Reconciliation MORI

8/22/2019 Reconciliation MORI

1/29

Jason's Reconciliation with Telamon: A Moral Exemplar in Apollonius' "Argonautica" (1.1286-1344)Author(s): Anatole MoriSource: The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 126, No. 2 (Summer, 2005), pp. 209-236Published by: The Johns Hopkins University PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3804899 .Accessed: 25/02/2011 18:07

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless

you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you

may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at .http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=jhup. .

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed

page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

The Johns Hopkins University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The

American Journal of Philology.

http://www.jstor.org
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=jhuphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/3804899?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=jhuphttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=jhuphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/3804899?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=jhup


2/29

JASON'S RECONCILIATION WITH TELAMON:A MORAL EXEMPLAR IN APOLLONIUS'ARGONAUTICA (1.1286-1344)

Anatole Mori

Abstract. At the end of the first book of Apollonius' Argonautica, Telamonaccuses Jason of plotting to leave Heracles behind, an insult for which Telamonlater apologizes. This article suggests that their reconciliation unites the Alex-andrian interest in what is appropriate for epic with Aristotelian views on angerand political friendship, two themes that resonate throughout the poem. WhileTelamon's apology and Jason's moderate response revise the structure oftraditional epic quarrels, the portrayal of self-control in this episode constitutes amoral exemplar in keeping with those Homeric scenes that were admired byancient philosophers.

INTERPRETERS OF THE THIRD-CENTURY B.C.E. EPIC ARGONAUTICAhave, for the most part, relied on literary parallels and allusions in orderto explicate the innovative choices made by its author, the Alexandrianscholar-poet Apollonius of Rhodes. It is certainly true that Apolloniusmodels his poem on the Homeric epics, yet it is also true that Apollonius'emulation of Homer does not always yield the results one might expector even readily understand. Accordingly, it occasionally proves helpful tobroaden the field of comparanda and to consider other influences on thepoem. This article shows how the long-standing philosophical debateregarding the moral utility of epic affected the portrayal of Jason, theelected leader of the Argonauts and the poem's central male character.Jason's calm reconciliation with his fellow Argonaut Telamon exempli-fies a moral response that is at odds with the wrathful resentment ofAchilles under comparable circumstances in the Iliad.

While Jason's avoidance of anger sets him apart from Achilles, itnevertheless reveals concern on the part of Apollonius to emulate whatwas seen as Homer's depiction of morally admirable behavior. Suchdepictions were admittedly rare in epic from the perspective of ancientphilosophers, but they represent an appropriate and even essential com-ponent of the genre. My first section, 'Anger in the Argonautica" therefore

AmericanournalfPhilology262005)09-236 2005 yThe ohnsHopkinsniversityress


3/29

210 ANATOLE MORIcontrasts the treatment of anger in the Argonautica with that of otherepics and suggests that Jason's atypical emotional self-control owes muchto Aristotelian ideas about appropriate displays of anger. The secondsection, "The Moral Utility of Epic," follows the philosophical debateregarding the capacity of poetry to instruct and concludes that Apollonius,like other scholars working in third-century Alexandria, placed a pre-mium on the moral as well as the textual integrity of epic poetry. Finally,the third section, "Epic Friendship and Philosophical Reconciliation,"considers Apollonius' emphasis on social harmony throughout the Argo?nautica and compares the speeches of Jason and Telamon during thereconciliation with specific passages in Homer and the Aristotelian corpus.

ANGER IN THE ARGONAUTICA

Apollonius experiments with the theme of epic anger in several episodesof the Argonautica. Anger is, of course, fundamental to the narrative ofthe Iliad, which begins with a quarrel and ends with a reconciliation,whereas quarrels in the Hellenistic epic are resolved quickly: within asingle episode in most cases. Unlike the wrathful Idas, Jason is marked byrationalization and the inclination toward compromise,1 and scholarshave long viewed him in a relatively negative light: as an anti-hero, love-hero, anxious realist, and even a coward.2 Although Mooney (1912, 36-37), for example, recognizes that Jason is "slow to wrath," he dismisseshim as "tame and insipid" in contrast to the passionate Medea.3 In

1Moreau (1994, 187), for example, claims that Jason lacks, among other heroicqualities, "l'impetuosite martiale d'un Idas." For Jason as a new heroic type, see Frankel1960. Drager (2001, 102-3, 121-23) agrees with Frankel and also observes that Idas' im-pious rage is a foil to the justified anger of the gods. Hunter (1993, 58) notes that Idasexemplifies "the purposelessness of 'brawn' without 'brainV Clauss (1993, 205-8) charac-terizes Telamon and Heracles as blustering Homeric types. For a positive reading of Aeetesas a Homeric warrior, see Williams 1996a and Thiel 1996.2See Hunter, 1993, 8-15, 25, for an extensive discussion of epic character and thecritical reception of Jason (e.g., Carspecken 1952, Lawall 1966, Beye 1969, Zanker 1979,Jackson 1992). Pietsch (1999, 158) suggests that Jason charts a middle course betweengreatness and weakness; we sympathize with Jason because of his youth and the immensityof the task that he undertakes, yet we cannot accept Jason as superior because of his lackof resourcefulness.

3At Arg. 4.394: Jason is frightened (hypoddeisas) at Medea's fury;she is boiling withrage and yearns, like Aeetes (3.581-83), to burn the Argo.The verb \)7co8e{8co"feel awe" or"tremble") appears only in connection with Aeetes: at 3.318, Argos fears Aeetes' reactionto the Argonauts, and at 3.435,Aeetes threatens Jason should he be afraid to yoke the bulls.


4/29

A MORAL EXEMPLAR IN APOLLONIUS' ARGONAUTICA 211

evaluating the significance of Jason's moderate temper we should not,however, discount the fact that anger is largely ineffectual in the Argo-nautica: those characters who express anger are usually rebuked, ig-nored, or even dismissed. The Argonauts work together to silence Idas'outbursts when he insults Jason and Idmon (1.463-71,487-91), when heobjects to their reliance on Medea (3.558-63), and when he tries to breakJason's enchanted weapons (3.1252-55). Although anger (cholos) maycertainly be justified against an openly hostile enemy, as when Amycuschallenges and insults the Argonauts (2.19-20) and is then killed in aboxing match by an angry Pollux (2.67-97),4 the poem consistently con-demns the rebellious, like Idas, and punishes the belligerent, like Amycusand Aeetes.5

Of particular interest in this regard are Jason's responses toTelamon.Telamon is the heroic obverse of the arrogant Idas, whose rashness isportrayed unfavorably.6 Telamon, by contrast, enjoys respect and goodreputation among the Argonauts: he demonstrates courage in battle(1.1043, 2.121-22), is chosen for two embassies to Aeetes (3.196, 1172-75), and quickly volunteers to plough the field of Ares (3.515-16).7 Never-theless, Telamon's impulsive nature gets the better of him on two occa-sions: during the initial audience with Aeetes (3.382-85) and, more

Thus Jason's fear at 4.394 does not undermine his heroism but rather reminds us ofMedea's supernatural lineage. Similarly,in Homeric usage imoSeCScoefers to the awe onefeels at supernatural or unusual power (//. 1.406; Od. 2.66, 9.377, 10.296) as well as on thebattlefield or in assembly (//. 5.521,12.413,18.199, 22.282, 24.265; Od. 16.425,17.564).4The poet takes care to show that Pollux's anger is justified. In this instance he actson behalf of his comrades against an openly hostile enemy. Note that Pollux, in contrast toHomeric warriors,refrains from taunting Amycus and meets his boasts with a smile (2.60-62). Medea's anger against the ancient bronze giant Talos (4.1671-72) is similarly justifiedinasmuch as he attacked the Argo without provocation (4.1638-39).5The poet refers to Aeetes' anger on a number of occasions: he angrily threatens theColchians as he plots to destroy the Argonauts (3.606-8); Medea fears the dread wrath ofher father (3.614); Aeetes is furious at Jason's success (4.6-10); Aeetes is enraged andthreatens the Colchians with death if they fail to recover Medea (4.230-35). He eventuallysuffers the loss of his fleet as well as his son Apsyrtus: the Argonauts ambush Apsyrtus andthe crew of his ship (4.468-70, 488-89); the rest of the fleet settles elsewhere rather thanreturn to Colchis (4.507-21, 1209-15). Rose 1984, 121-22, notes that while Amycus isopenly hostile, Aeetes hides his aggression. See also Green 1997, 265, n. on 3.367-81.6Idas' battle prowess against the Doliones is very briefly noted (1.1044), but hisappearances in the poem are, by and large, unflattering.7Peleus volunteers first, then Telamon, then Idas, a sequence that implies the rela-tive superiority of the two sons of Aeacus.


5/29

212 ANATOLE MORI

importantly for our purposes, after the Argonauts accidentally leaveHeracles behind on the coast of Mysia (1.1286-1344). The exchangebetween Telamon and Jason begins when Telamon accuses Jason of jeal-ously orchestrating a quick departure in order to rid himself of the greathero. The quarrel divides the Argonauts until the sea-god Glaucus inter-venes and explains that the loss of Heracles accords with the will of Zeus.Jason accepts Telamon's immediate apology and comments that, whilehe was initially offended by the accusation, he recognizes that Telamonwas defending a companion and would defend him just as fiercely undersimilar circumstances. Jason's rational analysis of Telamon's motivationthus allows him not only to put aside his own anger but also to forestallthe division of the Argonauts and the disruption of the voyage.8We find in Jason's acceptance of Telamon's apology a revision ofAchilles' rejection of Agamemnon's terms in Iliad 9. Like Achilles, Jasonhas been insulted, and, while the divine intervention of Glaucus clearlyfacilitates the reconciliation,9 the god's sudden appearance does notmitigate the challenge to Jason's authority. Yet, unlike heroes in the Iliad,Jason is willing to overlook the affront to his personal honor in order topreserve social harmony. Apollonius therefore appears to move awayfrom Homeric epic, where, as Adkins has argued, competitive valuesoutweigh cooperative excellences.1()The "quieter virtues" certainly comeinto their own in the Argonautica, and Jason's reconciliation with Telamonrepresents an ethical improvement over the bitter feuds of Homericwarriors,11 whether or not one views traditional oral epic as critical ofsuch quarrels. In fact, a number of modern readers have questionedwhether Homeric epic truly endorses a martial code of honor. Whilesome have held that the Iliad explicitly condemns Agamemnon and

8Cf. Redfield (1994,94-98) on the series of errors that follows Agamemnon's refusalto ransom Chryseis as well as his chapter on heroic error (128-59).9Knight (1995,288) emphasizes Glaucus' role as deus ex machina during the recon?ciliation.10See Adkins 1960, 30-60. Lloyd-Jones (1971,1-27, esp. 15) argues that the quietervirtues, such as loyalty and responsibility, are operative in heroic society; Havelock (1978,191) adds that the system of praise and blame in the Odyssey implicitly endorses a moralcode: "... the 'moral' of the tale, so to speak, is that one should prefer compromise aboveconfrontation." Adkins (1982,322) counters that Homeric epic was far from an appeal forcooperative values.11Williams (1996b, 29) claims that this episode fits into a pattern that representsJason as a Stoic hero: "Jason is fully aware of how Telamon has gone wrong and, as hereveals in his response, he is fully capable of instructing Telamon in Stoic principles. Jasonagrees that it is not suitable to allow grief to cloud judgement or wrath to govern a man,and then he illustrates this fact through his own restrained and articulate behavior."


6/29


evokes admiration for Achilles,12 such a reading is by no means unchal-lenged, and others have countered that both archaic and classical audi-ences would have seen the Iliad as an indictment of Achilles' arrogance.13Several ancient philosophical schools were indeed troubled by the ex-tremes of Achilles' temper: Aristotle in particular thought that the poemwas critical of the brutal treatment of Hector's corpse,14 and readers inlater antiquity also considered the behavior of Homeric heroes outdatedand outmoded.15 The philosophical reception of epic therefore suggeststhat the moderate Jason provides a civilized alternative to the firebrandsof Homer.

Vergil, perhaps Apollonius' closest reader, raises similar questionsabout the cost of passion, since by killing Turnus, Aeneas abandonsmerciful restraint and indulges the desire for vengeance. As Putnamwrites,"If Aeneas does possess an inclination to forgive it is certainly nothis ruling emotion as he prepares to kill Turnus. 6pyiX6xr\q controls histhinking, not rcpaoxnq, ira, not lenitas or the clementia to which it mightgive form."16 Aeneas, like Achilles, is emotionally embattled, and hisimpulsiveness has consequences that are raised (though unresolved) inthe Aeneid. Jason, on the other hand, tends to plan, or at least brood,before he acts,17 as in the case of the problematic ambush of Medea'shalf-brother Apsyrtus. This murder is an affront to the gods and callsdown the anger of Zeus; moreover, Jason's performance of the apotropaic

12Adkins (1982, 318) argues against Havelock 1978 by rejecting the idea that theancient audience was critical of Achilles and accordingly saw the implicit message of theIliad as "the inculcation of justice and cooperative excellences." Lloyd-Jones 1971 arguescontra Adkins that the Greeks had a fully developed notion of moral responsibility. Againstthe progressionist model of ancient moral psychology that colors Adkins's view, see, morerecently, Williams 1993.13E.g., Philodemus, On the Good King According to Homer, cols. 27-29 (Dorandi)argues that Homer uses Agamemnon to criticize Achilles and condemn those who love warand strife. See Asmis 1991, 39-41. For a more recent perspective, see Harris 2001, 141:"While the poet understands that gods and heroes must feel anger and may be led ineluc-tably to act on their anger, he was in my view highly critical of the unrelenting anger ofAchilles."14Arist. Rhet. 2.1380b28-31; Poet. 1454M1-15. Noted in Harris 2001, 76, with n. 15.15For example, Dio Chrysostom advises the men of his day to abandon the martialvirtues of epic poetry in favor of peaceful participation in civic administration (Or. 31). Fordiscussion, see Moxnes 1997, 268-69.16Putnaml990,13.17See, e.g., Jason's restraint during the assembly, 1.327-28; his amechanos delibera-tion, 1.460-61; his prudent (7cp6(ppcov)efusal to allow Atalanta on the Argo, 1.771-73; histesting of the Argonauts, 2.620-40.


7/29

214 ANATOLE MORImaschalismos (4.452-81) recalls the mistreatment of Hector's body. Butunlike the vengeful battlefield assaults on Hector and Turnus, the am-bush of Apsyrtus is premeditated and carefully planned. Jason and Medeahave agreed that some kind of stratagem (dolos) is necessary if theArgonauts are to escape the Colchian blockade (4.355-420). Jason is notshown to be in the grip of powerful emotion during the ambush nor doeshe appear to be terribly burdened by the moral implications of his action.One might regard such indifference as further evidence of impiety wereit not for the fact that, despite the problematic circumstances of theambush, the narrative itself fails to linger on the guilt of the two protago-nists. Once Circe has purified them, the import of the murder is largelylogistical: the nostos of the Argonauts is delayed, but eventually every-one, with only a few exceptions, will return home.18

Leaving aside the thorny question of the ambush, we may stillquestion why this particular epic poem should privilege self-control overwhat would appear to be a standard characteristic of traditional epicheroes.19 Although Apollonius' aesthetic goals are arguably too variousto sustain a uniformly philosophical poem,20 this article contends that

18Although this paper does not address the interpretive problems posed by theambush, I would suggest that divine anger with respect to the murder is apparently con-strained by the maschalismos and eventually appeased by Circe's ritual purification.Whilethe Erinys is said to witness the ambush (4.475-76), there is no mention of pursuit ormadness as in the case of Orestes. One could argue that the reference to the Erinys linksthe murder of Apsyrtus with Aeschylean tragedy, yet the brevity of the reference and theomission of additional information suggest that Apollonius sought here, as in the case ofPelias' disrespect to Hera that inaugurates both the poem and the voyage (1.14; 3.64-65),to emphasize the rewards of ritual observance rather than the horror of bloodshed or theintransigence of divine anger.The consequences of mortal transgression in this episode are,I would suggest, therefore consistent with the depiction of divine punishment throughoutthe poem.19See Hunter 2002, 140-52, for a discussion of anger in Homer and Apollonius.Hunter notes that Jason has more in common with the strategist Odysseus than withAchilles and adds that not only Jason but the Argonautica as a whole is removed from epicwrath (151).20Hunter (1988,452-53) observes: "The nature of heroism, and its particularinstantia-tion in the 'psychology' of Jason, is not Apollonius' central concern in the Argonautica. IfJason sometimes resembles the great heroes of Homer and sometimes wears a quitedifferent aspect, it is because of Apollonius' constant concern with the experimental, withtesting the limits and possibilities of the epic form and with exploring what it has seemedto take for granted."See also Hunter 1993,168-69. Drager (2001,151) argues that the unityof character is of secondary importance to the overall unity of the poem, which is rooted inthe anger of Zeus. Following Beye 1982, esp. 79, Pike (1993, 32) adds that "Apollonius, atalmost every important moment, seems to be pretending to be writing Homeric Epic andthen at once telling us that this is really what we might call Anti-Epic'."


8/29

A MORAL EXEMPLAR IN APOLLONIUS' ARGONAUTICA 215Jason's reconciliation with Telamon reveals both the moral foundation ofthis work and the effects of philosophical influence over Hellenisticpoetry in general. Beginning in the sixth century B.C.E. and continuingthrough the Hellenistic period, philosophers debated the moral utility ofpoetry, and our examination of the philosophical reception of epic willshow that the Argonautica's emphasis on self-control emulates what wasbelieved to be one of the best features of traditional epic. While philoso?phers condemned the emotional extremes of Homeric heroes, they praisedthe occasional display of heroic discipline. Jason's ethical behavior dur-ing the reconciliation therefore recalls the exceptional Homeric passagethat was viewed by ancient audiences (including Plato) as a moral exem-plar. In particular, the exchange between Jason and Telamon exemplifiesAristotelian theories regarding the expression of anger. Telamon's reac-tion to the loss of Heracles illustrates both the swift arousal of anger,through an admittedly misguided perception of injustice, and its immedi-ate resolution once this perception has been corrected. With his accept-ance of Telamon's apology Jason demonstrates that, although he wasinitially vexed by the insult to his honor, he is still capable not only ofanalyzing the cause of Telamon's fury but also of overcoming his own(morally justified) anger. The loss of Heracles sets the stage for a quarrelof Homeric proportions, but the unexpected appearance of the divineGlaucus sanctions a philosophical alternative to harmful strife. Apolloniusthus incorporates a philosophical exemplum that evokes Iliadic conflictas a generic precedent while at the same time eliciting respect for theintellectual pedigree of the Hellenistic hero. Consequently, in contrast toseveral recent interpretations that have sought to reconcile Jason's be?havior throughout the poem with the teachings of Stoicism or Scepti-cism,21 this article focuses on a single episode, the central philosophicalentry in Apollonius' varied aesthetic program.The confrontation between Telamon and Jason, like other episodesin the Argonautica, falls in line with Aristotelian observations about thecauses and characteristics of anger. As an affection of the soul, anger hasa share in the operations of both the mind and the body. Anger is not

21For the Argonautica as a Sceptic critique of both Homer and Scepticism itself, seeClayman 2000. Regarding the attempt by Klein 1983 to link Jason's amechania with theepoche of the Sceptic sage, see Hunter 1988,436, n. 6. Hunter finds logical and chronologi-cal weaknesses in Klein's argument but admires his effort to view the poem in terms of itsintellectual context. Williams 1996b, 40-41, suggests that by the end of the epic Jason'srational decisions have come to harmonize with Nature and Destiny in the manner of aStoic wise man.


9/29

216 ANATOLE MORIcoextensive with (meta) bodily pain; rather, it can only occur on accountof (dia) the thought of outrage that accompanies the feeling of pain(Rhet. 1378a30-33).22 Although anger presents itself physiologically, it isrooted in thoughts and beliefs and open to persuasion. As Aristotleobserves, the various perspectives of the four causes are especially help-ful in analyzing feelings because of the soul's hybrid nature (De An.403a3-bl). Anger is thus classed formally among the pathe, the feelingsor passions, which have both mental and physical components (Eth. Eud.1220bl0-15; Mag. mor. 1186al0-13). The efficient cause of anger is out?rage at a slight (Rhet. 1378a30); the final cause is the desire for restitution(1378bl); the material cause is the boiling of the blood around the heartthat causes the face to flush (De An. 403a26-b2).23 Heracles' rage at theloss of Hylas provides us with an especially vivid description of thematerial cause, as sweat drips from his brows and dark blood boils up inhis bowels (splanchna).24 In Homer, by contrast, anger is often describedas an external force that seizes men (e.g., cholos II. 1.387, achos 1.188,kotos 8.449), but a reference to blood that boils does not occur.25 Homericreferences to splanchna, moreover, are restricted to the entrails ofsacrificial animals (e.g., //. 1.464, Od. 3.9). We do find references to theflashing eyes and "black rage" of the furious Agamemnon and Antinous,26but these descriptions are not as explicitly physiological as that ofApollonius and do not refer to the heating of blood.Aristotle observes that, unlike hatred, which is unfocused and di-rected against a class, anger is directed against a particular person inreturn for an unjust act or personal insult (Top. 151al5; Rhet. 1378a30-b2). It is especially acute in the case of an unexpected betrayal of a friend

22For discussion, see Fortenbaugh 1975,12-16. On the relation of anger to pain, seealso Top.125b30-34.23On the physical effects, see also [Phgn.] 812a26-30; [Pr.] 869a4-5, 947b23-24.Renehan 1963 analyzes the confusion between the pericardial boiling of blood and/or heat(thermos) in the textual tradition.241.1261-62: koctocKpoxdcpoovXxq 5pcoq KrjKiev,v 5e KeXaivbvbnbonXayxvoxq eevai|Lia. 25Interestingly, Aristotle does include the phrase e^eaev ai|ia in a list of Homericidioms for anger (Nic. Eth. 1116b25-30). As Rackham 1968 notes in his commentary on thispassage, however, the phrase does not appear in the Homeric texts that have come down tous,although it does occur in Theocr. Id. 20.16 .To describe the anger of Heracles, Apolloniususes the same phrase as Theocritus (^eev aluxx,Id. 20.15). It would appear then either thatan anachronistic idiom slipped into Aristotle's list or that he had in mind an actual Homericpassage that has since been lost.26//. 1.103-4; Od. 4.661-62: uevecx; e uiyot(ppeveq uxpi kXa\va\ n\\x.nXavx\oooe 8eoi 7i\)plXocuTtexocovTiiKinv. See Turkeltaub2005 in this issue for "flashing eyes" in the Iliad.


10/29

A MORAL EXEMPLAR IN APOLLONIUS' ARGONAUTICA 217or companion (Pol. 1328al0-15). While such a general description of themotivation of anger is probably applicable to all the quarrels in epic, theArgonautic scene is exceptional inasmuch as the characters' speechesdisplay the logical components of anger, its rationale and resolution. Thereconciliation therefore differs from Homeric precedent not only in itsoutcome but also in its careful staging and the contrast between Telamon'sanger and Jason's restraint. Telamon's actions, for example, clearly placehim in the category of the orgiloi, those who display anger quickly butquickly extinguish it (Eth. Nic. 1126al2-17), in contrast to a characterlike Idas who exemplifies the akrocholoi, those who constantly fly into arage at the slightest provocation (1126al8-19). Telamon's own explana-tion of his actions is of equal if not greater significance: he alludes to hisanguish at the loss of Heracles, the injury that preceded his erroneousperception of injustice. Jason similarly confides that Telamon's accusa-tion caused him pain, but he recognizes that Telamon was not motivatedby self-interest: his anger halts at the juncture between the perception ofpain and an outraged reaction to a slight or injustice. These speechesconvey the characters' awareness of the causes of their own emotions,and taken as a whole, they offer the audience a subtle but nonethelesseffective case study of anger and its effects. But before we study thispassage in greater detail, we will need to consider both the role played byphilosophy in Hellenistic Alexandria and the arguments proposed byphilosophical critics of epic poetry.

THE MORAL UTILITY OF EPIC

The longstanding debate over the moral utility of poetry was waged, notsurprisingly, by philosophers rather than poets. We all know that Platobanished poetry on the grounds that it misleads the soul, but he was notthe first to object to poetic depictions of the gods. The arguments of hispredecessors, if less extensive than those of the Republic, were nonethe?less hostile. For example, Pythagoras (sixth century B.C.E.) is said to havevisited the underworld where he witnessed Hesiod bound and Homersuspended from a tree; for good measure, both were surrounded byserpents for lying about the gods (Diog. Laert. 8.21). Similarly thePresocratic Heraclitus of Ephesus (fl. 500 B.C.E.) states that Homer andArchilochus ought to be driven out of the lists and beaten with rods(Heraclitus, fr. 22 B 42 Diels-Kranz; Diog. Laert. 9.1). Later philosophicalcritics of Homer included Epicurus of Samos (341-270 B.C.E.), who gen-erally rejects paideia (Epicurea 228-29 Usener) and the Cynic Zoilus of


11/29

218 ANATOLE MORI

Amphipolis (fourth century B.C.E.), the so-called "Scourge of Homer"('OjLiripoiidaxi^, Suidas s.v. ZcaiXoc,), whose severe criticisms reportedlyled to his crucifixion by Ptolemy II (Vitr. De arch. 7.8-9).The Hellenisticperiod saw a general increase of interest in this question. Epicurus mayhave had no use for poetry, but the Stoics found in it redemptive glimpsesof moral truth and wisdom. Yet one must be careful not to overempha-size a contrast between a Stoic recognition of morally instructive poemsand an Epicurean rejection of all poetry. Giving the lie to this dichotomyare the Stoic Eratosthenes of Cyrene (c. 285-194 B.C.E.), who regardedpoets as inaccurate by nature and as entertainers rather than instructors(Strabo 1.2.3), and the first-century Epicurean Philodemus of Gadara(110 to 40 or 35 B.C.E.), who leavened his light verse with philosophicalallusions.27

We begin with a caveat, the recognition that Alexandria in the thirdcentury B.C.E. was hardly a stronghold for philosophical inquiry. Al-though the Museum was a well-known center of intellectual activity, itsappeal to philosophical circles was limited. Aristotle's library and wide-ranging research interests were a source of inspiration to the earlyPtolemies, yet philosophical inquiry did not flourish in Egypt as it had inGreece and Asia Minor. The Ptolemies invited philosophers to theircourt in the manner of other Successor kings, but, as Fraser (1972,1:484)observes, "Philosophers seem to have felt that the court of Alexandriawas not the place for them."28 Theophrastus refused to visit the royalcourt at Ptolemy Fs invitation (Diog. Laert. 5.37), although his student,Demetrius of Phalerum, who had governed Athens for ten years underthe rule of Cassander, emigrated to Alexandria in 307 B.C.E. Demetriusadvised Ptolemy I to acquire and study philosophical tracts on kingshipsince his friends would not be brave enough to recommend what iswritten in them.29 In contrast to his father, however, Ptolemy II appar-ently favored political expedience over moral rectitude. At the beginningof his reign he arranged for the murder of two half-brothers and laterscandalously married his full sister, Arsinoe.30 The younger Ptolemy also

27E.g., Anth. Pal. 9.570,11.41, 9.412 (= 3, 27, 29 Sider 1995).28Diogenes Laertius reports that Zeno's teacher, Stilpon of Megara, refused Soter'sinvitation (2.115). Zeno's successor, Cleanthes of Assos (331-232 b.c.e.), also refused aninvitation from the Ptolemaic court, but when his student Chrysippus of Soli (280-207b.c.e.) declined, another student, Sphaerus of Borysthenes (c. 2857-221 b.c.e.), went inCleanthes' place (Diog. Laert. 7.185).29Plut. Mor. 189D, Stob. Flor. 4.7.27. Discussed in Hazzard 2000,103-4.30Paus. 1.7.1. The Greek poet Sotades was executed for criticizing the marriage ofPtolemy II and Arsinoe II (Plut. Mor. 11A, Hegesander ap. Ath. 14.620f-21a).


12/29


imprisoned and executed Demetrius, ironically enough, for advisingPtolemy I not to choose him as his successor but rather the children ofhis first wife, Eurydice (Diog. Laet. 5.78). Thus Demetrius was one of thefew philosophers who accepted Ptolemaic hospitality?and he paid asteep price for his forthrightness.Other philosophers living in Alexandria included the peripateticStrato of Lampsacus (third century B.C.E.), who tutored Ptolemy II in thenatural sciences, and the polymath Eratosthenes, who studied with Zenoof Citium, the founder of Stoicism (335-263 B.C.E.). Eratosthenes latertutored Ptolemy IV and eventually succeeded Apollonius as head of theLibrary.31 Although Stoics and Epicureans lived at the Macedonian andSeleucid courts, respectively,32 philosophical circles of the day evidentlyobjected both to the lifestyle associated with Ptolemaic patronage and tothe absolutism of their rule. Moralists were undoubtedly offended byPtolemy IFs controversial marriage, extramarital affairs, and politicalmurders (Hazzard 2000, 39-44). Still, only Phylarchus (second centuryB.C.E.) is known to have publicly condemned riches as the ruin of Phila-delphus' judgment, and this lone criticism appears only after the death ofthe king.33 It is difficult to determine whether this singularity attests afear of reprisal, an accident of fate, or merely a lack of interest on thepart of other philosophical writers. What we can say is that, on the onehand, the early Ptolemies' interest in higher learning led them to acquireprivate tutors, invite philosophers to court, and seek the advice ofDemetrius in the establishment of the new Museum. On the other hand,philosophers themselves were wary of the Ptolemies' wealth and power.34

Although a number of the scholars working in the Library hadstudied philosophy elsewhere, in Alexandria they concentrated on liter-ary studies and the critical evaluation of ancient texts. The prominentmembers of the Library were, therefore, as Bing has observed, preoccupied

31Before Eratosthenes tutored Ptolemy IV, the poet Philitas of Cos (b. 340 b.c.e.)and his student Zenodotus of Ephesus (b. 325 b.c.e.) served as royal tutors (to Ptolemy II).Zenodotus served as royal tutor and as the first head of the Library,and the two positionswere also jointly held by Apollonius (roughly between 270 and 245 b.c.e.), Eratosthenes(c. 245-194 b.c.e.), and Aristophanes (see Pfeiffer 1968, 154-55, concerning the order ofsuccession). Pfeiffer suggests that Eratosthenes likely tutored Ptolemy IV, although Green1990,89, disagrees.32Fraser 1972,1:484-85.33Ath. 536d-e.34Probably with good reason, for, as Fraser (1972,1:485) comments,"... in generalit seems likely that the Ptolemies were less interested in the philosophical than in thereligious potentialities of kingship."


13/29

220 ANATOLE MORIfor the most part with poetry, not philosophy.35 For all his studies in theAcademy and the Stoa, Eratosthenes was no philosopher, even if he didretain an eclectic interest in philosophical ideas.36 Aristotle himself had abroad range of interests, and Alexandrian textual criticism was in nosmall part indebted to him,37 but we must distinguish between the spe-cialized influence of Aristotelian poetic theory and the broad appeal ofAristotelian empiricism. In the second century, Aristarchus' systematicanalysis of epic relied on Aristotelian ideas of what is generically appro?priate, and in Aristarchus' well-known dictum ("explain Homer fromHomer"), we find a general (Peripatetic) mandate adapted to narrowphilological ends.38One may nevertheless reasonably question the extent to which anacceptance of Aristotelian textual criticism entails an acceptance of Ari?stotelian views on, in this case, the passions. Given our limited knowl-edge regarding not only Aristotle's views on epic poetry but also theextent of the influence of philosophy proper in Alexandria, I would notwant to claim that Apollonius himself was whole-heartedly Aristotelianin either his philosophical beliefs or his aesthetic tastes.39 For that matter,Pfeiffer has even questioned the extent of Aristotle's influence withinthe Library, distinguishing his retrospective poetic analyses from theapproach inaugurated by Philitas, Zenodotus, and a new breed of scholar-poets.40 Pfeiffer's claim that Callimachus' poetic school was "ostenta-tiously anti-Aristotelian" (1968,137) has been countered by Koster (1970,120-22), who charges Pfeiffer with oversimplifying Callimachus' allegedopposition to organic unity,41 concluding that while Callimachus did

35Bing 1988, 14-15.36Fraser1972,1:483.37According to Diogenes Laertius (5.22-27), Aristotle's extensive works includedOn Poets (three books), Treatiseof the Art of Poetry (two books), and Homeric Problems(six books), as well as Poetics (one book). On Aristarchus' debt to the Poetics, see Porter1992, 73-80.38Aristarchus' dictum is noted in a D-scholium (//. 5.385) and preserved by Por-phyry (Schrader 1880-82, 297,16). For discussion, see Porter 1992, 70.39Hutchinson 1988, 3, notes that, while intellectuals would have been acquaintedwith trends in philosophy, it is difficult to assess the influence of these trends on the beliefsof individual poets. See also Hopkinson 1982, 11. Pohlenz (1965, 20, 32-35 = 95, 107-10)argues against the influence of philosophy over poetry, with the exception of Posidippusand especially Philitas, whose subjective, personal voice contrasted with the mimetic em-phasis of Callimachean poetry and heralded the tone of Roman love elegy.40Pfeiffer 1968, 88.41See Aristotle's discussion of ev, bXov,ueyeOo^Poet. 1450b21-51b6). Against thecharge that Callimachus opposed poems of great length, Koster (1970) cites the magnitude


14/29


achieve a form that Aristotle had not considered, it was not demonstra-bly anti-Aristotelian. But whether or not one construes Callimacheanaesthetics as antithetical to Aristotelian precepts, we are probably safe inassuming that, as a Homeric scholar and a poet in his own right, Apollonius,like Aristotle, would have been very much concerned with the selectionof actions and speeches appropriate not only to particular characters butalso to epic poetry in general.42 Apollonius' allegiance to the philosophyof Aristotle would have been less of a concern, in other words, than hisfidelity to the standards and expectations of his own field.In fact, the question of what is correct for Homeric epic assumedgreat significance for the Alexandrian critics, if not for the general pub-lic.43 This debate encompassed both textual matters and the behavior ofepic characters, particularly the gods. The ethically suspect in Homer wassubject to athetization at the hands of Zenodotus,44 who removed, forexample, a line in which Aphrodite carries a seat (diphros) for Helen (//.3.423-27) because he considered this behavior unsuitable (aprepes) for agoddess.45 Apollonius in turn objected to many of Zenodotus' readings ina published work, now lost,46 but his decision not to foreground Zeus asa character in the Argonautica is understandable in the light of suchconsiderations. Epic in the Hellenistic period was a highly self-consciousaffair, and it is tempting to imagine that such self-consciousness is in playwhen the Argonautic narrator asks the Muses to help him as the hypo-phetores of his song (1.22). This word has been understood to meaneither "interpreters" or "inspirers," and I am inclined to favor the former.47In the Museum of Alexandria the aid of the Muses was as critical for the

of Callimachus' epic Hecale and argues moreover that the Aetia's length is in harmony withAristotle's observation that epic is the natural form for a lengthy composition (Poet.1460a2). More recently, Hunter (1993, 190-95) comments that he is inclined to see thepoetry of both Callimachus and Apollonius as anti-Aristotelian and takes Callimachus'Reply to the Telchines (fr. 1.1-7) as a programmatic statement.42Nagy 1996,121-22.43Porter 1992,68-69.44Ptolemy II sponsored Zenodotus' production of an emended edition of Homer(Suidas, s.v.Zrrv68oTo


15/29

222 ANATOLE MORI

interpretation of poetry as it was for the writing of it. Given the intellec-tual climate in which Apollonius worked, it would be irresponsible toassume that the Argonautica does not reflect his views on what would berecognized as appropriate for epic on moral as well as poetic grounds.While textual critics like Zenodotus sought to produce a correctededition (diorthosis) of Homeric epic,48 it was primarily the philosopherswho questioned its moral integrity. Ancient critics of poetry tend to fallinto one of two camps: they are either formalists who see the poeticenterprise as intrinsically alien (for better or worse) to thought (dianoia)and truth,49 or they seek to exclude all but those poems that express apositive moral message.50 Plato falls into the latter category, believingthat for the most part poems depict a false world that caters to emotionalweakness rather than reason. Early in Book 2 of the Republic, Platointroduces the dangers of poetry by placing quotations of Hesiod andHomer in the mouth of Adeimantus (363b-c, 364d-e). Socrates' rejec-tion of Homer's authority (not to mention that of Adeimantus) becomesclear as he runs through a list of unsuitable passages that wrongly depictemotional gods and heroes (388a-d) and a dismal afterlife (386c-87a).51Yet at the same time, Socrates cites a Homeric passage in support of anargument (389d),52 and even goes so far as to admire a speech of Diomedesto Sthenelus (//. 4.411-18) that presents an appropriate model (395c) bydemonstrating the proper respect for ruling authority (389e).53 Likewise,at 390d Socrates cites the passage in which Odysseus chastises his heart(Od. 20.17) as an example of admirable behavior, and later at 441b herefers to the same passage as an accurate illustration of the workings ofthe tripartite soul. Since Plato does allow that poetry is capable of illus-trating true beliefs and proper behavior, his reservations with respect toHomer are due in large part to his insistence on positive models: it is left

48Cf. Nagy 1996,149-53.49The Stoic Posidonius (c. 135-51 b.c.e.) later makes the distinction between a poem(poiema), which is formally distinct from prose, and poetry (poiesis), which is a poem thathas meaning and imitates divine and human things (Diog. Laert. 7.60). As Asmis 1990,155,puts it, "a 'poem' is a type of linguistic structure (what we might call 'verse') that may ormay not have meaning."50The Stoics traditionally divided poetry into the (morally) good and the morallybad, with little to no middle ground. The second-century c.e. Stoic Aristo allows that apoem may be somewhat useful, falling somewhere in between not necessarily entirelygood, yet not therefore entirely bad. See the lucid discussion by Asmis 1990,165-66.51The list continues at 390a-91e.52Referring to Eumaeus' rebuke of Antinous {Od. 17.383-85).53For Platonic citations of Homer, see Labarbe 1949, who counts 150 quotations;Howes 1895 finds only 120.


16/29

A MORAL EXEMPLAR IN APOLLONIUS' ARGONAUTICA 223to later thinkers like Plutarch and Philodemus to argue that poetic ex-amples of bad behavior may serve as an effective deterrent.54In contrast to Plato, Aristotle prefers neither to blame poetry for alack of thought nor to subject it to rigorous moral critique?not becausepoetry is above such censure, but because it fails beneath it. Aristotledefines dianoia as a function of the speeches made by characters (Poet.1450a6-7), but later he asserts that thought more properly belongs to thesphere of rhetoric (Poet. 1450b4-13; 1456a33-36). Like Plato, Aristotleallows that poetry is likely to be irrational, but from his perspective suchflaws should be overlooked inasmuch as logic is not the natural prov-enance of the genre. Aristotle avoids Plato's extremes by adjusting theframework of the question and by arguing that the emotional catharsisgenerated by poetry is actually beneficial to society. Aristotle thus liber-ates the "intrinsic qualities" of poetry, in Halliwell's words, from Plato's"unmitigated moralism and didacticism."55 In Aristotle's categoricalfidelity, by which I mean his assumption that poetry is justified by itsnatural function, we find the origin of Aristarchus' injunction to "explainHomer from Homer," a practice meant to circumvent the imposition ofjudgments based on external canons of piety or morality.56 One must stillconcede, however, that Aristotle's attempt to reconcile poetry with rea-son dodges the question of its compatibility with the desiderata of truth.From Aristotle's perspective poetry and philosophy remain at odds, buton his view this contrast poses no intrinsic social threat.Later philosophers propose slightly different solutions to the prob-lem. The Epicurean Philodemus argues that the theme or thought content

54Plutarch argues that to prevent the young from listening to poetry is to stop uptheir ears and put them to sea in an undersized Epicurean boat (akation) (De AudiendisPoetis 15d). Rather, poetry should serve as an introductory lesson in order to learn thedifference between what is good and what is bad (15f). See also Asmis 1991, esp. 22-26, fordiscussion of Philodemus' On the Good King According to Homer:"Accordingto Philodemus,Homer presents a range of human and divine characters, from the very good to the verybad, and takes a clear moral stance in depicting their words and deeds" (24). Buffiere 1956,335, concludes ".. . c'est au lecteur et au moraliste de faire le depart entre les bons et lesmauvais exemples, de separer le miel et la cire."55Halliwell 1998,4: "What Aristotle does assert, against Plato, is that poetry shouldnot be subjected to simple and direct evaluation in terms of external criteria?moral, politi-cal, or otherwise."56Aristotle does appeal to an external standard,of course,when it serves his purposes.He argues, for example, that Homer's depiction of the mistreatment of Hector's corpseshould be excused because it corresponds to contemporary (kai nun) Thessalian practice(B.24.15 = fr. 166 Rose 1967,131).


17/29

224 ANATOLE MORIof a poem is as intrinsically important to a poem as its poetic structure,57but he cautions that such thought content need not be morally beneficial.Good poetry, that is, while possessing the capacity for philosophicalexpression, need not necessarily avail itself of it and may in fact do muchharm.58 With this assertion Philodemus, himself a poet, diverges fromEpicurean orthodoxy, which would eliminate all poetry, and from theStoics, who would argue that there is no utility apart from the moral.Like Aristotle, he discriminates between the virtue inherent to poetry (toentertain) from the virtue inherent to philosophy (to instruct).

Among the Stoics we find arguments to suggest that Homer eitheretymologized or allegorized the truth, or perhaps simply provided anintellectual medium out of which a higher order of thought eventuallyevolved. The Stoic Cornutus (first century C.E.) distinguishes betweenthe epic preservation of mythic narratives, which are the allegoricalexpression of reality, and the artifice of the individual poet, who mayhave preserved these myths only to distort their original sense for hisown purposes. On Cornutus' view, archaic poets like Hesiod and Homerunconsciously transmitted cosmogonic truth inasmuch as the divine namesand stories found in their works are rooted in ancient knowledge.59Cornutus does not see poetry as allegory stricto sensu60 but as the fossil-ized traces of ancient allegorical truths that only a Stoic wise man canrightly appreciate.As Long 1992 has shown, the Stoics generally agree with Cornutus'interpretation of myth in epic. That is, they see archaic poets as transmit-ters of reason (logos) via myth, but they do not believe that the myth-makers themselves were allegorists; rather, the myths were, in their origi?nal context, literal representations of the early world view.61 The heterodoxStoic Heraclitus (first to second century C.E.; not to be confused with thePresocratic Heraclitus) differs from orthodox Stoicism both in otherrespects and inasmuch as he regarded Homer as an allegorist.62 Heraclitus

57However, the formal structure of verse itself offers no moral benefit: On Poems 5,col. 29 (32 Mangoni) 17-19: Kai 8ioxi kocvaxpe^fKi) Ka0[6] 7i[o]tiu.(xt'tukcbcpe Xzi. SeeAsmis 1995b, 166. For an analysis of Philodemus' arguments in Book 5, see Asmis 1995a26:Philodemus "extends to all poems the claim that there is little utility in them, while showingthat they have a goodness that is independent of the utility of their subject matter."58Philodemus criticizes Homer for spreading lies about the gods in On Piety, al?though he argues that Homer offers a guide for moral leadership in On the Good KingAccording to Homer. See Asmis 1995a, 30.59For discussion of Cornutus' work, see Dawson 1992, 24-38.60Long 1992, 53-56.61Ibid.; see also Dawson 1992, 38-52.62Long 1992, 45-48; Buffiere 1962, xxxviii.


18/29

A MORAL EXEMPLAR IN APOLLONIUS' ARGONAUTICA 225asserts in the beginning of his Homeric Problems that, if Homer is not anallegorist, he is impious in every regard, as guilty of sacrilege as Salmoneusor Tantalus (1.1-3).63 Heraclitus argues that Homer, like Empedoclesand the pre-Socratic Heraclitus, uses allegory to express the truth aboutthe gods, who represent natural forces and elements (24.3-7). But forHeraclitus, as for Cornutus, poetic vocabulary still remains distinct fromphilosophical belief. Thus the Stoics, like Aristotle, rescue Homer fromoblivion and even allow for the presence of thought in epic, althoughonly to the extent that poetry preserves mythic truths, truths that arethemselves alien to the poetic art. However, as Philodemus, a hostilewitness, shows in his treatise On Music, the Stoics held that poetry, likemusic, could in fact be an incentive to moral virtue.64 By contrast Platoanalyzes a poem not according to how it sounds but according to what itsays, its logoi, and how it is expressed, its lexis (Rep. 392c). For Plato thesound of a poem belongs properly to the category of musical accompani-ment?rhythm and harmony (Rep. 397b-c, 398c-d). Yet according toPhilodemus, while Cleanthes of Assos (331-232 B.C.E.), Zeno's studentand successor, considered prose sufficient to express truth, he thoughtthat the melodic elements of poetry could effectively engage the listenerin an act approaching the contemplation of the divine.65 For Cleanthesthe rhythm and the sound of a (truthful and moral) poem could there-fore bring the audience to a higher level than unadorned prose.

Finally, the poet Aratus (c. 315-240 B.C.E.), who studied with Zeno,apparently capitalized on the beneficial effects of versification in hisStoic epic Phaenomena, written at the request of the Macedonian kingAntigonus Gonatas (c. 320-239 B.C.E.).66 Given Callimachus, high regardfor Aratus,67 not to mention Ptolemaic interest in philosophy and culturalcompetition with the Macedonian court, it is tempting to think thatApollonius seeded the Argonautica with philosophical elements in emu-lation of Aratus as well as Homer. The Phaenomena itself is heavilyindebted to a prose Phaenomena on constellations written by the

63'OuripiKocpop^fiuaxa = Buffiere 1962.64Philodemus argues that musical elements distract the listener and diminish theforce of the ideas in question, On Music 4, col. 28.22-35 (Neubecker).65On Music 4, col. 28.1-22 (Neubecker). Asmis (1990,194-95) observes that Diogenesof Babylon and other Stoics recognized the power of music to inspire virtuous action: "Itappears that poetic diction, which has rhythmic and melodic properties that are closelyrelated to musical sound, was thought to have a similar effect." See also Sen. Epist. 108.10.66Mooney 1912, 24, points out a number of textual parallels with the Argonautica,concluding that Apollonius had studied the poem. See more recently the references toAratus in Campbell 1994,passim.67Anth. Pal. 9.507.


19/29

226 ANATOLE MORIastronomer Eudoxus (c. 390-340 B.C.E.) and a lost work on weather-signs, possibly by Theophrastus (c. 370-286 B.C.E.).68 This recasting ofprose material in a poetic mold is apparently meant to enhance thedidactic authority of Aratus' voice, or at least it is not thought to detractfrom it.69 As Hunter (1995, 17) well shows, for Aratus the contrast be?tween prose and poetic representations of the cosmos is a contrast notbetween deep truth and superficial falsehood but between "differentmodes of organising experience." Hunter continues, "One mode is thatof the (didactic) poet, another is that of philosophy, which after Plato andAristotle tends towards systematisation and completeness, thereby in-creasing the gap between the two modes."70 Thus, where Plato and othersposit a categorical divide between true prose and false poetry, in theHellenistic period we find something of a reconciliation between theinspiration of the Muses, whether in the Library or in the Stoa, andthe natural logos of the cosmos.

To recapitulate, we have seen that the moral utility of poetry wasdebated long before, during, and long after the Hellenistic period. Atissue are the apparently inappropriate divine and heroic models found intraditional epic: are these representations falsehoods to be rejected, alle-gories to be interpreted, or examples of behavior to be avoided? Textualcritics and philosophers alike were absorbed by the question of appro?priate behavior in epic, and, while Alexandria was not a philosophicalcenter, both the early Ptolemies and scholars working in the Librarymaintained an interest in the ideas associated with Peripatetic and Stoicphilosophy. Apologists for Homer, like Aristotle and the Stoics, generallyallow that, while poetry skirts the rigors of philosophical thought, it isstill capable of preserving the impression of moral truth. Cleanthes goesso far as to invert Plato's idea of the divinely inspired poet by suggestingthat the audience's experience of poetry is akin to the contemplation ofthe divine. The more moderate position adopted later by Philodemusand Plutarch holds that traditional epic is useful for teaching the youngto distinguish between good and bad behavioral models.In truth, just such a set of didactic exempla emerges from the poet'scareful pairing and contrasting of characteristics throughout the Argo-

68Hunter 1995,1.69Cf. Kidd 1997, 10-12, who notes Aratus' debt to Cleanthes' Hymn to Zeus butcomments that Aratus' "higher purpose is literary rather than philosophical" (12).70The methodological difference then leads to the appearance of a qualitative dif?ference, for "systematic philosophy and science seek to close down options?to this extentthey become paradoxically like 'history' in the Aristotelian scheme?the poetic, didacticmode offers multiple readings which draw on diverse traditions" (Hunter 1995, 18).


20/29


nautica. Medea's impulsive passion is matched by Jason's measured re-sponses; violent characters like Idas, Amycus, and Aeetes find noblercounterparts in Telamon, Lycus, and Alcinous. Yet Apollonius does notsimply provide black and white examples of positive and negative typesof behavior: we see a number of examples of anger in a variety ofsituations as the epic narrative enacts Aristotle's "doctrine of the mean."It is, of course, fairly obvious that, if heroic epic is to illustrate philosophi?cal principles at all, it must do so in this manner, since, as Aristotleobserves in the beginning of the Poetics, it is a representational mediumthat, like drama, primarily expresses itself through the actions of itsagents, good and bad alike.The Argonautica's moral sensibility necessar-ily lies in the exposition of plot and character, in contrast, for example, tothe opening hymn to Zeus that sets the tone for Aratus' didacticPhaenomena (1-18). Thus, Apollonius does not openly champion thecause of moral poetry in the Argonautica nor does the poem's didacticutility suggest that one must recognize Apollonius as an adherent exclu-sively devoted to a particular school.71 It would be more accurate toconclude that, since philosophical audiences had consistently condemnedHomeric heroes for their lack of restraint, Apollonius felt it appropriateto show that the leader of the Argonauts would, given the opportunity,elect to behave in an enlightened fashion. In this way Jason attains thestandards of Homeric warriors, who are portrayed as "better than weare," but with the addition of greater self-control.

EPIC FRIENDSHIP ANDPHILOSOPHICAL RECONCILIATION

The reconciliation between Telamon and Jason at 1.1286-1344 is thor-oughly in keeping with the essence of homonoia, "together-mindedness,"described by Vian as a quintessential Argonautic virtue.72 The importance

71In particular, Apollonius' occasional allusions to the Phaenomena should not beunderstood to mark him as a crypto-Stoic, since these references are, by and large, playfulrather than programmatic. For example, the first three words of the Argonautica aredpx6|j.?V0(;j?oOoipe, echoing the opening words of the Phaenomena (ek Akx;dpxcou^aOa),which are also echoed by Theocr. Id. 17.1.Yet where Aratus proceeds to celebrate Zeus, theApollonian narrator speaks of the voyage of the Argonauts, not of Phoebus, much asTheocritus turns quickly from Zeus to Ptolemy {Id. 17.3). Similarly,in line 15 Aratus salutesZeus as "great wonder, a great advantage for humanity"; Apollonius reworks this line byaddressing Eros as "a great misfortune, a great abomination for humanity1'(4.445).72Vian 2002,1:16-17.


21/29

228 ANATOLE MORIof homonoia is apparent at the outset of the voyage, when Jason empha-sizes the common interests of all the Argonauts (1.336-37), and it be-comes more explicit not only in Orpheus' hymn (1.492-518) but also inBook 2, when the Argonauts establish a shrine dedicated exclusively tothe divine Homonoia (2.717-19). The poem's emphasis on homonoiarecalls Aristotelian ideas about social interaction inasmuch as Aristotlesees homonoia, in the sense of political friendship, as critically importantto the prevention of stasis within a healthy community.73 The poem'ssensitivity to appropriate displays of anger?when, why, and how long itshould be sustained?should therefore come as no surprise. From theArgonautic point of view, strife is counterproductive and should prob-ably be avoided, but it is generally manageable and even justified undercertain circumstances.

Turning to the text, we find that Telamon first challenges Jason ashe sits brooding74 over the loss of their ally:

. . . TeA-aucova 5' ZXevxotax;, o)5e t' ??ut?v"?Ha' amcoq E-OKnAot;,rcei vx>xoi dpuevov r\ev'HpotKAfjaXineiv o~?o5' ?kto0i ufjut; 6pcop?V,ocppa to keIvoi) ki>5o


22/29


ever, the quarrel does not compromise the safety of the Greeks. As soonas Glaucus explains that Heracles has disappeared because of the abduc-tion of Hylas, Telamon apologizes to Jason:

"Atoovt8r|, uri jjxhxi xotaooeoci, d(ppa5rr)cnvei' ti 7iep daadur|v 7tept ydp |T d%o


23/29

230 ANATOLE MORIThe distinction made by Jason between noble and ignoble motivationsresembles Aristotle's analysis of the appropriate and inappropriate occa-sions for displaying anger (Eth. Nic. 1125b26-26bl0).The even-temperedperson is angry for the right reasons, at the right person, to an appropri?ate degree, and for an appropriate length of time. At one end of thespectrum is deficiency: the person who never gets angry, even whenanger is warranted;78 at the other end is excess: the person who getsangry too quickly, for the wrong reasons, at the wrong person, to anexcessive degree, and for too long.79 Aristotle thus notes the differencesbetween people who are quick-tempered and those who ignore the cir-cumstances of an injury, harboring a grudge until the desire for ven-geance is satisfied.80 He then observes that it is not always easy to deter-mine whether anger is an appropriate reaction and that blame for excessesand deficiencies should be tailored according to the seriousness of thedeviation from the mean (Eth. Nic. 1126a31-bl0). In any event, sinceTelamon's accusation is the spontaneous result of anger and is neithermalicious nor premeditated, it fits Aristotle's description of a forgivableoffense (Eth. Mc.ll35b26-29; 1136a5-9).Jason's analysis of Telamon's motivation, accordingly, checks hisown indignation and ends the conflict among the Argonauts. His thought-ful (e7ci(ppa5eco(;, 1.1336) response contrasts with Telamon's senseless(d(ppa8ir|oiv, 1.1332) error:

Tov 8' oorc' Ataovoq mbq ?7U(ppa5?co


24/29

A MORAL EXEMPLAR IN APOLLONIUS' ARGONAUTICA 231When among all these men you alleged thatI wronged a good man. But by no means do I cherish harsh wrathagainst youEven though I was vexed before, since not out of anger over flocks of

sheepOr possessions were you roused to fury,But for a companion. I hope that you would quarrel in this wayWith another for me, should such a thing ever happen."He spoke, and united as before, they were seated.The use of the word jifjviv in line 1339 is atypical for Apollonius, whousually employs the terms %6ta)c; ("gall" or "bitter wrath") or Koxoq("grudge" or "smoldering rage"),81 reserving mtjvk; for instances of divineor supernatural anger, in keeping with Homeric usage.82 With this wordApollonius takes direct aim at the wrath of Achilles. The contrast couldnot be clearer: Jason, unlike Achilles, takes the context of the insult intoconsideration and places it into perspective. He does not equate hisanger, however justified it may be, with the wrath of the gods nor does hedestroy the concord of the Greeks to satisfy his injured pride. LikeAchilles at Iliad 18.112-13, Jason admits that he has suffered from theinsult,83 yet he is immediately able to distinguish those aspects of Telamon'serror that are good (defending a friend) from those that are bad (beingangry with the wrong man).84 Whereas Achilles and Agamemnon areunable to let go of their wrath and quarrel (^fjye xoAmo, //. 1.224; ^fjy'zpidoq, II. 1.319), Jason does not prolong the incident. He recognizes notonly that Telamon's error is commendable because it is grounded in

81See Stanford 1983, 30-31, for discussion of the different varieties of anger.82Campbell 1994, 302, ad 337-38. There are only three other instances of menis inthe poem: Cypris' anger at the Lemnians (1.802), Zeus' anger at the sons of Aeolus (3.337),and the expectation of Aeetes' anger at Alcinous (4.1205). Apollonius also employsutjviocogiv o describe the anger of all the gods at Phineus (2.247).83Achilles announces, "We will leave behind what has happened, though we havebeen grieved (d%vi)U?voi tep), conquering the thumos within our breast by necessity(dvdyKri)."Cf. Jason's statement that he "was vexed before" (7ipiv7iepdvinOeiq,1.1340).Wenote in passing that Achilles' pain lingers till he is compelled to conquer it by externalevents rather than by reasoned argument as is the case with Jason.84Frankel (1968,153, ad 1.1337-44) observes that Jason's speech becomes increas-ingly intellectualized ("mehr und mehr intellektualisiert"), as it emphasizes the importanceof loyalty to comrades. He points out the similarity to Hector's rebuke of Paris at //. 6.325-30, where Hector tells Paris that it is not right (ou kala) for him to keep anger (cholos) inhis thumos, and that he would himself fight with anyone he caught hanging back from thefray.


25/29

232 ANATOLE MORImoral outrage on behalf of a friend85 but also that it would be wrong toallow his own morally justified anger to linger beyond an appropriatelength of time. It is also telling that Jason admits that he was vexed(anietheis, 1340) at Telamon's insult; if he were not, he would be too mild,too deficient in anger, and therefore servile (andrapododes) in his tem-perament (Eth. Nic. 1126a6-9).86 Friendship proves to be a pharmakon,the initial cause of the error and at the same time an antidote to anger.87Telamon's hope that they may regain their friendship signals their recov-ery from stasis, and the two heroes end by sitting together as before(1.1344), united by their respect for each other and their concern for thesuccess of the voyage?a perfect illustration of Aristotelian politicalfriendship.88 Apollonius' use of the verb eSpiocovxo at 1344, which occursfive times in the poem in this same position, is significant. It refers twiceto the harmonious arrangement of the Argonauts on their rowing benches(1.330, 1.530), and it also appears as a participle in a similar context(3.170).89 By sitting down, Jason and Telamon physically realign them-selves with the rest of the rowers and symbolically recover their homonoiawith respect to their common goal.There is no room on board Argo for the inordinate wrath of eitherAchilles or Heracles. In order to return to Greece, the Argonauts mustreconcile their differences with the immortals and with each other. Jason'sreconciliation with Telamon clarifies the contrasts between the virtuesand values of Homeric and Argonautic characters, but it also shows thatApollonius emulates Homer's "inclusion" of moral set-pieces, such asthe passage in which Odysseus chastises his heart (Od. 20.17). It does notmatter, for our purposes, that the archaic poets who composed tradi?tional epic probably had scant interest in the philosophical utility of theirperformances; what matters is the concern for such utility in the Helle-

83Fillion-Lahille 1970, 54: "Ce n'est pas la colere en elle-meme qui est morale ouimmorale, mais l'usage que l'on en fait." Fillion-Lahille observes that Aristotle's recogni?tion of meritorious anger distinguishes him from the Stoics, who argued for the absolutesuppression of anger (55).86See Harris, 2001,305, with n. 84, on Philodemus' attitude toward anger ("Whoeverdoes not get angry, gives ample evidence of his baseness").87As noted above, anger is most intense between friends (Pol. 1328al). See Allen2000, 82-83, on friendship as a cure for anger in tragedy.88Kalimtzis (2000,72) discusses the differences between personal and political friend-ships: "Aristotle asserts that the utility of political friendship is having a share in shapingthe ev jieyeOei en megethei), the great matters over which citizens' lives depend."89The only other occurrence of this word appears to be thematically unrelated: at1.671 it refers to the four white-haired virgins seated at the Lemnian assembly.


26/29

A MORAL EXEMPLAR IN APOLLONIUS' ARGONAUTICA 233nistic period and the acknowledgment, by an intellectual elite, of itscontribution to the vigor of the epic genre. Therefore, Jason's restraintnot only offers a positive behavioral model that is consistent with thepoem's general emphasis on homonoia but also signals the poet's recog-nition of epic as morally contested ground. By portraying the epic heroas emotionally self-controlled, Apollonius sheds light on the numerousaspects of a poetic tradition whose narratives continued to inflect, com-plicate, and often defy the precepts of ancient philosophy.90University of Missouri-Columbiae-mail: [email protected]

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Adkins, A. W. H. 1960. Merit and Responsibility. Oxford: Clarendon Press.-. 1982. "Values, Goals, and Emotions in the Iliad." CPh 77:292-326.Allen, Danielle S. 2000. The World of Prometheus. The Politics of Punishing inDemocratic Athens. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Asmis, Elizabeth. 1990. "The Poetic Theory of the Stoic Aristo'." Apeiron 23:

147-201.-. 1991. "Philodemus' Poetic Theory and On the Good King According toHomerr CA 10:1-45.-. 1995a. "Epicurean Poetics." In Obbink 1995,15-41.-. 1995b. "Philodemus on Censorship, Moral Utility, and Formalism in

Poetry." In Obbink 1995,148-77.Beye, C. R. 1969. "Jason as Love-hero in Apollonius' ArgonauticaP GRBS 10:31-55.-. 1982. Epic and Romance in the "Argonautica" of Apollonius. Carbondaleand Edwardsville: Southern Illinois University Press.Bing, Peter. 1988. The Well-Read Muse: Present and Past in Callimachus and theHellenistic Poets. Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.Buffiere, Felix. 1956. Les Mythes d'Homere et La Pensee Grecque. Paris: LesBelles Lettres.-. 1962. Heraclite. Allegories d'Homere. Paris: Les Belles Lettres.

90A preliminary version of this paper was given at the 2002 APA Annual Meeting inPhiladelphia. For their insight and advice, I thank the Editor and the anonymous readersfor AJP. I owe a large debt of thanks to a number of colleagues for reading and comment-ing on various drafts: Elizabeth Asmis, Michael Barnes, Richard Hunter, Raymond Marks,Nicole Monnier, and David Schenker. I am also grateful to Henry Dyson for severalreferences and suggestions. All translations (unless otherwise noted) and any remainingerrors are my own.


27/29

234 ANATOLE MORI

Campbell, Malcolm. 1994. A Commentary on Apollonius Rhodius "Argonautica"III1-471. Leiden: E. J. Brill.Carspecken, J. F. 1952. "Apollonius Rhodius and the Homeric Epic." YCS 13:35-143.

Clack, Jerry. 1982. An Anthology of Alexandrian Poetry. Classical World SpecialSeries 1. Pittsburgh: Classical Association of the Atlantic States.Clauss, J. J. 1993. The Best of the Argonauts: The Redefinition ofthe Epic Hero inBook One of Apollonius' 'Argonautica." Berkeley and Los Angeles: Uni?

versity of California Press.Clayman, D. L. 2000. "The Scepticism of Apollonius' Argonautica." In ApolloniusRhodius. Hellenistica Groningana 4, ed. M. A. Harder et al., 33-53. Leuven:

Peeters.Dawson, David. 1992. Allegorical Readers and Cultural Revision in Ancient Alex-andria. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.Drager, Paul. 2001. Die 'Argonautika" des Apollonios Rhodios. Das zweite Zorn-

Epos der griechischen Literatur. Munich-Leipzig: Saur.Fillion-Lahille, Janine. 1970. "La Colere chez Aristote." REA 72:46-79.Fortenbaugh, W. W. 1975. Aristotle on Emotion. New York: Harper and Row.Frankel, Hermann. 1960. "Ein Don Quijote unter den Argonauten des Apollonios."MH 17:1-20.-. 1968. Noten zu den "Argonautika" des Apollonios Rhodios. Munich:Beck.Fraser, P. M. 1972. Ptolemaic Alexandria. 3 vols. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Green, Peter. 1990. Alexander to Actium: The Historical Evolution ofthe Hellenis?tic Age. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.-. 1997. The 'Argonautika" by Apollonios Rhodios. Berkeley and Los An?

geles: University of California Press.Halliwell, Stephen. 1998. Aristotle's Poetics. 2d ed. Chicago: University of ChicagoPress.Harris, William V. 2001. Restraining Rage: The Ideology of Anger Control inClassical Antiquity. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Havelock, E. A. 1978. The Greek Concept of lustice: From its Shadow in Homerto Its Substance in Plato. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Hazzard, R. A. 2000. Imagination of a Monarchy: Studies in Ptolemaic Propa-

ganda. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Hopkinson, Neil. 1982. A Hellenistic Anthology. Cambridge: Cambridge Univer?

sity Press.Howes, G E. 1895. "Homeric Quotations in Plato and Aristotle." HSCP 6:153-

237.Hunter, Richard L. 1988. "'Short on Heroics': Jason in the Argonautica." CQ38:436-53.-. 1993. The 'Argonautica" of Apollonius: Literary Studies. Cambridge: Cam?

bridge University Press.-. 1995. "Written in the Stars: Poetry and Philosophy in the Phaenomena of


28/29

A MORAL EXEMPLAR IN APOLLONIUS' ARGONAUTICA 235Aratus." Arachnion 2:1-34. On-line at .. 2002. "Le Argonautiche di Apollonio Rhodio e la tradizione epica." InMuse e Modelli. Lapoesia ellenistica da Alessandro Magno adAugusto, ed.Marco Fantuzzi and R. L. Hunter, 121- 75. Rome: Editori Laterza.

Hutchinson, G. 0.1988. Hellenistic Poetry. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Jackson, Steven B. 1992. "Apollonius' Jason: Human Being in an Epic Scenario."G&R 39:155- 62.Kalimtzis, Kostas. 2000. Aristotle on Political Enmity and Disease:An Inquiry intoStasis. Albany: State University of New York Press.Kidd, Douglas, ed. 1997. Aratus: "Phaenomena." Cambridge: Cambridge Univer?

sity Press.Klein,T. M. 1983. "Apollonius' Jason: Hero and Scoundrel." QUCC 13:115-26.Knight, Virginia. 1995. The Renewal of Epic: Responses to Homer in the

Argonautica" of Apollonius. Leiden: E. J. Brill.Koster, Severin. 1970. Antike Epostheorien. Palingenesia 5. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner.Labarbe, Jules. 1949. UHomere de Platon. Bibliotheque de la faculte de philosophieet lettres de l'Universite de Liege, fasc. 117. Paris: Les Belles Lettres.Lamberton, Robert, and John J. Keaney, eds. 1992. Homer's Ancient Readers: TheHermeneutics of Greek Epic's Earliest Exegetes. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton

University Press.Lawall, Gilbert. 1966. "Apollonius' Argonautica: Jason as Anti-hero." YCS 19:119?69.Lloyd-Jones, Hugh. 1971. The Justice of Zeus. Berkeley and Los Angeles: Univer?

sity of California Press.Long, A. A. 1992. "Stoic Readings of Homer." In Lamberton and Keaney 1992,41-66.Manakidou, Flora. 1998. "XOAOI, MHNIX, NEIKOZ in den Argonautika des

Apollonios Rhodios." Philologus 142:241-60.Mooney, G W. 1912. The Argonautica" of Apollonius Rhodius. Dublin: Dublin

University Press.Moreau, Alain. 1994. Le Mythe de Jason et Medee. Le va-nu-pied et la sorciere.Paris: Les Belles Lettres.Moxnes, Halvor. 1997. "Masculinity." In Conventional Values of the Hellenistic

Greeks, Studies in Hellenistic Civilization VIII, ed. P. Bilde et al., 262-84.Oxford: Aarhus University Press.

Nagy, Gregory. 1996. Poetry as Performance: Homer and Beyond. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.

Obbink, Dirk, ed. 1995. Philodemus and Poetry: Poetic Theory and Practice inLucretius, Philodemus, and Horace. New York: Oxford University Press.

Pfeiffer, Rudolf. 1968. History of Classical Scholarship: From the Beginning to theEnd of the Hellenistic Age. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 1998 Rpt, London:Sandpiper Books.

Pietsch, Christian. 1999. Die "Argonautika" des Apollonios von Rhodos.


29/29

236 ANATOLE MORI

Untersuchungen zum Problem der einheitlichen Konzeption des Inhalts,Hermes Einzelschriften 80. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner.Pike, D. L. 1993. "Jason's Departure: Apollonius Rhodius and Heroism." ActClass36:27-37.

Pohlenz, Max. 1965. "Die Hellenistiche Poesie und die Philosophie." In KleineSchriften, vol. 2, ed. Heinrich Dorrie, 1-37 [76-112]. Hildesheim: GeorgOlms Verlagsbuchhandlung.

Porter, James 1.1992. "Hermeneutic Lines and Circles: Aristarchus and Crates onthe Exegesis of Homer." In Lamberton and Keaney 1992, 67-114.

Putnam, Michael C. J. 1990. "Anger, Blindness, and Insight in Virgil's Aeneid."Apeiron 23:7-39.

Rackham, Harris, ed. 1968. The Nicomachean Ethics. Loeb Classical Library.Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.

Redfield, James M. 1994. Nature and Culture in the "Iliad": The Tragedy ofHector. 2d ed. Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press.Renehan, Robert. 1963. "Aristotle's Definition of Anger." Philologus 107:61-74.Richardson, N. J. 1992. "Aristotle's Reading of Homer and Its Background." InLamberton and Keaney 1992, 30-40.Rose, A. R. 1984. "Three Narrative Themes in Apollonios' Bebrykian Episode

(Argonautika 2.1-163)." WS 18:115-35.Rose, Valentinus, ed. 1967. Aristotelis. Qui ferebantur librorum fragmenta. Stuttgart:Teubner.Schrader, H. L. 1880-82. Porphyrii Quaestionum Homericarum ad Iliadem

pertinentium reliquias. 2 fasc. Leipzig: Teubner.Sider, David. 1995. "The Epicurean Philosopher as Hellenistic Poet." In Obbink

1995, 42-57.Stanford, W. B. 1983. Greek Tragedy and the Emotions. London: Routledge and

Kegan Paul.Thiel, Karsten. 1996. Aeetes der Krieger-Jason der Sieger. Palingenesia mono-

graphien und texte zur klassischen Altertumswissenschaft 60. Stuttgart:Franz Steiner.Turkeltaub, Daniel. 2005. "The Syntax and Semantics of Homeric Glowing Eyes:Iliad 1.200." AJP 126.2:157-86.Vian, Francis. 2002. Apollonios de Rhodes "Argonautiques." 2d ed., 3 vols. Paris:Les Belles Lettres.Williams, Bernard. 1993. Shame and Necessity. Berkeley and Los Angeles: Uni?

versity of California Press.Williams, M. F. 1996a. "The Character of Aeetes in the Argonautica of ApolloniusRhodius." Hermes 124:463-79.-. 1996b. "Stoicism and the Character of Jason in the Argonautica of

Apollonius Rhodius." Scholia 5:17-41.Zanker, Graham. 1979. "The Love Theme in Apollonius Rhodius' Argonautica."WS 13:52-75.

Reconciliation MORI

Documents

Transcript of Reconciliation MORI