Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T09:42:23.007Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Medea's Flight: The Fourth Book of the Argonautica*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 February 2009

Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

If Medea has attracted more readers to the Argonautica than any other character – thereby also determining which parts of the poem have become generally familiar – she has also provided critics of the poem with their major (sometimes their sole) topic for discussion. The main charge, particularly among critics writing in English, is that the various aspects of Medea – awakening love, deadly magic, fratricide – form neither a consistent nor a credible whole. One quotation, from an article which explicitly aims to summarise recent criticism, may stand as representative: ‘[Medea′s passion] produced an inconsistency [Apollonius] either ignored deliberately in the confidence of his Medea in love, or, just possibly, may not have noticed. The same emotionally immature and helpless Medea is the competent, unfrightened servant of Hecate, the cool instructress of Jason in taming the bulls, the calm soother of the dragon…the behaviour of Medea later in the [fourth] Book is, against all reason, quite untouched by what we would think of as a shattering experience, at the very least destructive of any real trust between her and Jason….It is as if Apollonius has thrown in [Apsyrtus′ murder] without care or realisation of its consequence for the consistency of her character’. Behind criticism of this kind lies both an understandable desire to relate the characters of ancient literature, if not to our own experience, at least to what instinct tells us is possible, and the whole tradition of criticism which descends from the Poetics of Aristotle. In recent years other approaches have gained currency, but in this paper I shall explore the presentation of Medea as a whole (Part I) and particularly of her flight from Colchis (Part II) within a traditional framework in an attempt to clarify what seem to me to be critical misunderstandings.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Classical Quarterly , Volume 37 , Issue 1 , May 1987 , pp. 129 - 139
Copyright
Copyright © The Classical Association 1987

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Particularly helpful are Hiibscher 10–38, Paduano and the survey by H. Herter, Bursian′s Jahresbericht 285 (1944/55), 291–4. Of criticism in English most can be learned from E. Phinney, ‘Narrative Unity in the Argonautica, the Medea-Jason Romance’, TAPA 98 (1967), 327–41 and Campbell 37–77.

2 Cf. Fusillo′s strictures (p. 287 n. 54)‘ II problema della "doppia Medea" e forse il piu ozioso e il piu falsato nell’ impostazione di quelli su cui si e soffermata la bibliografia apolloniana′.

3 C. Collard, ‘Medea and Dido’, Prometheus 1 (1975), 131–51 at 138–9.

4 Cf., e.g., S. Goldhill, Reading Greek Tragedy (Cambridge, 1986), pp. 169–98; for a ‘revised Aristotelianism’ cf. J. M. Redfield, Nature and Culture in the Iliad (Chicago, 1975), pp. 20–3.

5 Apsyrtus goes to his death like ancf. also 3.747–8, Fusillo 338.

6 Vian′s note on 1521, ‘Medee a aussitot compris le danger et le caractere irremediable de la blessure’, is hard to believe; contrast, e.g., Paduano 232.

7 7 Cf. B. M.W.Knox,‘ The Medea of Euripides’, YCS 25 (1977), 193–225 at 211–16 (= Word and Action, pp. 307–11).

8 This, of course, simplifies a highly complex subject, cf., e.g., S. C. Humphreys, The Family, Women and Death (London, 1983), pp. 72–3, Goldhill, op. cit., pp. 115–17.

9 Cf. P. Handel, Beobachtungen zur epischen Technik des Apollonios Rhodios (Munich, 1954), pp. 75–7, Vian′s edition of Book 4, pp. 20–1, Fusilio 283 n. 37.

10 Cf., e.g., Vian′s edition, p. 22. I do not find Vian′s reconstruction of Apsyrtus′ strategy credible

11 Cf., e.g., Wilamowitz ii.202. Beye 162 hedges his bets, perhaps wisely.

12 I do not agree with Vian (Note complementaire to 1116) that Medea is saying that she will torment Jason ‘comme un revenant’. Magical transport seems to suit her magical powers

13 Catullus used Medea′s speech for Ariadne′s lament in Poem 64; note 4.385–7/Cat. 64.192–7. There are other more general similarities, which might arise merely from the similarity of situation or from the common debt to Euripides. It is noteworthy that a cloak decorated with the story of Ariadne (4.423–34) is part of Medea′s way of avoiding Ariadne′s fate; this cloak was a gift from Hypsipyle, the first ‘Ariadne’ in the poem.

14 Note 3.368/4.391, 740.

15 Note 3.386–8/4.395–8; 3.396/4.410

16 Apollonius avoids any gruesome butchery by Medea herself, cf. Hiibscher 34–5.

17 4.468, cf. Od. 4.535, 11.411. It is interesting to compare the episode with Circe to the Iphigeneia in Tauris of Euripides: a couple, stained (in Medea′s case literally, cf. 4.473–4) with the blood of a relative of one of them, come at the command of a divine voice to receive purification. The purifier, who is related to murderer and victim, is forewarned of the arrival in a dream. The crucial difference between the two works is the moral status of Orestes and Medea

18 ii. 196–7, 203, 213.

19 Cf. 3.680 (Chalciope′s expressed wish to live)

20 Hiibscher 12–13 well observes that Jason′s conditional undertaking is very typical of him. His partial revelation of the story of Theseus and Ariadne would, of course, have to be considered in any full account of his behaviour in this scene.

21 Cf., esp., Paduano 199–200, Fusillo 259.

22 The curious phrasing of 1162,i, points to the fact that Medea′s only partner is herself

23 Note complementaire to 4.93

24 Cf. Hubscher 18.

25 For a different interpretation of 4.136–8 cf. A. Hurst, Apollonios de Rhodes: maniere et coherence (Rome, 1967), pp. 105–6. On the transference of the language of family relationships to amatory contexts in general cf. C. W. Macleod, ZPE 15 (1974), 218 (= Collected Essays, p. 17).

26 Trj in 369 clearly foreshadows Medea′s betrayal of Apsyrtus, cf. Frankel 481, Paduano 219. There is a similar effect at Eur. Med. 257 (cf. Page on 231). Medea exploits the same Homeric verses in her pledge to Chalciope at 3.730–2; that is not simple hypocrisy, as Medea′s motives are complex and apparently contradictory impulses exist side by side.

27 For other possible resonances in this simile cf. Hurst, op. cit., pp. 122–3, Beye 154, Fusillo 338

28 Note Od. l.Hl/Arg. 4.1012–13.

29 Od. b.XW/Arg. 4.1014; the doubt about whether the addressee is human or divine (cf. Livrea on IXadi in 1014); Od. 6.175/Arg. 4.1025; Od. 6.W0–2/Arg. 4.1026–8. For other Homeric passages cf. M. Campbell, Echoes and Imitations of Early Epic in Apollonius Rhodius (Leiden, 1981), p. 80.

30 Note the stress on the plurality of potential protectors at 4.1030. The lack of any specific reference to Jason marks the increased seriousness of Medea′s position since the murder of Apsyrtus and the visit of Circe. For Wilamowitz (ii.203) Jason′s silence here was ‘das Allerbezeichnendste fur die erloschene Liebe’, and subsequent critics have elaborated this view.

31 On the much disputedof 1.22 cf. most recently Fusillo 365–6.

32 The desire to be read against Homer may also be marked out by echoes of //. 1.1 in 4.1 and Od. 1.1 in 4.2, cf. L. E. Rossi, RFIC 96 (1968), 159–60. That 4.1–2 is ‘a concentration of tags’ (M.Campbell, Mnem.1 36 [1983], 155) does not disprove specific echoes, as the Iliad and the Odyssey have privileged status for later poets.

33 Cf. 3.288–9 (the onset of love)(the first sight of Jason).

34 Cf. 3.661 (the simile of the)

35 Cf. 3.773, 798 (Medea′s suicide speech), 961, 973 (first encounter with Jason).

36 Cf. p. 4 of Vian′s edition

37 Cf., e.g., H. Faerber, Zur dichterischen Kunst in Apollonios Rhodios‘ Argonautica (die Gleichnisse) (diss. Berlin, 1932), p. 88.

38 Cf. (from a different perspective) Paduano 206

39 Cf. also Livrea on v. 4, citing Kiihner-Gerth ii. p. 173 for ye attached to the apparently preferable of two alternatives.

40 As asserted by Frankel 458–9 and Beye 146, 164; a better view in Livrea′s note on v. 55.

41 Cf. Campbell 52.

42 Note the parallelism of 3.817 and 4.24–5, perhaps (as Dr Feeney suggested to me) emphasising Medea′s reduction to the status of a servant. vrjovSt in 4.50 would suit the matching of the two scenes, but I do not believe that it can stand. Some of the parallels between Books 3 and 4 have now been noted by A. Rose, ‘Clothing Imagery in Apollonius′ Argonautika’, QUCC 21 (1985), 29–44 at 36–7.

43 Note also 3.874–5/4.45–6. Medea′s isolation from her people is emphasised by the description of Aietes′ procession, accompanied by

44 Cf.10.360–2, 11.473–81, 544–7, 22.189–93.

45 Cf.22.1

46 Nowhere else in Apollonius of a person, but note 2.831 of the dying sounds of the board

47 Cf. h. Dem. 174, Bacchyl. 13.84–90, Eur. Ba. 866–76. For some of the associations of the fawn in these contexts cf. A. P. Burnett, Three Archaic Poets (London, 1983), pp. 93

48 Cf. G. Pompella, ‘Su Apollonio Rodio IV35^0’, Annali.Napoli 19 (1976/7), 53–61, Beye150.

49 Cf. Wilamowitz ii.212 n. 2, Frankel 456, and the notes of Livrea and Vian.

50 Pompella′s ‘teme di andare, e terrorizzata all’ idea di finire sotto la padrona’ (op. cit. 57)

51 Cf., e.g., J. M. Redfield, Arethusa 5 (1982), 188–91, R. Seaford, CQ 35 (1985), 318–19.

52 Cf. JHS 105(1985), 192.

53 Cf. 3.284–90.

54 For the very strong emotions indicated by ‘ fire in the eyes’, cf. L. Graz, Le Feu dans I‘ I Hade et VOdyssee (Paris, 1965), pp. 240–7.

55 Cf. Vianon 375, Beye 154.

56 There is a useful survey by N. Zagagi, ’Helen of Troy: Encomium and Apology’, WS 98 (1985), 63–88

57 This passage is echoed at 3.803 (Medea′s drugs).

58 Cf. 3.641 (corresponding to //. 3.180, 6.344, 356), following a dream description based on Penelope at Od. 18.187–9, 19.516–17, and 3.793–4 (corresponding to 3.411–12).

59 Helen 19.

60 Cf., e.g., Isocrates, Helen 67, Zagagi, op. cit., pp. 72–4.

61 Herodotus makes the abduction of Medea the last in the series of actions which inspired Paris to abduct Helen (1.2–3). His report of Greek opinion, ‘the women obviously would not have been abducted unless they had wanted it’ (1.4.2), shows that the question of female attitude was already inherent in the story. For the later linking of Medea and Helen cf. Propertius 2.34.5–8 (behind which may lie Arg. 4.445–9).

62 Cf. most recently J. Tatum, AJP 105 (1984), 44(M, S. Skulsky, AJP 106 (1985), 447–55, J. Griffin, Latin Poets and Roman Life (London, 1985), p. 159. With 4.1021 F. Rutten, Z)e Vergilii studiis Apollonianis (diss. Minister, 1912), p. 71 connected Aen. 4.361, Italiam non sponle sequor.

63 Vian′s attempt to deny this sense toiv in 4.1017 is unconvincing.