Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T06:40:01.805Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Statius' Achilles and His Trojan Model

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 February 2009

Elaine Fantham
Elaine Fantham
Affiliation:
University of Toronto
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Statius' last, unfinished poem, the Achilleid, is a more varied and charming work than readers of the The baid could ever have imagined, and is perhaps the most attractive approach to this highly imitative and professional poet. It is generally agreed that both Statius' diction and his narrative form are greatly influenced by Virgil and Ovid: but if he considered the Theban poem as his own Aeneid, we might fairly see the Achilleid as more akin to the Metamorphoses; diction and epic devices may remain recognizably Virgilian, but the relaxed tone, the gentle irony and open humour take us into Ovid's world. As an illustration, the brief episode in which Thetis conveys her sleeping son from Thessaly over the sea to Scyros probably draws its original inspiration from Venus' substitution of Cupid for Ascanius in Aeneid 1: Venus' son procures his own arrival, but she spirits away the sleeping Ascanius; ‘at Venus Ascanio placidam per membra quietem/ irrigat et fotum gremio dea tollit in altos/Idaliae lucos’ (Aen. 1. 691–3).

Type
Research Article
Information
The Classical Quarterly , Volume 29 , Issue 2 , December 1979 , pp. 457 - 462
Copyright
Copyright © The Classical Association 1979

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 The discovery of Achilles by Ulysses is handled in Met. 13. 162–8 as part of Ulysses' list of his services to the Greeks: Ovid also presents Achilles' seduction of Deidamia as an exemplum in Ars. 1. 679–700.

2 I base my statements about recognized influence initially on the two recent editions of the Achilleis; Dilke, O. A. W. (Cambridge, 1954),Google Scholar and Méheust, Jean, Éditions Les Belles Lettres (Paris, 1971).Google Scholar Negative claims about diction or imagery in Virgil and Ovid have been cross-checked by consultation of the concordances: for Virgil, A Vergil Concordance Warwick, H. H. (Minneapolis, 1975)Google Scholar for Ovid, A Concordance of Ovid, Barry, Deferrari and Maguire, (Washington, 1939)Google Scholar. Only the Tbebaid is used by Mozley, J. H., ‘Statius as an Imitator of Virgil and Ovid’, CW 22 (1933), 33–8.Google Scholar

3 I can see no good reason for Méheust (p. xxix n. 6) quoting Tro. 223 ‘Captaeque tellus nobilis Briseide’, or 350, ‘meus captis quoque/scit parcere ensis’.

4 For the topos in courtship compare Ov. Ars. 1. 555–6, Her. 16. 171–78, as consolatioi for seduction, Hor. C. 3.27, 73–6 (Kiessling-Heinze's parallel from the scholiast on Od. 11.322 makes a different point, offering marriage to Dionysus as consolation for desertion by Theseus), and Ov. Met. 5.525 f. I owe the last three references to the kindness of the anonymous referee.

5 Cat. 64.344 ‘cum Phrygii Teucro manabunt sanguine campi’: cf. Ach. 86 ‘tepido modo sanguine Teucros undabit Campos’. Compare also the imitation in Culex 306 ‘Teucris cum magno manaret sanguine tellus/ et Simois Xanthique liquor’.

6 Though unaware of the Senecan parallel, Dilke and Marastoni, A. (Leipzig, 1974)Google Scholar are inclined to adopt pondere, the reading in Lactantius Placidus' commentary, since funere may have crept into the text of 88 from 85 above. The adjective Hectoreus is Virgilian, cf. Aen. 1.273, 3.301 and 488, 5.190 and 634, and 2.543 ‘corpusque exsangue Hectoreum’; this is transferred by the Culex to the context of Achilles' mutilation and chariot-ride; 324–5 ‘Aeacides … Hectoreo lustravit corpore Troiam’. Did Statius know the Culex? He is uninfluenced by 306, so it would seem there is no need to assume dependence here.

7 As with undare, Statius has given a new construction to tardare, which is applied by Virgil (Aen. 5.453, 12.746, etc.) and Ovid (in Met. only at 13.81 and 283) to heroes hampered by wounds or grief. On the walls of Troy compare the formulation of Met. 12.587 ‘inrita qui mecum posuisti moenia Troiae’.tiote that Ach. 811 ‘ipsa iam dubiis nutant tibi Pergama muris’ may be influenced by Tro. 206 ‘dubia quo caderet stetit’.

8 Editors (most recently Giardina) prefer the reading of A, turpesque, or Ritschl's turpesne; but see Leo's defence of tutas (read only by Ambr. D 276) in Annaei, L.Senecae Tragoediae, (Berlin, 1878) Vol. i, p. 2;Google Scholar for Andromache to admit the shelter is turpis is to beg her own question, nor can we interpret turpes as tanquam turpes, implying only the child's motive.

9 Astu occurs three times in Ovid, at Met. 4.776, 7.419, and 13.193. It may also be the correct reading at Her. 9.45, ‘irae Iunonis iniquae’, where astu was conjectured by Bentley and independently by Housman. It occurs four times in Seneca, but only once outside this scene of Troades, at Phae. 153.

10 From this speech, note 13.193 ‘matren quae astu decipienda fuit’, and 326 ‘nee … cessante meo pro vestris pectore rebus …’ 369–70 ‘nee non in corpore nostio pectora sunt potiora manu, vigor omnis in illis. At vos, o proceres, vigili date praemia vestro’. Both vigil and providus are Ovidian: cf. F. 4.764, Met. 12.18.

11 Méheust rightly notes an echo of Ovid. Am. 2.12.256, ‘vidi ego pro nivea pugnantes coniuge tauros:/spectatrix animos ipsa iuvenca debat’.

12 A last word on Achilles and Astyanax; the physical description of Hector reflected in Astyanax at Tro. 466 'sic tulit fortes manus/sic celsus umeris, fronte sic torva minax/cervice fusam dissipans iacta comam’, and of Astyanax, as steer at 539 ‘cervice subito celsus et fronte arduus’, may be recalled by Statius at Ach. 339 'sic ergo gradum. sic ora manusque/nate feres’ and 368–9 (where Achilles stands out among the maidens) ‘quantum cervice comisque/emineat, quantumque umeros et pectora fundat’; but may be mere variations on epic portrayal of young heroes.

13 Possible echoes: Tro. 40 (cf. also 1060–2) ‘meus ignis iste est, facibus ardetis meis’: cf. Ach. 31 ‘me petit haec, mibi classis, ait, funesta minatur’. Tro. 1165 f. ‘petite iam rati domos. optata velis maria diffusis secet/secura classis’: cf. Ach. 63 ‘eunt tutis terrarum crimina velis’. Tro. 475 ‘tarn magna timeo vota’: cf. Ach. 145 'superant tua vota modum (both of vows made by the mother for her heroic son). Tro. 1141–2; ‘astra cum repetunt vices/premiturque dubius nocte vicina dies’: cf. Ach. 242 ‘iam premit astra dies’ (dawn, not dusk as in Seneca).Tro 391 ‘iuratos superis … lacus’: cf. Ach. 291–2 ‘iurandaque nautis insula’. Tro. 56 ‘columen eversum occidit/pollentis Asiae’–. cf. Ach. 530 ‘eversorem Asiae’; but the primary inspiration is Aen. 12.545 ‘Priami regnhrum eversor Achilles’. Tro. 507 ‘intuere turba quae simus super (the few survivors)’, cf. Ach. 910 ‘turba sumus’ (‘my son and I are already a fighting band’). But both probably derive from Ovid. Met. 1.355 (Deucalion and Pyrrha realize they alone survive); ‘nos duo turba sumus’.

Most of these should be regarded merely as coincidences of diction; only at Tro. 475/Ach. 145 do situation and diction coincide sufficiently to suggest that this pair may belong with the sure cases of imitation above.