chapter 3 The Death and Inheritance of Achilles

He’s gotta be larger than life1 ∵

The first five books of the Posthomerica may well be regarded as the first narra- tive cluster of the epic, starring Achilles as its central character. After two more of his victories, discussed in Chapter 2, the third book is dedicated to the death of the biggest Iliadic hero, which will automatically lead to the complex issue of his inheritance in Books 4 and 5.Vian outlines the central significance of Book 3 in this composition: in other traditions (Vian refers to Arctinus), Memnon and Achilles die on the same day. By postponing Achilles’ death to the next day and a new book, however, Achilles’ central place in the first five books is secured.2 The heritage of Achilles forms a bridge between the Iliadic past, personified by Achilles, and the future of the Trojan War without him. Perhaps unsurprisingly, then, Book 3 is marked by a remarkable amount of Homeric influence, even for Quintus, as he parts with this great hero.3 After Achilles dies an impressive death (section 3.1), both his material pos- sessions and his outstanding position in the hierarchy must be passed on to new champions. Plenty of opportunity for these new competitors to prove themselves is provided during the battle around Achilles’ corpse (section 3.2.2), in his funeral games (section 3.2.3.) and the judgment of arms (section 3.3). Among other heroes, Ajax and Odysseus make the most important claims. This chapter focuses on their successive attempts to obtain and maintain Achilles’ legacy in Posthomerica 3 to 5. These books are marked by their engagement

1 “Holding out for a Hero”—Bonnie Tyler. 2 Vian (1963 T1, 87–89). More observations about the coherence of the first five books ibid. (T1 9, 129, 132 and 1966 T2, 3). 3 “Aussi n’est-il aucun livre des Posthomériques où l’imitation homérique soit plus sensible et plus constante” (Vian 1963 T1, 87). Particularly the Patroclus episode and Book 24 of the Odyssey have to be taken into account. Also, Baumbach makes note of the meaningful, yet changing Homeric intertextuality throughout the first cluster of books, but finds the strongest adherence to Homer in the funeral games of Book 4 and the shield description at the begin- ning of Book 5 (2007, 109–110).

© koninklijke brill nv, leiden, 2018 | doi:10.1163/9789004380974_004 the death and inheritance of achilles 97 with Homer, but also by a clear departure from him. In their rivalry to succeed Achilles, the debate between Ajax and Odysseus represents not only an explicit confrontation between characters, but also a clash of heroic convictions, as one hero envisages—successfully—following the precedent of Achilles, whereas the other proposes—convincingly—the adoption of a new heroic course of action.4

3.1 Achilles: Iliadic Power

After having slain Memnon, Achilles vanishes into the hubbub like a storm (Q.S. 2.547–548), to re-emerge no earlier than at the beginning of Book 3. A new fight- ing day starts with the funeral of Antilochus (Q.S. 3.1–9). The latter’s commem- oration specifically resounds in Achilles’ wrath, which will be the first indicator and instigator of the new day’s battle: as quoted in section 2.4, Achilles takes up arms again out of “rage for his friend Antilochus” (χολούμενος Ἀντιλόχοιο,Q.S. 3.10). Thus, the beginning of Book 3 is presented as a logical continuation of the Memnon episode. Duckworth describes Achilles’ now-imminent death as a “sudden surprise”, for lack of anticipations of it before Posthomerica 3 (1936, 79–80). It seems to me, however, that the entire plot of Book 2 has provided sufficient reminiscences of the Iliadic history, and the Patroclus and Hector episode in particular,5 to at least implicitly foreshadow what is now about to happen. Achilles’ new rage is destructive: he would have killed all and taken Troy, were it not for Apollo (Q.S. 3.26–31). This ‘if not-situation’ (Nünlist & de Jong 2000, 171) recalls two similar counterfactuals during Achilles’ rage in Iliad 21. In the first, he would have slaughtered many more Trojans were it not for Sca- mander’s rage (Iliad 21.211–212). Later in the same book, Achilles’ chase of the Trojans would have led the Achaeans straight into the city, were it not for Apollo’s intervention (Iliad 21.537–546).6 A situation of similarly destructive proportions—and consequences—is now developed in Posthomerica 3. After two books, Achilles seems to have reached a climax of anger. This is already shown in the evolution of his engagement in battle: in Posthomerica 1, he was roused by Ajax’s exhortation, but in Book 2 he rode out with the rest of the army at dawn. This third battle day starts rather abruptly, with Achilles appearing

4 First observations about this matter have been published in my 2016a article. 5 Additional intertextuality to his Iliadic rage can be found in a brief description of the rivers Xanthus and Simoeis “choked with corpses” (Q.S. 3. 23–24; see also Mansur 1940, 5). 6 In Iliad 16, Patroclus posed a similar threat (discussed below).