CHAPTER TWELVE

THE FALL OF TROY: BETWEEN TRADITION AND GENRE

Andreola Rossi

As Aeneas, in book 2, begins his account of the final night of Troy, his recollection of the events follows, at least in its outlines, the path of memory of a rich literary and artistic tradition formed long before Virgil's own time. It is therefore natural that many studies of Aeneid 2 analyse Virgil's account in comparison with the intricate labyrinth of versions, literary and other, that the previous tradition had to offer. Heinze's seminal study' had set the standard and many modern scholars have followed along the same path. They have illuminated how Virgil constantly remodels, in his own fashion, the most salient episodes of the last night of Troy inherited from a previous tradi­ tion. To cite only some of the material taken into consideration: ear­ lier epics like the Iliupersis of Arctinus and the Little of Lesches as we find them in the summaries of Proclus, post-Virgilian Greek epics like the Posthomerica of Quintus Smyrnaeus, and the epyllion 1he Capture if Troy ('IA.iou aA.romc;) written by Tryphiodorus.2 Further, Euripidean dramas of the Trojan cycle, 3 the works of mythographers and, in another genre, historiography, the accounts of Timaeus and Hellanicus, partly preserved in Dionysius of Halicarnassus.

1 Heinze (1993) 3-67. 2 The relation between the Aeneid and these two later works is controversial. Heinze (1993) 37-49, Knight (1932) 178-89, Vian (1959), Campbell (1981), Gerlaud (1982) deny that these Greek authors were influenced by Virgil's Aeneid. For an opposite view see Keydell (1954), D'Ippolito (1976). Cf. also D'Ippolito in E. V. s.v. Trifiodoro. 3 On earlier epics on Troy's downfall see Davies ( 1989) 63-79. See further Anderson (1997) who collects all ancient sources, literary and other, on the topic. More specifically, for scenes of the sack of Troy on vase paintings see Scherer ( 1963) 96ff., Robert (1923-26), Wieneke (1954), Dugas (1937) 5-26. On the Tabula Iliaca see Weitzmann (1959) 34ff., Galinsky (1969) 32ff., Sadurska (1964), Horsfall (1979). On the painting of Polygnotus see Robert (1893), Schefold (1975), Stansbury­ O'Donnell (1989). For the relation between Virgil's Aeneid and the Cyclic Epics see Kopff (1981) 919-47. 232 ANDREOLA ROSSI

My study of Book 2 of the Aeneid analyses the Virgilian account from a different perspective and therefore explores different material. I study how Virgil has described the fall of Troy according to a pre­ cise literary topos which forms an essential subtext to the entire nar­ ration, a topos which has been recognized and labeled by ancient rhetoricians as Urbs Capta, the Fall qf the Ciry. First I outline briefly the origin of the topos and its development in various literary genres; then I show how Virgil is able to incor­ porate in his narration some of its most significant themes. I will conclude by discussing the larger narrative implications of his choice. It is probably no accident that Polybius' famous criticism of Phylarchus' tragic style (2.56. 7-8) focuses on Phylarchus' description and treatment of the capture of Mantinea by Cleomenes. Phylarchus, according to Polybius, "in his eagerness to arouse the pity of his readers (cr1tou&a~rov 8' d~ £A.wv), and to enlist their sympathies, treats us to a picture of clinging women with their hair disheveled and their breasts bare, or again of crowds of both sexes together with their children and aged parents weeping and lamenting as they are led away to slavery. This sort of things he keeps up throughout his history always trying to bring horrors vividly before our eyes. '4 Polybius rounds off his criticism of Phylarchus with the charge that the lat­ ter is unable to distinguish between history and tragedy, for the object of tragedy is not the same as that of history but quite the opposite. The tragic poet should thrill and charm his audience for the moment by the verisimilitude of the words he puts into his char­ acter's mouth, but it is the task of the historian to instruct and con­ vince for all time. 5 Polybius' criticism has always been interpreted as a more or less justified attack against Phylarchus' pathetic style. Polybius criticizes Phylarchus for the latter fails to distinguish between history and tragedy and regards pleasure, ~&ovi], achieved by an unmediated vividness of dramatic representation, not truth, as the legitimate func­ tion of historiography.6

~ Polybius 2.56. 7-12. 5 On this passage see, among others, Walbank ( 195 7) ad loc. and Wiseman ( 1993) 134ff.; also Wiseman in ch. I 7 below. Other comments throughout his work confirm Polybius' distaste for 'tragic history' although he himself could not escape its influence. Strabo accused him of trying to arouse pity in his readers (8.6.23). On tragic his­ tory see also Scheller (1911), Burck (1934) 178-233, Ullman (1942), Walbank (1955), Walbank (1960), Walsh (1961) 23-8, Sacks (1981) 144-70, Feldherr (1998) 7ff. 6 Other exponents of the so-called 'tragic history' were Duris and Clitarchus.