Reading Ovid's Medea: Complexity, Unity, and Humour

Reading Ovid’s Medea: Complexity, Unity, and Humour Reading Ovid’s Medea: Complexity, Unity, and Humour By STEPHEN CLARK RUSSELL, B.A., M.A. A Thesis Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies In Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy McMaster University © Copyright by Stephen Russell, May, 2011 Doctor of Philosophy (2011) McMaster University (Classics) Hamilton, Ontario TITLE: Reading Ovid’s Medea: Complexity, Unity, and Humour AUTHOR: Stephen Russell, B.A., M.A. SUPERVISOR: Professor Paul Murgatroyd NUMBER OF PAGES: iv, 368 ii Abstract This thesis offers a consideration of Ovid’s portrayal of Medea - in Heroides 6 and 12, Metamorphoses 7, and in Tristia 3.9. Although several scholars have examined the myth as Ovid presents it, no one has yet offered a literary appreciation of Ovid’s various accounts of the myth – one that examines his use of characterization, humour, audience response, and one that treats his Medea as a consistent, albeit complex, character. The first chapter focuses on the sources for Ovid’s Medea, the ways he makes changes and, as far as we can tell, innovations to his predecessors. The second begins with a general introduction to the Heroides, followed by a close reading of Heroides 6, showing how this letter is an oblique reference to Medea’s letter and myth, and I point out the links between the two poems, arguing that Hypsipyle’s letter must be read as a foreshadowing of Medea’s. The third chapter examines Heroides 12 – Medea’s letter - where I concentrate on Ovid’s characterization of Medea and specifically look at elements of black humour and foreshadowing. The fourth – and longest – chapter deals with the Medea of the Metamorphoses, where I propose that the real metamorphosis of this story is Medea herself, who moves from the state of an innocent young girl to that of a witch, yet noting that all of the changes take place within a work that is marked by its sense of playfulness – its perpetua festivitas – and note Ovid’s use of wit and irony even as his characterization appears to grow dark. The fifth and final chapter deals with the Medea in Ovid’s Tristia, where I place the Medea of this work within the context of Ovid’s exile poetry, while showing that he is working with a complex character and is in no way contradicting himself. iii Acknowledgements I would like to express my gratitude to my supervisor, Dr. Paul Murgatroyd, for his guidance and support. I would also like to thank the other members of my committee, Dr. Howard Jones and Dr. Daniel McLean, both of whom have been very helpful. To those institutions which have supported me with funding I am deeply grateful: SSHRC, the Department of Classics, Faculty of Humanities, and the School of Graduate Studies at McMaster University. Among the many people who have been helpful and encouraging at McMaster University, I would like to thank Dr. Claude Eilers and Dr. Evan Haley; Dr. Michael Snowdon, recens doctus, provided great friendship along this journey; and Carmen Camilleri, the department’s administrative assistant, helped me significantly as well. I would like to thank especially my family, and, above all, I would like to dedicate this to Toulouse, sine quo vita mihi non tam beata fuisset. iv Table of Contents Abstract iii Acknowledgements iv Chapter 1: The Sources for Ovid’s Medea 1 Chapter 2: Heroides 6 – From Hypsipyle to Medea 36 Chapter 3: Heroides 12 – Medea’s Letter to Jason 98 Chapter 4: Medea in the Metamorphoses 165 Chapter 5: Medea in Tristia 3.9 317 Conclusion 336 Bibliography 346 PhD Thesis – S.Russell McMaster - Classics Chapter 1: Ovid’s Sources for Medea This chapter will concentrate on the sources for Ovid’s Medea. I shall examine his main literary models, his use of the tradition, the changes he makes and, as far as we can tell, the innovations that he applies to the depictions of his predecessors. In order to do this, I shall present an overview of the Medea story as a whole (concentrating on what sets the various depictions apart from one another), then I shall place Ovid’s version against them and thus see what aspects he plays up, plays down, adds, and omits. The chapter starts with a summary of the different literary references and the various attitudes expressed toward the Medea myth,1 her genealogy, and includes a brief overview as to how her story has evolved and been interpreted differently during the course of the classical period throughout the different genres in which she appears. Since this project is strictly focussed on Ovid’s presentation, I will only examine these texts insofar as there is evidence that they help sharpen the perception of what Ovid is doing. Although Medea first appears in Hesiod, the main sources used for this will be Pindar, Euripides, and Apollonius, since they offer the most substantial extant evidence. As well, I consider both later versions of the myth and those that are difficult to attach a date – such as in Apollodorus, Seneca, Valerius Flaccus, Hosidius Geta, and Dracontius – that may highlight specific details of the story that are present in Ovid’s version but are not found in versions prior to that of Ovid and therefore which help to provide an overview of the myth that he had at his disposal. In addition to this, I briefly examine artistic representations of the Medea story, exploring the possible connections to parts of her 1 See p.2ff. 1 PhD Thesis – S.Russell McMaster - Classics myth that are only depicted in Ovid. The intricate play with his literary models causes Ovid’s Medea to be a much more complex character, one that requires a reader who is both conscious of those other texts as well as the tradition that exists beyond those models. By looking back to the main sources we can better appreciate the striking originality of the Medea he portrays. The Myth of Medea: an Overview of the Literary Attitudes toward her from Hesiod to Dracontius. Medea makes various appearances throughout classical literature, from her first emergence in Hesiod in the 8th century BC to that in Dracontius in the 5th century AD. Before looking specifically at what Ovid has done with her story and where he has made changes, it is important to look at the prior tradition and variations on her myth that the poet would have certainly had at his disposal, along with other versions from later antiquity which contain details which are found in Ovid and may have been influenced by his presentation or have come from (now lost) sources that were available to him. To start, we need to consider the attitudes of the authors toward her in the extant sources. While the later references to Medea tend to present her in a very negative light, the earlier ones either present her in a slightly positive way or in one that is neutral and therefore neither positive nor negative. In his Theogony, Hesiod mentions that Medea was taken by Jason to be his wife, but adds little else to his description other than to say that she produced a son, Medus.2 Her next two appearances, in Pindar and Herodotus, 2 Hesiod, Theogony 956-62, 993-1002. 2 PhD Thesis – S.Russell McMaster - Classics continue to foster this positive image. In two of his odes Pindar alludes to Medea.3 In the lengthier poem, Pythian 4, she acts as a prophetess4 who foretells how the Argonaut Euphamus will receive a clod of earth which will one day lead him to found Thera (and, from there, Cyrene). The remainder of the poem mostly concerns the adventures of the Argonauts, and specifically concentrates on the meeting of Jason and Pelias in Iolcus.5 Herodotus also offers an earlier and less complex version of Medea, beginning his narrative on the origins of the Persian-Greek conflict with the story of how Medea was stolen from Colchis by the Greeks in response to the earlier theft of Io from Argos by certain Phoenician sailors, and Herodotus later makes a remark about how she came from Athens and eventually gave her name to the Medes.6 Euripides’ tragedy seems to have changed the course of the myth, as it is the first extant account which presents a more detailed portrait of her story and, more 3 Pindar, Pythian 4, Olympian 13.53-54. 4 O’Higgins (1997) makes an interesting argument on the dual nature of Medea as prophetess and magical priestess. She makes a valid comparison (p. 115) between the song Medea sings to the Argonauts and the song that Circe sings to Odysseus in book 12 of the Odyssey. However, this comparison also highlights the major weakness of the essay, as it assumes a connection between Medea and Circe. Granted, it is extremely probable that by this time the relationship between these two figures had been established and was understood by the readers of the poem, but there is no extant evidence for this tradition. Equally, O’Higgins’ paper presupposes that Pindar was working with a tradition of the Medea story for which the only extant evidence that we have comes after him, since the essay interprets (too strenuously, in my opinion) Pindar’s words as having a double meaning that imply Medea’s power as a destructive force. This is a reading which I do not support, since it forces us to read Pindar through Euripides, which is a backward approach. 5 Curiously, the ode, dedicated to Arcesilas IV of Cyrene, was commissioned by an exile from Cyrene in an attempt to make an opening for that exile’s return.

Load more