compound requiro may have prompted the L copyist to correct quaesisse into vexisse. This verb, however, is not very flattering to Medea, and quaesisse continues the idea already present in the passage that Jason is wheedling his lover by stating that she is the only reason for his voyage, and that it is enough for him to have her on the Argo, now that she has finally been found. Liberman also compares the parallel percussit/excussit of  lines 81–2 based on the usage of two verbs from the same root in close proximity.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 41–4

75

41  verum age et hoc: A reprise of Virg. A. 12.832: verum age et inceptum frustra summitte furorem. The formula also appears in Hor. Ep. 2.1.214: verum age et his, qui se lectori credere malunt. As in the nunc age et has of 7.467 (both forms are well attested in epic), the interjection age maintains its original verbal ­syntactic function (cf. Perutelli on 7.467 with bibliography). quando potes: This expression is found at 7.241 (with Perutelli’s discussion of the causal quando). In book 7 Medea addresses her prayer to Venus, who is disguised as Circe. In this case it is Jason who addresses Medea in this hymnic invocation, as if she were a goddess. Compare namque potes of 1.11 (see Zissos ad loc.), spoken by the poet to the emperor Vespasian, and 2.490, the prayer Hesione directs towards Hercules, as though he were a god. 42  muneribus meritisque tuis: The enjambment (an entire hemistich ending in a hephthemimeral caesura) and the alliteration convey how great the merits that Jason ascribes to Medea are. The munus is a characteristic feature of the romantic relationship between two lovers (cf. Baldini-­Moscadi [2005] 241 n. 17 and Labate [1984] 111 and 220–6 for munera in Ovid’s erotic works). It is usually the man who brings the munus to the woman. In the relationship between Medea and Jason, however, Medea is the one who brings the gifts. Here, p ­ erhaps, the subversion process, typ­ical of magic, is taking place (in the Metamorphoses, each of Medea’s magical interventions on Jason’s behalf is a munus amoris; Baldini-­Moscadi [2005] 113 and 235–46). On munus, see Citroni in EV 3.619–21. On munus and meritum (key words for the relationship binding a supplicant to the one who listens to his plea) in regard to the events of Medea’s story, especially in the Latin authors before VF, see Lazzarini (2012) 95–6. 42–3  aurea . . . | terga referre sumus, socios ea gloria tangit: The metonymy aurea . . . terga describes the Fleece (also at 5.553 and 8.132). It is ambiguous whether sumus is meant to refer to Jason or to all the Argonauts; there seems to be a contrast between Jason (who receives the order to bring back the Fleece) and his companions (who undertake the voyage in order to win gloria). The phrase could also mean that obtaining the Fleece is an obligation for Jason (and a source of glory for his companions) whereas his real reward is Medea. We should not rule out Spaltenstein’s interpretation, who sees vainglory in gloria (OLD s.v. 4; Tib. 1.5.2: gloria fortis abest), which even further highlights the difference between Jason’s noble goal and the trivial aims of his companions. gloria tangit in a clausula seems to derive from Ov. Met. 4.639. 44  primis . . . palmis: Commentators as early as Pius understood this to mean summis digitulis (as Weber also did), and according to Wagner, this refers to the fingers (‘nondum labiis imprimit oscula, sed manibus iisque primis, digitis. Satis modeste!’). According to Langen, the poet shows Jason’s decency and modesty. Jason therefore kisses (the tips of) Medea’s fingers, but perhaps (as Spaltenstein says) he does so more as an act of supplication (as supplex ­confirms)

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

76

Commentary, lines 45–7

than due to decency (cf. Sen. Ep. 47.13: hos ego eosdem deprehendam alienorum servorum osculantes manum). Pellucchi (2012) 94 compares Ov. Met. 1.646: illa manus lambit patriisque dat oscula palmis and Prop. 2.26a.11: primas extollens gurgite palmas. supplex: This is the final time in the poem in which this phrase is applied to Jason. From now on, Medea will adopt the status of supplex (as an exile, she is also Jason’s hospes). 45–53  Medea’s reply. This reply is inspired by AR 4.88 and reprises VF 7.477– 509. The arrangement reflects the speaking character’s state of mind. Medea’s speech abounds in anacolutha, and the reader must search for words scattered through the lines, as the poet highlights at 45 (novis . . . singultibus). Medea is prepared to ruin herself because of Jason, losing all that she has: her family (domos patrias), her wealth (opesque meorum), her social status (regina), and her power (sceptrisque relictis). Again she seeks confirmation of the promises made in Jason’s earlier speech. 45  novis iterum singultibus orsa est: Compare Epic. Drusi 119–20: sic flebilis orsa est | singultu medios impediente sonos. As Spaltenstein notes, iterum (normally associated with a verb) in this case strengthens the adjective novis (as also in 3.666 and 4.283). orsa est is also used in a clausula at Ov. Met. 4.167. 46–7  linquo domos patrias . . . | . . . sceptris relictis: The list of things that Medea is giving up (including her many riches) follows the literary tradition from Euripides and Seneca (cf. Eur. Med. 31–3, 166–7, 502–3; Sen. Med. 118–20a, but also AR 4.1036–7 and Ov. Her. 12.109–12). Lazzarini rightly also compares the fates of the royal women from the house of Priam (e.g., Eur. Tr. 601). We should also note the clear echoes of 7.502: si te sceptra, domum, si te liquisse parentes (which this speech implicitly continues). 46  te propter: Every time the word propter occurs in VF (4.560; 7.315, 351), it appears after the pronoun, following archaic usage (see L-­H-­Sz 246 with bibli­ og­raphy). Anastrophe used with causal prepositions begins with Virg. A. 4.320 (Dido). See also Dewar on Stat. Theb. 9.65 and Perutelli on VF 7.315. Here the anastrophe and the central position give even greater emphasis to Medea’s almost accusatory tone. 47  nec iam nunc regina loquor: Technically, Medea has not yet become queen, but regina (which Dräger renders as ‘Königstochter’) sometimes applies to princesses, a Homeric legacy (e.g., Nausicaa as ἄνασσα). This usage begins with Plaut. Truc. 532; Ter. Eun. 168. See also Virg. A. 1.273 (on which Servius notes regina regis filia; abusive ait more poetico); Ov. Her. 12.2: at tibi Colchorum . . . regina vacavi (derived from Pind. Pyth. 4.11: δέσποινα Κόλχων with Braswell [1988] ad loc.). VF also applies it to Medea at 5.373, 385, 441; 6.657 (see Fucecchi with bibliography) and 7.444 (see Perutelli); see also 2.261 (referring to Hypsipyle)

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 48–50

77

with the comments by Poortvliet and Spaltenstein, as well as OLD s.v. 1b. VF uses the corresponding rex, applied, e.g., to Acastus in 1.174 (see Zissos). The contrast with profugae of the following line is striking and simultaneously alludes to Medea’s future status in Corinth (cf. Sen. Med. 447–9). Burman considers ‘loquor magniloquentiae verbum’ and cites as parallels Petr. Sat. 117; Ov. Her. 17.251 and Fast. 2.796. 48  vota sequor: For VF’s frequent use of sequor to mark the passivity of Medea’s actions, see Perutelli on 7.331. The verb indicates several times the passive nature of Medea’s advance towards her crime, following a poetic tradition the roots of which probably lie in tragedy (compare Ov. Her. 12.209; Met. 7.21, 56; Sen. Med. 895, 953; and VF 7.311, 348). This iunctura, attested only here in VF and absent from Virgil, has caused some confusion, especially concerning the meaning that should be applied to vota: Medea’s ‘wishes’ (as Caviglia, Liberman, and Pellucchi believe), Jason’s ‘promises’ (as Wetzel [1957] 168 p ­ roposes), or Jason’s ‘desires’ (as put forward by Lazzarini). I lean towards Lazzarini’s interpretation (‘I indulge your desires’). Note the division of the two phrases nec . . . loquor and sceptris . . . sequor into two hemistichs of four feet, marked by loquor and sequor, both before the caesura. 48–9  prior . . . dedisti | . . . (scis nempe) fidem: The reference is to the promises Jason made at 7.497–508. The convoluted syntax of the relative clause must be construed as follows: serva profugae hanc fidem quam ipse prior dedisti (scis nempe). For scis nempe, Liberman cites Cic. Att.9.15.3 and Apul. Met. 6.7. 49–50  di nostris vocibus adsunt | . . .: Medea refers to Jason’s words at 7.498– 500: per te, quae superis divisque potentior imis, | perque haec, virgo, tuo redeuntia sidera nutu | . . . iuro. She warns him that the same gods and the same stars that he invoked are watching him now. On the topos of oaths between lovers, the locus classicus is Hor. Carm. 2.8 (with Nisbet and Hubbard’s note). The verb adsunt is used to indicate the favourable involvement or the protection of the gods during an event (OLD s.v. 13b), but also as a technical term to refer to assistance in a trial (OLD s.v. 12). Medea therefore seems to seek legal guarantees to protect herself with regard to Jason’s promises. Note that in AR 4.88–91 Medea asks Jason to call the gods as witnesses to the promise he has made (which she herself does in line 53: hoc superos . . . deprecor), and the passage implies that there are specific legal conditions (see note 91 in Vian and Delage). 50  sidera et haec te meque vident. tecum aequora, tecum: The sound effect created by the alliterations and the metre, together with the triple repetition of the pronoun te, shows how deeply Jason has entered Medea’s head and how much she blames him for her current predicament. VF often plays with the repetition of personal pronouns, especially in the second person (see, e.g., lines 75–8). Swearing by the stars (which know the future) is common (cf. 7.498–500 and Virg. A. 4.519, with Pease ad loc.). The mention of the stars may also serve

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

78

Commentary, line 51

to contextualize the following scene, which describes the putting to sleep of the dragon (at night and with various astronomical implications). The stars and the moon are also frequently invoked in oaths of (often illicit) love (cf. Catull. 7.7–8; Stat. Ach. 1.644; Iuv. 8.149–50). The clausula aequora tecum is also used at 1.308. In this case VF adds the anaphora with tecum to give to Medea’s speech a greater feeling of agitation (a feature typical of everyday language). For aequor in the sense of ‘sea’, see Coleman (1999) 74. The poetic plural aequora (cf. the Homeric πελάγη) dates back to Ennius, Ann. 505 Skutsch, and became the most common form of the word in Latin epic for metrical convenience. 51  experiar quascumque vias: Medea now states plainly what the poet said at the beginning of the book (lines 5–6) and what her mother’s speech will later echo (168–9: iremus et ambae | in quascumque vias). The verb experiar with the sea is relatively common (cf. TLL v/2.1666.24–6), but the collocation with vias appears only here. 51–3  modo nequis . . . | . . . | ingerar: This passage is to be counted among the best examples of poetic irony in the poem. VF describes at 5.680–7 in plain terms how events in the kingdom of Colchis would develop: Medea would restore Aeetes to the throne with the help of Medus, the son she had with Aegeus (in the version of the story told at Hyg. Fab. 26–7). This time, the reference is more indirect, but the presence of the verb referat (52) could be perceived as a sign that VF is reviving a version of the myth (compare the analogous use of tradimus at 66). In this case, it could be the version reported by Ps-­Apollod. 1.9.28, according to which Medea, after returning to the Colchians in disguise and discovering that Perses has deprived her father of his throne, killed the former and gave the kingship back to Aeetes (but the reference could also be to some other variant, now lost). If so, one could see in ingerar (strongly emphasized by enjambment and caesura) not only a sense of compulsion and force (see OLD s.v. 3, with 7.651 and TLL vii/1.1551.27–46), but also the sense of ‘interference, commanding’ (as in Cic. Verr. 2.3.69: ingerebat . . . recuperatores), which would be understood as an allusion to the events concerning the overthrowing of the rulers. As Liberman notes, Carrion’s reading ingerar, coming after referat, appears to be the lectio difficilior, but it could serve to match ­experiar of 51. 51 abactam: Burman understands this to mean eiectam, repudiatam and cites Suet. Tib. 7: Agrippinam abegisse post divortium doluit, pointing out that exigere would be the most commonly used verb in this circumstance (on which see Treggiari [1991] 438); see also OLD s.v. 3b. For abactam taking the technical meaning of ‘to divorce’, cf. OLD s.v. 3b. Considering this proleptically ironic context, one might think of Jason’s future divorce, but perhaps also of Medea’s expulsion from Athens. Note the proximity of profugae (line 48), a position that Medea will occupy multiple times.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, line 53

79

53  hoc superos, hoc te quoque deprecor, hospes: In AR 4.88–91 Medea asks Jason (calling him ξεῖνε) to call the gods as witnesses to the promise he made. hospes, therefore, seems to take up AR’s ξεῖνε, and this is how Medea apostrophizes Jason in AR until the moment he promises to marry her. From then on, she begins to call him by his patronymic (AR 4.355: Αἰσονίδη), and VF does the same (Aesonides in 8.105 and 442). From the point of view of the peoples he comes across, hospes is the usual title for the foreigner Jason, and it appears with particular frequency in book 7 (see Perutelli on 7.1). Dido also calls Aeneas hospes in A. 4.10 and especially in 323 (see Pease’s comment, which also discusses the play on words between hospes and hostis). Burman (followed by Wagner) comments that foreigners were suspected of being treacherous as in Ov. Her. 17.193: certus in hospitibus non est amor; this trad­ition perhaps influences the choice of Medea’s apostrophe. Furthermore, Langen argues that Medea does not say Jason’s name out of modesty. On the tradition of the perfidus hospes in erotic poetry, see Della Corte (1969) and Pinotti (1988) on Ov. Rem. 265–8. On the construction of deprecor (here with a double accusative), see note on 99. The end of the speech is expressive because of the anaphora of hoc, which is continued with the alliterative hospes and emphasized by the ­second caes­ura (in addition, deprecor hospes, used in a clausula at 7.454).

54–67.  THE DRAGON The transitional section at 54–7 allows the narrative to shift from the location of Jason and Medea’s meeting to the place where the dragon is guarding the Fleece. The seemingly confused geography of these places (in addition to commentary on individual lines, see note on 105 and Pellucchi [2012] 104–6) is in fact useful for the double reference to the dragon in Colchis and the constellation of the Dragon (on which see note on 56–63). As in the previous book (starting at 7.389), VF depicts a change in Medea, formerly unsure, frail, and enamoured with Jason, and now a powerful and frightening sorceress. From this point onward, she will be the one to carry out the actions until she returns to the Argo, whereas Jason, now hesitant and fearful (almost a reversal of their roles compared to the previous scene), will restrict himself to following her orders in silence. 54–5  The book opened with Medea in her own room within the palace. The only indication of any movement came from prosilit (repeated in the simile) of line 21. Jason reached the woods first (cf. 24–5), and now the poet specifically states per devia rapido passu | tollitur, until he comes into the dragon’s presence. VF condenses the corresponding scene in AR 4.123: τὼ δὲ δι’ ἀτραπιτοῖο μεθ’ ἱερὸν ἄλσος ἵκοντο with what appears slightly before at 4.66: ὧς ἄρ’ ἔφη. τὴν δ’ αἶψα πόδες φέρον ἐγκονέουσαν.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

80

Commentary, lines 54–5

54  haec ait: A common formula used to mark the end of a speech (like dixerat at 1.182 or dixerat haec at 1.681) and derived from Homer (e.g., ὧς φατο, ὧς ἔφατ’). It is also attested several times in Virgil (e.g., A. 1.297; 4.630; 10.285). As in the Aeneid, haec ait always appears at the beginning of a line in VF (1.651; 3.521; 6.292; 7.431; 8.195). See Pease on A. 4.30, Harrison on A. 10.246, and Zissos on VF 1.182–3. furens: At this point in the narrative, furor has already won the internal war with pudor in Medea’s heart (the point of no return is found at 7.461–2: inde ubi facta nocens et evocabilis umquam | cessit ab ore pudor propiorque implevit Erinys). The word’s polysemy does not entirely rule out the possibility that at this moment both Medea’s amorous furor and the frenzy of an obsessed sorceress, who is about to take action, dwell together in her heart (according to some commentators, including Wagner, Spaltenstein, and Lazzarini, it is only the second hypothesis that is correct). The model seems to be the Virgilian Sibyl of A. 6.262–3: tantum effata furens antro se immisit aperto; | ille ducem haud timidis vadentem passibus aequat. Signs of a different furor can be found in line 20 (Medea/Ino struck by the whip of the Furiae). On the conflict between pudor and furor, see La Penna (1981) 241–3. On the Sibyl’s furor (Greek μανία), see Norden on A. 6.262. On Medea’s furor, Wagner notes ‘de incantatione iam cogitans’. per devia: The substantive use of the adjective devius (synonymous with avius and invius) in the neuter plural does not appear in poetry before the Augustan age (cf. Tib. 3.9.2, but also in prose, Liv. 21.33.4: invia ac devia). Spaltenstein notes that per devia could also refer to the association of Medea, magic, and nature (cf. 7.389–91: iamiam magico per opaca silentia Colchis | ­coeperat ire sono montanaque condere vultus | numina cumque suis averti ­fontibus amnes). The phrase is echoed in Sil. 17.530: cito per devia passu. 55 tollitur: Burman comments: ‘hoc uti interpretes verbo ad illustrandum . . . erecta supra vers. 20 sed plus notat, tolli est cum impetu, ire magnis gradibus, ut docuimus ad lib. 3.133’. Wagner explains the verb as abripitur, ­deproperat. Langen equates it to currit, properat, citing as a parallel Ov. Met. 7.779–80: collis apex medii subiectis imminet arvis: | tollor eo capioque novi spectacula cursus and justifying the reading with ‘ubi sane accedit notio ­movendi in altiorem locum’. Spaltenstein points to his comment on 3.133, in which tollitur conveys the sense of moving quickly with an upright posture (as the passages Langen cited, that is, Sil. 16.394 and 5.10, demonstrate); but he objects to the citation of this passage in OLD s.v. tollo 4a with the sense of ‘to climb up, to ascend’. In truth, nothing prevents us from thinking that the path Medea takes per devia to reach the dragon is on an incline (even if she passes through it quickly). In any case, tollitur translates φέρον in AR 4.66 (Pellucchi 123 refers to refugit in Virg. A. 6.472–6). ille haeret comes: VF echoes Ov. Met. 8.144: Gnosiacaeque haeret comes invidiosa car­inae, in which it is Scylla who grasps the ship from Cnossus after

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, line 55

81

her romantic desires fail to come to fruition. At the same time, the intertext with Virg. A. 6.262–3 is still present, insofar as VF, in addition to adopting furens, condenses the image of haeret comes. In a different situation that mirrors the present one, it is Medea, a conterrita virgo, who haesit in front of Jason (7.384). On this scene, in which one can detect echoes of Lucan (who in turn was inspired by the Virgilian passage on the Sibyl), see Baldini-­Moscadi (2005) 149–62. Hardie* sees an infantilization of Jason, as he resembles Hylas with Hercules or Ascanius with Aeneas (on the simi­lar­ities between the two situ­ ations, see Garson [1963] 261–2). Given that Medea is preparing to play the role of Hercules, the passage at 3.486 (haeret Hylas) seems to support this analogy. Compare also Mart. 3.91.3–4: huic comes haerebat domini fugitivus Achillas | insignis forma nequitiaque puer (the reference would not be flattering for Jason); Stat. Ach. 1.345: comes haeret eunti; Stat. Theb. 11.357–8: senior comes haeret eunti | Actor. The participle euntem at the end of the line makes up for the absence of the typical dative (even if haereo can sometimes be used in an absolute manner, cf. Virg. A. 8.558–9). Note the contrast between tollitur and ille haeret, underscored by enjambment and caesura, in order to highlight Jason’s dependence on Medea. As she rises and advances, he clings on to her, following her as a comes (which is etymologically derived from cum + ire). According to Wagner ‘maiorem vim habet τὸ haeret quam simplex est; inest notio alicuius terroris’. miseratur euntem: Courtney, Ehlers, and Spaltenstein adopt Meyncke’s correction miratur instead of miseratur. As already noted by Burman, miseratur euntem appears at Virg. A. 6.476 (the meeting between Aeneas and Dido in the Underworld), and in Liberman’s view the Virgilian parallel is fitting for this context (as it also hints at treachery). According to Langen (who cites the same passage), the verbum miserandi is justified by the words that Medea has just uttered. In Spaltenstein’s view it is precisely the Virgilian parallel that might have induced the copyist to write miseratur in place of miratur, but the verb must refer to Medea’s wondrous abilities as a witch (therefore miratur is more justified). Given the infantilization of Jason and his subordination to an active Medea, miratur therefore seems preferable. 56–63  The dragon: VF already mentions the dragon in previous books: 1.58– 63; 5.224–58; 7.165–9, 519–38. For this description, he operates on two distinct, but connected, levels. In the first part of the description the poet is inspired by the sketch of the constellation of the Dragon (Δράκων or Ὄφις to the Greeks, Draco, Serpens, or Anguis to the Romans), as found in Aratus (Phaen. 45–62) and subsequently in Cicero (Arat. fr. 8–10 Pellacani). The Dragon is still today a circumpolar constellation, whose form in antiquity encircled the North Pole,  the equatorial pole, and the elliptical, in which the zodiac signs were arranged. Here, terms like poli (Cic. Arat. fr. 4 Pellacani) and sidus (Arat. fr. 9.4) suggest an astronomical context, whereas lumina (Arat. fr. 9.3) is intentionally polysemous (it could mean ‘star, celestial body’, OLD s.v. 5b, but also ‘eyes’, OLD

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

82

Commentary, line 56

s.v. 9). The scene, therefore, moves from describing the constellation (58–61) to describing the dragon that guards the Fleece (61–3), whose features are nevertheless derived from those of the constellation. According to our sources, however, it was not the dragon from Colchis that became the homonymous constellation, but rather the one guarding the golden apples of the Hesperides (cf. Hyg. Astr. 2.6; Ps-­Erat. Catast. 3; Avien. Arat. Phaen. 159). On the other hand, in some versions, it is the Python, killed by Apollo (Schol. ad Arat. Phaen. 45), or the dragon defeated by Cadmus (Schol. ad Arat. Phaen. 45), and still according to others it is Athena who transforms a dragon that she fought during the Gigantomachy into a constellation (Hyg. Astr. 2.3; Schol. ad Germ. Arat. p. 60.15–17; 117.9–11 Breysig), or it is Zeus himself who transforms into a constellation in order to defend himself (Schol. ad Arat. Phaen. 46). The entire episode depicting the capture of the Fleece is the result of a remarkable development that weaves together diverse traditions, both intertextual and intratext­ual. In particular, the poet exploits the similarities between the myth depicting the capture of the Golden Fleece and that describing the seizure of the apples of the Hesperides. In both cases, there is a golden treasure located in a distant land at the edges of the earth (the one in the far east, the other in the far west), with a sleepless snake keeping watch. Analogies also appear in some rationalizing explanations for the myth, which emphasize the ambiguity in the term μῆλα, which could mean either apples or sheep; see, e.g., Σ AR 4.1396a = 762F3a; Diod. Sic. 4.26–7; Var. R. 2.1.6; Serv. ad Virg. A. 4.484; Mythogr. Vat. 1.38; 2.186; Pease on Virg. A. 4.483; Gantz (1993) 413. The use of these similarities serves to pave the way for the allusion to Hercules’ deification (his final labour is precisely to bring back the apples of the Hesperides; echoes of which can be read as the background to lines 75–8). VF is yet again inspired by Virg. A. 4.480–6, the depiction of the Numidian sorceress (who, like Medea, has a relationship with a dragon) as a guardian of the temple of the Hesperides. Furthermore, this passage also blends in references to Virg. A. 10.270–5, in which Aeneas is compared to a celestial body (specifically a comet and Sirius). Finally, note how the appearance of the constellation of the Dragon recalls the vocabulary and process of another ascent to the stars, that of Phrixus’ ram, which appears at 5.224–8 and is followed closely by the narration of the serpent that came from Caucasus in order to guard the Fleece (5.253–5). The simile involving the rivers at lines 90–1 confirms that VF alludes to the constellation of the Dragon, a simile still derived from Aratus, but with influence from Hesiod (Theog. 270–345) and from Medea’s invocation at Sen. Med. 692–704. 56–7  The alliteration of m (and n) creates a murmuring sound and a feeling of agitation, while the word order again produces a chiaroscuro effect (as noted for lines 24–33): saeva and luce appear between vibrantes and tenebras in order to produce the visual effect of a darkness pierced by a beam of light. Furthermore, the effect is strengthened by the repetition of the same idea (a typical feature of

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 56–8

83

VF’s style; see Spaltenstein on 1.109 and 8.57), with the figurative vibrantes . . . tenebras standing in for lucem vibrantem in tenebris. For a list where VF uses such transpositions, see Spaltenstein on 1.103. For VF’s frequent oxymora that play upon the contrast between light and darkness, see Pellucchi (2012) 126. 56  cum subito: For the cum inversum, see K-­S 2.338–9. Burman refers to AR 4.139 for the image of the blazing forest, which the Greek poet introduced with ὧς δ’ ὅτε. ingentem . . . nubila flammam: flamma, used as a poeticism (TLL vi/1.866.83) in place of nitor, begins with Virg. A. 6.300: stant lumina flamma (see also 8.620: terribilem cristis galeam flammasque vomentem), but the term also applies to the glow from the heavenly bodies; see OLD s.v. 5 and especially Le Boeuffle (1977) 42, who cites various passages, including Germ. Arat. 56–7 Gain: cava tempora claris | ornantur flammis (Dragon). VF employs the same term to describe the appearance of the constellation of Ares at 5.226–7: mira repente | flamma poli magnoque aries apparuit astro (note also repente and magno, which recall subito and ingentem). Compare also 1.568–9: dixit et ingenti flammantem nubila sulco | derexit, here the Twins’ ascent to heaven. In addition to the brilliance of the stars, the glow could refer to the serpent’s eyes or that of its own flames. In any case, the influence of Virg. A. 10.270: ardet apex capiti cristisque a vertice flamma must also be taken into account. On the motif of the serpent, often connected to that of the flame in Latin poetry, see Knox (1950), especially 380 for fire as the main weapon used by serpents. The image of a serpent whose eyes flash like sparks of fire is evoked at AR 4.1544–5; see also Virg. G. 3.433: flammantia lumina. The clausula nubila flamma comes from Ov. Tr. 1.2.45: ei mihi, quam celeri micuerunt nubila flamma and Fast. 3.285: ecce deum genitor rutilas per nubila flammas. 58–9  The scene reprises 7.529–30 (quis fragor hic? quaenam . . .?). At that point Medea rouses the dragon, and Jason becomes scared upon hearing it. Now he sees it in person. 58 rubor: This refers to the redness coming forth from the dragon and il­lu­ min­at­ing the vault of the heavens. More precisely, VF could be alluding to Eltanin (known also as Etamin or Gemma Draconis), the brightest star of the Dragon constellation, which has a red/orange colour and is located right on its head. Avienus adopts this image (perhaps indirectly from VF) in his description of the Dragon constellation, in Arat. Phaen. 152: sola micat solave rubent incendia crista. In AR the Fleece is at first likened to a cloud that becomes red (ἐρεύθεται) from the rays of the rising sun (4.123–6). Then, after it has been captured, it illuminates Jason’s cheeks and forehead with a red light, just like a flame. The redness might also come from the parallel Virgilian passage A. 10.272–3: siquando nocte cometae | sanguinei lugubre rubent, in which the gloomy colour

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

84

Commentary, line 59

foreshadows the bloody disasters to follow. On the red colour as characteristic of comets, see Le Boeuffle (1987) 232. poli: Following Virgil, VF usually employs this word in the singular (whereas the other Flavian epic poets use the plural) to refer to the vault of the heavens (on this subject, see Austin on A. 1.90 and Zissos on VF 1.17). The poet employed the same word in 5.227: flamma poli magnoque aries apparuit astro, but in this case there may be a more specific reference to the North Pole, in which the Dragon constellation is located (if so, the interpretation that rubor relates to the Eltanin would gain more credibility). extremusque adeo duplici de cardine vertex | dicitur esse polus is the def­in­ition provided by Cic. Arat. fr. 4 Pellacani (for other parallel passages, see also Pease’s thorough note on Cic. N.D. 2.105); the source is Arat. Phaen. 24: καί μιν πειραίνουσι δύω πόλοι ἀμφοτέρωθεν. The polar star was called ὁ πόλος in Greek (Ps-­Erat. Catast. 2) and polus in Latin (Le Boeuffle [1977] 92–3; see also [1987] 69). lugubre: According to the OLD s.v. 2b, this is an adjective (and modern trans­lators interpret it in the same way), whereas Spaltenstein takes it as an adverbial accusative, following TLL vii/2.1804.47 (which cites Virg. A. 10.273). The poet perhaps intends syntactic ambiguity. 59 sidus: The enjambment and the caesura add emphasis. Maserius makes the  comment that Jason believes he has seen a comet, an omen of disaster (cf. Ps-­Sen. Oct. 231–2: vidimus caelo iubar | ardentes cometen pandere infaustum facem; Plin. Nat. 2.92: cometes numquam in occasura parte caeli est, terrificum magna ex parte sidus atque non leviter piatum). Liberman (followed by Lazzarini and Pellucchi) supports this proposition, rightly comparing A. 10.272–3 and Sil. 8.637 (rubuit letale cometes). This is a blending of a Virgilian simile (namely an astral one, since Aeneas is compared to a comet or to Sirius) with the astral description of the dragon. On comets, see Le Boeuffle (1977) 63–73. reddit trepido cui talia virgo: Now that their roles have been reversed, Jason is the one to be trepidus (as Medea was in line 1). The adjective perhaps reprises the parallel Virgilian passage A. 6.290, in which Aeneas appears trepidus before the monsters of Hades. Jason is also afraid (frigidus) in the parallel scene at 7.529–30, and in AR 4.149 he follows Medea while πεφοβημένος. Reddit . . . talia is inspired by the Virgilian clausula talia reddit (A. 2.323 and 10.530), adopted also at Stat. Theb. 4.625. 60–3  The description of the dragon: In the first book of the poem, editors beginning with Ehlers (except for Kleywegt) insert into the text what became known as line 45: inter et attonitae mactat sollemnia mensae. This numbering means that the first description of the dragon in VF appears in lines 60–3 of the first book, thus creating an intriguing parallel with book 8 (VF accordingly employs both the Aratean and Virgilian intertexts and his own intratext). Descriptions of dragons are quite numerous in ancient sources, beginning with Hdt. 2.75–6. Some recurring features include a body covered with scales,

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, line 60

85

variously coloured skin, a back with spots, grey and glowering eyes that exude a terrifying light, large coils, multiple tongues, and often also wings, with which they can fly. See, e.g., Arist. HA 490a–b; Cic. N.D. 1.101; Plin. Nat. 10.75; Mela 3.82; Paus. 9.21.6; Ael. NA 2.38; Sol. 32.33; Amm. Marc. 22.15.26; Isid. Orig. 12.4.29. Regarding dragons, see Ogden 2013 (especially 201–6 on the dragon at Colchis). 60  ipsius . . . oculos et lumina . . . draconis: The use of ipsius at the beginning of the line emphasizes VF’s double reference to the dragon as a constellation and a physical animal. Meyncke (1867) 37 had already objected to the phrase oculos et lumina as a possible pleonasm (Lazzarini [2012] 110 calls it redundant, whereas Pellucchi [2012] 128 thinks it is a hendiadys), and Langen defines it as a tautology, comparing querellis... questuque of lines 453–4. Cf. exaudiri voces et verba (Virg. A. 4.460), nosse deos et caeli lumina (Luc. 1.452), and torquet adhuc oculos totoque vagantia caelo | lumina (Luc. 5.212–13). For other Valerian passages (including nexus ac vincula at 7.626), see Gebbing (1878) 77. Liberman and Spaltenstein emphasize that, although the words are often used as synonyms (TLL vii/2.1819, 47), lumina and oculi can be distinguished from one another, as in the periphrasis oculorum lumina found in Lucr. 4.836 and 6.184 and sidereique orbes radiataque lumina caelo in Stat. Silv. 2.1.42. VF is inspired by Cic. Arat. fr. 9.3 Pellacani: e trucibus oculis duo fervida lumina flagrant; therefore, it is the stars that represent the eyes of the Dragon constellation (to be exact, β and ν Dra, as Soubiran points out) that Jason is seeing. VF’s adoption of the words oculos (in the same metrical position) and lumina is clear, and thus the criticisms that this is a pointless pleonasm are invalid. On lumen applied to the stars, see also Le Boeuffle (1977) 42. In these two lines VF focuses on the concept of sight, a fundamental component of the dragon’s very nature, and the redundancy in oculos and lumina serves to enhance this feature. The dragon is above all a guardian, and the ancients traced the etymology of the word δράκων to the verb δέρκομαι (Paul. Fest. p. 67 M.: dracones dicti ἀπὸ τοῦ δέρκεσθαι, quod est videre; see also Chantraine, s.v. δέρκομαι). In nearly all of our sources, the dragon is portrayed as sleepless (see note on line 64) with eyes open. aspicis of the following line reaffirms the author’s focus on gaze, creating a subtle play on words with draconis. The emphasis on sight continues in the following lines (videt, 62; vigilanti . . . videnti, 64; lumina, 65), and the neutralization of the dragon’s gaze will be the weapon that allows Medea to defeat it (tempus ab hac oculos deflectere cura, 76; luctantia lumina, 85; nulla videbis | vellera, 100–1). lumina torva: The collocation occurs at Virg. A. 3.677: lumine torvo (the Cyclopes) and is adopted at Ov. Met. 2.752; 5.24; 9.27; Stat. Theb. 8.756; Silv. 5.1.140; 5.2.124. For a series of similar expressions, see Bömer on Ov. Met. 2.270 and 6.34. VF uses torvo . . . lumine to refer to the bulls’ gaze at 7.579, and perhaps the echo is meant to connect with the dragon the monstrous animals that Jason must confront. As Perutelli notes, torvus denotes the feral and monstrous

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

86

Commentary, line 61

­ ual­ities that an animal can possess, and the Latin authors predominantly apply q it to bulls (e.g., Ov. Met. 8.132; Tr. 4.9.29), perhaps because of an alleged etymological connection (Norden on A. 6.255; contra Walde-­Hofmann II.695). It is also fitting to compare Cic. Arat. fr. 8.2 Pellacani: torvu’ Draco serpit. 61 aspicis: This word, highlighted by enjambment, strengthens the visual (oculos et lumina), nearly theatrical (en) context of the scene, and through its consonance (it recalls aspis, aspidis), it emphasizes the dragon’s snake-­like (and deadly) form. The alliteration of s sounds evokes a hissing snake (ipsius en oculos et lumina torva draconis | aspicis. Ille suis haec vibrat fulgura cristis). Hissing patterns produce a similarly expressive effect at 7.525–7, the passage in which Medea rouses the serpent (torsit | sibila seque . . . sua vellera circum | sustulit atque omnis spiris exhorruit arbor). ille suis haec vibrat fulgura cristis: Liberman suggests emending ille suis haec to arrectis haec, since it seems strange to him that the flashes come from the serpent’s head, whereas line 60 suggests that they come from his eyes. Liberman does not notice how VF subtly reworks the scene. In fact, ille prompts the reader to watch for an intertextual connection, which is yet again the Virgilian passage ardet apex capiti cristisque a vertice flamma (A. 10.270), which in turn is linked to A. 8.620: terribilem cristis galeam flammasque vomentem. VF accordingly plays with the term cristis (note that he repeats the word in the same grammatical form), which can be understood as the crest of Aeneas’ helmet, but also as the dragon’s crest. Like the Dragon constellation, the Colchian dragon exudes light not only from his eyes, but also from his temples, as attested by Arat. Phaen. 54–6 and Cic. Arat. fr. 9.1–2 Pellacani: huic non una modo caput ornans stella relucet, | verum tempora sunt duplici fulgore notata. Lazzarini compares the flash emitted from the dragon’s crests to the common image of the crests on top of warriors’ helmets (already in Hom. Il. 6.116), and thus the poet depicts the dragon as a combatant equipped for battle; see the comments concerning serpents cristati or iubati in Conington and Nettleship on Virg. A. 2.206, Billerbeck on Sen. Her. F. 216–7 (cristati caput | angues) and especially Ogden (2013) 155–61. Wagner also compares AR 4.139–41. See note on 129–30. vibro is commonly used to refer to the tongues of snakes (see 1.61–2: multifidas . . . linguas | vibrantem; OLD s.v. 4b), but it is also sometimes applied to lightning (OLD s.v. 4, with Virg. A. 8.524: vibratus ab aethere fulgor cum sonitu venit and Stat. Silv. 5.2.102: castum vibraret Iulia [sc. lex] fulmen). vibro is also a technical term for the light of the heavenly bodies (cf. OLD s.v. 6). For the collocation vibrat fulgura, compare Man. 1.863: fulgura cum videas tremulum vibrantia lumen. fulgura recalls refulsit of line 58, and vibrat recalls vibrantes of line 57, but in this case the use and the meaning of the terms are different. Compare Cic. Arat. fr. 9.2 Pellacani: tempora sunt duplici fulgore notata (of the dragon). On the difference between fulgur, fulmen, and fulgor, see Hardie (1986) 177–87.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 62–3

87

62–3  meque pavens contra solam videt ac vocat ultro, | ceu solet: The text has been interpreted and emended in various ways (‘verba Valerii a nullo fere recte intellecta sunt’, according to Langen). I believe that we can keep the transmitted text as it is (the Codex Carrionis has the reading ac vocat, whereas the other codices have advocat). Langen translates this as ‘mir allein sieht furchtsam in die Augen’ (citing Virg. A. 11.373–4: illum aspice contra | cui vocat); the idea that the dragon only sees Medea is reasonable (Giarratano comments: ‘arte magica Medeam effecisse ne Iasonem conspiceret draco’). It is also reasonable to think that the dragon would fear Medea, given her power as a sorceress (contra Liberman), but I think the phrase could also mean ‘the dragon, fearing me alone (meque solam pavens), sees me standing before him’. ceu solet creates a larger problem. If we do not wish to alter the text, we must alter the punc­tu­ation in order to understand how to construe these lines. If we grant that solet refers to the three present tense verbs, we must interpret the line as ‘the dragon who, fearing me, sees me standing before him alone, as usual, calls to me of his own free will and asks me for food with his gentle tongue’. With the insertion of a more pronounced pause after videt (as Liberman does, though he also alters the text), the lines could mean ‘the dragon, fearing me alone, sees me standing before him and, as usual, calls to me of his own free will and asks me for food with his gentle tongue’, a reading that I propose. It would be more inventive, but not impossible, to understand everything from meque to ultro as a single chunk and to connect ceu solet to poscit, removing the comma after solet. On the basis of Ph. Wagner (p. 647), Liberman disagrees with Langen’s proposal that contra videre can mean ἄντην εἰσιδέειν, contra aspicere, contra intueri (and he cites Virg. Ecl. 7.7–8: atque ego Daphnim | aspicio. ille, ubi me contra videt). The text that he proposes (meque pavens non iam solam videt; haud vocat ultro, | ceu solet et blanda . . .) could also be justified; but it considerably trivializes the scope of the relationships between Medea and the dragon, through which one perceives the monstrous dimension that VF attributes to her in these circumstances (VF will resume doing so from line 94, when Medea seque suumque simul flevit crudelis alumnum). VF described Medea’s familiarity with the dragon at 1.60–3, and he will remind the reader at lines 95–7. Almost all commentators have understood ultro to mean ‘of his own free will’ (OLD s.v. 6b). The adverb confirms that Medea holds a position of power over the dragon, which not only fears her, but even calls out to her. It could also be connected to contra, and the two words could be seen as adverbs of place that show where Medea and the dragon stand (‘he sees me standing in front of him and calls to me from the other direction’). 63  blanda poscit me pabula lingua: The influence of Prop. 4.8.7–8: ieiuni serpentis honos, cum pabula poscit | annua et ex ima sibila torquet humo has been noted (Grüneberg [1893] 88; Colton [1964] 41–2; Perutelli on 7.525–6; cf. also Hutchinson ad loc.). VF keeps the dactyl pabula in the fifth foot and moves poscit across the third and fourth. The ablative blanda . . . lingua helps strengthen the

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

88

Commentary, line 64

verb poscit. Echoes of the same Propertian passage (on which see Fedeli, Ciccarelli, and Dimundo ad loc.) appear also at 7.525–6: ille, quod haud alias, stetit et trepidantia torsit | sibila. Note the repetition of the terms used earlier to describe Jason (blanda lingua in line 63 echoes the blando . . . ore of line 36), which are now applied to the dragon (another humanizing trait). On the frequent use of blandus to denote the tameness of animals, see note on 113. 64–7  Medea addresses Jason. According to some critics, Medea’s question is a rhet­oric­al one. In truth, as Zissos (1999) 290 notes, the passage is the result of VF’s meticulous poetic elaboration, as he presents his reader with variations of the myth already told by other authors. vigilanti hostem . . . | . . . auferre refers to the variant in which Jason faces the dragon in battle (cf. Pind. Pyth. 4.249), common in iconography (consider the Apulian volute krater from Monaco at LIMC 5.2, s.v. Iason 37 or the Apulian bell krater from Turin at LIMC 5.2, s.v. Iason 38). an lumina somno | mergimus . . . anguem, by contrast, refers to the version that VF presents (putting the dragon to sleep), the inspiration for which comes from AR 4.156–61. The lexical choices for the first option reflect its martial context: vigilare (‘to keep watch’, but also ‘to monitor, stand guard’), hostis, exuvias (the spoils taken from the golden ram, as at 5.491, but also in general ‘war plunder’). In the second option, the al­lit­er­ation of m foreshadows the heaviness caused by the sleep that Medea will induce in the dragon (especially lumina somno | mergimus, strengthened by enjambment, but also domitum . . . tradimus anguem). It is clear that VF chooses the second variant from the fact that mergimus and tradimus are in the indicative, compared to the subjunctive velis expressed in the first option. Furthermore, according to Zissos (1999) 290, the use of tradimus emphasizes the metapoetic purpose of this passage, since it conveys the mythological variation (namely AR’s) that VF chose for his own account (see also Zissos’s note for the use of this word in contexts concerning poetic transmission; in particular, see Cic. Inv. 2.1.3 and VF 6.103–4). We can also add another plausible interpretation. In light of the following lines (the comparison between Hercules and Jason) the choice that Medea puts forward to Jason seems to reflect the motif of Hercules’ choice (the first will be the one that Hercules chooses, whereas Jason will select the latter). VF already alludes to the hero’s choice (that is, to fight) at 2.381–2 by making Hercules declare dum spes mihi sistere montes | Cyaneos vigilemque alium spoliare draconem. On the allusions, the ‘negative allusions’ and the narrative variants employed by VF, see especially Feeney (1991) 313–37; Malamud and McGuire (1993); Barchiesi (1995); Zissos (1999), (2008) xl–xlii, and (2016). For iconographic evidence, see in particular the Paestan lekythos from the fourth ­century (LIMC 5.2, s.v. Iason 41) and the volute krater from Naples (n. 42). For the implications regarding Hercules’ choice, see Castelletti (2012b) 159–60 and (2014b) 187. On the acrostic DEMI that stamps lines 64–7, see Castelletti (2008) 228–9.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 64–7

89

64  dic age nunc: This is an Ovidian phrase (Her. 21.55: dic age nunc, solitoque tibi ne decipe more), repeated also in the Ciris (234: dic age nunc miserae saltem . . .). 64–5  utrum . . . | . . . an: This construction is avoided in Latin epic as too close to the sermo cotidianus (see Pellucchi [2012] 133). Perhaps the uniqueness of this case is intended to emphasize the poet’s desire to allude to the mythological variations. 64  vigilanti hostemque videnti: An adaptation of Virg. A. 9.345: Rhoetum vigilantem et cuncta videntem. Compare also Ov. Met. 3.55–7, where hostem is applied to the Martius anguis that Cadmus must defeat in order to sow the teeth that will give birth to the Spartoi (for the similarities between the Theban myth and the Argonautic one, see Perutelli on 7.76). For the insistence on sight, see note on 60–3. The sleeplessness of the dragon at Colchis is the characteristic on which literary sources focus the most: Eur. Med. 480–3: ἄυπνος ὤν; AR 2.409, 4.128: ὀξὺς ἀύπνοισι προιδὼν ὄφις ὀφθαλμοῖσι; Dionysius Scytobrachion, FGrHist 32 F 14, ap. Diod. Sic. 4.48.3; Chor. 12.54; Ov. Her. 6.13: pervigilem . . . draconem, Met. 7.35–6; Man. 3.5–11; Sen. Med. 472–3: somno . . . ignoto . . .  | insomne monstrum and 703–4: pervigil . . . | . . . serpens. 65 exuvias: Here with the specific meaning of exuviae as ‘animal skin’ (in a military context, the word refers to spoils). The term was used for the Fleece at 5.491 and 6.19. On the variatio modorum (with a violation of the sequence of tenses) found in velis . . . mergimus . . . tradimus, which several scholars observed, see most recently Pellucchi (2012) 133. Again, the changing of the syntax might be useful for VF’s metapoetic objective concerning tradimus (see note on 64–7). 65–6  lumina somno | mergimus: somno mergi or se mergi is quite common (Liv. 41.3.10: vino somnoque veri simile esse mersos iacere; Sen. Brev. 18.2: ut somno et caris turbae voluptatibus . . . mergas; Apul. Met. 2.1: somno simul emersus e lectulo), and the TLL cites only VF for this application to the word lumina (TLL viii.834.73). The combination of lumina and somno is almost Homeric. The clausula lumina somno is common (VF also uses it at 1.300) and goes back to Catull. 64.122. See especially Virg. A. 4.185; Ov. Her. 12.107: flammea subduxi medicato lumina somno; and Stat. Theb. 2.31: domuisset lumina somno (with the adoption of the word domo). 66 domitum: The verb domare can suggest both the idea of subjugating or domesticating animals (OLD s.v. 1) and the subduing of an enemy (OLD s.v. 2), thus referring both to the unusual relationship that Medea has with the dragon (which may seem absurd; cf. Perutelli on 7.550, echoed by Zissos on 1.95–7) and to the martial context that the previous lines evoked. 67  ille silet, tantus subiit tum virginis horror: Jason’s silence, more than his uncertainty at how to answer Medea’s questions, reflects his horror (at AR 4.67

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

90

Commentary, line 68

Jason is πεφονημένος) at seeing the power of the sorceress at work (contra Liberman), and therefore his mindset, already described at line 55, is reaffirmed. Jason’s role in this event is completely passive, granting greater em­phasis to the sorceress’s actions. For this reason, I agree with Spaltenstein that correcting tantus into tacitus (proposed by Heinsius and followed by Liberman) trivializes the sentence. I also follow the majority of modern editors in reading tum (which appears in some humanist codices and in the editio princeps, in place of the transmitted ut); tum makes the scene more fluid. For a study on the motif of silence in VF’s poem, see Anzinger (2007). For the final syllable of subiit as long, see Liberman’s thorough note 45 on line 67 and Pellucchi (2012) 136. virginis horror makes one think of the horrenda . . . virgine of 5.220; Hardie* compares Virg. A. 11.507: Turnus ad haec, oculos horrenda in virgine fixus (Camilla), which inspires the passage here.

68–91.  THE TRIAL OF THE DRAGON In nearly all our sources the dragon is the final obstacle that Jason must overcome to obtain the Golden Fleece, but the way in which this trial happens differs considerably. VF follows AR 4.156–61, where it is Medea who puts the dragon to sleep, allowing Jason to retrieve the Fleece without effort. This version, which Ovid (Met. 7.149–58 and 210–14) and Seneca (Med. 471–3 and 703–4) also followed, seems to be attested for the first time in Antimachus (fr. 73 Matthews ap. Σ AR 4.156–66). In Pindar (Pyth. 4.249), Jason kills the dragon τέχναις. According to Moreau (1994) 182, who cites Vian and Delage (1981) 5 n. 5, these τέχναι would be Medea’s magical arts and not the vaguely defined ‘arts’ of Jason. In Euripides’ Medea (480–2), however, and in Dionysius Scytobrachion (FGrHist 32 F 14, ap. Diod. Sic. 4.48.3), it is Medea herself who says she killed it (Mastronarde ad loc. raises the possibility of understanding κτείνασα of Eur. Med. 482 as ‘gave you the means to kill’). Jason also killed the dragon in the versions told by Herodorus (FGrHist 31 F 52) and Pherecydes (FGrHist 3 F 31), as reported by Σ AR 4.87 and 156–66a. According to Lycophron’s Alexandra 1313, the dragon is instead spared. Other mentions in which the victory over the dragon and the taking of the Fleece are attributed to Medea’s magical arts appear in Ennius (Adesp. 136 TrRF; see note on 437–8) and Ovid (Her. 12.107–10 and 165–6). In Ps-­Apollodorus (1.9.23) and Philostratus (Imag. 11) a version of the myth is attested in which Medea is the episode’s only protagonist; she puts the dragon to sleep with her φάρμακα and also takes the Golden Fleece, then returns together with Jason to the ship of the Argo. From the surviving sources it seems that Medea’s magical powers did not play any role in the earliest versions of the myth (there is no mention in the fragments of the Naupactia or in Herodorus of either her powers or her assisting Jason in his final trials). It is only in later accounts that Medea’s arts gain a

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, line 68

91

central role (as Gantz [1993] 358–9 notes), and they are firmly rooted in the poetic tradition of the Flavian period. VF grants an important role to Medea’s magic, as evidenced by, e.g., 6.439–48 (on which, see Fucecchi), but also in various episodes from the seventh book (on which, see Baldini-­Moscadi [2005] 135–62 and 259–68 and Davis [2020] 10–11) and from the eighth book (as noted on lines below, particularly 67–108 and 453–7). For the iconography related to the episode depicting the capture of the Fleece on account of Medea’s magic (one of the most frequently depicted scenes in ancient art), see LIMC 5.2, s.v. Iason 37–47 and LIMC 6.1, s.v. Medeia; Vojatzi (1982) 91–5; Kepetzis (1997) 34–5; Simon (1998) 27. The representations on vases from the Italic region date from the end of the fifth century through the entire fourth century bce. The episode is also depicted on sarcophagi: the standard iconography of these scenes closely follows AR’s account (cf. LIMC 5.2, s.v. Iason 49, 52; Gaggadis-­Robin [1994] 82–94; Simon [1998] 45–6). Medea uses magic tools such as the cup, the small box, and a plant twig, on which see Gaggadis-­Robin (2000). Though absent in the literary sources, Jason’s fight against the dragon (and particularly scenes of the dragon swallowing Jason) is well attested in iconography, starting from the beginning of the fifth century. There is an Attic red-­figure cup (found at Cerveteri and currently kept at the Musei Vaticani) painted by Douris and dated roughly between 490 and 470 bce, which depicts half of the body of a young man, whom an inscription identifies as Jason, protruding from the jaws of the monster, while Athena looks on; see LIMC 5.1 s.v. Iason 32 with related bibliography. Other pieces of iconographical evidence for the same motif can be found in Vojatzi (1982) 87–9; LIMC 5.1, s.v. Iason 30–5; Gaggadis-­Robin (1994) 88–9 n. 20; and Moreau (1994) 31–5. 68–74  Medea invokes Somnus. AR 4.145–8 describes the scene in which Medea puts the dragon to sleep in the third person. The model for an invocation directed towards Sleep dates back to Hom. Il. 14.233–41 (Διὸς ἀπάτη), which VF also uses in the sixth book in the deception against Medea. Other evocations of Sleep appear in Soph. Phil. 827–32; Eur. Or. 211–12; Nonn. Dion. 31.143, 158–65; Arg. Orph. 1001–19; Ov. Met. 11.623–9; Sen. Herc. F. 1066–81; Stat. Silv. 5.4, and Theb. 10.126–31. For an overview (especially for Greek literature), see Wöhrle (1995). The story of Palinurus in Virg. A. 5.838–61 also greatly influences this scene, particularly lines 68–91. In this invocation to Sleep the tone is that of a prayer (on which see Norden [1913] 143–63). Stretching her hands and directing her gaze towards the stars, Medea establishes herself as a medium between sky and earth so that she can invoke all the heavenly, cosmic, chthonic, and natural powers (as Tupet [1976] 406–7 notes for Ovid’s Medea). VF assembles his text with a series of suggestive echoes and references: Colchis of line 68 (the poet is speaking) is taken up by Colchis in line 70 (Medea apostrophizes herself). Somne pater (the poet is speaking) of line 70 is immediately echoed at the beginning of Medea’s invocation with Somne omnipotens, te, which thus

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

92

Commentary, line 68

gains emphasis immediately due to the anaphora of Somne. VF underscores words such as manus (68), connected to pede (69) to show how tense Medea is, from her hands, which she stretches towards the sky, down to her feet, which she uses to set the rhythm for her invocation. This tension, from pede up to astris, refers to the following te . . . ab omni | orbe voco (70–1). Furthermore, if one accepts the emendation vocemque at line 68, there would be a reference to voco of line 71. Medea’s prayer is, therefore, universal in scope, and VF continues his double allusion to the celestial dragon and the one in Colchis, presenting a Medea capable of exercising power over both. omnipotens (connected to the following ab omni through VF’s play with references) deserves particular attention: it is an epithet for Somnus, but it could also refer to Colchis. This invocation of Sleep is also a universal evocation of Medea’s powers, as confirmed by the strain in Medea’s body and her words, as she declares that by now she has often been able (with the help of Sleep’s horn) to move all natural ­elements, from the sea (freta) to the sky (nubila) and everything between them (fulminaque et toto quicquid micat aethere). In order to support the scene’s emphasis on universality, note that in line 70, -omn- appears four times: Somne pater: Somne omnipotens te Colchis ab omni (and all this power must be paradoxically directed in . . . unum . . . draconem). In addition to its effects at the semantic level, the repetition of the cluster -omn- has a phonetic effect, creating the striking atmosphere that is well-­suited to the evocation of a supernatural entity with dark connotations (and this effect continues into the following line with unum . . . draconem). Note also that pater (line 70) echoes potens. The whole scene is similar to the one depicting the precatio in Ov. Met. 7.192–219, but we can also detect Seneca’s influence (on these passages, see Tupet [1976] 406–7 and Baldini-­Moscadi [2005] 116–18 and 251–2). Influencing the course of the stars is an element of the repertory for sorceresses (consider in particular the deductio lunae, on which see Tupet [1976] 92–103; Lunais [1979] 222–5; Edmonds [2019], especially 19–32), and Seneca had already made Medea’s power even more striking by portraying her as able to compel the constellations that depict snakes to come down to earth and give her their poisons (Sen. Med. 692–704 with Boyle ad loc.). VF takes up this image and adapts it to the different phases of this episode. 68 iamque: Mehmel (1934) 13–16 characterizes VF’s style as a ‘iam-Stil’, in light of the frequency with which the poet moves from one scene to another (or from one image to another), signalling the change only with iam or ecce, which grants a sense of immediacy and liveliness to the scene, as it does here. As Zissos (2008) xxxii–xxxiv notes, this style sometimes disturbs the consistency of the poet’s narration, highlighting a clear difference between VF and AR’s narrative techniques. manus . . . lumenque intenderat: While stretching one’s hands towards the sky is a common gesture used in prayers (particularly for prayers addressed to

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, line 69

93

celestial deities; see, e.g., 1.80: tendensque pias ad sidera palmas, with Zissos ad loc., who refers to Headlam [1902] 52–3), there are various explanations adduced to defend the transmitted reading crinem. Burman observes that ‘crinem intelligo de rotatione capitis, quae sparsis capillis a vaticinantibus fieri solebant’; Weichert follows him, comparing 1.208–9: vittamque comamque per auras | surgentem laurusque rotat (Mopsus), but (as Strand [1972] 127 observes) VF is not discussing a vaticinatio, and crinem is poorly suited to the verb intenderat (Spaltenstein proposes that we instead think that Medea raises her hair as though for an offering, as Aquites does in 6.304). There could perhaps be a distant echo of Ov. Met. 7.188–90: bracchia tendens | ter . . . crinem | inroravit in the word crinem. Heinsius’s reading of lumen, adopted by Liberman (who refers to Kenney on Ov. Her. 16.37 for the use of the singular) is an appealing conjecture (more so than vocem, which does appear with intendere at line 362 and at Virg. A. 7.513–14: cornuque recurvo | Tartaream intendit vocem, or the reading vultum put forward by Ehlers). lumen (in support of which Reuss re­com­mends the intratextual reference to 3.571–2: nec longius acrem | intendes aciem) is also interesting for its implications regarding the lumina of line 60, nor should we neglect the vimen proposed by Koestlin (who compares 8.84 and Stat. Theb. 2.30–1: ni deus horrentem Lethaeo vimine mulcens | ferrea tergemino domuisset lumina somno), a reading accepted by Langen and Soubiran (the latter also compares the juniper branch that Medea uses in AR 4.156–9); in this case, one also thinks of the famous golden branch from Virg. A. 6.137: aureus et foliis et lento vimine ramus. astris: Cf. Palinurus at Virg. A. 5.838–61, where sleep comes down aetheriis . . . ab astris (838) with astris closing the line. Addressing a prayer to the sky is common for sorceresses, and Medea is also addressing the Dragon constellation here. 69 carmina: carmen (like cantus and ἐπῳδαί) is a typical term for referring to magical rituals and incantations (TLL iii.464.49–465.40); see Pease on Virg. A. 4.487. The power of Medea’s vox is both a fundamental and a characteristic trait of a sorceress; cf. Hor. Epod. 5.45–6: quae sidera excantata voce Thessala | lunamque caelo deripit and 17.6: Canidia, parce vocibus tandem sacris; Luc. 6.527–8: omne nefas superi prima iam voce precantis | concedunt and 6.685–7: tum vox Lethaeos cunctis pollentior herbis | excantare deos confundit murmura primum | dissona et humanae multum discordia linguae. On the vox magica and related phrases, see Baldini-­Moscadi (2005) 165–74. barbarico fundens pede: Wagner and Langen (followed by Liberman and Mozley) understand pede as ‘rhythm, modulation’, on which see OLD s.v. 11c (with Tib. 2.1.52: cantavit certo rustica verba pede). Spaltenstein prefers to read pede in its literal meaning, seeing in barbarico . . . pede an ellipsis and a metaphor (‘en dansant à la manière barbare’). More here than elsewhere, the term barbarico casts a sinister light on this sorceress, whose rhythm is barbarus not

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

94

Commentary, lines 70–1

only because it is foreign (and certainly this connotation is strong in the eyes of an astounded Jason), but also because it is mysterious to those who have not been initiated in the magical arts. Medea is preparing to give a demonstration of her monstrous powers, while the reader already knows the tragic consequences they will bring about, and the poet seems to be distancing himself from them (as foreshadowed by Jason at line 67 with virginis horror). The iunctura of pes with barbaricus appears only here, but it is perhaps inspired by the equally unique barbaro pede of Hor. Carm. 3.25.11. On the collocation fundere carmina or vocem see Ov. Met. 7.248: Medea verba simul fudit and Ps-­Sen. Her. O. 1080: cum . . . Orpheus carmina funderet. Compare also Stat. Silv. 2.5.34–5: iuvat inlaudabile carmen | fundere and Sil. 10.230: carmina pulsata fundentem barbara caetra. 70–1  Somne pater: ‘Somne omnipotens, te Colchis ab omni | orbe voco: The poet moves from third-­person to first-­person narration, repeating the vocative Somne in the process. Anaphora is typical in hymns (see Norden [1913] 149–50). The source seems to be Ov. Met. 11.623: Somne, quies rerum, placidissime Somne, deorum, but VF exaggerates both the power of Somnus and the repetition ­typically found in magical formulas by repeating the adjective omnis in Somne . . . Somne omnipotens and in omni. Somnus is identified as pater in the same Ovidian passage (Met. 11.633: at pater e populo natorum mille suorum), but VF also uses this epithet for other divinities (Bacchus at 2.256 and Tartarus at 4.258), whereas pater omnipotens frequently describes Jupiter (2.117 and 3.249; Virg. G. 2.325; A. 1.60 and passim). Somne omnipotens also echoes θεῶν ὕπατον in AR 4.146, but the original source is Hom. Il. 14.233: Ὕπνε, ἄναξ πάντων τε θεῶν πάντων τ’ ἀνθρώπων; see also Arg. Orph. 1002. In Latin, pater as an epithet for divinities appears as early as in Ennius (Atham. 42.1 Goldberg/Manuwald). If one accepts the conjecture (Somnus) pax o rerum, instead of the transmitted pater o rerum in Sen. Her. F. 1072 (on which see Billerbeck ad loc.), then the epithets pater and omnipotens are applied to Somnus only here in all of Latin literature (but cf. Ilias 133: cum pater omnipotens Somnum vocat atque ita fatur). Critics have interpreted the phrase ab omni | orbe in slightly different ways, as it can be understood with the distributive meaning ‘from every part of the world’ (Caussin, Mozley, Liberman, and Dräger) or with the sense of totus for omnis, ‘from all over the earth’ (Carelli, Caviglia, Soubiran, and Pellucchi). The borrowing from Luc. 8.624–5: ob omni | orbe (in the same metrical position) is clear. 71  unum iubeo nunc ire draconem: At Sen. Med. 472 Medea reminds Jason of how she forced the dragon to close its eyes in sleep for the first time: somnoque iussum lumina ignoto dare. ire draconem recalls sopire draconem (with the same clausula) of Ov. Met. 7.149 and also Her. 12.171: quae me non possum, potui sopire draconem, in which Ovid plays with the different meanings of the verb sopire (to put the dragon to sleep, but also to give relief to her love pangs, as Heinze

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 72–4

95

[1997] 197 notes). Medea already expressed a desire to use magical sleep as a remedy for the anguish caused by love at 7.245–7, and perhaps VF is  again employing the Ovidian Heroides by changing unum . . . virum (Her. 12.166) into unum . . . draconem. In VF, the word draco always appears in a clausula (as it also does in the Aeneid). 72–4  References to exerting magical power over nature are widely attested in literature (see, e.g., Moreau [2003]), and VF employs them at 6.152–4, regarding the Centores and the Choatrae, and at 6.439–45, regarding Medea. freta . . . nubila . . .  | fulminaque refers to control over storms, for which see TLL viii.387.68 and the notes of Fucecchi and Spaltenstein on 6.441 and Baldini-­ Moscadi (2005) 28–9. See also Sen. Med. 755 and Ps-­Sen. Herc. O. 452–3 for control over the sea; see Luc. 6.520 and Ps-­Sen. Herc. O. 470 for fulmina. 72 cornu: As many critics have noted, VF is the first to mention Somnus’ horn, and the concept is taken up by Stat. Theb. 2.144; 5.199; 6.27; 10.111; and Sil. 10.352. See also Serv. auct. ad Virg. A. 1.692: inrigat] infundit: proprie quia somnus sic pingitur quasi cornu infundat and Serv. ad Virg. A. 6.893: Somnum novimus cum cornu pingi. Liberman mentions West (1997) 234–5, who analyses different expressions concerning sleep falling upon or being poured over someone. In iconography, there are numerous attestations of Somnus wielding a horn (with drugs causing sleep or dreams): see Roscher 2.2.2847.64 and especially LIMC 5.1, s.v. Hypnos/Somnus 9–10; 32–4; 44–58; 66–83; 127 (appearing on a funerary relief dated to 65–8 ce); 129–32; and 152. See also Nordera (1969) 30 n. 64 for other poetic descriptions of sleep (usually the god’s wings). 73 fulminaque: All modern editors, along with Carrion, Reg and the editio princeps, print fulmina instead of the transmitted flumina. fulmina seems more persuasive on the whole, but flumina should not be ruled out, particularly in light of AR 3.532: καὶ ποταμούς ἵστησιν ἄφαρ κελαδεινὰ ῥέοντας and Virg. A. 4.489: sistere aquam fluviis et vertere sidera retro. The anaphora quae . . . quae (72) and especially that of sed nunc | nunc age (73–4) (according to Pellucchi [2012] 142, the latter is a gemin­ation), together with the enjambment and the ictus on nunc, work to build greater emphasis. et toto quicquid micat aethere: This refers to the sorceress’s mastery over the stars, already evoked at 6.441: sidera fixa pavent et avi stupet orbita Solis and 7.499: tuo redeuntia sidera nutu. There are numerous attestations of this power in literature, such as, e.g., AR 3.533: ἄστρα τε καὶ μήνης ἱεράς ἐπέδησε κελεύθους; Tib. 1.2.43–56; Prop. 1.1.19; Virg. Ecl. 8.69; A. 4.489 (with Pease ad loc.); Ov. Am. 2.1.24; Met. 7.199–209; Sen. Med. 675; Luc. 6.461–506; Sil. 8.500; see Baldini-­ Moscadi (2005) 36–7 (particularly n. 65). 74  maior ades: Langen rightly refers to 7.352–4, the passage in which Medea maiora precatur | carmina, maiores Hecaten immittere vires | nunc sibi. Liberman cites as a parallel Sen. Her. F. 312–13: aderit profecto, qualis ex omni solet | labore,

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

96

Commentary, line 75

maior, but also see Sen. Med. 674–5: maius his, maius parat | Medea monstrum. The search for ever greater power is characteristic of magical invocations (see Baldini-­Moscadi [2005] 118–19), even if (as Hardie* notes) maior sounds almost paradoxical: how could Sleep do a deed greater than what he already has, that is, controlling the seas, the clouds, and the stars? Medea is asking him to perform a completely unusual deed. fratrique simillime Leto: Traditionally, Sleep is similar to Death, and the two are often said to be brothers, as early as in Homer (at Il. 16.682, they are even twins). VF draws inspiration from Il. 14.231: ἔνθ’ Ὕπνῳ ξύμβλητο κασιγνήτῳ Θανάτοιο. There are also parallels in Virg. A. 6.278: consanguineus Leti Sopor and 522: alta quies placidaeque simillima morti, and Sen. Her. F. 1069: (Somne) frater durae languide Mortis. Perhaps Statius is thinking of VF when he describes the putting to sleep of the men on Lemnos at Theb. 5.197–9: cum consanguinei mixtus caligine Leti | rore madens Stygio . . . | Somnus et implacido fundit gravia otia cornu. The end of Medea’s invocation is powerful, with a climax in the final line that begins from the repeated nunc, is strengthened by the imperative age, moves from the comparative maior to the superlative simillime, and ends at last with the striking Leto. 75–8  Medea addresses the dragon. Medea now speaks directly to the dragon in the second person, as she had done with Somnus, but she does so with coaxing and deceptive words. This direct apostrophe to the dragon does not appear in other sources. VF skilfully composes lines 76–8 and packs them with different levels of meaning. On the surface, Medea speaks to the dragon, suggesting that he lower his gaze and relax his watch over the Fleece. She ironically tells him that he need not fear any trick, but it will be precisely her words that prove deceptive (doubly ironic, in fact, given that the same fate will befall Medea when Jason betrays her trust). VF’s model is Virg. A. 5.845–6, in which Somnus, taking the shape of Phorbas, advises Palinurus to rest while he himself takes the helmsman’s place (pone caput fessosque oculos furare labori | ipse ego paulisper pro te tua munera inibo). On a second level of meaning, one can again see an allusion to the event concerning the Hesperides. Indeed, the words Medea directs towards the dragon could be fitted to the conversation between Hercules and Atlas. Different sources tell this story differently, but according to Ps-­ Apollod. 2.5.11 (who was inspired by Pherecydes) Heracles offers to hold up the heavenly vault himself, in order to allow Atlas to go and retrieve the golden apples. Once he returned, Atlas declared that he would like to bring the apples to Eurystheus himself. Heracles then asks him to take back the heavenly vault for only a moment, so that Heracles can adjust the cushion on his head. Atlas agrees to do so, but Heracles, deceiving him, escapes with the golden apples. In addition to general similarities, in lines 76–8, some words seem to allude to particular moments from this episode: just like the dragon, Atlas is also ­burdened by cura (76) and longus labor (78); (ad)stante (77) may indicate the

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, line 75

97

firmness of the dragon’s position, as that of Atlas or Heracles must have been while they were holding up the sky (cf. 5.409: stat caelifer Atlans and Luc. 9.655–6: illa sub Hesperiis stantem Titana columnis | in cautes Atlanta dedit); dolus is present in both stories (and in both cases it is a double deceit: Atlas tries to trick Heracles, but Heracles tricks Atlas; Medea tricks the dragon, while Jason tricks Medea). Furthermore, when Medea judges that now is the time for the dragon to lower his gaze (tempus ab hac. . . deflectere cura), she seems to be reprising the Ovidian passage (Met. 4.644–5), in which Themis prophesies to Atlas that one day his tree will be robbed of its gold: tempus, Atla, veniet, tua quo spoliabitur auro | arbor. Line 91 (Hesperium veniens Alpheos in orbem), which adapts Ov. Met. 4.628: Hesperio, regnis Atlantis, in orbe, appears to confirm that VF has this passage in mind. In any case, Virgil stands in the background, as he often does in the poem: in addition to the obvious verbal echoes from A. 5.845–6, consider the point of contact with A. 4.480–6 (the Numidian sorceress, guardian of the temple of the Hesperides, who gives food to the dragon and keeps watch over the branches of the sacred tree, pouring out liquid honey and sleep-­inducing poppy, comes from the furthest land of the Ethiopians, where tallest Atlas holds up the starry sky upon his shoulders). The allusions to the myth of the Hesperides (see also lines 90–1) also bring to mind the deification of Hercules (on which see Castelletti [2012b] and [2014b]). 75  As Lucan attests (6.685–94), in the second part of her magical ritual, the witch Erichtho speaks in unclear, non-­human murmura, which belong to the language of wizards and their incantations. Lucan does not restrict himself to leaving Erichtho’s voice to the imagination, but rather he seeks to define it and its extraordinary characteristics: countless sounds are blended in this one voice, among which there are the screeches and howls of beasts and the hissing of serpents (quod strident ululantque ferae, quod sibilat anguis). VF’s te quoque, Phrixeae pecudis fidissime custos seems to evoke quod sibilat anguis in particular. Regardless of the mere sound effect dictated by literary need, VF, like Lucan, cannot have been unfamiliar with this kind of magical language, given his deep knowledge of priestly rituals. In magic papyri there are often rules concerning the sounds that must be pronounced in formulas and invocations to the deity, sounds that consist of hisses, whistles, smacking of the lips, the cries of the sparrowhawk, and bellowing. Moreover, towards the end (of what remains) of the eighth book, Medea, just depicted as a Bacchant, will find herself in the solitude of night (the ideal scenario for the sorceress), giving herself over to mournful lamentations with imitations of the sounds of nature, beginning with the voices of animals (cf. 8.446–57). For a detailed commentary and exact ­references, see Baldini-­Moscadi (2005) 56–7, 146–7, and 149–62 (on the links between Lucan and VF). On the story of Phrixus (the son of Athamas and Nephele, who, alongside his sister Helle, was saved from death by the golden ram that Zeus sent), see 1.277–293 with Zissos ad loc.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

98

Commentary, lines 75–6

75  te quoque, Phrixeae pecudis: For te/tu quoque and the vocative, see Zissos on 1.380 and Harrison on Virg. A. 10.139. See also n. 52 in Liberman 2.355 on the possibility that te quoque means et tu, as well as Pellucchi (2012) 144. Spaltenstein expresses confusion concerning the absolute usage of pecudis, while in 5.490–1 there is talk of auratae pecudis . . . | exuvias, but perhaps VF is thinking of Germ. Arat. 4.78 Gain: Phrixeae rutilo pecudis radiaverit astro (well-­suited to a cosmic reading of this passage, given that it describes the constellation of Aries). See also the Ovidian parallel on custos (Argus, the guardian of Io, treated as a shepherd), which could justify the choice of pecudis. Aside from simply vellus (1.167 and passim) and vellera (1.61 and passim), other terms that VF uses to describe the Golden Fleece include vellera pecoris Nephelaei (1.56), vellus Graium (1.519), and dives pellis (5.203). At 7.54 Aeetes accuses the Argonauts: scilicet Aeoliae pecudis poteretur ut auro. At 6.18–19 both vellera and exuvias pecudis sacrae are mentioned. At 5.189 pecus is employed to refer to the ram while it still lives (specifically, as depicted on Helle’s tomb). fidissime custos: fides is one of the central themes of Medea’s relationship with Jason, who is standing next to her, and it is precisely the dragon’s fides that will be betrayed by Medea (who ironically denies that there is any deceit in line 77). fidissime appears only three times in VF, and all instances occur in the eighth book and in the same metrical position. At 419–20 Medea addresses Jason, asking him for mercy and demanding that he honour his spoken promises (merear, fidissime coniunx | nil equidem), whereas at 197 it is Jason who addresses the helmsman Erginus in this way (et te, fidissime rector). Note that the single other Valerian appearance of the superlative form of fidus is again in relation to Erginus, since the hand capable of steering the ship must be fidissima (cf. 5.63–4: maesti omnes dubiique, ratem fidissima cuius | dextra regat). In this passage VF perhaps thinks of the fidissima custos, an Ovidian phrase (Met. 1.562 and Fast. 5.45), taken up at Stat. Theb. 1.530 (always in a clausula). Virgil (A. 9.648) identifies Butes as fidusque ad limina custos. custos is used both to refer to the dragon from Colchis (7.517: vellere custos; Ov. Met. 7.151: horrendus custos) and to the one guarding the golden apples (Man. 5.16: Hesperidumque vigil custos), but the Numidian sorceress, too, is the Hesperidum templi custos (Virg. A. 4.484). Hardie* suggests an interesting parallel with Ov. Met. 1.678, in which custos is applied to Argus, who, just like the dragon in Colchis, always has his eyes open. Moreover, Argus plays the role of a herdsman (Io has been transformed into a cow), which might make one think of a connection with the rationalist reading of the myth of the Hesperides (according to which a shepherd named Dracon was guarding sheep, not apples; cf. Diod. Sic. 4.27–8). 76  tempus . . . oculos . . . deflectere: For the use of tempus with the infinitive, understood as ‘the opportune moment to’, see OLD s.v. 8c. VF echoes Ov. Met. 4.644: tempus, Atla, veniet . . . . See also tempus est | aliquid movere fraude vulgari altius at Sen. Med. 692–3. According to most traditions Medea pours sleep

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 77–82

99

right onto the dragon’s eyes. The sorceress’s words are simultaneously an invitation and a dec­lar­ation of intent. VF is the only poet to use the collocation deflectere oculos. For similar expressions, cf. deflectere lumina (Ov. Met. 7.789), flectere lumina (Virg. A. 4.369), and see Pellucchi (2012) 145. 77  quem metuis me adstante: We can find an erased me stante in a fragment of the Codex Carrionis containing lines 8.46–105, whereas the codices record meis tande. The majority of editors accept Heinsius’s conjecture me adstante, but Liberman refuses to adopt it because of a metrical objection (it would be the only case of a monosyllabic word elided in the second foot), citing as a parallel for me stante Cic. Orat. 213. Although I acknowledge the uncertainty (not so much due to met­ric­al rarity, which does not seem to constitute a con­ vin­cing argument, but because of the parallels at 5.409 and Luc. 9.655–6: stantem . . . Atlanta), I prefer adstante, also on account of the parallel of 7.166: illum etiam totis adstantem noctibus anguem. 78  longum . . . pone laborem: Note the influence of the passage depicting the putting to sleep of Palinurus at Virg. A. 5.845: pone caput, fessosque oculos furare labori, but also of Virg. G. 1.293: interea longum cantu solata laborem and A. 3.160. 79–91  The dragon falls asleep. In this scene depicting the putting to sleep of the dragon, we can identify two phases: in the first (79–82) the dragon tries to resist Medea’s incantations; in the second (83–91), the sorceress increases their power, forcing the dragon to yield. Critics have noted that in the primary passages that inspire VF (AR 4.149–61 and Virg. A. 5.838–61), we also see a moment of resistance at first (AR 4.153–5; Virg. A. 5.847–53), followed by sleep triumphing over his target (the dragon and Palinurus, respectively). In addition to following the pattern found in the literary models (to which we can add Ov. Met. 7.149–59), the action described in this scene also corresponds to a well-­ documented practice in snake-­charming rites, one attested, e.g., not only among ancient peoples (the Marsi, the Marmaridae, the Garamantes, the Psylli, and the Ophiogeni), but also among modern ones; for specific references and descriptions of the practices, see primarily Tupet (1976) 187–95 (particularly 194–5 for AR and VF) and Ogden (2013) 209–14. VF emphasizes two moments of this event, in which Medea first addresses the heavenly powers and then the underworldly ones, expanding on AR 4.145–8 (Medea invokes sleep and also calls upon Hecate). 79–82  The constancy of the dragon’s guard is mentioned in 7.166–8, 525–8. Emphasis on the size, the savagery, and the tenacity of the dragon appears, e.g., at Eur. Med. 480–2; Pind. Pyth. 4.244–6; AR 2.404–7, 1208–9; 4.127–44; Ov. Her. 12.101–2; Met. 7.36; Man. 3.11; Diod. Sic. 4.47. Note the contrast between the ‘sleep-­causing’ words at the end of lines, quieti, soporis, somnos (a striking climax that follows the natural progression of the process when one falls asleep:

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

100

Commentary, lines 79–82

tranquillity, drowsiness, sleep) and the verbs at the beginning of lines, sustinet and horruit, in enjambment, which denote the dragon’s resistance. Phonetically, permissae recalls quamvis, but also percussus, which in turn is related etymologically to excussit. In these two final verbs VF moves from a passive action (the dragon is struck by sleep) to an active one (the dragon reacts and drives sleep away), by using two compounds of the verb quatio (cf. the repetition requiro . . . | . . . quaesisse in lines 39–40), arranged in the same met­ric­al position. The clear alliteration on the sound s, especially in lines 81 and 82, containing six words with a double s (counting dulces excussit), seems to reproduce the dragon’s hissing sound as it struggles and resists, although elsewhere, on the model of Virg. A. 2.9: suadente . . . sidera somnos, VF accompanies the idea of sleep with a hissing sound effect (3.33: spargebat sidera somnos; 4.389: dulcesque sequentia somnos; 7.169: in somnos . . . solvat, with Perutelli ad loc.). The variation of verbal tenses conveys an expression of distinct moments within the action: the two narrative infinitives (discedere and dare) denote the unending duration of the dragon’s intention not to yield, the present sustinet expresses the total ­duration of his act of resistance, while the perfects horruit and excussit denote two precise actions. 79  Aeolio discedere . . . auro: At 7.525–8, the dragon wrapped himself around the Fleece, which is on the tree. Aeolius refers to Phrixus’ stock, descended from Aeolus. The Fleece is identified by the same adjective at 7.54 and 7.517 (Aeolio . . . vellere); see also Mart. 8.28.20 (Aeolium pecus) and 8.51.9. In VF 5.632 it is described as Phrixeum metallum. Spaltenstein interprets discedere as a historical infinitive, but I prefer to take it with sustinet, as do most scholars. 80  dare permissae . . . ora quieti: Note again the echo of Virg. A. 5.844: datur hora quieti. On the Valerian reworking of this debated passage of Virgil’s, see Pellucchi (2012) 147. 81  primi percussus nube soporis: primus could be understood as an adjective (indicating the first sign of sleep) or (as Spaltenstein takes it on the basis of 1.1) in an adverbial sense. Among the passages Langen cites for percussus nube soporis (Claud. Stil. 1.309; De rapt. Pros. 1.81) the most relevant seem to be Stat. Ach. 1.646: discussa nube soporis (probably reminiscent of Valerius’ passage, as is attested by the same clausula) and Theb. 10.281–2: sopor supremaque nubes | obruerat, on account of the association of nubes with death. For percussus, Liberman refers to Arg. Orph. 542: γλυκερῷ βεβολημένος ὕπνῳ. Concerning the rather unusual collocation of percussus with nube, Hardie* suggests that we read it as permulsus nube. 82 horruit: For the association of this word with a snake, compare Ov. Her. 12.101: squamis crepitantibus horrens (the same dragon), and Virg. A. 11.754: serpens . . . arrectis . . . horret squamis. See also VF 7.527: omnis spiris exhorruit arbor (with Perutelli ad loc.) for the extension of pitiable characteristics to

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, line 83

101

nature, involving the same tree. Liberman also compares Sen. Her. F. 689–90: horrent opaca fronde nigrantes comae | taxo imminente, quam tenet segnis Sopor. dulces excussit ab arbore somnos: The construction excutere ab arbore does not appear anywhere else in literature, but I do not think that it is necessary to emend arbore into corpore or pectore (as Heinsius proposes), since this image, in which the dragon makes his drowsiness ‘fall’ from the tree as though it were ripe fruit, appears successful. Furthermore, consider that trees are the natural location for Sleep (Liberman rightly references Hom. Il. 14.286–9, Virg. A. 6.283–4, and Sen. Her. F. 689–90). As Weichert observes, excussit ab arbore is equivalent to saying excussit corpore, given that the serpent wraps itself completely around the tree. Liberman also mentions Ov. Met. 11.620–1: summaque percutiens nutanti pectora mento | excussit (Somnus) tandem sibi se. 83–7  Medea increases the intensity of her spell, relying upon the magic of the underworldly powers. AR 4.144–8 says that, after she invoked sleep, Medea called upon Hecate (the terrible queen of the night) to allow her to accomplish the deed. Next, after dipping a freshly cut juniper branch into a potion, she sprinkles her concoction over the dragon’s eyes and speaks the magical formulas, putting the dragon to sleep. VF does not mention Hecate, but he evokes her indirect presence by expanding on Medea’s use of the underworldly powers (she addresses the infernal deities, after addressing the celestial ones, at 7.311–15 and at Sen. Med. 8–18). The debt that VF owes also to Virg. A. 5.854–6 is clear: ecce deus ramum Lethaeo rore madentem | vique soporatum Stygia super utraque quassat | tempora cunctantique natantia lumina solvit. See Nordera (1969) 31–4 and (2016) 55–7 for astute observations on the Valerian reworking of this Virgilian passage. In this sequence, VF takes up the same syntactic structures (and also the same semantic ones) from the preceding section (lines 79–82): spumare and quassare match discedere and dare. perstat matches sustinet (and both govern two infinitives), and obruit matches horruit (all with phonetic similarities, too); quassare, the frequentative of quatio, matches (in the same metrical position) the previous compound words percussus and excussit. Furthermore, at the end of the lines, we find venenis, rami, and cantu, that is, the instruments with which Medea calls forth quieti, soporis, and somnos, which in turn are conceptual echoes of fatigat in line 86. 83  Tartareis . . . spumare venenis: Tartareus should be taken with its generic meaning of ‘underworldly’, as at 7.632: Tartareo . . . veneno (in the same metrical position). For the intransitive use of spumare, Liberman references Virg. A. 3.534: salsa spumant aspargine cautes and Luc. 6.28: spumat . . . pontus, and he also cites three other examples (including Claud. De rapt. Pros. 1.281: aegra soporatis spumant oblivia linguis) for a transitive use with the same meaning (‘to be covered by foam’ or ‘to emit foam’), highlighting VF’s boldness in employing this usage; here spumare describes Medea, while it is usually employed to describe the poison. Foam from the moon is a common feature in

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

102

Commentary, lines 84–5

the deductio lunae (on which see Tupet [1976] 93–4 and Baldini-­Moscadi [2005] 255), but here we see Medea foaming with infernal poisons, an image that picks up and exaggerates volvit spumanti carmina lingua | murmure continuo in Luc. 9.927–8 (concerning the Psylli, a people immune to the poisons of snakes and equipped with nearly magical powers). Cf. also VF 6.447: Atracio lunam spumare veneno. Also see the other passages cited by Nordera (1969) 31, according to whom VF synthesizes the traditional image of seers who are controlled by divine inspiration with that of Medea’s enchantment over the moon. The noun venenum (just like the Greek φάρμακον) can also mean ‘incantation’ or ‘magic­al formula’, in addition to poison (see Liberman 2.356 and Pharr [1932] 272–4). 84  cunctaque Lethaei quassare silentia rami: Medea, as in AR, waves a small branch that has been dipped in the waters of Lethe (in AR it is a juniper branch that was dipped in her concoction). As was long ago noted by critics, this image, although not immediately understandable, can be explained in light of Virg. A. 5.854–6: ramum Lethaeo rore madentem | . . . quassat . . . and AR 4.156–9. Wagner interprets the meaning as ‘omnem vim soporiferam, quae Lethaeo ramo inest’. silentia recalls the sleep-­inducing power of Lethe (an example of using the cause for its effect). In Virg. A. 6.705, the areas surrounding Lethe are tranquil (Lethaeumque domos placidas qui praenatat amnem), and Lethe itself is the river of forgetfulness (A. 6.749–51 and G. 1.78: Lethaeo perfusa papavera somno). There are also echoes of the passage in Sil. 10.354–6: quatit inde soporas | devexo capiti pennas oculisque quietem | inrorat, tangens Lethea tempora virga. On the collocation silentia rami (modelled on the traditional phrases silentia noctis in Lucr. 4.460 and Ov. Met. 7.184, and on silentia somni at Ov. Fast. 4.549), see the note in Nordera (1969) 32 and (2016) 56: ‘By using the transposition (silentia rami for ramum . . . soporatum), Valerius completely dissolves the still-­concrete and natural elements of the Virgilian description in the clash between the concreteness of the verb (quassare) and the extreme inconsistency of the substantive (silentia). The result is an accentuation of the magical and unreal character of the scene.’ Garson (1970) 184 sees a possible link between the repetition of the same metrical scheme in lines 84–7 and the repetitiveness of Medea’s incantations. In light of A. 5.854–6 and AR 4.156–8, Liberman proposes tincta in place of the transmitted cuncta, but the emendation, although clever, does not seem entirely necessary to me. 85  adverso luctantia lumina cantu: In addition to the alliterations that link luctantia to lumina and also to cantu, one may note how Medea’s magical formula (adverso . . . cantu) visually seizes the eyes of the struggling dragon. As already observed, cunctantique natantia lumina solvit of Virg. A. 5.854–6 stands in the background. A comparable expression also appears in Sil. 7.204: donec composuit luctantia lumina somnus, on which see n. 58 in Liberman 2.357. ­luctantia lumina denotes the dragon’s eyes, on which Medea’s incantation is

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 86–7

103

focused according to the tradition (see, e.g., AR 4.145: κατόμματον εἴσατο κούρη), but it could also be referring to the stars of the Dragon constellation. According to Nordera (1969) 33, VF summarizes and alters the concepts of cunctanti and natantia with a Virgilian term (luctantia, used to denote the difficult separation of the soul from the body at the moment of death, cf. Virg. A. 4.695) that shows the dragon’s active resistance and struggling (which is different from Palinurus’ passivity). Wagner comments that adverso cantu means ‘coram stans et canens’ (an interpretation also adopted by TLL i.866.4), but its proximity with luctantia could lead one to understand adverso with a sense of hostility and to see that the cantus with which Medea used to call to the dragon (as in 1.62: ex adytis cantu dapibusque vocabat) has now become hostile. 86 obruit: TLL ix/2.153.79 cites VF for obruere with the sense of opprimere, and the collocation obruit lumina is a variatio of the Virgilian solvit lumina, an expressive phrase. obruit used in reference to sleep appears only in post-­ Augustan poetry: Luc. 9.671–2: sopor aeternam tracturus morte quietem | obruit; Stat. Theb. 8.267: uno ratis obruta somno, 10.281–2: sopor supremaque nubes | obruerat; Silv. 5.3.224–5: dum lumina pulveris haustu | obruit. 86–7  omnem linguaque manuque fatigat | vim Stygiam: Medea employs all of her magic, both through her gestures (I do not understand manu in a restricted sense limited only to the hand waving the branch) and through her voice (by uttering the magical formulas). Nordera (1969) 34 discerns a Virgilian intertext, especially since the scenes appear in analogous contexts: Umbro, a priest of the Marsi and a snake charmer, at A. 7.754: spargere qui somnos cantuque manuque solebat. As Langen notes, fatigat vim Stygiam, ‘i.e. utitur ea usque ad fatigationem’; in fact, Medea must use the fullest extent of her underworldly power to prevail in putting the dragon to sleep. Stygiam (as in the case of A. 5.855) is to be understood in generic terms as ‘underworldly’ (as is Tartareis in line 83), even though the Styx can also be a poisonous liquid. VF also mentions the Stygian power, understood as magic, at 6.155: maximus hos inter Stygia venit arte Coastes. On the use of fatigo in VF, see also Korn on 4.69–70 (gemitu maestaque fatigat | voce Iovem), Perutelli on 7.311–12 (questu superos questuque fatigat | Tartara), and Nordera (1969) 34. 87  ardentes donec sopor occupet iras: According to Nordera (1969), this phrase is an expressive condensation with variatio of Virg. G. 4.190: fessosque sopor suus occupat artus and A. 2.381: (anguem) attollentem iras et caerula colla tumentem. Also compare A. 2.210: ardentesque oculos. In addition, ardentes recalls the astral shining of the Dragon constellation (cf. ardent ingentes oculi of Germ. Arat. 56 Gain). 88–91  The dragon finally yields and withdraws from the tree holding the Fleece, around which he had coiled himself. VF puts forth a vivid image (which does not appear in AR) describing the scene from the dragon’s highest point,

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

104

Commentary, lines 88–9

his altae . . . iubae, before moving from his head (the enjambment and the anaphora of iam make the reader feel the heaviness of the serpent’s caput, which is now forced to waver) to his huge neck (in addition to being ingens, VF visually represents the length of the dragon’s neck through inserting extra sua vellera between ingens and cervix). Lazzarini rightly compares the Virgilian image of the ash tree that farmers cut down with great effort (A. 2.629), which has as its model Talos’ collapse due to Medea’s magic (AR 4.1680–8) and Hercules’ collapse into sleep at Sen. Her. F. 1046–7. In light of the simile with the rivers (lines 90–1), we may also detect astro­nom­ic­al references: the Dragon constellation is usually described as a river flowing between the two Bears; the River constellation is most commonly identified with the Eridanus and the Nile. This astronomical subtext is useful for evoking Hercules’ deification, due to the labour involving the apples of the Hesperides (recalled by the words Hesperium . . . in orbem, 91). In this passage we have an excellent example of VF’s characteristic blending of several literary models. 88 iubae: Like crista (cf. note on line 61), iuba denotes the crest of various animals, including snakes; see TLL vii/2.571.4 (de cristis serpentium); Virg. A. 2.206–7: iubaeque | sanguineae; Rhet. Her. 4.62: iubatus draco; Stat. Theb. 5.572. For iubae cecidere, compare Stat. Silv. 2.5.14: tum cunctis cecidere iubae and Sil. 4.451: membra madent, cecidere iubae (the subjects are different, but the phrases appear in the same metrical position). For iuba in an astro­nom­ic­al context (often employed to indicate the manes of comets and various constellations), see Le Boeuffle (1987) 157–8. 88–9  nutatque coactum | iam caput: The image recalls Virg. A. 2.629: concusso vertice nutat and Sil. 6.234–5: ille super tumidis cervicibus altum | nutat utroque caput. Pellucchi (2012) 155–6 also compares Ov. Met. 11.620: summaque percutiens nutanti pectora mento. In light of the astronomical context, note that caput and cervix also refer to parts of the Dragon constellation: cf. Cic. Arat. fr. 9.1–5 and 10.1 Pellacani; Germ. Arat. 61 Gain. 89  itque ingens extra sua vellera: I follow Liberman’s emendation itque in place of the transmitted atque, as it provides an explicit verb of movement that matches the simile in the following lines (even if ellipses are not uncommon in VF). Heinsius proposed the reading ac vergens, but ingens . . . cervix seems justified in light of περιμήκεα . . . δειρήν at AR 4.127. VF has already used the phrase sua vellera at 7.526. The emphasis on the dragon’s relationship with the object of his care is also highlighted by the word suum at 7.167: qui nemus omne suum. Compare also the possessa dracone vellera at 1.60–1. Given that the dragon will be likened to Aeetes, the use of the possessive perhaps serves to emphasize this connection. 90–1  ‘Comparatio satis obscura et varia ratione explicata’, as noted as early as Langen, but more recent critics have also been unable to find a convincing ­explanation, proposing instead various interpretations linked to the length of the rivers or to their peculiarities (namely the flooding of the Po, the Nile Delta, and

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, line 90

105

the wanderings of the Alpheus). According to some, the dragon’s movement, as it relaxes its huge coils, would resemble the motions of rivers whose currents slow down considerably (see Summers [1894] 60 on the Alpheus and Langen ad loc.); Liberman 2.357–8 (‘comparaison obscure’) slightly reworks Langen’s explanations (the slowdown would be due to the force of the river’s collision with the sea rather than to its return to its streambed after the flooding; Burman understands the passage similarly), adding the parallel of Virg. A. 9.30–2: ceu septem surgens sedatis amnibus altus | per tacitum Ganges aut pingui flumine Nilus | cum refluit campis et iam se condidit alveo, which VF would have modified and adapted into a different context. According to Spaltenstein, the size and the length of these rivers would instead create the sense of similarity. Lazzarini and Pellucchi do not provide ­further clarification. As indicated, we must seek a solution in the astronomical context: in continuing the allusions to the Dragon constellation, VF adopts the Aratean trad­ition that compares the celestial dragon to a (stretch of a) river flowing between the two Bears: τὰς δὲ δι’ ἀμφοτέρας οἵη ποταμοῖο ἀπορρὼξ | εἰλεῖται, μέγα θαῦμα, Δράκων περὶ τ’ ἀμφὶ τ’ ἐαγώς, | μυρίος (Arat. Phaen. 45–7: the image is also adopted by Virg. G. 1.245; Sen. Thy. 870; Firm. Mat. 8.7; Cic. Arat. fr. 8.1–3 Pellacani; Germ. Arat. 48–50 Gain; Avien. Arat. Phaen. 138–41). The participle refluens, which adapts ἀπορρὼξ εἰλεῖται (rendered by Cicero as retorquens in Arat. fr. 8.2 Pellacani), seems to confirm that the simile is inspired by the dragon’s ascent to the heavens. The expression proiectus in septem with reference to the Nile’s seven arms is quite common in Latin literature (cf., e.g., Catull. 11.7–8; Virg. A. 6.800, as well as VF 4.718 for the Danube), but in this case it makes the reader think of the Bear constellation’s seven stars (septem stellae or Septentriones; see Le Boeuffle [1977] 87–91), towards which the Dragon constellation hurls itself, as VF asserts in 2.65: Serpens, septenosque implicat ignes (see Poortvliet ad loc.). VF therefore magnifies the Aratean simile by tripling it, perhaps following AR 4.127–35, where, right after the description of the dragon stretching its very long neck towards Jason and Medea, three rivers are mentioned (Lycus, Araxes, and Phasis); and a little later, AR likens the unravelling of the dragon’s coils and loops, caused by Medea’s incantation, to a wave flowing over the calm sea (AR 4.149–53). The astronomical context explains the choice to mention precisely three rivers (Po, Nile, and Alpheus): the Eridanus/Po and the Nile are trad­ition­ally the streams with which the River constellation is identified (see Allen [1963] 215–20; Le Boeuffle [1977] 139–40 and 203): cf. Germ. Arat. 617 Gain; Hyg. Astr. 2.32.1; Avien. Arat. Phaen. 1169 and 1315 (see also Ps-­Erat. Cat. 37 with Pàmias and Geus [2007] 186–7 and Santoni [2009] 138–9). Concerning the Alpheus, the main point is the allusion to the myth of the Hesperides, expressed through the phrase Hesperium . . . in orbem (see note on 90–1). In this regard, one should note that the only other passage in extant literature that mentions these three rivers together is Hes. Theog. 337–8: Τηθὺς δ’ Ὠκεανῷ ποταμοὺς τέκε δινήεντας | Νεῖλόν τ’ Ἀλφειον τε καὶ Ἠριδανὸν βαθυδίνην. Perhaps this is a coincidence, or perhaps VF wishes to draw the reader’s attention to a passage of the Theogony (the beginning of the catalogue of rivers born from Oceanus and Tethys) that occurs immediately after

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

106

Commentary, lines 90–1

Hesiod describes the serpent guarding the apples of the Hesperides (Hes. Theog. 333–5). 90 ceu: particularly used in poetry (it does not appear in prose before Seneca’s philosophical works), this particle is an archaism often introducing Virgil’s similes and is common in Flavian epic (appearing 28 times in VF, 61 in the Thebaid, and 76 in the Punica); see Perutelli on 7.301. Padus: the river Po, which VF mentions by this name at 1.527 and by the Greek Eridanus at 5.430. In addition to using the name Padus (A. 9.680), Virgil mentions the fluviorum rex Eridanus (G. 1.482). 90–1  septem proiectus in amnes | Nilus: For the Nile’s seven ostia, see, e.g., Catull. 11.7–8: quae septemgeminus colorat | aequora Nilus, Virg. A. 6.800: septemgemini turbant trepida ostia Nili (which VF echoes at 4. 718, but applies it to the Ister: septemgemini . . . Histri), and Man. 3.273–4: Nilus et erumpens imitatur sidera mundi | per septem fauces atque ora fugantia pontum (with Feraboli-­ Scarcia [2001] 269). For proiectus, compare Hyg. Fab. 14.1: duo flumina, Apidanus et Enipeus, separatim proiecta in unum convenient and Virg. A. 5.859: cumque gubernaclo liquidas proiecit in undas. 91  Hesperium veniens Alpheos in orbem: The Alpheus is the longest river in the Peloponnese and flows between Elis and Arcadia. Several legends tell of the river’s attempts to seduce Artemis and the nymphs (for references, see Roscher 1.1.255–8 s.v. Alpheios; LIMC 1.1 s.v. Alpheios). Alpheus pursues the nymph Arethusa to the island of Ortygia in the middle of the port at Syracuse. In a common version of the myth (Paus. 5.7.2; Ov. Met. 5.572–641), the nymph is transformed into a fountain in Ortygia, and the Alpheus mixes his waters with her. It was a popular belief that the Alpheus did not mix his waters with those of the Ionian Sea while making his journey from Greece to Sicily, but rather he only flowed back up to the surface in Arethusa’s spring. Hesperium . . . in orbem therefore refers to the western land Hesperia or Italy (see, e.g., Virg. A. 2.781 and EV 2.390–1 s.v. Alpheios). VF plays with the word Hesperium in order to allude to Hercules’ labour involving the Hesperides. The clear borrowing from Ov. Met. 4.628: Hesperio, regnis Atlantis, in orbe (appearing in the same metrical position, with Alpheos instead of Atlantis), further supports this reading; Ovid opens the story of the myth of the Hesperides’ golden apples with this phrase.

92–108.  MEDEA PITIES HERSELF AND THE DRAGON Medea continues expressing her affection for the dragon, a feature of the story that appears only in VF (not in AR). According to some, Medea’s sadness is

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 92–3

107

genuine (e.g., Garson [1965] 108; La Penna [1981] 244, who compares Mezentius’ final address to his horse in Virg. A. 10.861–6), whereas others (Perutelli; Fuhrer [1998]) see it as exaggerated, if not absurd. As already highlighted by Lüthje (1971) 332–3, Medea speaks to the dragon, who symbolizes Aeetes, but also to her fatherland and her priesthood. The scene seems to reprise what was expressed in lines 10–15: Medea hugs the dragon (who is carus to her, just like her father in line 12), almost obtaining the supremos amplexus that she had desired in line 10; she cries (flevit) tears that she would have liked to show to Aeetes (line 11: fletusque videres); she hopes that the dragon may spend his old age elsewhere (lines 14–15 and 102), and seeks to appease both the dragon and Aeetes (lines 10–15 and 103–4). In this speech Medea (unlike Jason) expresses sincere regret for what she has done, displaying pietas towards her father, but also devotion to her role as priestess. Medea accordingly pities the dragon, but also herself, since they are both heading towards an unhappy fate as a result of a betrayal. References to the celestial dragon and the myth of the Hesperides continue: the sorceress now confronts the dragon who no longer has the grand­eur of the star in the sky (as seen at night), but lies heavily upon the ground without lustre; not only will he never see the Fleece again (nulla . . . vellera), but he will also never see the golden apples (fulgentia dona). The foreshadowing of events to come is always present, especially in lines 106–8, which form a sort of res gestae filled with tragic irony. This account displays the heroic side of Medea’s character through her actions that echo those of Hercules (the killing of the sea monster, described in the second book, the taming of Cerberus and the winning of the apples of the Hesperides, alluded to in this book), but her remorse is also evident. Fucecchi (2014) 130–1 sees a paradoxical strand in Medea’s aristeia, since the monster that terrifies Jason seems like a domesticated animal, her heroic action is really a magical ritual, and her lament over the dragon she has put to sleep replaces a victor’s typical εὖχος. 92–4  Medea realizes what she has done, but also that she and the dragon are in the same condition (one of monstrousness and frustration). Her closeness with the dragon (cari) almost forms a ‘unanimity’ between them: Medea is proiecta, just as the dragon was proiectus a little earlier (at 7.9 Medea is said to be pervigil, as is the dragon), and she weeps for both herself and her pet alike. The topos of shedding tears at the sight of a loved one’s corpse is very common from Homer onwards (e.g., Il. 18.234–6: Achilles weeps at the sight of Patroclus’ coffin). See also Virg. A. 11.39–41, where Aeneas laments over Pallas’ dead body. 92–3  caput . . . draconis | vidit humi: Most attestations of the collocation caput draconis refer to the head of the Dragon constellation (cf. Hyg. Astr. 2.6.1; 3.2.1; 4. 3.3; Cic. N.D. 2.108). This is the only occurrence in VF of the locative genitive humi, which Virgil often uses in the same metrical position, as, e.g., in A. 2.379–80: anguem | pressit humi and 6.422–3: immania terga resolvit | fusus humi (this passage has sparked unnecessary statements that VF does not

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

108

Commentary, lines 93–5

understand the Virgilian text; cf. Lazzarini ad loc.). The construction should be vidit caput humi (pace Sil. 1.247: interdum proiectus humi). 93  fusis circum proiecta lacertis: Heinsius proposes emending proiecta into porrecta in order to avoid repeating proiectus of line 90, but the repetition serves to create a parallel between Medea and the dragon. On proiectus, cf. Hor. Carm. 3.10.3; Epod. 10.22. For the combination of two Virgilian passages (A. 9.444: tam super exanimum sese proiecit amicum and 12.433: Ascanium fusis circum complectitur armis), see Pellucchi (2012) 158–9. Lazzarini correctly compares 4.375: effusis . . . lacertis (Io; on her identification with Medea, see note on 6). 94  seque suumque simul: On the use and position of this Homeric collocation, see Christensen (1906–8) 167–74. Note the alliteration of s. flevit crudelis alumnum: According to Caussin and Courtney, crudelis would be in the genitive (suum crudelis alumnum flevit), but I understand it instead as a nominative, which is equivalent in sense to an accusative (as Liberman notes, se flevit crudelis = se flevit crudelem; see Kleywegt [1986] 2451–2, who compares agens at 7.151, dura at 7.310, and tuta at 8.314). Medea, therefore, realizes that she has been cruel, reigniting an internal conflict. At 1.695 VF calls Jason crudelis (in the same metrical position) because of his deception of Acastus, and Medea labels herself crudelis at 7.341. VF generally uses the term alumnus (rarely applied to animals) to refer to the birthplace of various characters (cf. 1.422: Oebalium alumnum; 3.160: Bistoniae alumnus; 4.223 and 5.573: Calydonis alumni), but here alo makes it clear that Medea herself is the one rearing the dragon, as repeated in the following lines (and expressed at 1.61–3). In this sense, the dragon is suum, a possessive that emphasizes Medea’s affection for him, as does cari of line 92. 95–7  The opening of Medea’s address recalls Virgilian funeral lamentations (for Euryalus and Pallas), but also Jason’s final words to Cyzicus, while this scene was foreshadowed at 1.60–3 (see Zissos ad loc.). 95  non ego te . . . videbam: Eigler (1988) 119 compares Virg. A. 9.481: hunc ego te, Euryale, aspicio and 11.152: non haec, o Palla, dederas. 95–6  talem . . . | . . . talis: talem (the dragon) and talis (Medea) recall the ­parallel talis . . . talem of lines 30–1 (for the emendations to these lines, see note ad loc.). 95  sera . . . sub nocte: The phrase is Virgilian (A. 7.16), and VF uses it at 7.400: ut sera cum se sub nocte. Night is generally the preferred time for carrying out magical rit­uals (and for feeding a dragon, which falls into this category), especially those concerning underworldly deities or beings. In VF both the scene in which Medea incites the dragon (7.519–38) and the one in which she puts it to sleep occur at night. Furthermore, the passage of the Aeneid, from which VF

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 96–9

109

borrows this iunctura, describes Circe, and in Valerius’ seventh book, Venus, who has assumed Circe’s appearance, accompanies Medea to her meeting with Jason. The magical context is clear, but I think that sera nocte also alludes to the Dragon constellation, which is seen at night (and Circe always burns fragrant cedarwood by night, nocturna in lumina, Virg. A. 7.13). 96  sacra ferens epulasque tibi: Wagner (followed by Liberman) understands this to mean ‘sacra ferens Hecatae’. Medea is a priestess of Hecate, but this line is clearly inspired by Virg. A. 4.484–5: Hesperidum templi custos, epulasque draconi | quae dabat, and VF combines Hesperidum templi custos with the (Virgilian) expression sacra ferens (on which cf. Pellucchi [2012] 161), employed in an absolute manner, as at A. 6.808–9: quis procul ille autem ramis insignis olivae | sacra ferens and 8.84–5: pius Aeneas tibi enim, tibi, maxima Iuno, | mactat sacra ferens. VF modifies epulasque draconi to epulasque tibi (see also epulasque daturum of Luc. 9.802). His aim is to emphasize Medea’s pietas as priestess. The Virgilian parallel allows us to understand better ex adytis at 1.62 and templa at 5.632, which critics have interpreted differently. 96–7  hianti | mella dabam ac nostris nutribam fida venenis: Medea’s tone is now apologetic and, after calling to mind her pietas as a priestess, she also mentions her compromised fides. For this scene, compare 1.63: et dabat externo liventia mella veneno (with Zissos ad loc.). The model is Virg. A. 4.484–6: epulas . . . | . . . dabat . . .  | spargens umida mella. Note also Stat. Theb. 4.99–100: si quis per gramina hianti | obvius et primo fraudaverit ora veneno. Strand (1972) 42–3 cites nostris . . . venenis of these lines to explain externo . . . veneno of 1.63 (in which Medea feeds the dragon with her own poisons, different from the ones he naturally has). On the use of honey (mella often appears in the plural) with medicines or poisons, see Pease on Virg. A. 4.484. Honey was also the food of the gods (Usener [1902] 178–83) and was associated with Hecate (AR 3.1035–6) and other chthonic deities (Eitrem [1915] 104). It is commonly employed in magical rites (cf. Pease on Virg. A. 4.486) and as sustenance for fantastic creatures like dragons (TLL viii.608.24–38; Zissos on 1.63 and Ogden [2013] 39–40). Honey is also used to put Cerberus to sleep at Virg. A. 6.420. 98  quam gravida nunc mole iaces: In this case gravidus has the sense of gravis (cf. TLL vi/2.2272.40). VF is the only one to employ the collocation gravida mole. OLD s.v. 2b cites this passage and 5.33: qualem . . . gravidum. . . parentem, which supports the connection between the dragon and Aeetes, but compare also qua mole iacentis at 4.322 (Amycus) and Ov. Met. 1.156: obruta mole sua cum corpora dira iacerent (the Giants). 98–9  quam segnis inertem | flatus habet: For this use of habere, see note on 3 and cf. 5.283: Colchos habeant quae proelia and Virg. A. 3.147: animalia ­somnus habebat. Serv. auct. ad Virg. A. 12.525 explains the etymology behind segnis as sine igne (see also Maltby [1991] s.v.), whereas iners (= in + ars) means

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

110

Commentary, lines 99–101

‘without skill’ and thus ‘without ability, incompetent’. The bull at 7.591 is also described as iners. As Lazzarini notes, the use of flatus in poetry to refer to the breathing of animals (e.g., horses, cf. 2.130) mainly appears from Virgil onwards, and later it is used spe­cif­ic­al­ly with regard to snakes, in order to indicate their characteristic breathing, together with their hissing (cf. Rufin. Hist. mon. 8.421d). 99  nec te saltem, miserande, peremi: Langen notes the allusions to Ov. Met. 4. 110: ego te, miseranda, peremi and Luc. 8.639: o coniunx, ego te scelerata peremi, which VF modifies with miserande, as when Jason had addressed Cyzicus at 3.290 (a case also involving the betrayal of a dear character, even if involuntarily; cf. Manuwald ad loc.). Note that Medea is also described as miseranda in line 9, just as at Sen. Med. 207. There are different ways to understand and translate saltem (for its use after a negation, as at 3.326, see OLD s.v. 2; Bortolussi and Sznajder [2001]). I interpret its meaning here (as Mozley and Soubiran do) as ‘at least I did not kill you’ (by contrast, Liberman, Caviglia, and Pellucchi understand it to mean ‘et je ne t’ai même pas achevé’, ‘se almeno ti avessi fatto morire’, and ‘nemmeno ti ho ucciso’, re­spect­ive­ly). As Zissos (1999) 291 points out, this phrase uses a negative allusion to present a variant of the myth (the one in which the dragon is killed, as in Euripides) that VF chooses not to follow. Furthermore, from the perspective of one knowing the rest of the story, we can detect tragic irony in the reference to killing one’s loved ones (both Absyrtus and Medea’s sons), and perhaps, given the dragon’s identification with Aeetes, there is also a reference to the murder of Pelias. For lines 99 and 100, Liberman follows Lemaire’s punctuation, supporting his interpretation of nec saltem. The period after peremi gives more emphasis to the perfect tense (which recalls peregi in line 108, serving to give a solemn closing to Medea’s tirade) and to Medea’s deed. 100  heu saevum passure diem: On the interjection heu, see the thorough note in Pellucchi (2012) 163. passure is a predicative vocative (cf. visure at 1.392, moture at 1.393, and promisse at 2.486), a construction imported from Greek and used in poetry beginning from Catullus (see L-­H-­Sz 25). Wagner, followed by Spaltenstein, comments: ‘quam tristis tibi orietur aurora’, understanding diem with its literal meaning and thinking of the serpent’s awakening on the following day, which would give the scene a sense of reality and immediacy. The majority of scholars understand diem as a metonymy for vitam. 100–1  nulla videbis | vellera: On the topos of losing one’s sight/light as a synonym for losing one’s life, see Lazzarini (2012) 136–7 (cf. Soph. Antig. 808–10). In this case the topos is magnified by the dragon’s strength in sight (on the etymological connection between δράκων and δέρκομαι, cf. note on 60). vellera, highlighted by enjambment, is taken up again (in the same metrical position, but in polyptoton) in line 106 (velleribus).

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 101–2

111

101  tua fulgentia dona sub umbra: The vellera are considered fulgentia dona, since Phrixus had given them as a gift to Aeetes, and they had been dedicated to Mars (cf. 1.528). fulgentia dona could also allude to the golden apples of the Hesperides, which were the Earth’s wedding gift to Zeus and Hera (Pherec. FGrHist 3 F 16) as well as Aphrodite’s gift to Hippomenes (Theocr. 3.40; Catull. 2.13; Virg. Ecl. 6.61; Ov. Met. 10.560–707). We see evidence that VF may exploit this double meaning in Lucan, who, in a brief passage devoted to this labour of Hercules, identifies the apples as fulgentia poma (9.366–7: Alcides . . . | rettulit Argolico fulgentia poma tyranno), or in Lucretius, who mentions them in 5.32: aureaque Hesperidum servans fulgentia mala. Moreover, in VF 7.167–8: qui nemus omne suum quique aurea (respice porro) | vellera, the poet wishes to indicate that the reader should ‘look beyond’ (that is, pay attention), since aurea, in hyperbaton by enjambment, not only refers to vellera. Finally, note that fulgentia dona is visually placed between tua and sub umbra, which could be understood as the shadow of the huge serpent (Wagner) or as that of Mars’ grove, mentioned at 1.228: vellera Martis in umbra, which is also the serpent’s by extension, just as are the vellera (as Langen notes). 102–4  Medea’s request that the dragon spend his old age elsewhere and forget about her, thus avoiding causing torment for her, is in reality another address to her father Aeetes (note the similarity with lines 14–15). The adoption of senectae | immemor Aeetes in lines 137–8 is significant, as it highlights the (tragic) irony of this request for indulgence. Retaliation will come promptly afterwards, when the Colchians pursue Medea and the Argonauts over the sea. 102  This line contains three elisions. Kösters (1893) identifies seven lines in which there are three elisions (the highest amount found in any single line of the Argonautica): 1.709; 2.166; 3.472; 4.126, 295; 8.102, 396. For VF’s limited use of elisions, see Zissos (2008) lxiv. cede adeo: Carrion’s reading, cede deo, which some editors have adopted, is attractive (especially in light of the Virgilian cede deo at A. 5.467 and the reading in Proba’s Cento 452, perhaps filtered through VF; cf. Lazzarini [2012] 138), but not entirely convincing. The use of adeo to emphasize an imperative appears, e.g., in Ter. An. 759: propera adeo, Min. Fel. 34 (see TLL i.614.43). senium nunc digere: The expression senium digere has been suspected (see the discussions in Liberman, Pellucchi, and Lazzarini). Several scholars (Frassinetti, Spaltenstein, Liberman, Delz, and Watt cited in Liberman) accept Renkema’s conjecture egere (idem est educere), based on 5.298: nox egesta metu and 8.454: querellis egeritur dies, instead of the transmitted de genere (L) and digere (Δ c*). Pellucchi is correct in shifting the discussion to the meaning that should be given to senium. Scholars unanimously consider this word only in the temporal sense of ‘old age’, but it designates the stage of life in which one’s hardships and pains increase. If digere has the meaning of conquerere and senium metonymically means ‘chagrin, douleur, dégoût’ (cf. Ernout-­Meillet s.v.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

112

Commentary, lines 103–6

senium), the expression (Pellucchi concludes) should be understood as an invitation to ‘sopportare altrove i disagi’. In view of the doubts concerning the expression senium digere and the attempts to explain the textual variations, I wonder if we might also consider emending it to vergere, on the model of Luc. 1.129–30: alter urgentibus annis | in senium and Stat. Theb. 1.392: in senium vergens. For inque senium, see also Stat. Theb. 2.110 (with Gervais). 103  immemor, oro, mei nec me: The alliteration of the sound m, with the ­repetition of the personal pronoun in polyptoton, emphasizes Medea’s lament. The hemistich echoes 7.477 (see Perutelli, particularly for the archaizing use of oro instead of rogo), in which Medea urges Jason to remember her: sis memor, oro, mei, contra memor ipsa manebo. In this case, therefore, we witness an inversion of the trad­ition­al prayer formula, in which one asks to be remembered (for parallel passages, see Lazzarini [2012] 138–9). Note the reappearance of immemor at line 138 (in the same metrical position, with senectae echoing senium), which contributes to the process of identifying the dragon with Aeetes, but also consider the phrase immemor Aesonides (of Jason, who has betrayed Medea) at Ov. Her. 12.16 (with Bessone ad loc.). See note on 412. 103–4  sibila toto | exagitent infesta mari: sibilare is a typical word used in reference to snakes (7.525–6: stetit et trepidantia torsit | sibila and Virg. A. 11.754), but the choice of the adjective infestus, appearing again in this same book on other occasions on which Medea feels persecuted by her family (262: infestam lampada, 449: infestos vibrantibus hastis), contributes to the theme of identifying the dragon with Aeetes (and, by extension, with her family and her entire homeland; see also Lazzarini [2012] 140). VF used the expression toto | . . . mari at 5.247–8, but here he alludes to Luc. 2.726–7: cum super aequora toto | praedonem sequerere mari (toto and mari are in the same metrical positions), creating a subtle parallel with Pompey, now an exile, as he pursues pirates over the sea without success. The parallel does not appear to be coincidental (we can add that Lucan uses in senium in reference to Pompey at 1.130) in light of VF’s allusion to a rare variant of the myth, according to which the dragon pursues Medea and Jason to the island of the Phaeacians (where he would then be killed by Diomedes at the end of the Trojan War); cf. Schol. ad Lykophr. Al. 615 and Hornblower (2015) 264–5. 104 cunctas: As Soubiran observes, perhaps there is a play on words with cunctas, understood as an archaic verbal form of cuncto(r) (Plaut. Cas. 792; Enn. Hect. Lytr. 74 Jocelyn; Accius, Trag. 628 Dangel; Apul. Soc. 2), to be understood, therefore, as: ‘Do you hesitate, son of Aeson? Do not waste time.’ 105–6  Aesonide . . . raptis | velleribus: Line 105 is the last one to be preserved in the Codex Carrionis (Δ). VF uses the name Aesonides most frequently when referring to Jason (fifty-­three times, as opposed to thirty-­three for Iason), and it appears as early as Hesiod (Theog. 993: Αἰσονίδης). AR makes extensive use of

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, line 106

113

it, but it is uncommon in Latin literature before VF (TLL i.1084.58–68), with the first at­test­ation at Prop. 1.15.17 (but maybe it would have been used by Varro Atacinus as well, as indicated by Zissos on 1.96–8, to whom I refer for the list of other patronymics). By now, Medea only calls Jason by his name (even if she uses a patronymic), but prior to this point she always called him hospes (53) or ille (12). See also Pease (1935) 294 for Aeneas’ progression from husband at A. 4.172 to a foreign guest (hospes, A. 4.323) to a foreign enemy (hostem, A. 4.424 and 549). Already in the first book Aeson wishes that he could see Jason umeros ardentem vellere rapto (1.346), and in the fifth book, the ghost of Phrixus prophesies the end of Aeetes’ reign: rapta soporato fuerint cum vellera luco (5.237). The collocation vellum raptum appears for the first time at Ov. Her. 6.14: rapta tamen forti vellera fulva manu. 106–8  The deeds to which Medea refers are as follows: the defeat of the bulls (cf. 7.556–606), the killing of the soldiers born from the earth (7.607–43), and the subduing of the dragon, which she has just now carried out. The use of three perfect tense verbs (exstinxi, dedi, peregi) recalls the plain language of inscriptions and sounds almost like an account of res gestae. The final peregi is a Virgilian echo (A. 4.653: vixi et quem dederat cursum Fortuna peregi), while exstinxi recalls A. 4.682: exstinxti te meque, soror, populumque patresque. Compared to Dido’s res gestae (A. 4.655), in which the queen is pleased to have founded a splendid city (urbem praeclaram statui) and to have seen the walls that she herself built (mea moenia vidi), having established a new homeland, Medea’s past acts work towards the destruction of what already exists in her homeland (patrios exstinxi . . . tauros, | terrigenas in fata dedi). Line 108 is loaded with tragic irony, since another even more terrible nefas awaits Medea (VF could be alluding both to her impending murder of her brother Absyrtus and to her future killing of her children). VF introduces the words (fusum) corpus habes at the beginning of line 108 as a reference to her brother’s corpse, which is chopped into pieces and thrown into the sea in order to slow her father’s pursuit (while it also alludes to the corpse of Pelias, as Medea prompts the king’s daughter to cut up his body and boil it). Note that at 7.518 Medea, when presenting the trial of the dragon to Jason, declares: nondum cuncta tibi, fateor, promissa peregi. Other examples of poetic irony in VF include 5.383–4; 7.238, 340, 505; 8.148, 439–40; cf. Summers (1894) 64; Liberman 2.360 n. 73. In Medea’s words we can also see an allusion to some of Hercules’ labours (the bull and the Hydra, which VF mentions at 1.35–6). In addition, in terrigenas we could perhaps see a reference to Antaeus, since the term is always linked to Antaeus and the Hydra (as, e.g., at 7.622–4): compare Stat. Theb. 6.893–4: Herculeis pressum sic fama lacertis | terrigenam sudasse Libyn, cum fraude ­reperta and Luc. 4.634–6, which compares Hercules’ fight against Antaeus to his battle against the Hydra: constitit Alcides stupefactus robore tanto | nec sic Inachiis, quamvis rudis esset, in undis | desectam timuit reperatis anguibus

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

114

Commentary, lines 106–8

hydram. These allusions serve to evoke Hercules’ ascent to the heavens (as in lines 75–8) through Medea’s excellence. 106 exstinxi: In addition to its usual meaning of ‘to take away one’s strength or life’, that is, ‘to kill, murder’, perhaps we should not rule out a play on words concerning the extinguishing of the bulls’ fire (as Spaltenstein interprets it). Note also the sonorous sibilants: patrios exstinxi noxia tauros, already employed at line 75. patrios exstinxi recalls exstinxti . . . patresque of Virg. A. 4.682. noxia: This is the only time this adjective appears in the poem. The technical term (commonly used in the legal sphere) probably echoes Sen. Med. 179, where Creon addresses Medea as follows: Medea, Colchi noxium Aeetae genus. In the same play Jason says about himself: si quod est crimen, meum est: | me dedo morti; noxium macta caput (1004–5). 107  terrigenas in fata dedi: The compound terrigena (a calque of the Greek γηγενής in AR 3.499, 1338, 1355; 4.365) appears in Latin already in Lucr. 5.1411 and becomes increasingly common for referring to the warriors born from the teeth of the dragon slain by Cadmus. VF uses it at 7.504 (cf. Perutelli for further observations), 7.629, and 8.450. in fata is an emendation made by Pius for transmitted infesta (L). dare in fata is equivalent to occidere. Burman compares this line to 7.545: daret aeripedes in proelia tauros. 107–8  fusum . . . draconis | corpus: This is an echo of Cic. N.D. 2.114 (on which see Pease ad loc. and Schol. ad Arat. Phaen. 443): Hydra, cuius longe corpus est fusum? The allusion to the Hydra is useful for the identification of Medea with Hercules. fundere can have various meanings, such as ‘to overthrow, to fell’ (OLD s.v. 13a with Virg. A. 6.423: fusus humi of Cerberus; this is what Jason sees before his eyes here) or ‘to spread out, to distribute over a large area’ (OLD s.v. 11), with a possible allusion to what will happen to Absyrtus’ body (but compare also frater mihi fusus at 4.746). The verb could mean ‘to pour out, to spill out’ (OLD s.v. 4b, used especially of rivers), with a reference to the Dragon constellation, which flows in the sky like a river (see also Man. 1.305–6: has inter fusus . . . | . . . Anguis). Regarding Absyrtus (whose death and dismemberment are mentioned by Ps-­ Apollod. 1.9.24; Pherec. FGrHist 3 F 32a–c), compare Virg. A. 9.722: Pandarus, ut fuso germanum corpore cernit (on the collocation, see Luc. 7.652: tot corpora fusa, Sil. 12.471: ast aeque per corpora fusa iacentum, and 15.767: corpora fusa iacent campos). Given the simi­lar­ities between the dragon and the tyrant Aeetes, perhaps we might also think of Pelias’ future murder at Medea’s behest. 108  omne nefas, iam, spero, peregi: As VF foreshadowed at 5.217–21, the entire second part of the poem is devoted to nefas, structured primarily around the character of Medea. In particular, her magic represents a perversion of one of the principal themes from the poem’s first part, that is, the theme of technical knowledge (on these features, see Zissos [2004a] 311–19). In Seneca’s Medea (cf. 122: adeone credit omne consumptum nefas?) the nefas of her magic meets

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, line 109

115

the nefas of her fratricidal conflict. Then, in Lucan the nefas of magic is an important element contributing to the bellum civile, one closely connected to the nefas of the civil wars, that is, the killing of kin. On this topic, see Baldini-­ Moscadi (2005) 94–5 and 120–1. As Pellucchi (2012) 168 notes, the par­en­thet­ic­al use of spero has no precedent in the language of epic; in fact, this paratactic construction is typical of everyday speech (cf. Hofmann [1980] 249–51).

109–33.  JASON TAKES POSSESSION OF THE FLEECE AND THE RETURN TO THE SHIP Compared to the corresponding scene in AR 4.162–6, VF expands upon the story of Jason’s capture of the Golden Fleece, by inserting a scene that some critics have deemed humorous, if not absurd: Jason’s climbing on the dragon’s body in order to reach the top of the tree, where the Fleece hangs, and the tree’s subsequent reluctance to give up its precious mantle. In order to comprehend the poet’s intentions, we must understand the dense and subtle web of allusive references that VF creates: the events concerning Hercules and those concerning Jason run parallel to each other in this episode; the former is destined to reach the heavens, the latter is destined to experience a less bright future. By scaling the dragon’s body to go and seize the Fleece that shines like a star, Jason effectively does nothing other than imitate on earth what Hercules will do in the sky. The reference is to the ascent to the stars of Engonasin (Ἐνγόνασιν, ‘the kneeling one’), the constellation in the sky that is placed above the Dragon, upon whose head he tramples. The most common identification given to these asterisms is precisely Hercules triumphing over the dragon that guards the apples of the Hesperides: cf. Hyg. Astr. 2.6.1: Engonasin] hunc Eratosthenes Herculem dicit, supra Draconem conlocatum, but also Ps-­Erat. Cat. 4. with Pàmias and Geus (2007) 68–9 and Pàmias, Massana, and Zucker (2013) 16; Santoni (2009) 70–1 and Avien. Arat. Phaen. 169–93. On the other hand, the scene is anticipated at 7.534–6, when Medea hopes that she could one day see Jason effortlessly walk upon the alder tree that was speckled with scales and upon the twisted coils of the ever-­wakeful monster: o utinam [ut] nullo te sim visura labore | ipsam caeruleis squalentem nexibus ornum | ipsaque pervigilis calcare volumina monstri. calcare volumina is Meyncke’s conjecture to replace the transmitted calcantem lumina, already defended (though without references to any astral connotations) by Damsté (1921) 401–2; Morel (1938) 71; Courtney (1970) 158, and Poortvliet (2003) 609–10. We may also recall the astral context by reading volumina, if we think of Germ. Arat. 49 Gain: immanis Serpens sinuosa volumina torquet. Jason is clearly likened to Hercules in the controversial simile in lines 124–6, a comparison highlighting more the distance between the two characters than their similarity. The poet’s allusive

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

116

Commentary, line 109

framework compares Jason’s last deed in Colchis (the taking of the Fleece) with Hercules’ first (killing the Nemean lion), explicitly demonstrating the disparity between the two characters. At the same time, Medea’s actions imply the last labours of Hercules, through which the Tirynthian hero earns his place in the heavens. The ancient authors do not agree on the order of the twelve labours, but the final two (whose order varies) are usually said to be the descent to the Underworld (to retrieve Cerberus) and the taking of the golden apples of the Hesperides (regarding this matter and for a list of ancient authors, see, e.g., LIMC 5.1, s.v. Herakles). Diodorus Siculus (4.27) says that Hercules, after he brought the golden apples to Eurystheus and had therefore completed his labours, obtained immortality, as Apollo had prophesied. As Adamietz (1970) 34 observes, VF is not interested in the labours’ absolute chronology, but rather their symbolic roles. The extremus labor (line 117) is, therefore, only a real labour for Hercules, who brings to completion what Jupiter had prophesied in the Weltenplan at 1.563: tendite in astra viri. Jason remains passive during the entire scene, and his status as a mortal, coupled with the weight of the mythological tradition (which tells of his tragic destiny at Corinth) prevents him from taking a path to the stars. The closing phrase tristesque super coiere Tenebrae (line 120) not only brings the curtain down on Aeetes’ kingdom but also suggests that the altera lux that opens the fifth book has become total darkness and that the taking of the Fleece marks the point of no return for Jason and Medea, who now head towards the sorrows that will emerge in their future tragedies. But this descent into darkness, followed by the heavenly radiance, also emphasizes Hercules’ final efforts (cf. 4.700–2). Finally, one perceives in this passage an echo of the fall of Troy, as told in Aeneid 2. In particular, VF adopts the simile of the kingdom that falls like a tree and the simile comparing Priam’s decapitated body to a tree trunk (cf. note on 114). From a narrative point of view, this ­episode, therefore, brings together a series of references to events that VF narrates earlier at key points in the poem (including the comparison between Jason and Hercules, the latter’s ascent to the heavens, the release of Prometheus, and the descent to the Underworld). These references, together with the evocation of a ruined kingdom (both Priam’s and Aeetes’, as foreseen in Jupiter’s Weltenplan), work to give the scene a strong sense of closure, which the caesura in line 120 further emphasizes. The taking of the Fleece thus marks an im­port­ ant point in the epic, reproducing what the middle of the work presented between the end of the fourth book and the beginning of the fifth (cf. 4.626– 5.221 with Zissos [2004a]), and it accordingly provides critical evidence ­supporting the theory that the poem consisted of eight books. For more information, in addition to comments on individual lines, see Castelletti (2012b) and (2014b) 185–7. 109  quaerenti tunc deinde viam, qua se arduus heros: This phrase is to be understood as saying quaerenti heroi viam qua se arduus (or arduum) ferret, as

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 110–11

117

pointed out by Liberman (who refers to Housman on Man. 3.158). Hardie* proposes comparing Virg. G. 3.8–9. Note that at 5.160–3 both Hercules in the act of freeing Prometheus and his father Jupiter are described as arduus. The adjective, often used as a predicate (as here), has the sense of erectus, reclinis, resupinus (cf. TLL ii.493.72–3), but in light of the context compare also the numerous examples in which virtus is described as ardua or aims towards lofty places (cf. Hor. Carm. 3.24.44; Ov. Ars 2.537, Pont. 2.2.11), as well as those in which the adjective arduus is linked to glory (Cic. Tusc. 3.34.84; Ov. Tr. 4.3.74); see also note on 110–11. For the elision of the pronoun se before the long syllable in arduus, see Bolton (1957) 106 (who provides a list of occurrences). For tunc/tum deinde, deinde tunc, Liberman lists Lucr. 5.1007; Sil. 10.535; 11.407; 17.16. 110 aurigerae: The word auriger is rare; aurifer is more common, cf., e.g., Cic. poet. fr. 33.70 Blänsdorf: aurifera arbor, said of the tree guarded by the Hesperides, and VF 5.637: nemus auriferum, which refers to the forest housing the Fleece. But it appears in Cic. Div. 2.63: aurigeris . . . Tauris (see Traglia [1950] 116). After VF, it occurs in Avien. Descr. orb. terr. 987: et Pactolus aquas agit auriger. Lazzarini rightly compares also Virg. A. 6.141 for the elegance of the term auricomos (a calque for the Greek χρυσόκομος) . . . fetus, which Virgil uses to describe the golden bough that Aeneas must take to the Underworld (an event echoed in VF 8.119–20 as the tree becomes reluctant to give up the Golden Fleece). 110–11  heia per ipsum | scande age: ipsum refers to the dragon. The same observations that apply to ipsius of line 60 (see note on 71) apply to ipsum here. heia age (to be compared to εἰ δ’ ἄγε at Hom. Il. 1.302; 22.381) appears in Virg. A. 4.569 (with Pease ad loc.): heia age, rumpe moras, which Servius glosses as ‘hoc loco per αὔξησιν figuram adhortationem implevit: nam eandem rem secundo dixit “heia age,” cum “heia” saepe age significet’. The phrase is found in Mart. 2.64.9 and Stat. Silv. 1.2.266 and appears at the beginning of the line, as in Virgil, but VF changes its metrical position (as at Sil. 8.214) and inserts per ipsum scande, which thus acquires greater emphasis by making Medea’s unexpected command even more pronounced. Note also nec mora fit of line 112, a Propertian phrase, which also reworks (in addition to dimitte moras of line 105) the Virgilian rumpe moras (but see also haud fit mora at Virg. G. 4.548, A. 5.749, and VF 5.60). Mart. 2.64.9 and Sil. 8.214 reproduce the entire hemistich: heia age, rumpe moras. In light of the astronomical subtext, scande (as Hardie* proposes) seems to reference Ov. Fast. 1.299–300: felices animae, quibus haec cognoscere primis | inque domus superas scandere cura fuit. I wonder, therefore, if we might be able to discern a reference to the proverbial phrase per aspera ad astra in se arduus heros | ferret ad aurigerae caput arboris, ‘heia per ipsum (and in perfertur ad ornum of line 133; see also VF 5.486–91: labores . . . aspera . . . perferre). Although the exact formula per aspera ad astra is not attested in classical Latin,

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

118

Commentary, lines 111–13

there is evidence for analogous phrases; cf. Corn. Sev. fr. 2.1–2 Blänsdorf: ardua virtuti longeque per aspera cliva | eluctanda via est: labor obiacet omnis honori; Sil. 4.603–4: explorant adversa viros, perque aspera duro | nititur ad laudem virtus interrita clivo and other examples in Tosi (1991) 749, nr. 1863. 111  adverso gressus . . . imprime dorso: The phrase imprimere gressus has no parallels and seems to have been constructed from the attested imprimere vestigia (Cic. Caec. 76), impresso genu (Virg. A. 12.303), pede collo | impresso (A. 12.356–7), and impressit pedem (Sen. Ag. 401). adverso . . . dorso should be understood as ‘with the back in front of you’ (OLD s.v. dorsum 6a); cf. TLL i.865.70–1. 112  nec mora fit: Cf. Prop. 4.10.36 (in the same metrical position): nec mora fit, plano sistit uterque gradum and TLL viii.1471.33–60. dictis fidens Cretheia proles: In AR, Jason removes the Fleece from the tree by obeying Medea’s instructions (4.163: κούρης κεκλομένης). Cretheus, Aeolus’ son (and brother of Athamas), is the father of Aeson, and therefore Jason’s grand­father. The adjective Cretheius appears only in VF, both here and at 2.611, where it refers to Helle (Cretheia virgo). For the nexus of the patronymic with proles (a stylistic feature of epic derived from Homer and used by the Augustan poets), see Lazzarini (2012) 146. 113 calcat: This verb often indicates a triumphant or victorious stride and ­figuratively displays a sense of contempt (TLL iii.137.74; Ov. Tr. 5.8.10: calcas . . . mea fata), connotations well-­suited to this scene’s double reading. calcat picks up calcantem lumina or calcare volumina monstri at 7.534–6. Courtney notes the zeugma with squamis (‘calcat scilicet squamas’). et aeriam squamis perfertur ad ornum: In VF the tree protecting the Fleece is described as a quercus (an oak) at 5.230, but at 7.169, 535, and 8.113 as an ornus (an ash tree, the wild ash). AR identifies the tree in question both as a φηγός (an oak, 2.405; 4.124) and as a δρηῦς (an oak, holm oak, 2.1145a; 4.162). Liberman notes that Latin poets could refer to trees in general by using the names of various species, but VF, on the one hand, follows AR in using two different names for the plant, and on the other hand, by choosing the word ornus (in closely connected passages from the second half of the poem), aims to create a parallel with Virg. A. 2.626, 631, in which the fall of Troy is likened to the fall of an ash tree that has been cut down: ac veluti summis antiquam in montibus ornum | . . . congemuit (which VF echoes in cum gemitu of line 120). In this case, Colchis, for which the tree serves as a metonymy (as does the dragon that clings to it), is the defeated city (just as Phrixus prophesies to Aeetes in a dream at VF 5.233– 40). aerius (cf. Lunelli [1969]) is a commonly used adjective to designate the height of trees, appearing as early as Catullus (64.291; see also Virg. Ecl. 1.58: aeria . . . ab ulmo and TLL i.1063.27), while the choice contributes to the p ­ assage’s

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, line 114

119

celestial subtext. The adjective also appears at 1.67 (describing Perseus’ winged sandals) and 2.553 (describing Troy’s high walls). Modern editors agree in adopting squamis (Ha Ven. 1523) in place of Niccoli’s conjecture quamvis. As Liberman observes, the reading found in L before correction, namely quamis, confirms squamis. 114  cuius adhuc rutilam servabant bracchia pellem: Note the repetition of adhuc in line 126: ibat adhuc aptans umeris, which creates a parallel between the ‘arms’ of the Fleece’s previous owner and those of its new one. rutilus is a common word for referring to the brilliant redness of gold (see OLD s.v. 2b); cf. also 5.250: sacrata rutilant cui vellera quercu. AR 4.124–6 portrays the Fleece as a cloud that turns red (ἐρεύθεται) beneath the rising sun’s blazing rays, and a little later (at 173) the poet says that a redness (ἔρευθος) like a flame came from the glittering Fleece. See also Luc. 9.364–5: serpens | robora complexus rutilo curvata metallo (of the golden apples of the Hesperides). For the technical and poetic use of the term bracchia on trees, in addition to TLL ii.2160.11, see Perutelli (1985) 39–42 on the humanization of nature (the tree becomes Jason’s opponent, barely letting the Fleece go from its own arms). We should also consider that the tree stands as a symbol for both Aeetes and Colchis, and that this anthropomorphizing is even more significant in light of the cited parallel passage concerning the fall of Troy, since the Trojan king Priam’s decapitated body is compared to a tree trunk lying on the beach (A. 2.257–8: iacet ingens litore truncus | avulsumque umeris caput et sine nomine corpus; the connection to the severed head is perhaps foreshadowed in caput arboris of line 110). 115–16  The Fleece is compared to a cloud illuminated by the sun and to a rainbow/Iris. Heinsius deletes the word aut on the grounds that it creates a double simile that only adds a similar image (that of the rainbow), but, according to Spaltenstein and Liberman (to whom I refer for discussions and parallel passages), the difference is due to VF’s poetic style. Iris is both the rainbow and the messenger of the gods. She is the one whom Jupiter sends to order Hercules to free Prometheus, the deed closing the first part of the poem (see Zissos [2004a] 331–7). By mentioning Iris in this passage, VF creates a parallel between this extremus labor (note also the pseudo-­etymological echo labitur . . . laborem) and the extremus labor of the poem’s first section. If this reading is correct, we might be able to discern several verbal echoes (nec mora fit of line 112 for fata morantem of 5.156; cum gemitu of line 120 for tum gemitu of 5.168; super . . . tenebrae of line 120 for desuper umbram of 5.175, together with arduus of line 109). In addition, there are conceptual similarities: the tree that protects the Fleece is like the Caucasus that imprisons Prometheus, and the groan the tree makes as it releases the Fleece is like the groan the mountain makes as Prometheus’ shackles come free, and finally, darkness falls upon this scene, just like the dying eagle’s shadow.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

120

Commentary, lines 115–17

115  nubibus accensis similem: This iunctura (without any known parallels) condenses AR 4.125–6, which Virgil adapts at A. 8.622–3: qualis cum caerula nubes | solis inardescit radiis longeque refulget (and which Servius glosses as an explanation of the phenomenon producing rainbows, the result of light being reflected against the clouds); but the image also makes one think of AR 4.185, in which the Fleece is λαμπόμενον στεροπῇ ἴκελον Διός. veste recincta: At Virg. A. 4.518 Dido, as she imitates a magical rite while setting up her funeral pyre, prepares the ritual veste recincta, a common detail applied to sorceresses, since the proper magical practice dictates that there should be no knots among the participants’ clothing (Servius’ gloss expresses the same sentiment). Rather than viewing this detail as a feature of the trad­ ition­al costume for those in a hurry (as Spaltenstein proposes, comparing OLD s.v. succinctus 1a, Hor. S. 2.6.107: succinctus cursitat hospes), I think that VF would like to endow this reference to Iris with an unsettling mark in order to distinguish it from the appearance in which she announces the order to free Prometheus. The nefas of the black magic somehow manages to stain the colours of the rainbow. In this sense, we can also understand ardenti . . . obvia Phoebo (116), which could be interpreted to mean ‘going towards the sun’ (and this is how the ancients explained rainbows; cf. adverso sole of Virg. A. 4.701 and Servius’ gloss, to which we add the texts cited by Liberman 2.360–1), but also ‘going against the sun’, in a threatening manner, as though it were an enemy (OLD s.v. 2), and, hence, going into darkness. 116  labitur ardenti Thaumantias obvia Phoebo: VF reworks Virg. A. 10.552: obvius ardenti sese obtulit. Kleywegt (1986) 24 points out the ambiguity in ardenti (which can allude as much to Phoebus’ heat as to his passion). In poetry, the verb labor often serves to designate a slow descent from the sky, especially that of a deity (cf. TLL vii/2.781.78); VF also uses it at 5.639 and 7.259. Iris is the daughter of Thaumas (first in Hes. Theog. 265–9), and poets employ the patronymic Thaumantias to refer to her quite commonly. VF uses it at 7.398, but see also, e.g., Virg. A. 9.5; Ov. Met. 4.480; Stat. Theb. 10.123. For passages mentioning the name’s derivation and ancient etymology (from the verb θαυμάζω), see Pease on Cic. N.D. 3.51. On Iris, see also the thorough note in Lazzarini (2012) 150. 117  corripit optatum decus extremumque laborem: In lines 37–40 Jason declares that he did not desire the Fleece and that only Medea herself was worth the voyage (decus . . . magnum). According to Lüthje (1971) 334 and Lewis (1984), Jason now shows his true face: above all, he desires the Fleece, not Medea. Strictly speaking, corripit governs only optatum decus, but through syllepsis (or zeugma) it also applies to laborem. On the whole, the expression optatum decus extremumque laborem is an example of a double designation (both objective and subjective) for the same referent (in this case, the Golden Fleece), a stylistic device attested in archaic epic and later Virgil; see Perutelli (2000) 174. For corripere (‘to seize violently’, cf. TLL iv.1040.21), Lazzarini ­compares Virg. A. 6.210:

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 118–20

121

corripit Aeneas extemplo, where Aeneas grasps the golden bough (an important intertext for this scene). The combination optatum decus may come from Sen. Med. 130–1 (inclitum regni decus | raptum), but compare also Hor. Carm. 4.14.37–40: Fortuna lustro prospera tertio | belli secundos reddidit exitus | laudemque et optatum peractis | imperiis decus adrogavit. In addition to its common abstract meaning, decus can also have the concrete sense of ‘decor­ ation’, as at 5.514: hoc patrium decus (as Langen and TLL v/1.242.27 understand it), which would refer both to 1.346 and to 8.125–6, in which Jason wears the Fleece as a piece of clothing. For extremumque laborem, cf. the beginning of the tenth Eclogue, where Virgil calls upon the nymph for aid in his final labour: extremum hunc Arethusa mihi concede laborem, whereas at A. 3.714 Aeneas’ labor extremus is the death of his father Anchises at Drepanum. At 4.545 VF describes the taking of the Fleece as a summus labor, and Ps-­Seneca uses the same expression to designate Hercules’ ‘final labour’ (a ‘debased one’, as Lazzarini notes) before his death in Her. O. 474 (the conquest of love), 816 (his vengeance upon the messenger Lichas, who brings him the poisoned shirt), and 1455 (his vengeance upon Deianeira). On Jason’s and Hercules’ different views on labor in VF, see comments above (and in particular cf. 5.486–7: ille meum imperiis urget caput, ille labores | dat varios and 5.542: ergo nec hic nostris derat labor arduus actis). 118  longos . . . per annos: For the use of similar expressions in poetry (Virg. A. 10.549: canitiem sibi et longos promiserat annos; VF 5.384: qui tulerit longis et te sibi iunxerit annis, 7.62: Martius ante urbem longis iacet horridus annis), see TLL vii/2.1638.28. Lazzarini also mentions Virg. A. 9.85: pinea silva mihi multos dilecta per annos, where Cybele recounts her affectionate relationship with the grove consecrated to her. 119  Phrixeae monumenta fugae: The Fleece is proof of Phrixus’ flight from Greece and of his sacrificing the ram (cf. 1.278–93, especially fugerit that opens line 280), but there is also an echo of 5.229: ipse sui Phrixus monumentum and 6.500: magna fugae monumenta dabis, and, therefore, there is an allusion to Medea’s imminent fate (and that of the Argonauts). We might be able to read the meaning of ‘exile’ in fuga (TLL vi/1.1465.74). Virg. A. 2.233–5 lurks in the background. 119–20  vix reddidit arbor | cum gemitu: This is a clear reworking of Virg. A. 2.233: vix ea fatus eram gemitu cum talia reddit (but see also congemuit at A. 2.631). For cum gemitu at the beginning of a line, compare Virg. A. 3.223, 3.577, and especially 4.687 (the dying Dido), but also Ov. Met. 8.521 and 11.395. For the feature in VF, see 2.609 (Helle plunges herself into the sea again after speaking to the Argonauts) and especially 7.458, in which Medea tosses the potions to Jason cum gemitu, casting aside her fatherland and her reputation in the process. But think also of the formulaic line commenting on the deaths of Camilla

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

122

Commentary, lines 120–1

and Turnus at Virg. A. 11.831 and 12.952, respectively: vitaque cum gemitu fugit indignata sum umbras. Compare also tum gemitu at 5.168 (for the parallel with Prometheus, see note on 115–16). 120  tristesque super coiere tenebrae: A dramatic and evocative closing. The darkness falls not only upon the tree, since the brilliance of the Fleece has been stolen from it forever, but it also covers the entire scene and closes (the reference to a theatre curtain by Spaltenstein is fitting) the episode depicting the taking of the Fleece with underwordly overtones (see note on 115–16 and the introduction to the scene). This darkness creates a stark contrast to the radiance described in lines 122–6. For tristes tenebras, see also its adoption at Sil. 6.150–1: intus dira domus curvoque immanis in antro | sub terra specus et tristes sine luce tenebrae. 121–33  Jason and Medea reach the Argo and its crew. In lines 121–6 VF’s narrative follows AR’s quite closely, but with different metaliterary implications and narrative echoes that assist the poem’s structuring. From 127 to 133 VF dispenses with the ambiguous and misleading speech that Jason delivers at AR 4.190–205, but adopts several elements present in his model. The Argo’s spon­ tan­eous movement at 129–30 (not mentioned by AR) creates a parallel with the ship’s motion at 5.210–12. The episode depicting the capture of the Fleece, together with the Argonauts’ stay in Colchis, comes to a definitive ­conclusion with the critical moment in which Medea climbs onto the Argo. Critics have expressed conflicting opinions regarding the differences between VF’s passage and its Apollonian model, particularly concerning Jason’s behaviour towards Medea and his comparison with Hercules. According to Lüthje (1971) 331–8, Jason’s abject duplicity reveals itself in these lines, as he takes excessive pleasure in the Fleece and leaves Medea stunned, especially when he had earlier declared to her that she was the most important thing for him. For a negative portrait of Jason, see also Lewis (1984). Hull (1979) 402–4 is of the opposite opinion, arguing that Jason’s good faith is not questioned here. 121 egressi: Jason and Medea leave the forest of Ares (AR 4.166: λεῖπον δὲ πολύσκιον ἄλσος Ἄρηος), but VF intentionally avoids mentioning the location (he would not need to do so anyway), since egressi creates a scene change, and one can imagine their departure from the preceding tristes tenebrae of the Underworld. Lazzarini (2012) 153–4 compares Virg. A. 9.314–15: egressi supe­ rant fossas . . . | castra inimica petunt (describing the expedition of Euryalus and Nisus towards the enemy camp). relegunt campos: In AR 4.99, the Argonauts travel up the river in the Argo in order to approach the forest of Ares, but in VF there is no mention of fields prior to this point. As Spaltenstein rightly notes, we must also imagine that the Argonauts have moved towards a specific meeting place, which the phrase praedicta . . . | ostia in 127–8 supports.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 121–4

123

121–2 fluminis ora | summa petunt: The last event described before the ‘proem in the middle’ in the fifth book is the Argo’s spontaneous movement towards the mouth of the river and towards the sea at 5.121–2: protinus in proram rediit ratis omine certo | fluminis os pontumque tuens. Note the verbal echo fluminis ora, which in 5.122 appears at the beginning of the line (fluminis os), whereas here it comes at the end, as if to emphasize the two moments physically (the metre requires the plural form ora, but VF moves the accompanying adjective to the following line in order to give it greater emphasis through enjambment). With Jason and Medea’s return to this same location, the part of the expedition that took place in Colchis effectively comes to a close. This specific reference should also be counted among the pieces of evidence showing that VF has created a series of closings points and in ring composition in the poem’s bipartite structure. According to Huguet (followed by Liberman), summa ora means ostia (TLL ix/2.1091.41). 122  micat omnis ager: VF uses micare in reference to the Fleece at 5.203: ubi pellis micet arbore sacra. Now it causes the entire field to shine. The verb micare is often employed to indicate the twinkling of the stars (cf. Le Boeuffle [1987] 183; Fucecchi [1997] 190–1) and sets up the forthcoming comparison with Hercules/Engonasin. This and the following image reproduce the radiance described at AR 4.167–78, but the emphasis placed on the shining field might also allude to the desert trans­form­ation that Hercules causes after killing Antaeus during his travels in Libya, an episode commonly located close to the site of the Hesperides’ grove (AR places it close to lake Tritonis). If so, there would be not only an additional reference to another deed Hercules completes before his deification, but also an allusion to materials from AR’s fourth book. Therefore, we can add this passage to the list of shortcuts that VF employs in order to end his poem at the eighth book. 122–3  villisque comantem | sidereis: The participle comans appears frequently in Flavian epic (see the list in Pellucchi [2012] 177 and Lazzarini [2012] 154–5, who also cites Sil. 6.184–5: qualisque comantes | auro servavit ramos Iunonius anguis, where the participle refers to the branches with golden foliage in the Hesperides’ grove). The phrase villisque comantem might allude to Cerberus, since this is how he appears when Hercules carries him out from the Underworld. For coma applied to a fleece, Liberman cites Accius, Trag. 39 Dangel: agnum inter pecudes aurea clarum coma; Calp. Ecl. 5.70; Ps-­Sen. Her. O. 735, but for comans referring to animals, see TLL iii.1755.14. Given the astro­nom­ic­al context (supported by the word sidereis and the simile in the following lines), comantem makes one think of the phrase stellamque comantem (appearing in the same position, in a clausula) at Ov. Met. 15.749. 123–4  totos . . . | . . .  sinistrae: VF’s model is AR 4.179–81: ἤιε δ’ ἄλλοτε μὲν λαιῷ ἐπιειμένος ὤμῳ | αὐχένος ἐξ ὑπάτοιο ποδηνεκές, ἄλλοτε δ’ αὖτε | εἴλει

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

124

Commentary, lines 124–6

ἀφασσόμενος. Note that VF adopts ἄλλοτε . . . ἄλλοτε of this passage through his anaphora nunc . . . nunc . . . nunc. Jason seems to put on the Fleece as though it were a piece of clothing. As Hardie* suggests, this behaviour, together with the simile comparing Jason to Hercules (by contrast, here AR compares him to a girl whose dress shines in the light of the moon), might make one think of the story of Hercules and Omphale and the demigod’s cross-­dressing. 124  nunc implicat ille sinistrae: Jason also carries the Fleece over his left shoulder in AR, and Spaltenstein notes that this detail derives from the custom of leaving the right hand free (Lazzarini perceives a possible analogy with the martial style of dress), in addition to the fact that for the Romans the toga was tied at the shoulder. But also see Hyg. Astr. 3.5.2 in regard to the Engonasin (the celestial Hercules): in sinistra manu quattuor [habet stellas], quas pellem leonis esse nonnulli dixerunt. 125–6  In AR 4.167–73 Jason is compared to a girl whose dress shines in the light of the full moon. Much has been written both on AR’s use of this comparison and on VF’s reworking of it. VF’s choice to use the first of Hercules’ ca­non­ ic­al labours as a point of comparison contributes to the structuring of his narrative, in ring composition with 1.34–6, and serves to make the contrast between the heroes explicit once again, the gap between whom is now not only physical, but also metaphysical. VF already mentioned the killing of the Nemean lion at 1.34–6 and 263; 2.495–6; 3.511–12; 3.567 and 720–1. For this canonical first labour of Hercules, see LIMC 5.1, s.v. Herakles. On this likening of Jason to Hercules, see Adamietz (1970) 37–8; Hull (1979) 403; Lewis (1984) 95–6; Gärtner (1994) 224–5; Fucecchi (2002) 56–8; Zissos on 1.34–6; Castelletti (2012b) 157–8 and 160–2 and (2014b) 186. 125  talis ab Inachiis Nemeae Tirynthius antris: This line echoes 1.107: protinus Inachiis ultro Tirynthius Argis (with Zissos ad loc.). Tirynthius marks Hercules’ family of Perseus (the ruling family at Argos, Tiryns, and Mycenae) and his service to Eurystheus (the king of Tiryns). Poets commonly use the adjective Inachius (derived from Inachus, the first king of Argos) to refer to the Argolis, where Nemea is located. For antrum = convallis, Liberman refers to Housman (1972) 1035 and Housman on Man. 5.311. The lion could not be harmed by weapons, and, according to Ps-­Apollod. 2.5.1–3, Hercules used his club to force the beast into a cave (hence antris), where he strangled it. 126  adhuc aptans umeris: Leo (1960) 229 understood the subtle nuance in adhuc, which alludes to the fact that Jason has just now taken the Fleece and has not yet found a definitive way to wear it, as Hercules did after he had just won the lion’s pelt. The nuance also highlights the unbridgeable gap between the two heroic figures (Hercules had already fixed the lionskin firmly in place at the beginning of the poem; cf. 1.34–5). Virg. A. 9.364: umeris . . . fortibus aptat is the model for this image. It is of interest to note that VF employs this stylistic

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 127–30

125

f­ eature twice, here and at 2.544–5: aptat superbis | arma umeris, where Hercules frees Hesione (and thus the echo does not seem accidental). 127–8  qui tunc praedicta tenebant | ostia: There is no mention of previously made agreements concerning the meeting point in either VF or AR. We must assume, therefore, that Jason had agreed on a meeting place with his companions. The term ostia, from which the meaning of portus develops (cf. Serv. ad Virg. A. 1.400), designates the exitus fluminum (cf. TLL ix/2.1156.59). 128 per longas apparuit aureus umbras: Jason’s bright appearance from among the darkness of the shadows (of the night) recalls an image that VF uses for the sun at 3.481–2: Phoebus . . . | . . . longas medius revocaverat umbras, all the more so since at the same point in the narrative, AR 4.183 places the scene at dawn (Ἠὼς μέν ῥ’ ἐπὶ γαῖαν ἐκίδνατο). In addition to presenting the real scene that Jason displays to his companions, this image seems to reference the hero’s (Jason/Hercules) return from the shadows of Hades (with an allusion to the theory of the double Hercules, cf. note on 230–1, of whom Jason would only be the simulacrum, cf. 6.536–8). This would also reference the constellation of the Engonasin, which shines in the darkness of the night. 129  clamor ab Haemonio surgit grege: In AR the Argonauts’ first reaction at the sight of the Fleece is amazement (4.184: θάμβησαν δὲ νέοι μέγα κῶας ἰδόντες), and they only raise a loud shout at the end of Jason’s speech (4.206–7: τοὶ δ’ ἰάχησαν | θεσπέσιον μεμαῶτες). VF inverts his model’s structure, shifting the amazement to Medea (attonita, 132). For the phrase clamor . . . surgit, see Virg. A. 11.832–3: tum vero immensus surgens ferit aurea clamor | sidera. For Haemonius, cf. note on 16. The word grex is employed often in comedy to refer to a group of people and is used in poetry beginning with the Augustan authors; VF uses it at 5.376 to refer to the group of women accompanying Medea during her first meeting with Jason. 129–30  The last time the ship was mentioned (5.210–12), namely after it had entered the mouth of the Phasis river, the Argo had turned its prow towards the open sea of its own accord. This was the last event VF narrated before the so-­ called middle proem, and Zissos (2004a) 316 discusses the metapoetic significance of this gesture, serving to strengthen a break in the epic: ‘immediately preceding the programmatic rupture of Valerius’ medial proem, the Argo (which serves as the thematic focus for the first half of the poem, but not the second) literally “turns away”.’ At this point in the eighth book the ship returns to the scene and makes another spon­tan­eous movement, which symbolically announces the return voyage and ratifies the thematic closure of the events in Colchis. For a list of the ship’s prodigious actions within the poem, see Pellucchi (2012) 121–2. 129–30  se quoque gaudens | promovet: The humanization of the ship is a traditional element of the Argonautic myth (cf. Aesch. fr. 20 Radt; AR 1.524–7).

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

126

Commentary, lines 130–1

Because it contains a beam obtained from a sacred oak in Dodona, the ship, in addition to moving of its own accord, is also able to speak in prophecy (cf. the fatidicam ratem at 1.2 with Zissos’ comments) and to experience emotions (cf. pavidam at 1.622). In this case, it rejoices (gaudens) at the successful enterprise, which confirms what it already knew (5.211: omine certo). promoveo is a tech­ nical term that generally indicates movement in a military setting (cf. Liv. 28.44.10: castra; Tac. Ann. 15.4). 130 ratis: VF uses ratis most often (eighty-­seven times) to refer to the ship (first found at Enn. Ann. 515 Skutsch; OLD s.v. 2); he also employs puppis (sixty-­ four times), carina (twenty-­two times), pinus (seven times), and alnus (four times), while the prosaic navis (employed by Virgil) does not appear in the Argonautica; see also Zissos (2008) lv. 131–3  In these three lines, VF condenses some moments from AR, but at the same time, he inserts precise allusions to future events. Jason first settles the Fleece on his shoulders, then he leaps onto the ship, while Medea watches attonita. According to Lüthje (1971) 234, this sequence (aurea . . . | terga prius, mox attonita cum virgine) demonstrates one more time that the Fleece is worth more than Medea to Jason, and the omission of the speech that Jason gives in AR strengthens this impression; at AR 4.190–7 the hero credits the success of the enterprise to Medea’s services. Spaltenstein is of a different opinion, arguing that VF is simply following the sequence of events narrated by AR. The collocation attonita virgo, which appears elsewhere only at Ov. Tr. 3.9.18 (pallor in attonitae virginis ore fuit), suggests that VF wishes to allude to the future murder of Absyrtus (a central theme of Ovid’s poem), casting yet another shadow over the finale to this episode. The image found in the clausula consistit in hasta summarizes AR 4.206–10 (Jason wears his battle equipment and sits down, armed, near Medea and Ancaeus) and decisively directs the narrative towards the following scene, in which Medea’s household arms itself and rushes off in pursuit (see also VF 8.309–10 and 317). 131  praecipites agit ille gradus: The combination praeceps gradus appears elsewhere only at Luc. 1.496: praecipiti lymphata gradu and Ps-­Sen. Her. O. 254: sonuere postes ecce praecipiti gradu, but VF is the first to devise the phrase gradus agere (3.441: ter tacitos egere gradus); cf. TLL i.1373.17 and vi/2.2328.76. Pellucchi (2012) 180 sees a possible enallage in praecipites (which in meaning refers to Jason; cf. 4.263: praeceps agit gradus). atque aurea misit: Liberman expresses doubt concerning misit, since one would expect to see mittit. If misit is the correct reading, it would be appropriate to emend atque into utque, as Barthius (and also Heinsius) do. According to Spaltenstein, VF refers to very precise moments in time, which can be traced back to AR. The reading ait in manuscript V seems to preclude the possibility of emending agit to egit.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 132–3

127

132–3  mox attonita cum virgine puppem | insilit: The echo of line 21 (prosilit attonito pede), in which Medea is likened to Ino, killing her son in the process, is clear (and foreshadows the tragedy in Corinth). In this sense, Medea is an attonita virgo, just as she is at Ov. Tr. 3.9.18, while she prepares to kill Absyrtus. But her amazement may be due to seeing the ship for the first time or because the Argo moves on its own (as Heinsius notes). puppis could mean both the stern and the entire ship (by synecdoche). In the parallel passage AR uses the exact Greek parallel πρύμνη (4.188–9: πρύμνῃ δ’ ἐνεείσατο κούρην | ἀνθέμενος). For the synonyms of puppis VF uses, see note on 130. For insilio with the simple accusative (instead of a dative or in + accusative), cf. Luc. 3.626: insiluit . . . puppem. 133  rapta victor consistit in hasta: Syntactically, rapta modifies hasta, but conceptually it also applies to Medea (cf. 1.548: virgine rapta). According to Spaltenstein (here and on 2.182), rapta equals cito, and Jason does not take hold of his spear at this moment. I believe that VF condenses AR 4.195–210. Jason displays pride in his triumph as a conqueror in armis, the same attitude that he will show towards the prospect of a new battle with the Colchian pursuers (an attitude that his sudden gesture of waving the spear emphasizes). rapta . . . hasta is a Virgilian expression (cf. A. 9.763: excipit, hinc raptas fugientibus ingerit hastas), also adopted by Ovid at Met. 5.137. The clausula in hasta has already appeared three times in VF: 1.641 (Neptune; see Zissos ad loc. for the use of in meaning ‘armed with’); 4.281 (Mars; see Murgatroyd and Spaltenstein ad loc. for the meaning ‘to lean upon’); 5.462 (Cytisorus; see Wijsman ad loc.). See also Kleywegt (1989) 434–5. Absyrtus will echo Jason’s attitude in hasta when he is described as in armis in line 136. According to Lazzarini, consistit in hasta compresses two constructions: hastam rapere (cf. arma rapere) and the verb consistere, modelled on expressions like stare in armis (cf. Virg. A. 9.581).

134–74.  THE REACTION OF MEDEA’S FAMILY VF follows AR 4.212–40, where the Colchians immediately react to Medea’s departure and prepare to pursue the Argonauts, who are already offshore. According to other versions of the myth (Σ AR 4.223–30a), the Colchians and the Argonauts had already faced each other in battle, during which Iphis lost his life (VF, on the other hand, has him die during the war against Perses, cf. 1.441 and 7.423) and Meleager killed Aeetes (Diod. Sic. 4.48). VF inserts a suasoria spoken in direct discourse by Medea’s mother, which does not appear in AR. This monologue acts as a companion piece to the one that Pelias directs in the first book to the newly departed Jason, who was guilty of having kidnapped Acastus (1.695: raptoque dolis crudelis Acasto), echoing the anguish that Alcimede feels at the departure of her son Jason at 1.315–34. As critics have

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

128

Commentary, line 134

noted (e.g., Shey [1968] 235; Zissos [2008] 369), VF creates a parallel structure between 1.700–9 and 8.134–74, since both passages mention Jason as he flees across the sea after kidnapping a royal scion (first Acastus, then Medea), while the local tyrant gathers his troops in a doomed effort to stop him. On the various passages that establish connections between the first and the eighth books to create a ring composition effect, see Barich (1982) 104–7 and Zissos (2008) xxxi–xxxii. On Aeetes as a double for Pelias, see also Galli (2005). Taliercio (1992) 200–2 suggests a comparison between the speech given by Medea’s mother and that spoken by the frantic Amata at Virg. A. 7.359–405, while Pellucchi (2012) 188–90 mentions Anna’s speech to the dying Dido at A. 4.675–85. The monologue spoken by Medea’s mother also serves to introduce an allusion to the cult of Magna Mater. The allusions appear especially clear in the lines immediately preceding (140–3) and following (171–4) the monologue. Medea had been likened to Magna Mater and Mâ–Bellona at 7.635–8 (on which see Perutelli and Davis), whereas at 8.239–42 VF mentions the lavatio of her cult statue in the river Almo. At 8.461–3 Medea will be described as a second Pallas as she climbs onto the ship for the first time (Palladia virgo stet altera prora; cf. note ad loc.). Therefore, the parallels between the events at Colchis and at Troy continue. Medea becomes assimilated with the Palladium, but she is also the daughter of the Mater and her maritime voyage to the west alludes to the cult’s translatio from Asia to Europe (a process which falls more generally within the context of the translatio imperii that Jupiter expresses in the Weltenplan at 1.542–56). Poliziano transposed here 136–85, but in γ they appear after line 385. Furthermore, lines 136–53 are absent in the Laurentianus (due to the loss of one folio, which contained lines 336–85 on its recto side and lines 136–53 on its verso). For Ehlers’s reconstruction of γ, see Schmidt (1976) and Liberman 1.lxxviii–lxxxi and 2.362 n. 85 (folios 105–14 formed a quinion, in which the bifolium containing lines 136–85 and 386–435, which would have been folios 107 and 112, was instead placed between folios 111 and 113). Pius states that he found the following sixteen lines placed after line 136 in some codices (‘non tamen antiquissimis’), which all editors except for Weichert (14–16 and 139–47), who moves them after line 139, have rightly considered to be spurious: occidit Aeetes, casu perculsus acerbo | stratus humi, carae relegens vestigia natae | dat gemitus: lacrymasque simul vocesque resorbet. | Heu miser attollens foedatam pulvere tandem | canitiem. Poterasne tuo nocuisse parenti, | filia, sola meae spes non indigna senectae? | duceris a Minyis furtim, dulcique carebis | coniugio, laeta et numquam praedone marito. | Hic labor est, Absyrte, tuus: revocare sororem | undique selectam pubem: iam classe parata [iamque arbore caesa alii codd.] | et nostro da vela mari. Tum ille impiger omen | accipit: et magni subiit [peragit T2] mandata parentis. | Interea velo remisque feruntur in altum | certatim Minyae: solers Neptunia proles | consulit, ut dubio caveant contendere cursu: | et securus ait nobis et tutior Ister.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 134–5

129

134–9  At 5.233–40 Phrixus appeared to Aeetes in a dream and prophesied that on the day that the Fleece would be stolen from the grove of Mars he would experience both the collapse of his reign and other misfortunes. Furthermore, he foretold that it would be advantageous for Medea, a virgo devoted to Diana, to be married to one of her local suitors. Now that the Fleece (which seems to perform an analogous role to that played by the Palladium in the fall of the Troy, according to 5.236–7) has been stolen, the echoes of that prophecy become noticeable. The spreading of the news that the Fleece has been stolen follows the topos regarding Fama (Hardie [2012]). In addition, VF repeats a scene that he described in the first book (1.700–8), depicting a tyrant gathering his troops on the shore in a fruitless attempt to pursue the Argonauts, since the ship has already sailed off. 134  interea patrias saevus venit horror ad aures: interea performs the transitional function of ἤδη in AR 4.212. For the expression venit . . . ad aures, compare Ov. Her. 12.138–9 (ad aures | venit), 18.79 (veniebat ad aures); Met. 14.750–1; Sen. Ag. 397; Ps-­Sen. Oct. 273; Stat. Theb. 11.745. As Barchiesi (1992) notes on Ov. Her. 3.59ff., periphrases involving aures are a common feature of plays from the archaic period to Seneca, when a sound announces a disaster or a character’s entrance onstage. For a list of passages and bibliography, see Bessone on Ov. Her. 12.138. Although patrias can also mean ‘of her fatherland’, critics agree on the meaning ‘of her father’, as it does at 2.2. VF derives the collocation saevus . . . horror from Virg. A. 2.559: at me tum primum saevus circumstetit horror, the context for which is again Priam’s death (for the connection between the fall of Priam and that of Aeetes, cf. the introductory note on 109–33). According to Spaltenstein, horror equals res horrenda, as it does at 4.661 (which the TLL vi/2.3001.52 counts among other passages in which it has the same sense of nuntius horrificus). One recalls that VF deployed the concept of horror emphatically at the beginning of the poem’s second part (5.220: horrenda trepidam sub virgine puppem). The following line explains what this saevus horror is. 135  fata domus luctumque ferens fraudemque fugamque: Note the triple polysyndeton of -que. Fata domus also appears at the beginning of a line in Ov. Met. 4.570, but see also Sen. Phaed. 698 and Ag. 223. In this case fata domus luctumque could be linked to Phrixus’ prophecy, particularly at 5.236: tibi regnorum labes luctusque supersunt. On the theme of the Golden Fleece as a symbol of power, see Mignanego (2001). On the use of fata ferre, with fata as the subject (as at line 174) or object (in the sense of ‘to bring one’s fate to completion’), see Lazzarini (2012) 163. The alliteration of f links three essential topics through repetition: fata, fraus, and fuga (connected by the word feens). For this reason, I prefer not to view fraudemque fugamque as a hendiadys for fugam fraudulentam (with Wagner and Spaltenstein), but rather as two distinct ­concepts (which correspond to two actions, both attributable to Medea, but also to Jason), which occur repeatedly in this book. Since virginis appears in

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

130

Commentary, lines 136–8

enjambment, it places emphasis on Medea (and makes a reference to maneat regnis ne virgo paternis at 5.240). This passage is echoed by Sil. 7.654: fraude fugae calamos. 136  subitis †inflexit†: subitis is translated like the adverb subito (cf. 1.218: s­ ubita . . . hirundine with Zissos). Editors consider the reading inflexit, found in L, uncon­vin­cing (see the discussion in Lazzarini [2012] 164–5). Schenkl’s ­conjecture, infelix, would allude to Absyrtus’ impending tragic fate, but a verb would perhaps fit better (such as insurgit of Ven. 1523, Heinsius’s vindex it, or Liberman’s surrexit). If we consider the context, a verb expressing slight movement (or perhaps also an adjective) might be appropriate, since the following coit and volat suggest a lively climax to this scene. Perhaps instruxit (which, however, does not appear elsewhere in VF) or irrupit? in armis: This is a recurring expression in epic poetry, nearly always appearing in a clausula (2.554; 3.430; 4.747; 6.171: Absyrtus in armis; 6.265, 295; see TLL ii.597.27–54). Here, it echoes in hasta of line 133. 137  urbs etiam mox tota coit, volat ipse: At 4.214–22 AR emphasizes the huge number of assembled Colchians by employing Homeric images relating to waves (Il. 4.422–7) and leaves (Il. 2.468; Od. 9.51) and describes how Aeetes jumps onto his chariot, which is drawn by a team of horses as fast as a gust of wind, a gift from the Sun (4.219–22). A little later (4.238–40) AR compares the Colchians putting their fleet to sea to a huge group of birds flying over the sea as a flock, an image that influences VF 8.150–3. I wonder if Ov. Fast. 3.193: cum pare quaeque suo coeunt volucresque feraque and 3.741: ecce novae coeunt volucres tinnitibus actae (see also Luc. 7.468: percussa pietate coit, totaeque cohortes) might have influenced the collocation coit, volat. volat might be traced back to the  image that appears in a parallel passage from the first book, in which the escaping Jason is compared to Daedalus taking off in flight (1.704: volucer cum Daedalus), thus referencing this scene, with the roles of the characters inverted. 137–8  senectae | immemor Aeetes: The tyrant’s old age is a recurring topos, but in this case we may note the echoes of a phrase spoken by Pelias, a character paralleling Aeetes, at 1.718: in nostrae durus tormenta senectae. We can also see echoes of 102–3: senium . . . | immemor (with an association between the dragon and Aeetes). On the similarities between Pelias and Aeetes, see Galli (2005). Lazzarini also notes Virg. A. 9.477–80: evolat infelix . . . | . . . | . . . non illa virum, non illa pericli | telorumque memor (Euryalus’ mother). Aeetes is a Greek nominative, used frequently by VF. 138 complentur litora bello: The model is AR 4.218–19: ὧς οἱ ἀπειρέσιοι ποταμοῦ παρεμέτρεον ὄχθας, | κλαγγῇ μαιμώοντες. For the use of bellum to refer collectively to armed groups (soldiers) in poetry beginning with Ov. Met. 12.25 (with Bömer), the TLL compares VF 1.551–2; 7.609 and 627; 8.139 and 427.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, line 139

131

Spaltenstein (followed by Zissos on 1.551–2) rejects the metonymy (which could possibly also be applied to bella at 8.427), whereas Strand (1972) 62, Perutelli (on 7.609), and Liberman 2.269 n. 336 understand it in the same way that the TLL does. I think that we might detect a metaphorical meaning (according to Lazzarini, bellum designates both the armed Colchians and their will to fight). 139  nequiquam: fugit immissis iam puppis habenis: This line summarizes the scene already described at 1.700–3. There, from a high lookout point, Pelias could only see the sails of the ship, already gliding at sea, but here we cannot say definitively whether the Argo is already out of sight (as in AR) or if the Colchians can still see it (as Spaltenstein believes). Enjambment serves to highlight the word nequiquam at 6.250. It appears in this position several times in Lucretius (e.g., 2.1148) and Virgil (A. 10.122). See also Luc. 8.662. fugit picks up on fugam in line 135. iam is a conjecture of Heinsius, which editors generally accept instead of the transmitted nam. The phrase νηῦς ἤδη at AR 4.226 supports this reading. immissis . . . habenis appears in the same metrical position at 1.687: volat immissis cava pinus habenis and 5.586. As Zissos (on 1.687) points out, nineteen different commentators have followed the example of Gebbing (1878) in understanding immissis . . . habenis in a metaphorical sense as ‘at full speed’ (as at Virg. A. 5.662: furit immissis Volcanus habenis); but habenis can also have the technical meaning of χαλινά (that is, the hawsers or rudder cables), according to Langen and TLL vi/3.2392.79–2393.3, as it does at Virg. A. 6.1: classique immittit habenas (on which see Norden; Servius glosses habenas as funes); Ov. Fast. 3.593; Sen. Med. 347. See also Nordera (1969) 64. Lazzarini compares Virg. A. 5.662: furit immissis habenis, describing the speed with which fire spreads (to be compared to the speed with which the Argonauts flee). 140–4  The abrupt transition between lines 139 and 140 is suspect. According to Schenkl (1871) 299, it is possible that some lines before 139 are lost (Thilo, praef. xxi, also raises the same point) or VF never wrote the lines that he had intended to compose for this point in the narrative. Weichert proposes inserting here the sixteen lines that Pius found in some codices, emphasizing how well they lend themselves to filling in what seems to be a lacuna in the text by providing narrative continuity. The transmitted adhuc in line 140 seems abrupt (emended here). According to Barich, the contrast is meant to create a nice effect through the clash between the general powerlessness and the refusal of Medea’s mother to accept that she is now separated from her daughter. Spaltenstein also reads the passage in this sense, arguing that the abrupt transition fits VF’s style, as he often moves from one scene to another in the manner of a stage play in order to achieve a poignant effect. By beginning this section with the word Mater (Idyia), VF emphasizes not only Medea’s mother, but also Magna Mater, whose cult is implicit in the background to these lines through keywords: Mater, matresque nurusque, ululatibus at 140–3 and genetrix, exululans, famulae, clamore

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

132

Commentary, lines 140–1

supremo at 171–4. Other clues reinforce this ritual context, such as tendebat . . . palmas (line 140), potes (line 145), and siquid super accipe templis (line 157). The assimilation between mater and the Mater Idaea was already suggested in the parallel passage from the first book (1.143–70), in which Alcimede becomes distraught over Jason’s departure (see particularly 1.318– 19: femineis . . . ululatibus obstat | obruit Idaeam quantum tuba Martia buxum). On the one hand, therefore, Medea’s mother and the other Colchian women (almost like a tragic chorus, as Spaltenstein notes) are in despair and pray for Medea’s return, and on the other hand, the Mater tries to detain Medea (to whom the status of goddess is given), whose flight by sea towards the west foreshadows and alludes to the translatio of the cult of Magna Mater from Asia to Europe. On this theme (taken up again in lines 454–7), see especially Fucecchi (2013). 140  Mater Idyia: As Dureau de Lamalle, Walker, and Loehbach have, I prefer to adopt Wagner’s conjecture Idyia, which palaeographically is not too far from transmitted adhuc and is metrically defensible due to the prosody at Hes. Theog. 352: Ἰδυῖα (an amphibrach: short, long, short), whereas in Ovid Idyia is an antibacchius (long, long, short); see also Liberman 2.362 n. 89 for discussion. According to the majority of our sources, Medea’s mother is Idyia (Εἴδυια or Εἰδυῖα in AR 3.243; Ἰδυῖα in Hes. Theog. 352 and 960; Idyia in Cic. N.D. 3.48; Ov. Her. 17.232). She was Aeetes’ second wife, the daughter of Oceanus and Tethys, and also the mother of Chalciope. Apart from the scene from the seventh book in which Medea is medios inter deserta parentes (7.103), VF only mentions her here, but other sources also rarely refer to her (see RE 15.1.30, 34). Note that Mater Idyia closely recalls the phrase Mater Idaea, used to refer to the Magna Mater (2.536; Liv. 29.10.6; Cic. Ver. 2.5.186); perhaps this is not accidental, in light of the allusions to that cult within this passage. ambas tendebat in aequora palmas: To stretch out one’s arms or hands is a customary gesture of prayer or supplication that appears already in Homeric epic (Il. 4.523; 21.115–16); VF uses this collocation at 1.80: tendensque pias ad sidera palmas (see Zissos) and 2.469. In this case, compare, e.g., Virg. A. 1.93: ingemit et duplicis tendens ad sidera palmas and Ov. Met. 8.849: tendens super aequora palmas; but above all see VF 7.270: hasque manus, ut possum, a litore tendo, in which Jason is the one who makes a plea to Medea as though she were a deity (in this case also, Medea is both a puella, cf. line 142, and a goddess). On the gesture of stretching out one’s hands in supplication, see also Headlam (1902) 52–3; Perutelli on 7.269–70; Bömer on Ov. Met. 11.541; Pease 1935 on A. 4.205 and 229; Sullivan (1968). 141 soror: Chalciope, Medea’s older sister and the wife of Phrixus, is well attested in our sources (cf. AR 3.248; Ov. Her. 12.62, 16.234; Met. 7.51). VF ­mentions her by name at 6.477: Calciopem . . . sororem (otherwise she is called sororis at 7.117 and soror at 8.171).

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 142–3

133

omnes aliae matresque nurusque: VF completes the description of the Colchian women with the mothers and young brides. The clausula matresque nurusque is Ovidian (Met. 3.529, 4.9; Fast. 4.133; Tr. 2.1.23), and this image recalls matrum turba at Ov. Met. 7.50 (servatrix urbes matrum celebrabere turba), used in Ovid to refer to all the women in a city who participate in the cult of a deity (see Bömer ad loc.). Liberman cites line 281: alii pariter populique patresque; see also 2.247: inruerant actae pariter nataeque nurusque and Ov. Fast. 4.295: procedunt pariter matres nataeque nurusque (in the ritualistic context of Magna Mater). 142  aequales . . . puellae: As Lazzarini notes (by comparing 5.342; 6.497; 7.180–1), these are enslaved women who accompany Medea and help her in the worship of Hecate. 143  exstat sola parens: For the idiomatic meaning sola, which would not entail that the person to whom it refers is isolated, but rather denote their uniqueness, see Liberman 2.362–3 n. 91 and OLD 6 s.v. solus. The emphasis placed on Idyia echoes that given to Alcimede in 1.317–19 (supereminet . . . obstat). Lazzarini detects a possible theatrical nuance in exstat. Cybele is also called parens at Ov. Fast. 4.182 (Idaeae . . . parentis) and 359 as well as at Virg. A. 10.252 (alma parens Idaea deum). impletque ululatibus auras: Grüneberg (1893) 93–4 proposes that VF is inspired by Luc. 2.32–3: votisque vocari | adsuetas crebris feriunt ululatibus aures, but it seems to me that the collocation is instead Ovidian (Fast. 6.513: complent ululatibus auras; adopted also by Stat. Silv. 5.5.71: novas tremulis ululatibus auras). VF will pick up the motif immediately after this monologue in lines 171–2: implet soror omnia questu | exululans, but it seems clear that there is an allusion to the phrase femineis . . . ululatibus at 1.318 (see Zissos’s thorough note ad loc., which correctly mentions lamentis gemituque femineo ululatu found at Virg. A. 4.667, with Pease’s comments, and 9.477, as well as A. 2.487–8: plangoribus . . . | femineis ululant). As Pease notes on A. 4.168, ululatus, Greek ὀλολυγή, belongs to a group of onomatopoeic words, which also includes ἀλαλαί and ἐλελεῦ. ululatus and similar terms (as Zissos observes), just like Greek ὀλολυγή (on which see Mastronarde on Eur. Med. 1173), are very much in use in Flavian epic when describing female sounds (cf. Tac. Hist. 4.18.3: ut virorum cantu, feminarum ululatu sonuit acies), and this word may indicate a mournful cry or religious frenzy (especially in a Bacchic context); for passages, see Zissos and OLD s.v. ululatus and ululo 2. The howls in the ceremonies performed by the Galli are well known: Anthol. Gr. 6.173: γαλλαῖον ὀλόλυγμα; Luc. 1.565: sanguinei populis ulularunt tristia Galli; Mart. 5.41.2: ululat matris entheae Gallus. VF also uses the verb at 3.232: et motis ululantia Dindyma sacris. See note on exululans at 172. 144–70  Medea’s mother’s suasoria. As critics have noted, these poignant lines, which have no parallel in AR, echo Alcimede’s distress at Jason’s departure at

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

134

Commentary, lines 144–6

1.315–34, as well as Pelias’ at Acastus’ departure at 1.712–24. In the background we might detect Ariadne’s speech at Catull. 64.132–201 and Anna’s at Virg. A. 4.675–85. Eigler (1988) 125 sees similarities with Neptune’s monologue at VF 4.118–30, while Zissos (2012a) 103 notes the similarities with Hecate’s lamentation at 6.497–502. Taliercio (1997) 200–2 examines the analogies between Idyia and Virgil’s Amata by comparing VF 8.140–74 to Virg. A. 7.359–405. For the expression of grief while standing before the sea, Lazzarini mentions the scene in which Morpheus takes the shape of the dead Ceyx and appears to Alcyone in a dream (Ov. Met. 11.674–709). The twenty-­seven lines of this suasoria can be divided into two parts. In the first, Idyia tries to correct the problem by persuading Medea to come back and by threatening Jason (in lines 144–8 Idyia apostrophizes Medea; in lines 149–53 Idyia addresses herself; in lines 153–7 Idyia apostrophizes Jason); in the central line (157) the mother reaches the climax of her despair; beginning from line 158, Idyia completely changes her way of thinking. Her anger gives way to reason (why accuse an innocent?) and to motherly love, which culminates in the topos of a desire for a shared fate. On suasoriae in VF (particularly those at 3.645–89 and 5.624–70), see Barich (1982) 18–21; Scaffai (1986) 2424; Zissos (2008) lii. 144–8  The direct apostrophe to Medea. Its theme is the difference between Medea’s fatherland (where she would be queen and surrounded by her relatives) and a foreign land (where she would be alone). Note the triple use (with polyptoton) of the interrogative pronoun quo . . . quid . . . quis and of the demonstrative huc . . . hic . . . haec (with Lazzarini’s note ad loc.). Note the repetition of the personal pronoun with alliteration, in the clausulae turba tuorum, tua tellus and with polyptoton in te . . . tibi. 144  siste fugam . . . puppem: Perhaps an echo of Luc. 9.283–4, in which Cato’s words have the power to make the ships turn back: ignavum scelus est tantum fuga. dixit et omnes | haud aliter medio revocabit ab aequore puppes (note that this occurs in the same metrical position as medio . . . aequore puppem). 145  nata, potes: Commentators generally understand the word potes as a reference to Medea’s magical powers, but we should add that potes is a formula used in prayers to the gods (cf. note on 41 and Lucr. 1.31: nam tu sola potes). turba tuorum: This is an Ovidian phrase (Met. 12.286; Pont. 1.7.15), which Statius also adopts at Silv. 4.8.43. See note on 141 concerning matrum . . . turba at Ov. Met. 7.50. Lazzarini compares CLE 01189 for a choral lament, which strengthens the funereal feel of Medea’s departure. 146  iratus nondum pater: The preceding scene (134–9) seems to contradict the idea that Aeetes is not angry yet. We must read this, therefore, as a lie told  by  Idyia in a desperate attempt to make her daughter return, or rather we  should understand nondum in reference to the sombre fact that Medea

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 147–9

135

has not yet stained herself with blood by killing Absyrtus (an example of anticipatory irony). haec tua tellus: The collocation tua tellus appears at Ov. Fast. 3.572 and Tib. 1.7.25. 147  quid terris solam te credis Achaeis: The combination terris . . . Achaeis appears in the same metrical position at 3.697. Compare also Stat. Ach. 2.62: terras freto delato Achaeas. For this meaning of credere (‘to entrust, hand over’), see OLD s.v. 1a. Other occurrences appear at 2.292 (with Poortvliet) and 6.215. Virgil prefers to use the adjectival forms Achaius, Achaicus, and Achivus, but from Lucan onwards Achaeus becomes common, especially in Flavian epic. 148  quis locus Inachias inter tibi, barbara, natas: locus means one’s ‘position in society, rank, station’ (OLD s.v. 17). barbara is in the vocative case instead of its original dative due to attraction, possibly for metrical reasons (cf. Liberman 2.358–9 n. 64). Liberman adopts Postgate’s emendation nuptas instead of the transmitted natas, arguing that Inachias should not be understood as ‘Greek’, but rather simply as ‘Argive’, since it refers to the events at Corinth. Given the context, the events at Corinth clearly lurk in the background, whether Inachias is to be understood as Argive or as Greek (OLD s.v. b). The emendation accordingly seems unnecessary, especially since nuptas refers to already married women, who would not be competing with Medea (specifically, Creusa will be the one to do so). natas is, therefore, a more preferable choice, since the contrast is between natives and foreigners (one that inverts the traditional perspective, since here the foreign land is Greece). Note the emphasis on the word nata (lines 145 and 162), natas (lines 148 and 156), and natus in acrostic (cf. note on 153–7). 149–53  Idyia’s speech now shifts to present a mother’s introspective outlook and places emphasis on marriage and the household. 149  istane vota domus: Critics do not agree on how to interpret the phrase vota domus. Some (Mozley, Rupprecht, Caviglia, Liberman, and Dräger) understand domus as a nominative (in that case, we would need to consider the final syllable as long, as is metus at 2.225; for further examples, see Liberman 1.226 n. 47 on 3.199), accordingly taking the phrase to mean ‘the desired home’; others interpret it as a genitive (Schulte, Spaltenstein), translating these words as ‘vota parentum’ (Wagner), ‘les vœux de notre maisonnée’ (Soubiran). There are also differing opinions concerning vota (are they Medea’s or her mother’s?). The syntax allows for the different proposals, but I am inclined to connect this line with the following one and thus understand both from the mother’s ­perspective, taking, therefore, domus as a genitive. exspectatique hymenaei: The only two attestations of this noun in VF appear in the eighth book (here and in line 259), both in a clausula and following the

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

136

Commentary, lines 150–1

Catullan (64.20 and 141; 66.11) and Virgilian pattern (appearing in a clausula fifteen out of sixteen times, but the model is Greek, as Soubiran highlights by citing Callim. Hym. 4.296; Theocr. 18.8). hymenaeus is a Latin transcription for the Greek ex­clam­ation shouted during weddings, a personified god (Serv. ad Virg. A. 1.651). When it has the sense of ‘marriage’ (OLD s.v. 2), the word is almost always in the plural (in Virgil, there may be one attestation of the singular at A. 4.127, with Pease; see also Catull. 66.11: novo auctus hymenaeo and Sen. Phoen. 262–3). Liberman compares Virg. A. 11.54: hi nostri reditus expectatique triumphi; see also Catull. 64.141: sed conubia laeta, sed optatos hymenaeos. 150–3  The simile with a bird of prey. Spaltenstein says that Idyia wishes to be a seabird, just like the Harpies (for which see his note on 4.450) and that she desires to possess their characteristic screech (claro . . . cantu, 152). He also takes the simile as part of a literary motif that includes the transformation of Scylla and her father (Ciris 536–41) and of Tereus, Philomela, and Procne (Ov. Met. 6.667–74), in which these birds chase each other while demanding revenge. Zissos (per litteras) suggests a reference to AR 3.1111–17, in which Medea wishes that a rumour or a bird would come to Jason if he should ever forget her. Pellucchi (2012) 84–5 connects this simile to the one likening Hercules to a halcyon at 4.42–50 (in both cases a parent wishes to regain their kidnapped child). Considering the maritime context, the reference to a bird of prey that emits a clarus cantus also makes one think of the Sirens, creatures who are connected to revenge and hinder the Argonauts’ return home (AR 4.900–2). If so, we could count this passage among those in which VF alludes to episodes  told in AR (in particular 4.892–921 about the Sirens on the island of Anthemoessa), which he will not otherwise narrate. For a list of these episodes, which constitute important clues for estimating the number of intended books for this poem, see Adamietz (1976) 110–12. 150  hunc petii grandaeva diem: For hic taking the meaning of talis, see TLL vi/3.2728.16–20; Bömer on Ov. Met. 5.111; Strand (1972) 70; and Perutelli on VF 7.10. On the elevated compound grandaeva (Greek πολυετής does not imply extreme old age), which Ennius perhaps used but is first attested in Lucilius (fr. 1108 Marx; cf. Pac. fr. 120.2 Schierl: grandaevitas), see Bömer on Ov. Met. 5.99 and VF 1.736: grandaeva Thessalis (Alcimede; with Zissos ad loc.). Its first known attestation in epic occurs at Virg. A. 1.121, but post-­Virgilian epicists use it frequently (it appears seven times in VF). 150–1  vellem unguibus uncis | ut volucris: Note the alliterative sequence of the letter u (unguibus uncis), underlining the howl with which Idyia tries to make an impression on Medea (the alliteration continues with the plosives: possem praedonis in ipsius ora). unguibus uncis is a Lucretian clausula (5.1322: morsibus adfixae validis atque unguibus uncis, of lionesses in battle), but see also VF 7.312 (with Perutelli’s and Davis’s notes): minibus . . . uncis, which serves to

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 151–3

137

signify that Medea is a witch, and Germ. Arat. 688–9 Gain: redit armiger uncis | unguibus . . . ales. Spaltenstein also highlights how fingernails (directed against a man’s face) are a traditional weapon for women as at Hor. Carm. 1.6.18–19: proelia virginum | sectis in iuvenes unguibus acrium. The collocation ut volucris appears elsewhere only at Ov. Met. 2.716 (when Mercury is compared to a kite) and Ilias 417, taking the same metrical position at the beginning of the line in each case. For other examples of a Kurzvergleich in VF, see Gärtner (1994) 54–8. 151–2  possem praedonis in ipsius ora | ire: VF applies the term praedo, often used to refer to pirates (OLD s.v. 1), exclusively to Jason and always to mark his wickedness: Pelias refers to him in the same way at 1.723 (with Zissos), as do Aeetes at 7.50 (see Perutelli) and Absyrtus at 8.267. On the attestations of praedo, see also Pellucchi (2012) 203–4 and Lazzarini (2012) 174–5 for the term’s implications for the development of the narrative. In AR 3.372 Aeetes calls the Argonauts λωβητῆρης. For the phrase in ora ire, compare ipsa loquentis | iret in ora at 7.293–4 with Perutelli, who emphasizes how the image comes from Ovidian erotic poetry, such as Ov. Am. 1.7.64: in vultus . . . ire meos (with McKeown) and 2.5.46: in teneras . . . ire genas. Liberman understands praedonis in ipsius ora as a hypallage for praedonis in ipsa ora. 152  claro . . . cantu: This might be an adaptation of the phrase ὄπα λείριον (literally ‘the voice of the lily’, so sweet and clear), which AR uses to describe the Sirens’ song at 4.903 (also note the homophony between ἵεσαν and ire ratem at the beginning of the respective lines). The same expression is also used in Arg. Orph. 253 to describe Orpheus’ song, which in AR overpowers the Sirens with the Bistonian cithara and lively music. 153  quam genui: Might this be an echo of γείνατο at AR 4.896? See also Virg. A. 5.39: quem genuit and 10.848: quem genui (in the same position, with enjambment). 153–7  Idyia directly apostrophizes Jason. Medea had already been betrothed to Styrus: cf. 5.257–8: plena necdum Medea iuventa | adnuitur thalamis Albani virgo tyranni and 6.44: pacta quod Albano coniunx Medea tyranno. The very thing that Idyia claims Pelias did not order Jason to do (evadere furto . . . abducere natas . . . siquid super accipe templis) is on the contrary exactly what Pelias had rhetorically encouraged Jason to do at 7.48–50 (the irony in cur age non, which finds echoes in non . . . Pelias . . . te iubet . . . instead materializes through Jason’s actions). Note that lines 154–8, in which Idyia’s attention turns to Jason, are sealed with the acrostic NATVS (natas appears at the end of the central line that  provides the T for this acrostic); for detailed analysis, see Castelletti (2008) 229–30. Lazzarini compares these lines to Amata’s situation in Virg. A. 7.359–72.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

138

Commentary, lines 153–6

153  Albano . . . tyranno: Cf. 5.257. The first mention of Styrus (a character who does not appear in AR but is primarily inspired by Virgil’s Turnus) as Medea’s fiancé occurs at 3.497 (Styrus gener with Manuwald ad loc.), and he is always marked as Albanus (cf. 5.258, 459; 6.44). The Albani (cf. 3.497; 5.258 and 459; 6.194 and 271) were a people who settled near the western coast of the Caspian Sea on the left bank of the river Cyrus (today known as the Kura), corresponding to the modern regions of Azerbaijan and Dagestan (see Fucecchi on 6.44, who cites Plin. Nat. 7.12 and Gell. 9.4.6). For tyrannus, adopted into Latin from Greek τύραννος in the archaic period and initially used with the neutral sense of ‘sovereign, monarch’ (OLD s.v. 1), see Zissos on 1.29–30, Wijsman on 5.258, and Harrison on Virg. A. 10.448. Virgil uses the term both in a neutral fashion and with its pejorative connotation, but during the principate the latter meaning seems to prevail, and VF employs it in this way to describe Pelias, Laomedon, Amycus, and Aeetes (cf. Zissos). In Styrus’ case, the pejorative sense does not seem as pronounced (or if it is, it reflects the perspective of an audience on Jason’s side, according to Wijsman). This is most likely unintentional, but we can also subtly read the unfortunate suitor’s name in promisSa TYRannO (in the same case). 154  nil tecum miseri pepigere parentes: Aeetes had promised the Fleece to Jason, at 7.651–2: terga . . . quae [qui γ C*] pepigit. Also consider lines 7.46–7: ipsum me pandere lucos | imperet. For pepigere parentes, compare Catull. 62.28: quae pepigere viri, pepigerunt ante parentes, whereas the collocation miseri . . .  parentes (already used at 5.349: nondum miseros exosa parentes) appears in the same metrical position starting from Virg. A. 12.932: miseri te si qua parentis (a variation on Lucr. 3.51: miseri venere parentant). On pango as a tech­nical verb for betrothals, see Lazzarini (2012) 176. 155  non hoc Pelias evadere furto: VF uses evadere in the same position at 7.163: ut tandem evadere tectis (Jason expresses his hope that Medea runs away from home) and in the opposite situation at 7.299 (Medea wishes to escape Venus’ words). furto could refer to the Fleece, but considering what Idyia says in line 157 we must understand furtum with reference to Medea. furtum can mean ‘abduction’ (OLD s.v. 1b, and this is how Spaltenstein takes it), but it is also often used in the context of ‘secret love affairs’ (OLD s.v. 2), and Jason will be compared to Mars visiting Venus furto in line 228. Liberman compares Paris and Helen at Aesch. Ag. 402: κλοπαῖσι γυναικός and 534: ὀφλὼν γὰρ ἁρπαγῆς τε καὶ κλοπῆς δίκην (see Fraenkel 2.270). Lazzarini (who interprets furto as an instrumental ablative and not in an adverbial sense) compares Virg. A. 10.91: foedera solvere furto, probably an allusion to Paris’ abduction of Helen. 156  abducere natas: A repetition of the clausula that appears at 7.49: ipsas gremiis abducere natas (with Davis ad loc.), which in turn is adopted from Virg. A. 10.79: gremiis abducere pactas (as Perutelli notes, which shows how abduco is

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 157–62

139

a verb frequently used to designate the seizing of women, especially in the language of comedy (TLL i.61.3–15). 157  vellus habe . . . super accipe templis: Cf. 7.48: templis sacrata avellere dona. Spaltenstein disagrees with the OLD’s (s.v. 3) interpretation of super as insuper here, instead considering it an elision for superest (‘if something precious is still to be found in my temple, take it’). According to Liberman, templis is an ablative of place, but Spaltenstein and Dräger take it as a dative of possession. 158  quid ego quemquam: Since the last vowel in ego is usually short (cf. Müller [1894] 411), this line has prompted various editors to make conjectures. Müller’s restoration, quid ego o, which Liberman accepts (with further discussion of the issue at 2.363–4 n. 98), convinces neither Lazzarini nor Pellucchi, who find the proposals in Columbus, ago quemve, and Courtney (1961) 7, ago quemque (the latter accepted by Soubiran), even less persuasive. This is a troub­ ling issue, but there is a long rhetorical tradition of using sed quid ego at the beginning of a line (cf., e.g., Enn. Ann. 314 Skutsch; Lucil. 1000 Marx; Catull. 64.164; Virg. A. 2.101). Provided that VF might also be reusing the original prosody of ego, by analogy of Greek ἐγώ, and that the prosody of disyllabic words ending in -o fluctuates in Flavian poetry (cf. Perutelli on virgo at 7.2), I prefer the reading ego et (despite Heraeus ap. Liberman 2.364 n. 98), on the model of Prop. 4.2.3 (with the comments of Fedeli, Ciccarelli, and Dimundo ad loc.). Note that VF also elides ego before et at 1.116 and 328 (in the same metrical position). 159  ipsa fugit . . . (nefas) ipsa ardet: Note the emphatic positioning of nefas, which falls between the two symmetrical cola ipsa fugit and ipsa ardet. The parenthetical use of nefas, introduced in Catull. 68.89 and used often by Virgil (A. 7.73; 8.688; 10.673), appears frequently in VF (3.186 and 258; 4.692; 5.39; 8.267 and 434). ardet amore (cf. Catull. 64.19) and similar expressions are frequently employed (see Pease on Virg. A. 4.101). 160–5  VF lists the typical symptoms of lovesickness, which manifest themselves in Medea’s various sensory perceptions. For a discussion, see especially Spaltenstein (2005) 420–1 and Lazzarini (2012) 180. 160 infelix: This word is also applied to Medea at 6.490; 7.239, 296, and 371. For its occurrence in literature culminating in Virgil’s Dido, cf. Perutelli on 7.239. 161  †nam singula†: The text is hopelessly corrupt. The reading in the codices, nam singula (V), is due to the mistaken diplography from nam singula in 160 (note the repetition of the ending -unt in redeunt and subierunt). All proposed corrections are entirely conjectural. 162  nullae te . . . dapes . . . iuvabant: The construction of iuvare with a noun is a feature of Valerian style. On the commonly occurring refusal to eat as a symptom

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

140

Commentary, lines 163–5

of lovesickness, see, e.g., Catull. 50.9: nec me miserum cibus iuvaret; Lazzarini (2012) 181. 163 tempora: As Langen notes, the transmitted tempora is not very con­vin­ cing. Liberman 2.364 n. 100 proposes that we restore Orville’s conjecture, pocula (explaining the error from pucula – po(c)ula – pora), which would match dapes; in order to justify this balanced construction, Liberman cites various parallels, including 2.155 and 194; 4.454–5; Tib. 1.5.49–50; Virg. A. 1.706). All modern editors keep tempora, which is the lectio difficilior, consistently used in the manuscripts. I am also inclined to keep the text as transmitted, though I also find Nairn’s (1899) 21 proposed carmina worthwhile. aegraque membra: Liberman follows Courtney’s proposal in emending the transmitted verba into membra, on account of both the phrase’s meaning and its frequent use (cf. Ov. Her. 11.38; 21.190; Luc. 8.86–7; Sil. 6.89–90; Stat. Theb. 6.511–12; Ps-­Quint. Decl. 12.2). Furthermore, verba is often substituted for membra (for which see Housman’s note on Man. 2.758, which emends this line by adopting Scaliger’s proposed membra in place of verba and cites as parallel cases Ov. Met. 14.148; Juv. 10.198; Prop. 2.34.22). Watt (2001) 231–2 adopts the same emendation for Sen. Ep. 95.12, citing this line as a possible parallel. According to Spaltenstein, the correction is unnecessary, since in this passage Medea displays a series of symptoms that are considered characteristic of lovesickness from Sappho onwards, such as the lover’s pallor (cf. Sapph. 2.14) and aphasia (cf. Catull. 51.9: lingua . . . torpet). Pellucchi and Lazzarini keep the reading of the manuscripts, but I think that emending verba into membra is the right decision. 164  errantesque genae: Lemaire points out that genae could be understood either literally (Medea’s cheeks change colour depending on her state of mind) or figuratively (genae have the sense of oculi, a widely attested poeticism appearing as early as Enn. Ann. 546 Skutsch; cf., e.g., Prop. 3.12.26; Ov. Her. 20.206; Stat. Theb. 12.325; TLL vi/1.767.69–83. The second hypothesis is preferable, as VF also applies this meaning to genae at 7.258: attolle genas. The case at 1.758: genas et lumina pressit is more problematic: critics are divided as to whether to understand genas as the lion’s ‘eyelids’ or ‘cheeks’ (see Kleywegt’s and Galli’s notes ad loc.). 164–5  alieno gaudia vultu | semper erant: Critics disagree on what this phrase means, and several attempts have been made at correcting the text (Langen emends it to in aliena, ah! gaudia vultu, while Baehrens proposes alieno ad gaudia vultu | semper eras). There is no need to alter the text. If we understand alieno vultu as an ablative of quality (A-­G 415) with gaudia (to be understood as ‘appearance, look’; cf. OLD s.v. 6), we can apply the meaning of ‘not your own’ to alieno, implying that Medea is faking joy in this case (Liberman, Caviglia, Soubiran, Dräger, Pellucchi). According to Pius (followed by Carelli and Spaltenstein, who take alieno vultu to mean alieni viri vultu), Medea’s happiness

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 165–8

141

depends upon Jason’s own (in such a case, alieno vultu would need to be understood as an ablative of source or cause). For the literary models in this scene, see Lazzarini (2012) 183–4, who cites Hom. Od. 20.347 (serving as the model for Hor. S. 2.3.72); Iuv. 3.105; and Quint. Inst. 11.1.39. 165–70  These lines can be read in different ways depending on how one chooses to punctuate them (for the different variations favoured by different editors, see the discussion in Liberman 2.366 n. 105 and Pellucchi [2012] 211–12). If we do not wish to alter the text, the resulting passage is convoluted and difficult. The manuscript tradition notwithstanding, I prefer to follow the text proposed by Liberman. However these lines are read, they portray the topos of the desire (common among lovers) for a shared fate, which is a tragic motif that appears in the Dido and Anna episode in Virg. A. 4.678–9. 165  cur tanta mihi non prodita pestis: For the trope of love as an illness, the loci classici are Catull. 76.20: eripite hanc pestem perniciemque mihi; Virg. A. 1.712: pesti devota futurae and 4.90: tali persensit peste teneri, see Pichon (1902) 232 and La Penna (1951) 206–8. VF also uses the first Virgilian passage at 7.125: aegra nova iam peste canis rabieque futura and at 7.252: pestemque latentem (see Perutelli’s and Davis’s notes ad loc.). 166  consideret aula: This collocation only appears in VF. consideo has its proper meaning of ‘settle as a colonist, make one’s home’ (OLD s.v. 4). aula (a poeticism attested at least as early as Virgil) appears also at 6.47; 7.102 and 301 with the meaning of ‘an aristocrat’s mansion’ whether belonging to a king or to heroes (cf. TLL. ii.1456.15). 167  nec talem paterere fugam: Elsewhere VF employs the collocation ferre fugam a few times (see 4.644 and 7.297; note on 5). This use of pati (on the second person singular ending -re for -ris in the poem, cf. Contino [1973] 20), already attested at Ov. Tr. 3.1.74: et patimur nati, quam tulit ipse fugam, suggests that in the eyes of Medea’s mother, this is a forced exile rather than a voluntary choice. Lazzarini rightly compares Eur. Med. 74–5, where the phrase ἐξανέξεται πάσχοντας refers to the exile of Medea’s children; she is speculating on other possible tragic models lost to us. 167–8  commune fuisset | . . . nunc omne nefas: If we exclude the line Troia (nefas!) commune sepulcrum Asiae Europaeque at Catull. 68.89, in which nefas is par­en­thet­ic­al, this phrase is found at Luc. 1.6–7: certatum totis concussi viribus orbis | in commune nefas and Sen. Thy. 139–40: peccatum satis est; fas valuit nihil | aut commune nefas. Lazzarini notes that in these two cases the adjective extends the reach of the offence to the whole community, namely the entire calamity of the civil war and the degeneration weighing upon the descendants of Pelops, respectively. In Stat. Ach. 668–9 (silet aegra premitque | iam commune nefas) the word refers to the wrong­doing in the consummated union between Achilles and Deidamia, at least in the eyes of the girl. Leo emends nunc to

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

142

Commentary, lines 168–71

mecum, whereas Heinsius chooses tecum, but the original reading is justified by the following iremus (the nefas has already been committed, and Medea’s flight is imminent). For other examples of postponing aut to the second term in a phrase, cf. Langen on 2.181. 168–9  iremus et ambae | in quascumque vias: This phrase picks up on the vagueness of Medea’s plans for escape, which VF evokes at lines 4–5. Lazzarini compares Sen. Med. 891–2 (the nurse speaks to Medea): effer citatum sede Pelopea gradum | Medea, praeceps quaslibet terras pete. 169 pariter: VF repeats the word pariter, here highlighted by the caesura and the al­lit­er­ation with petiisse, in line 172, placing it in the same metrical position. On the topic of sharing the same fate, Lazzarini compares Ov. Met. 11.441–3 (Ceyx speaks to Alcyone). 170 et saevi, quaecumque est, hospitis urbem: The collocation saevus . . . hospes appears only here and at Lucr. 5.984–7: eiectique domo fugiebant . . . | . .  .  | . . . cedebant nocte paventes | hospitibus saevis instrata cubilia fronde. saevus is often used by epic poets in reference to tyrants while it also designates a warrior’s ruthlessness (cf. Virg. A. 2.29, Achilles; 11.910, Aeneas). In this case, quaecumque is a relative in­def­in­ite pronoun whereas in line 4 (the first mention of the theme of Medea’s vague plans for escape) it is an adjective. 171–4  These closing lines of Idyia’s suasoria recall lines 140–3 almost verbatim: genetrix ~ mater, soror is repeated, implet exululans ~ implet ululatibus (the word exululans at the beginning of this line adopts the same prefix as exstat of line 143), pariter ~ aequales, notos ~ auras, while famulae replaces puellae, but also matresque nurusque. The scene recalls a tragic chorus yet again, but this time VF’s lexical choices strengthen the impression that he intends to allude to the ritual context of the Magna Mater, especially given his decision to use the word exululans (see note on 172). genetrix is employed instead of the more common mater in phrases like magna deum genetrix (Virg. A. 2.788 and 9.82); clamore supremo is an Ovidian clausula that VF also adopts at 1.752 and which can evoke a funerary context (namely the conclamatio, see note on 172), a context well-­suited to Idyia’s grief over losing Medea and to the triduum filled with funeral lamentations (which the word questu in line 171 could evoke) over the loss of Attis. On the allusions to the evocatio or translatio of foreign cults in VF and other Flavian poets, see Fucecchi (2013). For the cult of Magna Mater, see, e.g., Graillot (1912); Wiseman (1984); Gruen (1996) 5–33; Borgeaud (1996); Roller (1999); and Horsfall on Virg. A. 2.788 and 11.768. For Cybele’s role in the Trojan War (especially in the Aeneid), see Nauta (2007) and Hardie (2007). 171  implet . . . questu: questibus implet is a Virgilian iunctura (cf. G. 4.515 and A. 9.480, always in a clausula), which VF uses at 2.167 and 6.726. Here, he ­modifies the phrase by using the singular questu.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 172–3

143

172 exululans: Half of this verb’s appearances in Latin literature are found in Ovid (Fast. 4.186 and 341; Ars 1.508; Met. 1.233; 4.521; 6.597; Tr. 4.1.42), though he is not the ‘inventor’, since we also find it in Cic. Leg. 2.39: ut eadem exululent. Howling is one of the most important features of Cybele’s ancient cults (cf. Bömer on Ov. Fast. 4.186). famulae: famulus/-a appears in poetry as an elevated synonym for the prosaic servus (TLL vi/1.266.32–267.33) and ancilla (TLL vi/1.268.48–84); cf. Axelson (1945) 58; Watson (1985) 434–6; Zissos (2008) 389–90, who notes that VF also uses the term to denote the ministers and assistants of a cult who are not of enslaved status (cf. 3.19 and Ov. Met. 3.574 with Bömer’s note) or to refer to the divine figures who carry out Jupiter’s will (such as the Argo at 1.308 or the Harpies at 4.520). At 3.19: Dindyma sanguineis famulum bacchata lacertis, VF references the ministers of Cybele’s cult, who for a long time did not enjoy the status of priests (cf. Graillot [1912] 77), but were instead called famuli (cf. Cic. Leg. 2.9.22: Idaeae matris famulos). The women of Phrygia also participated in the goddess’s cult, but I wonder if we should discern VF playing an ironic game with Cybele’s attendants, as they practised self-­ emasculation; in that case, the use of famulae should be counted among the well-­known examples of Roman derision towards the Galli, whom they charged with howling to Attis with effeminate voices and a discordant ruckus (cf. Apul. Met. 8.26: chorus puellarum; Ov. Met. 3.536: feminae voces; Iuv. 2.111: fracta voce and 6.515: rauca cohors); see Graillot (1912) 302. This scorn also extends to the Phrygians in general (Virg. A. 12.99: semiviri Phrygis, adopted by VF at 8.347; A. 9.617: o vere Phrygiae, neque enim Phryges; A. 4.215: Paris cum semiviro comitatu). clamore supremo: This is an Ovidian clausula (but see also clamore supremos at Virg. G. 4.460 together with the reading in the manuscripts P and R). VF uses it at 1.752: horruit interea famulum clamore supremo (with Zissos ad loc.). As Spaltenstein notes, clamore supremo alludes to a funereal context. This allusion is strengthened by the presence of the word nomine (line 174), which recalls the conclamatio (cf. D-­S s.v. funus 1387d, 1395d), precisely the subject of the Ovidian passage, and is perhaps also foreshadowed at 3.349–50: iecere supremo | tum clamore faces. Spaltenstein compares Prop. 4.7.24: te revocante (cf. the reclamant in line 173) regarding the conclamatio (on which see Fedeli, Ciccarelli, and Dimundo ad loc.). 173  in vacuos dant verba notos: Poets frequently use the expression verba dare, just like voces dare (see Spaltenstein’s extensive note) to mean ‘to speak’, and in this case the words end up in vacuos . . . notos, that is, thrown into the winds (on this pro­verb­ial expression, see Otto [1890] s.v. ventus 2.364–5 and Nisbet and Hubbard on Hor. Carm. 1.26.12). The south winds are said to be vacui, but in truth this adjective describes Idyia’s own words. Liberman cites Ov. Met. 12.469: verbaque tot fudit vacuas animosus in auras and Virg. A. 12.592 for

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

144

Commentary, line 174

the equivalency of noti for venti (or aurae, aer). See also 1.421: saltem in vacuos ut bracchia ventos (with Zissos, who mentions that Servius provides the gloss ventos inanes = vacuos at Virg. A. 10.82). notus is the specific name for the south wind, but here it should be understood as a poeticism referring to the winds in general (cf. OLD s.v. 1b). dominamque reclamant: That Medea’s famulae refer to her as their mistress is unsurprising, but the word domina is also applied to Cybele at 3.22; Ov. Fast. 4.340 and 368; Catull. 35.14 (Dindymi dominam), 63.13 and 91; Virg. A. 3.113. Lazzarini compares 5.441: clamantem . . . procul linquens regna parentem, a line proleptically describing this flight scene (carved on the doors of Aeetes’ palace), in which Medea is the one who calls to her father. For the new construction of reclamare with an accusative (which VF also uses at 3.596), see Kleywegt (1986) 2455. 174  te venti procul et tua fata ferebant: Compare 5.17: dicta dabant ventis nec debita fata movebant. This phrase provides an effective closing for the passage, creating an excellent contrast between the active winds that drive Medea far away and the ineffective winds (vacuos . . . notos, 173), which do not bear the words of the famulae. Wagner (1864) 393 highlights the appropriateness of the poet’s tragic/ elegiac apostrophe to Medea after the preceding tirade. The clausula fata ferebant echoes Virg. A. 2.34: sive dolo seu iam Troiae sic fata ferebant (inspired by Hom. Il. 2.834 and adapted at Ov. Met. 3.176; see Bömer); thus, VF creates yet another link to Colchis’ ultimate fate by alluding to the downfall of Troy. Moreover, the parallel between Medea and the Trojan Horse is quite fitting, considering the devastating consequences the latter had for those who brought it inside the walls of the city. On the combination fata ferre, see TLL vi/1.362.11–15. For the expression fata ferre aliquem, see Virg. Ecl. 5.34: postquam te fata tulerunt and VF 2.592–4: te quoque . . .  | . . . | fata ferunt and 7.133: fata virum si iam suprema ferebant.

175–216.  THE SAILING Now that the events in Colchis have come to a definitive conclusion, the poem addresses the complicated return voyage of the Argonauts. Lines 175–201, in which the Argonauts debate which route they should take, corresponds to AR 4.241–302. The following section (202–16), treating Medea’s isolation, concludes the part of the story connecting the departure from Colchis to the Argo’s first docking on the island of Peuce. In AR, the corresponding section ends at line 302. The difference between VF’s account and that of his model is clear not only from the number of lines in the Flavian poem (about forty, as opposed to the sixty in AR), but also especially from the content. Indeed, if the Greek model presents a unified whole, the Latin poet joins two scenes that strongly contrast

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 175–6

145

with one another, producing what will prove to be a constant motif in the remainder of the book: the overlap and mutual integration of the theme of travel and return as well as the theme of complications in Jason and Medea’s relationship. 175–201  The debate concerning the trip’s route. In this section, VF is clearly inspired more by the Virgilian episode in which Palinurus advises Aeneas to change their route (cf. A. 5.8–34) than by the corresponding passage in AR; for a detailed comparison, see especially Pellucchi (2012) 225–6. As to the story of the return voyage, the Argonautic traditions differ considerably. According to some sources (e.g., Eur. Med. 431–3; 1261–5; Herodor. FGrHist 31 F 10; Callim. fr.  19 Pfeiffer), the Argonauts retrace the same route by which they came. According to others (e.g., Pind. Pyth. 4.9–58 and 251–62; Hecat. FGrHist 1 F 18; Antim. fr. 76 Matthews), after the Argonauts sail through the rivers Phasis or Tanais and arrive at the Ocean, they reach the Red Sea, and from there (passing through Libya) they come to the Mediterranean. AR reuses a rare tradition ascribed to Timagetes: the Argonauts arrive at the Adriatic by travelling back up the river Ister with a winding itinerary that was of aetiological geographic interest to the poet, as he seeks to reuse and reconnect all of the pieces related to the Argonautic cycle; cf. Delage (1930); Vian and Delage (1981) 16; Paduano and Fusillo (1986) 565–9; Hunter (2015) 7–14. As far as VF is concerned, since the poem breaks off at line 467, we can only establish that he chooses to follow his Hellenistic model in having the Argonauts travel a different route than the one by which they came, that is, in having them pass through the Ister. For more information, see Pellucchi (2012) 221–5. 175  inde diem noctemque volant: It is difficult to establish whether we should take this temporal indication literally (in this case, the discussion concerning the route the Argonauts should take would occur after a single day and night, that is, in half the time that it takes in AR 4.244) or whether we should understand diem noctemque in a more general sense (with Spaltenstein). In any case, the collocation is common in prose and appears in poetry at least as early as Virg. G. 3.341. Perhaps VF was thinking of A. 3.201–2: ipse diem noctemque negat discernere caelo | nec meminisse viae media Palinurus in unda. See also nocte dieque at line 416. The Argo’s swiftness is expressed by volant at Ov. Her. 6.66: illa volat; ventus concava tela tenet, and the theme is found already in the opening lines of Euripides’ Medea. Unlike in AR, there is no divine intervention to hasten the ship’s course here. 175–6  redeuntibus aura | gratior: aura is primarily an elevated word, used in the context of sailing to designate how the winds both hinder and help sailing (cf. TLL ii.1473.40). The motif of the favourable wind is already found in AR 4.241. Here the wind is not only favourable for sailing but also pleasant since it brings the heroes home; perhaps VF is also thinking of the clausula ubi gratior aura in Hor. Ep. 1.10.15.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

146

Commentary, lines 176–8

176  et notae Minyis transcurrere terrae: As noted by Summers (1894) 46, transcurrere is a historical infinitive as well as an example of variatio modorum with respect to the preceding redeuntibus aura gratior, with ellipsis of a form of sum (cf. Merone [1957] 84–5, who notes that VF’s choice of verb allows the reader to see the different lands gliding past in front of the heroes’ eyes). OLD (s.v. transcurro 2b) cites this line for the sense of ‘to move rapidly or hurry across, through’, applied to inanimate objects. Kleywegt (1986) 2464–5 observes how this kind of reversal (in this case, the ship glides in front of the known world, rather than the opposite) is a narrative technique already known to the archaic poets and frequently employed by Virgil (e.g., A. 3.72: terraeque urbes recedunt). 177 Erginus: Erginus, one of the two sons of Poseidon (cf. 1.415 with Zissos), had replaced the helmsman Tiphys, who died while the Argonauts were staying with Lycus (cf. 5.13–66). AR portrays Erginus’ brother Ancaeus as the one who replaces Tiphys as helmsman (cf. 2.894–8). As sons of Poseidon, both are experts regarding the sea. For a profile of Erginus as a character, see Kleywegt (1991) 229 and Pellucchi (2008a). puppi sic fatur ab alta: VF exactly reproduces part of Virg. A. 8.115. See also A. 5.12: ipse gubernator puppi Palinurus ab alta. On the role of the gubernator, see note on 202. The formula sic fatur, which serves to introduce direct discourse (already common in Virgil), always appears in the same metrical position within the poem (cf. 3.616; 4.61; 5.193; 7.171). 178  vos . . . Aesonide: Merone (1957) 38–9 dispels the confusion produced by the use of the plural vos despite the fact that the speech is addressed to Jason (represented by the vocative singular Aesonide), stating that the plural is employed honoris causa. A speech addressed to a crowd and with an apostrophe directed only towards its foremost figure is a feature that already appears in Homer (cf. Od. 2.310; 3.43) and is also widespread in Latin poetry (e.g., Virg. A. 1.140 and 375; Prop. 3.14.44; Sil. 3.222). Pellucchi (2012) 231 considers Virg. A. 9.525: vos, o Calliope as VF’s intertext. contenti vellere capto: Heinsius emended transmitted capto into rapto (which Burman followed), but Liberman is correct in saying that an issue would arise not so much since it would be strange for an Argonaut to say rapto (as Weichert argued, but compare Aeson’s words at 1.345–7: te . . . | victorem atque umeros ardentem vellere rapto | accipiam) as much as because, while capto expresses the idea of possession, rapto focuses on the process of acquisition. Compare also 6.319–21: iam Phasidis amnem | contigeras nec longa dies, ut capta videres | vellera. The transmitted text also supports Lazzarini (2012) 6, who claims that the heroes have achieved the complete fulfilment of their desires, as emphasized by the use of the ablative with contentus, an allusion to a series of poetic passages that reference the restoration of the Golden Age (Cic. Arat. 17 Pellacani: malebant tenui contenti vivere cultu; Tib. 1.1.25: iam

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 179–81

147

modo iam possim contentus vivere parvo; Ov. Met. 1.103: contentique cibis nullo cogente creatis). VF also uses contentus with the ablative at 7.354: nec notis stabat contenta venenis (Medea), in which it is difficult to detect a reference to the Golden Age. 179 superet: OLD s.v. 7c cites this line for the meaning ‘to remain to be done, experienced, etc.’. 180  crastina namque dies: On the use of the feminine crastina dies or of the masculine crastinus dies, cf. TLL iv.1106.11–47; Norden on Virg. A. 6.429. trucis ad confinia Ponti: For trucis applied to the Black Sea, cf. Catull. 4.9: trucem ponticum sinum; in trux numerous commentators see a reference to the etymology of the Pontus Euxinus (called Πόντος Ἄξεινος and later Πόντος Εὔξεινος for eu­phem­is­tic / apotropaic purposes), as reported, e.g., by Ov. Tr. 4. 4.55–6: frigida me cohibent Euxini litora Ponti: | dictus ab antiquis Axenus ille fuit and Plin. Nat. 6.1: Pontus Euxinus, antea ab inhospitali feritate Axinus appellatus. For the entire expression trucis ad confinia Ponti, Lazzarini compares Pind. Pyth. 4.203–4: ἐπ’ Ἀξείνου στόμα πεμπόμενοι | ἤλυθον. 181 Cyaneas: VF does not differentiate between the Cyaneae and the iuga concita (cf. 1.4) or the Symplegades (the rocks which crash together, named from the verb συμπλήσσω). The πέτραι Κυανέαι were a pair of rocky islets located on the European shore of the Bosporus (cf. AR 4.1002–3 and the related scholion; Delage [1930] 131). Given that both were famous for the same (op­tic­ al) phenomenon of seeming to crash together, the ancients often confuse the Symplegades with the Planctai rocks (which Hom. Od. 12.59–61 and AR 4.924–6 place near the Strait of Messina), as one can read, e.g., in Plin. Nat. 6.13: insulae in Ponto Planctae sive Cyaneae sive Symplegades. In VF, the dramatic trip through the Symplegades happens on the voyage to Colchis (4.637–710). Euripides places it during the return voyage in Med. 431–3, 1263–4, though lines 1–2 seem more ambiguous (cf. Mastronarde ad loc.). Here, Cyaneas (the etymology of which signifies the gloomy nature of the place, cf. Eur. Med. 2) is a substantive adjective, as it is at 1.58–9: conticuit, certas Scythico concurrere ponto | Cyaneas (note that in the eighth book VF reuses the same met­ric­al pos­ ition for ponto and Cyaneas, and also observe the alliteration of c, used to imitate a percussive effect), but VF also uses the adjective with cautes (1.630), montes (2.381–2; 8.193), and rupes (4.637–8). o Tiphy: VF uses the Greek vocative Tiphy in the same metrical position at 5.102. Tiphys is traditionally depicted as the Argo’s helmsman (cf. AR 1.105–10), and VF introduces him at 1.418–19 (cui tradere caelum | adsidua Tiphys vultum lassatus ab Arcto), well before the catalogue of heroes, and thus underlines his particular importance. The poet also assigns a metapoetic function to Tiphys’ character, since he embodies not only the Argo’s helmsman, but also the poet’s Aratean guide (on this feature, see especially Krasne [2014a]). Tiphys’ death

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

148

Commentary, lines 181–4

happens during the voyage to Colchis (5.15–34) immediately after Idmon’s. On the implications of this episode, see van der Schuur (2014). 181–2  meminique . . . tuorum | . . ., pater, memini, venerande, laborum: For the rare occurrence of rhyme, here produced by tuorum and laborum, see Summers (1894) 53. The convoluted syntax in these lines, the hyperbaton, the isocolon, and the anaphora of memini indicate Erginus’ emotional state (cf. Catull. 101) and underline this important moment within the story, in which the new helmsman is about to change the Argonauts’ route. On the honorary use of pater (a common title given to leaders appearing from Plaut. Trin. 878, which expresses Erginus’ respectful homage to his predecessor), see also note on 70. The collocation pater venerandus, which does not appear before VF and only returns in later Latin, also serves to extol the figure of Tiphys. The adjective venerandus appears elsewhere in the poem only at 1.11–12 (fave veneranda canenti | facta virum) and 5.207, where Jason promises that he will place the statue of the river Phasis in a gallery upon returning home, so as to make the statue veneranda to the eye. This is echoed at Sil. 3.477–8: sed iam praeteritos ultra meminisse labores | conspectae propius dempsere paventibus Alpes. 183 mutandum, o socii, nobis iter: Likewise Palinurus urges Aeneas to approve a change in the planned route at Virg. A. 5.22–3: superat quoniam Fortuna, sequamur | quoque vocat, vetamus iter. As Pellucchi (2012) 233 observes, here, as in 2.485, the interjection o combines through synaloepha with the ending -um in mutandum, though this happens more often between o and the final vowel of a word; cf. 1.7 and 215; 2.55, 113, and 274; 4.206, 327, and 436; 8.181. 183–4  altera Ponti | eluctanda via: This iunctura appears elsewhere (in the same met­ric­al position) only in Corn. Sev. fr. 2.1–2 Blänsdorf: ardua virtuti longeque per aspera cliva | eluctanda via est: labor obiacet omnis honori. According to Liberman 2.367, this is a brachylogy for altera via Pontus eluctandus est (TLL cites this Valerian passage without specific comments). In this case, the transitive meaning of eluctor is to achieve something through effort; cf. TLL v/2.427.74–5: ‘labore et nisu superare (c. notione effugiendi, se eripiendi)’. The verb is first attested in Virg. G. 2.224. with the meaning of ‘to force (a way) out or up’ (cf. OLD s.v. 1b). For the intransitive use of the verb with regard to water that flows from an outlet with difficulty (cf. Virg. G. 2.244: aqua eluctabitur omnis), Lazzarini (2012) 195 compares especially Luc. 2.211–22 for the ­virtuosity in using the various terms relating to the flowing of currents. 184  et cursu quem fabor eundem est: This use of the archaic fari (which Cicero already places among obsolete verbs at De or. 3.153) is rare. VF also employs fabor at 4.579 (cf. Virg. A. 1.261; Prop. 4. 4. 2; and Sen. Phaed. 885 as precedents). According to Bettini (2004), the verb adds a more pronounced grandeur than its synonyms dicere, canere, memorare, and referre (and in the

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 185–7

149

case of the Propertian passage it bestows the majesty of a vates upon the poet; cf. Fedeli, Ciccarelli, and Dimundo ad loc.). On fabor, see also Tränkle (1960) 44 and EV 2.556–7. 185  haud procul hinc: This is a Virgilian phrase (cf. A. 8.478 and 603, in the same metrical position) that provides some variation on the canonical introduction for a topothesia compared to the formulas like est locus (cf. AR 4.282: ἔστι δέ τις ποταμός). ingens Scythici ruit exitus Histri: VF applies the word exitus to the outlet of a river at 4.718, and although Langen compares Lucr. 6.727 (exitus amnis, which appears in a clausula as it does here, but with a different meaning), Contino (1973) 19 correctly counts the passage among the new semantic developments that VF adopts. ruere for a river’s violent flow is a Virgilian construction (cf. A. 4.164), and VF uses it at 5.179–80 to describe the Phasis, which opens into the sea (magnus ubi adversum spumanti Phasis in aequor | ore ruit). Scythicus Hister refers to the entire Danube. Originally, the Romans used the term Danuvius for the upper and middle sections of the river (inhabited by the Celts), while Hister, Istros, or Ister designated the river’s lower section, inhabited by Thracian tribes, who had passed the names along to the Greeks (subsequently applied to the river’s entire length). VF often employs the word Scythicus to refer to the areas to the north and the east of the Black Sea, and the poet uses the adjective to denote the river Phasis already in the poem’s second line (Scythici . . . Phasidis, with Zissos ad loc.). Perhaps here its meaning is more specific, given the proximity of the Scythian people. The collocation draws in­spir­ation from Ov. Tr. 5.1.21: Scythicique in finibus Histri (in the same metrical position). 186–7  fundere non uno tantum quem flumina cornu | accipimus: flumen is commonly used for a stretch of water (cf. TLL vi/1.964. 28), particularly with compounds of the verb fundere (cf. Virg. G. 4. 228: effuso stagnantem flumine Nilum), but in this case the verb is used transitively (as in Aus. Mos. 433). VF uses cornu to designate the mouth or one of the outlets of a river delta, as in Ov. Met. 9.774: septem digestum in cornua Nilum (other examples can be found in TLL iv.971.41). Greek utilizes the phrase κέρατα Ὀκεανοῖο (cf. Hes. Theog. 789, of the river Styx, on which see Castelletti [2006] 30; AR 4.282 of the Ister). Rivers are often depicted with a horn of cornucopia in their hands, from which water flows, and in some cases they are described with the horned heads of bulls (cf. Virg. G. 4.371–2: et gemina auratus taurino cornua vultu | Eridanus and Sil. 3.405: Palladio Baetes umbratus cornua ramo). 187  septem exit aquis, septem ostia pandit: VF mentions the seven mouths of the Danube’s outlet at 4.718: septemgemini . . . exitus Histri. On their exact number, which could vary from three to seven (cf. Plin. Nat. 4.79; Claud. Cons. Hon. IV 630), see Langen’s note on 4.718 (seven, however, is the most commonly cited number, cf. Ov. Tr. 2.189; Stat. Silv. 5.2.136–7). For aqua used in the sense of a

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

150

Commentary, lines 188–91

‘branch’ or ‘arm’ of a river, see also Ov. Am. 2.13.10: septem . . . aquas and Prop. 2.1.32: septem captivis debilis ibat aquis (of the Nile). 188  illius adversi nunc ora petamus: Dräger (2003) 545 observes that adversus could refer both to illius and to the implied subject nos, but the frequency with which this participial adjective is used with nouns referring to waters, waves, and rivers in order to designate their movement against someone entering them (cf. TLL i.866.8–867.2) makes one more inclined towards the first interpretation (and thus referring to illius). 188–9  et undam | quae latus in laevum Ponti cadit: For the collocation unda cadit, the model for which Pellucchi identifies as Virg. G. 1.109, see TLL iii.16.82– 17.1. The question of how to interpret latus in laevum has prompted some confusion, but the majority of commentators accept the interpretation put forth by Burman, according to which we must understand the phrase not from the point of view of the Argonauts, but from that of someone entering the Black Sea from the Bosporus (and thus would see the Ister on their right); cf. Ovid’s pontus laevus (Tr. 1.2.83) in reference to the location of Tomis. Only Dräger (2003) 545 accepts Langen’s rather forced explanation, which, in an effort to defend a reading from the Argonauts’ point of view, offers the hypothesis that laevum means the ‘arm’ of the river further to the south, among those flowing into the Black Sea (and thus, the ‘arm’ on the left from the Argonauts’ point of view, as they are travelling in this direction). Such a proposal creates an unnecessary conflict with lines 375–7. 189  inde sequemur: For the variatio modorum found in the jussive future tense verb sequemur compared to the hortatory subjunctive petamus (line 188), see Merone (1957) 62–3 (comparing Homer’s shift from οἴσετε to οἴσομεν at Il. 3.103–4). 190–1 flumine certo | perferat: Liberman wonders (perhaps correctly) whether we should emend certo to recto, on the model of Virg. A. 8.57: ipse ego te ripis et recto flumine ducam (Tiber is speaking to Aeneas), where recto denotes the manner in which the river flows rather than its path. TLL iii.925.21 cites this passage for flumine certo with the sense of ‘without difficulty’, like certa via, but I think the idea of ‘safety’ is also involved (Lemaire, Mozley, Caviglia, and Pellucchi). For the adjective certus applied to the motion of water, Lazzarini (2012) 198 cites Lucr. 5.507–8: Pontos, mare certo quod fluit aestu | unum labendi conservans usque tenorem. All the modern editors except for Giarratano and Kramer, who keep proferat of the manuscript tradition, accept perferat from the editio princeps. 191  inque aliud reddat mare: If VF is following AR, this is the Adriatic. For  the combination aliud mare (= alterum mare), see also 1.354 (with Zissos ad loc.).

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 191–4

151

191–2  sint age tanti | . . . quam: On age with the hortatory subjunctive, cf. TLL i.1404.41–63. For the elision of potius before quam, which is found in poetry only here and at 7.428–9 (idque sedet quam nos quaecumque subire | patris iussa tui, with Perutelli ad loc.), see K-­S 2.463 n. 7 and Timpanaro (1978) 39–81. On the expression tanti est (an Ovidian favourite), see Langen ad loc. and Madvig (1887) 550–6. 192–3  saeva subire | saxa iterum: The alliteration of s is striking. Lazzarini (2012) 199 identifies as a model Virg. A. 10.677–8: in saxa, volens vos Turnus adoro | ferte ratem saevisque vadis immittite Syrtis, which probably inspired VF to imagine the difficult journey at the Cyanean Rocks (the terrible Syrtes also belong to the list of particularly volatile and unsafe places; cf. 7.86: saevas . . . Syrtes and Luc. 9.301–18). Also compare 4.585: fera saxa and 641: insana saxa (both referring to the Cyanean Rocks). For saeva saxa, see also Ov. Pont. 3.6.44: saeva quid in placidis saxa verere aquis? 193  quam Cyaneos perrumpere montes: VF uses the collocation Cyaneos montes at 2.382, echoed at Stat. Theb. 11.438: Pontus Cyaneos vetuit concurrere montes. Luc. 2.716–17 deploys the term montes for the Cyanean Rocks. For the use of perrumpere in contexts emphasizing the boldness of those who exceed naturally impassable limits, Lazzarini (2012) 199–200 compares Hor. Carm. 1.3.36: perrumpit Acheronta Herculeus labor and Ov. Am. 2.16.21: cum domina Lybicas ausum perrumpere Syrtes. VF uses the simple verb rumpere at the beginning of the poem in order to describe the passage through the Symplegades (1.3–4: mediosque inter iuga concita cursus | rumpere). 194  sat mihi, non totis Argo redit, ecce, corymbis: Editors have expressed some confusion concerning the phrase sat mihi. Liberman notes that logic and the line’s syntax invite us to understand Argo redit as depending upon sat mihi and accepts Heinsius’s emendation rediisse, which could be traced to the error redi esse turned into redi ecce. This proposal is clever, but unnecessary. sat mihi is elliptical (as at 1.174: sat multa parato or 4.66: sat tibi furtum), and it brings the speech proposing a change of routes to a close; the poet, through his ‘alter ego’ as the ship’s helmsman, uses this to hint at how the Argonauts will return home. In this sense, sat mihi should also be understood as a sign of how the poet expresses himself, as he includes several references to well-­known episodes from the myth that require no further elaboration in the poem. The phrase non totis Argo redit, ecce, corymbis should be understood the same way. On the one hand, the helmsman’s vivid account (emphasized by the deictic ecce) shows the current status of the ship, which had lost part of its corymbi during its passage through the Symplegades (4.691–3). On the other hand, the same phrase alludes to the ship’s ascent to the heavens by describing the form that the Argo takes in the sky according to the Aratean tradition. The use of the word corymbis, meaning ‘part of a ship’s decorations’, is important, as this

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

152

Commentary, lines 194–5

­ eaning appears only in VF (the noun is common in the sense of a cluster of m fruit or flowers or of ivy berries; cf. TLL iv.1081.20–1). This sort of Valerian hapax that refers to the Greek tradition is modelled upon the Homeric hapax στεῦται γὰρ νηῶν ἀποκόψειν ἄκρα κόρυμβα (Hom. Il. 9.241), which (again as a hapax) Aratus adopts precisely to describe the celestial Argo at Phaen. 686: οὐδέ τι ἄκρα κόρυμβα μένει πολυτειρέος Ἀργοῦς. AR in turn uses this phrase in the description of the Argo’s passage through the Symplegades at 2.600–2: ἡ δ’ ἰκέλη πτερόεντι μετήορος ἔσσυτ’ ὀιστῷ, | ἔμπης δ’ ἀφλάστοιο παρέθρισαν ἄκρα κόρυμβα | νωλεμές ἐμπλήξασαι ἐναντίαι (for a study of these three passages, see Kyriakou [1995] 28). VF uses the term, first at 1.273: auratis Argo reditura corymbis, then at 4.691–3: saxa sed extremis tamen increpuere corymbis | parsque (nefas!) deprensa iugis: nam cetera caelo | debita, where the poet recalls both Aratus and AR. In these passages the Latin poet alludes to the ship’s ascent to the heavens, a theme that he announced from the poem’s very first lines (1.3–4: mediosque inter iuga concita cursus | rumpere flammifero tandem consedit Olympo), which these lines at the end of Erginus’ speech clearly echo (note the reworking of rumpere into perrumpere). non totis Argo redit . . . corymbis refers in particular to the shape of the constellation Navis, which in the Aratean tradition appears in the sky as only part of a ship (more specifically, the stern) moving backwards, as though it were returning to the dock; cf. Arat. Phaen. 342–52; Germ. Arat. 344–55 Gain; Hyg. Astr. 2.37. Unlike these Aratean models, which make it clear that the part that was destroyed between the Symplegades was the one to reach the stars (cf. Germ. Arat. 350–2 Gain: sed quae pars violata fuit, coeuntia saxa | numine Iunonis tutus cum fugit Iason | haec micat in caelo), according to VF, the remaining part of the ship (and thus presumably the prow) ascends to the heavens (cf. 4.692–3: nam cetera caelo | debita). On the metapoetic implications of this difference from the Aratean model (perhaps attributable to the poem’s recurring theme of civil strife), see Krasne (2014a) 36–9. On the Argo’s ascent to the heavens in VF, see Galli (2007) 37–8 and Zissos (2008) 78. However one interprets this line, this is the final allusion in the (preserved section of the) poem to the Argo’s catasterism and should be counted among the work’s closing elements, which support the hypothesis that the eighth book would be the last. 195–6  Already after the dramatic passage describing the Symplegades, the poet had highlighted how Jason was not aware of the divine plan (or of fate), which held that the Symplegades would never move again after a ship managed to pass through them: talia fundit | imperio fixos Iovis aeternumque revinctos | nescius. id fati certa nam lege manebat, | siqua per hos undis umquam ratis isset apertis (4.707–10). Compare AR 2.604–6: πέτραι δ’ εἰς ἕνα χῶρον ἐπισχεδὸν ἀλλήλῃσιν | νωλεμὲς ἐρρίζωθεν · ὃ δὴ καὶ μόρσιμον ἦεν | ἐκ μακάρων, εὖτ’ ἄν τις ἰδὼν διὰ νηὶ περάσσῃ. On the Argonauts’ ignorance of the divine plan in VF, see Ripoll (1998) 274; Gross (2003) 175–83 and 239–49; Manuwald (2009); Río Torres–Murciano (2011) 144–92.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 196–9

153

haec ait ignarus fixas iam numine rupes | stare: For haec ait, see note on 54. For the construction ignarus with an infinitive, used in poetry only here and in Ov. Met. 6.263 and 8.196, cf. TLL vii/1.274.59–92. 196  neque adversis ultra concurrere saxis: adversis . . . saxis is a variation on adversaque saxis | saxa dedit at 4.659, which Statius adopts at Theb. 5.469–70: ratis ipsa moram portusque quietos | odit et adversi tendit retinacula saxi. concurrere is frequently applied to the Symplegades, beginning with Ovid (cf. Am. 2.11.3; Met. 7.63, 15.337), and VF uses it at 1.59–60, 630; 4.562. Compare Eur. IT 42: τὰς συνδρόμαδας πέτρας. Lazzarini (2012) 201 thinks that VF also has the realm of armed combat in mind, as in Liv. 1.25.3: infestis . . . armis velut acies terni iuvenes . . . gerentes concurrunt; Ilias 267–8: aequis adversis tecum concurrat in armis | impiger Atrides; Virg. A. 11.293: ast armis concurrunt arma cavete. 197  reddidit Aesonides: For the patronymic, see note on 105. Unlike in AR 4.295–6, where all the Argonauts applaud and support the decision after the Argo speaks, here only Jason says something. On Jason’s role as ductor, cf. Castelletti (2014b) 177. 197–9  et . . . | haud . . . nec . . . | . . . et: For cases like this one, in which the poet plays with the use of various coordinated negators, see K-­S 2.49. Here, the ­parallelism especially occurs between the phrases et te . . . tetigere and nec me . . . recuso (in litotes, with haud negating only vani). 197  fidissime rector: This iunctura appears only in this passage, and the poet only uses the word fidissime in this book (see note on fidissime custos at 75). Ovid is the first to use the adjective (in the same metrical position) at Met. 4.281 and 9.569. See also Stat. Theb. 9.815, 12.215, and 12.596. rector, just like magister of line 202, refers to the helmsman of a ship (cf. OLD s.v. 1). 198  haud vani tetigere metus: The use of tangere in regard to feelings is common (cf. OLD s.v. 8), while VF employs the word metus very often (fifty-­six times, see Lazzarini [2012] 202). 198–9  nec me ire recuso | longius: As Lazzarini (2012) 202–3 observes, when recuso and the following verb have the same subject, the construction more often employs the simple infinitive rather than an accusative and infinitive (cf. Virg. A. 2.704: nec nate tibi comes ire recuso; Stat. Ach. 1.539: neque enim comes ire recusem; the passages are connected by a character’s determination to participate in a bold undertaking). This, therefore, would be the first (perhaps the only?) example of recuso with the accusative. According to Liberman 2.368 longius is not an adverb, but instead modifies an implied internal object accusative (longius [iter] ire). 199  et cunctis redeuntem ostendere terris: I do not believe that the adoption of the Manilian clausula ostendere terris is coincidental. Manilius describes the

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

154

Commentary, line 200

un­chan­ging nature of the movements of the cosmos, and in particular how the sun must never change its course: numquam transversas solem decurrere ad Arctos | nec mutare vias et in ortum vertere cursus | auroramque novis nascentem ostendere terris (1.524–6); the adoption of the accusative participle (with red­ euntem in place of nascentem), as well as the substitution of cunctis for novis, further highlight the interaction between the two poets. After the allusion to the ship’s ascent to the heavens (cf. 194), the poet again turns to astronomy. On the one hand, this reference serves to increase the grandeur of the image of the triumphant hero; on the other hand, since it is inserted into Jason’s approving response to Erginus’ decision to change routes, it recalls the series of fateful consequences that the Argonauts’ return will have for Greece, comparable to those that would be produced if the sun altered its route. There is an implicit reference to the myth of Phaethon, which is connected to the Argonautic saga both through his path that goes out of control (first he moves upwards, just as  the Argonauts in AR travel to the north until they reach the Riphean Mountains; then Phaethon moves to the south until he creates a desert in Libya, an episode that AR relates, and then his voyage comes tragically to an end at the Eridanus, precisely the river that the Argonauts now choose to take) and through his relationship to Aeetes (who was Phaethon’s stepbrother). VF references the myth of Phaethon in 5.429–32, with metapoetic implications (for analysis and commentary, cf. Heerink [2014] 90–2 and Keith [2014] 286–9). In that case, the reference is understood as foreshadowing the tragic destiny that awaits Aeetes (cf. Wedeniwski [2006] 170). In the first book (1.525–7, with Zissos’s notes ad loc.) the sun threatens to make Jason suffer Phaethon’s fate. In this line in the eighth book the allusion would therefore provide evidence to support the views of those who see Jason’s character in a negative light (see the discussion in Castelletti [2014b]), whose desire for personal glory will cross over into the realm of hubris. Lazzarini (2012) 203 also sees an allusion to the Argo’s status as the first ship as well as a reference to triumph (in an imperial setting). 200  inde alios flectunt regesque locosque: While the absolute usage of flec­ tere (denoting changes in direction) is quite common (cf. Cic. Arat. 34.61 Soubiran; Virg. A. 9.372; VF 2.3), the use of the accusative without a prepos­ ition is suspect. Among the various proposed emendations (e.g., Wagner’s flexu instead of flectunt, in which the accusatives would depend on petunt of line 201), I prefer the solution inque offered in Watt (1984) 169 (which Frassinetti [1995] 315 and Caviglia adopt), even if the double final -que renders the reading problematic (VF uses this technique elsewhere, as in line 285, and this is also attested in Ovid, with one of the -que suffixes inserted into the following line; cf. Christensen [1906–8] 166). However, since the textual transmission is unanimous here, according to Summers (1894) 45 and Liberman 2.368, we must understand flectunt as reflexive (= flectuntur; cf. TLL vi/1.895.14), as at

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, line 201

155

2.3–4: neque enim patrios cognoscere casus | Iuno sinit, mediis ardens ne flectat ab undis. 201  adsuetumque . . . plaustris migrantibus: In these lands, which nomads frequent (cf. Hor. Carm. 3.24.9), the sea (and the river) is accustomed to travel by wagon, as it freezes often (cf. Virg. G. 3.356–62 and Spaltenstein on 4.721). The practice ascribing the plaustrum to northern peoples is found at 6.154–5: nunc vere novo compescere frondes | nunc subitam trepidis Maeotin solvere plaustris (see Fucecchi ad loc.). Liberman suggests replacing adsuetum with sulcatum, but this emendation would trivialize an important feature inherent in the adjective adsuetum (as Lazzarini [2012] 205 notes), that is, the Argonauts’ astonishment and fascination at foreign people’s customs such as this (and, consequently, the amazement of a Roman in the imperial period). On the ­differences between the Roman and the barbarian worlds within the poem, see, e.g., Shreeves (1978). 202–16  Near the Ister and Medea’s isolation. These lines have led to lively debates among the commentators, particularly with regard to two ostensible inconsistencies, which some attribute to the poem’s incomplete status (for a summary of the various theories, see Pellucchi [2012] 243–51). The first concerns lines 207–11, in which the poet describes a northern landscape (moving from the land of the Sarmatians to the Hyperboreans and passing through the entirety of Scythia), while in lines 214–17 he mentions Cape Carambis and the lands of Lycus (in add­ition to the Thessalian hills). The other inconsistency (which more recent commentators have attempted to defend) concerns lines 211–12, where the poet recounts the murmura of the Argonauts, even though so far he has not mentioned any such discussions among the heroes. I believe that we can solve these problems by keeping in mind AR’s corresponding narrative (AR 4.241–302) and the Flavian poet’s efforts to rework it. As to the apparent inconsistency regarding the route VF describes, my proposal is similar to the hypothesis expressed in Liberman 2.369, but without the need to assume that the author failed to make final revisions to his poem, since there only seems to be a geographic inconsistency. We must consider lines 207–11 as a proleptic vision that hyperbolically exaggerates Medea’s feelings. The places mentioned in these lines are those that AR describes. This is, therefore, a precise reference to VF’s Greek source, which sketches a stage of the journey that the voyagers have not physically traversed yet (from line 217 onwards the Argonauts are on the island of Peuce), and perhaps they will never traverse it in the Latin Argonautica. While the Argonauts ‘travel’ through these northern places in their minds, they are still in front of Cape Carambis, which they will pass shortly (line 214), but they will do so on the open sea and not by ‘hugging’ the coast, since they have already changed their route on Erginus’ suggestion (lines 200–1). If we restore the phrase murmura ponti in place of the murmura ponunt in line 211, not only would we resolve some syntactic problems, but we would

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

156

Commentary, line 202

also restore the proper chronological and geographical order. ipsi quoque murmura ponti | iam Minyae, iam ferre volunt (lines 211–12) means that all the other Argonauts (and not just Erginus and Jason, whom the poet mentions earlier) accept the decision to pass through the Black Sea to reach the Ister, instead of following the coast like they did on the trip to Colchis. Lines 211–12 thus bring Medea’s prolepsis to a close (and increase the sense of anguish through the Ovidian murmura ponti), explicitly reusing the motif of the Argonauts’ unanimous consent that was expressed in AR 4.295: ᾧ καὶ πάντες ἐπευφήμησαν. In physical terms, the Argonauts have changed their route towards the north in lines 200–1, but the fact that Jason points out Cape Carambis and Lycus’ territories to Medea in lines 214–15 does not necessarily mean that the Argo is sailing near these landmarks. Jason could merely be pointing out distant places to Medea, while recounting two important moments from the journey to Colchis; the same discussion could include references to the Thessalian mountains, which they certainly could not see but could only imagine. In any case, by having Jason mention these three places, the poet yet again references his Greek source and more specifically AR  4.298–302: γηθόσυνοι δέ, Λύκοιο καταυτόθι παῖδα λιπόντες, | λαίφεσι πεπταμένοισιν ὑπεὶρ ἅλα ναυτίλλοντο | οὔρεα Παφλαγόνων θηεύμενοι· οὐδὲ Κάραμβιν | γνάμψαν, ἐπεὶ πνοιαί τε καὶ οὐρανίου πυρὸς αἴγλη | μίμνεν ἕως Ἴστροιο μέγαν ῥόον εἰσαφίκοντο. VF mentions Cape Carambis and Lycus’ territory directly, but he replaces the mountains of Paphlagonia with those of Thessaly (the prospect of which Jason employs, fallit, in order to soothe Medea’s pain). Finally, note that the mention of the cult of Diana at Tauris (Thoanteae . . . Dianae, 208), in addition to the implications created by the reference to the figure of Thoas, summarizes and adapts (in a manner that fits VF’s style) the Apollonian episode that describes the construction of the temple to Hecate in Paphlagonia, together with the related sacrifices in the goddess’s honour that Medea performs (cf. AR 4.244–52). 202 puppe procul summa: For the collocation summa puppe, see 4.85: Thracius at summa sociis e puppe sacerdos (with Ov. Her. 10.133: di facerent ut me summa de puppe videres) and 5.45: nec summa speculantem puppe videbo. Rather than highlighting geographical distance in concert with a conjectured passage that would have needed to precede these lines (as Langen, among ­others, would expect to see), procul underlines the physical and emotional distance between Medea and the rest of the group. She stands behind the helmsman, who takes his place at the ship’s stern (cf. line 177). Lazzarini (2012) 206 correctly compares Stat. Ach. 2.23: turre procul summa, lacrimis comitata suorum, in which Deidamia says farewell to Achilles as he departs from Scyros by ship. vigilis post terga magistri: VF uses the phrase post terga at 5.148, 6.135, and 347, but this seems to be the only place where it alludes to the context of imprisonment (prisoners’ hands are tied behind their backs), as it does when Virgil uses

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 203–4

157

it at A. 2.57: ecce, manus iuvenem interea post terga revinctum and 11.81: vinxerat et post terga manus. For magister with the sense of gubernator (which originally meant ‘captain’, as at 1.382), see Virg. A. 1.114–16: ingens a vertice pontus | in puppim ferit: excutitur pronusque magister | volvitur in caput and Ov. Ars 1.6: Tiphys in Haemonia puppe magister erat. VF introduces the collocation vigil magister, which Sil. 3.173: vigili stant bella magistro takes up and Statius modifies as follows: solus stat puppe magister | pervigil inscriptaque deus qui navigat alno (Theb. 8.269–70), quem propter clausique greges vigilantque magistri (Theb. 9.190), and cura canum et trepidos moneat vigilare magistros (Ach. 1.708). 203  haeserat auratae genibus Medea Minervae: Just like a supplicant, Medea clings to a statue of Minerva that was probably carved on the Argo’s stern. The likeness is, therefore, a tutela (cf. OLD s.v. 2b), that is, an image of a guardian deity, either painted or carved on a ship’s stern (cf. Casson [1971] 347). According to Langen, the tutela that appears to Jason in a dream before he leaves for Colchis (cf. 1.301: visa coronatae fulgens tutela carinae) cannot be the same one that is mentioned in this line, since the former is made from a beam of prophetic wood from Dodona. But Dräger is correct in saying that the statue of Athena (who is the protective numen for the Argonauts, together with Juno) carved on the stern could have been made using the wood from Dodona. According to Soubiran, 1.215: tuque o puppem ne desere, Pallas also refers to the tutela described here. auratae denotes the material (either gold or gilded wood) from which the image was made (as Soubiran understands it) rather than the Fleece’s reflection upon it (as Dräger interprets it). Ovid also mentions a tutela in the shape of Minerva at Tr. 1.10.1, while Virg. A. 10.171 describes a gilded one. The speaking oak upon the Argo was mentioned as early as Aeschylus (cf. fr. 20 Radt). In the image that our line evokes, Medea almost seems to merge with Athena (also note the alliteration in Medea Minervae), a detail that foreshadows Medea’s later identification with the Palladium at 462–3 (interque ingenita Graium | nomina Palladia virgo stet altera prora), where the Colchian princess is described as a second Minerva (there, she is on the ship’s bow). 204  deiecta residens in lumina palla: deicio has the sense of ‘to throw over, to cover with a garment’, instead of the more frequent meaning of ‘to throw away, to take off ’ (cf. TLL v/1.397.7). The line recalls 1.132: [Thetis] sedet deiecta in lumina palla (see Zissos ad loc.). Critics agree in considering the scene from the first book (describing the anguished marriage of Peleus and Thetis) as foreshadowing what will be confirmed in the final book. Furthermore, the parallel between Medea and Thetis recalls the subject of the Trojan War (cf. Barnes [1981] 364), which appears constantly in the eighth book (cf. Fucecchi [2014] 116–17). Using a mantle to cover one’s eyes is a gesture of grief and despair. VF reworks similar gestures in AR but of a different nature (cf. AR 4.4 and 749–50, with Lazzarini [2012] 208). Statius echoes this line (itself a reworking of Virg.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

158

Commentary, lines 205–7

A. 6.862: deiecto lumina vultu and Ov. Met. 6.607: deiectoque in humum vultu) several times, always with mournful connotations (cf. Theb. 11.495: deiectam in lumina pallam; 12.469: obtenta summittere lumina palla). palla is ana­chron­is­tic­ al­ly Roman (cf. Galli on 1.132) and refers both to the long garment that Roman women wear over the stola and to the costume of tragic actors. As such, this could be a reference to the scene’s theatricality. We should not disregard the possibility that the word palla, placed at the end of the line just like Minervae at 203, is also meant to recall the Palladium in some manner, about which see note on 203. Pellucchi (2012) 252–3 also compares an analogous scene in Arg. Orph. 1223–4. 205  flebat adhuc: Liberman 2.369 and Dräger (2003) 546 explain the word adhuc in light of line 45 (contra virgo novis iterum singultibus orsa est), whereas Lazzarini (2012) 208 compares the recurrence of this adverb in Seneca’s Medea (117, 897, 904, and 993) for the theme of remaining persistently fixed in one mindset; Lazzarini also mentions the influence of Euripides’ Medea, especially lines 24–8, on the grief expressed by the Valerian Medea. quamquam Haemoniis cum regibus iret: For the Flavian epicists’ preference for quamquam instead of quamvis (which is consistent with how Virgil and Horace use the word), see Axelson (1945) 124 n. 16 and Pellucchi (2012) 253. For VF’s usage of quamquam with the subjunctive (as here and at 3.506; 5.373; 6.3) or with the indicative (2.561 and 8.400), see Contino (1973) 41–3. The Argonauts are often identified as reges in the poem (cf., e.g., 1.203, 342; 3.28, 173), perhaps by way of an analogy with the Homeric ἄναξ. There is no equivalent expression in AR or Pind. Pyth. 4, but they are often called βασιλῆες at, e.g., Arg. Orph. 109, 281. 206  sola tamen nec coniugii secura futuri: The position of the adjective sola (followed by the adversative tamen and the caesura) serves to highlight Medea’s isolation and recalls her mother’s words in line 147 (thus confirming her fears, according to Dräger [2012] 546). For securus with the genitive, cf. 3.329: tantique metus secura (already at Luc. 8.784: modo securus veniae). Lazzarini (2012) 209–10 compares the circumstances of Medea’s exile to those of Ovid’s as the poet travels from Rome to the Black Sea (cf. Tr. 2.189: solus ad egressus missus septemplicis Histri). For coniugium (a term that appears with particular frequency in this book, cf. lines 277, 279, 300, and 393), see Pease on Virg. A. 4.172 (coniugiumque vocat). 207 illam Sarmatici miserantur litora ponti: The adjective Sarmaticus is attested in poetry beginning with Ov. Pont. 4.10.38: Sarmaticum . . . mare (the Black Sea), and VF employs it often (cf. 2.176; 5.423; 6.232; 8.217). The Sarmatae (or Sauromatae cf. 7.235) were people that dwelled on the northern shores of the Black Sea, and, according to Herodotus (4.177), descended from a union of the Scythians and the Amazons.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, line 208

159

208  illa Thoanteae transit defleta Dianae: The question of whether to understand the verb transit as transitive or intransitive has raised a debate concerning the transmitted illa. Liberman is the only one who amends the text, printing templa. As Langen and Pellucchi observe, the anaphoras present in the Virgilian models for this phrase (Ecl. 1.38–9: ipsae te, Tityre, pinus | ipsi te fontes, ipsa haec arbusta vocabant; 10.13–15: illum etiam lauri, etiam flevere myricae, | pinifer illum etiam sola sub rupem iacentem | Maenalus et gelidi flevere saxa Lycaei; and A. 7.759–60: te nemus Angitiae, vitrea te Fucinus unda, | te liquidi flevere lacus), to which we may add Ov. Met. 11.44–8 (the death of Orpheus), provide clear evidence in favour of keeping illa. transit, therefore, can be used intransitively (cf. OLD s.v. 10), as at 5.120 and 2.431, in which case its subject would be illa (that is, Medea). But, given the freedom often afforded to the poet, we may think of illa as standing in for litora (sc. Thoanteae . . . Dianae) as the direct object of transit and understand the phrase as ‘the shores of the Sarmatian sea pity her, and she, mournful, passes through the shores of Diana of the land of Thoas’. For defleta, see 2.79; 5.60; and especially 6.495–502 (Hecate pities Medea), but also compare 4.374–5: flevit Amymone, flerunt Messeides undae, | flevit et effusis revocans Hyperia lacertis (Io’s flight foreshadowing Medea’s; see Pellucchi [2012] 246 n. 11). Concerning the phrase Thoanteae . . . Dianae, critics (cf. Venini [1971a] 590–1; Frings [1998] 267; Dräger [2003] 546; Pellucchi [2012] 255) have noted that, rather than alluding to Thoas, king of the Taurians (to whom Iphigenia was sent as a priestess after she was saved from the attempted sacrifice), VF references Thoas, father of Hypsipyle, who, after he was rescued from the massacre of the men at the hands of their daughters, arrived in Tauris in order to become a priest of Diana (cf. 2.301–3: ille procul . . . fugit . . . | Taurorumque locos delubraque saeva Dianae | advenit). This reference is meant to evoke a positive father/daughter relationship (between Thoas and Hypsipyle) that contrasts with the negative one between Aeetes and Medea (as Dräger [2003] 546 notes). VF’s allusion could also conceal other interesting facets. The first possibility (that is, a reference to Thoas, king of the Taurians) would allude to the events concerning Iphigenia among the Taurians (cf. Ov. Pont. 3.2.45–96), including the killing of the cruel Thoas and especially the flight of Orestes and Pylades after they steal the statue of Diana from the temple, a detail well-­suited to the Valerian  motif of associating Medea with the Palladium (seized and brought to the west). The second possibility (that is, a reference to Thoas, father of Hypsipyle) concerns the death of Absyrtus and would be counted among the clins d’œil that VF uses in the eighth book to condense the Apollonian source material. Thoanteae . . . defleta Dianae could allude to the sacred tunic that Thoas gave to his daughter Hypsipyle, which was in turn given to Absyrtus (cf. AR 4.421–34), as well as to the murder of Absyrtus that happens in (or near) the temple of Artemis (AR 4.435–71). Note that the Graces had made the sacred tunic for Dionysus on the island of Dia (which Callimachus identified with Naxos), and Dionysus later gave it to his son Thoas. The god had slept with

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

160

Commentary, lines 209–11

Ariadne there, and the fact that Hypsipyle gave the same tunic to Jason establishes a parallel structure of crossed fates shared by abandoned women (Ariadne forsaken by Theseus, Hypsipyle by Jason, and Medea also by Jason), to which VF perhaps also alludes. In light of these considerations, the word defleta takes on still greater importance, and its link with the earlier line nec coniugii secura futuri (206) becomes clear. 209–10  nulla palus, nullus Scythiae non maeret euntem | amnis: As Romeo (1907) 67 notes, VF only uses maereo with an accusative of person here (comparatively, at 1.335 and 6.626, the verb governs an ablative of cause). Note the sophistication of the (almost mathematical) composition here, in which nulla + palus = nullus (making use of anaphora, homeoteleuton, and polyptoton). We may add the litotes non maeret, the enjambment of the word amnis (both of which Pellucchi [2012] 255–6 notes), and the repetition of the sounds m, n, and t. Among the various rivers in Scythia (in this instance, the term is less general than when it appears elsewhere in the poem), the foremost are the Ister, the Hypanis (today known as the Southern Bug), the Borysthenes (today known as the Dnieper), and the Tanais (today known as the Don), which marks the border between the lands of the Scythians and the Sarmatians (cf. Hdt. 4.17–18 and 47–57). On Scythia in mythology, cf. Bessone (1997) 97–8. 210  Hyperboreas . . . pruinas: VF is the only one to use the collocation Hyperboreas . . . pruinas, but he draws inspiration from Virg. G. 4.517–18: solus Hyperboreas glacies Tanaimque nivalem | arvaque Riphaeis numquam viduata pruinis (Hyperboreas and pruinas occupy the same metrical positions, but in two successive lines). In this description of nature’s sorrow, VF uses hyperbole, even mentioning the areas of the mythical far north, such as those inhabited by the Hyperboreans, found as early as Hom. Hymn. 7.29, on whom see Pind. Isth. 6.23; Hdt. 4.32–4; AR 4.89–91; Plin. Nat. 4.89–91. The use of the verb moveo to refer to non-­physical movement is an Ovidian practice (even if this passage is closer to Stat. Theb. 6.189–90: nunc vallem . . . nunc flumina questu | nunc armenta movet), cf. Am. 3.7.57–8: illa graves potuit quercus adamantaque durum | surdaque blanditiis saxa movere suis; Ars 3.321: saxa ferasque lyra movit Rhodopeius Orpheus and other passages cited in TLL viii.1542.62. 211  tot modo regna tenens: Compare what Medea said at lines 47–8 (nec iam nunc regina loquor, sceptrisque relictis | vota sequor). For the phrase regna tenere, cf. Virg. A. 7.735: cum regna teneret; Prop. 2.13.28: nunc mea regna tenet; Ov. Fast. 4.584: tertia regna tenet; Sen. Oed. 445: Ponti regna tenet nitidi matertera Bacchi (Ino). The hyperbole continues since Aeetes (traditionally) only rules Colchis. Lazzarini (2012) 213 correctly notes that this tendency towards amplification is already active in the Latin literary tradition concerning the tragic heroine, in passages related to her accusations over the past and against Jason’s new wife (cf. Ov. Her. 12.27–8, and especially Sen. Med. 211–16 with Boyle’s notes ad loc.).

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 211–12

161

211–12  ipsi quoque murmura ponti | iam Minyae, iam ferre volunt: This line has prompted countless discussions among critics (see the summary in Pellucchi [2012] 247–51). All modern editors print murmura ponunt and use various methods in an effort to justify both this word and the fact that ferre has no explicit object. I prefer to restore the readings found in the codices, namely murmura (Reg Bon. 1498) ponti (Laurentianus), as Burman does, since they help us understand the text better. First of all, while murmura ponunt is a rare iunctura (this would not be a problem in itself, but then we need to assign a precise meaning to the verb ponunt), murmura ponti is a well-­attested clausula: cf. Lucr. 3.1032: et contempsit equis insultans murmura ponti; Prop. 1.8a.5: tune audire potes vesani murmura ponti; Ov. Met. 11.330–1: quae pater haut aliter quam cautes murmura ponti | accipit; Ov. Tr. 1.11.7: quod facerem versus inter fera murmura ponti; Luc. 5.570–1: si murmura ponti | consulimus. Ehlers considers ponti to be an error caused by the preceding litora ponti (207), but I think that it is precisely the poet’s intention to reuse this clausula (though with variation) in order to emphasize the change in how the pontus is perceived (shifting from Medea to the Minyans). quoque and iam . . . iam also serve to highlight the connection between lines 207 and 211–12. It is therefore essential that we correctly interpret the word ferre, which I propose we understand not in the sense of ‘to carry’ (which would require explaining the object murmura), but rather with the meaning ‘to withstand, to endure, to undergo’ (cf. OLD s.v. 16, 19, and 20) murmura ponti (that is, ‘the threatening roaring of the sea’). This is an interesting choice of a verb, since it also hides a metapoetic aim (as tradimus of line 66 does), namely that the Argonauts will ‘hand down’ (cf. OLD s.v. 33–4) that which ‘murmurs’ at sea (a motif possibly inspired by Ov. Tr. 1.11.7: quod facerem versus inter fera murmura ponti). Finally, AR’s text provides supporting evidence that murmura should be read with ponti, since at AR 4.286–7 the Greek poet mentions the murmuring of the Ister’s headwaters: πηγαὶ γὰρ ὑπὲρ πνοιῆς βορέαο | Ῥιπαίοις ἐν ὄρεσσιν ἀπόπροθι μορμύρουσιν. Therefore, we can again explain the cryptic Valerian phrase through a comparison with AR, to whom the Roman poet alludes even with a single word or detail. I believe that Silius Italicus is thinking of lines 210–12 in 7.255–7: Neptunus totumque videt totique videtur | regnator ponto, saevi fera murmura venti | dimittunt nullasque movent in frontibus alas. OLD s.v. volo 5a cites this passage with the meaning of ‘to agree’. 212  vix adlevat ora: The narrator’s gaze is again focused upon Medea’s present circumstances, and her condition recalls her status at the beginning of Euripides’ Medea (lines 24–8, as Lazzarini [2012] 215 observes). The construction is different, but the combination of ora and adlevat recalls the sad passage from the third book (3.339–40), where Jason weeps over Cyzicus’ body: hunc [sc. Cyzicum] crebris quatiens singultibus ora | adlevat Aesonides.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

162

Commentary, lines 213–16

213–14  ad seras siquando dapes, quas carus Iason | ipse dabat: serus could mean ‘which happen late, at a late hour’ (cf. OLD s.v. 5b, which compares Ov. Met. 1.219 and Mart. 2.14.160), but we should understand it rather in the adverbial sense of ‘slowly’ (as Lazzarini [2012] 215 does), connoting the difficulty with which Medea opens up to even the simplest actions. For the absolute use of siquando (an elliptical expression of siquando facit, referring to adlevat) with the meaning of ‘occasionally’, cf. L-­H-­Sz II.607. carus Iason also appears in a clausula at line 316. There is no irony in the adjective carus, since the perspective is Medea’s, whose affection for Jason is genuine. 214  iam nubiferam transire Carambin: nubifer (see Arens [1950] 250) does not appear in poetry before the Augustan age (cf. Tib. 1.4.44; Ov. Met. 2.226). VF also uses it at 2.506 (nubiferi venit unda Noti, applied to the south wind) and 4.599: quid tibi nubifera surgentem rupe Carambin (with Cape Carambis). For transire, cf. 5.120: transit Halys (which OLD cites as a poetic usage). The Argonauts rounded Cape Carambis on the voyage to Colchis (cf. 5.107–8 and also AR 2.93–4). As various ancient sources report (e.g., Strab. 7.309; Plin. Nat. 2.245; Mela 1.104), Cape Carambis (modern Kerempe, Kerempi, or Kerine), together with the promontory of Criu Metopon, both on the tip of the Tauric Chersonese (Crimea), served as an essential point of reference for sailors and divides the Black Sea into two parts. For the importance of Cape Carambis in the narrative economy of the Argonautica, cf. Delage (1930) 163–4 and Venini (1971a). 215 significans: This verb appears only here in the entire poem, and perhaps not by coincidence. VF uses the verb (‘to point out with a sign’) to preserve an important element of the Apollonian narrative absent from the Latin poem: the ray of light sent from the sky to show the path leading to the Ister. In AR 4.294–302 the poet states that, after the Argo’s speech concerning the change of route, Hera sends the Argonauts a favourable sign, at which they shout in unison that they should follow the indicated path. A ray of heavenly light (ὁλκὸς ἐτύχθη | οὐρανίης ἀκτῖνος, 296–7) appears where they were planning to go, and the heroes follow it (after leaving Lycus’ son on land) for as long as its radiance lasts (ἐπεὶ πνοιαί τε καὶ οὐρανίου πυρὸς αἴγλη, 301), that is, up to the Ister’s currents, without rounding Cape Carambis. iam regna Lyci: Lycus was the mythical king of the Mariandyni, whose territory extended from Paphlagonia to Bithynia. There is a reference both to the previous description of the voyage to Colchis (4.733–62) and to AR 4.298. In conjunction with the preceding significans, should we detect an echo of Pollux’s ascent to the heavens, which he earned for defeating and killing Amycus, the cruel king of the Bebryces and an enemy of king Lycus and the Mariandyni (cf. 4.199–343 and 733–62)? 215–16 totiensque gementem | fallit ad Haemonios hortatus surgere montes: Jason’s deception serves to comfort Medea by suggesting that they are

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, line 217

163

approaching Thessaly. We can see a syntactic shift: Jason is the subject of the relative clause (quas . . . dabat, lines 213–14) and of the phrase totiensque . . . fallit that comes immediately after, a phrase connected to the main clause vix adlevat ora (line 212), which has Medea as its implied subject; this may be surprising, but is not uncommon in VF. For the predicative participle gementem governed by fallit (a stylistic feature of Virgil; cf. A. 4.296: quis fallere possit amantem?; 7.350: fallitque furentem), see TLL vi/1.182.79–183.1. On the adjective Haemonius used to refer to Thessaly, see note on 16. The construction hortor with an infinitive, which developed in Augustan poetry (cf., e.g, Virg. A. 2.33; Ov. Met. 8215), appears in all three Flavian poets. VF uses it at 1.213–14: fremere . . . hortantur (with Zissos); 2.334–5: precari | hortatur; 6.18–19: hortatum . . . reddere; and 7.377: hortatur . . . insurgere (with Perutelli).

217–58.  THE WEDDING AT PEUCE On the island of Peuce, VF concentrates various episodes that AR had placed in several locations, particularly the wedding of Jason and Medea, which in the Greek model took place on the island of the Phaeacians after the murder of Absyrtus (cf. AR 4.302–521 and 982–1222). The condensation of the episodes recounted in AR, in addition to representing a typical feature of VF’s style, is also an important piece of evidence for the theory that the poem was concluded in eight books. Numerous references to the Trojan War (with parallels between Jason and Paris) also support this hypothesis, as do the allusions to other events evoked in Jupiter’s Weltenplan and to other scenes that appeared in the first book, which create a ring composition effect (e.g., the interruption of the ­wedding, matching the episode at 1.140–8, in which Centaurs interrupt the wedding of Pirithous and Hippodamia). Finally, unlike his Greek model, VF describes a wedding filled with dark elements, ­contributing to the foreshadowing of future tragedy and strengthening the feeling that the poem is coming to a close. For further information, in addition to the comments on individual lines, I refer the reader to discussions in Pellucchi (2012) 259–64 and 267–78 as well as Buckley (2016) 69–76. 217  insula Sarmaticae Peuce stat nomine nymphae: Even if the epic practice of the topothesia dates back as far as Homer (cf., e.g., Il. 11.711–13), the model for beginning a description in this way is Virgilian (cf. A. 3.210–11: Strophades Graio stat nomine dictae | insulae Ionio in magno). For the use of the verb stare with geo­graph­ic­al locations, cf. OLD s.v. 13. VF employs it for the city of Sinope, originally a nymph, at 5.109–10: stat opima Sinope | nympha prius. The island of Peuce (not a real island, but rather formed from two areas where the Ister branches) is known today as Piczina or Kedrilleh (see RE 19.1384–90; Delage [1930] 204–5; and Spaltenstein ad loc.). AR describes it in detail at 4.309–22,

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

164

Commentary, lines 218–22

and various Latin poets mention it (e.g., Luc. 3.201; Mart. 7.54.3; Stat. Silv. 5.2.136; cf. Mela 2.7.98). VF seems to have invented the idea that Peuce was named after a nymph (probably using the myth of Arethusa as a model), which Stat. Silv. 5.2.137 adopts (cf. note on 256). 218  torvus ubi et ripa semper metuendus utraque: The question of how to understand the word torvus has divided scholars. The most convincing theory was advanced by Pius (accepted by Langen), who sees this adjective as an example of the poetic custom of describing rivers with the characteristics of those who live on their banks (who in this case had a reputation for being harsh). We should not entirely reject Burman’s interpretation (accepted by Wagner), who sees in torvus a reference to the depictions of rivers as having the heads of bulls, as in, e.g., Virg. G. 4.371–2 (cited in note on 186). Finally, I would not rule out an echo of Cic. Arat. fr. 8.2 Pellacani: torvu’ Draco serpit, which connects the celestial dragon to a river (cf. note on 60). For this feature of the Ister’s waters, Lazzarini (2012) 221 compares Sen. Phoen. 116: ubi torva rapidus ducat Ismenos vada (see Barchiesi [1988] ad loc.) and Sen. Med. 763–4: Hister, in tot ora divisus, truces | compressit undas omnibus ripis piger, which may have influenced the Valerian ripa semper metuendus utraque. In the words ripa . . . utraque we may perhaps detect a reference to the shape of the island, which was formed from two places where the Ister forks, a detail that would have an importance of its own in light of AR’s text, in which the Colchian pursuers enter one of the two paths (Καλὸν Στόμα, ‘Beautiful Mouth’) in order to block the Argonauts’ way. 219  in freta per saevos Hister descendit alumnos: The use of descendere for the flowing of streams is common (cf. TLL v/1.648.45), but it appears with in freta in this passage only. Langen reads an allusion to the people who live around the river’s banks in saevos . . . alumnos (an interpretation that Liberman and Lazzarini accept), whereas TLL i.1796.84 understands the phrase as a peri­ phrasis for the branches of the Ister delta (Spaltenstein and Pellucchi agree). One image does not necessarily exclude the other. The emendation of alumnos into Alanos (proposed by Maserius and followed by Burman) is out of place (see the reasons given in Liberman 2.370–1). 220  solvere in hoc tandem resides dux litore curas: The collocation solvere curas is well attested in poetry, beginning with Lucr. 4.908 (cf. TLL iv.1473.32–6). resides should be understood having a causative force (cf. OLD s.v. reses b): Jason’s worries make him slow and reluctant to reveal them. 221–2  sua pacta . . . | promissamque . . . foedusque iugale: The reference is to the promises Jason made at 7.497–508. foedus . . . iugale is an explicit allusion to  a wedding (Virg. A. 4.16: vinclo . . . iugali, with Pease ad loc.). Compare Hypsipyle’s words to Jason at Ov. Her. 6.41–2: heu! ubi pacta fides? ubi conubialia iura | faxque sub arsuros dignior ire rogos? For thalami foedus, see Ov. Met. 7.403: thalami quoque foedere iungit.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 223–4

165

223  ultro omnes laeti instigant meritamque fatentur: The Argonauts’ reaction resembles how they respond in AR 4.1126–7 (γήθησε δὲ θυμὸς ἑκάστου | ἡρώων, μάλα γάρ σφιν ἑαδότα μῦθον ἔειπεν), where they rejoice in Alcinous’ decision to celebrate Jason and Medea’s wedding rather than handing the princess over to the Colchians. Virgil often uses the adjective laeti to highlight the acceptance with which Aeneas’ companions receive one of his commands (cf., e.g., A. 3.169; 7.130), and here the adverb ultro (cf. OLD s.v. 5) underscores the Argonauts’ approval. Lazzarini (2012) 223–4 detects a reference to the key concept of meritum in the predicative adjective meritam, which forms the basis for Medea’s right (especially in Ovid and Seneca) to a very firm bond with Jason. From a Roman perspective, the Argonauts deem Medea worthy of marriage precisely because of the merita she performed for them. 224  ipse autem invitae iam Pallados erigit aras: ipse autem appears at the beginning of a line once in Catullus (64.207) and opens sentences more frequently in Cicero (N.D. 1.10, 12; Arat. fr. 34.55 Soubiran). All the editors from Heinsius onwards correctly read ipse (proposed by Balbus) instead of the transmitted ipsa. In narrating Jason’s action (one suitable for a ductor), VF reuses the  scene depicting the construction of a temple to Hecate in Paphlagonia, described at AR 4.244–52, which he hints at in line 208 (cf. note ad loc.). We should not rule out the possibility that the poet is also thinking of AR 4.1691, in which the Argonauts raise a sanctuary to Athena on Crete. The larger question concerns how to interpret the word invitae, and this issue has divided critics (Liberman even obelizes the word). The 1498 edition reads innuptae, while Loehbach proposes invictae. Between the two, I would prefer the first solution (cf. 1.87–8: tu . . . innuba Pallas), in which case the word iam would go with erigit. Sandstroem (1878) 42 thinks that Pallados is a gloss that slipped into the text and accordingly proposes a massive reworking of this passage: ipse autem invictae iam linquere virginis aras | incipit. If we must emend the text, I would rather read the following (put forward by Heinsius): invita iam Pallade erigere aras | incipit Idaliae numen nec spernere divae. In any case, invitae iam Pallados can be kept and explained. According to critics, Minerva/Athena (who in the ancient poetic imagination is the model of celibacy, just like the other virgin goddess, Artemis/Diana) would oppose the wedding because she senses the wicked consequences that will result from this union between Jason and Medea (as Weichert, Langen, and Mozley argue), or because Jason decided to resort to Medea’s assistance rather than using only his strength (as Langen argues). But Athena’s opposition can also be explained in light of what develops in the following lines, that is, the paradigm choice between virtus and voluptas (cf. note on 228–31). Here, Jason embodies the model of the wrong choice, i.e. he prefers Venus/voluptas (cf. line 225) to Athena/virtus, and thus the goddess opposes his decision. Moreover, Athena has another reason to be opposed to Jason: Medea is likened to the Palladium; thus, by

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

166

Commentary, lines 225–6

extension, Jason is likened to the one who steals it (like Odysseus or Diomedes) or to Ajax, who violates Cassandra in front of the Palladium and thus provokes Athena’s anger. It is, therefore, significant that the goddess opposes Jason during a religious ceremony. Concerning the genitive Pallados, where one would expect a dative, see Prop. 4.1.101: Iunonis facito votum impenetrabile, with Shackleton Bailey (1956) 222 and Fedeli, Ciccarelli, and Dimundo ad loc. 225  incipit Idaliae numen nec spernere divae: Kleywegt (1986) 2461 paraphrases this line as ‘et incipit numen Idaliae divae non spernere, i.e. colere’. The conjunction nec (equivalent to et . . . non) only negates the word spernere, not the entire phrase. The litotes nec spernere tellingly highlights Jason’s voluntary choice in favour of voluptas; cf. Cic. Leg. 1.52: an, id quod turpissimum dictu est, voluptatem? at in ea quidem spernenda et repudianda virtus vel maxime cernitur; Hor. Ep. 1.2.55: sperne voluptates: nocet empta dolore voluptas. Lines 224–5 may contain an echo of 6.499–502, in which VF foreshadows the tragedy at Corinth (the result of another choice in favour of voluptas): non invisa tamen neque te, mea cura, relinquam | magna fugae monumenta dabis, spernere nec usquam | mendaci captiva viro meque ille magistram | sentiet et raptu famulae doluisse pudendo. The adjective Idalius is derived from Idalion (now known as Dali), a city on Cyprus associated with Venus’ cult; cf. Virg. A. 1.681, 5.760; Prop. 2.13.54; Ov. Ars 3.106. It first appears in literature (where it always refers to Venus) at Theocr. 15.100. See also Catull. 36.12. The expression numen . . . divae is of archaic character (cf. RE 17.2.1276.57–1278.20). 226–7 praecipueque sui siquando in tempore pulcher | coniugii Minyas numquam magis eminet inter: Consider the non-­linear syntactic structure in these two lines: the anastrophe involving the preposition inter, which has been placed four words after one would expect, and the hyperbaton with the word Minyas are pronounced. Because of this syntax, Langen notes that VF connects two different phrases: ‘praecipue – siquando in tempore – coniugii inter Minyas eminet’ and ‘numquam magis eminuit quam tempore coniugii’, citing as a parallel Hor. Sat. 1.4.101–3: quod vitium procul afore chartis | atque animo prius, ut si quid promittere de me | possum aliud vere, promitto, where the poet joins the ideas ‘ut quid aliud promittere possum’ and ‘si quid promittere possum’. For other instances of anastrophe and hyperbaton concerning a substantive adjective and a preposition, see 1.151: nubila contra, with Langen’s and Zissos’s notes ad loc. For the elliptical use of the word siquando, see note on 213. For the phrase numquam magis (equivalent to tantum quantum umquam), see Housman on Luc. 5.166. For the topos of the hero’s beauty, compare first of all Virg. A. 4.141–2: ipse ante alios pulcherrimus omnis | infert se socium Aeneas atque agmina iungit. Jason’s beauty is highlighted at 5.363–72 (see Stover [2012] 198–206 and Castelletti [2014b] 181). For this passage, Lazzarini (2012) 225–6 compares the traditional praise of the future couple’s beauty found in epithalamia.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 226–8

167

226 sui: The word applies to coniugii (227), but it might also refer to numen (225). Jason begins to accept Juno’s divine will as well as his own wishes (since he, too, now desires to marry Medea). 228–31  On this double simile, see especially Castelletti (2012b) 155–62 (with a discussion of earlier bibliography) and (2014b). The choice of comparandum is significant. By likening Jason first to Mars and then to Hercules, VF’s simile illustrates the le­gend­ary choice of Hercules. Whoever chooses voluptas like Mars, depicted while going secretly (furto) to visit his paramour Venus, will face tragic consequences (VF does not choose the adjective sanguineo at random, even if it is applied to the word Hebro). By contrast, whoever chooses virtus, as Hercules does, is destined to receive divine rewards. This simile, therefore, on the one hand, yet again looks ahead to the future, tragic events in Corinth. On the other hand, it decisively closes the account of Hercules’ ascension, as the hero has now completed all his labours (the last of which VF subtly evokes in the episode depicting the taking of the Fleece) and can join the divine assembly and enjoy a lawful wife (i.e. Hebe), whose description as Iunonia testifies to Juno’s reconciliation with her stepson. Hercules’ choice between ἀρετή and κακία dates back to Prodicus (cf. Xen. Mem. 2.1.21–4). On the ways in which this literary theme develops in antiquity, see Alpers (1912); for its artistic representations, especially in the Renaissance period, see Panofsky (1930). On the choice, see also Galinsky (1972) 101–25 and Stafford (2005). 228  qualis sanguineo victor Gradivus ab Hebro: The word victor appears in the Laurentianus, but it is absent from the Vaticanus. For this reason, both Kramer and Courtney disregard this reading, either leaving a lacuna (Courtney) or replacing it with gradiens, though I would prefer fervens, on the model of Stat. Theb. 3.261: fervidus in laevum torsit Gradivus habenas. All other recent editors, after Poortvliet (2003) 610, who reads veniens (another conjecture of Kramer, who also proposes rediens), agree in accepting victor. The origin of Mars’ common title Gradivus is uncertain (cf. Walde-­Hofmann 1.616); this may explain why the prosody of the first syllable shifts between long, as it is here (e.g., Virg. A. 3.35; 10.542; Ov. Met. 14.820), and short (e.g., Ov. Met. 6.427; VF 5.650; 6.602). The Hebrus (today known as the Maritsa) is a river in Thrace, the source of which is near the Odrysian mountains or Mount Haemus (hence the confusion between Hebro and Haemo reported by Burman); its mouth is located in the Thracian sea, facing Samothrace (cf. Plin. Nat. 4.41 and 43). VF refers to it by name often (cf. 2.515; 4.463; 6.139; 7.646), as do other Latin poets, who liken it to the wars Mars waged (cf., e.g., Virg. A. 12.331–3: qualis apud gelidi cum flumina concitus Hebri | sanguineus Mavors clipeo increpat atque furentis | bella movens immittit equos). VF reuses the adjective sanguineus from Virgil, where it illustrates Turnus’ aristeia (by alluding to the proverbial warlike nature of the Thracian peoples), but here the Flavian poet applies it to the river. The image of Mars leaving a bloody river is most suited to this simile’s proleptic

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

168

Commentary, lines 229–31

function. The purpose of the simile comparing Jason and Mars at 7.645–6 (based on the one that appeared in the Aeneid) was different, as there Jason was likened to the god having heroically subdued Aeetes’ bulls: Aesonides, qualis Getico de pulvere Mavors | intrat equis hauritque gravem sudoribus Hebrum (see Perutelli’s note ad loc.). Jason is also likened to Mars at 3.83–6; see Fucecchi (2004) 126–9. 229  Idalium furto subit aut dilecta Cythera: On Idalium, see note on 225. The as­so­ci­ation between Idalium and Cythera (Aphrodite’s sacred island off the coast of the Peloponnese) already appears in Virgil (A. 1.681; 10.52 and 86). Despite the qualms expressed by certain commentators, the adverb furto should here be understood in its erotic sense of ‘secretly’, with reference to adultery. Lazzarini (2012) 228 correctly compares Ov. Her. 6.43–4: non ego sum furto tibi cognita; pronuba Iuno | adfuit et sertis tempora vinctus Hymen (Hypsipyle speaking to Jason), a passage echoed by VF. The story to which the poet alludes is well known: it concerns the illicit love affair between Mars and Venus, mentioned as early as Homer (Od. 8.266–366), and thus presents the house of Hephaestus as a meeting place for their secret affair (the Valerian furto echoes the adverb λάθρῃ at Od. 8.269). On the subject of Virg. A. 10.51–3, Lazzarini notes how it is at the very least curious that the image following the catalogue of places that belong to Aphrodite is that of a hero giving up his weapons and choosing to rest: est Amathus, est celsa mihi Paphos atque Cythera | Idaliaeque domus positis inglorius armis | exigat hic aevum. VF modifies and develops this image in the following two lines. 230–1  seu cum caelestes Alcidae invisere mensas | iam vacat: The apotheosis of Hercules and his marriage to Hebe date back to Homer (cf. Od. 11.601–4). It is important to note that this passage had been debated in antiquity as a pos­ sible interpolation, since Hercules cannot be in two separate places sim­ul­tan­ eous­ly, such as Hades and Olympus; see Castelletti (2006) 165–8. It is difficult to say with certainty whether VF is aware of this dispute and whether he wishes to use these lines to suggest that the real Hercules is among the gods, while the ‘false Hercules’ (that is, Jason) is destined to suffer in Hades (and from a proleptic standpoint, he is also destined to suffer in Corinth). In any case, the myth also receives treatment elsewhere in Latin poetry: Catull. 68.111–16; Prop. 1.13.23–4; Ov. Met. 9.400; Ps-­Sen. Oct. 210–11; Mart. 9.65.13. Poets often use the verb invisere with domus and similar terms, but its iunctura with mensas only appears here. For the impersonal use of vacat (first found in poetry in Virg. A. 1.373), see also L-­H-­Sz II.348.41. For a list of instances in which vaco functions as a subject and is constructed with a dative and an infinitive (cf. OLD s.v. 5b: ‘there is time, or leisure to’), as is the case here, see Langen’s note ad loc. 231  et fessum Iunonia sustinet Hebe: Some editors have altered the transmitted text. Köstlin (1880) 41 and Reuss (1900) 415 have refuted Baehrens’s proposed

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, line 232

169

reading of fessum Iuno iam destinate Hebae. Liberman 2.372–3 has decisively refuted Langen’s suggestion to move lines 230–1 after line 232 in order to connect the simile to Medea. These lines verify that Hercules’ apotheosis occurs, while also illustrating the proper choice that one should make. The com­bin­ ation Iunonia . . . Hebe is found at Ov. Met. 9.400, but concerning this case, Caviglia (1999) 687 n. 33 correctly highlights the fact that Iunonia is not simply a decorative epithet, but rather ‘l’emblema dell’ormai avvenuta conciliazione, in cielo, fra Ercole e la sua divina persecutrice’. 232–6  These lines present difficulties. Courtney thinks that there is a lacuna after line 232. Langen moves line 233 before line 230 and emends seu to ceu. If we keep the text as transmitted and preserve the strong pause after Cupido (as Ehlers and Spaltenstein do, among others), we must assume that the subject of suscitat is an implied Cupido. Liberman removes the pause after Cupido, places a semicolon after curis, and adopts Meynke’s conjecture adnuit unanimis, asserting the need for a verb that allows Cupido to be the subject of suscitat and permits the restoration of the adjective unanimus, which the classical poets preferred to unanimis (cf. Catull. 66.80; Virg. A. 4.8; 7.335; 12.264; VF 1.615; 3.571; 4.162; 6.60). Pellucchi and Lazzarini with hesitation defend the reading in the codices. While I admit that there might be a lacuna in the text, I am inclined to emend adsunt unanimes into adnuit unanimis. This emendation offers the benefit of providing a more consistent text, resolving the problem of the apparent change in subject for the verb suscitat in line 233. Yet, pace Liberman, I prefer to understand unanimis as a nominative singular adjective (as does Langen) applied to Venus. In fact, Strati (2002) has shown that, in the sermo cotidianus, the form unanimis was more common than unanimus already by the first century ce. According to Strati, this passage of VF’s would contain the first attestation of the form unanimis in poetry (Strati understands unanimes as the nominative plural form of unanimis). We might also add that the textual tradition for Virg. A. 12.264 varies between unanimis and unanimes, as Lazzarini (2012) 231 correctly notes. Therefore, if we adopt the reading unanimis (singular), our text would have a more consistent structure of verb-­ descriptor-­subject, descriptor-­subject-­verb. Concerning the meaning, Venus agrees and gives her assent to the marriage while Cupid supports her by urging Medea to cheer up. Thus, Venus would be unanimis, in contrast to the invita Minerva of line 224. This situation would lend further credence to the reading of the double simile in lines 228–31 as a philosophical choice between virtus and voluptas. The decision to emend the transmitted adsunt to a third-­person verb is also supported by the structure of lines 232–46 (and especially by the first five lines), which begin with a third-­person verb four times, with ipsa (Venus) inserted between them. Venus and Cupid serve as the subject of one of  these verbs each (adnuit and suscitat, respectively); then the subject is always Venus, and the poet employs an interlocking structure (ipsa . . . induit,

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

170

Commentary, lines 232–6

ipsa . . . donat). On Venus’ role in this scene (and in the entire poem), see also Elm von der Osten (2007) 138–51; Buckley (2013) 94–5. 232–3  adnuit unanimis Venus hortatorque Cupido | suscitat adfixam maestis Aeetida curis: For adnuit at the beginning of a line, cf. Virg. A. 4.127: adnuit atque dolis risit Cytherea repertis (Venus). For hortator . . . suscitat, Liberman cites 4.32–3: hortator postquam furiis et voce nefanda | inpulit Oenides. According to Gärtner (1998) 70 n. 18, Cupido is a dull simplification. Wagner proposes the emendation suscitat hic fixam and Frassinetti (1995) 315 offers adfixam hic maestis, but these corrections are unnecessary (cf. Liberman 2.373). VF uses the verb adfigo only here and construes it with a dative. The verb is typically used in a concrete sense (it is a technical term for ‘to nail onto the gallows’), which probably leads Wagner to hypothesize that VF must have used a plain verb (hic fixam), but Lazzarini (2012) 232 compares Tib. 1.3.87: at circa gravibus pensis adfixa puella. The collocation maestis . . . curis also appears in Sil. 6.551 and 8.78. VF uses the patronymic Aeetis in 6.481 and 7.445, instead of the Ovidian Aeetias (cf. Met. 7.9 and 326); for the distinction between the two, see Perutelli on 7.445. 234–5  ipsa suas illi croceo subtegmine vestes | induit: VF gives features of Roman ritual practice to his account of this marriage, particularly the confarreatio (a solemn religious ceremony reserved only for patrician families; cf. Pellucchi [2012] 268–9). We can detect the first allusion to this rite in the words croceo subtegmine, which refers to the reddish-­yellow veil that recalls the flammeum worn by Roman brides (on which see Spaltenstein ad loc. and his note on 243, in addition to Lazzarini [2012] 232–3); cf. Catull. 61.8; Luc. 2.361; Plin. Nat. 21.46. In its strictest sense, subtegmen (or subtemen) designates the woof of a fabric which must be inserted into the warp (cf. Ov. Met. 6.56: inseritur medium radiis subtemen acutis), but it is often used in poetry to refer to the fabric itself (as also in VF 6.227: picto . . . subtegmine bracae). All commentators highlight the significance of the choice of the adjective croceus, referencing the embroidery decorating the veil that Helen brought to Troy for her wedding with Paris, which Aeneas later gave to Dido when they first met (cf. Virg. A. 1.649–52), emphasizing the dark undertones present in the scene depicting Jason and Medea’s marriage. induo has a causative sense (construed with an accusative of the item worn and the dative of the person who wears it, cf. TLL vii/1.1265.9–29), as in Virg. A. 11.77 and Ov. Her. 20.90. 235–6  ipsa suam duplicem Cytherea coronam | donat: This is surely the bridal diadem, and VF adapts this image from Virg. A. 1.654–5: colloque monile | bacatum et duplicem gemmis auroque coronam (describing the gifts of Aeneas to Dido), which also serves as the model for Sen. Med. 572–4: est et auro textili | monile fulgens quodque gemmarum nitor | distinguit aurum, quo solent cingi comae (the crown that Medea will send to Creusa). The sequence from Virgil to

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 236–8

171

Seneca to VF leaves little doubt regarding the proleptic function of the Valerian passage: as Stover (2018) 116 observes, ‘Medea is married while adorned with a divine gift that will do harm to yet another bride in the future, and thus the parallel with the situation in Thebaid 2 is striking: the necklace worn by Argia during her ill-­omened marriage to Polynices will one day adorn the neck of Eriphyle.’ Critics disagree on why the crown is described as duplex (is it because it is made out of two precious metals or because it has two sets of loops?), and there is no more certainty regarding Virgil’s passage than there is for VF’s. Both these hypotheses are plausible, and, in my opinion, there is no reason why we could not imagine a golden diadem set with two layers of precious stones (among the various parallels depicted in the visual arts, see LIMC V.1, s.v. Iason 66). 236  et arsuras alia cum virgine gemmas: Despite Langen’s assertions (who claims that this line is difficult to understand), the meaning is quite clear: VF refers to what will occur in Corinth, where Creusa will be set on fire by the gifts that Medea gives her (VF hints at this scene at 1.226: cerno et thalamos ardere iugales and describes it more extensively at 5.442–51). As Schimann (1998) 126–7 notes, this is an example of the ancient Virgilian interpretatio (the basic idea, which Servius highlights in the comment on Virg. A. 1.650, is that one woman receiving jewellery as a gift from another portends a tragic fate). For the entire expression, Liberman compares line 114 of the Alcestis Barcinonensis: arsurosque omnes secum disponit odores, whereas Lazzarini (2012) 233–4 cites Virg. A. 11.74–7, where Virgil describes the cloth that Dido gave to Aeneas, which he in turn lays on Pallas’ corpse (this echo casts yet another deathly shadow over the marriage between Jason and Medea). 237–8  tum novus implevit vultus honor ac sua flavis | reddita cura comis: As in line 31, honor has the meaning of pulchritudo, but here VF alters its syntactic relationship with the verb impleo (of which honor is the subject). The poet picks up the detail that Medea has blond hair (flavis . . . comis) from the scene in which AR describes the preparations she makes for her pivotal meeting with Jason (3.829–30). In Euripides Medea’s sons (cf. Med. 1141–2) and Jason’s new bride (980) are the ones who have blond hair. For the combination flavis . . . comis, see TLL ix/2.112.36–7, and on the significance of blond hair in Greek and Latin literature, see Pease on A. 4.590. Note the ­repetition of the word cura, which VF employs twice before to denote ‘­ worries’ (cf. lines 220 and 233), but which should be understood as having the positive meaning of ‘care’  (thus further highlighting Medea’s change of mind as she finds new splendour). 238  graditurque oblita malorum: Burman cross-­references Virg. A. 1.501 (Dido compared to Diana): gradiensque deas supereminet and the description of Aeneas compared to Apollo at A. 4.147: ipse iugis Cynthi graditur. For a list of passages in which the verb gradior serves to emphasize the gait of heroes or

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

172

Commentary, line 239

distinguished figures, cf. TLL vi/2.2138.69–70. Ovid also uses the phrase oblita malorum in a clausula at Tr. 5.5.5. 239–42  Critics have recognized that these lines provide a clear reference to the rites held in honour of the Magna Mater (see also note on 171–4 with bibli­og­ raphy). Other allusions to the worship of Cybele in the poem can be found at 3.231–4 and 7.635–6. This passage in particular hints at the lavatio of Cybele’s statue, a ceremony which was performed by the banks of the Almo river on 27 March; cf. Ov. Fast. 4.337–42 (with Frazer’s and Fantham’s notes); Luc. 1.599– 600; Mart. 3.47.1–2; Sil. 8.362–3; Stat. Silv. 5.1.222–4. In the imperial period the ritual took place during the celebratory holiday for Cybele and Attis, which began on 22 March and lasted until 27 March, the so-­called ‘day of blood’, and was devoted to making sacrifices and other offerings to the goddess: the priests cut themselves in order to offer blood to the goddess, and we should not rule out even the possibility that the initiates performed self-­castration. These acts of bloody mutilation should be linked to the ritual concerning the death and resurrection of Attis, itself connected to the harvest cycle (cf. Frazer on 4.337). The fourth day included a festival (the Hilaria) celebrating the god’s resurrection. Finally, the last day was devoted to a procession bringing the goddess’s statue from the Porta Capena to the Almo, where the statue, the wagon used to transport it, and other ritual objects were washed and purified. VF has various reasons to refer to these ceremonies. First of all, by evoking a purification ritual performed after bloodshed (and perhaps after dismemberment), the poet alludes to the murder of Absyrtus and to the resulting purification ritual that Circe advised the Argonauts to perform, as told by AR 4.551–752. Moreover, in light of Medea’s assimilation with a goddess (and a foreign one), the poet alludes to the danger of importing foreign cults to Rome, perhaps with the polemical intent of a person well acquainted with these cults, since VF was a quindecimvir (as Caviglia also observes). Indeed, beyond the murder of her brother and sons, the fatal results of Medea’s/Cybele’s translatio will produce more global consequences. The reference is to the future clashes between East and West, the first of which will be the Trojan War, foreshadowed by the adjective Mygdonius (see note on 239). There is also a reference to internal wars, both those that have already happened (in Colchis) and those still to come (Rome’s civil wars). This wedding, therefore, is ominous, as Mopsus’ prophecy will ­confirm in lines 247–61. 239  sic, ubi Mygdonios planctus sacer abluit Almo: The Almo (today known as the Acquataccio) is a very small river that flows into the Tiber (cf. Ov. Met. 14.329; RE 1.1589.34–60). The river’s epithet sacer evokes the lavatio of Cybele’s cult statue in it. Mygdonius is a poeticism for Phrygius (OLD s.v.). VF uses it in 3.47, where he describes Cybele as Mygdonia mater (see also dolor Mygdonius at Stat. Silv. 5.3.245 and cantus Mygdonius at Claud. De rapt. Pros. 2.268).

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 240–2

173

240  laetaque iam Cybele festaeque per oppida taedae: Cybele (Magna Mater) was a goddess originally from Phrygia, sometimes identified with Rhea (cf. Eur. Bacch. 59) and also with Demeter (cf. Eur. Hel. 1301–5). According to tradition, she arrived at Rome in the year 204 bce, and her cult was the first one to reach the city from Asia Minor (cf. Liv. 29.14; Ov. Fast. 4.247–370). The epithet laeta led Burman and Graillot (1912) 131 to believe that VF alludes to the day of the festival celebrating Attis’ resurrection (Hilaria, on 25 March). The phrase per oppida suggests that the festivities were not limited to Rome, but rather were celebrated in various cities (as Liberman, Soubiran, and Dräger note). According to Liberman, festae . . . taedae refers to the festive pine tree used in the Hilaria, as opposed to the funereal pine (under which Attis castrated himself) that was carried in a procession on 22 March, the day of the Arbor Intrat. I wonder if VF also thinks of these details in his choice to place the marriage between Jason and Medea on the island of Peuce (that is, the ‘island of pine trees’, from the Greek πεύκη, which means both ‘pine tree’ and ‘an object made of pine wood’; see also Rossignoli [2004] 81–2; Mart. 7.7). 241–2  quis modo tam saevos adytis fluxisse cruores | cogitet: This line refers to the bloody sacrifices and the self-­castration that Cybele’s priests performed in imitation of Attis’ actions (as in Catull. 63). The collocation saevos . . . cruores also appears at Stat. Theb. 12.719 with reference to fratricidal blood, supporting the notion that VF also thinks of civil wars (Lazzarini [2012] 236). quis . . . cogitet has no parallels in epic poetry (the closest passages are Ter. Ph. 12: nunc siquis est qui hoc dicat aut sic cogitet and Aetna 536–7: quod si quis lapidis miratur fusile robur, | cogitet obscuri verissima dicta libelli), but it is an effective formula for directing the reader’s attention towards the bloody consequences that will emerge from a moment of joy. On the strong variatio modorum between the subjunctive cogitet, which expresses an unlikely possibility, and the following indicative meminere, see Merone (1957) 64. 242  aut ipsi qui iam meminere ministri: This is the reading found in the codices. Liberman adopts Heinsius’s conjecture haut ipsi quin and asserts that ipsi qui ministri meminere cannot mean qui ex ipsis ministris meminit (although this is how Langen understands it, and all other modern editors, myself included, follow his interpretation). Courtney follows Barth’s example in reporting in his apparatus that qui is an adverbial ablative equivalent to quid. The ministri are technically the assistants to the priests or otherwise the minor officiants within a collegium (the minister is usually a slave, while the magister is a free man); cf. OLD s.v. 2. 243–51  As critics have noted extensively, the marriage ritual that VF describes broadly follows Roman wedding ceremonies (see D-­S s.v. matrimonium), particularly the confarreatio (Treggiari [1991] 21–4). VF treats the scene differently from AR, who unsurprisingly spends more time describing its Hellenistic

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

174

Commentary, lines 243–6

f­ eatures, such as the preparation of the wedding chamber (4.1129–155). VF also places greater emphasis on the role of the auspices (AR only briefly touches upon a sacrifice), which the Latin poet yet again exploits in order to introduce details concerning the tragic future awaiting Jason and Medea. By the end of the Republic the practice of examining the flight of birds before a wedding had become a formality (cf. Cic. Div. 1.15.28), and while the auspices were a part of the ceremony, there was no genuine expectation that they would declare divine will (from the flight of birds or from animal entrails) regarding the couple’s future. The role played by Mopsus, who foresees the tragic developments destined to come at the end of the voyage, is, however, important for VF’s narrative technique. This scene, which mirrors 1.211–26 (see Zissos [2008] xxxii and the comment ad loc.), also serves to link the first and the eighth books, further lending credence to the idea that this book would be the last. 243–4  inde ubi sacrificas cum coniuge venit ad aras | Aesonides: After the dextrarum iunctio and the augur’s prayers to the gods who oversee marriage, the newly-­weds proceeded to make a sacrifice at the altar; cf. Var. R. 2.4.9; Ps-­ Sen. Oct. 699–702; Tac. Ann. 11.27. AR 4.1128–9 describes the sacrifice. inde ubi is a formula that appears very often at the beginnings of lines in epic and didactic poetry, starting with Lucretius (e.g., 3.449, 502, 870); see also, e.g., Virg. G. 2.367; A. 3.69; VF 2.584 and 7.461. sacrificus is a poetic adjective found in Ovid (Fast. 1.130; Met. 12.249). Lazzarini (2012) 237–8 detects the motif of a blending between the nuptial and the sacrificial altars (already a Greek literary trope, used, e.g., in Sophocles’ Antigone, in addition to being widespread among Latin authors, as seen in Lucretius’ evocation of Iphigenia’s story at 1.84–101) and compares Sen. Med. 37–9: hoc restat unum, pronubum thalamo feram | ut ipsa pinum postque sacrificas preces | caedam dicatis victimas altaribus, in which Medea imagines sacrificing the future couple (Jason and Creusa) like victims on an altar, after uttering ritual prayers (sacrificas preces). The clausula venit ad aras (a variation on the Ovidian veniebat ad aras, found at Met. 11.579) also appears at 1.525. 244–5  unaque adeunt pariterque precari | incipiunt: For the absolute use of the verb adeo, cf. TLL i.617.72–8. Liberman 2.375 compares the Greek verb ἐποίχομαι (‘to approach in order to honour’), which Pindar uses at Ol. 3.40 and Pyth. 2.24. According to Frassinetti (1995) 315, lines 243–6 have been mixed up and should be read as follows: inde ubi sacrificas cum coniuge venit ad aras | Aesonides, ignem Pollux undamque iugalem | praetulit, unaque adeunt pariterque precari | incipiunt et dextram pariter vertuntur in orbem. 245–6  ignem Pollux undamque iugalem | praetulit: The rite of water (represented by the common metonymy unda) and fire, symbols of civilized life, but also of marital harmony and the management of the household, ratified the marriage (cf. Var. L. 5.61; Paul. Fest., p. 77.21 Lindsay; Ov. Ars 2.598; Lact. Inst.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, line 246

175

2.9.21; Serv. ad Virg. A. 4.167; and Treggiari [1991] 168). In order to offer water to the newly-­weds, a puer (perhaps called praelux, but there are no at­test­ations of this term; cf. Spaltenstein ad loc.) carrying a lit torch stood before the bride. The fact that Pollux plays the role of the puer here is not accidental. Wagner suspects a play on words between Pollux and puer praelux, while Lemaire sees an astronomical connection to the star that praelucet on the brow of the Dioscuri (as described in VF 1.568–73 and 5.367). Pellucchi (2012) 296 develops Liberman’s 2.375–6 observation that in antiquity the Dioscuri were often identified with the Cabiri, and that this would be one of the etymologies connected to the term camillus (cf. Var. L. 7.34), which designates the role performed by the puer in the confarreatio (according to a different in­ter­pret­ation, camillus refers to all the attendants or pueri, cf. Paul. Fest., p. 82 Lindsay). Although I would not reject these interpretations, I believe we can explain VF’s decision to use Pollux for a different, astronomical reason. According to a well-­attested tradition, the appearance of the double star of the Dioscuri in the sky is a good omen, as VF confirms at 1.568–73 referring to the phenomenon of St Elmo’s fire, which appears to sailors to indicate the end of a storm: dixit et ingenti flammantem nubila sulco | direxit per inane facem, quae puppe propinqua | in bifidum discessit iter fratresque petivit | Tyndareos, placida et mediis in frontibus haesit | protinus amborum lumenque innoxia fundit | purpureum, miseris olim implorabile nautis. The appearance of only one star, however, is a sign of disaster (cf. Le Boeuffle [1977] 210). Pliny, e.g., reports this phenomenon at Nat. 2.101: existunt stellae et in mari terrisque. vidi nocturnis militum vigiliis inhaerere pilis pro vallo fulgorem effigie ea; et antemnis navigantium aliisque navium partibus ceu vocali quodam sono insistunt, ut volucres sedem ex sede mutantes, graves, cum solitariae venere, mergentesque navigia et, si in carinae ima deciderint, exurentes, geminae autem salutares et prosperi cursus nuntiae, quarum adventu fugari diram illam ac minacem appellatamque Helenam ferunt et ob id Polluci ac Castori id numen adsignant eosque in mari invocant. hominum quoque capita vespertinis magno praesagio circumfulgent. omnia incerta ratione et in naturae maiestatae abdita. Further testimony is found at Stat. Theb. 7.791–3: non aliter caeco nocturni turbine Cauri | scit peritura ratis, cum iam damnata sororis | igne Therapnaei fugerunt carbasa fratres. In the first part of VF’s poem, the Dioscuri always appear together (cf. 5.367); they are a symbol of brotherly harmony, helpers for sailors in danger and an example of how one can earn a spot among the stars, in accordance with Jupiter’s will. By contrast, the poet presents them separately in the second half of the Argonautica, and this feature coincides with the poem’s general contours, according to which the poetics of nefas (that is, betrayal, strife, and civil war) become more p ­ ronounced after the passage through the Symplegades and the arrival at Colchis (for a study on how different situations are reflected in the poem’s two parts, see Krasne [2011], especially 139–46 on the Dioscuri). VF mentions only Pollux in his account of this marriage ceremony, who has been commissioned with carrying the fire and the water. I believe that

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

176

Commentary, line 247

this allusion contributes to the poem’s guiding principles, and that it can be explained by the passage from Pliny, where the author states that the appearance of only one star (that is, one of the two Gemini) foretells disaster for sailors, insofar as it portends shipwreck (mergentes) or that the vessel will catch fire (exurentes). The ignis and the unda that Pollux carries accordingly become symbols of future calamities: in the short term (e.g., the shipwreck that will kill Styrus; cf. lines 318–84), in the medium term (the fire that will burn Creusa alive, cf. arsuras at line 236 and exurentes found in Pliny), or in the long term (the Greek fleet and the destruction of Troy). This allusion to the appearance of one of the Gemini stars foreshadows the Trojan War (a prominent topic in the eighth book). As we can see in both Pliny’s and Statius’ passages (see also Schol. ad Germ. Arat., p. 219.5–6 Breysig), the single star that brought disaster was that of Helen, infamous sister of the Dioscuri (we can also find traces in the modern name St Elmo’s fire, a Christian adaptation on ancient beliefs). After mentioning the deified Hercules (cf. line 230), the poet names the other of Jupiter’s sons who attained a spot in the heavens by his father’s will (Pollux earned his place among the stars by killing Amycus) in order to contrast his fate with Jason’s. It is not coincidental that this allusion occurs during Jason’s wedding, which is sponsored by Venus (representing voluptas). Just as in the Virgilian marriage between Dido and Aeneas (cf. Virg. A. 4.165–72), which would also end in tragedy (cf. 4.169–70: ille dies primus leti, primusque malorum | causa fuit), the astronomical element (cf. 4.167–8: Tellus et pronuba Iuno | dant signum: fulsere ignes et conscius aether) plays a role in the celebration of Jason and Medea’s wedding, during which the omens of future misfortune will become more explicit in lines 247–51 (see especially the absence of concordia in line 248, which is foreshadowed by the fact that Pollux appears alone). Regarding the phrase dextrum . . . in orbem, the turn to the right was part of the dexteratio/ adoratio (cf. Plin. Nat. 28.25 and Liberman 2.376 n. 149), and the act of rotating one’s body to the right (attested, e.g., in Liv. 5.21.16; Suet. Vit. 2.5; Plut. Quaest. Rom. 14) was probably connected to the apparent movement of the sun and the moon. The clausula vertuntur in orbem confirms the allusions to an astro­nom­ic­al context, since it appears only here and at Man. 2.856–9: omne quidem signum sub qualicumque figura | partibus inficitur mundi; locus imperat astris | et dotes noxamque facit; vertuntur in orbem | singula et accipiunt vires caeloque remittent. 247–8  sed neque se pingues tum candida flamma per auras | explicuit: As various commentators observe, the taking of the auspices is a preliminary rite performed before the celebration of a Roman wedding (cf. Cic. Div. 1.28), but VF inserts it at the end of his description, serving to make the resulting omens seem even bleaker. Langen identifies the model for this scene in Sen. Oed. 303–27 (the dialogue between Manto and Tiresias), and Liberman provides

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 248

177

references to the cited Virgilian passage A. 4.167–8 with Servius’ note on 4.399. From the Seneca passage, see especially lines 311: et summam in auras fusus explicuit comam (according to Summers [1894], this is echoed by the Valerian expression per auras | explicuit); 314: non una facies mobilis flammae fuit; and 321–3: sed ecce pugnax ignis in partes duas | discedit et se scindit unius sacri | discors favilla (the divided flame foreshadows the events related to Oedipus’ sons; cf. Stat. Theb. 1.35–6: flammasque rebellis | seditione rogi). The detail of the divided flame is first attested in literature at Callim. fr. 165 Pfeiffer (as Lazzarini [2012] 239 observes, who also compares AP 7.396 and 399, Ov. Ibis 35–6 and Sil. 16.546–8), whereas for the omens involving fire and incense during marriage ceremonies, see Treggiari (1991) 164–5. A flickering flame (or one that goes out) as a bad omen for the marriage is a recurring motif (cf. Ov. Her. 21.159–60; Met. 10.6–7), as is the motif of trading the wedding torch for one for mourning: cf. Sen. Med. 15–18 (with Boyle ad loc.); for other examples unrelated to Jason and Medea, cf. Ov. Fast. 2.561–2; Met. 6.430; Prop. 4.3.13–14 (with Fedeli, Ciccarelli, and Dimundo ad loc.). For the use of torches, see also Bömer on Ov. Fast. 4.727. For the phrase pingues . . . auras, Langen compares pinguis . . . fumus at Luc. 8.730 and Sil. 4.307 as well as the pinguis flamma at Ov. Tr. 5.5.11 and Tac. Germ. 5 (thus understanding the epithet as describing the quality of the sacrificial fire), but according to Liberman 2.376, Soubiran (2002) 294, and Lazzarini (2012) 240 (who refers to Lucr. 5.296, where pingues modifies taedae on account of the pitch with which they have been soaked), the adjective refers to the incense that makes the air heavy. But no one compares this passage with 1.204: sic fatus pingui cumulat libamine flammam (see Zissos ad loc.), where the poet marks the end of the speech that Jason gives before Mopsus’ prophecy. For candidus applied to flamma and similar words, cf. TLL iii.240.16. explicuit is often applied to fire or flames in poetry, but the verb is only construed with se in prose. 248  nec tura videt concordia Mopsus: This refers to the libanomantia, that is, the taking of auspices from observing the way in which the smoke produced by burning incense rises upward; cf. RE 12.2551–2; Eitrem (1915) 220–1. The adjective concors expresses a human quality, but here it is linked to an inanimate object (tura). For other similar examples of personification (as also in line 295), see Kleywegt (1986) 2478. VF does not choose to use the form concordia at random. As Lazzarini (2012) 241 notes, Ov. Fast. 2.631–2 mentions Concordia as a goddess favourable on the day of the Caristia, or the festival of familial love, in which the boni are expected to offer tura to their household gods, and Ovid names Medea among the mythic figures whom he orders to stay far away from the festivities, due to the crimes she committed against her family. A classic example of harmony between spouses appears in Catull. 64. The absence of Concordia in VF refers not only to future familial strife, but also to discordia among the populace, itself a trigger for wars, especially civil ones (the archetype

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

178

Commentary, lines 249–51

for which was, for the Romans, precisely the strife between the brothers Romulus and Remus, to which the earlier mention of Pollux subtly alludes). Mopsus: With Idmon, Mopsus is one of the two seers to take part in the Argonautic expedition (on this figure, see Zissos [2008] 186–9 and 261–2). He is mentioned already in Pindar (Pyth. 4. 189–91), and in AR 4.1505–36 he dies in Libya, towards the end of the Argonauts’ return voyage. VF often puts his own authorial voice into the mouths of these vates, and critics have recognized pos­ sible autobiographical allusions on account of VF’s status as a quindecimvir (cf., e.g., Stover [2012] 151–79). This prophecy acts as a companion piece to the one spoken by Mopsus in the first book, completing it and bringing it to a close. Unlike what happens in the first book, where Idmon immediately follows Mopsus’ rather negative and pessimistic prophecy with a more optimistic one of his own, this passage features no counterpoint, and the feeling of pessimism predominates (cf. Finkmann, Reitz, and Walter [2019] 673). 249  promissam nec stare fidem, breve tempus amorum: The echo of line 222 promissamque fidem thalami is unambiguous. Compare Virg. A. 4.522: non servata fides cineri promissa Sychaeo (Dido) and 6.346: en haec promissa fides est? The phrase stare fidem is an Ovidian styleme (cf. Am. 2.6.14: stetit ad finem longa tenaxque fides, with McKeown ad loc. on the conjugal vocabulary). Is this an expression of the poet’s own thoughts? Or is it connected by asyndeton to the preceding videt? Heinsius adds an et before breve, but I believe that breve tempus amorum can also be connected to Mopsus’ vision through asyndeton (if, however, the phrase is the author’s comment, Liberman notes, it should be placed within parentheses). See Lovatt (2019) 99–100 on this marriage as ­broken faith. 250  odit utrumque simul, simul et miseratur utrumque: Soubiran (2002) 294 highlights the Ovidian background to this line, expressed through its symmetry (the isocolon between the two hemistichs is nearly perfect) and repetitions (as Mopsus censures both). Lazzarini (2012) 241 expands upon the argument by pointing out how the line’s structure adds to the depiction of the seer, who shatters the earlier harmony and expressions of partnership that occur during the ceremony (cum coniuge venit ad aras | . . . unaque adeunt ­pariterque precari | incipiunt . . . | . . . dextrum pariter vertuntur in orbem, 243–6). 251  et tibi tum nullos optavit, barbara, natos: The apostrophe barbara, coming straight from the poet’s mouth, is particularly expressive. This epithet, which refers to Medea and clearly foreshadows her status (and her actions) in Corinth, is also used to designate Medea at 148 (in her mother’s speech). VF is perhaps inspired by Ov. Ars 2.381–2: coniugis admissum violataque iura marita est | barbara per natos Phasias ulta suos (Ovid is referring to the same events at Corinth).

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 252–4

179

252–5  According to ritual practice, the preparation of the banquet followed the sacrifice made by the newly-­weds. This scene, which acts as a buffer between Mopsus’ inauspicious premonitions and the arrival of the pursuers from Colchis, is a reworking of several Virgilian passages, especially Virg. A. 1.210–15 (describing the banquet prepared after the Trojans land at Libya): illi se praedae accingunt dapibusque futuris | tergora diripiunt costis et viscera nudant; | pars in frusta secant veribusque trementia figunt | litore aena locant alii flammasque ministrant. | Tum victu revocant viris, fusique per herbam | implentur veteris Bacchi pinguisque ferinae. For a detailed analysis of how VF rewrites this scene, see Nordera (1969) 74–7 and (2016) 74–5; Hudson-­Williams (1979); and Salemme (1991) 83. The episode is also similar to the one narrated at 1.250–4, in which the Argonauts, at Jason’s suggestion, enjoy their final evening before they set out on their expedition: ‘hanc vero, socii, venientem litore laeti | dulcibus adloquiis ludoque educite noctem!’ | paretur. Molli iuvenes funduntur in alga | conspicuusque toris Tirynthius. Exta ministri | rapta simul veribus Cereremque dedere canistris. 252  mox epulas et sacra parant: Contino (1973) 66 points out the hendiadys epulas et sacra, used for epulas sacrificales. 252–3  silvestria laetis | praemia venatu facili quaesita supersunt: laetis refers to Jason’s companions (as it also does at line 233) and signals the transition to a moment that is more relaxed than the gloomy prophecy uttered in the preceding lines. For the use of this adjective in hunting scenes, see, e.g., Virg. G. 3.375, while for its use in the context of preparations for a sacrifice, compare Virg. A. 5.58 (with Conington and Nettleship). VF does not depict the hunting scene in full, but, in accordance with a well-­known narrative technique, he condenses it into a few words (praemia venatu facili). The term praemia often describes the spoils of the hunt, and Langen compares the following parallels: Hor. Epod. 2.36: iucunda captat praemia (referring to a bird hunt); Prop. 3.12.46: sive petes calamo praemia, sive cane. According to Lemaire, Mozley, Liberman, and Soubiran, supersunt is a synonym for abundant, but Dräger understands it as ‘are available’ (cf. OLD s.v. 7). The conjectures offered by Heinsius (strata and laeti in place of sacra and laetis), Burman (lestis in place of laetis), and Köstlin (superdant instead of supersunt) seem unnecessary. 254 pars veribus, pars undanti despumat aeno: This line has produced numerous debates (see Liberman 2.377–8 n. 154 and Pellucchi [2012] 300–2), largely because scholars look for loyalty to the Virgilian model (A. 1.212–13: pars in frusta secant veribusque trementia figunt; | litore aena locant alii flammasque ministrant), which VF reworks in his own way. The greatest exegetical difficulty concerns the belief (held by Thilo, Langen, and Strand) that pars . . . pars refers to what the Argonauts do to the animals they have hunted (as in the Virgilian model, where it describes the actions of Aeneas’ companions), which would

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

180

Commentary, lines 255–6

require that we either accept that there is a strong zeugma in the verb despumat (understood with its transitive meaning, as in Virgil) or that we modify the text. Both Nordera (1969) 75–7 and Hudson-­Williams (1979) 379 independently propose the most con­vin­cing solution to this problem. The subject of this clause is not, in fact, the Argonauts, but rather the food itself (as is also the case in lines 252–3, in which the spoils of the hunt serve as the subject). We can reconstruct VF’s decision to reverse his Virgilian model by comparing an intermediary passage, namely Ov. Met. 6.644–6: vivaque adhuc animaeque aliud retinentia membra | dilaniant; pars inde cavis exsultat aenis | pars veribus stridunt (Philomela and Procne). Furthermore, the verb despumat should be understood in an intransitive sense (i.e. dispumari, spumam emittere; cf. TLL v/1.752.10, as attested in Luc. 6.506 and Apic. 5.3.1) and as applied (by zeugma, but one that is far gentler and more acceptable than the one Langen proposes) both to the pars veribus (stridet or stillat, ‘which sizzles’ or ‘which froths’) and to the other pars (which ‘boils’ in a bronze cauldron). For undanti, Nordera (1969) 75 refers to Virg. A. 7.462–3: magno veluti cum flamma sonore | virgea suggeritur costis undantis aeni. 255  gramineis ast inde toris discumbitur: Compare 1.252–3: molli iuvenes funduntur in alga | conspicuusque toris Tirynthius (for the similarity between the two passages, cf. note on 252–5). Analogous scenes appear often (cf. Virg. A. 1.214–15 and Luc. 7.760–1), as does the way to distinguish characters by their placement at the banquet: in this case, Jason and Medea occupy a prominent position in relation to the other Argonauts, as, e.g., at Virg. A. 8.175–8 (where Evander welcomes Aeneas and sets aside a lion skin for him, which VF replaces with the ram’s fleece, while the others receive grassy beds): dapes iubet et sublata reponi | pocula gramineoque viros locat ipse sedili, | praecipuumque toro et villosi pelle leonis | accipit Aenean solioque invitat acerno. On the use of the conjunction ast, cf. L-­H-­Sz 489. discumbo is a technical verb, as is accumbo, for taking one’s place at a banquet; cf. TLL v/1.365.21. VF also uses it impersonally at 2.190–1: discumbitur altis | porticibus. The iunctura between this word and toris is found at Virg. A. 1.708: toris iussi discumbere pictis; compare also Ov. Met. 8.566: discubuere toris and Fast. 1.402: gramine vestitis accubuere toris. gramineus appears in the poem only here and at 4.339: graminea sternuntur humo, but the iunctura with torus can also be found at Stat. Theb. 1.583. 255–6  olim | Hister anhelantem Peucen quo presserat antro: The fact that the Argonauts celebrate the marriage banquet in a cave may draw inspiration both from AR 4.1130–40 and Virg. A. 4.165–6: in AR the Phaeacians prepare the marriage bed in the divine grotto, henceforth renamed the ‘cave of Medea’ (cf. AR 4.1153–4: Ἄντρον | Μηδείης), where Macris, the daughter of Aristaeus, lives; Virgil explicitly states that the wedding of Dido and Aeneas takes place in a cave (cf. 4.165–6: speluncam Dido dux et Troianus eandem | deveniunt). The mythic

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 257–8

181

tradition of the river Ister raping the nymph Peuce is a Valerian invention that Statius adopts (as Summers [1894] 11 observes) at Silv. 5.2.137: Hister et umbroso circumflua coniuge Peuce. Note that Statius also reworks the Valerian passage at Silv. 3.2.64–6: nec enim temeraria virtus | illa magis, summae gelidum quae Pelion Ossae | iunxit anhelantemque iugis bis pressit Olympum. The motif of rivers becoming enamoured with nymphs is important (cf. Alpheus and Arethusa with note on 90). anhelantem refers to the breathlessness of Peuce’s rush to escape her pursuer rather than sexual panting (as Spaltenstein interprets it). The verb presserat is used in regard to sexual acts (both those of humans and animals), and OLD s.v. 2b cites this passage (with Prop. 1.13.22) for that definition, but nearly all the commentators have detected a sense of violence in it, too (it is not an accident that the poet labels this same cave as infaustum in line 315). I believe that, in this passage, VF has in mind the horrible words uttered by Seneca’s Medea at Med. 408–10: quae Scylla, quae Charybdis Ausonium mare | Siculumque sorbens quaeve anhelantem premens | Titana tantis Aetna fervebit minis? Thus, this ill-­omened Valerian wedding scene, in which sex is tinged with violence, also alludes to the future devastating violence that Medea’s vengeance will cause. 257–8  ipsi inter medios rosea radiante iuventa | altius: The beginning of this line recalls Virg. A. 10.132: ipse inter medios, in which Virgil describes Ascanius’ beauty, which shines like a gem among tawny gold (the section closes with the word auro, as does the following line in VF). VF uses the same Virgilian formula at 4.531, and Silius Italicus also does frequently (e.g., 8.551; 15.635). Here, ipsi refers to Jason and Medea, who occupy a position of honour and are therefore seated above the others, just like Hercules in the passage from the first book (cf. conspicuus, 1.253). For the phrase rosea . . . iuventa, cf. lines 26 and 30 (on Jason’s beauty), 5.365; and Tib. 1.4.29. For the image of radiating beauty, Salemme (1991) 84 compares Sen. Phaed. 770: ut fulgor ­teneris qui radiat genis. 258  inque sui sternuntur velleris auro: All the commentators correctly compare AR 4.1141–3, in which the Fleece is spread over the marriage bed prepared for Jason’s and Medea’s wedding. If the Hellenistic source text contains a well-­ attested trad­ition in the Greek world (that of preparing the marriage bed; cf. Livrea [1973] 323), several commentators (following Huguet) detect a reference to the Roman ritual of confarreatio in VF’s passage, citing in particular Serv. auct. ad Virg. A. 4.374: mos enim apud veteres fuit flamini ac flaminicae, dum per confarreationem in nuptias convenirent, sellas duos iugatas ovilla pelle superiniecta poni eius ovis, quae hostia fuisset, ut ibi nubentes velatis capitibus in confarreatione flamen ac flaminica residerent and Paul. Fest., p. 102.1 Lindsay in pella lanata nova nupta consedere solet. For sui . . . velleris, cf. line 89 (sua vellera, of the dragon).

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

182

Commentary, line 259

259–317.  THE COLCHIAN FLEET IN PURSUIT OF THE ARGONAUTS The Apollonian episode depicting the murder of Absyrtus opens with a confrontation between the Greeks and the Colchians (cf. AR 4.302–37). With the arrival of the Colchian fleet on Peuce, VF does not exactly follow the story as told in his Greek model but rather distinguishes himself by updating and extending it. First of all, since he placed the wedding on Peuce earlier than AR did, VF instead uses AR 4.1000–7 for reference (the arrival of the Colchians on the island of the Phaeacians). Moreover, the Roman poet does not limit himself to describing only the two battle formations but expounds upon the psychology of the characters independently of his source material by inserting original features such as Absyrtus’ speech in lines 261–86. The difficulty in reconciling the motif of the Argo as the first ship with the arrival of a fleet from Colchis (a problem absent in AR) is one of the topics that have led to debate. One of the strong themes that emerges from this section is the foreshadowing of future clashes between East and West, already announced in the Weltenplan in the first book, which appears in Absyrtus’ speech: he aims to destroy the whole of Greece rather than simply to recover the Fleece and Medea. For in-­depth analyses, in addition to comments on individual lines, see Pellucchi (2012) 305–14 and Biggs (2019) 344–5 on the description of the Colchian fleet. 259–60  quis novus . . . | . . . rupit: The poet’s own voice signals the transition to a new section, manifesting itself through the classic device of an introductory question (or the invocation of the Muse), as at 3.14–18; 5.217–25 (the middle proem); and 6.515–17: quis tales obitus dederit, quis talia facta | dic age tuque feri reminiscere, Musa, furoris. | Absyrtus, with which VF introduced the figure of Absyrtus in order to praise his merits in battle. The clear echo of this final passage (note that quis and Absyrtus are in the same metrical positions; cf. line 261) serves to introduce the motif of the enmity between the Colchians and the Greeks, abruptly interrupting the festivities for the wedding. This passage evokes AR 4.1000, that is, the moment when the Colchian pursuers catch Jason and Medea by surprise on the island of the Phaeacians. These lines also recall those with which AR introduces the scene depicting the murder of Absyrtus (cf. AR 4.450–1: πῶς γὰρ δὴ μετιόντα κακῷ ἐδάμασσεν ὀλέθρῳ | Ἄψυρτον; τὸ γὰρ ἧμιν ἐπισχερὼ ἦεν ἀοιδῆς). As Lüthje (1971) 347 correctly observes, followed by Pellucchi (2012) 308, the proemial questions at 3.14–18 introduce the section leading to the death of Cyzicus, and thus the similarity with this section of the eighth book may support the hypothesis that the episode on Peuce could have ended with the death of Absyrtus (who was also, like Cyzicus, first a host and then an enemy to the Argonauts). The sudden arrival of the Colchian fleet is foreshadowed in the first book (1.140–8) through the scene recounting the Centauromachy that interrupts the marriage banquet of Pirithous and

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 259–62

183

Hippodamia, depicted on one of the painted panels decorating the Argo. We, therefore, find another reprise of themes presented previously, which VF uses to construct the poem’s closure. 259  quis novus inceptos timor impediit hymenaeos: The practice of beginning a sentence with the interrogative form of the pronoun appears already at Virg. A. 4.10: quis novus hic nostris successit sedibus hostes? See also Ps-­Sen. Epigr. 5.7–8: quis novus hic dominus terramque diemque fretumque | permutat?; Stat. Theb. 10.690: quis novus inceptis rapuit te casus ab armis? quis has an adjectival sense (cf. line 58). The adjective novus highlights the unexpected nature of the fear (as Lazzarini [2012] 246 argues, who also compares Ov. Her. 19.89: unde novus timor hic, quoque illa audacia fugit?). On the differences between timor and metus in the poem, see Pederzani (1987) 122–3. inceptos . . . hymenaeos recalls Virg. A. 4.316 and the theme of the unfinished wedding (Dido and Aeneas, Laodamia and Protesilaus). For the refined use of the verb impedio and the metrical lengthening of impediit (short by prosody) in a clausula following the Grecism hymenaeos (as in Virg. A. 7.398: canit hymenaeos and 10.720: profugus hymenaeos), cf. Perutelli (1997) 26 and 29 and Spaltenstein on 2.225 (on the lengthening of metus before the caesura). 260  turbavitque toros et sacra calentia rupit: The uncommon combination turbare toros could be understood in a concrete sense, as in Sen. Dial. 4.25.1: parum agilis est puer aut tepidior aqua poturo aut turbatus torus aut mensa neglegentius posita, or we could interpret toros as a metonymy for ‘wedding’ (cf. Ov. Pont. 3.3.50: legitimos sollicitasse toros). calere is often used in ritual contexts to characterize the offerings, altars, or the entire place of worship; cf. Virg. A. 1.417; Ov. Met. 8.671; VF 2.331. The TLL iii.149.47–8 cites this passage as meaning Iasonis et Medeae epulas ferventes. For the collocation rumpere sacra, compare Virg. A. 8.109–11: terrentur visu subito cunctique relictis | consurgunt mensis. audax quos rumpere Pallas | sacra vetat, itself an example of an interrupted religious ceremony (piaculum), which was ill-­omened (as in the case of this passage); see also Serv. ad Virg. A. 3.407. 261–2  Absyrtus subita praeceps cum classe parentis | advehitur: On the mythological tradition concerning Absyrtus, see LIMC 2.1, s.v. Apsyrtos. Absyrtus appears several times in VF’s poem, and critics are divided on the questions of his age and position. According to Summers (1894) 3, VF presents Absyrtus as a youth at 5.457–8 (filius hunc iuxta primis Absyrtus in annis | dignus avo quemque insontem meliora manerent) and 7.339–40 (nec videris ulla iuventae | gaudia, non dulces fratris pubescere malas?), whereas in 6.171–2, 8.136, and here the character takes on a far more mature role as a warrior. Like the majority of modern commentators, I believe that there only seems to be a contra­dic­tion and that the different passages are not incompatible, especially since in the fifth book Absyrtus is compared to his elderly father and said to be

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

184

Commentary, lines 262–3

already worthy of him (note also the extradiegetic foreshadowing of his tragic fate), while in the passage from the seventh book Medea speaks of her younger brother in affectionate terms. Absyrtus is, therefore, young, but can already fight valiantly. The mention of Aeetes’ fleet poses a more substantial problem since VF follows the tradition that the Argo was the first ship. This difficulty does not seem insurmountable if we suppose that the poet chose to apply the term subita to classe parentis not only to express the idea of suddenness and surprise (as it does at 306), but also to allude to the fact that the fleet has been improvised and put together hastily (cf. OLD s.v. subitus 5), as VF also makes explicit at lines 287–8 (intorquent truncis frondentibus undam | . . . raptim formata). advehitur is in the middle voice and is used absolutely. The phrase cum classe is found in the same metrical position in poetry first at Catull. 64.53 (Thesea cedentem celeri cum classe tuetur, creating an interesting contrast between Theseus, who departs with his swift fleet, and Absyrtus, who arrives); it appears several times in Lucan (4.530; 5.328; 8.574). Silius Italicus echoes this Valerian clausula at 12.363: cum classe paterna. 262–3  profugis infestam lampada Grais | concutiens: Latin writers typically use the adjective profugus to refer to the Trojans (cf. Sall. Cat. 6.1; Tib. 2.5.20), and VF’s decision to employ it does not appear coincidental, considering that the motif of the Trojan War will become increasingly prominent in this book. We should understand the word Grais (a poeticism commonly used in elevated language, cf., e.g., Enn. Ann. 165 Skutsch; Lucr. 1.66; Virg. A. 10.720) as playing a similar role, as in the future it will designate other generations of Greek warriors (cf. Graecia fallax of line 275); it is important to note the change of perspective produced by the combination of the terms profugis and Grais (now the Greeks are the fugitives, as the Trojans will be very soon). The phrase infestam lampada (a poetic Grecism) . . . concutiens is also proleptic. In fact, on the one hand, Absyrtus’ gesture echoes that of Pollux (ignem . . . iugalem, 245–6), extending (in a disturbing manner) the references to the Roman ritual of the confarreatio. On the other hand, it recalls the war torch, brandished like a wedding one, that Absyrtus mentions at 278. The construction quatio or  quasso with the accusative lampada (or lampadem) is common (cf. TLL iv.118.48), and VF also uses it at 1.840, 3.125, and 8.278. The poet thus depicts Absyrtus with the features of an Erinys, foreshadowing the hal­lu­cin­ations and the regret that Medea will experience as a result of murdering him (cf. Sen. Med. 962–3: quem trabe infesta petit | Megaera? with Ripoll [2004] 205 and Lazzarini [2012] 248–9, who provides further parallel passages). Note the enjambment of concutiens, following the enjambed advehitur of the preceding line (which in turn takes as its subject Absyrtus of the preceding line, in alliterative anaphora). 263  diramque premens clamore sororem: Baehrens emends the reading from the codices, diram, to diro, which Schenkl, Kramer, and Liberman follow.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 264–5

185

Printing diro . . . clamore, applying to the shouting of Absyrtus, also entails a change of perspective on the part of the narrator: is it the poet, the Argonauts who hear the din, or the Colchians who follow after it? If we keep the reading diram, it applies to Medea (from the perspective of Absyrtus rather than VF). Based on grammar and frequency, both variants are possible, but I believe that the reading diram is preferable. The adjective belongs to elevated register (cf. Acc. Trag. 621 Dangel: dirum . . . diem), and its association with the Dirae (cf. Schol. ad Hor. Carm. 1.2.1: a furiis tractum, quae Dirae dicuntur) accounts for its frequent attribution to underworldly gods and beings: cf. Virg. A. 3.211 and 713: dira Caeleno; Ps-­Sen. Her. O. 1012: dira Tisiphone; Virg. A. 7.454: adsum dirarum ab sede sororum (Allecto). The last passage in particular, together with Ps-­Sen. Her. O. 952: seu dira soror es (Medea), persuades me to keep the reading diram. Medea is considered to be dira in the eyes of her brother (whom she will kill), which matches both the unsettling atmosphere that the poet creates in these lines and the traditional image of the sorceress, evoked elsewhere in the poem (cf. 5.219: horrenda virgine; 6.156–7; 6.449–54; and Spaltenstein on 5.219). In addition, cf. dira . . . lingua at line 352 (Medea’s spells) and ac dira precantur | coniugia et Stygias infanda ad foedera taedas at 2.172–3 (appearing in the context of disastrous weddings), but also Sen. Phaed. 564: Medea reddet feminas dirum genus (with Baldini-­Moscadi [2005] 123). The phrase premere clamore appears often in hunting contexts (cf. Virg. G. 3.413: ingentem clamore premes ad retia cervum; Virg. A. 1.324: aut spumantis apri cursum clamore prementem), but it is also employed in martial contexts; cf. Luc. 3.541: remorumque sonus  premitur clamore and Sil. 11.110: hinc pariter magnoque viros clamore premebant. 264–5  atque ‘hanc, o siquis vobis dolor iraque, Colchi, | accelerate viam: All of the manuscripts report this reading. Liberman, on the basis of doubts raised by Heinsius (who makes the emendation atque haec), Baehrens (who conjectures heia agite), and Caussin (who changes atque into usque), rejects atque (asserting that a simple and generic atque cannot introduce direct discourse after advehitur . . . concutiens . . . -que premens) and begins the direct speech after sororem, proposing in the apparatus that we add ait after hanc. I agree with Spaltenstein that this is unnecessary. The speech begins immediately after atque, and the shift from the third person narrative to Absyrtus’ direct discourse is VF’s narrative technique that allows the poet to give the story more liveliness and to highlight immediately the speaking character (cf. 2.112–14, in which the phrase sonat aequore clamor precedes direct discourse). Furthermore, despite Liberman’s claims, the development of the preceding scene (lines 261–3) sets up this speech very well: first we see Absyrtus, who appears unexpectedly and approaches with a fleet prepared in real time; the picture continues by describing his actions as he waves a torch aggressively and then moves on to recounting the sound as he screams at his sister, who is still far away, and finally his

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

186

Commentary, lines 265–6

words reach the reader. The noun phrase siquis vobis dolor iraque separates the interjection o from the vocative Colchi (according to Langen), or from the imperative accelerate (see TLL ix/2.6.67–8). The collocation dolor iraque is used at 2.165 and can be traced back to Ov. Ibis 86 (et peragent partes ira dolorque suas). The terms ira and dolor are often associated (cf. 2.165; 3.384; 8.290) in both poetry and prose (cf. TLL v/1.1841.25–1842.39), but, as Lazzarini (2012) 250–1 notes, they persistently occur in Seneca as a ‘tragic pair’ (cf. Sen. Phoen. 352: tumet animus ira, fervet immensum dolor; Ag. 142–3: quocumque me ira, quo dolor, quo spes feret, | hoc ire pergam); and particularly Med. 153–5, 943–53, with regard to the heroine’s conflicting passions as in Euripides). The iunctura accelerare viam is a Valerian invention (Pellucchi [2012] 318 cites Virg. A. 5.609: viam celerans). 265–6  neque enim fugit aequore raptor | Iuppiter aut falsi sequimur vestigia tauri: On the correlative neque . . . aut, which appears in Prop. 2.28.57 and remains primarily a poetic feature until the late period, see TLL ii.1567.84– 1568.11; K-­S 2.104; and Fedeli, Ciccarelli, and Dimundo on Prop. 4.1.104. The word raptor appears four times within the poem. The noun lacks an apparent erotic connotation only at 1.159–60 (citus occupat auras | raptor, of Zeus’ eagle as it snatches up a lamb), since raptor commonly serves to denote predatory birds (cf. OLD s.v. 1b). If we consider the omen as foreshadowing the various ‘kidnappings’ perpetrated by Jason (both that of Acastus and that of Medea), we may transfer the sense of ‘abductor, rapist’ (cf. OLD s.v. 2) to this passage, too; cf. 6.121–2 (raptor amorum | Neurus) and 8.399 (alius . . . raptor). Classic examples of a raptor include Hades/Pluto (cf. Prop. 3.2.24; Claud. De rapt. Pros. 1.1 and passim); Tityus (cf. Hor. Carm. 4.6.2); Paris (Stat. Silv. 5.1.57); and Jason himself (cf. Sen. Med. 613). The myth that VF brings to mind is that of Europa, daughter of Agenor, king of Tyre, who is abducted by Jupiter (cf. raptor Iuppiter), transformed into a snow-­white bull, and is then brought to the island of Crete (where she becomes queen and gives birth to Minos and Rhadamanthus); cf. Ov. Met. 2.836–3.5 and LIMC 4.1, s.v. Europa I. In the narrative economy of the Valerian poem, the combinations of Medea/Europa, Jason/Jupiter (and Absyrtus/ Cadmus) suit various purposes. According to the chain of events that Herodotus introduces (1.1–2, already stated in Jupiter’s Weltenplan), the rape of Europa fits into a sequence of mythological abductions (Io, Europa, Medea, Helen) that provide the basis for various conflicts between the West (Greece and later Rome) and the East. VF evokes the assimilation between Io and Medea in the fourth and the seventh books of the poem (cf. note on 6). Absyrtus’ words now support Medea’s connection to Europa: the prince denies that he is following the trail of Europa (non sequimur), but by doing so, he underscores it further. Medea’s assimilation with Helen is made explicit at lines 395–9. Absyrtus can therefore be assimilated to one of the three brothers who chase after Europa (Cadmus, the future king of Thebes, Phoenix, and Cilix, the latter two of whom

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 267–9

187

serve as eponymous heroes for a pair of coastal peoples). The adjective falsus frequently describes humans or other beings that have experienced transform­ ations (cf. TLL vi/1.192.33), and VF applies it to Venus, who takes the form of Chalciope at 6.491 (falsae . . . sorori). For the phrase falsi . . . vestigia tauri, Lazzarini (2012) 252 compares Ov. Met. 2.871: falsa pedum primis vestigia ponit in undis (Jupiter begins his escape across the sea in the form of a bull), but consider also Ov. Ars 3.252: falso Sidoni vecta bove and Man. 1.361–2: tum vicina ferens nixo vestigia Tauro | Heniochus. 267–8  puppe (nefas!) una praedo Phrixea reportat | vellera: The speech given by his father Aeetes in the preceding book (cf. 7.35–61) influences Absyrtus’ monologue. This line contains strong verbal echoes of 7.43–5: quinquaginta Asiam (pudet heu) penetrarit Iason | exulibus, meque ante alios sic spreverit una, | una ratis spolium ut vivo de rege reportet?; Perutelli (ad loc.) refers to the motif of the refugee left with only a single ship, as at Hor. Carm. 1.37.13, describing Cleopatra after Actium. On the image of the Argo as the sole ship, cf. 5.438–9: exoritur Notus et toto ratis una profundo | cernitur. On the parenthetical use of the word nefas, cf. note on 159. For Jason’s designation as a praedo, see note on 151. Phrixea . . . vellera describes the Fleece at 6.150 and is an Ovidian styleme (cf. Met. 7.7); for other periphrases, see note on 75 (Phrixeae pecudis). reportat is a technical verb that designates the spoils of war (cf. OLD s.v. 3a), as it does at 7.45. 268  qua libuit remeat cum virgine: Cf. 7.48–50: cur age non templis sacrata avellere dona | omnibus atque ipsas gremiis abducere natas | praedo libet? and 8.156–7. Except for Mozley, who follows Wagner in understanding qua as an adverb of place, all other modern commentators follow Langen, who takes it as  a relative pronoun (with prolepsis, attraction to its antecedent, and the ­omission of the preposition); cf. K-­S 2.112.2.b. 268–9  nobis | (o pudor!) et muros et stantia tecta reliquit: Langen already grasped the significance of these lines as indicating a sense of shame on Absyrtus’ part, since he has lost the Fleece and the girl without even having fought a war (the city walls and its buildings are still standing). The poet again foreshadows the subject of the Trojan War, after which a small group of fugitives on a single ship bring home a precious treasure that they have rescued from the ruling population of Asia (as Lazzarini [2012] 253–4 notes). For the exclamation o pudor, cf. Ov. Her. 9.111: o pudor! hirsuti costis exuta leonis. Beginning in Seneca’s time, the phrase pro pudor becomes common at the beginning of a verse (cf., e.g., Ps-­Sen. Epigr. 10.6; Luc. 10.47 and 77; Mart. 10.68.6; Stat. Theb. 10.270 and 874). For muros . . . tecta, cf. Amata’s gazing over her defeated city at Virg. A. 12.595–6: regina ut tectis venientem prospicit hostem, | incessi muros, ignis ad tecta volare and Ov. Her. 16.57 (Paris to Helen): hinc ego Dardaniae muros excelsaque tecta. For the collocation stantia tecta, cf. Mart.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

188

Commentary, lines 270–2

1.12.12: stantia non poterant tecta probare deos (describing the collapse of a porticus). 270  quid mihi deinde satis: Compare the words of Turnus as he despairs over the shame that he feels, given that he has been removed from battle at Virg. A. 10.675–6: quid ago? aut quae iam satis ima dehiscat | terra mihi? 270–2  nec quaero vellera nec te | accipio, germana, datam nec foederis ulla | spes erit: Absyrtus addresses Medea directly. In AR, the Colchians only demand Medea back, since they feel that the Argonauts won the Fleece fairly. In VF, Absyrtus assigns equal value to the Fleece and to his sister, declaring that he is interested in neither. In fact, he invokes the theme of the Trojan War (cf. 275–6 and Fucecchi [2014] 117). The triple anaphora with nec, which connects the Fleece, Medea, and the hope of peace, leaves no doubt as to the Colchian prince’s only desire: war. The association between Medea and the Fleece is already evoked in Aeetes’ words at VF 7.35–61; Jason’s at 8.37–40; and Idyia’s at 8.155–8. Already Euripides’ Medea feels that she is equated with the Fleece as another spoil of war (cf. Med. 255–6). McClellan (2019) 186 sees here a possible ring composition with the ‘mutilation’ of Jason’s brother, Promachus, at the end of book 1. The end of this line further highlights the brother’s scorn for his sister, as it ends with the rare combination of two monosyllabic words, in which the personal pronoun te seems to disappear, while the enjambment of accipio, which follows immediately after the caesura, further highlights the emphasis placed on the word nec; cf. Prop. 1.4.19–20: nec tibi me post haec committet Cynthia nec te | quaeret (and Ov. Met. 8.111–12: nec te data munera, nec te | noster amor movit). On the construction of spes with a genitive (a Virgilian ­stylistic feature), see EV 4.996. For te accipio, see also Sil. 16.191–2: quam te, Dardanide pulcherrime, mente serena | accipio intueorque libens (Syphax is speaking to Scipio). Medea is Absyrtus’ half-­sister (germana here), since they have the same father, but he is the son of either Asterodeia (according to AR 3.242), Eurylyte (cf. Naupact. fr. 4 Bernabé), or of other nymphs (see Lazzarini [2012] 255). At 6.587, Medea refers to Juno, who has taken the form of Chalciope, as germana. On the difference between soror and germana, see Bessone (1997) on Ov. Her. 12.113 (where Medea calls Absyrtus germane). For the phrase foederis . . . spes (the collocation appears only here and at Claud. In Eutr. 2.324: nec spes iam foederis extat), see the curse that Dido casts upon the descendants of the Trojans and the Carthaginians at Virg. A. 4.624: nullus amor populis nec foedera sunto, but also A. 10.90–1: quae causa fuit consurgere in arma | Europamque Asiamque et foedera solvere furto? 272  aut irae quisquam modus: Following Heinsius, who proposes the emend­ ation spes super, Liberman (alone among modern editors) places a comma after the word spes, arguing that the future tense erit is not suitable for the phrase

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 272–5

189

nec . . . ulla spes (citing 7.628; 8.435; Virg. A. 2.137; 9,131; 10.121 as parallel passages). But Absyrtus’ threats extend into the far future, and this is precisely his intention, to go beyond the present moment (in accordance with the model offered by Dido’s threats in Virg. A. 4.624, which the poet evokes; see particularly the phrase nec foedera sunto). For the adjectival use of quisquam (which appears only here in the poem), see Summers (1894) 42. For the use of quisquam for ullus (frequent when the adjective modifies a person, but less common when it refers to inanimate objects or abstract concepts), cf. L-­H-­Sz 196. 272–3  inde reverti | patris ad ora mei tam parvo in tempore fas sit: Langen ac­know­ledges a certain difficulty in understanding the word inde (the reading in all codices); he proposes that it has a temporal sense (= deinde, si perniciem hostibus paraverim, nondum fas reverti). Liberman solves the problem by restoring Heinsius’s conjecture unde, using AR 4.378: πῶς ἵξομαι ὄμματα πατρός as a point of comparison. Neither solution is convincing (and several scholars even omit the word from their translations, cf. Carelli, Caviglia, and Soubiran). Although with hesitation, I do not think that it is impossible to defend inde. In any case, if we must alter the text, I would prefer to emend inde to immo, even if the adverb appears nowhere else in VF (unless we accept Langen’s proposal to emend illa at 7.165 into immo, which would explain the error of replacing immo with inde). immo usually appears at the beginning of a phrase (cf. Virg. A. 1.753; 9.257; 11.459) and serves to correct an earlier question or assertion by adding further clarification (cf. L-­H-­Sz 492). In this case, that would appear to match precisely what Absyrtus’ words convey, as he imagines a scenario in which he returns home too soon and without the Fleece, Medea, or satisfaction. patris ad ora is a formula that Ov. Met. 8.115 employed in the clausula of a hexameter line. The phrase parvo in tempore appears in the same metrical position at Stat. Theb. 7.522: si vobis hic parvo in tempore carus. fas sit also acts as a hexameter clausula at 1.118: fidere fas sit (see Zissos ad loc.); Stat. Theb. 11.162 (exsolvere fas sit); and Ach. 1.73. For the use of fas est with an infinitive (at 8.419 and 443), in contexts expressing indignation, cf. TLL vi/1.292.34. 274–5 quinquaginta animae me scilicet unique mersa | sufficiet placare ratis: This line contains another clear echo of Aeetes’ speech at the beginning of the preceding book (cf. 7.43–5: quinquaginta Asiam (pudet heu) penetrarit Iason | exulibus meque ante alios sic spreverit una, | una ratis). The contrast between quinquaginta and una is stark in both passages, but from the speaker’s point of view, the total number is still extremely small when compared to the strength of the kingdom of Colchis (which represents the power of all Asia). The model for the numeral quinquaginta is Virg. A. 2.503–5: quinquaginta illi thalami, spes ampla nepotum, | barbarico postes auro spoliisque superbi | procubuere (Priam’s ruined palace). The collocation quinquaginta animae also appears in Stat. Theb. 3.76–7: quinquaginta animae circum noctesque diesque | adsilient. For the elision of a long vowel before a word that begins with a short

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

190

Commentary, lines 275–7

vowel (quinquaginta animae), see Giarratano (1904) lv. For the collocation mergere ratem, Pellucchi (2012) 322 compares 1.604–5: da mergere Graios | insanamque ratem and Lazzarini (2012) 256 refers to Stat. Ach. 1.80–2: ne pete Dardaniam frustra, Theti, mergere classem: | fata vetant; ratus ordo deis miscere cruentas | Europamque Asiamque manus (lines that offer numerous parallels with this passage). For the construction sufficio and an infinitive, cf. L-­H-­Sz 348. placare ratis might contain an ironic echo of Sen. Med. 506–7: quin potius ira concitum pectus doma, | placare natis (Jason is speaking to Medea). 275–6  te, Graecia fallax, | persequor: Jason is described as fallax at Ov. Ars 3.33: Phasida, iam matrem, fallax dimisit Iason and Her. 17.229: omnia Medeae fallax promisit Iason. The rhetorical exaggeration of Absyrtus’ invective goes beyond attacking just his main opponent and extends to the whole Greek world, yet again fitting with the motif of the Trojan War and, more broadly, the conflict between East and West (cf. Fucecchi [2014] 117). These words also recall the well-­known topos of Greek treachery, which can be traced back to the tricks they used in order to bring about the destruction of Troy (compare also the proverbial timeo Danaos et dona ferentes). We should not exclude the possibility that the word fallax is an allusion to the imminent murder of Absyrtus, which, although it does not appear in VF’s poem as we have it, is presented by AR as the infamous result of a trap laid by Jason and Medea (4.456: δολωθείς). For the epithet applied to a region, Lazzarini (2012) 257 compares Graecia mendax at Iuv. 10.174. persequor also appears at the beginning of a line and with enjambment at Lucr. 5.55–6: cuius ego ingressus vestigia dum rationes | persequor ac doceo dictis and Luc. 1.200–2: Roma, fave coeptis; non te furialibus armis | persequor; en adsum, victor terraque marique, | Caesar (Caesar praises himself as a world conqueror). 276  atque tuis hunc quasso moenibus ignem: The hyperbaton between the pairs tuis hunc and moenibus ignem emphasizes the verb quasso, which, just like quatio (at line 278), is frequently used in relation to weapons (tela, hastam; cf. 7.577–8). Both verbs also appear in a iunctura with lampada, cf. Petr. Sat. 124.277: sanguineam tremula quatiebat lampada dextra; Stat. Theb. 10.283: lunarem quatiens exerta lampada dextra. Authors also employ quatere to describe the actions of the Furies; cf. 7.149: ipsum angues, ipsum horrisoni quatit ira flagelli (Orestes, driven to frenzy). VF suggests a picture of Absyrtus caught in the grip of his furor for vengeance, thus transforming the deeds normally performed during wedding rituals (that is, brandishing the torch, here represented by the word ignem) into actions that will prove ruinous (the image is of a genuine wartime siege) for the Colchians. For the repetitive quasso . . . quatio (278), which led Clerq to emend quasso into spargo (on the model of 1.14; Luc. 3.98–100; and Sen. Tro. 38–9), see Liberman 2.380 n. 167. 277  nec tibi digna, soror, desum ad conubia frater: The situation mirrors Ov. Her. 12.113: at non te fugiens sine me, germane, reliqui (see Lazzarini ad loc.). The

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 278–80

191

irony in Absyrtus’ words is also comparable to Medea’s sarcasm as she describes the marriage rites in Sen. Med. 37–9 (see Ripoll [2004] 205). For the technical term desum, used to indicate one’s absence at ritual ceremonies, cf. TLL v/1.787.59. Absyrtus’ verbal irony concerning his close relationship with his sister is also reflected in the word order (as Pellucchi [2012] 323 points out): soror and frater appear at the end of two hemistichs, and digna recalls desum through alliteration, while the phrase ad conubia, placed in hyperbaton, serves to divide them. 278–9  primus et ecce fero quatioque hanc lampada vestro | coniugio: VF invokes the twofold significance of the torch as both a nuptial and a funereal symbol in lines 247–8 (cf. Ov. Her. 6.45–6; Ps-­Sen. Oct. 593–5), and he adopts it again for these lines, following the model offered by a motif in Seneca’s Medea (13–18, in which Medea calls upon the Furies to attend Jason and Creusa’s wedding and to brandish their grim torches, just as they had at her own). Note the anaphora primus . . . primus, in anastrophe with the phrase et ecce. This perhaps alludes to the role that Absyrtus would play in the wedding in the absence of Medea’s father. 279–80  primus celebro dotalia sacra, | qui potui: VF invents the collocation dotalia sacra, which Lazzarini (2012) 258–9 explains as a combination of the adjective dotalis (denoting items connected to dowry; cf. Virg. A. 4.103–4: liceat Phrygio servire marito | dotalisque tuae Tyrios permittere dextrae, with Pease ad loc.) with expressions such as sacra marita (Prop. 3.20.26; Ov. Her. 12.87) or sacra iugalia (Ov. Met. 7.700). See also Ov. Her. 12.53: regnum dotale Creusae (with Bessone [1997] ad loc.). Modern commentators are divided on the precise meaning that should be assigned to the phrase dotalia sacra: should we understand it in the more general sense of ‘relating to marriage’ (as Mozley, Caviglia, and Liberman do, following TLL v/1.2056.10–12), or as connected to the dowry more specifically (as Carelli, Soubiran, Dräger, and Pellucchi do, together with TLL v/1.2054.19)? For a discussion, see Pellucchi (2012) 324. We can explain the relative clause qui potui, which is sarcastic and occupies an emphatic position, in light of what follows: Absyrtus has taken his absent father’s place (after all, he is the one who takes charge of the revenge mission in AR, too). 280 patriae veniam da, quaeso, senectae: The collocation patriae . . .  senectae, which VF uses at 3.302 (conticuit patriae exitium crudele senectae) draws inspiration from Prop. 3.19.15: crimen et illa fuit, patria succensa senecta (see Shackleton Bailey [1952] and Colton [1964] 39). For veniam da, cf. 1.196: da veniam. On the verbal insertion quaeso (used like oro), already considered a refined archaism by the time of Cic. Att. 12.6, see Hofmann (1980) 282–3. It also appears at 7.478 (see Perutelli ad loc.). On the use of the archaic term senecta instead of senectus in oblique cases (metri causa), cf. note on 14.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

192

Commentary, lines 281–3

281–2  quin omnes alii pariter populique patresque | mecum adsunt: This line clearly resembles Lucil. 1229 Marx: totus item pariterque die populusque patresque, which serves to describe the entire undifferentiated populace. Bentley questions the use of the plural populi and emends the word to populus (which Langen and Mozley, among other editors, accept). As Kramer and Liberman have pointed out, a comparison with 1.833 (populos regesque receptat) and 5.405 (proceres audit populosque precantes), to which we may add Luc. 5.65 (populique ducesque), supports keeping the transmitted populi (as do all recent editors). Therefore, at the end of a speech alluding several times to a clash between different peoples, Absyrtus suggests that the whole Colchian populace is on his side by employing terms that recall Roman institutional vocabulary, such as populus and patres (consider the acronym SPQR). VF frequently employs terminology that references Roman institutions; cf. 1.71–3: populumne levem veterique tyranno | infensum atque olim miserantes Aesona patres | advocet; 1.759–61: ferrumne capessat | . . . | an patres regnique acuat mutabile vulgus. The particle quin also appears with its emphatic sense (cf. OLD s.v. 2) at 4.653 and 7.183. See Strand (1972) 10 for the common collocation omnes (or totus) with pariter (e.g., 2.31 and 202; 5.180; 6.616; 7.611), used to denote the fullness and scope of an action (just like the phrase una omnes does in line 412). 282–3 magni virgo ne regia Solis | Haemonii thalamos adeas despecta ma­riti: Absyrtus sarcastically draws attention to Medea’s noble pedigree, since, despite being a descendant of the Sun (like Absyrtus), she is now the bride of a foreign husband (as Liberman notes, according to the Roman ritual of the deductio in domum mariti, which took place by torchlight; cf. Treggiari [1991] 166). In addition to the chiastic hyperbaton, which mixes two Ovidian stylistic features (regia virgo appears at Ov. Met. 2.570 and 868; 13.523; the phrase magni . . . Solis occurs at Ov. Rem. 276), the holospondaic line also emphasizes its solemn nature. The collocation virgo regia can be found as early as Catull. 64.86–7, where it refers to Ariadne, the archetypical princess to fall in love with a foreigner and consequently abandon both her fatherland and family, only to be abandoned herself later. VF also uses the phrase magni . . . Solis at 1.44 and 8.350. For the combination Haemonius maritus, see note on 16. Styrus refers to Jason as a Haemonius adulter (cf. 338), with a clear allusion to Paris. For the word despecta (a feature of amatory vocabulary, which Virgil introduces at A. 4.36: despectus Iarbas; cf. Pichon [1902] 128), again compare an Ovidian passage depicting Medea after she has been tricked and abandoned by Jason at Her. 17.231–2: non erat Aeetes, ad quem despecta redirect, | non Idyia parens Chalciopeque soror. The present subjunctive adeas is followed by the perfect tense decuit (284); the present subjunctive highlights the fact that the sentence refers to something planned for the future, namely Medea’s wedding, which Absyrtus hopes to prevent (ne . . . adeas); see Merone (1957) 103.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 284–6

193

284  tot decuit coiisse rates, tot fulgere taedas: Absyrtus brings his sarcastic speech to a close by depicting the fleet, currently deployed for battle, as a marriage procession. The reading coiisse appears in the 1498 edition, but all the codices read coire. Liberman cites Virg. A. 12.709: inter se coiisse viros et cernere ferro (although the Virgilian codices are also divided on which form to use) and Stat. Theb. 10.750–1: quin socium coiisse animas et corpore in uno | stare omnes. The line, which all modern editors except Giarratano, who prefers coire, print as I have, creates an elegant symmetry, with tot repeated in anaphora and variatio between the perfect (coiisse) and the present (fulgere) infinitives. For the size of the Colchian fleet, see also AR 4.236–40. Perhaps VF has a subtle etymological joke in mind when he creates a parallel between the words rates and taedas, since both items are generally made out of pine wood (cf. the Greek πεύκη); see Eur. Med. 4 for the ship (the Argo) and AR 4.223 for a torch, respectively. For another possible etymological joke, see note on 293. 285 dixerat atque orans iterum ventosque virosque: Although several ­scholars (e.g., Wagner, Madvig, Köstlin, and Giarratano) have accepted the humanistic emend­ation dixerat itaque, all manuscripts read dixerat atque, which is defensible both in terms of meaning and frequency (it appears at the beginning of a line at Virg. A. 4.663 and 12.574; VF 5.210; Stat. Theb. 8.80 and 9.481; Ach. 1.726). dixerat often functions as a formula for marking the end of direct discourse; cf. Lundström (1971) 24–5. For the triple polysyndeton in this same metrical position, cf. note on 110. For the alliteration of v, a common feature in polysyndetic forms from Lucretius onwards, cf. Christensen (1906– 8) 185. 286a–b perque ratis supplex et remiges vexilla magistris: The text is hopelessly corrupt. The codices transmit an unmetrical line (perque ratis supplex et remiges vexilla magistris), with countless reconstructions proposed (see the list in Liberman 2.380 and Pellucchi [2012] 327–8). In all likelihood we must suppose that there is a lacuna between remiges and vexilla, as Leo (1960) 257–8 hypothesized. All recent editors agree upon this solution and either print the text with a lacuna or insert the conjecture offered by Leo (perque ratis supplex et remigis vexilla magistris) or Sudhaus (ap. Kramer: perque ratis supplex et remigis vexilla magistris). I prefer to understand ratis as singular (Leo, Sudhaus, and Liberman) rather than plural (Courtney and Pellucchi) and to interpret remigis as a collective singular (cf. OLD s.v. b). According to Liberman (who cites Stat. Theb. 4.802–3: ibi exultans conclamat ab agmine primus, | sicut erat levibus tollens vexilla maniplis), we can explain the phrase vexilla magistris if we consider two different scenes: Absyrtus both runs all over his own boat and sends signals to the other helmsmen (therefore taking magistris as a dative plural).

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

194

Commentary, lines 287–90

287–9  Unlike in AR, where the Colchians already possess a fleet, VF describes in real time how they built one. Liberman cites Virg. A. 4.397–400: tum vero Teucri incumbunt et litore celsas | deducunt toto navis. Natat uncta carina, | frondentisque ferunt remos et robora silvis | infabricata fugae studio, and Pellucchi adds Luc. 3.512–13: sed rudis et qualis procumbit montibus arbor | conseritur. 287  illi autem intorquent truncis frondentibus undam: For the collocation of intorqueo with unda, Liberman compares 3.476 (intortis . . . undis), and Pellucchi points to Virg. A. 3.207–8: nautae | adnixi torquent spumas. See also Sil. 8.449: contorquens undas per saxa Mataurus. The use of truncus as a synonym for ‘oar’ is not attested elsewhere (OLD s.v. 2), and here the word is not an example of metonymy but rather refers to branches that are still leafy, used by the Colchians as crude oars (since they have had to assemble their ships quickly). Compare frondentisque . . . remos at Virg. A. 4.399. 288  quaeque die fuerat raptim formata sub uno: The relative pronoun quae with the enclitic -que connects this phrase with the preceding one. barbara . . . ratis (292) is the pronoun’s referent and stands in apposition to arbor of line 289. Carelli, Liberman, Spaltenstein, and Dräger also interpret the lines this way, but Mozley, Caviglia, Soubiran, and Pellucchi understand arbor as the pronoun’s referent. die . . . sub uno (an anastrophe and hyperbaton for the phrase sub uno die) is an ablative of time (according to Summers [1894] 47, the word sub is redundant, just as at 3.600, 4.105, and 7.418); for an ablative of time used with the preposition sub, cf. L-­H-­Sz 279. Also see Housman (1972) 1274 for the meaning of sub in the phrase sub uno die. formare does not mean ‘to make, to produce’, but rather ‘to give form to’ (formam dare; cf. TLL vi/1.1102.22). According to Pellucchi (2012) 329, raptim formata conveys the same sense as infabricata at Virg. A. 4.400. 289  et tantum deiecta suis a montibus arbor: Summers (1894) 47 observes that tantum serves as a synonym for modo (cf. OLD s.v. 8c and 10a ‘only just’). Spaltenstein detects traces of sentimentality in the phrase deiecta suis a montibus, but compare, e.g., Plin. Nat. 19.172: itaque deferent ex his avulsos ramos seruntque, item Sicyone ex suis montibus et Athenis ex Hymetto. 290  quid dolor et veterum potuit non ira virorum?: Several commentators assume that the poet offers a sort of excusatio non petita in this line, as he tries to justify the improbability of the Colchians building a fleet in a single day. According to Venini (1972) 11, this defence is not serious, but Spaltenstein sees an example of a familiar epic theme (which also appears at 6.649: gestamen . . . illius aevi), namely that the ancient heroes (veteres) are more capable than the poet’s contemporaries. The collocation veterum . . . virorum recalls 1.11–12: sancte pater, veterumque fave veneranda canenti | facta virum (an adaptation of AR 1.1; see Zissos ad loc. for the adaptation’s considerable metapoetic

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 291–3

195

importance). This is no mere coincidence, since the poet reworks AR’s line for a specific purpose. Indeed, VF replaces the veneranda facta of the viri veteres (that is, the great deeds of the epic heroes, in this case, the Argonauts) with the Colchians’ dolor and ira (on the combination of the two, see note on 264). The poet, therefore, takes a comparable situation (the voyage of the ‘first ship’) but considers it from the opposite perspective, with veteres viri applied not to the Argonauts, but rather to the Colchians, who are motivated by dolor and ira rather than veneranda facta. Note that veterum . . . virorum appears in the same metrical position at Virg. A. 3.102: tum genitor veterum volvens monimenta virorum and 8.356: reliquias veterumque vides monimenta virorum; Ov. Pont. 1.3.61: i nunc et veterum nobis exempla virorum. 291  haud longis iam distat aquis: The verb disto is attested nowhere else in the poem. Pellucchi (2012) 330 identifies the model for this expression in nec longo distat cursu at Virg. A. 3.116; cf. also Virg. A. 10.197 et longa sulcat maria alta carina. For disto with an ablative of degree of difference (A-­G 414), cf. K-­S 1.406–7. 291–2 sequiturque volantem | barbara Palladiam puppem ratis: For the Argo’s flight, see note on 175. The collocation Palladia puppis is attested only here in literature, but the Argo is described as the Palladia ratis at 5.206 (Palladium patiare ratem). Palladia ratis appears in poetry first with Ov. Ibis 266: est data Palladiae praevia duxque rati, but also compare Phaed. 4.7.9: fabricasset Argus opera Palladio ratem (with Cavarzere [1973–4] 104–7 on the detail that Minerva contributed to the Argo’s construction, which VF records at 1.126: Pallada velifero quaerentem bracchia malo and 457: Palladia pinu). Compare also Sen. Med. 366–8: non Palladia compacta manu | regum referens inclita remos | quaeritur Argo; Stat. Silv. 2.7.50: et puppem temerariam Minervae; and Ps-­Erat. Catast. 35. In this line, the poet does not create a contrast between the words puppis and ratis, since he uses both interchangeably in the poem to refer to the Argo (and therefore, they can denote a complete ship), as much as a contrast between the epithets Palladius and barbarus, which clearly distinguish the ship built by the will and the genius of a goddess (a ship destined to reach the heavens) from the one that primitive men constructed in a crude manner. Finally, we should not exclude the possibility that the poet might have used the word Palladiam in order to allude to the theme of the removal of the Palladium (cf. note on 224). The line’s construction is remarkable with the al­lit­er­ation of p, antithesis, chiasmus, and lexical variatio. 292–3  ostia donec | Danuvii viridemque vident ante ostia Peucen: Danuvius (Danubius in some codices) is an alternative form for Hister (cf. RE 4.2103–8 for the use of the two terms). According to Soubiran 295, viridem (in alliteration with Danuvii and vident) refers to Peuce as an island of the pine trees (cf. note on 240). I wonder whether we should also see an etymological play on the word

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

196

Commentary, lines 294–7

peuce (πεύκη), ‘pine tree’ and by extension ‘ship’ (cf. Eur. Med. 4; cited in note on 284). As such, viridem . . . Peucen would be the Argo (with viridem referring to its strength and vigour). The collocation viridem . . . vident closely recalls 1.77–8: Gloria, te viridem videt immunemque senectae | Phasidis in ripa stantem ­iuvenesque vocantem, in which viridis modifies the personified Glory (see Zissos ad loc.), whom Jason glimpses from afar: here the adjective has the figurative sense of ‘vigorous, thriving, youthful’ or refers to the colour of the laurel, a symbol of victory (as Ripoll [1998] 206 notes). We, therefore, find yet another echo of the first book within the eighth, serving to contrast two situ­ations that mark the beginnings of two ex­ped­itions with very different purposes (and outcomes; cf. note on 290). For the phrase ante ostia, which specifies the island’s location, Liberman cites Amm. Marc. 22.8.43: cum autem ad alium portuosum ambitum fuerit ventum, qui arcus figuram determinat ultimam, Peuce prominet insula, contrasted with AR 4.310: εὖρος μὲν ἐς αἰγιαλοὺς ἀνέχουσα. 294  ultimaque agnoscunt Argoi cornua mali: cornua is a poeticism denoting the sail antennas (antemnarum extremitates, cf. Serv. ad. Virg. A. 5.832), as attested from Virgil onwards (cf. A. 3.549 and 5.832) and remains in use through late antiquity; see TLL iv.970, 34. The ultima cornua are therefore the tips of the antennas (contra Spaltenstein, who understands ultima as an adverb). In naval jargon, the malus is the ship’s mast (cf. TLL viii.2121.1: ‘arbor navis, quae tenet vela et antemnas’). VF first mentions the Argo’s mast at 1.126: Pallada velifero quaerentem bracchia malo (on which see note on 292). The adjective Argous comes from the Greek Ἀργῶος, used as early as in Euripides (e.g., Eur. Andr. 793; Med. 477). In Latin, it appears first at Hor. Epod. 16.57, and VF uses it frequently compared to other poets (cf. 3.3, 430, and 691; 5.435; 6.116 and 731; 7.573; 8.294 and 328); see TLL ii.536.80–537.5. 295–6  tum vero clamorem omnes inimicaque tollunt | gaudia: Virgil often employs the phrase tum vero to highlight critical moments in the narrative (cf. Fordyce on A. 7.519), and VF uses it at the beginning of a line at 2.525 and 6.469, and in the same metrical position as here at 2.76; 3.576; 7.475 and 631. Langen views this phrase as a hendiadys for laetum clamorem tollunt, while Kleywegt (1986) 2478 identifies a zeugma (between clamorem and gaudia with the verb tollunt), an oxymoron (inimicaque . . . gaudia), and a brachylogy for gaudia ob inimicos visos. We may find echoes of this line in Corip. Iust. 2.390–1: gaudia quanta illic, quantus favor! undique laetus | tollitur in caelum populorum clamor ovantum. 296–7  tum gravior remis fragor, ut procul Argo | visa viris: gravis . . . fragor is an Ovidian collocation (cf. Fast. 3.368: et gravis aetherio venit ab axe fragor). The poeticism fragor is often used in epic (it appears twenty times in VF). remis should be understood as a dative, with an implied verb such as fit (as Liberman proposes) serving to complete the noun phrase. For the crashing of oars, TLL v/1.1235.14

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 297–300

197

compares Stat. Theb. 5.337–8: agunt Minyae, geminus fragor ardua canet | per latera. The alliterative collocation visa viris appears in the same metrical pos­ ition at 5.94–5: atque ea vixdum | visa viris atra nox protinus abstulit umbra (at the sight of Sthenelus’ grave). 297  unamque petunt rostra omnia puppem: petere is a conventional verb for describing military assaults (cf. OLD s.v. 2), and the contrast between omnia and una (enhanced by the chiasmus) paints the picture of a numerical imbalance between the fleet of the Colchians and the solitary Argo. rostra is applied to makeshift boats (as at 2.77 to the Argo); the image is anachronistic to evoke Roman naval battles; cf., e.g., Liv. 28.30.10: iam in ipsa pugna haec cum infesta rostro peteret hostium navem (note the collocation navem petere). The com­bin­ ation puppem petere (with a different meaning) also appears at 3.459–60: continuo puppem petere et considere transtris | imperat Ampycides. 298–9  princeps navalem nodosi roboris uncum | arripit: Here, we should understand princeps as a synonym for primus (cf. OLD s.v. 1), as at 3.80: princeps galeam constringit Iason, when Jason leads the group and throws himself into battle; but also compare 3.496–7: primusque coacta | advehit Albana Styrus gener agmina porta (Spaltenstein additionally compares Virg. A. 7.647: primus init bellum). princeps serves to introduce Styrus (mentioned at 299). It is possible that VF employs wordplay, since princeps can also mean ‘prince, nobleman’, given that Styrus is the prince of the Albanians (cf. 153: Albano . . . tyranno). By itself, uncus refers generally to a hook (cf. OLD), and at 2.428 it has the meaning of ‘anchor’. In this case, VF continues to create an anachronistic image of a naval battle, and he uses uncus in order to allude to the hooks that the Romans use to board enemy ships. The poet reduces the risk of seeming too anachronistic by using the genitive of specification nodosi roboris, which suggests that the uncus is still crudely fashioned. Liberman cites various passages that mention this hook in the context of naval warfare (e.g,. Liv. 30.10.16; Sil. 14.320–7; see also Casson [1971] 121–2). nodosi roboris appears (in the same metrical position) at 2.534, where it refers to Hercules’ knotty club. The collocation is Ovidian (cf. Met. 6.691 and 12.349). 299  et longa Styrus prospectat ab unda: longa should be translated like longe; cf. Virg. G. 2.163: Iulia qua ponto longe sonat unda refuso. prospectat is used absolutely (cf. TLL x/2.2204.2–3), but its object is clearly the Argonauts’ ship. For the collocation longa . . . unda, cf. also Stat. Ach. 92: sit pretium longas penitus quaesisse per undas and Silv. 1.3.19: frondibus, et longas eadem fugit umbra per undas (note the same metrical positioning). On Styrus (Medea’s fiancé, whom VF introduces for the first time in the poem at 3.497), see note on 153. 300  coniugio atque iterum sponsae flammatus amore: According to Kleywegt (1986) 2474, the words coniugium and sponsae . . . amore constitute a hendiadys. flammatus amore is a Virgilian clausula; cf. A. 3.330–1: ast illum ereptae magno

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

198

Commentary, lines 301–4

flammatus amore | coniugis. iterum describes the moment Styrus sees Medea again. The term sponsa (which technically designates a betrothed woman and is attested as early as Naevius) does not appear elsewhere in the poem. For the collocation sponsae . . . amore, cf. Liv. 26.50.3: extemplo igitur parentibus sponsoque ab domo accitis cum interim audiret deperire eum sponsae amore. VF’s line ­echoes Virg. A. 2.343–6 (Coroebus’ doomed love for Cassandra): venerat insano Cassandrae incensus amore | et gener auxilium Priamo Phrygibusque ferebat, | infelix qui non sponsae praecepta furentis | audierit (this is also the only at­test­ ation of the word sponsa in Virgil, who introduces it into epic poetry). 301–2  iamque alii clipeos et tela trabalia dextris | expediunt: For the epic motif of the preparations for battle, Pellucchi (2012) 335 cites Luc. 7.139–43 and Sil. 4.9–19. For the alliterative collocation tela trabalia, compare teloque trabali of Enn. Ann. 607 Skutsch (which Virgil adopts at A. 12.294) and VF 1.663: quadrifida trabe tela Iovis. The phrase tela . . . dextris expediunt is equivalent to armant dextra telis (cf. TLL v/1.931.55). For the collocation expedire tela, cf. Liv. 38.25.12 and 25.14. 302  armant alii picis unguine flammas: For the transferred use of armo, which denotes the arming of men or things with objects that would not properly be called weapons (in this case, torches), cf. TLL ii.619.15–16. The com­bin­ ation picis unguine appears at Calp. Ecl. 5.81 and Gratt. 363. For flammas with the sense of taedas accensas (that is, faces), cf. Virg. A. 2.256, 6.518, and 11.144; TLL vi/1.866.73. 303  impatiens tremit hasta morae: The quivering spear is a characteristic image in Latin epic (cf. Virg. A. 2.52 and 175; 11.644; Stat. Theb. 5.570; 12.774; Sil. 2.448). As Lemaire and Spaltenstein have already observed, VF applies an animistic touch to the image by adding a psychological note (impatiens . . . morae) to the purely physical dimension of this action (as, e.g., at Hom. Il. 8.111; 11.574; 15.317). VF uses the collocation impatiens . . . morae at 3.613–14: iamque morae impatiens cunctantes increpat ausus | Tiphys (with Manuwald ad loc.). The phrase is well-­attested in the literary tradition; cf. Sen. Phaed. 583: sed Phaedra praeceps graditur, impatiens morae; Oed. 99–100: saxaque impatiens morae | revulsit unguis; Luc. 6.424; Front. Strat. 1.3.4; Sil. 8.4; Suet. Cal. 51.2. 303–4  nec longius inter | quam quod tela vetet superest mare: Critics are divided over the interpretation of this phrase, which Pellucchi (2012) 336–7 construes as nec mare quod superest inter longius quam tela vetet. According to some scholars, the meaning is that the two sides are already only a spear throw’s distance apart (Mozley, Caviglia, Soubiran, and Pellucchi), whereas others (myself included) understand the phrase as indicating that the sides are still just out of reach for hurling javelins (as Lemaire, Liberman, and Dräger). inter has an adverbial sense, as it does at 5.336–7: stetit arduus inter | pontus and 6.220 (with Fucecchi ad loc.), and perhaps also in Hyg. Fab. 28.4 and Ps-­Sen.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 304–7

199

Oct. 721 (see the discussion in Liberman 2.382). tela vetet is a brachylogy for tela conici vetet. Here, as in line 325, mare means ‘stretch of sea’ (TLL viii.377.80). On  the topic of the distance between enemies in Flavian epic, see Steele (1930) 336. 304–5  vocibus urguent | interea et pedibus pulsant tabulata frementes: The detail vocibus urguent (as well as pulsant . . . frementes) supports the in­ter­pret­ ation concerning the distance between the two sides that I offer above (if the men were already able to move on to fighting, they would not restrict themselves to shouting). The collocation pedibus pulsare appears in the first line of Ennius’ Annales (Musae, quae pedibus magnum pulsatis Olympum), but it seems hard to believe that VF aims to parody the line. The use of the verb pulso for stomping one’s feet is well-­attested (cf. OLD s.v. 1b). For the clausula tabulata frementes, compare Ov. Met. 5.627–8: anne quod agnae est, | si qua lupos audit circum stabula alta frementes. Statius in particular is fond of using frementes in a clausula (cf. Theb. 1.348; 3.298; 6.488; 7.584). Compare also Sil. 2.447–8: quam circa immensi populi condensaque cingunt | agmina certantum pulsantque trementibus hastis. According to Contino (1973) 19, tabulatum with the sense of ‘the deck of the ship’ is a Valerian innovation (the term also appears at 3.463). 306–7  cum subitas videre rates vibrataque flammis | aequora: For this use of the cum inversum construction, see K-­S 2.338–9. We should understand the phrase subitas . . . rates with the meaning of ‘unexpected ships’ (or rather, ‘suddenly . . . ships’) instead of ‘makeshift boats’ (even if both meanings can coexist, as at 287–8). videre is a perfect indicative verb, as is cecidere in line 88 (cf. note ad loc.). VF presents the image of the sea illuminated by fire at 2.582–3: hic unda, sacris hic ignibus Ide | vibrant and 3.558: stagna vaga sic luce micant. Liberman compares Virg. A. 4.566–7: iam mare turbari trabibus saevasque videbis | conlucere faces, iam fervere litora flammis. The verb vibrare sees frequent use in contexts relating to light, cf. vibrantes luce tenebras at 57 and vibrat fulgura at 61 (but also consider Man. 1.863: fulgura cum videas tremulum vibrantia lumen). The verb is associated with the sea at Sil. 14.566: tremula vibratur imagine ­pontus and Stat. Theb. 6.579: vibratur . . . freti caeli stellantis imago. 307  non una Minyae formidine surgunt: This is the reading found in the manuscripts. The transmitted text compels one to consider the meaning of the litotes non una . . . formidine, and commentators have expressed doubts concerning this phrase. What would these different fears of the Argonauts be? Must we suppose (as Langen does) that the poet refers only to Jason, who, unlike the rest of the Argonauts, is afraid that he might lose Medea (in addition to the possibility that he may lose the Fleece)? Many propose that we emend the text (Bosscha and Baehrens propose non ulla, Heinsius and Balbus non vana, Postgate non ima, and Bury non minima). Liberman prints the text as transmitted,

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

200

Commentary, lines 308–11

but suggests in the apparatus non parva (with minimus = parvus). Spaltenstein (unpersuasively) proposes that non ulla should be understood as equivalent to nulla. If we must alter the text, I propose that we emend non to et and that we consider una as an adverb. VF uses et una in a clausula at 2.497 and 3.728 (following Virg. A. 4.704 and 9.230) and without a conjunction (as well as in the same metrical position) at 8.244 and 412. The triple correlative et . . . Minyae . . .  primus et . . . prosilit et (which concludes with the nec . . . segnius . . . constitit) underscores the unity and speed of the Argonauts’ reaction, and their fear ­(formidine) requires no further explanation. Given that the phrase et una always appears within a clausula in epic poetry, another possible solution would be to emend non to sic (with una still understood as an adverb). The correlatives, therefore, would be cum . . . videre sic . . . surgunt. 308–9  primus et in puppem deserta virgine ductor | prosilit: By using the anastrophe primus et (for et primus), the poet assigns an emphatic position to the adjective. VF places its noun referent (ductor) at the end of this same line in front of the verb (placed in hyperbaton and enjambment), which likewise occupies a prominent position at the beginning of a line (the conjunctions also produce a symmetrical effect: primus et . . . prosilit et). For the phrase deserta virgine (which can be explained by the fact that the men must go to battle, but it is also perhaps proleptic), compare 7.103–4: at trepida et medios inter deserta parentes | virgo silet and 7.305–6: haud aliter deserta pavet perque omnia circum | fert oculos tectisque negat procedere virgo (Medea is the subject), but also 2.455–6: iam certa sonat desertaque durae | virgo neci (Hesione, the daughter of Laomedon). On the title ductor, cf. note on 30; on prosilit, see note on 21. 309  et summa galeam rapit altus ab hasta: The poet continues to indicate the speed of Jason’s reaction by using the verb rapit after prosilit. VF uses the collocation rapit . . . altus to describe the Sun at 5.411–12: at medii per terga senis rapit ipse nitentes | altus equos. summa . . . ab hasta is an echo of Virg. A. 11.747: arma virumque ferens; tum summa ipsius ab hasta (compare also Sil. 12.625: summa liquefacta est cuspis in hasta). Ripoll (1999) 507 notes that the image of the resting soldier, who has left his helmet hanging on the tip of spear, is echoed at Sil. 7.294–5 (haud procul hasta viri terrae defixa propinquae | et dir e summa pendebat cuspide cassis); this image is inspired by Virg. A. 10.835–6 (in which a helmet hangs from a tree branch), but the detail of the spear is VF’s. 310  ense simul clipeoque micat: For the use of the verb micare in reference to weapons, cf. TLL viii.931.35. The word simul connects micat to the preceding rapit and continues the image of Jason’s rapid preparations for battle. 310–11  nec cetera pubes | segnius arreptis in litore constitit armis: nec . . . segnius means et non segnius. cetera pubes is a Virgilian clausula (cf. A. 5.74; 7.614), which VF uses at 1.354 and Statius adopts at Theb. 6.663. On the

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 312–15

201

metonymy pubes, employed often in epic poetry to denote youths capable of bearing arms, see EV 4.339, Fordyce on Catull. 64.4, and Perutelli on VF 7.77. The verb arripio (especially when it appears in the collocation arripere arma) often serves to designate the act of grasping hastily one’s weapons (cf. TLL ii.639.56–75). 312  at tibi quae scelerum facies, Medea, tuorum: This apostrophe directed towards Medea breaks off from the arming scene described in the preceding lines. The phrase at tibi at the beginning of a line is common already in Augustan poetry (cf., e.g., Virg. A. 2.535; Prop. 1.16.41; Tib. 1.7.55), and VF also uses it at 1.433 (with Zissos). In this case, the Ovidian beginning at tibi Colchorum, memini, regina vacavi comes to mind (Ov. Her. 12.1, on which see Bessone ad loc.). Adamietz (1976) 36 compares this apostrophe to Medea to the one directed towards Hypsipyle at 2.242–6 (sed tibi nunc . . .), which demonstrates the parallelism between these two characters through contrast. The poet also uses the collocation scelerum facies in a passage from the episode at Lemnos, at 2.216–17: unde ego tot scelerum facies, tot fata iacentum | exsequar? which is the poet’s first ‘heat-­ of-­the-­moment’ comment on the Lemnian women’s murder of their husbands. The iunctura has Virgilian ancestry, and the Flavian poet also recalls Virg. A. 6.560–1: quae scelerum facies? o virgo, effare; quibusve | urgentur poenis? quis tantus plangor ad auras? (Aeneas asks the Sibyl to explain to him the crimes and penalties he will witness in the Underworld). On the Valerian reworking of this passage from the Aeneid, see also Kleywegt (1986) 2485. 313  quisve pudor Colchos iterum fratremque videnti: For quis . . . pudor and the dative (videnti, a participle modifying the preceding tibi), compare Hor. Carm. 1.24.1: quis desiderio sit pudor. VF employs a similar structure at 1.172: quis pudor heu nostros tibi tunc audire labores. 314–15  quidquid et abscisum vasto iam tuta profundo | credideras: Commen­ tators have interpreted the perfect participle abscisum in various ways. According to Liberman, it is a form of the verb abscindere here and at 1.872: cardine sub nostro rebusque abscisa supernis, whereas at 7.324: sentit et abscisum quicquid pudor ante monebat, it is a form of abscidere. According to Perutelli (on 7.324), if we consider the lexical similarities between the two passages (abscisum, quicquid, pudor), it seems likely that both participles would be from the same verb (abscindere, which appears seven times in the poem). As Spaltenstein comments (on 1.827), the apparent issues are not genuine problems, since the OLD assigns the same meaning (‘to cut off ’) to both abscido 2 and abscindo 3 (and thus the two verbs could have been confused often, cf. TLL i.147.76). The combination vasto . . . profundo is a variation of 1.37: ira maris vastique placent discrimina ponti. vastus belongs to those Quantitätsepitheta, like altus, immanis, ingens, or magnus, which see particular use in Latin epic to convey majesty in an elevated style or pathos (cf. Worstbrock [1963] 193–5).

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

202

Commentary, lines 315–17

Authors frequently use the adjective vastus to describe the sea and its related dangers (cf. EV 5.1.454–5). The substantive adjective profundum, used to denote the sea (OLD s.v. 1b) and first introduced by Virgil (A. 12.263), appears fourteen times in VF (acting as an alternative to the more traditional pelagus and ­pontus). For an in-­depth study, see Mantovanelli (1981). 315  ergo infausto sese occulit antro: Medea hides in the cave where her wedding cere­mony was taking place (cf. line 256). infaustum antrum appears only here, but the use of this adjective, in addition to recalling the violence inflicted upon the nymph Peuce (as Dräger also argues), can be justified both by the ritual ceremony’s interruption by the torches of the Colchians and by the heavy influence of the literary tradition: consider, in particular, the cave visited by Dido and Aeneas (see note on 255–6), but also the Sibyl’s cave (cf. note on 312), since this passage shares verbal echoes with Virg. A. 6.262: tantum effata furens antro se immisit aperto. As Pellucchi (2012) 342 observes, the act of seeking shelter in a cave is a topos in Latin poetry (cf. Ov. Met. 2.269; 3.31; 13.47; Sen. Her. F. 1107; Sil. 8.191). For the reflexive use of the verb occulo, cf., e.g., Virg. A. 12.53: et vanis sese occulat umbris. 316  non aliud quam certa mori: For the construction non aliud quam, a variant of nihil aliud quam and, as here, often equivalent to the word tantummodo, see TLL i.1634.35–65. The collocation certa mori yet again alludes to Dido: cf. Virg. A. 4.563–4: illa dolos dirumque nefas in pectore versat | certa mori. In addition to VF, Ov. Met. 10.428 (certa mori tamen est) and Stat. Theb. 3.378 (ibo libens, certusque mori) adopt this iunctura. 316–17  seu carus Iason | seu frater Graia victus cecidisset ab hasta: These lines explain why Medea is certa mori. Regardless of whether carus Iason (also described this way in line 213) or her brother is the one to fall, she will be in a hopeless situation. Graia . . . hasta appears only here, but the adjective Graius is common in Latin epic (VF uses it nineteen times). The hyperbaton Graia . . . ab hasta reprises summa . . . ab hasta from line 309 (occupying the same metrical position). Every scholar from Langen onwards constructs the phrase by considering the verb cecidisset as governing the complementary Graia . . . ab hasta, rather than the participle victus (even though both options are possible). The decision is based on the construction cadere ab aliquo (syntactically a Grecism equivalent to ἀποθνῄσκειν ὑπό τινος), which Ovid introduced into Latin poetry (cf. Met. 5.192: et tanto cecidisse viro and 13.597: occidit a forti . . . Achille with Bömer ad loc.); see also TLL iii.28.78.

318–84.  STORM AT SEA Here, VF departs dramatically from AR, but adopts several Virgilian elements in describing the storm at sea that Juno rouses. The storm scene mirrors 1.574–658

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 318–19

203

(see Zissos [2008] xxxii and 329) and thus constitutes yet another point connecting the first and the last book in an important closural gesture (cf. Deremetz [2014] 63). The scene’s function is all the more obvious in light of Jupiter’s Weltenplan. As Lüthje (1971) 349 notes, in the first book the storm appears as an obstacle to the Argonautic expedition, one plotted by the divine beings who are opposed to the prospect of human domination over the sea; the tempest in the eighth book supports the Argonauts and their return home, yet again demonstrating that Jupiter’s will shall ultimately be fulfilled. The crux of the scene is the aristeia and the death of Styrus. Styrus, who is absent not only from AR’s account, but also from the entire Argonautic tradition, is clearly a Virgilian character essentially modelled on the figure of Turnus (both are betrothed to the daughter of a local king, that is, to Medea and Lavinia, re­spect­ive­ly), but who also adopts some traits from Iarbas (Dido’s suitor) and Numanus Regulus (Turnus’ brother-­in-­law, who scorns and insults the Trojans, just as Styrus does Jason). Furthermore, the poet endows Styrus with features of the Giant Orion, again making reference to astronomy. On the scene, see Pellucchi (2012) 345–53 and Fucecchi (2014) 117 and 131–2. 318–36  Juno’s intervention. Juno is Jason’s protectress (cf. 1.73); when the hero finds himself in this predicament, she personally takes action to save the Argonauts from sure defeat by stirring up a storm (322–3: ipsa subit terras tempestatumque refringit | ventorumque domos). VF reworks Virgil’s storm (A. 1.50–156) by making Juno herself now play the role that she had once entrusted to Aeolus in Virgil (where she requests that he release the other winds in order to rouse a storm). 318  haud ita sed summo segnis sedet aethere Iuno: Langen (on 2.150) extensively comments on VF’s tendency to postpone the conjunction sed from the clauses that it introduces (cf., e.g., 1.236, 475, 522). In this case, he postpones sed by two words (as at 3.194; 4.544; 5.554; 7.160 and 174): we should therefore construct the sentence as sed haud ita segnis sedet Iuno (haud simultaneously negates both segnis sedet and sinit of line 319). For the opening phrase haud ita, also compare Lucr. 3.682; Virg. A. 11.396; Hor. S. 2.2.46 and 2.5.18. Pellucchi (2012) 353–4 notes that the expression summo . . . sedet aethere Iuno is the product of blending Virg. A. 11.726 (summo sedet altus Olympo) and 1.223–4 (Iuppiter aethere summo | despiciens). Finally, note the strong alliteration on s (sed summo segnis sedet . . . sinit), designed to reproduce the hissing sound of the winds that will stir up the storm. 319  aut sinit extrema Minyas decernere pugna: Here, as at 4.193: omnibus idem animus forti decernere pugna (note the same clausula) and 5.636–7: imus | in nemus auriferum et sumptis decernimus armis, the poet uses decernere absolutely. For this usage (cf. OLD s.v. 1), compare Virg. A. 12.282: sic omnis amor unus habet decernere ferro. The collocation extrema . . . pugna appears only here in literature (though it has a distant echo in 6.749: iam tandem extremas pugnae

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

204

Commentary, lines 320–3

defertur in oras), and Spaltenstein compares extrema . . . proelia of 3.64 (the death of Cyzicus; but the syntax is different here). 320  nec numero quoniam Colchis nec puppibus aequos: This passage has produced various points of confusion, mainly because quoniam is construed with an accusative (aequos). In order to defend keeping the text as transmitted, we must suppose either that the poet has elided a verbum videndi (for example, videt or cernit) or that this represents an exceptional use (not attested elsewhere) of quoniam based upon the Greek ἅτε (with the participle ὄντας, implied in this case), and is therefore analogous to the word quippe (cf. K-­S 2.791 n. 7); accordingly, we must understand aequos as a predicative adjective modifying Minyas and quoniam as having an adverbial sense (with causal undertones). Courtney prefers to adopt Wagner’s conjecture aequi for aequos in such a way that the conjunction can introduce a causal clause with a subject (Minyae) for  the indicative verb and a predicate nominative (aequi) depending upon an  implied copula. Liberman obelizes the entire passage (from quoniam to aequos), proposing (2.383) that we consider quoniam a gloss that migrated into the text in place of perhaps utpote and is drawn from the passage’s similarity to Virg. A. 12.230–1: numerone an viribus aequi | non sumus? While I would not exclude the possibility that VF has effectively presented a grammatical calque of a Greek construction (ἅτε + a participle is common), I believe that the text may be corrupt. Wagner’s proposal is the most economical (but also the lectio facilior). If we must intervene in the text, I would prefer to alter quoniam (Liberman is probably correct in considering it a gloss). I dislike neither the iuvenum that Liberman proposes nor the comitum offered by Delz, but I would not rule out the possibility of an adjective agreeing with Colchis, such as, for example, admotis (which could agree with puppis as well), on the model of 5.50–1: lumina et admotis nimium mens anxia Colchis | profuit (in this passage, admotis is a conjecture by Gronovius, accepted by all editors, in place of the transmitted attonitis). 321  ergo ubi diva rates hostemque accedere cernit: The collocation ergo ubi at the beginning of a line is common in Augustan poetry (it appears four times in Virgil and sixteen in Ovid), and it appears four times in VF. Contino (1973) 66 points out the hendiadys rates hostemque (equivalent to hostem qui erat in ratibus). 322–3  ipsa subit terras tempestatumque refringit | ventorumque domos: subit terras is an Ovidian iunctura (cf. Ov. Met. 11.61: umbra subit terras, et quae loca viderat ante, but also 6.697) that various authors adopt (cf., e.g., Curt. 4.10.5; Sen. Nat. 2.1.3; Tro. 846; Iuv. 4.10). Liberman observes that the verb subire here has the meaning of ‘to go into an enclosed space’ (cf. OLD s.v. 10b), rather than the sense of ‘to go underground’ that it has in Ovid. VF has the first book of the Aeneid (A. 1.50–63) in mind, where the winds are confined to an underground

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 323–6

205

cave. The verb can therefore also have the same meaning here that it does in Ovid. refringere appears only twice in the poem, with the same grammatical form (refringit) and in the same metrical position (here and at 1.595: rex tunc aditus et claustra refringit), an im­port­ant recurrence. In this book, Juno performs the action that Aeolus accomplishes in the first book. The choice of the verb refringit is probably inspired by Hor. Carm. 3.3.26–8: nec Priami domus | periura pugnaces Achivos | Hectoreis opibus refringit, where Juno speaks of the sack of Troy. Virgil uses the same verb (in the same clausula and notably its only attestation in his corpus) to describe Aeneas tearing off the golden bough (Virg. A. 6.210: corripit Aeneas extemplo avidusque refringit). Liberman 2.383 observes that the phrase refringit . . . domos is a brachylogy for domorum claustra refringit. 323–4  volucrum gens turbida fratrum | erumpit: The motif of the winds running riot appears as early as Homer (cf. Od. 5.295–332) and is an iconic feature of Latin poetry (cf., e.g., Virg. A. 1.81–3; Ov. Tr. 1.2.26–30; Sen. Ag. 474–6; Luc. 5.597): VF uses it at 1.610–21. The poet is the first who uses gens for the winds, but the term frequently denotes any type of group (cf. TLL vi/2.1851.47). The winds are typically portrayed as winged (volucrum) and brothers (fratrum), as in Ov. Met. 1.60; 6.693; 14.545 and Fast. 5.203 (the concept is already present in Germ. Arat. 5.5–9 Gain). Also compare VF’s phrases magnis cum fratribus Eurus (2.265) and fratribus . . . Borea respondet (6.164). turbidus is a conventional epithet given to the winds (cf. OLD s.v. 1b), not usually partnered with the word gens; the collocation appears only here in VF. turbidus is also used to describe Mezentius when he is likened to Orion in Virg. A. 10.762 and is applied to Orion at Stat. Theb. 9.843 (on the allusions to Orion within this passage, cf. note on 336). For the use of the verb erumpere to describe the activities of the winds, cf. TLL v/2.839.16–27. 324  classem dextra Saturnia monstrat: Spaltenstein compares Sil. 2.531–2: et palmam tendens: hos, inquit, Noctis alumna | hos muros impelle manu (Juno sends Tisiphone to destroy Saguntum). Compare also Stat. Theb. 10.282–4: armataque Iuno | lunarem quatiens exerta lampada dextra | pandit iter firmatque animos et corpora monstrat. 325 videre inque unum pariter mare protinus omnes: This line creates another contrast between the words omnes and unum, just as lines 70–1 and 297, as well as 4.494, 6.371, and 7.630. For the use of the ending -ere, cf. note on 88. For pariter . . . omnes, cf. note on 281. For the partitive meaning of the word mare, cf. note on 304. According to Spaltenstein, here we have a rhetorical reversal of the idea found in VF’s Virgilian model una Eurus Notusque . . . Africus (A. 1.85). 326  infesto clamore ruunt: The collocation infesto clamore is attested elsewhere only at Cic. Verr. 2.12 and Val. Max. 7.3, but also compare VF 4.502–3:

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

206

Commentary, lines 326–7

emicat hic subito seseque Aquilonia proles | cum clamore levat and the description of the Symplegades’ movement in Phineus’ prophecy at 4.574–6: vix repetunt primae celeres confinia terrae | iamque alio clamore ruunt omnisque tenetur | pontus et infestis anceps cum montibus errat. Pellucchi (2012) 357 cites Virg. A. 1.83, where the verb ruunt denotes the movement of the winds as they exit Aeolus’ cave. 326–7  inimicaque Colchis | aequora et adversos statuunt a litore fluctus: Most translators understand a zeugma with the verb statuunt: it takes the meaning of ‘to convey, to assign a task’ (cf. OLD s.v. 11) when governing aequora and the sense of ‘to raise, lift up’ (cf. OLD s.v. 1) when governing the object fluctus. Dräger (2003) 551 considers the nexus inimicaque Colchis aequora as a prolepsis indicating the results of the phrase adversos statuunt . . . fluctus (‘so that the waves become hostile to the Colchians’). Soubiran resolves the difficulty by translating as ‘ils dressent une mer aux Colques aggressive et des vagues contre eux déferlant du rivage’. VF is reworking an Ovidian passage narrating the events concerning Troy, specifically one of the shipwrecks that occur during the victors’ return voyage to Greece (the allusion is, therefore, both proleptic and contributes to one of this book’s recurring motifs); see, in particular, the line spargimur et ventis inimica per aequora rapti (Met. 14.470). The combination adversi fluctus is common, at least from Lucr. 6.725 onwards (see TLL i.866.21). 328–36  This passage has generated a lot of discussion, in part due to several textual problems. It describes the results of the storm at sea, which hurls Styrus’ ship high into the air and then back down again through the strength of the wind and waves. One point on which all commentators agree is that the name Styrus is used metonymically, as his movement also matches that of his ship (for a case study of this stylistic feature in Latin epic, see Langen on 2.581). The hyperbolic description of a ship flung all the way up to the sky (reaching even as far as the stars) and subsequently falling into the abyss again has its precedent in Virgil’s description of the passage through the strait of Scylla and Charybdis at A. 3.564–7: tollimur in caelum curvato gurgite, et idem | subducta ad Manis imos desedimus unda. | Ter scopuli clamorem inter cava saxa dedere, | ter spumam elisam et rorantia vidimus astra. Cf. also Virg. A. 1.106–18; Ov. Tr. 1.2.19–22; Met. 11.497–506; Luc. 5.638–44. The frequent appearance of tech­nical terms from astronomy (tollitur, 328; in astra, 330; vertex, 332; gurges, 333; micat, 333; poli, 334; caelestia limina, 334; ardentis, 335) is important in this case. In fact, I believe that VF intends to conjure a scene of Gigantomachy, in which Styrus is likened to Orion, following Virgil’s depiction of the contemptor divum, Mezentius, at A. 10.762–8: at vero ingentem quatiens Mezentius hastam | turbidus ingreditur campo. quam magnus Orion, | cum pedes incedit medii per maxima Nerei | stagna viam scindens, umero supereminet undas, | aut summis referens annosam montibus ornum | ingrediturque solo et caput inter nubila condit, | talis se vastis infert

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 328–9

207

Mezentius armis. VF recycles the enormity of the Virgilian Giant/Mezentius in the image of Styrus being lifted (tollitur, 328) up to the stars only then to sink into the Underworld (vasto . . . hiatu, 329). If this passage is read through an astrological lens, it might allude both to the rising and the setting of the constellation Orion (which marks the beginning of storms); after his death, Orion either ascends to the heavens (according to most sources; cf. Le Boeuffle [1977] 201) or sinks into chaos (the variant that VF offers in 2.123: chaos implet Orion, following the model of Hom. Od. 11.572–5; cf. Murgatroyd [2009] 89). The first clue that VF is rewriting this scene is provided at 323, where the poet transfers to the winds (gens turbida) the evocative force of the adjective turbidus (with the sense of ‘storm-­bearing’; cf. Hardie [1986] 97 for its implications), which Virgil had used to describe Mezentius/Orion. This feature is indicative of the reversal between the storm scene in the first and the eighth books: in the former the winds oppose the Argonauts, whereas in the latter they aid Jason and his followers. Furthermore, VF creates another subtle connection to the first book, in which Neptune declares non meus Orion aut saevus Pliade Taurus | mortis causa novae (1.647–8; see Zissos ad loc.). Indeed, though he may be hostile and threatening, Styrus/Orion will not be the one to kill the Argonauts (in a storm at sea), but precisely the opposite will happen, since Styrus/Orion himself will die in this storm. The end of the poet’s description of Styrus’ death is also meaningful, as it contains the clausula virgine cessit (368), in which we can read a double reference: Styrus dies because of the virgo Medea; Orion dies because of the virgo Minerva. The death of Styrus, whose speech decisively declares the reasons for the future Trojan War, is, therefore, another key element proving that Jupiter’s will (expressed in the Weltenplan) is being fulfilled. This speech occurs during a cosmic storm, which is also significant, since it contains elements of the Gigantomachy. The clausula proelia divum (336) that closes this section provides a piece of supporting evidence for this reading. On the relationship of Orion and the Giants, cf. Renaud (2004) 201–7 and Chaudhuri (2014) 70–1. 328–9  tollitur atque infra Minyas Argoaque vela | Styrus habet: Editors disagree on the text (for a discussion, see Liberman 2.383–4 and Pellucchi [2012] 358). The solution adopted by Ehlers, Liberman, Soubiran, Dräger, and Pellucchi seems the most convincing to me: we should restore Giarratano’s conjecture infra (in place of the transmitted intra) and assign it an adverbial rather than a prepositional function (pace Giarratano, who prefers it as a preposition). With this solution, we can keep the transmitted habet (from the Vaticanus, whereas the editio Bononiensis reads abit, which Baehrens emends to adest); habet takes as complementary objects Minyas and Argoa . . . vela. This version of the text recovers the idea of the ships’ vertical movement (which Courtney suggests), as they are driven upwards and downwards, a motion well-­ suited to a scene depicting a storm (and fitting the hyperbolic description of the event’s cosmic scale).

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

208

Commentary, lines 329–33

329–30  vasto rursus desidit hiatu | abrupta revolutus aqua: vasto . . . hiatu is coined by Lucr. 5.375 (sed patet immani et vasto respectat hiatu) and is adopted by Virg. A. 6.237 (spelunca alta fuit vastoque immanis hiatu, for the Sibyl’s cave) and Luc. 1.209 (erexitque iubam et vasto grave murmur hiatu). VF also employs it at 1.638 (describing the first storm that the winds rouse against the Argo) and 4.595: alter aquas Acheron vastoque exundat hiatu (Phineus describes the river Acheron, located in the area of what will be Heraclea Pontica). The phrase accordingly makes clear reference to the depths of the Underworld (a concept also present in alter Acheron at 4.595; cf. Murgatroyd ad loc.). The verb desidit (‘to fall, sink’; cf. OLD s.v. 1), which, though not attested elsewhere in VF, adapts desedimus of Virg. A. 3.565, completes the idea of a plunge into the Underworld. Ehlers and Caviglia favour the reading abruptus, but I prefer to read abrupta . . . aqua, since the poet never applies this adjective to living beings elsewhere (cf. 2.615; 4.413; 6.84). 330–1  iamque omnis in astra | itque reditque ratis: For the hyperbole of the ship lifted as high as the stars, cf. Virg. A. 3.564–7 (cited in note on 328–36). In this case, we should understand omnis . . . ratis as omnes rates (as the majority of commentators do), that is to say, we should imagine that the storm affects the entire fleet of the Colchians in the same way. The polysyndetic phrase itque reditque, common in Flavian epic (cf. Steele [1930] 340), is found in Augustan poetry (cf. Virg. A. 6.122; Tib. 2.6.46; Ov. Her. 15.118; Tr. 5.7.14), and VF employs it at 1.725; see Langen on 1.72; Norden on Virg. A. 6.122; and Wills (1996) 446–7. The collocation in astra appears often in poetry (and Manilius in particular favours using it in a clausula, cf. 3.522; 4.279; 5.198, 416, and 604). VF only employs it elsewhere in Jupiter’s Weltenplan: tendite in astra viri (1.563). 331–2  lapsoque reciproca fluctu | descendit: OLD (s.v. reciprocus 1) cites this passage as an example of the adjective applied to objects that display back-­and-­ forth movement. Liberman 2.384 compares Stat. Theb. 3.57: pelago iam descendere carina; see also Sil. 15.238: et fluctus rapido fugiebat in aequora lapsu. 332–3  vorat hos vertex, hos agmine toto | gurges agit: The Flavian poet’s debt to Virg. A. 1.117–18 is clear: torquet agens circum et rapidus vorat aequore vertex. | Apparent rari nantes in gurgite vasto. Pellucchi (2012) 361 rightly notes the rhetorical devices present in the Valerian passage, especially agmine . . . agit as figura etymologica, which follows the more Varronian vorat . . . vertex (the words have different etymologies, but the assonance is clear). Silius Italicus adopts the phrase vorat . . . vertex (inspired by the Virgilian vorat aequore vertex) at 4.230: Scipio qua medius pugnae vorat agmina vertex. On the equivalency between the words vortex and vertex (the former is the archaic spelling), see Quint. Inst. 8.2.7. Baehrens’s conjectured aequore in place of the transmitted agmine unnecessarily trivializes the passage (VF uses the same clausula at 2.530: iamque agmine toto). It is more difficult to comprehend the precise meaning of

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 333–4

209

the phrase toto agmine. I believe that Langen still offers the best interpretation, taking the words to mean agmen undarum. Nearly every modern interpreter accepts this proposal, though Carelli and Soubiran believe that the phrase refers to the array of ships. In support of Langen’s theory, Liberman compares Macr. Sat. 6.4.4, who explains that the use of the word agmen in reference to streams of water was a poeticism introduced as early as Ennius: agmen pro actu et ductu quodam ponere non inelegans est ut ‘leni fluit agmine Thybris’ [Virg. A. 2.782]. immo et antiquum est: Ennius enim in quinto [= 163 Skutsch, who cites VF 4.721] ait: ‘quod per amoenam urbem leni fluit agmine flumen’. gurges functions here as a synonym for vertex (cf. TLL vi 2.2360.17), as Servius glosses on Virg. A. 12.673: ‘undabat vertex’ abundabat. Et bene in translatione permansit, ut verticem undare diceret: vertex enim undarum dicitur, ut ‘verticibus rapidis’ [A. 7.31] et ‘vorat aequore vertex’ [A. 1.117]. 333  simul in vultus micat undique terror: The transmitted reading in vultus has prompted discussion, since there are no other attestations of the verb micare construed with in and accusative. Liberman 2.384–5 n. 194 emends in vultus to ob vultus on the model of Sil. 17.476–7 (ipsaque ob ora | lux atrox micat). The rest of the editors keep the text as transmitted and accept the possibility that VF (here as elsewhere, cf. Kleywegt [1986] 2469–70) offers an unparalleled construction. If we must alter the text, I would propose emending in vultus to in vultu (pace Liberman; Heinsius also proposed simili in vultu), a widely attested phrase with the sense of ‘on one’s face’. Compare, e.g., the expression totus in vultu est dolor, which appears twice in Seneca (Ag. 128 and Med. 446 with Boyle, who calls it ‘an exemplary use of vultus “face,” as the site of character and feelings, as opposed to facies, the physical contours themselves’). Compare also Sen. Ep. 115.14: tam dulce si quid Veneris in vultu micat. In this case, the word terror should be understood in its literal sense and not as a metonymy for lightning (a theory advanced by Pius, and which some modern commentators have adopted; cf. Pellucchi [2012] 362–3). terror can quite easily be understood in both senses (since the lightning bolts cause fear), and the image seems quite clear: ‘one can read their fear on their faces’. The motif of lightning causing fear is already present in Virgil (cf. A. 1.90–2 and 8.431–2), and VF also presents it at 4.661–6. Moreover, lightning serves as an instrument of divine ven­geance in the first and the final books of the Aeneid (cf. Hardie [1986] 177–87); by presenting it as a frightful means of punishment in this passage, VF further promotes a reading of this passage describing the storm sent against the Colchians through the lens of the Gigantomachy. For mico used for the flash of thunderbolts, cf. TLL viii.930.31–9. 334  crebra ruina poli caelestia limina laxat: ruina poli is a variation on caeli ruina of Virg. A. 12.129, which makes reference to the proverbial expression caelum ruere (used to express that something is impossible) and foreshadows disaster on a cosmic scale (cf. Hardie [1986] 93–4). The falling sky (an atavistic

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

210

Commentary, lines 335–8

and recurring fear dating back to Hesiod, cf. Theog. 154–210, with West’s comment ad loc.) is a motif that not only appears in the Virgilian passage describing the storm (Virg. A. 1.128–9: disiectam Aeneae tuto videt aequore classem, | fluctibus oppressos Troas caelique ruina), but also, e.g., at Lucr. 6.291; Virg. G. 1.324; Ov. Met. 11.517; Luc. 5.632; Sen. Ag. 471; Sil. 1.251. crebra ruina is a Valerian iunctura, while caelestia limina represents a variation on the more common limina caeli (attested beginning with Accius, Trag. 206 Dangel: dicitur alto ab limine caeli), which VF adopts at 4.28 (see Korn ad loc., with a list of other uses). For the linking of limen with caelum, see TLL vii/2.1406.80–1407.33; and for laxo used of doors and similar objects, cf. TLL vii/2.1072.22–33. 335  non tamen ardentis Styri violentia cedit: The Virgilian Turnus provides the in­spir­ation for the character of Styrus in the verbal echoes Styri violentia cedit: cf. violentia Turni at Virg. A. 11.376 and 12.45 (as Langen notes), together with fiducia cessit of A. 9.126 (cf. Summers [1894] 33). Liberman also compares Virg. A. 12.45–6: haudquamquam dictis violentia Turni | flectitur; exsuperat magis aegrescitque medendo. Virgil describes Turnus as ardens in A. 12.55 (ardentem generum), but the epithet is common and serves to characterize various figures, even just in VF (e.g., it modifies Pelias at 1.701; Jason at 2.3). Writers often employ ardens to refer to the radiance of the heavenly bodies (cf.  Le Boeuffle [1987] 54), and we should also consider VF’s decision to use this epithet in light of Styrus’ identification with Orion (cf. also Man. 5.723: mersit et ardentis Orion aureus ignes). 336  hortatur socios media inter proelia divum: VF adopts the formula hortatur socios from Virg. A. 6.184 (where Aeneas encourages his companions to follow the Sibyl’s orders). For the phrase media inter, cf. note on 56. proelia divum alludes to the winds as divine powers, with a reference to the Gigantomachy (see note on 328–36). This collocation (which appears nowhere else except in Stat. Theb. 9.835–6: non haec tibi proelia divum | dat pater) echoes Germ. Arat. 554–7 Gain: cochlidis in­vent­or, cuius Titania flatu | proelia commisit divorum laetior aetas, | bellantem comitata Iovem, pietatis honorem | ut fuerat, geminus forma, sic sidere, cepit. Also compare the words Jupiter addresses to Capaneus (who, like Styrus, is a mortal rebelling against a god) at Stat. Theb. 10.909: quaenam spes hominum tumidae post proelia Phlegrae? 337–55  Styrus’ monologue. This speech is inspired by that of Iarbas at Virg. A. 4.206–18. 337–8  transferet ergo meas in quae volet oppida dotes | Colchis: The hyperbaton (transferet . . . Colchis; meas . . . dotes) and the prolepsis of the relative pronoun (quae volet oppida) serve to throw this phrase into confusion. Rather than taking dotes to refer to the dowry given to the groom, we should perhaps understand it in the sense of the gifts offered by a suitor, in accordance with customs of the heroic age (as Wagner and Caussin do; cf. D-­S II.388). According

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 338–40

211

to Pius, dotes refers to Medea, since her father gave her to Styrus. For dos used more broadly, cf. TLL v/1.2043.44–72. dotes could also be understood as ‘gift, talent, endowment’ (cf. OLD s.v. 3) and could therefore refer to the transfer of astronomical knowledge from East to West. According to Spaltenstein, the phrase quae volet means quaevis oppida (cf. OLD s.v. volo 7d). 338  et Haemonius nobis succedet adulter: For the adjective Haemonius, cf. note on 16. VF continues to include allusions to the Trojan War by using the phrase Haemonius . . . adulter, which recalls Dardanius . . . adulter that Virgil uses to describe Paris at A. 10.92 (see Barnes [1981] 369). Jason is already dismissively called an adulter at Sen. Med. 456. For the construction succedo and a dative object (in the sense of ‘to become successor, take over’, cf. OLD s.v. 5), see 7.67: succede meae, fortissime, laudi. Bentley replaces the transmitted succedet with subsidet on the basis of Virg. A. 11.268 (devictam Asiam subsedit adulter), but I do not find this change necessary (see the discussion in Liberman 2.385). 339  nec mihi tot magnos inter regesque procosque: On the polysyndeton -que . . . -que, cf. note on 2. According to Contino (1973) 66, regesque procosque is a hendiadys for the phrase regios procos. In any case, the line makes reference to Jupiter’s Weltenplan at 1.551–2: quae classe dehinc effusa procorum | bella. 340  profuerit prona haud dubii sententia patris: According to Romeo (1907) 37, this use of the adjective pronus (in the sense of ‘favourable’) is consistent with the practice of poets of the period (cf. Stat. Silv. 4.8.61–2: si modo prona invicti Caesaris adsinit | numina). Pellucchi (2012) 366 mentions the expression patris filiam pollicentis (cf. TLL x/2.1936.71–2). The clausula sententia patris ironically adapts the idea expressed at 1.548–9: nulla magis sententia menti | fixa meae (where the sententia in question belongs to the pater of the gods). 341–3  Styrus calls Jason’s moral standing and heroism into question by implying that it was only the assistance of a woman’s magic that enabled the Greek to accomplish his earlier exploits (that is, the yoking of the bulls and the defeat of the Spartoi). On this passage, which is critical to our efforts to form an overall assessment of Jason’s character, see Castelletti (2014b) 187–8. In light of the association between Styrus and Orion (cf. note on 328–36), we should not rule out the possibility that VF again alludes to astronomy. The constellation Orion stands directly in front of the Taurus, and Hyginus relates that, according to some sources, Orion is confronting the bull; cf. Astr. 2.33.1: itaque Oriona cum Tauro decertantem fecerunt. For the Sumerians, these constellations depict the battle between Gilgamesh (= Orion) and the celestial Bull (sent to destroy the city of Uruk); cf. Sesti (1987) 396–401. The story of Gilgamesh seizing the bull’s horns and defeating it serves as an allegory for the Sumerians’ astronomical achievement in calculating the date of the spring equinox, which for two millennia occurred under the sign of the Taurus. This achievement is comparable

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

212

Commentary, lines 341–2

to the Argonauts’ triumph in retrieving the Golden Fleece, that is, Aries, which, due to the precession of the equinoxes, replaced the Taurus as the sign under which the spring equinox took place. It is difficult to say whether VF intends to make such an allusion by depicting the defeat of the Eastern Styrus/Orion/ Gilgamesh at the hands of the Western Argonaut Jason. Gilgamesh is also the Sumerian equivalent of Hercules, and the fact that Styrus reproaches Jason for not being a true Hercules (since Hercules genuinely defeated bulls and the Hydra sine carmine) may allude to the occasional depictions of Orion as equipped with a lion’s skin and a club (cf. Sesti [1987] 399). Ptolemy (Alm. 8.1 H132–6) describes Orion as bearing a club and a lion’s pelt, both famous at­tri­ butes of Hercules, and ancient astrological charts depict him in this way. But no classical poet mentions a possible link between this constellation and Hercules. Might sine carmine of line 342 refer to this? Styrus’ defeat shows that only the real Hercules has earned a place among the stars (in accordance with divine will), and the reproaches he hurls at Jason (who pretends to be Hercules) foreshadow the failed hero’s impending downward spiral. Finally, note that there is yet another link to the first book, as the two terms in successive clausulae, tauros (342) and hydri (343), on the one hand, refer to tauros (8.106) and draconis (8.107), thus establishing a connection between these lines and Medea’s Herculean deeds, but, on the other hand, they also link back to angue (1.35) and iuvencis (1.36), that is, to the labours performed by the real Hercules (on this connection, cf. Zissos [2008] 102–5 and Castelletti [2012b] 153; see also 7.622–4, with Perutelli’s and Davis’s notes ad loc.). 341–2  an virtus praelata viri est et fortior ille | quem sequitur: The alliterative figura etymologica virtus . . . viri, attested already at Plaut. Am. 212, is commonly used in Cicero (e.g., Tusc. 2.43; Pis. 27.3; Mil. 81.9; Orat. 2.346) and also appears at Virg. A. 4.3–4: multa viri virtus animo multusque recursat | gentis honos (Dido admires Aeneas), to which VF alludes. Also compare 1.30: instat fama viri virtusque haud laeta tyranno, in which the vir is Jason (and that line expresses the opposite opinion of Jason). On VF’s use of the complicated term virtus (which more or less cor­res­ponds to the Greek ἀρετή), see Eisenhut (1973) 163; Ferenczi (1995) 148–9; Ripoll (1998) 316–18; Manuwald (1999) 241–3; Zissos (2008) 98–9. The phrase fortior ille | quem sequitur recalls non carior ille . . . | quem sequimur of lines 12–13. 342  iungam igniferos sine carmine tauros: This line’s resemblance to igniferos possit sine Colchide iungere tauros of Mart. Sp. 28.7 is clear. According to Steele (1930) 340, Martial is the one imitating VF, but Zissos (2003–4) 407–8 believes that the opposite is the case. It is difficult to establish priority with precision. What matters is the connection between the Herculean labour that Martial describes and the equally Herculean one that Jason performs at 7.554–606 (that is, the yoking of Aeetes’ fire-­breathing bulls, thanks to the assistance of Medea’s magic), to which the line refers. The passage is, therefore, important both for

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 343–6

213

developing the as­so­ci­ation between Jason and Hercules, and for developing the one between Styrus, Orion, and Hercules. The adjective ignifer (cor­res­pond­ing to Greek πυρφόρος) is first attested at Cic. Arat. fr. 34.88–9 Soubiran (at propter se Aquila ardenti cum corpore portat, | igniferum mulcens tremebundis aethera pinnis); it finds abundant use in Lucretius (2.25: lampadas igniferas; 5.459 and 498: aether ignifer) and is also commonly employed among later poets to refer to various objects (e.g., Ov. Met. 2.59; Sen. Med. 34; Luc. 3.41; Stat. Theb. 5.50). ignifer is only used to describe a bull (or any other animal) here and in the cited passage from Martial. carmen is a technical term from the vocabulary of magic (cf. note on 69); it refers to Medea’s spells used to help Jason in his undertakings, but I would not discount the possibility that the word also alludes to the poetic tradition (cf. note on 341–3). 343  saevaque Echionii ferro sata persequar hydri: This line refers to the killing of the Spartoi (cf. 7.607–48), another Herculean task that Jason performs. sata denotes the sons of the Earth, who were born from the planting of the dragon’s teeth (cf. OLD s.v. satus1 for offspring). Echionii . . . hydri refers to the dragon slain by Cadmus and is a variation on Cadmei . . . hydri that appears at 6.437 and 7.76. As Perutelli comments on 7.76, hydrus is a calque from the Greek term that appears in poetry beginning from Virg. G. 2.140–1: haec loca non tauri spirantes naribus ignem | invertere satis immanis dentibus hydri (a passage that probably inspires VF both here and at 6.437). On the similarities between Jason’s labour and Hercules’ killing of the Hydra, see Perutelli (1997) 467–8. Here as well we might detect an astronomical allusion as subtext, since we can also count the Scorpion, a child of the Earth that was sent to face (and kill) Orion (cf. Ps-­Erat. Cat. 7), among the saeva sata. Both this line and the preceding one give a clear indication of Orion’s boastfulness, a feature already present in Arat. Phaen. 639–40, Ps-­Erat. Cat. 7 and 32, and Ov. Fast. 5.539–40, where the Giant hunter declares that he is capable of killing all the animals on earth. 344–5  hoc adeo interea specta de litore pugnas | amborum: Styrus makes an abrupt, but not unprecedented (cf. 4.130 and 5.395) change of addressee and begins to speak to Medea (from afar). For the use of adeo after a deictic, cf. 5.395: hac adeo duce ferte gradus and Liberman 2.385 n. 199. 345–6 victoris eris. Iam digna videbis | proelia: The phrase victoris eris appears in the same metrical position at Stat. Theb. 11.392–3 (mater; io patria, o regum incertissima tellus, | nunc certe victoris eris!, Eteocles is speaking to Polynices) and echoes the concluding words of Pompey’s tirade, delivered shortly before his fateful clash with Caesar at Pharsalus at Luc. 7.122–3: omne malum victi, quod sors feret ultima rerum, | omne nefas victoris erit (Jason, as the winner, will bring Medea’s nefas with him). digna . . . proelia should be contrasted with those that are indigna, that is, Jason’s proelia in book 7, from Styrus’ point

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

214

Commentary, lines 346–8

of view. We should also read the phrase in relation to the clash between Caesar and Pompey, which victoris eris recalls. According to Spaltenstein, dignus has the meaning of iustus (cf. OLD s.v. 8). Pellucchi (2012) 368 notes the variatio in how the poet constructs videbis, as the verb governs the complementary object digna . . . proelia, then the infinitive caput ire, and finally two object accusatives (corpus and crines). 346–7 iamque illud carum caput ire cruenta | sub freta: The metonymy carum caput, used to refer to a beloved person, is common in Greek and Latin. VF also employs it at 4.24: stansque super carum talis caput edere voces (with Korn ad loc.). As Pellucchi (2012) 369 notes, VF coins the iunctura cruenta . . . freta, which he develops based on the epithet’s frequent application to liquids (cf. TLL iv.1239.32–41). For the construction eo with the preposition sub, cf. TLL v/2.639.77–9. 347  semiviri nec murra corpus Achivi: As every commentator notes, Styrus’ accusation that Jason is effeminate (semiviri . . . Achivi) picks up on a common trope employed against Easterners (here reversed and directed against the Greeks), including Aeneas and the Trojans. Undoubtedly, VF alludes here and in the following line to A. 12.97–100: da sternere corpus | loricamque manu ­valida lacerare revulsam | semiviri Phrygis et foedare in pulvere crinis | vibratos calido ferro murraque madentis. Also compare Virg. A. 4.215: et nunc ille Paris cum semiviro comitatu; 9.617: o vere Phrygiae – neque enim Phryges; and Luc. 8.552: impure ac semivir. Statius repeats the trope at Theb. 6.820–1: favorem | semiviri and Ach. 2.78: Phryga semivirum. Styrus ironically mentions myrrh, an ointment both used as a perfume (and therefore, emphasizing Jason’s effeminacy, as at Virg. A. 12.99–100, where Aeneas’ hair is said to be wet with myrrh), but also employed to oil bodies before cremation (thus explaining the mention of pitch, sulphur, and fire in the following line). 348  sed pice, sed flammis et olentes sulphure crines: As Liberman 2.386 n. 200 observes, the transmitted text presents a phrase that should read as nec videbis corpus et crines olentis murra, sed pice, sed flammis et sulphure, but which means nec videbis corpus Achivi murra, sed pice, sed flammis et olentes sulphure crines. The problem, therefore, is that the participle olentes agrees grammatically only with the word crines, but in terms of meaning it should also agree with corpus. There have been numerous attempts at emend­ ation, including Frassinetti’s sed flammis redolens et sulphure cernes (for other conjectures, cf. Liberman 2.386 and 370), but perhaps we do not need to alter the text if we compare (with Summers [1894] 39) olentes sulphure with olentia sulphure of Ov. Met. 5.405. For the repetition of the conjunction sed, see 4.604 and 6.673 (with Gebbing [1878] 44). For the custom of anointing corpses with myrrh and other unguents before cremation, see Mart. 11.54.1: unguenta et casias et olentem funera murram and Prop. 4.7.32: cur nardo flammae non oluere

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 349–52

215

meae? (with Fedeli, Ciccarelli, and Dimundo ad loc. for add­ition­al comparanda). The model is found at Hom. Il. 23.170–92, where Achilles treats Patroclus’ body quite differently from Hector’s. 349–50  vos modo vel solum hoc, fluctus, expellite corpus: | non te, Aeeta pater, generi aut, Sol magne, pudebit: Styrus makes another sudden change of addressee and now speaks to the fluctus. Critics have interpreted these lines in various ways, and the debate primarily hinges upon understanding the referent of the phrase hoc . . . corpus. According to Caviglia, hoc . . . corpus refers to Jason (the main target of Styrus’ enmity), whereas others believe that it refers to Styrus, who, therefore, uses an expression from the sermo cotidianus such as hic homo (= ego; cf. Soubiran [2002] 296) to indicate himself. Soubiran captures the sense well by translating the line as ‘vous, vagues, jetez-­moi, même seul, sur la côte’ (vel means ‘at any rate; even if only’; cf. OLD s.v. 6). Styrus, therefore, makes a heroic declaration (‘even if only I should die, Aeetes and the Sun would not be ashamed because of me’). No interpreter has detected that the lines contain yet another allusion to the myth of Orion. In fact, VF suggests the possibility of Styrus’ death by paraphrasing what Hyginus recounts about Orion’s at Astr. 2.34.3: Istrus autem dicit Oriona a Diana esse dilectum et paene factum ut ei nupsisse existimaretur. Quod cum Apollo aegre ferret et saepe eam obiurgans nihil egisset, natantis Orionis longe caput solum videri conspicatus, contendit cum Diana eam non posse sagittam mittere ad id quod nigrum in mari videretur. Quae se cum vellet in eo studio maxime artificem dici, sagitta missa caput Orionis traiecit. Itaque eum cum fluctus interfectum ad litus eiecisset et se eum Diana percussisse plurimum doleret, multis eius obitum prosecuta lacrimis, inter sidera statuisse existimatur. The similarities are clear: in both cases, the main character falls in love with a virgo, whom he should have married, but who ultimately kills him at sea (either involuntarily or indirectly, cf. at 352: ipsa movet and at 368: virgine cessit). Note also the reference to the Sun’s pudor, which can be traced back to Apollo’s own, and the verbal echo solum . . . corpus, which recalls caput solum in Hyginus’ account. In light of this comparison, I wonder whether we should emend corpus to caput (Liberman proposes pectus) or whether VF chose corpus for the sake of variatio (or as a complement) relative to his model. For the use of modo to strengthen an imperative, cf. 7.61: modo nostra prior tu perfice iussa (with Perutelli’s comment ad loc.). expello is a technical verb that denotes the expulsion of dead bodies from shipwrecks onto the shore, cf. TLL v/2.1637.69–81 with references to Quint. Decl. 388.17: sed post paucos dies corpus expulsum est. For the elision of the pronoun te into Aeeta, cf. note on 109. For the collocation Sol magne, cf. note on 282. 351–2  fallor, an hos nobis magico nunc carmine ventos | ipsa movet: The speech returns to an internal monologue. Styrus is convinced that the storm is Medea’s doing, since control over natural phenomena is a well-­attested ability of sorceresses (cf. note on 72). The use of fallor an at the beginning of a sentence

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

216

Commentary, lines 352–7

is an expression from the sermo cotidianus that appears quite often in Ovid (cf. Bömer on Ov. Fast. 2.853 and also Am. 1.6.49; Met. 13.641; Fast. 1.515). The expression also appears in Ps-­Sen. Her. O. 1978 and Stat. Theb. 4.596, in a different metrical position. Rather than an ethical dative (as Spaltenstein argues), nobis is a dative of disadvantage (as Pellucchi [2012] 372 notes). For the use of carmen in magical contexts, cf. note on 69. For the very common iunctura magico . . . carmine, cf. TLL iii.464.64–8. For movere ventos and similar expressions, cf. TLL viii.1541.80–1542.3. 352 diraque levat maria ardua lingua: The collocation levare maria is a Valerian invention. For the predicative use of the adjective ardua, which has the sense of in arduum, in altum, cf. TLL ii.494.19–29. The phrase dira . . . lingua is equivalent to magico . . . carmine (cf. TLL v/1.1269.62). Compare also Stat. Theb. 2.512: audeat et dirae commercia iungere linguae (with Gervais ad loc.). For the use of dirus applied to prayers or incantations, cf. TLL v/1.1269.50; Spaltenstein compares 6.151: diros magico terrore Choatras. Pellucchi (2012) 373 adds 2.172–3: dira precatur | coniugia. 353–4  atque iterum Aesonides, iterum defenditur arte | qua solet: For the patronymic Aesonides, cf. note on 105. atque iterum, used as a formula at the opening of hexameters, appears already at Lucr. 3.849 and is common in VF (cf. 3.387 and 666; 6.238; 7.150 and 202). Contino (1973) 68 considers the repetition of iterum . . . iterum (attested already at Accius, Trag. 29–30 Dangel and employed at VF 4.400 and 6.300) as an anaphora, but according to Pellucchi (2012) 373, it is an example of geminatio. 354–5  haud illi cantus et futtile murmur | proderit: Here, as at line 79, haud negates the entire clause. The terms cantus and murmur are often connected to magic; cf. note on 69 and 85, as well as Baldini-­Moscadi (2005) 165–74. On the basis of Leo (1960) 232, I follow the spelling futtile, found in the Laurentianus (as do Baehrens, Courtney, and Liberman), which is orthographically more accurate than the futile found in the Vaticanus and adopted by other editors. 355  ite, rates, et frangite virginis undam: According to Spaltenstein, ite has an ex­clama­tory sense and serves to strengthen the imperative (frangite), as at 1.56–7: i decus, et . . . | redde and Virg. A. 7.425: i nunc ingratis offer te, inrise periclis. On this type of formula, cf. TLL v/2.632.37. For the use of frangere in reference to waves (as at 1.363: hic patrium frangit Neptunius aequor), see TLL vi/1.1244.61–74. For the clausula virginis undam (-s), compare Ov. Tr. 1.10.27–8: quodque per angustas vectae male virginis undas | Seston Abydena separat urbe fretum (Hero and Leander) and Mart. 7.32.10–12: non harpasta vagus pulverulenta rapis | sed curris niveas tantum prope Virginis undas, | aut ubi Sidonio Taurus amore calet. 356–7  dixit et intortis socio cum milite remis | prosilit: Styrus ends his speech and proceeds to action, hurling both himself and his ship against the

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 357–60

217

Argonauts. Since the collocation torqueo (or similar words) and remum does not appear elsewhere (although there is a distant echo in tortaque remigio spumis incanuit unda of Catull. 64.13), Langen compares intortis remis to intorquet clavum of Claud. 24.363. Pellucchi (2012) 374 cites intortis . . . undis of 3.476 (in the same metrical position), referring to TLL vii/2.31.65–6 and 69–81 for analogous uses of the verb intorquere (understood to mean circumagere vel convertere vel rotare). For this usage of prosilit (cf. OLD s.v. 1), see Virg. A. 5.139–40: finibus omnes, | haud mora, prosiluere suis. The phrase socio cum milite is a pleonastic way of expressing cum milite (serving as a collective singular). 357–8 at fluctu puppis labefacta reverso | solvitur effunditque viros ipsumque minantem: Following Summers (1894) 33, Liberman correctly compares Virg. A. 10.305: solvitur atque viros mediis exponit in undis (describing the destruction of Tarchon’s ship). In his reworking, VF replaces exponit with the more expressive effundit (which frequently denotes the breaking up of a ship, cf. Sil. 6.686 and Tac. Ann. 14.3), thus combining the passage with A. 6.339 (Palinurus): exciderat puppi mediis effusus in undis. Also compare Lucr. 3.592–4: quin etiam finis dum vitae vertitur intra, | saepe aliqua tamen e causa labefacta videtur | ire anima ac toto solvi de corpore . Note also that labefacio appears elsewhere in VF only at 7.175: quis mota loco labefactaque cessit (used for Medea), a pathetic or ironic echo here. 359  tum quoque et elata quaerentem litora dextra: With Liberman (n. 301 on 6.564), I accept Courtney’s emendation of tum in place of the transmitted tunc (cf. note on 26: tum quoque siderea). The phrase elata . . . dextra is used at Virg. A. 10.414–15: Strymonio dextram fulgenti deripit ense | elatam in iugulum, and VF employs it at 3.139 (Ancaeus kills Telecoon). strictum . . . ensem in the following line serves to explain the meaning of this phrase. 360  ibat et arma ferens et strictum naufragus ensem: Styrus wields his weapons in order to fight in a battle that in fact does not even start. Fucecchi (2014) 132 observes the irony in this scene, since Styrus would prefer to die in battle rather than by drowning wretchedly, but the latter scenario will ultimately come to pass. This image of a Giant extending his arms in order to brandish his weapons also alludes to the pose of the Aratean Orion; cf. Arat. Phaen. 588–9: Ὠρίων, ξίφεός γε μὲν ἶφι πεποιθώς, | πάντα φέρων Ποταμόν, κέραος παρατείνεται ἄλλου and most im­port­ant­ly Cic. Arat. fr. 34.367–9 Soubiran: at parte ex alia claris cum lucibus enat | Orion, umeris et lato pectore fulgens, | et dextra retinens non cassum luminis ensem. See also Germ. Arat. 331–2 Gain: tale caput magnique umeri, sic balteus ardet, | sic vagina ensis, pernici sic pede lucet and Serv. ad Virg. A. 3.517 (armatumque auro circumspicit Oriona): bene ‘armatum auro’, quia et balteus eius et gladius clarissimis fingitur stellis. sic Lucanus ‘ensiferi nimium fulget latus Orionis’. Langen correctly observes that ire is synonymous

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

218

Commentary, lines 361–4

with natare, a common usage in reference to both humans and ships, coined by Ovid (cf., e.g., Her. 17.59, 92, and 194; 18.91–2; 19.32); Statius adopts it at Theb. 9.326. VF might also be subtly alluding to Orion’s ability to walk on water (cf. Ps-­Erat. Cat. 32). For the common expression arma ferre, cf. TLL ii.596.44– 597.26; for stringere ensem, cf. TLL v/2.610.16–20. 361–2  incipit et remos et quaerere transtra solutae | sparsa ratis: The order is complicated by a hyperbaton that crosses lines due to enjambment, providing a physical reflection of the chaotic situation as the wrecks scatter over the sea; in terms of the meaning, the sentence should be construed as incipit quaerere et remos et transtra sparsa ratis solutae (as Pellucchi [2012] 376 proposes). For the repetition of the verb quaerere after quaerentem of line 359, see Liberman 2.166–7 n. 42 (who also provides a list of similar occurrences in VF). Also see Housman (1926) xxxiii for this phenomenon in Latin poetry. The collocation soluta ratis appears in Liv. 21.28.10: primus erat pavor cum soluta ab ceteris rate in altum raperentur, but compare texts as early as Plaut. Am. 412: nam noctu hac soluta est navis nostra e portu Persico and Hor. Epod. 10.1: mala soluta navis exit alite. Pellucchi (2012) 376 correctly refers to Virg. A. 10.306–7: fragmina remorum quos et fluitantia transtra | impediunt (describing Tarchon’s shipwreck). 362–3  maestasque aliis intendere voces | puppibus: The codices all transmit the word altis, an epithet commonly applied to ships (cf. 1.314), but which perhaps seems excessive in regard to the crude boats of the Colchians. Langen (followed by Strand) justifies this reading by pointing to the fact that Styrus is in the water. Even if it feels somewhat trivial compared to altis (which would be the lectio difficilior), I accept Heinsius’s conjecture aliis (as do other editors, including Giarratano and Liberman). intendere is frequently used with a dative (here puppibus, but cf. 68: intenderat astris), and its appearance in a iunctura with vocibus seems to be a variation on the Virgilian intendit vocem of A. 7.514 (as Pellucchi [2012] 376 notes). 363  ast inter tantos succurrere fluctus: Summers (1894) 52 observes that this is the only case in extant Latin literature where ast appears before a preposition (at 255 it appears in front of an adverb). The verb succurrere sees frequent use in military contexts to designate rescue operations (cf. OLD s.v. 2). Ovid employs ­tantos . . . fluctus in the same metrical position at Tr. 1.2.87: seu me diligitis, tantos compescite fluctus. 364  nulla potest †aut ille velit† quotiensque propinquat: We should understand nulla as nulla ratis. The transmitted aut ille velit is difficult to interpret (the editio Bononiensis has haud ulla velit, which Heinsius accepts). There are numerous proposed emendations (see the list in Liberman 2.387 n. 207), but none are particularly convincing. Among the many options, aut ulla velit (formed from combining the line as transmitted with the version found in the

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 365–8

219

editio Bononiensis) has gained much support, but I would also draw attention to aut ille sequi (Courtney [1965] 155) and non ulla audet (Liberman). 365 tunc aliud rursus dirimit mare: Spaltenstein argues that mare does not mean fluctus here (as it does in line 304), since the word continues the hyperbole (by suggesting that it takes an entire sea to put a stop to Styrus’ excessiveness). For dirimere mare, cf. Sen. Ag. 540: dirimit insanum mare. iam tamen enat: All manuscripts transmit errat, but only Giarratano, Kramer, and Ehlers leave this reading unchanged. The other editors emend the text either by adopting the variation extat, taken from the Aldine edition (Langen, Liberman, Spaltenstein, and Pellucchi), or by accepting Sandstroem’s conjecture enat (as Courtney, Caviglia, and Soubiran, among others, do). I believe that Sandstroem is correct. In support of this conjecture, we can compare the passage from Cicero’s Aratea (cited at note on 360), where the verb enat appears in the same metrical position (Cic. Arat. fr. 34.367–8 Soubiran: at parte ex alia claris cum lucibus enat | Orion). In the Cicero passage, all editors follow the majority of the codices that transmit enat, although manuscripts A, M, and S read errat, which may also explain the mistake in VF’s text­ual tradition. 366–7  iamque abiit fundoque iterum violentus ab imo | erigitur: For the repetition of the adverb iam (with the sense of modo . . . modo, a correlative usage that Virgil introduces; cf., e.g., Ecl. 4.43; A. 4.157), see Wölfflin (1885) 245. For the use of abeo in the context of a shipwreck, cf. TLL i.71.17. As Pellucchi (2012) 379 notes, the phrase fundo . . . ab imo is a Virgilian linguistic feature (cf. A. 2.419; 5.178; 7.530) that Silius Italicus also adopts (cf. 3.50; 4.245; 8.629); we should also consider the intratextual echo of 1.657–8: iam placidis ratis exstat aquis, quam gurgite ab imo | et Thetis et magnis Nereus socer erigit ulnis, which creates yet another parallel between this scene and the one depicting the storm in the first book, but with the situations reversed (in that instance, the storm has ended and the Argo is raised, erigit, by Thetis and Nereus, whereas here Styrus is lifted for the last time before he sinks into the depths). 367–8  sed fluctus adest magnoque sub altis | turbine mergit aquis: For the construction consisting of adsum (used absolutely) and a subject referring to an inanimate object, cf. TLL ii.919.78–920.83. Liberman proposed mergit in place of the transmitted figit, and all subsequent editors have accepted this conjecture. The TLL vi/1.712.65 reports the apparent construction figere sub with an ablative as unique (see also Kleywegt [1986] 2470). Liberman does not comment on his conjecture in a note, but defends it in his apparatus by comparing Virg. A. 6.341–2: quis te, Palinure, deorum | eripuit nobis medioque sub aequore mersit? In support of this proposal, I would compare Germ. Arat. 658–60 Gain: horret vulnus adhuc et spicula tincta veneno | flebilis Orion et tamquam parte relicta | poenae tela fugit; tamen altis mergitur undis and 313–14: tunc alte

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

220

Commentary, lines 368–70

Cynosura redit, tunc totus in undas | mergitur Orion, umeris et vertice Cepheus (thus ­continuing the allusions to Styrus as a parallel for Orion). 368  et tandem virgine cessit: Williams (1978) 227 cites this phrase among the expressive new phrases that VF coins, often in the pursuit of brevitas (e.g., totusque dei at 1.207; nube nova linquente domos at 1.706; spumea subsequitur fugientis semita clavi at 2.430; leni canebant aequora sulco at 3.32; iniqui | nube meri at 3.65–6; et magnae pelago tremit umbra Sinopes at 5.108). The expression’s meaning is clear: whether one interprets the phrase as ‘Styrus has now given up his hopes of obtaining Medea’ (Spaltenstein) or ‘Styrus has ceased to exist’ (for cessit as equivalent to occidit, cf. Langen), the fact remains that he is now dead (either at the hands of or because of the virgo). For cedere in the sense of ‘to give up’ (used with an ablative), cf. TLL iii.725.20. Liberman 2.387 n. 209 reads the phrase as an ironic euphemism, on the basis of the legal meaning of the verb cedere used with the ablative with regard to a possession (cf. in iure cessio). We can also detect a final allusion to the myth of Orion (with whom Styrus has been assimilated) in this expression. VF indeed alludes to the death of Orion by Artemis or Athena (both virgines) at 4.122–3: Iuppiter, iniustae quando mihi virginis armis | concidit infelix et nunc chaos implet Orion (with Murgatroyd ad loc. and Le Boeuffle [1977] 201 for the variations on the myth). Note that cedere is also a part of the technical astro­nom­ic­al vocabulary used to refer to the retreating or setting of a star (cf. Le Boeuffle [1987] 84). 369  Absyrtus visu maeret defixus acerbo: Now that Styrus has disappeared, the poet proceeds to describe Absyrtus’ reaction. According to TLL viii.39.60, maeret, used intransitively and absolutely, is here equivalent to indignatur. VF employs the word defixus often (see the list in Schulte [1931] 45), especially in contexts expressing a psychological state of mind, as at 7.82: ipsum etiam et maesta stabat defixus in ira or 7.407: ergo ut erat vultu defixus uterque silenti (with Perutelli’s and Davis’s notes ad loc.). In this case, visu . . . acerbo should instead be understood as an ablative of cause (Liberman and Pellucchi also read it this way, but, according to Spaltenstein, it could be a dative; cf. portu at 3.42 with Manuwald ad loc.), as at Stat. Theb. 1.490–1: stupet omine tanto | defixus senior and Sil. 9.253: defixi omine torpent. 370  heu quid agat: Heinsius’s proposed heu instead of the transmitted nec (Schenkl conjectures nunc) has the virtue of restoring a formula that introduces an internal monologue, as already at 1.71 (see Zissos ad loc.) and 7.309 (see Perutelli and Davis ad loc.). Virgil employs this formula abundantly (cf. A. 4.283–4: heu quid agat? quo nunc reginam ambire furentem | audeat adfatu? quae prima exordia sumat? and 12.486), and Ovid adopts it at Fast. 3.609. For the use of free in­dir­ect speech in VF, see Auhagen (1998); for this feature in ancient epic, see Perutelli (1979) and L-­H-­Sz II.363.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 370–2

221

370–1  qua vi portus et prima capessat | ostia: For qua vi at the beginning of a sentence, see especially Virg. A. 9.399–400: quid faciat? qua vi iuvenem, quibus audeat armis | eripere?, which displays a similar structure to the Valerian line: it contains a rhet­oric­al question followed by qua vi and echoed through the polyptoton quid . . . qua, as at A. 4.283–4. Also compare Servius Danielis’ comment on Virg. A. 4.283: HEU QUID AGAT ut solet, personis de quibus loquitur adfectum commodavit, ut [9.399] ‘heu quid agat? qua vi iuvenem quibus audeat armis (eripere)?’ Either the Virgilian interpreter has made a mistake (perhaps by mixing the first hemistich of A. 4.283: heu quid agat with the latter hemistich from A. 9.399?), or Servius was reading a text as found here in VF (or might the Valerian text have caused the confusion?). The Servius passage seems to support the accuracy of Heinsius’s conjecture (cf. note on 370). The verb capesso (attested already as early as Naevius) is particularly common in VF (appearing twelve times); in this line it seems to recall the passage from the first book (depicting a similar situation, as Jason wonders what he should do, considering whether he has to use violence or to travel over the sea); cf. 1.74: armisona speret magis et freta iussa capessat (in this case, the verb has the same meaning; cf. TLL iii.310.42). For the use of the synonyms portum . . . ostia, cf. Virg. A. 1.399–400: haud aliter puppesque tuae pubesque tuorum | aut portum tenet aut pleno subit ostia velo. For the verbose collocation prima . . . ostia (TLL ix/2.1156.80 only cites VF), cf. 5.184: ac dum prima gravi ductor subit ostia pulsu. The phrase primum ostium Peuces, mox ipsa Peuce insula at Plin. Nat. 4.79 is syntactically different, unless the Valerian prima is a transposition for primum. Compare also the tautological phrase primoque in limine, found at 1.709. 371  qua possit Minyas invadere clausos: qua should be understood as a pronoun rather than as an adverb (as Spaltenstein interprets it). Instead of using a question mark to separate the participle clausos from the words that precede it (as Langen and editors up to Mozley used to do), I choose punctuation cor­res­ pond­ing with the interpretation offered in Leo (1960) 348, who correctly notes that clausos refers to Minyas. We can explain the participle by considering the passage from the Colchians’ subjective point of view, since the Argonauts are unreachable for them, insofar as they are clausos by the stormy sea. Langen and Liberman comment that this explanation does not fit with clausos of line 387, which should have the same meaning. But the situation in question is a siege (as Spaltenstein notes), and the very storm that protects the Argonauts traps them at the same time. Furthermore, at 387, VF may be thinking of AR 4.327–8, where the Colchians blockade all of the Argonauts’ potential escape routes (although the Minyans still manage to escape). 372  quos videt agnoscitque fremens: Sabellicus proposes the conjecture fremens in place of the transmitted tremens, and editors have unanimously accepted it. Soubiran skilfully translates the collocation videt agnoscitque as ‘il aperçoit et reconnaît’, since the phrase is not used for the sake of decorative

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

222

Commentary, lines 372–5

redundancy but rather expresses two distinct actions (first physical perception, then mental understanding). Pellucchi (2012) 382 cites Serv. ad Virg. A. 3.351: ea agnoscimus quae iam pridem vidimus. But also note the echo of 293–4: vident . . . agnoscunt. And compare Ov. Pont. 1.4.5: nec, si me subito videas, agnoscere possis and Plin. Ep. 7.27: respicit, videt agnoscitque narratam sibi effigiem. 372–3  maria obvia contra | saevaque pugnat hiems totusque in vertice pontus: Readers have interpreted this passage in various ways, depending on how each one chooses to understand the syntax (for this debate, see Liberman 2.388 n. 212 and Pellucchi [2012] 382–3). Rather than understanding three (or two) elliptic sentences using the same verb (as Caviglia, Liberman, Dräger, and Pellucchi do), I prefer one sentence with three subjects (maria, hiems, and pontus), as Mozley and Soubiran do, all of which depend upon the verb pugnat, which has a singular form in accordance with the rather common agreement ad sensum. The word maria (as in line 304) refers to a part of the sea. For the verbose structure obvius and contra, which VF employs also at 2.550 (obvia cui contra), cf. Virg. A. 11.504: ire obvia contra (used in a clausula); Man. 1.504–5: surgere contra | obvius (Orion); Sen. Her. F. 217. VF adopts the phrase saeva . . . pugnat hiems from Ovid; cf. Tr. 1.11.41: improba pugnat hiems (in the same metrical position) and Her. 19.120: invida pugnat hiems (used in a clausula). For the expression totus . . . in vertice pontus, Langen compares Luc. 5.644: omnis . . . in fluctibus unda est and Stat. Theb. 5.598: totum . . . in vulnere corpus. 374  abscessit tandem vanaque resedit ab ira: All of the manuscripts contain the reading recedit, while resedit is Caussin’s conjecture (on the model of Virg. A. 6.407: tumida ex ira tum corda residunt) that Kramer, Courtney, and Liberman accept, so that the verbs abscedo and recedo would not appear in the same line. This conjecture has the indisputable advantage of offering a text better suited to the passage, since it also restores a Virgilian element. I, therefore, cautiously accept it, even in light of the scepticism voiced by Pellucchi (2012) 383–4, who observes that in the Virgilian passage the verb is construed with ex and ablative, while in VF it would need to be construed with ab (although that is normally how recedo is construed when it is used in reference to a person). 375  et tanta de clade †rates†: The Laurentianus preserves the word rates, while ratis comes from the second-­hand writing in the Monacensis (which derives from L). Neither reading is satisfactory, since neither agrees with the preceding words (if we read resedit in line 374). Nevertheless, critics are divided on the question of which reading to choose (see the discussion in Pellucchi [2012] 384–5). Like Courtney and Liberman, I think that the text is corrupt (rates/ratis would thus be a gloss that slipped into the text in place of a verb that had the boat as its subject; cf. Liberman 2.388). Among the various proposed emend­ations, I would prefer either Watt’s ruit or Liberman’s fugit instead of

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 375–9

223

Courtney’s querens (which would require that we include the word inde in this same sentence, but VF’s modus scribendi instead puts inde at the beginning of a new sentence). 375–6  latus inde sinistrum | adversamque procul Peucae defertur in oram: Commentators from Langen onwards have wondered about the apparent contra­dic­tion between these lines and what Erginus says at 8.188–9: illius adversi nunc ora petamus et undam | quae latus in laevum Ponti cadit. As I have noted ad loc., the phrase latus in laevum Ponti refers to the point of view of one entering the Black Sea from the Bosporus and who, therefore, has the Ister on their right-­hand side; VF does not specify in any way whether the Argonauts docked on the left side of the island of Peuce (that is, on the Ister’s more southern branch), although Langen, followed by Dräger, theorizes that they did. Therefore, the poet says that at this point Absyrtus’ fleet moves towards its left (latus . . . sinistrum, which is also governed by in at 376; cf. Spaltenstein on 1.716) and lands on the shore facing the island (adversam . . . in oram), that is, it lands on the mainland (the Ister cuts the island off and separates it from the mainland, cf. 377–8), while the Argonauts remain far away (procul) on the other side of the island. VF thus adopts in his own fashion what we find at AR 4.305–16. Peucae (in the dative) is Courtney’s clever emend­ation for the transmitted Peuces, and the dative is governed by adversam. If we keep Peuces (as the majority of editors do), we must suppose that Absyrtus lands on the island’s other shore. In any case, I do not find it necessary to assume confusion (as Mozley does) or an oversight (as Pellucchi does) on the author’s part, and much less that the Argonauts change their plans or that the Argo has moved (as Dräger argues). defertur is a technical seafaring term, which denotes a naval manoeuvre that brings a ship from the sea onto the shore (cf. TLL v/1.315.29). Liberman 2.388 proposes emending adversam into diversam, but Pellucchi (2012) 386 correctly cites in adversa(m) ora(m) at Stat. Theb. 5.75 and Plin. Nat. 9.98. 377–8  gemino nam scinditur insula flexu | Danuvii: For the shape of the island, which the river divides, see AR 4.309–16. scinditur (which here means abscinditur, cf. OLD s.v. 5c) indicates that the forking of the river separates the island from the mainland (as Langen observes). The phrase gemino . . . flexu adapts AR 4.311–12: ἀμφὶ δὲ δοιαί | σχίζονται προχοαί. For flexus used to refer to a winding section of a river, cf. TLL vi/1.910.80. 378–9  hac dudum Minyae Pagasaeaque puppis | in statione manent: hac is a variant from the sixteenth century that the majority of modern editors accept in place of the transmitted ac or at (Baehrens provides the conjecture tuta, while Köstlin offers ut). The word dudum (equivalent to iamdiu, iampridem, ex multo tempore, cf. TLL v/1.2177.16) refers to the fact that the Argonauts had been camping at this location for some time, while Absyrtus and the Colchians only arrived recently. The phrase Minyae Pagasaeaque puppis echoes Ov. Met.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

224

Commentary, lines 379–83

7.1: iamque fretum Minyae Pagasaea puppe secabant (see Bömer’s comment ad loc. and Steele [1930] 339 n. 3 for a survey of comparable periphrases for the Argo, such as Ov. Met. 13.24: Pagasaea carina; Luc. 2.715 and Sil. 11.469: Pagasaea ratis). VF employs the epicizing form Pagaseia puppis at 1.422, but uses pinus Pagasaea at 5.435. Here, in statione means ‘at anchor’ (OLD s.v. 3), as it does in Liv. 23.34.2: ubi navis occulta in statione erat and 31.23.3: classem in statione usque ad noctem tenuit. For the expression in statione manere, compare Lucr. 4.387–8: qua vehimur navi, fertur, cum stare videtur; | quae manet in statione, ea praeter creditur ire. The noun statio also refers to the apparently stationary position of a celestial body (OLD s.v. 1 and Le Boeuffle [1987] 250–2), as in Lucr. 4.395–6: solque pari ratione manere et luna videtur | in statione. Also compare Germ. Arat. 4.59–60 Gain: Virgineque et Libra semper pendentia ­tantum | nubila continua magis in statione manebunt. Should we perhaps detect an allusion to the Argo as a constellation? 379–80  illinc Aeetius heros | obsidet adversa tentoria Thessala classe: The Colchians now begin to besiege the Argonauts. Aeetius heros is a periphrasis for Absyrtus. The adjective Aeetius only appears in VF (6.267: Aeetia virgo; 6.542: Aeolii proles Aeetia Phrixi; 6.691–2: Aeetia . . . foedera; and 7.565: Aeetia tellus). Compare the Catullan adjective Aeetaeus (64.3: fines Aeetaeos) and the Ovidian patronymic Aeetias for Medea (Met. 7.9 and 326). The verb obsideo in the context of a naval blockade otherwise sees use exclusively in prose (see, e.g., Cic. Fam. 12.15.3: a classe eius obsideri; Front. Strat. 1.5.7: cum tota classe obsideretur); cf. TLL ix/2.222.83–223.4. Also compare 5.395–6: ingentia namque | castra alios aditus atque impius obsidet hostis (Perses’ camp besieges Aeetes’ city). The term ten­toria is used in poetry only here and at 6.7 (Scythiaeque super tentoria sistit), where it refers to Perses’ forces. The poet also makes a clever choice in employing the adjective Thessala, since in this situation depicting a siege, it is not difficult to glimpse yet another allusion to the Trojan War (Spaltenstein correctly compares the image of the Greek tents at Troy to the tentoria here and cites Virg. A. 2.29: hic saevus tendebat Achilles). 381  impatiens pugnaeque datur non ulla potestas: The enjambment of impatiens, which is connected to the words pugnaeque and potestas through al­lit­er­ ation, emphasizes Absyrtus’ powerless rage (note the echo of impatiens from line 303; both occur in similar situations, where a battle was impossible). VF uses the clausula ulla potestas at 7.205, but the phrase datur non ulla potestas is a variation on the Virgilian nulla datur potestas (cf. A. 3.670 and 7.591). Compare also VF 4.19: nulla deum superare potestas. The enclitic -que, used after a neg­ ation, has an adversative tone, as it does in aegraque in line 163 (cf. Liberman 2.364–5 n. 101). 382–3  noctes atque dies vastis mare fluctibus inter | perfurit: The use of the supporting expression of continuous time noctes atque dies is first attested in

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 383–4

225

Lucretius (2.12 and 3.62) and also appears at Virg. A. 6.127; Man. 4.339; and Aetna 260. For the combination vastis . . . fluctibus, see Virg. A. 1.86 and 133; 3.421–2. Here, as at line 303, inter has an adverbial sense, and, according to Kleywegt (1986) 2470, it should be interpreted attributively with mare, as at 6.220. The verb perfurio is not very common (cf. TLL x/1.1426.70), but it is attested from Lucretius onwards, who uses it to describe precisely the frenzied sea at 1.275–6: ita perfurit acri | cum fremitu saevitque minaci murmure pontus. The verb also appears at Virg. A. 9.343 (at the beginning of a line, where it describes Euryalus’ rage); Stat. Theb. 4.389, 739, and 830; and Sil. 4.243. 383–4  expediant donec Iunonia sese | consilia: Following Langen’s model, Liberman offers the periphrasis donec Iuno consilia sua expediat. For the phrase expediant . . . sese, the TLL v/2.1606.43 cites only this passage, which it explains as se explicare, procedere. The combination sese expedire is attested beginning from Ter. Ph. 823 (cura sese expedivit), and it is rather common in prose, especially in military contexts; cf. Caes. Civ. 1.51.4: celeriter sese tamen Galli equites expedient; Liv. 21.46.5: consistit utrumque agmen et ad proelium sese expediebant; and Tac. Ann. 14.8.1: ut ad gratandum sese expedire. We should, therefore, understand VF’s poetic expression in its archaic sense of ‘to accomplish, achieve’ (cf. OLD s.v. 7) or ‘solve, clear up, settle’ (OLD s.v. 3). For the construction expedire consilia (‘to decide on a course of action’), cf. Cic. Fam. 10.33.5: itaque proximis litteris consilium meum expedietur; Hor. Epod. 11.25–6: unde expedire non amicorum queant | libera concilia nec contumeliae graves; Liv. 37.7.1: nec consilium expediebatur; Sen. Dial. 9.6.1: sententia consilium expediat. 384 atque aliquem bello ferat anxia finem: The description of the storm comes to a close by hinting at the one who started it, that is, Juno. This section ends with the significant word finem, denoting not only the end of the storm (the last one in the poem), but also (perhaps) the end of the Argonauts’ toils (cf. Deremetz [2014] 63). For the alliterative ferat . . . finem, cf. Virg. A. 3.145 (quam fessis finem rebus ferat). I believe that the adjective anxia predicatively modifies the implied subject, Juno (Contino [1973] 82; see also 81–2 for a survey of cases within the poem where nouns are elided), rather than Pallas (Loehbach [1872] 16).

385–467.  DISCUSSION ON MEDEA’S FATE AND THE MEETING BET WEEN JASON AND MEDEA In this final, incomplete section, VF returns to AR’s outline (4.338–95). The significant differences between the two accounts include the reasons why Medea is returned to the Colchians and the methods through which the return takes place: in AR, the Argonauts decide to entrust Medea to a local king so that he may pass judgment on who should obtain her, while in VF the Argonauts

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

226

Commentary, line 385

decide to hand her over to the Colchians in order to avoid dying in an uneven battle. One of this section’s strong themes is the inevitable deterioration of the relationship between Medea (who feels increasingly alone and betrayed) and Jason, who must confront an internal agony over the conflict between what he owes to his group as a leader and what he owes to his wife as a husband. Topics already announced in Jupiter’s Weltenplan return, particularly the motif of the clash between East and West (the Trojan War will serve as the first stage of this ongoing conflict), which Medea’s departure from Colchis brings about (see Penwill [2018] 82–3). The influence of VF’s Virgilian model is also quite strong, especially in regard to the breakdown of Dido and Aeneas’ relationship in the fourth book of the Aeneid, but also in regard to Amata’s speech at A. 7.359–405. The foreshadowing of future tragedies becomes ever more persistent, and the reader can feel the influence of Seneca’s Medea (especially concerning Medea’s conversations with Creon at Med. 179–300 and with Jason at Med. 431–578). The complexity (and richness) of Medea’s character emerges not only because of her depiction in VF’s sources (in both Greek and Roman tragedy and Virgil’s Dido), but also in the poet’s portrayal of the heroine as a powerful deity (by equating her to Magna Mater or to the Palladium), as an Erinys, or as a possessed Bacchant, even though always with a touch of sympathy. Indeed, although both Medea and Jason are now proceeding towards their tragic future, the poet adopts a forgiving attitude, since both are victims of events greater than they are (as well as victims of the weight of the mythological and literary tradition). The poem breaks off at line 467, probably because of the author’s death. The several interpretive problems and the possible lacunae in the final lines lead one to believe that VF did not have the time to give the necessary labor limae to his work. In any case, the numerous references to the Weltenplan and to other passages from the first book support the theory that this would have been the poem’s final book (which probably ended with the murder of Absyrtus). For in-­depth analysis, see Castelletti (2014b) and Pellucchi (2012) 389–403. 385  at Minyae tanti reputantes ultima belli: Caviglia describes this line as ‘Tacitean’ on account of its clear brachylogy. Langen paraphrases the expression ultima belli as ‘qualis tandem eventus belli futurus sit’, thus understanding (as Pellucchi [2012] 403 does) the verb reputare in the sense of ‘to reflect on, consider’ (cf. OLD s.v. 2). The word ultima frequently denotes an outcome (cf. OLD s.v. 6d), but here the Argonauts are not so much reflecting on the battle’s possible outcome as they are calculating its results (taking for granted that they will lose on account of the Colchians’ superiority in numbers). The sense of the word reputare (OLD s.v. 1) should, therefore, also be understood as ‘to ascertain by calculation’, in light of the analogous construction at 2.139: tardi reputant quae tempora belli. Soubiran accordingly translates accurately as ‘mais les Minyens, qui supputent l’issue d’un tel affrontement’.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 386–91

227

386–7 urguent et precibus cuncti fremituque fatigant | Aesoniden: The hyperbaton urguent . . . fatigant conveys the agitation and high degree of stress that his companions inflict upon Jason. The use of fatigare emphasizes the persistent nature of their requests (cf. TLL vi/1.348.66–7), and VF employs it in a iunctura with the word prex, which is attested in poetry beginning with Hor. Carm. 1.2.26–7: prece qua fatigent | virgines sanctae and sees frequent use in prose, especially in Livy (cf., e.g., 1.11.2: coniunx precibus raptarum fatigata; 27.45.10: fatigare precibus). The men also add threats to their entreaties, as indicated by the instrumental ablative fremitus, used here, as at 2.82 with the sense of murmur indignatum (cf. TLL vi/1.1280.1). For the patronymic Aesonides, cf. note on 105. 387–8  quid se externa pro virgine clausos | obiciat: For the elision of the pronoun se into externa, cf. note on 109. For the phrase externa . . . virgine, see 7.309–10: externo se prodere patrem | dura viro, where the perspective is reversed, since externus . . . vir (matching AR 3.795: ἀνέρος ἀλλοδαποῖο) is Jason. For this meaning of the adjective externus, cf. TLL v/2.2021.76. clausos repeats the same verb form as found in line 371 (cf. note ad loc.). The TLL ix/2.55.84 detects a negative undertone (prodendo) in how this passage employs the verb obicere, here used absolutely (as in Virg. A. 8.144–5 and Liv. 8.34.11) instead of the more common construction with a dative (e.g., periculo obicere). 388  quidve illa pati discrimina cogat: Note the anaphora with quid in the previous line. The collocation pati discrimina is a Valerian invention, but the poet uses the noun discrimina with the sense of ‘dangers, perils’ several times (cf. 1.37: discrimina ponti; 1.217: discrimina rerum, a clausula already present in Virg. A. 1.204; 4.619; 5.686; 7.426); cf. TLL v/1.1359.61. For the collocation cogat pati, see, e.g., Lucr. 2.291: cogatur ferre patique. 389–90  respiceret pluresque animas maioraque fata | tot comitum: Jason’s companions leverage both quantitative (they are plures compared to Medea alone) and qualitative arguments (their fata are maiora compared to that of a barbarian woman). Readers’ interpretations (and their subsequent translations) of the verb respicere vary between the meanings ‘to turn one’s attention to’ (cf. OLD s.v. 6) and ‘to have regard for, show concern for’ (OLD s.v. 8); for an account of the debate, cf. Pellucchi (2012) 404. The verb respicere also frequently serves to direct the reader’s attention towards the presence of a technopaignion, which in this case, is the acrostic PACE in lines 391–4 (see note on 394). The use of the word animae to refer to the Argonauts also appears in line 274 (cf. note ad loc.). For the collocation maiora . . . fata, cf. 4.126–7: maioraque . . . | vincunt fata Iovis. 390–1  qui non furiis nec amore nefando | per freta, sed sola sese virtute sequantur: The Argonauts thus claim that they are better than Medea (but also better than Jason), since they only follow Jason for the sake of virtus rather than

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

228

Commentary, lines 392–3

his madness of ill-­fated love. furiis and amore nefando constitute a hendiadys, just like furiis et crimine at 2.80. Furiis refers both to the motif of the furor of love (see line 2) and proleptically to the frenzy that this love will produce, namely the tragedy at Corinth and the future wars between populations, as confirmed by the presence of nefas implied in the adjective nefando. This is the only instance in the poem where the adjective nefandus is applied (indirecly) to a person (also found at 1.779; 2.396; 3.385; 4.42 and 516), but Medea has already been called nefanda at Sen. Med. 871: nefanda Colchis. These lines contain a clear echo of the outlook expressed at the beginning of the poem’s second part at 5.219–20: ventum ad furias infandaque natae | foedera et horrenda trepidam sub virgine puppem. 392–3  an vero ut thalamis raptisque indulgeat unus | coniugiis: On the connecting phrase an vero, only attested here in hexameter poetry but appearing in other forms of poetry beginning with Plautus and in prose beginning with Cicero, see Pellucchi (2012) 405. In this coordinate clause, the Argonauts call Jason’s virtus into question, wryly questioning whether the sole purpose of their voyage has been to enable him alone to delight in an abducted paramour. The poet uses indulgere as a technical verb from amatory vocabulary, referring to indulgence in pleasures (cf. Virg. G. 4.198 and other examples mentioned at TLL vii/1.1252.14–29). The collocation indulgent thalamis appears at 2.371: ­viduis . . . indulgent thalamis, but the verb’s connection with coniugiis does not appear elsewhere. Pellucchi (2012) 406 comments that thalamis and coniugiis do not constitute a hendiadys, since the latter term serves as a metonymy for the word uxor, in accordance with a usage first attested in Accius, Trag. 3 Dangel (cf. TLL iv.325.16–37). Also compare Ilias 301–2: cum memor Atrides raptae sibi coniugis instat | Dardaniumque premit iuvenem. Rather than emphasizing the anger of Jason’s companions (as Langen argues), I believe that we should read the plural nouns thalamis and coniugiis (commonly used in the plural) proleptically, as the use of the word raptis suggests (cf. note on 265). After all, Jason will not be the only one to delight in an abducted woman (line 399 alludes to Paris). 393  id tempus enim: This sentence lends itself to various interpretations, depending also on how one chooses to punctuate it. In the mouth of Jason’s companions, this declaration can in fact seem entirely sarcastic, since this is not the right moment for conjugal pleasures (this is how Langen, Summers, Dräger, Liberman, and Pellucchi interpret it), or we can read it as serious, with the sense that this is the right moment to hand Medea over and to resolve the conflict with the Colchians (Caviglia follows this reading, placing a period after the sentence and distinguishing it from the preceding questions). Given the sentence’s ambiguity (perhaps intentional), I prefer to separate it from what comes before and to end it with a question mark. If we do so, on the one hand, the question expresses all of the sarcasm that Jason’s companions direct at him,

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 393–4

229

but on the other hand, it also preserves the question’s entire sense when we compare it to Mopsus’ words (8.395–9), which make it clear that Paris’ time has not yet come. enim is not a poetic word (cf. Axelson [1945] 122–3), and when it occurs, it is generally as part of fixed formulas such as est enim, quis enim, neque enim, and sed enim. For this use of tempus, Liberman compares Virg. A. 12.156: non lacrimis hoc tempus, but also see 76: tempus . . . deflectere. The phrase id tempus enim appears in Col. 3.6.4: id enim tempus; Plin. Nat. 18.245: id enim noxium et exitiale ei est tempus; Gell. 17.8.2: id enim est tempus istic cenandi; see also Cic. Mur. 72: quod enim tempus fuit and Red. sen. 3: quod enim tempus erit. 393–4  sat vellera Grais | et posse oblata componere virgine bellum: The companions propose as a solution that they keep the Fleece but hand Medea over to the Colchians in order to put an end to the conflict. This is effectively what Absyrtus demands at AR 4.340, since he believes that the Argonauts have earned the Fleece, but not his sister. For the common collocation componere bellum, see TLL ii.1835.12–17. Here, the word oblata is synonymous with reddita (cf. TLL ix/2.501.32). In addition to the chiastic hyperbaton (VF’s stylistic ­trademark) between the expressions componere . . . bellum and oblata . . . virgine, this line also allows us to appreciate Valerius’ rewriting of his direct model, namely Virg. A. 12.109: oblato gaudens componi foedere bellum (from which VF  borrows the collocation componere bellum and where he substitutes the ablative oblateo . . . foedere with the ablative oblata . . . virgine). The Virgilian passage refers to Aeneas, who, after having equipped himself with the arms that his mother had provided, rejoices in the fact that the war between the Rutulians and the Trojans can now come to a close as a result of his duel with Turnus (who proposes the duel; cf. A. 12.75–80). VF, therefore, alludes to Virgil’s account but reverses its structure, since in the Aeneid the fighters prepare for bloodshed to obtain a girl (Lavinia) as a reward, whereas in AR and VF the Argonauts are willing to give up the girl (Medea) in order to avoid a massacre. In both cases, the ultimate goal is to establish peace. The poet practically puts his seal on their desire to end the war by constructing the acrostic PACE (lines 391–4), which concludes in line 394, the final word of which is bellum (for the collocation componere . . . pace, see, e.g., Liv. 26.40.2: nova pace inconditas componere res and Tac. Ann. 14.39.4: animos pace componi). On this acrostic, which the verb respiceret in line 389 serves to mark, see Castelletti (2008) 230–1 and (2014b) 67–8. 395–9  In these lines, the poet finally makes explicit what he had previously implied several times, namely the causal link between the Argonauts’ ex­ped­ ition and the future clashes between different peoples, in primis the Trojan War. The clear allusion to Jupiter’s Weltenplan establishes yet another connection between the poem’s first and eighth books, thus providing further evidence in support of the theory that the work was composed in eight books. On these

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

230

Commentary, lines 395–8

lines, and particularly on the topic of the Trojan War in VF, see Barnes (1981); Zissos (2008) xli; Pellucchi (2012) xxv–xxvi; Fucecchi (2014) 117 and 132–3; and Davis (2014) 196–9. 395  quemque suas sinat ire domos: For the construction consisting of the hortatory subjunctive sinat and an infinitive, cf. L-­H-­Sz 356. For the phrase ire domos, compare Prop. 3.11.12: iret ut Aesonias aurea lana domos. 395–6  nec Marte cruento | Europam atque Asiam prima haec committat Erinys: For Mars as a metonymy for bellum, cf. 1.223 and 810; 5.276 and 598; 6.39, 156, 436, 602, and 751. For the use of the collocation Europam atque Asiam at the beginning of a line, VF could count upon a series of Virgilian precedents, such as A. 1.385: Europa atque Asia; 7.224: Europae atque Asiae; but especially 10.91: Europamque Asiamque (which Statius adopts three times at Ach. 1.82, 410, and 730), referring to the same conflict. See also Prop. 2.3.35–6: quod tanti ad Pergama belli | Europae atque Asiae causa puella fuit and Catull. 68.69: Troia – nefas – commune sepulcrum Asiae Europaeque. Langen notes that we must understand Erinys as referring to Medea, thus referencing Virg. A. 2.573: Troiae et patriae communis Erinys (Helen), and that Virgil himself could count upon an already established Greek tradition, especially in tragedy (e.g., Aesch. Ag. 749; Eur. Andr. 103; Or. 250; Tr. 459). Liberman 2.389 adds Ps-­Sen. Oct. 23: illa, illa meis tristis Erinys (Agrippina). VF employs the word Erinys as a metonymy for the frenzy of war at 4.617: castra ibi iam Scythiae fraternaque surgit Erinys. 397–8  namque datum hoc fatis trepidus supplexque canebat | Mopsus: In light of the thorough analysis in Liberman 2.389–90 n. 225, I adopt the punc­tu­ ation that became common starting from Courtney onwards, who deletes the comma after fatis. As a result, the words trepidus supplexque canebat | Mopsus serve as the main clause and govern the other three phrases that comprise this sentence (the infinitive datum hoc fatis, with esse elided, depends upon canebat, while the two complementary clauses introduced by ut depend upon supplex). For the construction supplex with ut, Liberman 2.390 compares Cic. Sull. 18 and Tusc. 3.77. The demonstrative hoc refers to the clash between Europe and Asia that fate has already put in place (datum). trepidus conveys the fear that these divine words inspire rather than Mopsus’ potential alarm; cf. 1.210: vox horrenda viris and 1.228: terrificat (perhaps this passage influences Stat. Theb. 8.151–2: sed Mopsus idem trepidusque ferebat | Actor idem, with Augoustakis ad loc. and Theb. 3.547–9). The collocation trepidus supplexque appears only here. On Mopsus, see note on 248. 398 ut in seros irent magis ista nepotes: All modern editors except for Giarratano accept the variant ista, printed in the editio Bononiensis, in place of the transmitted ipsa. According to Mozley and TLL vii/2.1844.67, ista refers to the abduction of Medea, but other commentators (e.g., Liberman) read it as a reference to the war between Europe and Asia. There have been numerous

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 399–400

231

­ roposals for emending the text, including Burman’s iret magis ira (for a list of p other suggestions, see Pellucchi [2012] 409 and Liberman 2.390), but none of them really solve the problem. Also see Perutelli’s note on 7.247 (istaque) for the confusion of iste and ipse (cf. also Davis’s note ad loc.). Here, the poet uses magis in place of potius (cf. Langen on 5.563 for a survey of similar cases). According to Summers (1894) 41 and TLL v/2.650.17, the expression in . . . irent . . . nepotes is a reworking of nefas eat in nepotes of Sen. Thy. 29. Given the context and the place of nepotes in the clausula, I believe that VF is thinking of the end of Dido’s tirade at Virg. A. 4.629: pugnent ipsique nepotesque. One wonders then whether we should restore the transmitted ipsa. 399  atque alius lueret tam dira incendia raptor: The alius . . . raptor is Paris (labelled as a Phrygius raptor at Stat. Silv. 5.1.57; on the word raptor, see note on 265). The phrase lueret . . . incendia is intentionally ambiguous. As Soubiran (2002) 296 suggests, the poet plays upon both the literal and the figurative meanings of the word incendia (for the latter, cf. Virg. A. 1.566: tanti incendia belli) in order to demonstrate that an abductor (Paris) will pay (lueret) with his own life for the horrible burning of Troy and/or that an abductor will make the Greeks pay (i.e. will retaliate) for the terrible conflict (which may have been caused by Medea’s abduction). For luo in the sense of ‘to suffer by way of ex­pi­ ation, pay as a fine’, cf. OLD s.v. 1a and b and TLL vii/2.1841.18. Pellucchi (2012) 410 highlights that the adjective dira applies to incendia and can have different undertones, such as atrocia (cf. TLL v/1.1273.35) and fatalia, calamitatem portendentia (TLL vii/2.1844.69). 400–4  As critics have noted, these lines are inspired by Virg. A. 4.393–6: at pius Aeneas, quamquam lenire dolentem | solando cupit et dictis avertere curas, | multa gemens magnoque animum labefactus amore | iussa tamen divum exsequitur classemque revisit. In both cases, the leaders (Aeneas and Jason) feel pity for the women they love, but they ultimately will not hesitate to betray them. After his companions complain, Jason must make a difficult decision: he must either honour his fides and religio towards Medea (to which we may add pudor of line 464), or he must comply with his companions’ wishes. His personal interests are therefore in conflict with the needs of the many, thus undermining his position as leader. Jason’s wavering between his duty as captain and his obligations as a lover is expressed by his hesitation whether to hold Medea tightly and face the Colchians directly or to listen to his companions. See ­further Pellucchi (2012) 391–2 and Fucecchi (2014) 132–3. 400  ille trahens gemitum tantis ac vocibus impar: VF also uses the iunctura trahere gemitum (-us) at 4.135. Its first attestation is at Ov. Met. 11.709, but (as Pellucchi [2012] 410 notes) it may date back to Ennius’ Andromacha, if we accept Ribbeck’s trahens in the fragment: sed quasi aut ferrum aut lapis | durat rarenter gemitum †conatur trabem† (fr. 32 Goldberg/Manuwald, who obelize

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

232

Commentary, lines 401–6

trabem). For the collocation vocibus impar, compare Calp. Ecl. 2.3–4: nec impar | voce. 401–2  quamquam iura deum et sacri sibi conscia pacti | religio dulcisque movent primordia taedae: For the use of quamquam with the indicative, cf. note on 205. For the construction religio conscia sibi with genitive, cf. TLL iv.372.31–55. On the complexity of the term religio in the poem, cf. Zissos on 1.180; see also Manuwald (2009) 591–2 and Castelletti (2014b) 176 for Jason’s wavering between gloria and religio as his primary motivation for undertaking the expedition. dulcis . . . primordia taedae refers to the marriage that began at line 220. The adjective dulcis is common in marriage contexts, as is the metonymy taedae for nuptiae, first used at Catull. 64.302 (cf. OLD s.v. 2 and Langen ad loc.). 403–4  cunctatur †mortemque cupit sociamque pericli | cogitat. haut ultra sociis obsistere pergit†: The text as transmitted poses problems regarding consistency and has been emended in various ways (see Liberman 2.390–1 and Pellucchi [2012] 411). In addition to the incongruous mortemque cupit (not a heroic sentiment, even if Jason displays great weaknesses), the main problem concerns how to reconcile the abrupt shift from cunctatur . . . cogitat to haut ultra . . . pergit (the only part of the text that all editors seem to agree is genuine). Schenkl’s conjecture Martemque for mortemque seems to capture the right sense (for Martem as a metonymy for bellum, cf. note on 395). But it seems risky to me to print the rest of the text as it is without supposing that there is a lacuna (Pellucchi follows Caviglia in suspecting that there is one), despite VF’s weighty and concise usus scribendi. Indeed, as Liberman observes, the phrase haec ubi fixa viris (405) cannot be connected to anything specific from the preceding lines. I accordingly choose to obelize, since the missing portion of the text may be far longer than a simple hemistich placed either before or after cogitat (Bury, Baehrens, Schenkl, Kramer, Courtney, Soubiran, and Liberman have also proposed various lacunas), and the version of the text transmitted to us might have been reconstructed by an editor after VF, who used fragments of the poem that were left incomplete (cf. Liberman 2.391). The construction of socius (here with the sense of ‘a person who shares a responsibility’; cf. OLD s.v. 2) and the genitive pericli (a syncopated form of periculi, cf. 5.229 and 6.474) is common; cf., e.g., Sen. Ag. 234: tu nos pericli socia, tu, Leda sata; Cic. Fam. 13.71.1; Tac. Hist. 3.60. cogitat has the sense of ‘to take into account’ (OLD s.v. 8b) or rather ‘to  worry about’ (here to worry about the one united in danger with him, sociam . . . pericli). 405  haec ubi fixa viris: viris is a dative of agent governed by the participle fixa (cf. TLL vi/1.717.84), as at 5.288: stat pectore fixum (with implied mihi). 405–6  tempus fluctusque quietos | expectant: For the meaning of the word tempus, cf. note on 393. The phrase tempus ex(s)pectare is common, especially

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 406–9

233

in prose (e.g., Cic. Verr. 2.1.81; Phil. 10.9.1; Fam. 11.1.4), but see Ov. Met. 9.722: pactaeque exspectat tempora taedae. VF combines it with the Virgilian clausula fluctusque quietos (A. 5.848). 406–7  ipsam interea quid restet amantem | ignorare sinunt: For the practice of postponing the adverb interea until the second word in a statement (a typical feature of poetic texts), see TLL vii/1.2183.61. For sinunt used with an infinitive, cf. note on 395. Liberman 2.391 suspects that the word restet (which has this same meaning at 1.458) should read constet (for the confusion between con- and re-, see the observations in Delz [1992] 250 on Stat. Silv. 4.3.122). 407  decretaque tristia servant: The question of how exactly we should understand the verb servare has provoked debate. The verb is used absolutely, but Lemaire the­or­izes that there is an implied sub pectore (on the model of Virg. A. 1.36: aeternum servans sub pectore volnus) and accordingly interprets servant in the sense of celant. According to Liberman 2.391–2, the typical meaning of the phrase decreta servare is equivalent to decreta observare (as in Cic. Att. 16.16b.8; Sen. Oed. 985). Despite the verb’s various possible nuances (‘to conserve, maintain, observe, hide’), the resulting image is that the Argonauts have made a decision on what to do (cf. fixa viris of line 405) and keep this choice hidden from Medea (since their plan is disadvantageous for her; cf. tristia). For decreta, a rather uncommon poetic plural that also appears at 464, cf. TLL v/1.156.65. Also compare Sen. Oed. 985–6: servatque suae decreta colus | Lachesis dura revoluta manu. 408–67  Medea’s response and her meeting with Jason. According to Mehmel (1934) 96, this scene should be counted among the best in the poem. Considering the scene’s structure and content, it is clear that the poet is rewriting AR 4.350– 95 (where Medea criticizes Jason for failing to fulfil the promises he made and expresses fear at the prospect of being returned to her family), while also evoking Virgilian passages, especially A. 4.296–332 (in which Dido confronts Aeneas after she learns that the Trojans are preparing to leave) and Amata’s speech at A. 7.359–405. I would add Seneca’s Medea, particularly the scenes depicting Medea’s conversations with Creon in lines 179–300 and with Jason in lines 431–587. For a detailed study of VF’s work in adapting his models, see Pellucchi (2012) 392–403. 408–9  sed miser ut vanos, veros ita saepe timores | versat amor fallique sinit nec virginis annos: At AR 4.350–90, Medea realizes that Jason is planning to betray her, but the Greek poet does not explain how she does so. Conversely, VF picks up the typical motif of the deceived lover’s intuition which appears in his Virgilian model: cf. A. 4.296–8: at regina dolos (quis fallere possit amantem) | praesensit motusque excepit prima futuros | omnia tuta timens. We can also detect other Virgilian echoes in VF, particularly allusions to A. 4.12–13: credo

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

234

Commentary, lines 410–11

equidem, nec vana fides, genus esse deorum. | Degeneres animos timor arguit (on which Servius provides the gloss nec enim ‘vana fides’ est, id est falsa: nam ‘degeneres animos arguit timor’, id est probat, inpugnat). Pellucchi (2012) 413 also compares Ov. Her. 1.12: res est solliciti plena timoris amor and highlights the development of the passage’s rhetorical tone, as it contains a hyperbaton in enjambment (miser . . . | . . . amor), a chiasmus (ut vanos veros ita), an alliteration with homoeoteleuton (vanos, veros), and a powerful antithesis (vanos contrasting with veros). The iunctura miser . . . amor is of Catullan origin (cf. 91.2 and 99.15), also adopted by Tib. 1.2.91; 1.9.1; cf. also Virg. A. 5.655; Ov. Rem. 21, 657; and Met. 14.703. The collocation vanos . . . timores has an elegiac ancestry (Ps-­ Tib. 3.4.13); cf. VF 6.459: veros metuens aperire timores. versare timores is a Valerian iunctura (almost an inversion of Prop. 3.17.12: spesque timorque animos versat utroque modo), for which Langen compares the expressions versare dolos (e.g., Virg. A. 2.62; 4.563), versare curas (Virg. A. 5.701), versare consilia (Virg. A. 1.657), and vertere questus at VF 7.6. For the construction sino with an infinitive, cf. note on 395. As at 4.200; 7.130 and 435, nec has the sense of ne . . . quidem (cf. Summers [1894] 47). As Liberman 2.307 n. 156 observes, annus is synonymous with ‘youth’ (cf. TLL ii.119.33–62), a metaphor that Virgil introduces and VF employs often (3.179; 5.457; 6.571; 7.295). The clausula virginis annos (according to Spaltenstein equivalent to the phrase annos virgineos) echoes the Ovidian virginis annis (Her. 21.11; Met. 10.440; Tr. 3.7.17) and Virginis anni at Man. 3.573. 410  ac prior ipsa dolos et quamlibet intima sensit: VF echoes Virg. A. 4.296–7: at regina dolos . . . | praesensit. The Virgilian praesensit is broken down into prior . . . sensit, where the adverb prior can mean ‘before anyone says it’ (according to Langen) or ‘before it happens’ (as Spaltenstein reads it). The poet reuses prior in line 413. Langen compares a series of passages for the motif of something coming into one’s mind, including Lucr. 4.129; Virg. A. 2.174; and Ov. Ars 2.479. Pellucchi (2012) 414 argues that ac has a slightly adversative meaning (cf. L-­H-­Sz 478). Liberman 2.392 notes that this is the only time that quamlibet appears in epic, but it can be found in other poetic texts (such as Lucr. 5.1263; Hor. Epod. 11.23; Germ. Arat. 176 Gain; Prop. 4.11.149) and is common in Ovid (e.g., Met. 10.119). The adjective intimus is synonymous with arcanus (cf. TLL vii/1.2213.10) and appears in a iunctura with the word signum (411) only here and at Plaut. Rud. 673: ab signo intimo. The clausula intima sensit adapts Ov. Her. 16.135: obstipui praecordiaque intima sensi. 411  non fidi iam signa viri: The adjective fidus sees common use as an epithet for the word vir (here with the meaning of ‘husband’, since Jason and Medea have just recently held their wedding); cf. TLL vi/1.704.3649–51, but here it notably has particular weight, since Medea openly calls Jason’s fides into question, a motif that will prove to be critical in their story’s tragic development. See Lovatt (2019) 100–3 on this final quarrel of the poem.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 411–14

235

411–12  nimiumque silentes | una omnes: On this silence, which makes Medea suspicious, see Anzinger (2007) 228. The situation at Virg. A. 4.298–9 is different, as there Fama is the one to spread the news that the Trojans are leaving, whereas AR’s Medea already knows all about the Argonauts’ plans (4.350). For the topos of the silence of the guilty, Spaltenstein compares Hor. Epod. 7.15–16: tacent et albus ora pallor inficit | mentesque perculsae stupent. As at 1.501, the adverb una strengthens omnes (for this Valerian habit, cf. note on 281: omnes . . . pariter). OLD s.v. una 2a cites this passage with the meaning of ‘in one and the same action, together’. 412–13  As critics have noted, the Valerian Medea reacts to the prospect of her abandonment differently from both the Greek and the Virgilian models. Dido raves like a Bacchant (cf. A. 4.300–3), while AR’s Medea, despite feeling some pain, remains composed (cf. 4.351). The Valerian Medea at first remembers who she is and remains clear-­headed and calm, but then takes the initiative to address Jason forcefully (at this point VF returns to following his models). 412  haud illa sui tamen immemor umquam: The Ovidian immemor . . . sui (cf. Am. 3.7.76; Met. 10.171; Tr. 4.2.24; Pont. 1.3.36) recalls what Medea says to the dragon/Aeetes at 103 (immemor, oro, mei), but in this case the outlook on the matter has been reversed, as underlined by the words haud and tamen. During this upwelling of pride, Medea feels not only her royal dignity, but especially the weight of his­tor­ic­al memory that weighs upon her character (consider the Ovidian sit Medea ferox and the Senecan Medea nunc sum), which will soon display a dark side. 413  nec subitis turbata minis: On the correlative haud . . . nec (appearing also at 7.650–1 and 8.79–80), which serves to negate an entire sentence (a usage characteristic of archaic Latin that begins with Lucr. 5.373), see Austin on Virg. A. 1.327. minae should be understood in the sense of ‘threat, danger’, cf. TLL viii.992.83–4. This passage is the only place where the word appears as part of a iunctura with subitae. 413–14  prior occupat unum | Aesoniden longeque trahit: For Medea’s verbal aggression, compare Virg. A. 4.304 (tandem his Aenean compellat vocibus ultro) and AR 4.352–4 (αἶψα δὲ νόσφιν Ἰήσονα μοῦνον ἑταίρων | ἐκπροκαλεσσαμένη ἄγεν ἄλλυδις, ὄφρ’ ἐλίασθεν | πολλὸν ἑκάς). As Pellucchi (2012) 416 notes, the use of the verb occupo to introduce speech (‘praevalente notione praeveniendi, praesumendi’; cf. TLL ix/2.389.41) is a feature of the sermo cotidianus (cf. Turp. Com. 212 Rychlewska; Hor. Sat. 1.9.6) that migrated into the language of Flavian epic. VF also uses it at 1.39 and 2.137. The expression prior occupat also appears at 6.198 (albeit in a different metrical position) and is common in Statius (in the same metrical position); cf. Theb. 11.500: prior occupat hastae; Theb. 12.148: prior occupat ore; Ach. 1.711: prior occupat acer. The adjective unum (‘only, the one and only, alone’, OLD s.v. 7) adapts μοῦνον of AR 4.352. For the action expressed

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

236

Commentary, lines 414–16

through longeque trahit (cf. Luc. 4.757: defecta gravis longe trahit ilia pulsus), Pellucchi (2012) 416 compares 3.372–3. 414  mox talibus infit: talibus infit is a Virgilian clausula (cf. A. 10.861) serving to introduce direct discourse that VF employs three times (here, at 1.666, and at 2.610). infit appears as early as in archaic Latin (it introduces direct speech in Enn. Ann. 385 Skutsch), but becomes common in Virgil (six times) and in his successors (four times in VF, twice in Statius, and eight times in Silius). 415–44  Medea’s speech. Jason and Medea’s conversation also occurs in AR 4.355–90, but in addition to using a different structure, the Roman poet renders it in a more elevated style and with more rhetorical polish (cf. Soubiran [2002] 297). For a detailed analysis of the differences between the two authors’ accounts, cf. Pellucchi (2012) 394–6. 415  me quoque, quid tecum Minyae, fortissima pubes: The beginning of Medea’s speech recalls the opening of the corresponding address in AR 4.355–6: Αἰσονίδη, τίνα τήνδε συναρτύνασθε μενοινήν | ἀμφ’ ἐμοί; Summers (1894) 26 consults the Greek source text in order to confirm Thilo’s reading quid tecum (a conjecture of Heinsius) in place of the transmitted vittae cum. The majority of modern editors have followed this reading, with the exception of Giarratano, Kramer, Mozley, and Ehlers, who accept the variant vir, tecum, found in a humanistic manuscript (according to Liberman 2.392, this would be Niccoli’s conjecture), and Baehrens, who proposes quin tecum. Spaltenstein, Soubiran, and Dräger detect an ironic streak in the words fortissima pubes (indeed, Medea will say that they are scared in lines 427 and 436). fortissime of 7.67 (which Aeetes says of Jason) is also ironic (cf. Perutelli ad loc.), as it is, e.g., at Ov. Met. 13.278 (where Odysseus uses it for Ajax). In 7.11 Medea is still speaking genuinely when she calls Jason iuvenis fortissime. Clearly, her opinion of him has changed, as the ironic fidissime coniunx of line 419 confirms. 416  nocte dieque movent: The expression nocte dieque is common in poetry (cf. TLL v/1.1038.13–16) and is already present in archaic Latin; cf. Laev. fr. 2 Blänsdorf. VF also uses it (at the beginning of a hexameter) at 2.281. See also diem noctemque volant in line 175. movent has the sense of moliuntur (as Langen observes), as it does at 1.757 (quid moveat?). On this irregular use of the indicative verb movent rather than the typical subjunctive in an indirect question, see L-­H-­Sz 537–40. Contino (1973) 50–2 discusses three other such instances in the poem (1.277–82; 7.118–20; 8.64–6) and attributes the practice to a desire for variatio modorum; cf. K-­S 2.494. According to Pellucchi (2012) 418, in the three cases Contino cites the variatio occurs after a preceding, typical use of the subjunctive, but this passage only contains the indicative, and we should, therefore, consider it unique. In order to fix this anomaly, Thilo proposes the conjecture novent, which Hudson-­Williams (1959) 62 n. 5 defends (comparing multa novantem at 5.303), but only Courtney accepts.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 417–20

237

417–18  These lines develop the themes of slavery and deception, which Hecate’s gloomy prophecy at 6.500–2 predicts: magna fugae monumenta dabis, spernere nec usquam | mendaci captiva viro meque ille magistram | sentiet et raptu famulae doluisse pudenda (see Fucecchi ad loc.). The plural noun dominos in line 418, which refers to all the Argonauts, confirms that Medea feels that she is a slave (captiva, 417) taken in war rather than a slave to love (although captiva and dominus are terms connected with the motif of the servitium amoris). The topic of deceit (decepta, 418) also appears at Virg. A. 4.330: non equidem omnino capta ac deserta viderer. Note also the several verbal echoes of Ov. Her. 3.66–8, where the captiva in question is Briseis, who is writing to Achilles (thus making another implicit reference to the Trojan War): si tibi iam reditusque placent patriique Penates, | non ego sum classi sarcina magna tuae. | Victorem captiva sequar, non nupta maritum. For the use of captiva to refer to a prisoner taken in the Trojan War, see also Sen. Tro. 911 and 988. 416–17 liceat cognoscere tandem, | si modo Peliacae non sum captiva ­carinae: Pellucchi (2012) 418 correctly observes that the clause si . . . non sum, governed by the periphrasis liceat cognoscere (for which, cf. Ps-­Tib. 3.5.23), introduces a hypothesis with a restrictive and non-­interrogative sense, as indicated in Contino (1973) 49. si modo is equivalent to dummodo (cf. L-­H-­Sz 673). For the construction captiva with genitive, cf. TLL iii.373.33–5. The periphrasis Peliacae . . . carinae refers to the Argo, which was made out of wood from Mt Pelion (cf. 1.94–5). The adjective Peliacus (from Greek Πηλιακός; cf. AP 16.110.4) is first attested at Catull. 64.1 (Peliaco quondam prognatae vertice pinus) and appears in VF 1.95 and 406; 3.353; and 8.451. The adjective’s ancient form Pelius can be found in the prologue to Ennius’ Medea (in nemore Pelio); Phaed. 4.7.6; and Plin. Nat. 4.30. 418  nec dominos decepta sequor: For the collocation dominum sequi, compare Hor. Carm. 2.14.24: ulla brevem dominum sequetur; Man. 2.81; and Sen. Tro. 993. Note the alliteration in dominos decepta. 418–19  consultaque vestra | fas audire mihi: For the construction fas . . . mihi with infinitive, cf. 1.508 and 7.208. In the seventh book, Medea refers constantly to what is fas. In this case, it has an ironic (and almost scornful) tinge, since the poet only uses the word consulta (TLL iv.586.58) elsewhere at 1.241 (superum quando consulta videtis) in order to refer to the deliberations of the gods. For the use of fas est with infinitive in indignant contexts, cf. note on 272. 419–20 vereor, fidissime coniunx, | nil equidem: All recent editors after Caviglia and Ehlers, who adopt Shackleton Bailey’s conjecture merear, uphold the reading from the codices, vereor (which White [2007] 264 also maintains). Medea’s dismissive and sarcastic tone in these lines argues in favour of her making a dec­lar­ation (vereor . . . nil) that could otherwise seem too bold

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

238

Commentary, lines 420–4

in her challenging situation. Liberman also compares Virg. A. 9.207–8: equidem de te nil tale verebar | nec fas. Fidissime coniunx is a masculine variant of the Ovidian clausula fidissima coniunx (Pont. 1.4.45), adopted at Ilias 564 and Sil. 3.133. 420–2  miserere . . . -que serva | . . . | . . . -que . . . sperne: As is usual (cf. TLL viii.1119.67–80), a second coordinate imperative (serva) follows the imperative form of the verb misereor, and here the poet adds a third imperative (sperne), with both linked by the enclitic -que. On the motif of pity, Pellucchi (2012) 420 compares Virg. A. 4.318: miserere domus labentis. 420–1  promissaque serva | . . . conubia: We can find a similar, although far more sarcastic, request in AR 4.356–8. The collocation conubia servare appears elsewhere only at Virg. A. 3.319. 421  usque ad Thessalicos saltem . . . portus: The Thessalici portus are the ports of Iolcus, that is, the Pagasae (cf. 5.191) ports from which the Argonauts set sail (cf. AR 1.238, 318, 524, and VF 1.171) and which Medea will try to see in line 451. For Medea’s fear of being handed back over to her family, cf. lines 50–3. Following Liberman, Pellucchi (2012) 421 notes that the motif of granting the slightest concession (saltem) to a heroine who is about to be abandoned is already present in Catullus (64.160–3) and Virgil (A. 4.429–30); compare also the single night that Creon (ruinously) grants to Euripides’ Medea, in light of other examples of prolepsis that appear in this passage (see note on 422). 422  inque tua me sperne domo: This is yet another example of a tragic allusion (spe­cif­ic­al­ly of what will happen at Corinth, where Jason will reject Medea in favour of Creusa) that the knowledgeable reader can detect, but the characters involved cannot (cf. Hershkowitz [1998] 17). According to Liberman 2.393, the poet uses sperne in place of repudia metri causa (on which, see Treggiari [1991] 435–41). 422–3  scis te mihi certe, | non socios iurasse tuos: As Liberman 2.393 observes, scis . . . certe (compare scis nempe of line 49) is equivalent to the phrase certe non ignoras, thus making the emendation of scis into scio, as proposed by Sandstroem (1878) 43, unnecessary. For the contracted form iurasse, cf. Contino (1973) 21. The oath to which Medea refers may be the one from 7.497–500, or the oath made during the wedding ceremony (cf. promissam fidem of line 249). Soubiran also draws attention to the oaths mentioned at AR 4.357–90. 423–4  hi reddere forsan | fas habeant, tibi non eadem permissa potestas: The Argonauts have no formal obligations concerning Medea, but Jason is bound by his marriage vows (and morals). Following Manitius (1889) 250, Liberman 2.393 compares Virg. A. 9.95–7: immortale carinae | fas habeant? . . . | . . . cui tanta deo permissa potestas? and suggests that the text should read fas

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 425–8

239

habeant. The clausula permissa potestas also appears at Luc. 1.595 and Sil. 11.512. 425  teque simul mecum ipsa traham: Soubiran compares Sen. Med. 427–9 (sola est quies, | mecum ruina cuncta si video obruta: | mecum omnia abeant. trahere, cum pereas, libet) and Luc. 7.654–5 (nec, sicut mos est miseris, trahere omnia secum | mersa iuvat gentesque suae miscere ruinae). For trahere with the meaning of ‘to drag down in ruins’, cf. OLD s.v. 8b and Sen. Her. F. 307: omnes trahe. See also Sen. Oed. 643–4: te pater inultus urbe cum tota petam | et mecum Erinyn pronubam thalami traham. 425–6  non sola reposcor | virgo nocens: Medea correctly points out to Jason that she is not the only culprit being pursued by the Colchians, but that they are also chasing him and the other Argonauts. For reposco in the sense of ‘to demand back’, cf. OLD s.v. 1. The word nocens plays a key role in the Ovidian Medea’s letter to Jason (cf. Ov. Her. 12.106: nunc tibi sum pauper, nunc tibi visa nocens and 117–18: nec tamen extimui (quid enim post illa timerem?) | credere me pelago, femina iamque nocens); there, like here, it proleptically alludes to her future vengeance. Pellucchi (2012) 422 also compares Sen. Med. 498–9: restat hoc unum insuper, | tuis ut etiam sceleribus fiam nocens (Jason is speaking), but see also the intriguing parallel at Enn. Iph. 205 Jocelyn (Adesp. 124 TrRF): pro male­ factis Helena redeat, virgo pereat innocens? 426  atque hac pariter rate fugimus omnes: Burman casts doubt on the reading omnes found in the codices and proposes emending it to ambo (which Schenkl and Baehrens defend). All modern editors correctly return to the text as transmitted, not only because it is far more logical to think that all the Argonauts (in addition to Medea) are fleeing (as well as are pursued by the Colchians), but also since VF’s usus scribendi often tends to strengthen the adverb pariter with the adjective omnes (cf. line 281). The perfect tense verb fugimus refers to the moment at which Medea and the Argonauts left Colchis (as Spaltenstein notes). Soubiran compares Sen. Med. 447: fugimus, Iason, fugimus. 427–8  an fratris te bella mei patriaeque biremes | terrificant: Liberman (following Burman’s example) is perhaps correct in choosing to follow the variant at from the editio Aldina, but Medea’s sarcasm permeates the passage and makes, therefore, a direct question addressed to Jason (whose courage is being called into question) seem like a more probable reading. All other modern editors after Liberman accept the transmitted an. The majority of commentators have understood bella in its literal sense (cf. TLL ii.1825.53), but Liberman (who also proposes emending it to tela) and Spaltenstein see it with a reference to the troops born from the earth (mentioned in line 430). The word biremes is an anachronism (compared to what is said in lines 287–9) that is already present at Virg. A. 1.182: Phrygiasque biremis (this clausula probably inspired VF). As

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

240

Commentary, lines 428–30

Spaltenstein notes, we can understand biremes in both Virgil and VF simply as a synonym for ‘a ship (of war)’. For ships with two rows of oars, see also Hor. Carm. 3.29.62 and Luc. 8.562. We can read patriae as a synonym for Colchis (as TLL ii.2004.52 and Mozley do) or as a reference to the figure of Medea’s father (with Caviglia, Liberman, Soubiran, Dräger, and Pellucchi). The verb terrificant echoes terrificat (in the same metrical position) that the poet uses to comment on Mopsus’ prophecies at 1.227–8: iamdudum Minyas ambage ducemque | terrificat. The poet thus creates yet another connection between the first and the eighth books, since these are the only two times in the poem where the verb terrificare appears (although it is rarely used in poetry, and, when it is, it always appears at the beginning of a line (cf. Lucr. 1.133 and 4.62; Virg. A. 4.210; Stat. Theb. 7.678; and Sil. 17.475). 428  magnoque impar urgueris ab hoste: The adjective magnus is only applied to the noun hostis here and at Liv. 42.49.2: cum ad magnum nobilemque aut virtute aut fortuna hostem euntem consulem prosecuntur. The iunctura ef­fect­ ive­ly (compare B. Alex. 30.2.5: itaque non magno intervallo relicto ab hoste, with a different syntax) replaces more common periphrases like cum magna multitudine hostium premeretur (Caes. Gall. 5.37.5), magnum hostium numerum (Caes. Civ. 1.51.5), magnam vim hostium circumvenit (Liv. 3.5.9), and magna vis hostium (Liv. 26.6.5; Sen. Dial. 6.25.4). For the construction urg(u)eri ab hoste, cf. Virg. A. 10.375: mortali urgemur ab hoste. 429–30  finge rates alias et adhuc maiora coire | agmina: For the construction fingere with infinitive, already attested at Adesp. 131.3 TrRF (finge advenam esse), cf. OLD s.v. 8. According to Langen, the expression adhuc maiora (used by Sil. 4.476 and 6.711 in the same metrical position) means etiam maiora. Liberman 2.393 observes that rates and agmina pick up bella and biremes of line 427 in chiasmus. The phrase coire agmina is adopted (in the same metrical position) by Sil. 12.380–2: prorumpit latebris, adversaque late | agmina inhorrescunt, longumque coire videtur | et conferre gradum. 430  nulla fides, nullis ego digna periclis: With this question, Medea introduces the list of favours for Jason and the Argonauts, which will continue until line 440. The passage’s principal model is AR 4.360–8, to which we may add Virg. A. 4.320–3. In terms of structure, the line is quite similar to 3.704: dextera? nulla fides, nulli super Hercule fletus? (see the detailed analysis in Pellucchi [2012] 424). Soubiran (2002) 297 notes the polysemy of the word fides, which can mean ‘faith’ but also ‘staying true to one’s word’. Pellucchi (2012) 424 rightly observes that digna periclis represents an adjectival form of variatio on the expression dignare periclis, which appears at 1.57 (yet another echo between the two books). For a list of syncopated forms that appear in the poem (periclis = periculis), cf. Contino (1973) 19. Soubiran and Spaltenstein correctly understand nullis ego digna periclis as ‘am I not worth risk on your part (the risk of dying for me)?’

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 431–4

241

431  non merui mortemque tuam comitumque tuorum: Langen reads the text as non vetui (equivalent to arcui) mortem tuam, while Liberman restores Heinsius’s conjecture in emending mortem tuam to Martemque tuum. We can, however, keep the text as transmitted (as all other modern editors do, with the exception of Ehlers, who erroneously prints comitem), if we consider that this sentence naturally follows what Medea says in the previous line (‘I deserve that you and your companions risk your lives for me because of what I have done for you’). The alliterations on the sounds m and t are noteworthy, in a­ ddition to the polyptoton tuam . . . tuorum highlighted by the caesuras (as Pellucchi [2012] 424 notes). 432–3  vellem equidem nostri tetigissent litora patris | te sine: Medea’s wish that Jason had never come to Colchis (as this was the cause of all of her future troubles) has its source in the prologue to Euripides’ Medea. As Pellucchi (2012) 425 observes, the common motif of blaming the root cause of one’s sufferings begins with Ennius’ translation of the opening of Euripides’ Medea; for a history of this motif, see Hross (1958) 43–9; Desbordes (1979); and Pellucchi (2008b). It is difficult to establish which model exactly inspires the Valerian reworking, and even more difficult to identify the source of the iunctura tetigissent litora, which appears both at Catull. 64.172–6 (. . . tetigissent litora puppes, at line 173) and in Virg. A. 4.657–8 (felix, heu nimium felix, si litora tantum | numquam Dardaniae tetigissent nostra carinae). VF’s innovation on these cited models lies in Medea’s lament only for Jason’s arrival, te sine, but not the arrival of the expedition’s other members (as Ariadne and Dido do). For the anastrophe te sine at the beginning of a line (already at Virg. A. 12.883), cf. 1.765 and 5.44, all passages in which a feral motif plays a role. The poet constructs the optative subjunctive vellem paratactically (as he does for possem of line 150), and this structure can be found at Virg. A. 11.584 (vellem haut correpta fuisset). 433  duxque illis alius quicumque fuisset: Summers [1894] 42 reports that the use of alius instead of alter, which the context would require, is strange, but the formula alius quicumque is well documented (e.g., Hor. Sat. 1.6.95), especially in prose (cf. TLL i.1651.80–3). The phrase dux . . . alius strongly echoes Virg. A. 4.36–7: despectus Iarbas | ductoresque alii (like Dido, Medea would have scorned any other leader). 434  nunc remeant meque ecce (nefas) et reddere possunt: The manuscripts unanimously report this reading. Some editors (Bury, Langen, Mozley, and Liberman) modify the transmitted text by emending possunt into poscunt (as R, T, and Casaubon) and by accepting Schenkl’s conjecture of te instead of et. Although I admit that this proposal is clever, I believe that we can keep the text as transmitted, given that its sense seems to be consistent with Medea’s previous thought. The word nunc highlights the contrast between what Medea would have preferred (vellem, 432) and her actual situation, namely that the ungrateful

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

242

Commentary, lines 435–8

Argonauts (who would have died had Medea not helped them because of love for Jason) now can even give her back to her family. In addition, the construction me . . . reddere possunt finds an echo in te . . . iungere . . . | posse of lines 437–8 (in both cases, they are only ‘able’ precisely thanks to Medea herself). On the postponing of the word ecce, cf. note on 12; for the par­en­thet­ic­al use of the word nefas, cf. line 159. 435  nec spes ulla super: This hemistich adapts the Virgilian nec spes ulla fugae (A. 9.131 and 10.121). For the meaning of super, cf. note on 157. 435–6  quin tu mea respice saltem | consilia: Medea’s exhortation that Jason recall the past already appears in VF’s models; cf. AR 4.356–8 and Virg. A. 4.314–19. On the use of quin to strengthen the imperative, a typical feature of the sermo cotidianus (and found in poetry from Virg. A. 6.824 onwards), cf. L-­H-­Sz 276. According to Dräger, consilia refers to the assistance that Jason receives from Medea’s magical interventions, which is evoked in lines 437–8. The word does not appear anywhere else as part of a collocation with the verb respicere. 436  et nimio comitum ne cede timori: Medea asks Jason to trust in her (since she has shown that she deserves his loyalty throughout the various trials that she will recount in the following lines), instead of giving in to his companions’ excessive fears. The formula ne cede with dative appears at the beginning of a line in Virg. A. 6.95 (tu ne cede malis) and in a clausula at Luc. 8.627 (ne cede pudori) and Stat. Ach. 1.534 (ne cede parenti). For attestations of the construction ne and a present imperative in VF (originally a feature of the sermo cotidianus adopted by Catullus), which the poet also uses in line 12 (ne crede), cf. Contino (1973) 24. The Ovidian combination nimio . . . timori (Pont. 2.7.7) is also found at Stat. Theb. 10.493 (nimius timor). 437–8  In these two lines, Medea recounts two trials that Jason was able to overcome thanks to her assistance: the yoking of Mars’ fire-­breathing bulls (7.559–606) and the defeat of the dragon that had been guarding the Fleece (8.55–120). Strand (1972) 60 points to three parallel passages: 7.547–52: vos mihi nunc primum †in flammas† invertite, tauri, | aequora, nunc totas aperite et volvite flammas. | Exeat Haemonio messis memorando colono. | Tuque tuum pestem in Graium da, nata, draconem | ipsius aspectu pereant in velleris, ipsa | terga mihi diros servent infecta cruores; Adesp. F 136 TrRF: non commemoro, quod draconis saevi sopivi impetum | non quod domui vim taurorum et segetis armatae manus (the attribution of this passage is disputed; cf. Jocelyn [1967] 350); Ov. Met. 7.29–31: at nisi opem tulero, taurorum adflabitur ore | concurretque suae segeti, tellure creatis | hostibus, aut avido dabitur fera praeda draconi. 437–8  credidit ardentes quis te tunc iungere tauros | posse: Pellucchi (2012) 427 construes the ordo verborum as follows: quis credidit tunc te posse iungere

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 438–41

243

tauros ardentes. The phrase ardentes . . . tauri appears at 7.63–4 and also at 8.450. The bulls are said to be ardentes insofar as they breathe fire (cf. 7.66–7); also compare igniferos . . . tauros of line 342; fumantes at 7.283; and ardentia cornua at 7.587. The collocation iungere tauros (which VF uses at 8.342) is widely attested; cf., e.g., Virg. A. 8.316; Ov. Her. 12.93; Mart. 27.7. 438  quis ad saevi venturum templa draconis: The phrase saevi . . . draconis appears at Adesp. F 136 TrRF (cited in note on 437–8). The dragon was kept in a sacred space, and the word templa accordingly recalls nos ut Phrixeo spolientur templa metallo at 5.632. 439–40  o utinam ergo meus pro te non omnia posset | atque aliquid dubitaret amor: Medea’s speech returns for a moment to the theme of her internal conflict (framed by the pronounced hyperbaton meus . . . amor), a section that is not present in VF’s Apollonian model. Summers (1894) 5 detects a reference to Medea’s future decision to betray Absyrtus. The use of the formula o utinam at the beginning of a line is a stylistic feature of Propertius (1.3.39; 1.8a.9; 1.16.27; 4.4.33) that is also common in Ovid (its first attestation in epic appears at Met. 1.363) and in Lucan; VF uses it at 1.113 (with Zissos); 3.617; 7.135 and 534. VF produces a sad echo of this last passage in particular (cited in introduction to lines 109–33), where Medea hopes to see Jason prevail over the trial of the dragon. On the construction utinam . . . non (which VF also employs at 2.142) instead of utinam . . . ne to express a negative wish, cf. L-­H-­Sz 331. 440  quin nunc quoque quaero: Only Baehrens, Langen, and Giarratano accept quaere found in the manuscript tradition. All modern editors print quaero from the editio Bononiensis of 1498. Note the alliteration of the sound q (and the pseudo-­polyptoton in qui- . . . quo- . . . quae-). 460–441  With the exceptions of Köstlin (1880) 456 and Ehlers (1970) 78–9, all modern editors accept Lemaire’s proposal to transpose line 460 here (see Liberman 2.394 n. 249). Although Ehlers proposes printing dubitas (from L) instead of the transmitted iubeas and changing the order of the hemistichs (following Pius’s example), he does not adopt this solution in his 1980 edition (instead printing the same text as other recent editors). 460  quid iubeas. heu, dure, siles: Spaltenstein compares Dido’s pleas to Aeneas to Jason’s silence here (Virg. A. 4.368–71): nam quid dissimulo aut quae me ad maiora reservo? | num fletu ingemuit nostro? num lumina flexit? | num lacrimas victus dedit aut miseratus amantem est? | quae quibus anteferam? The adjective dure is commonly applied to those who spurn a lover (cf. TLL v/1.2308.79–80). Dräger detects a wordplay in the phrase dure, siles, which would recall the lack of emotion of the durus silex of Ov. Met. 9.303. 460–441  magnumque minatur | nescioquid tuus iste pudor: For the construction involving the verb minor with magnum, cf. TLL viii.1030.68–73. For

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

244

Commentary, lines 441–4

the collocation magnum . . . nescioquid, Liberman compares Sen. Phaed. 858: perplexa magnum verba nescio quid tegunt (Pellucchi [2012] 429 also compares Petr. Sat. 83.7: nescioquid magnum promittere), while for minatur nescioquid, he cites Sen. Apoc. 5.2: nescioquid illum minari. 441–2 mene, optime quondam | Aesonide: Most editors connect optime quondam to the patronymic Aesonide. Liberman (followed by Spaltenstein) does not accept the idea that Medea would rebuke Jason so directly and thus places commas after optime and quondam, so that quondam refers to the following ferre preces. But I think that the development of Medea’s thoughts and feelings (already projected into the future) justifies this insult (which does not entail her complete detachment from Jason). For mene (which also appears in line 467 and is strengthened by the following anaphora me), compare the heart-­ rending mene fugis? at Virg. A. 4.314. 442–3  me ferre preces et supplicis ora | fas erat: The phrase ferre preces also appears at VF 4.218 and 547. Pellucchi (2012) 430 observes that the verb ferre takes two complementary objects in zeugma: with preces it is synonymous to offerre (cf. Langen on 2.282), whereas ferre ora means ‘to have the appearance, the expression’ (as at 4.19 and 5.466). For supplicis ora, cf. 7.431–2: illa tremens, ut supplicis aspicit ora | conticuisse viri (the situation is comparable to this one, as Jason is silent). fas erat already appears at the beginning of a line at Virg. G. 1.127 and A. 12.28. According to Liberman 2.394, fas has the same sense as the Greek δυνατόν (cf. Catull. 51.2 and TLL vi/1.1291.52). According to Spaltenstein, it has the sense of ‘it was right’ and similar expressions. 443–4  haud hoc nunc genitor putat aut dare poenas | iam sceleris domi­ numque pati: I follow the syntax adopted by Kramer, Mozley, Courtney, Liberman, Dräger, and Spaltenstein. dare poenas and dominumque pati depend upon the verb putat (as if they were epexegetic infinitives connected to hoc), and haud negates the entirety of the two phrases connected by aut (which Baehrens emends to hanc), as in lines 318–19. Other critics (Langen, Ehlers, Caviglia, Soubiran, and Pellucchi) follow Schenkl’s model in understanding haud hoc nunc genitor putat as a parenthetical clause and accordingly make the two infinitives dare poenas and dominumque pati depend upon fas erat. For the phrase dare poenas (equivalent to puniri), already attested at Enn. Ann. 95 Skutsch, cf. TLL v/1.1665.7–55 (and iv.1665.16–22 for the genitive of charge that depends upon the construction, here sceleris). For dominum pati, cf. Sen. Phaed. 535–6: iussa nec dominum pati | iuncto ferebat terra servitium bove and Stat. Theb. 4.739: nec legem dominosve pati. 444  sic fata: This is a common formula for ending direct speech (cf. Virg. A. 4.685; Ov. Met. 10.731; Luc. 3.34), which VF already uses (in the feminine) at 2.160 and 7.537. For a catalogue of the formula sic fatus, cf. Lundström (1971) 24–5.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 444–7

245

444–6  parantem | reddere dicta virum furiata mente refugit | vociferans: Medea is also enraged at the end of her speech at AR 4.391–3, but the detail of her running away derives from Virgil; cf. A. 4.362–4 and 388–91. parantem reddere dicta represents a reworking of the Virgilian multa parantem | dicere (A. 4.390–1). reddere dicta with the meaning ‘to reply’ is used as early as Lucr. 4.461; cf. Ov. Met. 8.717 (reddebant dicta). VF uses the same expression but with a different meaning (‘to report someone’s words’) at 2.600: precor, mea reddite dicta. furiata mente (almost an adverb, according to Spaltenstein) echoes Virg. A. 2.407 and 588 (non tulit hanc speciem furiata mente Coroebus; Servius glosses as est figura Graeca: μανεὶς τὰς φρένας). According to Pellucchi (2012) 431, the expression is formed from the verb furiare, a neologism coined by Horace (Carm. 1.25.14, which Porphyry glosses as cum furore concitare), adopted by Stat. Theb. 11.488 and Sil. 14.297. The choice of the verb is well-­suited to introducing the following scene, where Medea is described as caught in the grip of a Bacchic frenzy. The verb refugit (OLD s.v. 1 ‘to turn back and flee, run away’) is also clever, not only because it concisely summarizes what Virgil describes more extensively at A. 4.389, but also because it refers to a theme, namely flight (which fugit of lines 449 and 450 restates), that has, is, and will be developed in various ways (flight from her homeland, flight from Jason, flight from Greece). The verb vociferor is common in the poem (cf. 3.81 and 685; 5.170; 6.301) and always appears in its participial form (a trope already used by Virgil, e.g., A. 2.679; 7.390; 9.596, followed by Statius, e.g., Theb. 2.468; 3.348; 5.65). 446–50  These lines draw inspiration from Virg. A. 4.300–3: saevit inops animi totamque incensa per urbem | bacchatur, qualis commotis excita sacris | Thyias, ubi audito stimulant trieterica Baccho | orgia nocturnusque vocat clamore Cithaeron. VF compares Medea to a Bacchant at 6.752–60; see Fucecchi (1997) 264–9: ‘la menade è, forse, il più tradizionale paradigma del furore femminile’; Gärtner (1994) 169–70; and Elm von der Osten (2007) 89–91. In addition to the Virgilian Dido (and Amata at A. 7.373–405), other women who are likened to Maenads include Ariadne at Catull. 64.251–64 and Tarpeia at Prop. 4.4.71–2. Also compare cruenta maenas of Sen. Med. 849. At the end of VF’s sixth book, the comparison foreshadows the events in Colchis, while this comparison in the eighth book foretells future tra­ged­ies, beginning with the murder of Absyrtus, which in AR occurs right after the discussion between Medea and Jason (4.421–81). On this simile, see especially Gärtner (1994) 232–5 and Pellucchi (2012) 397–9. 446–7  qualem Ogygias cum tollit in arces | Bacchus: The entire manuscript tradition unanimously records this reading. In order to bypass the difficulty posed by the lack of a verb in the comparative clause introduced by qualem (on which, see note on 21), Langen and Leo read contollit in place of cum tollit, whereas Weichert emends it to pellit and Williams (ap. Courtney) chooses compellit. The transmitted text can be defended, as long as we assume what is

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

246

Commentary, lines 447–8

implied (cf. Lemaire: ‘Medea refugit vociferans, qualis vociferatur femina – Thyas –, cum illam Bacchus tollit in arces Ogygias’). In defence of keeping the text as transmitted, Samuelsson (1930) 135 cites 6.260: qualem populae fidentem nexibus umbrae. Liberman 2.395, among others, also accepts the reading tollit, explaining that the verb might allude to the force with which Bacchus stirs up the Maenads into a state of enthusiasmos (as a parallel, compare Hor. Carm. 3.4.21–2). The poet also uses the verb tollitur to describe the agitated movements of a furens Medea at 55. This adjectival construction involving the word arx (cf. TLL i.741.66–742.5) also appears at 1.575 and 598 (Pangaea . . . arce) and 7.562 (Rhipaeas . . . arces). The adjective Ogygius appears in the poem only here and at 2.624–5: Ogygii quam nec trieterica Bacchi | sacra. The periphrasis Ogygias (= Thebanas) . . . arces refers to Mt Cithaeron (as at Virg. A. 4.303). 447  et Aoniis inlidit Thyiada truncis: As Liberman 2.395 (to whom I refer for the various parallel passages) explains, these lines refer to the gesture Bacchus makes when he strikes the Maenads with his thyrsus in order to inspire frenzy in them (cf. Ov. Her. 13.33–4 and Ars 3.709–10: per medias passis furibunda capillis | evolat, ut thyrso concita Baccha, vias; Lucr. 1.922–3: sed acri | percussit thyrso laudis spes magna meum cor). Liberman, however, obelizes transmitted inlidit, and numerous scholars have sought to emend this word: in his 1724 edition, Burman proposes instigat and impellit, accepted by Langen and Wagner, respectively, whereas Burman (1759) adds incendit. Pellucchi (2012) 443 correctly keeps the text as transmitted and refers to TLL vii/1.377.25–6 for inlido having the sense of iactare, allidere, ferire, contundere, and in contexts de motu. Thyiada is Thilo’s emendation (Heinsius reads Thyada) for the transmitted tyana and tympana, which would not make sense. Thyias or Thyas (cf. Greek θυιάς, θυάς) is an epithet frequently applied to Bacchants (cf. Catull. 64.391; Virg. A. 4.302; Ov. Fast. 6.514), which also appears in VF 3.265; 5.81 (as Thyas); and 6.757. The adjective derives from Thyia, the daughter of a priest of Dionysus (either Castalius or Cephissus), who introduces the god’s cult to Delphi. Aoniis . . . truncis is a periphrasis used to denote the thyrsus (Liberman 2.395 and Pellucchi [2012] 443); we should, therefore, take truncis as an ablative of means. Spaltenstein is of a different opinion and argues that Aonius is not a natural designation for a thyrsus, and that we should, therefore, understand truncis in its literal sense and as a dative (this is also how Mozley reads it). 448  talis erat talemque iugis se virgo ferebat: Note the echo of Virg. A. 1.503: talis erat Dido, talem se laeta ferebat. For the repetition of talis . . . talem in polyptoton see note on 30–1 (although there the adjectives describe two different figures). For the phrase se . . . ferebat, see note on 109. Commentators are divided on the meaning of iugis. Some understand it as a synonym for transtris (e.g., Lemaire, Wagner, Mozley, Ehlers [1970] 63, and Perkins [1974] 264) and thus interpret it as saying that Medea’s Bacchic motions occur on the Argo. I  follow Langen (as do Carelli, Caviglia, Liberman, Soubiran, Dräger, and

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 449–52

247

Pellucchi) in understanding iugis as the peaks of the mountains. Attempting to reject this interpretation by pointing to the lack of mountains on the island of Peuce is falling into the trap of hyperrealism (the image of Medea wandering among the mountains like a Bacchant is meant to be evocative rather than realistic). 449–50  cuncta . . . tauros: The only way to reconcile the content of these lines with the rest of the passage is to understand them as referring to hallucinations caused by Medea’s wild frenzy (as Langen, Burman, and Soubiran do): Medea ‘flees’ from (and, therefore, tries to repress) the episodes that comprise her acts of betrayal towards her family (namely the bulls and the Spartoi), as these hallucinations cause her to become anxious over her (now uncertain) future. These  lines are also syntactically detached from the phrase in lines 451–2 (si . . . cerneret, which could, however, be attached directly onto line 448), and this would lead one to suspect a lacuna of at least one line after line 450 (as Baehrens, Bury, and Mozley do). Schenkl, Jachmann, and Liberman athetize this portion of the text as an interpolation. Although I admit that it is possible to interpret these lines as describing Medea’s hallucinations (Spaltenstein compares the reference to Orestes’ matricide at 7.147–52), I prefer to insert brackets, since I think this is either a gloss or a different passage (e.g., 7.504 or 8.106) that later migrated here (as Jachmann [1935] 238 proposes), or perhaps this passage is the work of a compiler who edited the text after the poet’s death (as Liberman 2.396 proposes). 451–2  si Pagasas vel Peliacas hinc denique nubes | cerneret et Tempe lucentia fumo: If we delete lines 449–50, this sentiment connects syntactically to line 448: iugis se virgo ferebat | si . . . | cerneret. For the brief description of these Thessalian places, which Medea hopes to glimpse during her Bacchic wanderings, Liberman rightly refers to Ov. Met. 1.568–72 (on which see Bömer): est nemus Haemoniae, praerupta quod undique claudit | silva: vocant Tempe; per quae Peneos ab imo | effusus Pindo spumosis volvitur undis | deiectumque gravi tenues agitantia fumos | nubile conducit. In addition to Tempe (a classic locus amoenus in Thessaly; cf. Malaspina [1990]), VF adapts tenues . . . fumos to tenui . . . fumo (as Langen pointed out) and also converts agitantia . . . nubile into the striking image of Peliacas . . . nubes and the participle lucentia. The Ovidian passage accordingly helps us fill the gap in the transmitted text with the word tenui, first proposed by Baehrens, which some editors (Baehrens, Langen, Giarratano, and Mozley) place after Tempe, while others (Kramer, Ehlers, Caviglia, Soubiran, Dräger, Liberman, and Pellucchi) place it before the proper noun. Courtney refrains from doing anything more than signalling a lacuna after Tempe, while others propose different conjectures (Bury: iam pellucentia; Lemaire: viridi; Frassinetti [1995] 316: umenti, as he also emends cerneret to cernat). For the image of smoke, Langen (followed by Fuà [1988] 40) compares this passage to Hom. Od. 1.57–9 (where Odysseus longs to

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

248

Commentary, lines 453–4

see the smoke from the houses on Ithaca again); but fumus can refer to any kind of emitted gas (cf. Spaltenstein for examples). For the noun Pagasae and the corresponding adjective, cf. notes on 378 and 421. Rather than denoting only the port from which the Argonauts set sail (Pagasae), here Pagasas (a noun) refers to the entire area of the surrounding gulf (cf. RE 18.2299.52–3; Ov. Met. 12.412; Fast. 5.401), as the possible construction of Pagasas (understood as an adjective) with nubes seems to confirm. On the adjective Peliacus, cf. note on 417. The periphrasis Peliacas . . . nubes denotes the area around Mt Pelion. 453  hoc visu contenta mori: The construction consisting of the adjective contentus and a present infinitive is attested in poetry from Ovid onwards (Met. 2.638–9; Tr. 1.10, 50), but is primarily used in prose (cf. TLL iv.680.15–36). On contentus, see note on 178. The collocation hoc visu also appears at 6.549: satis hoc visu quaecumque rependo. 453–7  The poet now superimposes the image of Medea as a maga/monstrum over the image of Medea as a virgo infelix. As highlighted by Baldini-­Moscadi (2005) 146–8, we should not see a striking distortion of Medea’s character (e.g., La Penna [1981] 246) in this scene that depicts gloomy nightly laments, but rather a poetic depiction of a sorceress’s characteristic features, such as the ability to imitate the sounds of nature (including the voices of animals), as in the witch Erichtho in Lucan (cf. 6.685–94) and in various magical papyri (cf. Graf [1997] 194–8). Medea had already demonstrated this ability in the passage where she put the dragon to sleep (cf. line 75). In light of what I observed at lines 171–4, I would not rule out the possibility that this evocation of images relating to agony, that is, the howls of wolves and the lamentations of a woman who has lost her children, might allude once more to the sinister rituals of the Magna Mater (on the implications of such an allusion for Medea, see also note on 462–3). 453–4  tunc tota querellis | egeritur questuque dies: Some critics detect in these two hemistichs an inaccurate interpretation of the following Virgilian passage: namque ut supremam falsa inter gaudia noctem | egerimus (A. 6.513– 14). According to Leumann (1947) 138, VF would have interpreted the Virgilian perfect subjunctive egerimus as the present indicative form of egero and would have subsequently proceeded to use the verb incorrectly in its passive form and with the sense of agere or exigere diem both here (egeritur . . . dies) and at 5.297 (nox . . . egesta). Courtney (1965) 151 and Liberman 2.175 accept the theory that VF makes a mistake, while Koster (1973) 87 and Pellucchi (2012) 437 are correct in challenging this assumption, since the use of the verb egero with the meaning of tempus consumere, transigere, distrahere (cf. TLL v/2.244. 62) is also attested at Luc. 3.718 (egere quod superset animae, Tyrrhene) and Pers. 5.69 (egerit hos annos), and it is unlikely that three roughly con­tem­por­an­eous authors would have made the same mistake independently. On the basis of the doubts already

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 454–7

249

expressed by Burman (who proposes that we emend questuque to fletuque or gemituque), Liberman athetizes questuque and proposes planctuque in the ap­par­atus. None of these conjectures are decisive (fletuque seems the most convincing to me, in light of the appearance of flesse at Virg. G. 4.509; cf. my comment on the following line), and it does not seem foreign to VF’s style to  consider querellis . . . questuque simply as a pleonasm (Weichert compares phrases such as oculos et lumina, voces et verba, gentes populique, but Liberman claims these are not suitable comparisons). 454–5  eademque sub astris | sola movet: sub astris (which also appears at 2.171) is an Ovidian clausula (Met. 15.787) or perhaps even earlier a Virgilian one, if we accept the variant astris instead of antris at G. 4.509 (flesse sibi, et gelidas haec evoluisse sub antris). Here, as at Sil. 15.109, it is synonymous with the phrase sub caelo nocturno (for astra as a metonymy for nocte, cf. TLL ii.975.26– 30). Night is the time best suited to practising magic (cf. note on 95). In this sense, I interpret the ambiguous eadem as a neuter plural that refers to querellis . . . questuque (as Langen and Pellucchi do), rather than as a nominative singular feminine (as Weichert and Liberman take it). Indeed, if we choose to adopt the latter interpretation, we must either alter the transmitted movet (Baehrens proposes manet, while Liberman offers dolet or gemit) or otherwise explain creatively its use. For eadem movet understood as easdem querelas movet, Liberman 2.397 refers to TLL viii.1545.24–30 while he observes that this interpretation would require Medea to do the same things during the night that she does by day. Medea aches (querellis . . . questuque) day and night, but she only adds magical rituals to her laments when she is alone at night (the typical conditions for practising magic). 455–6  maestis veluti nox illa sonaret | plena lupis: For this absolute use of velut (equivalent to velut si), cf. L-­H-­Sz 675. nox illa (which, according to Langen, means locis nocturnis) refers to the same night during which Medea laments, and therefore illa requires no emendation (Liberman even obelizes illa and proposes emending it to alta or ipsa, as does Watt). TLL viii.47.60 cites only this passage for maestus modifying lupus, but Spaltenstein compares Luc. 6.688 (gemitusque luporum), and Liberman 2.397 refers to Virg. G. 1.485–6: et alte | per noctem resonare lupis ululantibus urbes. nox . . . plena is a type of brachylogy for nox in qua luna plena erat (cf. Caes. Gall. 4.29.1: eadem nocte accidit ut esset luna plena or Plin. Nat. 11.109: operantur et noctu plena luna). But compare also Ov. Am. 1.8.56: plena venit canis de grege praeda lupis. For the sorceress’s imitation of animal sounds (such as the sound of wolves), cf. Luc. 6.688: latratus habet illa canum gemitusque luporum. 456–7  quaterentque truces ieiuna leones | ora: For the adjective trux used as an epithet for wild beasts (cf. OLD s.v. 2), see, e.g., Ps-­Sen. Oct. 86–86a: vincam saevos ante leones | tigresque truces (a passage that perhaps inspired VF to create

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

250

Commentary, lines 457–9

the interlocking hyperbaton truces . . . leones, ieiuna . . . ora). For quatere ora (also at 2.501: quatit ora fragor), compare Virg. A. 5.200: aridaque ora quatit (note the Valerian reworking of arida into ieiuna) and Ps-­Sen. Oct. 735: quatit ora et artus horridus nostros tremor. See also the parallels cited in Liberman 2.397, including Virg. A. 7.15–16: iraeque leonum | vincla recusantum et sera sub nocte rudentum. 457  vel orbatae traherent suspiria vaccae: Commentators agree in identifying the archetype for this image of vaccae deprived of their calves in the famous passage at Lucr. 2.355–6, which perhaps also inspired VF 3.737–40 (describing a lioness whose cubs have been stolen). The image is a favourite one in Greek and Latin (cf. Quint. Smyrn. 7.257–9 and 13.261–2; Ov. Fast. 4.459–60; Sil. 8.129; Claud. 5.430). Baldini-­Moscadi (2005) 147 rightly also compares the image of the tigris orba natis that appears in Sen. Med. 863, which characterizes Medea as the cruenta maenas that the chorus had mentioned previously (perhaps also explaining the reference at lines 446–7 of the reading bacchae from the Laurentianus and Vaticanus). The comparison with a mother deprived of her children naturally makes us think proleptically about the events in Corinth; since Medea is like one of these cows, both mitigating the savagery of the image of the Senecan tiger (in addition to providing a fitting comparison between the cow’s mugitus and the sorceress’s murmura) and perhaps also taking up the simile between Medea and Io again (which is developed in the fourth book and resumed at 7.111–13). trahere suspiria is a widespread styl­is­tic feature in Latin poetry (cf. Ov. Am. 2.19.55; Met. 2.753; Sil. 1.530, among the other ex­amples cited by Langen on 4.135). This is the only place in the poem where the verb orbare appears, and it is used absolutely (often it is construed with an ablative of separation; cf. OLD s.v. 1a), as at Lucr. 2.355: at mater viridis saltus orbata peragrans. 458–9  procedit, non gentis honos, non | Solis avi, non barbaricae decor ille iuventae: Critics have reconstructed and interpreted these lines in various ways (for a discussion of the different proposals, see Pellucchi [2012] 439–40). Here I print the text of Kramer, Soubiran, and Pellucchi, in which the three nouns honos, gloria, and decor should be understood as predicates of the implied subject (Medea) of the verb procedit. According to Baehrens, Mozley, Courtney, Liberman, and Spaltenstein, we must suppose that there is a lacuna after line 457. If we do not assume a lacuna, we must have a thorough understanding of what meaning to apply to procedit. Given that the previous scene depicts Medea as alone (sola, 455), but she speaks with Jason starting in line 465, either we must consider that the preceding section continues from line 458 until line 463 and that from line 463bis onwards (maestus at . . .) the poet transitions to a different scene (and to a different place) in which Medea is in Jason’s company, or we must understand that Medea is already in Jason’s presence at line 458. In the latter case, Ehlers (1970) 64 and Frassinetti (1995) 316 are

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 461–2

251

correct in understanding the verb procedit in the sense of ‘to come into public view, appear’ (cf. OLD s.v. 3b). Otherwise, we should understand the verb in its more common sense of ‘to go or move forward or onward, advance, progress’ (cf. OLD s.v. 1). But even if we do not suppose that there is a lacuna, I believe that there is an abrupt change in the situation between lines 457 and 458. VF adopts the iunctura gentis honos from Virg. A. 4.4–5 (multa viri virtus animo multusque recursat | gentis honos), in which we should interpret honos in the sense of ‘dignity, prestige’ (and therefore with a different sense from honor of lines 31 and 237); cf. TLL vi/3.2930.17–27. The reading gloria magni appears in a humanistic codex (see also lines 282 and 350), but the majority of manuscripts have a lacuna (which Courtney, Liberman, and Spaltenstein leave in the text). Sudhaus proposes that we fill the lacuna with gloria restat or restat imago instead. For iuventae, cf. note on 26 (the word appears nowhere else as part of a iunctura with barbaricus, which suggests a Roman point of view). As Pellucchi (2012) 440–1 underscores, the three predicates modifying the subject powerfully sketch the depth of Medea’s downward spiral, as she has lost her former social status (gentis honos), the brilliance of her divine ancestry (gloria magni | Solis avi), and her youthful beauty (barbaricae decor ille iuventae). The chiasmus and the anaphora of non enhance this effect. 461–2  qualis erat cum Chaonio radiantia trunco | vellera vexit ovans: As Langen observed, the dative Chaonio . . . trunco expresses direction and, as a periphrasis, describes the Argo, which contains a beam taken from a sacred oak tree of Dodona (for the connection of the adjective Chaonius with Dodona in Epirus, see OLD s.v. 2). Note the alliteration of the v sound in vellera vexit ovans. radiantia . . . vellera is an Ovidian iunctura; cf. Met. 6.720: vellera cum Minyis nitido radiantia villo. For the Fleece’s radiance, compare lines 115–16 and 258–9. 462–3  As Langen notes, these lines depict Medea boarding the ship tri­umph­ ant­ly and seem to contradict lines 202–16, where the poet describes Medea as distraught, stunned, and frightened at what she has done. Schmit-­Neuerburg (2001) considers these and the poem’s remaining lines to be interpolations and  accordingly proposes deleting them. Liberman 2.398 counters Schmit-­ Neuerburg’s criticisms and supports the authenticity of this passage. Perhaps the most sensible approach is to consider the poem incomplete and likely lacking labor limae, especially in this last part (as Pellucchi does). But VF might also be alluding, as he does elsewhere in the poem, to another version of the story (from which source?) that features the motif of Medea’s triumph. These lines explicitly liken Medea to the Palladium (Palladia virgo stetit altera prora). Fucecchi (2014) 30 correctly compares this scene to the Palladium’s arrival into Latium, as narrated at Sil. 13.77–8: veniamque precatus | Troianam ostentat trepidis de puppe Minervam. Even if we are unable to know how the poet intended to conclude his epic, it is reasonable to suppose that this assimilation of Medea

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

252

Commentary, lines 462–3

with the Palladium, just like her assimilation with Magna Mater, should be read as the quindecimvir poet’s allusion to the translatio deorum and to the rituals of evocatio, which can be traced to Medea’s departure from Colchis (Medea acts as both a priestess and a goddess at the same time, as the numerous passages in which she saves Jason and the Argonauts make clear). The poet, therefore, again points to Jupiter’s Weltenplan in book 1 and the translatio imperii towards Rome, where both the Palladium and the cult of the Magna Mater will occupy a prominent position. The arrival of powerful foreign deities (whose cults, we should remember, were overseen by the quindecimviri) entails the introduction of several unpleasant aspects of Eastern civilizations, as ­evidenced by the allusions to the Magna Mater’s bloody rituals and to the dark sides of Medea’s tragic figure (cf. Fucecchi [2013] 31–2). 462–3  interque ingentia Graium | nomina Palladia virgo stetit altera prora: For the phrase ingentia . . . nomina (first attested at Laus Pis. 231: qui sonat, ingenti qui nomine pulsat Olympum), cf. Ov. Met. 3.512: nomenque erat auguris ingens; Mart. 11.5.5: si redeant veteres, ingentia nomina, patres; and Stat. Ach.  1.798–9: omnis honos illic, illic ingentia certant | nomina. According to Spaltenstein, nomina has the sense of ‘the name of a person’ (cf. OLD s.v. 17), as it does at 3.426: nomina divum. On the epithet Palladia, cf. note on 291–2. The description virgo . . . altera emphasizes the similarities between Medea and the Palladium (a likeness of the virgo Pallas). Burman cites Mus. Her. 33: ἄλλη Κύπρις ἄνασσα. Palladia . . . prora refers to the figure of Pallas that decorates the  Argo’s prow. Liberman also compares 5.220: horrenda trepidam sub virgine puppem. 463bis  maestus at ille minis et mota Colchidos ira: This line appears only in the Laurentianus, and the majority of editors consider it spurious (as an interpolation from Niccoli, who owned the manuscript). Ehlers (1970) 65–6 challenges the interpolation theory and considers the text handed down in the codex (moestus ait ille minis et noto Colchidos ira) too incorrect to have come from Niccoli’s hand (the humanist, therefore, would have limited himself to transcribing the line). Courtney (1972) 217 and Poortvliet (1991) 41 dispute Ehlers’s reconstruction (although Poortvliet admits that the line may be an ancient interpolation). In support of this line’s authenticity, Pellucchi (2012) 442 cites AR 4.391–4. minis could refer both to the pressure the Argonauts put on Jason (as Ehlers [1976] 255 understands it) or (more likely) to Medea’s threats (as Liberman 2.398 and Dräger interpret it). mota is the conjecture offered by Ehlers (1976) 225 in place of the transmitted noto (Laurentianus) or nota (M2, Reg, and the 1474 edition). mota (which Soubiran, Dräger, Liberman, and Spaltenstein accept) is rather banal compared to nota, but it is supported (and also seems to continue the alliteration on the m sound found in maestus and minis) by the Ovidian mota . . . ira, attested several times (cf. Met. 1.765–6; 8.355; 11.323; Tr. 1.1.103). Fucecchi (2014) 133 n. 68 declares himself in favour of

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Commentary, lines 464–6

253

nota (which we can perhaps compare to Sen. Med. 394: irae novimus veteris notas) and detects in it a proleptic allusion to who Medea will turn out to be (or perhaps an allusion to the Medea who has provided proof of her ira, understood as the ‘strength’ that she displayed in the trials she faced at Colchis). The connection between minae and ira (which recalls the furiaeque minaeque of line 2) appears at 1.722 (furiis iraque minaci). Compare also Virg. A. 8.60 (iramque minasque); Ov. Met. 6.688 (iramque animosque minaces); Sen. Ag. 597 (minaces victoris iras); and Stat. Theb. 12.504 (iraeque minaeque) and 12.687 (minae et prior ira). 464–5  haeret, et hinc praesens pudor, hinc decreta suorum | dura premunt: The conflict between pudor and furor had tormented Medea throughout the seventh book. Now it is Jason who is tormented by the clash between the responsibilities to his men as a leader (decreta suorum) and his duty to Medea as her husband (pudor). The use of the verb haeret to indicate a person’s mood is common in Latin poetry. In this case, VF has in mind Sen. Med. 390: haeret: minatur aestuat queritur gemit (Medea). On haeret (which also appears at the beginning of a line at 3.486 and 641; 4.5; and 7.436), see note on 55. Following Mozley, Dräger, and Liberman 2.399 (who also compares 5.597), I interpret praesens with the meaning of ‘urgent, pressing’ rather than the simpler ‘present’, and such an interpretation places still greater emphasis on the word pudor (the iunctura does not appear elsewhere). For decreta, cf. note on 407. Considering the context, the phrase decreta . . . dura (not attested elsewhere) may echo Sen. Oed. 985–6: servatque suae decreta colus | Lachesis dura revoluta manu. 465–6  utcumque tamen mulcere gementem | temptat: Soubiran detects an allusion to Virg. A. 6.468–9: talibus Aeneas ardentem et torva tuentem | lenibat dictis animum lacrimasque ciebat (while in the Underworld, Aeneas tries to alleviate a tormented Dido), and Liberman compares A. 4.393–5: at pius Aeneas, quamquam lenire dolentem | solando cupit et dictis avertere curas, | multa gemens (a similar situation). The adverb utcumque is only attested once each in Virgil, Propertius, and Tibullus, but it appears six times in Horace and three times in Ovid. Among the Flavian epicists, it only appears here and in Stat. Theb. 7.518. VF also uses the construction temptare with infinitive (OLD s.v. 7) at 4.399 (temptant accedere nymphae). 466  et ipse gemens et dictis temperat iras: The variant dictis temperat iras appears in a humanist manuscript (M2) instead of tempera dictis from the Vaticanus. Liberman 2.399 considers this reading far more plausible than Heinsius’s et tempora quaerere dictis, but athetizes the text despite citing as a parallel the Virgilian clausula temperat iras from A. 1.57 (see also Prop. 3.22.22: victrices temperat ira manus, where the syntax is reversed). Kramer, Courtney, Ehlers, and Caviglia also obelize tempera dictis, while Baehrens and Bury offer the conjecture et lenit pectora dictis.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

254

Commentary, line 467

467  mene aliquid meruisse putas, me talia velle: For the meaning of this line, Pellucchi (2012) 443 compares AR 4.395: ἴσχεο, δαιμονίη· τὰ μὲν ἁνδάνει οὐδ' ἐμοὶ αὐτῷ. meruisse is the reading found in the codices, and many editors accept it (including Liberman, Spaltenstein, and Pellucchi). Wagner, Lemaire, Thilo, Baehrens, Giarratano, Mozley, and Soubiran accept the conjecture metuisse from Barth. Here, meruisse has the sense of delinquere (cf. TLL viii.810.22). Liberman compares Tib. 1.10.5: an nihil ille miser meruit, nos ad mala nostra and Ov. Met. 5.492: terra nihil meruit. Many editors place a question mark after the word velle, but it is not pos­sible to establish with certainty that the sentence was intended to end here. Penwill (2018) 84–5 suggests an allusion to the Fleece, vellus, in velle (which would be an imperative of vello, ‘to pluck’, with the ablative me: ‘pluck such things from me, fleece me of such things’); thus ‘the Flavian Argonautica ends with an impassioned and equally futile plea for history to be changed’. Cf. Penwill (2013) 30 on the ending as deliberately Lucanic.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

Bibliography 1.  Editions, Commentaries, Translations of Valerius Flaccus Burman, P. (1724). C. Valerii Flacci Setini Balbi Argonauticon libri octo. Cum notis inte­ gris Ludovici Carrionis . . . et aliorum, curante Petro Burmanno, qui et suas adnotationes adiecit. Leiden. Caviglia, F. (1999). Valerio Flacco, Le Argonautiche. Milan. Courtney, E. (1970). C. Valeri Flacci Argonauticon libri octo. Leipzig. Davis, P. J. (2020). Valerius Flaccus, Argonautica Book 7. Oxford. Dräger, P. (2003). C. Valerius Flaccus, Argonautica/Die Sendung der Argonauten. Frankfurt. Ehlers, W.-W. (1980). Gai Valeri Flacci Setini Balbi Argonauticon libri octo. Leipzig. Fucecchi, M. (1997). La τειχοσκοπία e l’innamoramento di Medea: Saggio di commento a Valerio Flacco, Argonautiche 6,427–760. Pisa. Fucecchi, M. (2006). Una guerra in Colchide. Valerio Flacco, Argonautiche 6,1–426. Pisa. Galli, D. (2007). Valerii Flacci Argonautica I: Commento. Berlin. Giarratano, C. (1904). C. Valerii Flacci Balbi Setini Argonauticon libri octo. Milan. Huguet, A. (1837). C. Valerii Flacci Setini Balbi Argonauticon libri octo. Paris. Kleywegt, A. J. (2005). Valerius Flaccus, Argonautica, Book I: A Commentary. Leiden. Korn, M. (1989). Valerius Flaccus, Argonautica 4,1–343. Hildesheim. Kramer, O. (1913). C. Valerii Flacci Setini Balbi Argonauticon libri octo. Stuttgart. Dureau de Lamalle, A. (1811). Valérius Flaccus, Argonautique ou la Conquête de la Toison d’or. Paris. Langen, P. (1896–7). C. Valeri Flacci Setini Balbi Argonauticon libri octo, 2 vols. Berlin. Lazzarini, C. (2012). L ’ addio di Medea: Valerio Flacco, Argonautiche 8,1–287. Pisa. Lemaire, N. E. (1824–5). C.  Valerii Flacci Setini Balbi Argonauticon libros octo veteri novaque lectionum varietate, commentariis, excursibus, testimoniis, Argonautarum catalogo, indice nominum rerum et verborum universo instructos ac diligenter recensi­ tos edidit N.E.L. Paris. Liberman, G. (1997–2002). Valérius Flaccus, Argonautiques, 2 vols. Paris. Manuwald, G. (2015). Valerius Flaccus, Argonautica 3. Cambridge. Mozley, J. H. (1934). Valerius Flaccus. Cambridge, MA. Murgatroyd, P. (2009). A Commentary on Book 4 of Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica. Leiden. Pellucchi, T. (2012). Commento al libro VIII delle Argonautiche di Valerio Flacco. Hildesheim. Perutelli, A. (1997). C. Valeri Flacci Argonauticon liber VII. Florence. Poortvliet, H.  M. (1991). Valerius Flaccus Argonautica Book II: A Commentary. Amsterdam. Rupprecht, H. (1987). Caius Valerius Flaccus Setinus Balbus. Argonautica. Die Argonautenfahrt. Lateinischer Text mit Einleitung, Übersetzung, kurzen Erläuterungen, Eigennamenverzeichnis und Nachwort. Mitterfels. Schenkl, C. (1871). C. Valerii Flacci Setini Balbi Argonauticon libri octo. Berlin. Shelton, J. E. (1971). A Narrative Commentary on the Argonautica of Valerius Flaccus. PhD diss. Vanderbilt University.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

256 Bibliography Soubiran, J. (2002). Valerius Flaccus, Argonautiques. Leuven. Spaltenstein, F. (2002–5). Commentaire des Argonautica de Valérius Flaccus, 3 vols. Brussels. Taliercio, A. (1992). C. Valerio Flacco, Argonautiche: Libro VII. Rome. Thilo, G. (1863). C. Valeri Flacci Setini Balbi Argonauticon libri octo. Halle. Wagner, I. A. (1805). C. Valerii Flacci Setini Balbi Argonauticon libri VIII. Göttingen. Weichert, A. (1818). C. Valerii Flacci Argonauticon liber octavus. Meissen. Wijsman, H.  J.  W. (1996). Valerius Flaccus, Argonautica, Book V: A Commentary. Leiden. Zissos, A. (2008). Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica Book 1. Oxford. 2 .  Other Works Adamietz, J. (1970). ‘Jason und Hercules in den Epen des Apollonios Rhodios und Valerius Flaccus’. A&A 16: 29–38. Adamietz, J. (1976). Zur Komposition der Argonautica des Valerius Flaccus. Munich. Allen, R. H. (1963). Star Names: Their Lore and Meaning. New York. Alpers, J. (1912). Hercules in bivio. Diss. Göttingen. Anzinger, S. (2007). Schweigen im römischen Epos: Zur Dramaturgie der Kommunikation bei Vergil, Lucan, Valerius Flaccus und Statius. Berlin. Arens, J. C. (1950). ‘-fer and -ger: Their Extraordinary Preponderance among Compounds in Roman Poetry’. Mnemosyne 3: 241–63. Augoustakis, A. (2016). Statius, Thebaid 8. Oxford. Auhagen, U. (1998). ‘Heu quid agat? Erlebte Rede bei Valerius Flaccus und seinen Vorgängern’. In U.  Eigler and E.  Lefèvre (eds.), Ratis omnia vincet: Neue Untersuchungen zu den Argonautica des Valerius Flaccus, 285–92. Munich. Austin, R. G. (1955). Virgil, Aeneidos Liber IV. Oxford. Axelson, B. (1945). Unpoetische Wörter. Ein Beitrag zur Kenntnis der lateinischen Dichtersprache. Lund. Baldini-Moscadi, L. (2005). Magica Musa: La magia dei poeti latini. Figure e funzioni. Bologna. Barchiesi, A. (1988). Seneca, Le Fenicie. Venice. Barchiesi, A. (1992). Ovidii Nasonis, Epistulae Heroidum 1–3. Florence. Barchiesi, A. (1995). ‘Figure dell’intertestualità nell’epica romana’. Lexis 13: 49–67. Bardon, H. (1962). ‘Le goût à l’époque des Flaviens’. Latomus 21: 732–48. Barich, M. J. (1982). Aspects of the poetic technique of Valerius Flaccus. PhD diss. Yale University. Barnes, W. R. (1981). ‘The Trojan War in Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica’. Hermes 109: 360–70. Bednara, E. (1906). ‘De sermone dactylicorum Latinorum’. ALL 14: 317–60. Bernabé, A. (1996). Poetae epici Graeci: Testimonia et fragmenta. Stuttgart. Bernstein, N. (2014). ‘Romanas veluti saevissima cum legiones Tisiphone regesque movent: Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica and the Flavian Era’. In M.  Heerink and G. Manuwald (eds.), Brill’s Companion to Valerius Flaccus, 154–70. Leiden. Bessone, F. (1991). ‘Valerio Flacco e l’Apollonio commentato’. MD 26: 31–46. Bessone, F. (1997). P. Ovidii Nasonis, Heroidum Epistula XII. Medea Iasoni. Florence.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

Bibliography 257 Bessone, F. (1998). ‘Valerius Flaccus und die Medeen des Ovid’. In U. Eigler and E. Lefèvre (eds.), Ratis omnia vincet: Neue Untersuchungen zu den Argonautica des Valerius Flaccus, 142–71. Munich. Bettini, M. (2004). ‘Tarpeiae turpe sepulchrum / fabor: Il “mito romano” fra discorso autorevole e discorso screditato’. In C. Santini and F. Santucci (eds.), Properzio tra storia, arte e mito. Atti del Convegno Internazionale (Assisi, 24–26 maggio 2002), 199–230. Assisi. Biggs, T. (2019). ‘Naval Battles in Greek and Roman Epic’. In C. Reitz and S. Finkmann (eds.), Structures of Epic Poetry. Vol. II.1: Configuration, 317–53. Berlin. Billerbeck, M. (1999). Seneca, Hercules Furens. Leiden. Blänsdorf, J. (2011). Fragmenta poetarum Latinorum epicorum et lyricorum praeter Enni Annales et Ciceronis Germanicique Aratea post W.  Morel et K.  Büchner editionem quartam auctam curavit. Berlin. Bolton, J. D. P. (1957). ‘Notes on Valerius Flaccus’. CR 7: 104–6. Bömer, F. (1969–86). P. Ovidius Naso, Metamorphosen, 7 vols. Heidelberg. Borgeaud, P. (1996). La Mère des Dieux: De Cybèle à la Vierge Marie. Paris. Bortolussi, B. and Sznajder, L. (2001). ‘Syntaxe et interpretation de saltem’. Papers on Grammar VII: 35–59. Boyle, A. J. (2014). Seneca, Medea. Oxford. Braswell, B. K. (1988). A Commentary on the Fourth Pythian Ode of Pindar. Berlin. Breysig, A. A. B. (1967). Germanici Caesaris Aratea cum scholiis. Hildesheim. Buckley, E. (2013). ‘Visualising Venus: Epiphany and Anagnorisis in Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica’. In H. Lovatt and C. Vout (eds.), Epic Visions: Visuality in Greek and Latin Epic and its Reception, 78–98. Cambridge. Buckley, E. (2014). ‘Valerius Flaccus and Seneca’s Tragedies’. In M.  Heerink and G. Manuwald (eds.), Brill’s Companion to Valerius Flaccus, 307–25. Leiden. Buckley, E. (2016). ‘Over her Live Body? Marriage in Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica’. In N. Manioti (ed.), Family in Flavian Epic, 61–88. Leiden. Cairns, F. (2019). ‘The Prologue of Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica (1.1–21): Quinde­ cimvirate, cortina, and Caledonian Sea’. CCJ 65: 1–28. Carelli, L. (1954). Lucano. Farsaglia/Valerio Flacco. Argonautiche. Turin. Casson, L. (1971). Ships and Seamanship in the Ancient World. Princeton. Castelletti, C. (2006). Porfirio. Sullo Stige. Milan. Castelletti, C. (2008). ‘Riflessioni sugli acrostici di Valerio Flacco’. GIF 60: 219–34. Castelletti, C. (2012a). ‘Following Aratus’ Plow: Vergil’s Signature in the Aeneid’. MH 69: 83–95. Castelletti, C. (2012b). ‘Why is Jason Climbing the Dragon? A Hidden Catasterism in Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica 8’. ICS 37: 141–65. Castelletti, C. (2014a). ‘Aratus and the Aratean tradition in Valerius’ Argonautica’. In A. Augoustakis (ed.), Flavian Poetry and its Greek Past, 49–72. Leiden. Castelletti, C. (2014b). ‘A Hero with a Sandal and a Buskin: The Figure of Jason in Valerius Flaccus’. In M.  Heerink and G.  Manuwald (eds.), Brill’s Companion to Valerius Flaccus, 173–91. Leiden. Castelletti, C. (2016). ‘Nel solco di Arato: Lasciare il segno scrivendo con le stelle. Esempi da Apollonio, Virgilio, Valerio Flacco e Stazio’. In F. Guidetti (ed.), Poesia delle stelle tra Antichità e Medioevo, 231–62. Pisa.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

258 Bibliography Cavarzere, A. (1973–4). ‘La trama allusiva di Fedro IV 7’. AAPat 86: 99–119. Chantraine, P. (1956). Dictionnaire étymologique de la langue grecque. Paris. Chaudhuri, P. (2014). The War with God: Theomachy in Roman Imperial Epic. Oxford. Christensen, H. (1906–8). ‘Que-que bei den römischen Hexametrikern (bis etwa 500 n. Chr.)’. ALL 15: 165–211. Coleman, R. (1999). ‘Poetic Diction, Poetic Discourse, and the Poetic Register’. In J. N. Adams and R. G. Mayer (eds.), Aspects of the Language of Latin Poetry, 21–93. Oxford. Colton, R. E. (1964). ‘Influence of Propertius on Valerius Flaccus’. CB 40: 35. Conington, J. and Nettleship, H. (1963). The Works of Virgil. Heidelberg. Contino, S. (1973). Lingua e stile in Valerio Flacco. Bologna. Courtney, E. (1961). ‘On Valerius Flaccus’. CR 11: 106–7. Courtney, E. (1965). ‘Valeriana tertia’. CR 15: 151–5. Courtney, E. (1972). Review of W.-W.  Ehlers, Untersuchungen zur handschriftlichen Überlieferung der Argonautica des Valerius Flaccus (1970). CR 22: 216–19. Cusset, C., ed. (2003). La météorologie dans l’antiquité, entre science et croyance. Actes du colloque international interdisciplinaire de Toulouse, 2–4 mai 2002. Saint Étienne. Damsté, P. H. (1921). ‘Ad C. Valerii Flacci Argonautica’. Mnemosyne 49: 383–407. Dangel, J. (1995). Accius, Œeuvres. Paris. Davis, M. A. (1989). ‘Ratis audax: Valerius Flaccus’ Bold Ship’, Ramus 18: 46–73. Davis, M. A. (2016). ‘Ratis audax: Valerius Flaccus’ Bold Ship’. In A. Augoustakis (ed.), Oxford Readings in Flavian Epic, 17–44. Oxford. Davis, P. J. (2014). ‘Medea: From Epic to Tragedy’. In M. Heerink and G. Manuwald (eds.), Brill’s Companion to Valerius Flaccus, 192–210. Leiden. Delage, E. (1930). La geographie dans les Argonautiques d’Apollonios de Rhodes. Paris. Della Corte, F. (1969). ‘Perfidus Hospes’. In J. Bibauw (ed.), Hommages à M. Renard, Vol. I, 312–21. Brussels. Delz, J. (1976). Review of E.  Courtney, Valeri Flacci Argonauticon libri octo (1970). Museum Africum 5: 96–100. Delz, J. (1992). ‘Zu den Silvae des Statius’. MH 49.4: 239–55. Deremetz, A. (2014). ‘Authorial poetics in Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica’. In M. Heerink and G. Manuwald (eds.), Brill’s Companion to Valerius Flaccus, 49–71. Leiden. Desbordes, P. (1979). ‘Ἀργὼ πᾶσι µέλουσα’. In Argonautica: Trois études sur l’imitation dans la littérature antique, 42–82. Brussels. Edmonds, R.  G., III. (2019). Drawing Down the Moon: Magic in the Ancient GrecoRoman World. Princeton. Eigler, U. (1988). Monologische Redeformen bei Valerius Flaccus. Frankfurt. Eisenhut, W. (1973). Virtus Romana. Munich. Eitrem, S. (1915). Opferritus und Voropfer der Griechen und Römer. Oslo. Elice, M. (2003–4). ‘Il mirabile nel mito di Medea: I draghi alati nelle fonti letterarie e iconografiche’. Incontri triestini di filologia classica 3: 119–60. Elm von der Osten, D. (2007). Liebe als Wahnsinn: Die Konzeption der Göttin Venus in den Argonautica des Valerius Flaccus. Stuttgart. Fantham, E. (1998). Ovid, Fasti Book IV. Cambridge. Fedeli, P., Ceccarelli, I., and Dimundo, R. (2015). Properzio, Elegie libro 4, 2 vols. Nordhausen.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

Bibliography 259 Feeney, D. C. (1986). ‘Following after Hercules, in Apollonius and Vergil’. PVS 18: 47–83. Feeney, D. C. (1991) The Gods in Epic: Poets and Critics of the Classical Tradition. Oxford. Feraboli, S. and Scarcia, R. (2001). Manilio, Il Poema degli Astri. Vol. II, libri III–V. Milan. Ferenczi, A. (1995). ‘Sine honore labores: Zum Virtusbegriff bei Valerius Flaccus’. Philologus 139: 147–56. Finkmann, S., Reitz, C., and Walter, A. (2019). ‘Prophecies in Roman Epic’. In C. Reitz and S. Finkmann (eds.), Structures of Epic Poetry. Vol. II.2: Configuration, 614–83. Berlin. Fordyce, C. J. (1977). P. Vergili Maronis Aeneidos libri VII–VIII. Oxford. Fordyce, C. J. (1990). Catullus: A Commentary. Oxford. Fraenkel, E. (1950). Aeschylus, Agamemnon, 3 vols. Oxford. Frassinetti, P. (1995). ‘Chiose a Valerio Flacco.’ In G.  Milanese and A.  Porro (eds.), Mélanges G. Tarditi. Vol. I, 299–317. Milan. Frazer, J. G. P. (1929). Ovidi Nasonis Fastorum libri sex, 5 vols. London. Frings, A. (1998). ‘Die Rettung des Thoas’. In U. Eigler and E. Lefèvre (eds.), Ratis omnia vincet: Neue Untersuchungen zu den Argonautica des Valerius Flaccus, 261–8. Munich. Fuà, O. (1988). ‘La presenza di Omero in Valerio Flacco’. AAT 112: 23–53. Fucecchi, M. (2002). ‘Giasone e le similitudini: Ambiguità e ossessione dei modelli eroici’. Aevum(ant) 2: 45–61. Fucecchi, M. (2004). ‘Quem circum vellera Martem/aspicio? (Val. Fl. 1, 223 s.), ovvero: L’ira e i dubbi di una divinità disorientata’. In F. Spaltenstein (ed.), Untersuchungen zu den Argonautica des Valerius Flaccus: Ratis omnia vincet III, 107–32. Munich. Fucecchi, M. (2013). ‘With (a) God on Our Side: Ancient Ritual Practices and Imagery in Flavian Epic’. In A. Augoustakis (ed.), Ritual and Religion in Flavian Epic, 17–32. Oxford. Fucecchi, M. (2014). ‘War and Love in Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica’. In M. Heerink and G. Manuwald (eds.), Brill’s Companion to Valerius Flaccus, 115–35. Leiden. Fuhrer, T. (1988). ‘Ahnung und Wissen: Zur Technik des Erzählens von Bekanntem’. In U.  Eigler and E.  Lefèvre (eds.), Ratis omnia vincet: Neue Untersuchungen zu den Argonautica des Valerius Flaccus, 11–26. Munich. Gaggadis-Robin, V. (1994). Jason et Médée sur les sarcophages d’époque impériale. Rome. Gaggadis-Robin, V. (2000). ‘Κουρὴ Αἰήτεω πολυφάρµακος: Les images de Médée magicienne’. In A. Moreau and C. Turpin (eds.), La magie dans l’antiquité grecque tardive: Les mythes, 289–320. Montpellier. Gain, D. B. (1976). The Aratus Ascribed to Germanicus Caesar. London. Galinsky, G. K. (1972). The Herakles Theme: The Adaptations of the Hero in Literature from Homer to the Twentieth Century. Oxford. Galli, D. (2005). ‘Modelli di intertestualita: La figura di Pelia in Valerio Flacco (Val. Fl. 1, 22–36)’. Philologus 149: 366–71. Ganiban, R. T. (2014). ‘Virgilian Prophecy and the Reign of Jupiter in Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica’. In M. Heerink and G. Manuwald (eds.), Brill’s Companion to Valerius Flaccus, 251–68. Leiden. Gantz, T. (1993). Early Greek Myth: A Guide to Literary and Artistic Sources. Baltimore. Garson, R.  W. (1963). ‘The Hylas Episode in Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica’. CQ 13: 260–7.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

260 Bibliography Garson, R. W. (1965). ‘Some Critical Observations on Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica II’. CQ 15: 104–20. Garson, R. W. (1970). ‘Valerius Flaccus the Poet’. CQ 20: 181–7. Gärtner, U. (1988). ‘Zur Rolle von Personifikation und Allegorie bei Valerius Flaccus’. In U.  Eigler and E.  Lefèvre (eds.), Ratis omnia vincet: Neue Untersuchungen zu den Argonautica des Valerius Flaccus, 67–85. Munich. Gärtner, U. (1994). Gehalt und Funktion der Gleichnisse bei Valerius Flaccus. Stuttgart. Gebbing, H. (1878). De C. Valerii Flacci tropis et figuris. Diss. University of Marburg. Gervais, K. (2017). Statius, Thebaid 2. Oxford. Goldberg, S. M. and Manuwald, G., eds. (2018). Fragmentary Republican Latin, Ennius: Dramatic Fragments, Minor Works. Cambridge, MA. Graf. F. (1997). Magic in the Ancient World. Cambridge, MA. Graillot, H. (1912). Le culte de Cybèle, mère des dieux, à Rome et dans l’empire romain. Paris. Gross, A. (2003). Prophezeiungen und Prodigien in den Argonautica des Valerius Flaccus. Munich. Gruen, E. (1996). Studies in Greek Culture and Roman Policy. Berkeley. Grüneberg, A. (1893). De Valerio Flacco imitatore. Diss. University of Berlin. Hanses, M. (2014). ‘The Pun and the Moon in the Sky: Aratus’ΛΕΠΤΗ Acrostic’. CQ 64: 609–14. Hardie, P. (1986). Virgil’s Aeneid: Cosmos and Imperium. Oxford. Hardie, P. (1993). The Epic Successors of Vergil. Cambridge. Hardie, P. (2007). ‘Phrygians in Rome / Romans in Phrygia’. In G. Urso (ed.), Tra oriente e occidente: Indigeni, Greci e Romani in Asia Minore, 93–103. Pisa. Hardie, P. (2012). Rumour and Renown: Representations of Fama in Western Literature. Cambridge. Harrison, S. J. (1991). Vergil, Aeneid 10. Oxford. Headlam, W. (1902). ‘Ghost-Raising, Magic, and the Underworld’. CR 16: 52–61. Heerink, M. (2014). ‘Valerius Flaccus, Virgil and the Poetics of Ekphrasis’. In M. Heerink and G. Manuwald (eds.), Brill’s Companion to Valerius Flaccus, 72–95. Leiden. Heerink, M. (2020). ‘Replaying Dido: Elegy and the Poetics of Inversion in Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica’. In N. Coffee, C. Forstall, L. Galli Milić, and D. Nelis (eds.), Intertextuality in Flavian Epic Poetry: Contemporary Approaches, 187–203. Berlin. Heinze, T. (1997). Der XII. Heroidenbrief: Medea an Jason. Leiden. Hershkowitz, D. (1998). Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica. Abbreviated Voyages in Silver Latin Epic. Oxford. Hofmann, J. B. (1980). La lingua d’uso latina (trans. L. Ricottilli). Bologna. Hollis, A. S. (2007). Fragments of Roman Poetry c. 60 BC–AD 20. Oxford. Hornblower, S. (2015). Lykophron: Alexandra. Oxford. Horsfall, N. (2003). Virgil, Aeneid 11: A Commentary. Leiden. Horsfall, N. (2008). Virgil, Aeneid 2: A Commentary. Leiden. Housman, A. (1903–30). Marcus Manilius, Astronomicon, 5 vols. Cambridge. Housman, A. (1926). M. Annaei Lucani Belli civilis libri decem. Oxford. Housman, A. (1972). The Classical Papers, collected and edited by J.  Diggle and F. R. D. Goodyear. Cambridge. Hross, H. (1958). Die Klagen der verlassenen Heroiden in der lateinischen Dichtung. Untersuchungen zur Motivik und zur dichterischen Form. Munich.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

Bibliography 261 Hudson-Williams, A. (1959). ‘Imitative Echoes and Textual Criticism’. CQ 9: 61–72. Hudson-Williams, A. (1979). ‘Valerius Flaccus VIII 252–4’. Mnemosyne 32: 379. Hull, K. W. D. (1979). ‘The Hero-Concept in Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica’. In C. Deroux (ed.), Studies in Latin Literature and Roman History, 379–409. Brussels. Hunter, R. (2015). Apollonius of Rhodes, Argonautica Book IV. Cambridge. Hutchinson, G. (2006). Propertius, Elegies Book IV. Cambridge. Jachmann, G. (1935). ‘Eine Elegie des Properz’. RhM 84: 193–240. Jacoby, F. (1957). Die Fragmente der griechischen Historiker. Teil 1: Genealogie und Mythographie. Neudruck vermehrt um Addenda zum Text, Nachträge zum Kommentar, Corrigenda und Konkordanz, 2 vols. Leiden. Jocelyn, H. D. (1967). The Tragedies of Ennius. Cambridge. Jortin, J. (1734). ‘Valerius Flaccus’. In P. Burman, J. Jortin, J.-P. D’Orville, Miscellaneae observationes in auctores veteres et recentiores, IV,1. 157–92. Amsterdam. Keith, A. (2014). ‘Ovid and Valerius Flaccus’. In M. Heerink and G. Manuwald (eds.), Brill’s Companion to Valerius Flaccus, 269–89. Leiden. Kenney, E. J. (1996). Ovid, Heroides XVI–XXI. Cambridge. Kepetzis, E. (1997). Medea in der bildenden Kunst vom Mittelalter zur Neuzeit: ‘So im Herzen bedrängt erglühte verderbliche Liebe’. Frankfurt. Kersten, M. (2013). ‘Ein Akrostichon im zweiten Buch De bello civili? Lucan. 2,600–608’. RhM 156: 161–71. Kleywegt, A. J. (1986). ‘Die Dichtersprache des Valerius Flaccus’. ANRW 2.32.4: 2448–90. Kleywegt, A. J. (1990). ‘Praecursoria Valeriana (IV)’. Mnemosyne 42: 420–40. Kleywegt, A. J. (1991). ‘Die “anderen” Argonauten’. In M. Korn and H. J. Tschiedel (eds.), Ratis omnia vincet: Untersuchungen zu den Argonautica des Valerius Flaccus, 225–37. Hildesheim. Knox, B. M. W. (1950). ‘The Serpent and the Flame: The Imagery of the Second Book of the Aeneid’. AJP 71: 379–400. Koster, S. (1973). ‘Missverständnisse bei Valerius Flaccus?’. Philologus 117: 87–97. Kösters, H. (1893). Quaestiones metricae et prosodiacae ad Valerium Flaccum perti­ nentes. Münster. Köstlin, H. (1889). ‘Zur Erklärung und Kritik des Valerius Flaccus’. Philologus 48: 647–73. Krasne, D. (2011). Mythic Recursions: Doubling and Variation in the Mythological Works of Ovid and Valerius Flaccus. PhD diss. University of California at Berkeley. Krasne, D. (2014a). ‘When the Argo Met the Argo: Poetic Destruction in Valerius’ Argonautica’. In A. Augoustakis (ed.), Flavian Poetry and its Greek Past, 33–48. Leiden. Krasne, D. (2014b). ‘Where Have All the Aetia Gone? Aetiological Reassignment in Valerius Flaccus’s Argonautica’. In C.  Reitz and A.  Walter (eds.), Telling Origins/ Dichtung und Ursache, 545–76. Hildesheim. Kyriakou, P. (1995). Homeric hapax legomena in the Argonautica of Apollonius Rhodius: A Literary Study. Stuttgart. Labate, M. (1984). L ’ arte di farsi amare: Modelli culturali e progetto didascalico nell’elegia ovidiana. Pisa. La Penna, A. (1951). ‘Note sul linguaggio erotico dell’elegia latina’. Maia 4: 187–209. La Penna, A. (1981). ‘Tipi e modelli femminili nella poesia dell’epoca dei Flavi’. In Atti del congresso internazionale di studi vespasianei (Rieti, settembre 1979), 223–51. Rieti.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

262 Bibliography Le Boeuffle, A. (1977). Les noms latins d’astres et de constellations. Paris. Le Boeuffle, A. (1987). Astronomie, astrologie, lexique latin. Paris. Le Boeuffle, A. (1989). Le ciel des romains. Paris. Leo, F. (1960). Ausgewählte Kleine Schriften. Vol. II. Rome. Lesky, A. (1931). ‘Medeia’. RE 15: 29–65. Leumann, M. (1947). ‘Die lateinische Dichtersprache’. MH: 4 116–39. Lewis, B. E. (1984). ‘Valerius Flaccus’ Portrait of Jason: Evidence from the Similes’. AC 27: 91–100. Lindsay, W. M. (1913). Sexti Pompei Festi De verborum significatu quae supersunt cum Pauli epitome. Leipzig. Livrea, E. (1973). Apollonii Rhodii Argonauticon liber IV. Florence. Loehbach, R. (1872). Studien zu Valerius Flaccus. Neuwied. Lovatt, H. (2019). ‘Faith in Fate: Plot, Gods, and Metapoetic Morality in Valerius Flaccus’. In A. Augoustakis, E. Buckley, and C. Stocks (eds.), Fides in Flavian Literature, 85–108. Toronto. Lunais, S. (1979). Recherches sur la lune I: Les auteurs latins de la fin des Guerres Puniques à la fin du règne des Antonins. Leiden. Lundström, S. (1971). ‘Sprach’s’ bei Silius Italicus. Lund. Lunelli, A. (1969). Aerius: Storia di una parola poetica. Rome. Lüthje, E. (1971). Gehalt und Aufriss der Argonautica des Valerius Flaccus. Diss. University of Kiel. McClellan, A. M. (2019). Abused Bodies in Roman Epic. Cambridge. McKeown, J. C. (1987). Ovid, Amores. Vol. I: Text and Prolegomena. Liverpool. McKeown, J. C. (1989). Ovid, Amores. Vol. II: A Commentary on Book One. Leeds. Madvig, J. N. (1887). Opuscula academica. Copenhagen. Malamud, M. A. and McGuire, D. T. (1993). ‘Flavian Variant: Myth. Valerius’ Argonautica’. In A. J. Boyle (ed.), Roman Epic, 192–217. London. Malaspina, E. (1990). ‘La valle di Tempe: Descrizione geografica, modelli letterari e archetipi del locus amoenus’. StudUrb (B) 63: 105–35. Maltby, R. (1991). A Lexicon of Ancient Latin Etymologies. Leeds. Manitius, M. (1889). ‘Vorbilder und Nachahmer des Valerius Flaccus’. Philologus 2: 248–54. Mantovanelli, P. (1981). Profundus: Studio di un campo semantico dal latino arcaico al latino cristiano. Rome. Manuwald, G. (1999). Die Cyzicus-Episode und ihre Funktion in den Argonautica des Valerius Flaccus. Göttingen. Manuwald, G. (2009). ‘What Do Humans Get to Know about the Gods and their Plans? On Prophecies and their Deficiencies in Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica’. Mnemosyne 62: 586–608. Marx, F. (1904–5). C. Lucilii carminum reliquiae, 2 vols. Leipzig. Mastronarde, D. J. (2002). Euripides, Medea. Cambridge. Matthews, V. J. (1996). Antimachus of Colophon: Text and Commentary. Leiden. Mehmel, H. (1934). Valerius Flaccus. Diss. University of Hamburg. Merone, E. (1957). Sulla lingua di Valerio Flacco. Naples. Meyncke, G. (1867). ‘Beiträge zur Kritik des Valerius Flaccus’. RhM 22: 362–76. Mignanego, L. (2001). ‘I quattro volti del vello d’oro’. ARF 3: 11–35.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

Bibliography 263 Moreau, A. (1994). Le mythe de Jason et Médée: Le va-nu-pied et la sorcière. Paris. Moreau, A. (2003). ‘Les perturbation astrales et météorologiques’. In C. Cusset (ed.), La météorologie dans l’antiquité, entre science et croyance. Actes du colloque international interdisciplinaire de Toulouse, 2–4 mai 2002, 169–78. Saint Étienne. Morel, W. (1938). ‘Zu den Argonautica des Valerius Flaccus’. RhM 87: 60–74. Moret, J.-M. (1975). L’Ilioupersis dans la céramique italiote: Les mythes et leur expression figurée au IVe siècle, 2 vols. Rome. Müller, L. (18942). De re metrica poetarum Latinorum, 2nd ed. Leipzig. Nairn, J. (1899). ‘Notes on Valerius Flaccus’. CR 13: 21–2. Nauta, R.  R. (2007). ‘Phrygian Eunuchs and Roman Virtus: The Cult of the Mater Magna and the Trojan Origins of Rome in Virgil’s Aeneid’. In G. Urso (ed.), Tra ori­ ente e occidente. Indigeni, Greci e Romani in Asia Minore, 79–92. Pisa. Nesselrath, H. G. (1998). ‘Jason und Absyrtus: Überlegungen zum Ende von Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica’. In U.  Eigler and E.  Lefèvre (eds.), Ratis omnia vincet: Neue Untersuchungen zu den Argonautica des Valerius Flaccus, 347–54. Munich. Nisbet, R. G. M. and Hubbard, M. (1970). A Commentary on Horace, Odes Book 1. Oxford. Norden, N.  (1913). Agnostos Theos: Untersuchungen zur Formengeschichte religiöser Rede. Leipzig. Norden, N. (19273). P. Vergilius Maro. Aeneis Buch VI. Stuttgart. Nordera, R. (1969). ‘I virgilianismi in Valerio Flacco. Contributo a uno studio della lingua epica nell’età imperiale’. In A. Traina (ed.), Contributi a tre poeti latini, 1–92. Bologna. Nordera, R. (2016). ‘Virgilianisms in Valerius Flaccus: A Contribution to the Study of Epic Language in the Imperial Age’. In A.  Augoustakis (ed.), Oxford Readings in Flavian Epic, 45–79. Oxford Novakova, I. (1964). Umbra: Ein Beitrag zur dichterischen Semantik. Berlin. Ogden, D. (2013). Drakon: Dragon Myth and Serpent Cult in the Greek and Roman Worlds. Oxford. Otto, A. (1890). Die Sprichwörter und sprichwörtlichen Redensarten der Römer. Leipzig. Paduano, G. and Fusillo, M. (1986). Apollonio Rodio, Le Argonautiche. Milan. Page, D. L. (1938). Euripides, Medea. Oxford. Palmer, L. R. (1954). The Latin Language. London. Pàmias, J. and Geus, K. (2007). Eratosthenes, Sternsagen (Catasterismi). Oberhaid. Pàmias, J., Massana, I., and Zucker, A. (2013). Eratosthène de Cyrène, Catastérismes. Paris. Panofsky, E. (1930). Hercules am Scheidewege. Leipzig. Pasquali, G. (1920). Orazio lirico. Florence. Pease, A. S. (1935). Publi Vergili Maronis Aeneidos liber quartus. Cambridge, MA. Pederzani, O. (1987). ‘Curiositas e classicismo nelle Argonautiche di Valerio Flacco’. MD 18–19: 101–29. Pellacani, D. (2015). Cicerone, Aratea. Parte I: Proemio e catalogo delle costellazioni. Bologna. Pellucchi, T. (2008a). ‘Il personaggio di Ergino in Valerio Flacco’. In L. Castagna and C. Riboldi (eds.), Amicitiae templa serena: Studi in onore di Giuseppe Aricò. Vol. II, 1257–87. Milan. Pellucchi, T. (2008b). ‘Il prologo della Medea come paradigma teatrale: Il caso di Fedro IV,7’. In G. Aricò and M. Rivoltella (eds.), La riflessione sul teatro nella cultura romana. Atti del convegno (Milano 10–12 maggio 2006), 229–51. Milan.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

264 Bibliography Penwill, J. (2013). ‘Imperial Encomia in Flavian Epic’. In G. Manuwald and A. Voigt (eds.), Flavian Epic Interactions, 29–54. Berlin. Penwill, J. (2018). ‘How it All Began: Civil War and Valerius’s Argonautica’. In L. Donovan Ginsberg and D. Krasne (eds.), After 69 CE: Writing Civil War in Flavian Rome, 69–85. Berlin. Perkins, J. B. (1974). ‘An Aspect of the Style of Valerius Flaccus’ Argonauticon’. Phoenix 28: 290–313. Perutelli, A. (1979). ‘Registri narrativi e stile indiretto libero in Virgilio (a proposito di Aen. 4,279 sgg.)’. MD 3: 69–82. Perutelli, A. (1985). ‘I bracchia degli alberi: Designazione tecnica e immagine poetica’. MD 15: 9–48. Perutelli, A. (2000). La poesia epica latina: Dalle origini all’età dei Flavi. Rome. Pfeiffer, R (1988). Callimachus, 2 vols. New York. Pharr, B. (1932). ‘The Interdiction of Magic in Roman Law’. TAPhA 63: 269–95. Pichon, R. P. (1902). Index verborum amatoriorum. Paris. Pinotti, P. (1988). Ovidio, Remedia Amoris. Bologna. Poortvliet, H. M. (2003). ‘Valerian Leftovers (III)’. Mnemosyne 56: 606–10. Radt, S. (2009). Tragicorum Graecorum fragmenta. Vol. 3: Aeschylus. Göttingen. Renaud, J. M. (2004). Le mythe d’Orion. Liège. Ricci, M.  L. (1977). ‘Di alcune similitudini mitologiche in Valerio Flacco’. SIFC 49: 145–96. Río Torres-Murciano, A. (2011). El restablecimiento de la causalidad épica en Valerio Flaco. Saarbrücken. Ripoll, F. (1998). La morale héroique dans les épopées latines d’époque flavienne: Tradition et innovation. Paris. Ripoll, F. (1999). ‘Silius Italicus et Valérius Flaccus’. REA 101: 499–521. Ripoll, F. (2004). ‘L’inspiration tragique au chant VII des Argonautiques de Valérius Flaccus’. REL 82: 187–208. Ripoll, F. (2008). ‘Jason au chant VIII des Argonautiques de Valérius Flaccus: Héros ou anti-héros?’. Pallas 77: 173–84. Roller, L.  E. (1999). In Search of God the Mother: The Cult of Anatolian Cybele. Berkeley. Romeo, G. (1907). Saggi grammaticali su Valerio Flacco. Catania. Rossignoli, B. (2004). L’Adriatico greco: Culti e miti minori. Rome. Rychlewska, L. (1971). Turpilii comici fragmenta. Leipzig. Salemme, C. (1991). Medea: Un antico mito in Valerio Flacco. Naples. Samuelsson, J. (1930). ‘Ad Valerium Flaccum’. Eranos 28: 168–75. Santoni, A. (2009). Eratostene, Epitome dei Catasterismi. Pisa. Scaffai, M. (1986). ‘Rassegna di studi su Valerio Flacco’. ANRW 2.32.4: 2359–447. Schetter, W. (1959). ‘Die Buchzahl der Argonautica des Valerius Flaccus’. Philologus 103: 297–308. Schierl, P. (2006). Die Tragödien des Pacuvius: Ein Kommentar zu den Fragmenten mit Einleitung, Text und Übersetzung. Berlin. Schimann, F. (1998). ‘Valerius Flaccus und Vergil: Interpretatio Vergiliana’. In U. Eigler and E. Lefèvre (eds.), Ratis omnia vincet: Neue Untersuchungen zu den Argonautica des Valerius Flaccus, 123–39. Munich.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

Bibliography 265 Schmidt, P.  L. (1976). ‘Polizian und der italienische Archetyp der Valerius FlaccusÜberlieferung’, Italia medioevale e umanistica 19: 241–56. Schmit-Neuerburg, T. (2001). ‘Triumph der Medea? Kritische Bemerkungen zu den Argonautica des Valerius Flaccus’. Philologus 145: 121–36. Schönberger, O. (1965). ‘Zum Weltbild der drei Epiker nach Lucan’. Helikon 5: 123–45. Schulte, W. H. (1965). Index Verborum Valerianus. Hildesheim. Séchan, L. (1926). Études sur la tragédie grecque dans ses rapports avec la céramique. Paris. Sesti, G. M. (1987). Le dimore del cielo: Archeologia e mito delle costellazioni. Palermo. Shackleton Bailey, D. R. (1956). Propertiana. Cambridge. Shey, H.  J. (1968). A Critical Study of the Argonautica of Valerius Flaccus. PhD diss. University of Iowa. Shreeves, C. E. (1978). Landscape, Topography and Geographical Notation in the Argonautica of Valerius Flaccus. PhD diss. University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Simon, E. (1998). ‘Medea in der antiken Kunst. Magierin-Mutter-Göttin’. In A. Kämmerer, M. Schuchard, and A. Speck (eds.), Medeas Wandlungen: Studien zu einem Mythos in Kunst und Wissenschaft, 13–53. Heidelberg. Skutsch, O. (1985). The Annals of Q. Ennius. Oxford. Smolenaars, J. J. L. (1994). Statius Thebaid VII, A Commentary. Leiden. Somerville, T. (2010). ‘Note on a Reversed Acrostic in Vergil’s Georgics 1.429–33’. CP 105: 202–9. Sommer, F. (1914). Handbuch der lateinischen Laut- und Formenlehre. Heidelberg. Soubiran, J. (1972). Cicéron, Aratea. Paris. Soussan, A. C. (2006). La figure d’Athamas dans la mythologie gréco-latine. PhD diss. University of Paris X. Stafford, E. (2005). ‘VICE OR VIRTUE? Herakles and the Art of Allegory’. In L. Rawlings and H. Bowden (eds.), Herakles and Hercules: Exploring a Graeco-Roman divinity, 71–96. Swansea. Steele, R. B. (1930). ‘Interrelation of the Latin Poets under Domitian’. CP 25: 328–42. Stocks, C. (2016). ‘Daddy’s Little Girl? The Father/Daughter Bond in Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica and Flavian Rome’. In N. Manioti (ed.), Family in Flavian Epic, 41–60. Leiden. Stover, T. (2010). ‘Rebuilding Argo: Valerius Flaccus’ Poetic Creed’. Mnemosyne 63: 640–50. Stover, T. (2012). Epic and Empire in Vespasianic Rome: A New Reading of Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica. Oxford. Stover, T. (2018). ‘Civil War and the Argonautic Program of Statius’s Thebaid’. In L. Donovan Ginsberg and D. Krasne (eds.), After 69 CE: Writing Civil War in Flavian Rome, 109–22. Berlin. Strand, J. (1972). Notes on Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica. Gothenburg. Strati, R. (2002). ‘Appunti per la storia di unanimus: Tra Plauto e Virgilio’. Paideia 57: 477–503. Sullivan, F. (1968). ‘Tendere manus: Gestures in the Aeneid’. CJ 63: 358–62. Summers, W. C. (1894). A Study of the Argonautica of Valerius Flaccus. Cambridge. Tatum, J. (2016). ‘Why is Valerius Flaccus a Quindecimuir?’ CQ 23: 129–37. Timpanaro, S. (1978). Contributi di filologia e di storia della lingua latina. Rome.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

266 Bibliography Tosi, R. (1991). Dizionario delle sentenze latine e greche. Milan. Traglia, A. (1950). La lingua di Cicerone poeta. Bari. Tränkle, H. (1960). Die Sprachkunst des Properz und die Tradition der lateinischen Dichtersprache. Wiesbaden. Treggiari, S. (1991). Roman Marriage. Iusti Coniuges from the time of Cicero to the time of Ulpian. Oxford. Tupet, A. M. (1976). La magie dans la poésie latine: Des origines à la fin du règne d’Auguste. Paris. Usener, H. (1902). ‘Milch und Honig’. RhM 57: 177–95. van der Schuur, M. (2014). ‘The deaths of Idmon and Tiphys in Valerius’ Argonautica’. In A. Augoustakis (ed.), Flavian Poetry and its Greek Past, 95–112. Leiden. Venini, P. (1971a). ‘Valerio Flacco e l’erudizione apolloniana’. RIL 105: 582–96. Venini, P. (1971b). ‘Sulla struttura delle Argonautiche di Valerio Flacco’. RIL 105: 597–620. Venini, P. (1972). ‘Su alcuni motivi delle Argonautiche di Valerio Flacco’. BStudLat 2: 10–19. Venini, P. (1989). ‘Sull’imitazione virgiliana in Valerio Flacco’. Athenaeum 67: 273–5. Vian, F. and Delage, É. (1981). Apollonios de Rhodes, Argonautiques. Tome III: Chant IV. Paris. Vojatzi, M. (1982). Frühe Argonautenbilder. Würzburg. Watson, L. C. (2003). A Commentary on Horace’s Epodes. Oxford. Watson, P. (1985). ‘Axelson Revisited’. CQ 35: 430–48. Watt, W. S. (1984). ‘Notes on Latin Epic Poetry’. BICS 31: 153–70. Watt, W. S. (2001). ‘Notes on Seneca’s Philosophical Works’. RhM 144.2: 231–3. Wedeniwski, E. (2006). Antike Beschreibungen von Türbildern: Vergil Georgica 3, Properz 2,31, Vergil Aeneis 6, Ovid met. 2, Valerius Flaccus 5 und Silius Italicus 3. Marburg. West, M. L. (1997). The East Face of Helicon. West Asiatic Elements in Greek Poetry and Myth. Oxford. Wetzel, S. (1957). Die Gestalt der Medea bei Valerius Flaccus. Diss. University of Kiel. White, H. (2007). ‘Notes on Valerius Flaccus’. Orpheus 28: 252–64. Williams, G. (1978). Change and Decline: Roman Literature in the Early Empire. Berkeley. Williams, R. D. (1960). P. Vergili Maronis. Aeneidos Liber V. Edited with a Commentary. Oxford. Wills, J. (1996). Repetition in Latin Poetry: Figures of Allusion. Oxford. Wiseman, T. P. (1984). ‘Cybele, Vergil and Augustus’. In T. Woodman and D. West (eds.), Poetry and Politics in the Age of Augustus, 117–28. Cambridge. Wöhrle, G. (1995). Hypnos der Allbezwinger: Eine Studie zum literarischen Bild des Schlafes in der griechischen Antike. Stuttgart. Wölfflin, E. (1885). ‘Was heisst bald . . . bald?’. ALL 2: 233–54. Worstbrock, F.J. (1963). Elemente einer Poetik der Aeneis. Munich. Zissos, A. (1999). ‘Allusion and Narrative Possibility in the Argonautica of Valerius Flaccus’. CP 94: 289–301. Zissos, A. (2003–4). ‘Navigating Genres: Martial 7.19 and the Argonautica of Valerius Flaccus’. CJ 99: 405–22. Zissos, A. (2004a). ‘Terminal Middle: the Argonautica of Valerius Flaccus’. In S. Kyriakidis and F. de Martino (eds.), Middles in Latin Poetry, 311–44. Bari.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

Bibliography 267 Zissos, A. (2004b). ‘L’ironia allusiva: Lucan’s Bellum Civile and the Argonautica of Valerius Flaccus’. In P. Esposito and E. M. Ariemma (eds.), Lucano e la tradizione dell’epica latina, 21–38. Naples Zissos, A. (2012a). ‘The King’s Daughter: Medea in Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica’. Ramus 41: 94–118. Zissos, A. (2012b). ‘Allusion and Narrative Possibility in the Argonautica of Valerius Flaccus’. In A. Augoustakis (ed.), Oxford Readings in Flavian Epic, 111–26. Oxford.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

Index Locorum This index is selective of passages mentioned in the introduction and commentary. Apollonius Rhodius 2.404–7 99 2.600–2 152 2.604–6 152 2.1208–9 99 3.594–8 58 3.617–32 54, 73 3.669–73 54 4.1–66 49 4.18–19 53 4.24–5 58 4.26–34 52, 53, 55, 56 4.40–126 65, 67, 79, 120 4.54–65 67 4.83–91 73, 76, 79 4.93–4 72 4.124–6 119 4.127–44 99 4.144–8 91, 101 4.149–61 90, 93, 99 4.162–6 115 4.167–73 124 4.190–205 122 4.212–40 127, 130, 193 4.241–302 144 4.298–302 156 4.302–521 163 4.302–37 182 4.338–95 225 4.352–4 235 4.355–6 236 4.450–1 182 4.982–1222 163 4.1000–7 182 4.1036–7 76 4.1130–40 180 4.1141–3 181 4.1544–5 83 Aratus Phaen. 6 5 24 84 45–62 81–2, 86, 105 342–52 152 443 114 588–9 217

639–40 213 778–87 3–4 Avienus Arat. Phaen. 138–41 105 152 83 159 82 169–93 115 588–9 217 Catullus 64.132–201 134 Euripides Med. 24–8 161 31–3 76 166–7 76 255–6 188 480–2 90 431–3 145 480–2 99 502–3 76 1261–5 145 1279–89 63 Germanicus 48–50 105, 115 56–7 83, 103 61 104 176 234 313–14 219–20 331–2 217 344–55 152 534 50 554–7 210 617 105 658–60 219 688–9 137 4.59–60 224 4.78 98 5.5–6 205 Homer Il. 14.231 96 14.233–41 91

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

270 16.682 96 18.234–6 107 Od. 11.572–5 207 11.601–4 168 Lucan 3.512–13 194 6.685–94 97 7.122–3 213 9.283–4 134 9.364–5 119 Ovid Her. 12.72 73 12.101–2 99 12.109–12 76, 90 12.165–6 90 17.229 190 Met. 1.568–72 247 4.481–511 61 4.525–62 63 4.628 97 4.644–5 97 6.644–6 180 7.36 99 7.149–58 90 7.188–90 93 7.192–219 92 7.210–14 90 Pindar Nem. 4.56 58 Pyth. 4.9–58 145 4.244–6 99 4.249 88 4.251–62 145 Seneca Her. F. 689–90 101 1069 96 Med. 8–18 101 118–20 76 179–300 226 408–10 181 427–9 239 431–578 226 572–4 170

Index Locorum 692–704 82 961–2 61 Thy. 870 105 Silius Italicus 2.531–2 205 10.352 95 10.354–6 102 Statius Silv. 3.2.64–5 181 5.2.137 181 Theb. 2.144 95 3.76–7 189 4.99–100 109 5.197–9 95, 96 6.27 95 6.893–4 113 8.675–6 71 10.111 95 10.282–4 205 Valerius Flaccus 1.1–4 2, 152 1.15–20 2 1.34–6 124 1.58–63 81 1.71–3 192 1.140–8 163, 182 1.226 171 1.315–34 134 1.482–3 5 1.531–67 2, 6, 7–9, 116, 128, 163, 182, 186, 203, 207, 208, 211, 226, 229, 252 1.568–73 175 1.574–658 202–3 1.610–21 205 1.700–3 131 1.712–24 134 1.759–61 192 1.833 192 2.64–5 5 2.168 52 2.357–77 3–6 2.381–2 7, 88 2.391–2 2 3.14–18 182 3.80 197 3.339–40 161 3.496–7 197 4.691–3 151, 152

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



Index Locorum 4.707–10 152 5.17 144 5.210–12 122, 125 5.220 90 5.224–58 81 5.229 121 5.233–40 129 5.348–9 53 5.368–75 65, 70 5.438–9 187 5.442–51 171 5.486–91 117 5.683–7 56–7 6.439–48 91, 95 6.499–502 166, 237 6.604–8 70 7.43–5 187, 189 7.48–50 187 7.103–372 49 7.165–9 81, 99 7.384 81 7.389–91 79, 80 7.396–7 65, 66 7.461–2 80 7.477–509 76, 77 7.519–38 81, 83, 99, 100 7.547–52 242 7.556–606 113 7.607–43 113 8.54–133 7 8.134–74 8 8.217–317 7 8.239–42 8 8.318–84 7

Virgil A. 1.117–18 208 1.212–13 179 1.654–5 170 2.257–8 119 2.490 52

271

2.503–5 189 3.564–7 206, 208 4.12–13 233–4 4.68–73 67 4.141–50 67 4.165–72 176, 80 4.296–332 233–4 4.300–3 245 4.368–71 243 4.393–6 231 4.397–400 194 4.480–6 97, 109 4.642 49 4.675–85 134 5.8–34 145 5.341–98 65 5.838–61 91, 93, 96, 97, 99, 101, 102 6.137 93 6.262–3 80 6.278 96 6.522 96 7.45–6 57 7.311–15 101 7.359–405 226 7.373–405 245 7.400–538 65 8.175–8 180 8.620 86 9.364 124 9.399–400 221 10.270 86 10.677–8 151 10.762–8 206–7 11.39–41 107 12.97–100 214 12.236–7 4 12.331–3 167 G.

1.245 105 1.293 99 1.424–35 2–5 4.517–18 160

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi

General Index References are to page numbers. This index is selective and based on the introduction and commentary. Absyrtus  57–8, 130, 159, 172, 182–93, 220–4; see also Medea Acastus 127–8 Aeetes 130–1 and Pelias  127–8 decline of kingdom of  7 fate of  56–7 the dragon as  107, 111–12 see also Sol Alcimede  127, 133–4 Almo 172 Alpheus 104–6 Argo as Minerva’s boat  195, 252 from Pagasae  223 Argonauts debate Medea’s fate  225–33 debate on trip’s route  144–63 pursued by the Colchians  182–202 Asia (East), clash with Europe (West)  7, 182, 190, 226, 230 Astraea 3 Athamas 61–4 Attis 172–3 Cadmus 62 Carambis, Cape  155–6, 162 Chalciope  54, 57, 132 Charon 52 Cinna 4 Circe 61 Colchis, see under Medea Corinth, Medea’s future in  7, 58–64, 116, 127, 163, 166–7, 170–1, 178, 226, 228, 238, 250 Creusa  59, 170–1, 174, 176 Cupid 169–70 Cybele, see under Magna Mater Cythera 168 Diana, cult of at Tauris  156, 159 Dioscuri  2, 175–6; see also Pollux Dragon (constellation)  81–4, 86, 93, 104–7 Endymion, see under Jason Engonasin  115–16, 124

Erginus  146–53, 155–6 Eridanus, see under Po Erinys, see under Furies Europa 186 Furies 61–2; see also Medea Golden Fleece capture of  7, 81–2, 115–27 in Medea’s and Jason’s wedding  181 Haemon 58 Harmonia 62 Hebe 167–9 Hebrus 167 Hecate, see under Medea Helle 62 Hercules  2, 6–7, 52, 107, 115–16; see also Jason Hesperides  7, 82, 96, 107, 116 Hyperboreans  155, 160 Hypsipyle 58 Iarbas 7 Idyia 127–8 Ino, see under Medea Iris 119–20 Ister  145, 149, 155–6, 195–6, 223 Isthmus 63–4 Jason and Phaethon  154 and the dragon  79–115 as Endymion  66–70 as Hercules  122, 124–5, 167–9 as Mars  167–8 heroism of  7 meeting with Medea  65–79 speeches of  72–6, 153–5, 254 see also Golden Fleece, Medea Juno rousing sea storm  202–25 Jupiter and Gigantomachy  6–7 and the translatio imperii 8 Weltenplan of  2, 6, 8–9, 116, 163, 182, 203, 207, 226, 229

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 07/04/22, SPi



General Index

Latmus, Mt.  67 Learchus 63 Lemnos  2–3, 7 Leucothea 63 Luna, see under Medea Lycus, lands of  155–6, 162 Mariandyni, see under Lycus Mars  65, 129; see also Jason Medea and Absyrtus  188–92, 201 and the dragon  79–115 and Europa  186 and Hecate  53, 65, 67, 101, 109 and the Palladium  8, 158–9, 165, 226, 251–2 as a dove  70–2 as Bacchant  226, 245–7 as Erinys  226, 230 as Ino  60–4, 127 as Io  52 as Luna  66–70 as Magna Mater  8, 128, 132, 172–3, 226, 251–2 decides to leave Colchis  49–64 family of  127–44 farewell speech of  52–5 isolation of  155–63 magical arts of  90–106, 248–50 monologues of  55–8 speeches of  76–9, 88–90, 96–9, 106–115, 236–44 wedding of with Jason  163–81 see also Argonauts, Corinth, Golden Fleece, Jason Medus  57, 78 Melicertes 62–4 Minerva  157, 165–6; see also Argo Mopsus  174, 177–9, 229–30 Nephele 62 Nile 104–6

Pagasae, see under Argo Palaemon, see under Melicertes Pallas, see under Minerva Pelias, see under Aeetes Perses  57, 78 Peuce  7, 144, 155, 163–82, 195–6, 223 Phasis 65 Phrixus 62 Pleiades 3 Po 104–6 Pollux  66, 174–6 Sarmatians  155, 158 Selene  67, 68, 69 Sibylline Books  8 Sirius 66 Sol, and Aeetes  7–8, 215 Somnus 91–6 Spartoi  49–50, 89, 213, 247 Styrus  7, 137–8, 197–8 as Orion  7, 206–7, 211–13, 217–20 death of  203, 216–20 monologue of  210–16 Symplegades  147, 151–2 technopaignion 2–6 Tiphys  4, 146–8 Tisiphone, see under Furies Turnus 7 Valerius Flaccus and Aratus  2–6 and Virgil  2–6 astronomy in  2–6, 8, 211–12 editions of  10 manuscript tradition of  9–10 name of  2–6 poem’s end in  6–9 poem’s ideology in  1–6 sphragis in  1–7 Venus  166–71, 176

273