ABSTRACT Virgil's Anna: Unanima Soror Anna Lam Director: Alden Smith, Ph.D. the Present Study
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
ABSTRACT Virgil’s Anna: Unanima Soror Anna Lam Director: Alden Smith, Ph.D. The present study concerns Anna, the sister of Dido in Book Four of Virgil’s foundational, Roman epic poem, the Aeneid. I analyze the intertextual relationship Anna’s character shares with the nurse figure of tragedy, and how Virgil builds a new kind of tragic figure out of the Greek material—the tragic, maternal sister. Virgil further links Anna to the nurse figure by using specific incendiary language and by utilizing her deep religious and etymological origins as a mother/nurse goddess. These connections link her to the other two sisters of the Aeneid, Juturna and Acca, who are also fundamentally associated with motherhood. Within Virgil’s narrative, these three sisters are employed to assist in the founding of Rome, the ultimate telos of the Aeneid. APPROVED BY DIRECTOR OF HONORS THESIS: ______________________________________________________ Dr. Alden Smith, Department of Classics APPROVED BY THE HONORS PROGRAM: __________________________________________________________________ Dr. Elizabeth Corey, Director DATE: _______________________ VIRGIL’S ANNA: UNANIMA SOROR A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of Baylor University In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Honors Program By Anna Lam Waco, Texas May 2019 TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter One: Introduction . 1 Chapter Two: Anna and Dido: Redefining Tragic Sisterhood . 20 Chapter Three: Anna as Kindler: Incendiary Language in Book Four . 42 Chapter Four: Anna as Nurse: Further Connections . 51 Chapter Five: Conclusion . 67 Bibliography . 69 ii CHAPTER ONE Introduction The Aeneid is complex and profound, qualities that Henry Nettleship, in his 1885 essay “Suggestions Introductory to a Study of the Aeneid,” argued had not been adequately considered among his contemporary scholars. Nettleship explained that Virgil could not be compared to Homer (which only exaggerated the deficiencies that critics of the Aeneid saw) but must instead be considered within the richer and vaster literary and historical context in which the Aeneid was written.1 Such a project is a daunting one, but the present study of Anna, the sympathizing sister of Dido, is an attempt to contribute in a small way to this project. Consideration of Anna is inextricably linked to her captivating and emotionally alluring sister, Dido, the queen of Carthage. Virgil’s Dido is tenaciously passionate, her character endowed with a fearsomely benevolent love that is precariously balanced against an equally fearsome manic-depressive odium. Opposite this imposing and radiant figure is Anna, a character much humbler in stature, yet one who acts in a kind of “supporting role” to Dido— something much more interesting than a mere foil character. In her we find the 1Henry Nettleship, “Suggestions Introductory to a Study of the Aeneid,” in Lectures and Essays on Subjects Connected with Latin Literature and Scholarship, (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1885), 98. 1 even-tempered constitution of a dear sister and confidante, and it is upon Anna that a truly sincere tragedy is foisted. Well-intentioned, but missing the mark, Anna seeks her sister’s happiness yet in doing so ensures her doom. This chapter will examine the interpretations of Anna over the decades as a foundation for a fuller study of her character in the wider literary and historical context in which she is situated. Beginning with suggestions from Macrobius and Servius, many have understood the Aeneid to have been indebted to a great many earlier poetic works,2 one of which was Naevius’ Bellum Punicum, the first Roman epic. Macrobius discussed Naevius’ influence on Book 1,3 and one may accordingly hypothesize that a similar influece carried into Book 4, which picks up the narrative following Anna’s tale.4 He likewise noted Naevius’ treatment of both Anna and Dido as individual characters—a potential precedent for Virgil.5 Servius on the other hand offers an alternate tradition: Varro ait non Didonem sed 2See R. A. Smith, Virgil, (Wiley-Blackwell, 2011) for a fuller discussion of Virgil’s various other poetic influences. 3Macrob. Sat. 6, 2, 31 in Emil Baehrens, Fragmenta Poetarum Romanorum (Lipsiae: Teubner, 1886). 4See Aruthur Stanley Pease, Publi Vergili Maronis Aeneidos Liber Quartus, (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1967), pp. 18-21 for a much longer and more detailed discussion on the extent to which scholars have attributed influence in the Aeneid to Naevius. 5[C]uius Filiae Fuerint Anna et Dido Naevius dicit, “Naevius says Anna and Dido were his daughters” (Schol. Dan. Aen. 4, 9). 2 Annam amore Aeneae inpulsam se supra rogum interemisse, “Varro said that not Dido, but Anna, killed herself on the funeral pyre, impelled by love of Aeneas” (Schol. Dan. Aen. 4, 682). Servius’ commentary thus indicates that existing versions of the story from which Virgil could have modelled Book Four already included Dido, Anna, and Aeneas. We can thus infer that Virgil was participating in a literary tradition very much alive in his time. Part of the success of the Aeneid was that it was wrought from Rome’s splendorous legendary past, as E. K. Rand has observed.6 Virgil masterfully assimilated material from the old legends of Rome’s ancestors,7 giving already deeply revered traditions a place in the poetic canon. This is not to say that Virgil was merely an imitator but instead that he was a creator building upon already well-respected literary traditions. This is again Nettleship’s view, shared by scholars like Richard Heinze, who argued in his influential 1903 Virgils Epische Technik that Virgil could only have written his epic after an “endless process of appraisal, consideration and reconsideration” of various preceding works in 6Edward Kennard Rand, The Magical Art oF Virgil, (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1931). 7For a deeper discussion of the legendary Aeneas, see Sergio Casali, “The Development of the Aeneas Legend” in A Companion to Vergil's Aeneid and its Tradition (John Wiley & Sons, 2014). 3 epic, epyllion, and tragedy that doubtlessly influenced the Aeneid.8 Of the books that wax tragic, none does so more overtly than Book Four.9 Heinze sees Anna’s role as a confidante and go-between as a borrowing of the stock nurse figure in Hellenistic romantic literature. He states that her use is primarily a technical device whereby the audience learns of the heroine’s deepest feelings without the poet resorting to a monologue. Virgil’s decision to have the functional part of the nurse be played instead by a sister preserves, according to Heinze, the “elevated style that epic demands,” and he considers Anna’s role important for the dramatic and artistic effect of the fourth book (especially in its final, emotionally- charged scene) but not essential to its action.10 T. R. Glover similarly observes an elevation of style in the Dido episode, but also the remarkable way that story is told against the backdrop of history in the Aeneid, emphasizing Virgil’s vast knowledge of and appreciation for Greek poets such as the tragedians and the Alexandrines.11 Book Four is indeed 8Richard Heinze, Virgils Epische Technik, (Leipzig: B. G. Teubner, 1903), reprint, Los Angeles: California University Press, 1994, p. 208. 9Some scholars have argued that ‘dramatic’ is a more appropriate label than ‘tragic’ for the fourth book. See H. L. Tracy, “Aeneid IV: Tragedy or Melodrama?” The Classical Journal 41, 5 (1946): 199-202. 10Heinze (1903) 100. 11T. R. Glover, Studies in Virgil, (London: E. Arnold, 1904): p. 50-51. 4 preoccupied with feminine experience in much the same way the plays of Euripides are. Tragedy concerned with conflict, and Virgil depicts Dido faced with a struggle to resist passion as Phaedra did in Euripides’ Hippolytus. Just as Phaedra is manipulated by Aphrodite into falling in love and subsequently kills herself, Dido is just as callously manipulated by Venus (though Glover notes that Dido’s love may have happened without the additional encouragement).12 Glover’s account of Dido is that Virgil presents her as both woman and queen. She is just shy of divinity (despite the many appropriate comparisons), yet she is no girl, having been taught by both the bitter and sweet experiences of life. She has all the tenderness and sympathy of a woman, yet the regal carriage and stately accomplishments of a queen. Her sensibilities are endowed with that distinctly Roman sense of womanly decorum and modesty, pudicitia, which rests deeply and immovably in her conscience. This last characteristic, Glover says, is the crucial aspect of Dido’s character that Anna underestimates. He identifies Dido’s sister with the stock sister of Greek tragedy, particularly Ismene, calling her Cyrenic and “a woman of the ‘common-sense’ school, not at all of an imaginative habit.”13 In this way, she bears resemblance to Phaedra’s nurse in 12Ibid., 164-169. 13Ibid., 174. 5 the Hippolytus, whose similar disregard for moral scruple is a defining characteristic.14 Anna encourages Dido to act contrary to her conscience, and in doing so directly participates in her sister’s undoing.15 That Dido belongs in the company of other tragic heroines is a point made by Norman W. DeWitt in his “The Dido Episode as Tragedy.”16 Like these women, she is of noble birth, thus lending a similarly splendorous palatial setting to the fourth book’s narrative. DeWitt also points to other features of Book Four that are shared with tragedy, such as the lack of reference to time, passages with a lyric flavor, and the presence of stock characters. To this last feature, DeWitt likens Anna to tragic stock figures such as Ismene, the sister of Antigone, or Phaedra’s nurse in the Hippolytus. Ascanius carrying Helen’s mantle to Dido evokes Medea’s children carrying the deadly robe to Jason’s bride. Suicide was also common among tragic characters, and Book Four does 14H.