Herculeo Sub Nomine Pendent an Intertextual Research Into the Character of Hercules in Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica

Home , Doliones, Hercules and Cacus, Hesione, Hesione (mythology)

Herculeo sub nomine pendent An intertextual research into the character of Hercules in Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica

Name: M. Liebregts Study: MA Classics and Ancient Civilizations: Classics Student number: 10173730 University: University of Amsterdam Thesis supervisor: dr. M.A.J. Heerink Second reader: dr. P.S. Gerbrandy Date: 30-06-2016 Word count: 18.456

I hereby declare that this thesis is an original piece of work, written by myself alone. Any information and ideas from other sources are fully acknowledged in the text and notes.

Amsterdam, the 30th of June 2016.

2 Contents

Introduction 4 1. The Argonautica: a belated epic 4 2. Intertextuality and Valerius’ character Hercules as 6 an intertextual test case 3. The Apollonian Hercules: the archaic hero 8 4. Hercules in Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica 9

1. Hercules’ arrival (book 1) 10 1. Pelias the poet (Arg. 1.31-7) 10 2. Hercules’ actual arrival (Arg. 1.107-19) 14 3. The catalogue of Argonauts (Arg. 1.353-489) 18 4. The child Achilles (Arg. 1.255-70) 19 5. Jupiter’s speech (Arg. 1.563-7) 20 6. Conclusion 22 2. The Hesione episode (Arg. 2.445-578) 24 1. The divergence from Apollonius of Rhodes 25 2. An Ovidian narrative structure 27 3. The archaic hero in archaic Troy 32 4. Conclusion 35 3. Reflections on Hercules (Arg. 3.598-725) 37 1. Divergences from Apollonius of Rhodes’ Argonautica 38 2. A Virgilian narrative structure? 42 3. Telamon versus Meleager 43 4. Conclusion 50

Conclusion 52

Appendix 1: Hercules’ presence in the Argonautica, both in real person 55 and in references.

Bibliography 57

3 Introduction

Herculeo sub nomine pendent. Val. Fl. Arg. 3.600

It’s Hercules upon whose name they hang.1

Hercules is an important character in Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica. Although research into the intertextual relationships of this epic pertaining to the literary tradition is thriving, a character analysis with this particular focus is lacking. In this study, I hope to show that the examination of scenes in which one specific character, Hercules, features, will yield new insights into the interpretation of this character and of Valerius Flaccus’ poem. I will conduct three case studies in three different chapters, in order to better understand Hercules’ remarkable role in the Argonautica. I will now introduce my subject and research question.

1. The Argonautica: a belated epic In Greek mythology, the Argo is believed to be the very first ship to have traversed the seas. The primacy of this event is highlighted in the opening lines of Valerius Flaccus’ epic about Jason’s famous quest for the Golden Fleece in Colchis, the Argonautica:

prima deum magnis canimus freta pervia natis faticidamque ratem, Scythici quae Phasidis oras ausa sequi mediosque inter iuga concita cursus rumpere flammifero tandem consedit Olympo. Val. Fl. Arg. 1.1-2

First crossing of the sea I sing, by the gods’ | own mighty sons, and the prophetic ship | that dared to seek the shores of Scythian Phasis | and forge a path between the Crashing Rocks, | to rest at last with heaven’s fiery stars.

1 Translations of Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica used in this chapter are by Barich (2009), who bases

4 This declaration of primacy could also be read in a metapoetical way: the poet is claiming to embark upon something that has not been done before. 2 Valerius, however, was certainly not the first to write on Jason’s quest. References to the Argonautic myth can already be observed in the Homeric epics.3 By stating to be the first, Valerius Flaccus is in fact, paradoxically, calling attention to the epic’s relatively late position in the literary tradition: the Latin poem is written in the first century CE, during the Flavian era.4 This way, the ‘belated’ Argonautica is able to respond to and interact with a multi-generic tradition.5 Between texts, interconnections exist, that may be deliberate or accidental. Especially since the last quarter of the twentieth century, scholars have paid attention to these intertextual relationships in Latin poetry, for, as Braund puts it, ‘an awareness of intertextuality and of literary texture is crucial to an understanding of Latin literature’. 6 Multiple theoretical concepts regarding referentiality, allusions, and repetition in Latin texts have been outlined.7 These tools are useful to detect the way in which texts respond and react to each other. This interplay is not limited to Latin literature. By contrast, many Latin texts are deeply indebted to Greek literature too. Scholars agree that Apollonius of Rhodes’ Greek epic on the same mythological expedition, written in the third century BCE, is Valerius Flaccus’ primary source model.8 The language and style, however, are mostly Virgilian.9 Therefore, the poem has been regarded for a long time as imitative. In the early twentieth century, Wilamowitz-Moellendorf judged Valerius Flaccus for ‘seine sklavische Abhängigkeit von Virgil’ and Mehmel concludes that ‘Valerius glaubte Virgils imitator zu sein’.10 Nowadays, in general, this ‘Virgilization’ is not seen as imitation anymore; rather, it is understood that Valerius Flaccus uses the Virgilian intertext to create and innovate.11 It is not only allusions to Apollonius’ and Virgil’s works, however, that

2 Hershkowitz (1998) 35. 3 For example Od. 12.70: Ἀργὼ πᾶσι µέλουσα. ‘Argo famed of all’. Translation by Murray (1919). 4 On the possible dating of the poem, see Zissos (2008) xiv-xvii. 5 See Hershkowitz (1998) 35-8 on the Argonautica’s belatedness. 6 Braund (2002) 203. 7 See for example Hinds (1998), Wills (1996), Thomas (1986), and Conte (1986). 8 See for example Mehmel (1934) 5-40 on Apollonius of Rhodes’ Argonautica as Valerius Flaccus’ primary source model. 9 See for example Barnes (1995) 273-8. 10 Wilamowitz-Moellendorff (1924) 165n.2; Mehmel (1934) 132. 11 Barnes (1995) 277: ‘Valerius’ language and style both accept and resist the influence of Virgil’s.’ See also Feeney (1991) 313-37 and Hardie (1993) 83-7.

5 can be perceived in the Flavian epic: scholars have detected influences from inter alia Homer, Aratus, Dionysius Scytobrachion, Ovid, Virgil, Lucan, and Seneca.12 Thus, Valerius Flaccus’ poem is deeply indebted to the literary tradition. The Argonautica, then, self-consciously varies and reflects on this literary tradition. Paradoxically, the poem is presented as an archi-epic,13 the subject matter of which is situated before the events described in the monumental Homeric epics. This way, the narrator is able to both comment on the literary tradition and allude to events that will happen in the future, which are already known through other literary works. Meta- literary comments can often be detected in the Argonautica. For example, sometimes the narrator refers to versions of the Argonautic myth that differ from the one that the author chooses to tell.14 Moreover, Valerius presents the Argonautica as a ‘late proto- text’ by ‘allusions in the future tense’,15 which connect the narrative to the events in the Iliad, the Odyssey and the Aeneid.16 To uncover the literary play in Valerius’ Argonautica, intertextual research is fruitful.

2. Intertextuality and Valerius’ character Hercules as an intertextual test case Intertextual research into Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica is thriving17. This type of research, however, often focuses on the influences in one specific scene or from one specific literary work on Valerius’ epic. In my thesis, a different approach is applied; I will examine multiple intertextual influences in the portrayal of one specific character: Hercules. Intertextual research on this character individually has not been done before, despite the prominent role in the Argonautica. Because Hercules is the intertextual hero par excellence, it is likely that many allusions to previous literature can be found in scenes where this hero plays a role.18 I hope that my innovative focus will make this study a relevant addition to the current body of research on

12 See for studies on Valerius’ Latin intertexts especially Heerink and Manuwald (2014). See Galli (2014) on Dionysius Scytobrachion, Castelletti (2014) on Aratus, and Zissos (2002) on Homer. 13 Deremetz (2014) 61. 14 See for example Zissos (1999) on the Argonautic narrative that is not always univocal. 15 See Barchiesi (1993). 16 See Deremetz (2014) 61-2, and Zissos (2008) xl-xli. 17 See for example Heerink and Manuwald (2014) 249-358 for studies on the Argonautica’s interplay with Virgil, Lucan, Ovid, Seneca, Statius and Silius Italicus. I assume that Valerius Flaccus wrote his epic before Statius and Silius Italicus, as the majority of scholars does, so I excluded their epic works from my intertextual research. 18 See Galinsky (1972) and the more recent work by Stafford (2012) on Hercules’ pluriform character in the Greek and Latin literary tradition, and on how ancient poets dealt with him.

6 Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica and its intertextual ratio with respect to the literary tradition. My research question is:

How does intertextuality add meaning to episodes in Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica in which the character of Hercules plays a role?

In Valerius’ narrative on the Argonautic enterprise, Hercules is not just one of the many crew members of the Argo:19 he is among the main characters in the poem, together with Jason and Medea. His presence and enormous strength are highlighted multiple times throughout the narrative. Nevertheless, he is one of the few Argonauts that will not reach Colchis. Instead, Hercules is physically left behind in Mysia, after the loss of his friend Hylas, as early as in book 3. In the additional 5 books, he remains present through his absence, in exclamations, comparisons, and allusions.20 In order to illustrate the significant part Hercules plays in the Argonautica, I have added an appendix to my study, which contains an overview of all scenes which feature Hercules. In the main part of this thesis, I will conduct a total of three case studies on the appearance of Hercules, in three individual chapters. The first chapter focuses on five passages of book 1 of the Argonautica that are concerned with Hercules’ character.21 These multiple, relatively short, instances show how Valerius used other literary sources to shape his Hercules and how the poem’s belatedness is expressed. Next, I will take a closer look at a single scene in close detail: chapter two examines the Hesione episode (2.445-598). Scholars have discussed the effect of this scene, because Valerius’ source model Apollonius of Rhodes does not tell this story. I will show how an intertextual approach is able to yield new insights into interpretations of this scene. In the third chapter and final case study, I will look at a scene in which Hercules himself is not physically present (3.598-725). In this episode, the Argonauts are discussing whether they can continue their expedition without Hercules, after he and Hylas have not returned from the woods. The differences between the structure of the

19 Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica records 52 Argonauts, including Jason. Zissos (2008) 240. 20 It is generally accepted that the transmitted Argonautica is not complete: the final part is lacking. However, most scholars agree nowadays the intended number of books was eight. See Hershkowitz (1998) 1-34 for a discussion on the possible endings of the Argonautica. 21 Arg. 1.31-7, 107-19, 255-70, 353-489, 563-7.

7 Argonauts’ debate and of that in the corresponding scene in Apollonius of Rhodes’ poem, as well as the intertextual allusions in Telamon’s and Meleager’s speeches, are significant for the function of this scene. Thus, my three chapters cover book 1 of the Argonautica, Hercules’ major appearance in book 2, and the Argonauts’ crucial debate concerning him in book 3. Based on this corpus of three case studies, I will be able to draw multiple conclusions on the added value of intertextuality in episodes in Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica, which feature Hercules. In the remainder of this introduction, I will give an interpretation of Hercules’ performance in Apollonius of Rhodes’ Argonautica, the main source model for Valerius Flaccus’ epic, followed by some remarks about his character in the Flavian Argonautica.

3. The Apollonian Hercules: the archaic hero In Valerius’ main model, Apollonius’ Argonautica, Hercules is presented as the ultimate hero.22 He leaves the expedition prematurely, after the Argonauts have left him behind accidentally. It appears, however, that his departure is fated.23 Scholars have suggested that Hercules had to leave the expedition for dramatic reasons: with Hercules, there would have been no Argonautic poem, since he could have won the Golden Fleece through his outright superior force. 24 According to DeForest, Apollonius’ story itself is an epic in Homeric fashion, but all the participants in the story are non-heroic, except for Hercules.25 For this reason, this Greek Argonautica has been interpreted as an anti-epic, into which the non-heroic Jason fits well as the central figure and the individualist Hercules does not.26 The Argonautic enterprise is a story about team effort: right from the start, it is clear that Jason is not able to accomplish the quest on his own. Therefore, Clauss argues that ‘Hercules’ godlike strength and self-sufficiency are completely inappropriate for a group of highly

22 In antiquity, many varying narratives circulated on Hercules’ share in the Argonautic expedition. In some versions, he is not a part of the crew at all, while in other accounts he does complete the journey to Colchis. In both Apollonius’ work and in Valerius’ epic, Hercules leaves the expedition after the Argonauts’ stay in Mysia. See Zissos (2002) 73n17 for an overview. 23 See also Chapter 3. 24 See for example Clauss (1993) 176, Feeney (1986) 61. 25 See DeForest (1994) 8-9. 26 See for example Beye (1969).

8 talented, but interdependent, heroes engaged in a nautical ἄεθλος’.27 He stresses that the Herculean hero must have appeared too unrealistic for the audience of Apollonius’ Argonautic poem, which was written many centuries after the Homeric heroic epics.28 Consequently, the archaic Hercules has to leave the Argonautic expedition and the Argonautic poem: he is the wrong hero in the wrong epic.

4. Hercules in Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica On the surface, Valerius’ Hercules seems to play the same role as Apollonius’ hero. Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautic story, however, is generally considered to be ‘recuperated’:29 the Argonauts, including Jason, are heroes again. If all Argonauts are heroes, the question remains which role Hercules fulfils in Valerius Flaccus’ poem. Does he still embody Apollonius’ archaic hero, who has to leave the poem because he is not in the right epic? The Valerian Hercules is an ambiguous character: there are distinctions between his human and divine form, his own status and Jason as leader, and between the collective adventure of the Argonauts and his personal itinerary.30 Ripoll argues that Hercules and Jason are both heroes, but they are acting on different levels. He stresses that Jason follows in the footsteps of Hercules: he is a Hercules on a human scale, and Hercules serves as an exemplum for him.31 In this study, I will focus on Hercules’ character, and consequently a thorough examination of his role in relation to Jason and the other Argonauts is beyond the scope of this thesis. However, my research will enable me to make some preliminary observations about their interrelationship. Intertextual allusions in my case studies will also allow me to make some suggestions about Hercules’ exceptional characterization and the implications of his departure for the continuation of Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica. I will now turn to the main part of my study.

27 Clauss (1993) 196-7. 28 See Clauss (1993) 205. 29 See for example Hershkowitz (1998) 105-90. 30 See Ripoll (1998) 86-160. He examined Hercules’ role in as well Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica as in Statius’ Thebaid and Silius Italicus’ Punica. 31 Ripoll (1998) 94.

9 1. Hercules’ Arrival (book 1)

In this first case study, I will deal with five passages from book 1 of the Argonautica, in which Hercules features.32 A study of intertextuality in these passages leads to multiple observations. After arguing that a Senecan intertext at the beginning of the poem underscores a link between Hercules and Jason, I will show that Hercules is characterized several times as a belated figure in light of the literary tradition. He, like multiple other characters, is in a later period of his life than he was in Apollonius of Rhodes’ epic. Characters in the epic seem to be aware of the poem’s belatedness. Moreover, I will demonstrate that Valerius Flaccus’ Hercules is given more emphasis than was the case in the Greek epic, which points the reader to Hercules’ significant part in the Argonautica. Finally, I will show that an intertextual play with Virgilian and Homeric intertexts, spread out over book 1, strengthens the connection of particularly Hercules with epic literature. It seems to characterize him as an epic hero of the past.

1. Pelias the poet (Arg. 1.31-7) After the Argonautica’s proem (1.1-21), the actual narrative has only just started, when Hercules is invoked. Pelias, Jason’s cruel uncle, wants to commission the latter with an impossible task to get rid of him.33 He experiences difficulty, because Hercules already freed the world from all dangers and monsters:

ergo anteire metus iuvenemque exstinguere pergit Aesonium letique vias ac tempora versat, sed neque bella videt Graias neque monstra per urbes ulla: Cleonaeo iam tempora clausus hiatu Alcides, olim Lernae defensus ab angue Arcas et ambobus iam cornua fracta iuvencis. ira maris vastique placent discrimina ponti. Val. Fl. Arg. 1.31-7

32 Translations used in this chapter are by Barich (2009) for Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica, who bases his version on Ehler’s Teubner edition (1980). Other texts and translations used here derive from Race (2008) for Apollonius of Rhodes’ Argonautica, from Fitch (2002) for Seneca’s Hercules Furens, and from Rushton Fairclough (1999) for Virgil’s Aeneid. 33 Pelias does not want to be deposed, for Jason is the legitimate heir to the throne of Iolcus.

Pelias’ thoughts, formulated as they are at the beginning of the epic, are clearly programmatic, for Hercules is presented as a foil for Jason. Just as the former used to be, Jason is now ordered by a king to perform a Herculean labour. Gärtner has shown that the specific Herculean labours mentioned above also serve as an analogy for the trials Jason will have to fulfil in Colchis, later in the poem: Jason has to fight against two bulls (7.573-606), encounters a serpent-like dragon (8.54-94), and will adorn himself with the Golden Fleece, as Hercules did with the skin of the Nemean lion 34 (8.121-6). The phrasing of Pelias’ difficulties strengthens the link between Hercules and Jason, for neque bella videt Graias neque monstra urbes (1.33) recalls the prologue of Seneca’s Hercules Furens, where the goddess Juno struggles with devising an impossible assignment for her stepson Hercules:35

quae bella? quidquid horridum tellus creat inimica; quidquid pontus aut aer tulit terribile dirum pestilens atrox ferum, fractum atque domitum est. … monstra iam desunt mihi, minorque labor est Herculi iussa exequi quam mihi iubere. Sen. HF 30-3, 40-2

What warfare? Any fearful thing the hostile earth produced, or sea or air brought forth, however frightening, monstrous, poisonous, dreadful, savage, has been broken and tamed. … Now there are no monsters left me, and it is less of a labour for Hercules to fulfil my commands, than for me to give them.

34 See Gärtner (1994) 65-7. 35 See Deremetz (2014) 57, Buckley (2014) 309-11, and Galli (2007) 59.

11 This allusion to Seneca’s tragedy has triggered scholars to read the entire Argonautica in a tragic light. According to Buckley, the Argonautica is framed as a kind of Senecan tragedy and ‘always aware that tragedy is just beyond its horizon’.36 Indeed, tragedy-oriented backdrops, such as Cyzicus, Prometheus, and Medea, are omnipresent in the Argonautica. Epic, however, often incorporates elements of other genres, a phenomenon Harrison calls ‘generic enrichment’.37 Therefore, Buckley’s expression, that ‘Senecan tragedy is at the heart of what the Argonautica is really about’,38 seems somewhat overstated, although the Senecan intertext does make the reader aware of the tragic side of Hercules’ character.39 The allusion makes the established link between Hercules and Jason at the beginning of the Argonautica stronger: just as Pelias is a kind of Senecan Juno, Jason is portrayed as a kind of Hercules. No such explicit link between Hercules and Jason is present in Apollonius of Rhodes’ Argonautica. In his work, Pelias orders Jason to traverse the Aegean, hoping that he would either die at sea or on land (1.15-7).40 Although the enterprise is indicated to be a (Herculean) labour (ἄεθλον, 1.15), Jason does not have to cross the sea because Hercules expelled all dangers from the countryside.41 So, the deviation from the Greek Argonautica and the allusion to the prologue of Seneca’s tragedy signal to the reader that there is a link between Hercules and Jason right from the start in Valerius’ account of the Argonautic expedition. Deremetz argues for a metapoetical reading of Pelias’ machinations.42 According to him, Pelias seems to represent the poet searching for a new subject, one that is different from all the traditional and hackneyed subjects, such as Hercules’ labours: Jason’s quest inaugurates a new epic tradition. The scene is a mise en abyme: an ‘embedded or inset scene which is a microcosm of its larger framework.’ 43

36 Buckley (2014) 307. 37 See Harrison (2007) on ‘generic enrichment’ in epic and other genres in the Augustan age. 38 Buckley (2014) 325. 39 In Seneca’s Hercules Furens, Hercules eventually kills his wife and children, excited to madness by divine power. See Galinsky (1972) 167-84 on Seneca’s Hercules. 40 Arg. 1.15-17: αἶψα δὲ τόν γ᾿ ἐσιδὼν ἐφράσσατο, καί οἱ ἄεθλον ἔντυε ναυτιλίης πολυκηδέος, ὄφρ᾿ ἐνὶ πόντῳ ἠὲ καὶ ἀλλοδαποῖσι µετ᾿ ἀνδράσι νόστον ὀλέσσῃ. ‘As soon as he saw Jason, he took note, and arranged for him the ordeal of a very arduous voyage, so that either on the sea or else among foreign people he would lose any chance of returning home.’ 41 According to Zissos (2008) 102, the absence of terrestrial monsters marks the completion of a phase of human advance: by turning to the sea, Pelias implements Jupiter’s Weltenplan, which is expressed later in the book (Arg. 1.531-60). 42 See Deremetz (2014) 57-8. 43 Braund (2002) 219.

12 Considering this interpretation, Hercules could embody the archaic epic tradition, because he already did it all, while Jason’s heroic exploits still have to start.44 Deremetz’ statement is in line with Clauss’ interpretation on Apollonius’ Hercules as the archaic, ‘outdated’ hero, who was not in the right place in the ‘renewed’ epic.45 When Pelias wants to give an order to Jason, he thinks of three specific dangers to which Jason can no longer be subjected, because of Hercules’s actions. Allusions to the Nemean lion and the Lernean hydra are obvious. The identity of the two bulls, whose ‘horns already smashed’, however, is unclear. Zissos seems to be sure that one of them is the Cretan Bull, but he does not succeed to ascertain the identity of the other bull.46 In all cases, the reference to the enemy in combination with the broken horns is odd. The phrase ambobus iam cornua fracta iuvencis (1.36) is therefore rather vague. I would like to suggest the possibility of an allusion to Apollonius of Rhodes’ poem. For, in his narrative, when all the preparations are done and the Argo is about to set sail, two bulls are sacrificed:

τὼ δ᾽ ἐπὶ βουσὶν ζωσάσθην, Ἀγκαῖος ὑπέρβιος, Ἡρακλέης τε. ἤτοι ὁ µὲν ῥοπάλῳ µέσσον κάρη ἀµφὶ µέτωπα πλῆξεν, ὁ δ᾽ ἀθρόος αὖθι πεσὼν ἐνερείσατο γαίῃ: Ἀγκαῖος δ᾽ ἑτέροιο κατὰ πλατὺν αὐχένα κόψας χαλκείῳ πελέκει κρατεροὺς διέκερσε τένοντας: ἤριπε δ᾽ ἀµφοτέροισι περιρρηδὴς κεράεσσιν. Ap. Rhod. Arg. 1.425-31

Two comrades, proud Ancaeus and Heracles, girded themselves to slay the bulls. With his club the latter struck his bull in the middle of the head upon its brow; it fell immediately in a heap and lay on the ground. Ancaeus struck the broad neck of the other with his bronze ax and cut through the strong tendons; it fell forward on both horns.

44 Iam … olim … iam (Arg. 1.34, 35, 36) emphasize that Hercules already did it all in the past. 45 See also Introduction. 46 Inter alia, the Minotaur and the river-god Achelous have been suggested, although these opponents are not part of Hercules’ twelve paradigmatic labours. See Zissos (2008) 104-5 for the full discussion on this topic.

13 In this scene, Hercules slays one of the two bulls mentioned, and there is an explicit reference to their horns. So, when Pelias states ‘both bulls horns already smashed’, this might be a reference to this Apollonian scene.47 It could be a final comment of Pelias as a representation of the poet: because the Argonautic narrative has already been told by Apollonius of Rhodes, it is Valerius Flaccus’ difficult task to write an Argonautic epic that distinguishes itself from its Greek predecessor.

2. Hercules’ actual arrival (Arg. 1.107-19). We have seen in the previous passage, that Hercules already defeated all terrestrial dangers at the beginning of Valerius’ Argonautic narrative. This implies that Hercules accomplished all his labours at the start of the Argonautic expedition.48 It is a clear signal of Valerius’ conscious belatedness, for in Apollonius’ epic, Hercules completed only a few of them.49 Apart from the notion at the beginning of the epic, it also becomes clear that Hercules is staged in a later period of his life in the scene where he physically arrives to participate in the expedition:

protinus Inachiis ultro Tirynthius Argis advolat, Arcadio cuius flammata veneno tela puer facilesque umeris gaudentibus arcus gestat Hylas; velit ille quidem, sed dextera nondum par oneri clavaeque capax. Val. Fl. Arg. 1.107-11

In Valerius’ epic, Hercules is the very first Argonaut to arrive. The prominent position catches the eye of the reader. In Apollonius’ epic, by contrast, Hercules enters the story for the first time in Apollonius’ epic, in the middle of the catalogue of

47 The forward movement of the bulls when they fall also implies that their horns will be ‘smashed’. 48 According to Zissos (2009) 104, olim (Arg. 1.35) also suggests the completion of Hercules’ labours prior to the Argonautic expedition. 49 In several instances in Apollonius of Rhodes’ Argonautica, it is suggested that Hercules will return to his master Eurystheus after the expedition (for example Arg. 1.1317-8; 1.1347-8).

14 Argonauts (1.124-32). In the Greek poem, it is told that Hercules had just caught the Erymanthian boar when he decided to join the expedition, against the will of his master Eurystheus (αὐτὸς δ᾽ ᾗ ἰότητι παρὲκ νόον Εὐρυσθῆος ὡρµήθη, 1.130-1). He was on his way back from Arcadia to Argos, carrying the living animal (ἀπ᾽ Ἀρκαδίης … Ἄργος … ζωὸν φέρε κάπριον, 1.125-6), while Hylas (Ὕλας, 1.131) brings his weapons. The Apollonian narrative is invoked in Valerius’ introduction of Hercules’ character, signalled by striking similarities. For example, the recurrence of Argos (1.107) and Arcadian (1.107) venom can hardly be coincidental. Furthermore, ultro (1.107) highlights Hercules’ own intent to participate, signalled by ἰότητι (1.130) in the Greek epic, and Hylas once again carries Hercules’ weapons. However, Eurystheus’ former unwillingness is not mentioned in Valerius’ version. 50 The omission of this information, which demonstrates that Hercules is still serving Eurystheus in Apollonius’ narrative, supports the notion that Valerius’ epic is self- consciously staged in a later period, where Hercules already accomplished his labours. While the content of these lines is based on Apollonius’ narrative, influence from Virgil’s Aeneid is also visible. Verbal echoes suggest that the relationship between Hercules and Hylas as described here resembles the one of Virgil’s Aeneas and his son Ascanius: dextera and oneri allude to the scene, in which Aeneas has to flee from Troy and takes Ascanius by his right hand:51

haec fatus latos umeros subiectaque colla veste super fulvique insternor pelle leonis, succedoque oneri; dextrae se parvus Iulus implicuit sequiturque patrem non passibus aequis. Verg. Aen. 2.721-24:

50 Moreover, the deadly veneno (Arg. 1.108), possibly originating from the hydra of Lerna, could oppose Apollonius’ living (ζωὸν, Arg. 1.126) animal. 51 See Hershkowitz (1998) 150-154. This resemblance between Hercules and Hylas and Aeneas and Ascanius recurs at the beginning of the Hylas episode (Arg. 3.481-780), where Valerius Flaccus says haeret Hylas lateri passusque moratur iniquos (Arg. 3.486), in agreement with Virgil’s sequiturque patrem non passibus aequis (Aen. 2.724). Hercules is also called pater Tirynthius (Arg. 3.565). See Heerink (2015) 113-117 on the relationship between Hercules and Hylas modelled on Virgil’s Aeneas and Ascanius.

15 So I spoke, and over my broad shoulders and bowed neck I spread the cover of a tawny lion’s pelt and stoop to the burden. Little Iulus clasps his hand in mine, and follows his father with steps that match not his.

In this scene, Virgil makes Aeneas look like Hercules in putting on a lion’s skin (pelle leonis, 2.722). It is an example of window allusion, because Valerius Flaccus made Hercules resemble Aeneas, who was in the alluded scene himself modelled on Hercules.52 Due to the adverb Inachiis (1.107), Zissos suggests that Valerius Flaccus links the passage with the singing rivers that were mentioned in the previous lines.53 The combination Inachiis … Argis, however, is attested only once before Valerius Flaccus, in Virgil’s Aeneid (7.286), where it refers to Juno, who arrives from Argos.54 Indeed, she is the next character to appear in the narrative. Against the reader’s expectations, Hercules’ arrival does not indicate the start of the catalogue of crew members. Instead, the goddess interferes.55 Just as in the Aeneid, Juno is the dominant goddess in the Argonautica.56 As she hated Aeneas, she now hates Hercules. This strengthens the resemblance of Valerius’ Hercules with Virgil’s Aeneas, outlined above. Whereas Juno hates Hercules, she supports Jason. Therefore, when Hercules reports himself to join Jason’s expedition, Juno rebukes the former:

quos talibus amens insequitur solitosque novat Saturnia questus: ‘o utinam Graiae rueret non omne iuventae in nova fata decus nostrique Eurystheos haec nunc iussa forent. imbrem et tenebras saevumque tridentem iamiam ego et inviti torsissem coniugis ignem.

52 See Thomas (1986) 188-9 on window allusion, which he calls ‘window reference’. See Hinds (1998) 21-4 on the distinction and overlap of the terms ‘allusion’ and ‘reference’. 53 Zissos (2008) 143. Arg. 1.105-6: canunt … amnes. Inachus was in mythology both river and river-god. 54 Aen. 7.286-7: Ecce autem Inachiis sese referebat ab Argis saeva Iovis coniunx. ‘But the fierce wife of Jove was coming back from Argos, city of Inachus.’ 55 Hercules and Hylas are immediately set apart from the others. This might foreshadow their upcoming separation from the Argonautic expedition. Manuwald (2015) 27. 56 On the role of Juno in Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica, see Schubert (1991).

16 nunc quoque nec socium nostrae columenve carinae esse velim Herculeis nec me umquam fidere fas sit auxiliis comiti et tantum debere superbo.’ Val. Fl. Arg. 1.111-9

Against these two | mad Juno rails, renewing old complaints: | ‘I wish that all the glorious youth of Greece | would not to novel fortunes rush, but that | my own Eurystheus gave out these commands. | Storm and darkness and a ruthless trident, | all these long since would I have thrown at him [Hercules], | and lightning’s fire, though Jove my spouse forbid it. | Nor even now do I desire this man | as pillar of our ship and its ally, | for his help never could I rightly trust | and owe such a debt to this companion’s pride.’

Although Valerius’ main narrative is about Jason’s quest for the Golden Fleece, in this passage, the attention is centred on Hercules and Juno’s hatred for him.57 Because Hercules is part of Jason’s expedition, Juno cannot get rid of him (yet). By the time Valerius Flaccus wrote his Argonautica, Juno’s complaints have become a common feature in Latin literature.58 The fact that she is ‘renewing’ (novat, 1.111) her ‘usual complaints’ (solitos … questus, 1.112), hints at Valerius’ self-conscious belatedness: it is a metaliterary comment.59 This Valerian speech of Juno recalls especially the goddess’ comparable oration in Virgil’s Aeneid, where she protests that she will not be able to prevent the Trojans from settling in Italy (1.37-49). An analogical relationship between these speeches exists, for both declamations appear at the beginning of the narrative. Moreover, both scenes are complaints of powerlessness: Juno is unable to persecute her enemies freely in the Argonautica as well as in the Aeneid.60 The Aeneid in its entirety is structured around two interventions on Juno’s part.61 Hardie observes that the overall Argonautic story does not allow for that same structure, but that the Herculean

57 Jason and Hercules are paralleled once more, for Juno wishes that the commands (iussa, Arg. 1.115) would have been given by Hercules’ master, Eurystheus, instead of by Pelias. 58 Similar scenes also appear in Ovid (Met. 2.508-30, 3.259-72, 4.420-31) and Seneca (HF 1.1-124) See Zissos (2002) 77. 59 See Zissos (2008) xl, 146. Hardie (1990) 17 suggests that Juno’s complaints have become literary convention. 60 See Zissos (2008) 145-6. 61 Aen. 1.37-49 and Aen. 7.239-322.

17 subplot does allow for a close imitation of Virgil. 62 In this way, this ‘Hercules Theme’ 63 that is interwoven into the Argonautic storyline, seems to constitute a kind of mini-Aeneid. Knowing that Virgil’s Juno did everything to counter Aeneas, the reader’s expectation is already raised at the beginning of the Argonautica that Valerius’ Juno will not rest after these initial words. Indeed, she will intervene for a second time in book 3, and, in contrast to the Aeneid, Juno gets her way: Hercules physically leaves the Argonautic enterprise.64 By getting rid of the hero who is paralleled to the epic hero Aeneas, Valerius suggests that his Argonautica will take a different direction than Virgil’s epic did. I will come back on this topic later, in chapter 3, when the Argonauts are discussing whether or not to leave Hercules behind.

3. The catalogue of Argonauts (Arg. 1.353-489) The importance of Hercules in Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica is signalled by his arrival before all the other heroes that will man the Argo. In addition, a divergence from Apollonius of Rhodes’ catalogue of crew members in the Latin version (1.353- 489) also alerts the reader to Hercules’ prominent role. For in the Greek epic only Meleager is linked to Hercules: he is said to become superior to all heroes, except for Hercules (1.195-8).65 In Valerius’ poem, by contrary, Hercules’ name is not only connected to Meleager, but also to Telamon, Cepheus, and Philoctetes. The connection with Telamon (1.353-5) could hint at the upcoming Hesione episode (2.455-578), just as Hercules’ initial link with Hylas (1.109-10) might foreshadow the Hylas episode (3.481-780). Cepheus is introduced as Hercules’ assistant against the Erymanthian boar (1.374-6). Because it is this labour that Hercules was performing at the moment he decides to join the Argonautic expedition in Apollonius’ epic, the link between Cepheus and Hercules could be a playful reference to alternative versions of the Argonautic narrative. Finally, Philoctetes is told that he will once handle

62 See Hardie (1990) 5. 63 See Manuwald (2015) 23. 64 However, he remains in the background throughout the epic, in exclamations, comparisons and in stories about him. See appendix 1. 65 Arg. 1.195-8: ὧδ᾿ ἔτι κουρίζων περιθαρσέα δῦνεν ὅµιλον ἡρώων· τοῦ δ᾿ οὔ τιν᾿ ὑπέρτερον ἄλλον ὀίω νόσφιν γ᾿ Ἡρακλῆος ἐπελθέµεν, εἴ κ᾿ ἔτι µοῦνον αὖθι µένων λυκάβαντα µετετράφη Αἰτωλοῖσιν. ‘Thus, while still a boy Meleager entered the very bold crew of heroes, and I do not believe that any other man would have come superior to him except, to be sure, Heracles, if he had stayed there and been raised for one more year among the Aetolians.’

18 Hercules’ arrows (1.391-3), which is an ‘allusion in the future tense’ to the upcoming Trojan War.66 In the catalogue of Argonauts, Valerius’ self-conscious belatedness with respect to Apollonius’ Argonautica can be perceived again. Whereas Meleager is said to be still a boy (ἔτι κουρίζων, 1.195) at the moment of the Apollonius’ Argonautic expedition, Valerius’ narrative does not contain such information. Instead, in the Latin poem, the width of Meleager’s proud breast is said to be vying with Hercules’ (spatiumque superbi pectoris Herculeis aequum, 1.434-5). So, whereas the Greek Argonautica explains that Meleager will eventually become nearly as powerful as Hercules, he is portrayed as equal to Hercules immediately from the start in Valerius’ narrative.67 The hero has grown up, just like Valerius’ Argonautica is presented to be further developed.

4. The child Achilles (Arg. 1.255-70) Before the actual expedition starts, the Iliad’s protagonist Achilles is staged to say goodbye to his father, Peleus (1.255-70).68 The little boy is said to be fascinated by the Argonauts, and specifically by Hercules:

stupet in ducibus magnumque sonantes haurit et Herculeo fert comminus ora leoni. Val. Fl. Arg. 1.262-3.

He [Achilles] gapes at all the princes there, absorbed | in all their loud conversing, while he puts | his face right next to Hercules’ lion skin.

66 According to some versions, the Greeks needed Hercules’ weapons, which he had given to Philoctetes, to eventually win the Trojan War. See Introduction on the device ‘allusion in the future tense’, and also Chapter 2 on allusions to the ‘future’ Trojan War. 67 Meleager’s proud (superbus, Arg. 1.434) breast could be interpreted as an intratextual hint to his later arrogant speech, where he argues to continue the Argonautic enterprise without Hercules (Arg. 3.645- 89). See Chapter 3 on this speech. 68 This scene is modelled on Homer’s encounter of Hector and Astyanax (Il. 6.474-81). See Zissos (2008) 207 for parallels and reversals.

19 Although a similar goodbye scene takes place in Apollonius’ Argonautica, the connection between Hercules and Achilles is innovative. It is implied that Achilles regards Hercules as his example.69 Whereas the Valerian Hercules resembled the protagonist of the Virgilian Aeneid just some hundred lines ago, now he is linked to the major hero of Homer’s Iliad. The link between Hercules and these epic heroes suggests that Hercules is the major epic hero in this poem.70 Valerius’ belated composition of the poem continues in this scene: the Latin Achilles is older than he was in the Greek Argonautic epic. In Apollonius’ poem, the expectation was raised that he was just a baby, because Achilles’ mother is said to be holding him in her arms (ἐπωλένιον φορέουσα Πηλεΐδην Ἀχιλῆα, 1.557-8). Valerius, by contrast, calls Achilles a puer (1.257), and it appears that is already able to walk, for he jumps (adsiluit, 1.259) to his father. But, despite their difference in age, Achilles is in both epics still a child. Radke has examined the function of infant epic heroes in Callimachean epic. She notices that, with regard to Apollonius’ scene, Achilles’ childhood implies that the formation of the Iliadic hero is still in its infancy.71 The scene is, to paraphrase, ‘an emotional and vivid announcement of the future that Homer had designed in the Iliad, although this future had not yet been written’.72 In this way, the illusion emerges, that the future is still wide open, although poets like Homer have already written about it.73 The appearance of little Achilles in Valerius Flaccus’ epic has the same impact: it strengthens the poem’s effort to present itself as the archi-epic, as a ‘late proto-text’ for the literary tradition.74

5. Jupiter’s speech (Arg. 1.563-7) The culmination appears after Jupiter’s announcement of his Weltenplan (1.531-60) that the Argonautic expedition will eventually lead to shifts in the world power. Then, he directs his words to only Hercules and the Dioscuri, Castor and Pollux:

69 A link between the heroes Achilles and Hercules is already established in Homer’s epic. In the Iliad, Achilles compares himself with Hercules, who also could not escape death, although he was dear to Zeus (Il. 18.115-21). 70 I do not claim that Hercules is the only hero that is linked to these epic protagonists. See for example Hershkowitz (1998) 109-10, to see that Jason is portrayed as Aeneas too. 71 See Radke (2007) 271-3. 72 Radke (2007) 272: ‘Die Szene ist damit eine emotionele und anschauliche Ankündigung der Zukunft, die Homer in der Ilias entworfen hat. Doch diese Zukunft is noch nicht geschrieben.’ 73 See also Heerink (2014) 81n37, who calls this Hellenistic program ‘rejuvenation’. 74 Deremetz (2014) 61.

20 'tendite in astra, viri: me primum regia mundo Iapeti post bella trucis Phlegraeque labores imposuit; durum vobis iter et grave caeli institui. sic ecce meus, sic orbe peracto Liber et expertus remeavit Apollo.' Val. Fl. Arg. 1.563-7

‘Press onwards to the stars, | my men [Hercules, Castor, Pollux]: for only after war with fierce | Iapetus and toils on Phlegra’s plain | did kingship set me [Jupiter] at the cosmos’ helm. | A hard and toilsome journey I’ve decreed | for you to reach the heaven. Even so | it was, how very like my Liber’s [Bacchus’] path, | when he had crossed the world; Apollo too | returned this way, his sojourn done on earth.’

It is generally agreed that Hercules’ final apotheosis is pronounced here with the words tendite in astra.75 In the proem, the catasterism of the Argo was already predicted, and Jupiter’s apostrophe seems to confirm these opening words. 76 However, because he only directs his words to Hercules and de Dioscuri, scholars have discussed whether or not all Argonauts are in effect being addressed.77 Because all addressees are children of the god himself, Jupiter seems to favour his own progeny and to use the Argonautic expedition to promote his own sons to divinity.78 Ganiban argues that ‘the certain type of hero (his own progeny) and the certain type of heroic reward (apotheosis) Jupiter urges on, stands in meaningful contrast to the type of heroism and heroic reward voiced by other Argonauts, and especially their leader Jason, who rouses men to join him on his expedition with appeals to gloria and religio (1.76-80)’.79 Hence, Jupiter’s words seem to differentiate Hercules (and Pollux and Castor) from the other Argonauts. It is a distinction that will recur more often in the epic.80

75 See for example Castelletti (2014) 190 and Ripoll (1998) 100 on the announcement of Hercules’ apotheosis in Jupiter’s words. 76 See Arg. 1.1-4, cited in the Introduction. 77 See for example Kleywegt (2005) 312-3 and Feeney (1991) 333-4, who support the statement that all Argonauts are being addressed with Jupiter’s words. 78 See Ganiban (2014) 261-7. See also Zissos (2014) 272-3, 279-84 on Jupiter’s favouring of his own progeny. 79 Ganiban (2014) 266. 80 Jupiter’s full speech (Arg.1.531-67) reminds the reader immediately of Jupiter’s speech in book 1 of the Aeneid (Aen. 1.254-296), where he announces the coming imperium sine fine (Aen. 1.279). In this speech directed to Venus, he explains to his daughter about the future of her (and hence also his own)

21 In Valerius’ epic, Hercules’ final apotheosis is announced at the beginning of the Argonautic expedition. This stands in contrast to Apollonius’ narrative, where the sea- god Glaucus prophesies his apotheosis to the Argonauts once Hercules is no part of the expedition anymore.81 Both Jupiter and Glaucus emphasize that Hercules still has to prove himself before his catasterism: the Apollonian Glaucus imposes the precondition that Hercules will have to complete a few more labours (εἴ κ᾽ ἔτι παύρους ἐξανύσῃ, 1.1319-20), while Jupiter explains that Hercules ‘journey to heaven’ (iter … caeli, 1.555) will be durum and grave (1.555). Because Valerius’ Hercules is in a later stage in his life than Apollonius’ Hercules was, it is plausible that the Latin hero is closer to his apotheosis than he was in the Greek epic. Moreover, it is implied that Hercules receives his apotheosis within the time span of the epic, for near the end of the poem, when Jason is compared to Hercules, he is said to enjoy the heavenly banquet (8.230-1).82

6. Conclusion Intertextuality in five different passages in book 1 of Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica has shown to be very effective to characterize Hercules. First, the Senecan intertext at the beginning of Valerius’ poem (1.33) strengthens the established parallelism in book 1 between Hercules and Jason. Jason’s quest for the Golden Fleece is presented as a kind of Herculean labour, as Pelias’ orders to Jason resemble Juno’s to Hercules. The striking difference is that Jason still has to perform his (first) labour at the start of Valerius’ Argonautic expedition, while Hercules already completed them. Because Hercules is portrayed as a hero who ‘already did it all’, before he is physically present in the poem, he seems to embody the ‘archaic’ hero. In this respect, he is presented as a different hero than the other Argonauts, including Jason, which is illustrated by Jupiter’s speech, in which Hercules is addressed and Jason is not.

descendants: the Romans and Augustus. See Ganiban (2014) 256-61 on allusions to and diversions from Jupiter’s speech in the Aeneid. 81 See Chapter 3. In Diodorus Siculus’ narration of the Argonautic expedition, Glaucus is the one who prophesies immortality to both Hercules and the Dioscuri (Diod. Sic. 4.48.). This coincides with the prophecy of Valerius’ Jupiter. 82 Arg. 8.230-1: seu cum caelestes Alcidae invisere mensas iam vacat et fessum Iunonia sustinet Hebe. ‘Or when Hercules has leisure | to sit at heaven’s banquet tables: weary, | he finds support in Hebe, Juno’s handmaid.’

22 Valerius staged his Hercules in a later period of his life than Apollonius did, because the Latin Hercules already completed his ‘canonical’ works at the beginning of the narrative. This diversion can be interpreted as a metaphor of Valerius’ conscious belatedness. Also characters like Achilles and Meleager are older than they were in the Greek epic, which suggests that not only Hercules, but the entire poem is presented as belated. Moreover, it seems like Pelias is aware of the Argonautica’s belatedness: he encounters difficulties to devise a renewing quest for Jason, just like the Flavian poet has to search for a new subject. This way, Valerius expresses his belated position in the literary tradition through the character of Pelias. Finally, the reader is also pointed to the poem’s belatedness, when the poet stages the protagonist of the ‘future’ Iliad as a child, and therefore presents his Argonautica paradoxically as an archi-epic. In book 1 of Valerius’ poem, Hercules is given more attention than he received in Apollonius’ epic. This is marked in all five examined passages: there is a link between Hercules and Jason at the beginning of the poem (1.31-7), Hercules is the very first Argonaut to participate in the expedition and is rebuked by Juno (1.111-9), he is connected multiple times to other Argonauts in the catalogue of crew members (1.353-489), and he is the only hero specified to attract Achilles’ attention in the goodbye scene (1.263). Finally, Jupiter directs his words to Hercules in particular in his imposing speech (1.563-7). This emphasis on the character of Hercules alerts the reader on his prominent role in the Argonautica, which suggests serving a purpose. Hercules’ uniqueness is signalled several times, for instance when little Achilles, the Iliadic hero par excellence, is said to be fascinated particularly by this hero (1.263). Not only Homer’s protagonist, however, is linked to Hercules. At the moment Hercules physically enters the narrative, intertextual correspondences between him and Virgil’s protagonist Aeneas occur. The former’s portrayal as a kind of Aeneas, who is persecuted by Juno’s wrath, hints at the Herculean subplot in Valerius’ Argonautica as a kind of mini-Aeneid. Thus, Hercules is associated with the major characters of previous epics. That Hercules is linked to these heroes, who are the protagonists in earlier epics, confirms the image of Hercules as the archaic epic hero.

23 2. The Hesione episode (Arg. 2.445-578)

In this chapter, I examine Valerius Flaccus’ Hesione episode (2.445-578), where Hercules defeats a sea monster and liberates the princess Hesione.83 I will state that the divergence from Apollonius of Rhodes offers a contrasting effect in Valerius’ scene, which proves that Hercules can operate best when he carries out a labour on his own. Furthermore, I will argue that an underlying Ovidian structure emphasizes that Valerius’ Hercules is characterized as an archaic epic hero that is not interested in physical love. The image of Hercules’ archaic heroism is strengthened in this episode by the multiple allusions to the future Homeric Trojan War, that serve to present the Argonautica as the archi-epic, and by parallels with a Virgilian scene. Taking these intertexts into consideration, Hercules is portrayed as an ‘old-fashioned’ hero, whose interests are very different from his fellow Argonauts. First, I will summarize the scene. Valerius Flaccus’ Hesione episode contains the following events: after the Argonauts have landed at Troy (2.445-50), Hercules and Telamon move into the direction of a sound they hear, when they go together into the countryside (2.451-61). Hercules finds Hesione chained to the rocks (2.462-7) and asks who she is and why she is there (2.468-9). Hesione answers that she is about to be devoured by a sea monster (2.470-92), after which the place is described (2.493-6). Suddenly the sea monster appears, and the actual fight and the liberation of Hesione take place (2.497- 549). King Laomedon arrives and tries to trick Hercules, for he does not want to reward him with the horses he promised to the liberator (2.550-66). After narratorial comments on Troy’s upcoming doom (2.567-73), Hercules answers that he will return later, and the Argonauts leave Troy (2.574-8). I will now turn to my analysis of the episode.

83 Translations used in this chapter are by Barich (2009) for Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica, who bases his version on Ehler’s Teubner edition (1980). Other texts and translations used here derive from Race (2008) for Apollonius of Rhodes’ Argonautica, from Rushton Fairclough (2001) for Virgil’s Aeneid, and from Miller (1916) for Ovid’s Metamorphoses,

24 1. The divergence from Apollonius of Rhodes Although Valerius Flaccus’ account of the Hesione episode is not narrated in the Greek Argonautica, the Hesione episode seems to be composed with the corresponding Greek scene in mind.84 Valerius tells about Hercules’ liberation of Hesione between the departure from Lemnos (2.428) and the arrival at king Cyzicus (2.634). Between these same events in Apollonius’ work, on the other hand, the narrator tells about the Eartborn men that dwell in Cyzicus’ land.85 Hera stages these monsters against Hercules as a labour (1.989-97), and the hero defeats them together with the other Argonauts (1.998-1011). So, Hercules is the initial protagonist in both Valerius Flaccus’ scene and in Apollonius’ passage. Moreover, cues to the Apollonian text can be perceived in the Hesione episode. Since, when the Valerian narrator reports that the Argonauts land on the Dardanian shore (Dardaniis … harenis, 2.445), the same appellation for Troy is used as in Apollonius’ account, when the reader is informed that the Argonauts leave Dardania (Δαρδανίην δὲ λιπόντες, 1.931). In addition, in Apollonius’ fight against the Earthborn men, a sea monster is mentioned in a simile (πόντιον … θῆρα, 1.991). Considering that Apollonius of Rhodes is Valerius Flaccus’ primary source model, these correspondences are highly significant. It seems that Valerius has exploited these Apollonian cues and included Hercules’ fight against the sea monster at Troy in his narrative. Thus, although the content differs vastly between the Greek and Latin Argonautica, the Latin episode seems to be a deliberate response to the Greek counterpart, based on the parallel position in the narrative and on mutual allusions. I will now illustrate how the variation should be interpreted.

84 The story about Hesione was well known. References to elements of it can already be found in Homer (for example Il. 5.638-42, 7.452-3, and 20.145-8). Other examples that recount the story are Diodorus Siculus (4.32, 4.42), Ovid (Met. 11.194-220), and Hyginus (Fab. 89). Dionysius Scytobrachion is believed to be the first author to link these the liberation of Hesione with the Argonautic expedition in his prose Argonautica. See Galli (2014) on Dionysius Scytobrachion’s Argonautica. 85 The Argonauts in Apollonius of Rhodes’ poem leave Lemnos in verse 1.910 and arrive in Cyzicus’ land in verse 1.953.

25 In Apollonius of Rhodes’ Argonautica, Hera is told to stage the fight with the Earthborn men as a labour for Hercules specifically.86 He is reported to ‘bring them to the ground one after another’ (ἐπασσυτέρους πέλασε χθονί, 1.994), which suggests that he will defeat the giants on his own.87 However, as soon as the other Argonauts join him in the fight, the fight ends up in carnage. This is illustrated by an elaborate comparison:

ὡς δ᾽ ὅτε δούρατα µακρὰ νέον πελέκεσσι τυπέντα ὑλοτόµοι στοιχηδὸν ἐπὶ ῥηγµῖνι βάλωσιν, ὄφρα νοτισθέντα κρατεροὺς ἀνεχοίατο γόµφους: ὧς οἱ ἐνὶ ξυνοχῇ λιµένος πολιοῖο τέταντο ἑξείης, ἄλλοι µὲν ἐς ἁλµυρὸν ἀθρόοι ὕδωρ δύπτοντες κεφαλὰς καὶ στήθεα, γυῖα δ᾽ ὕπερθεν χέρσῳ τεινάµενοι: τοὶ δ᾽ ἔµπαλιν, αἰγιαλοῖο κράατα µὲν ψαµάθοισι, πόδας δ᾽ εἰς βένθος ἔρειδον, ἄµφω ἅµ᾽ οἰωνοῖσι καὶ ἰχθύσι κύρµα γενέσθαι. Ap. Rhod. Arg. 1.1003-11.

And as when woodcutters throw down their long timbers, recently felled by their axes, in a line along the edge of the sea, so that by absorbing moisture they can receive the strong pegs, thus at the narrows of the white-capped harbour they [the Earthborn men] were laid out one after another, some in heaps dipping their heads and chests into the salt water while they stretched their lower limbs out on the land; others, conversely, rested their heads on the sandy shore and their feet in the deep water, both groups to become the prey of birds and fish alike.

According to DeForest, here, the story is ‘spoiled by too many heroes’: the participation of the other Argonauts turns Hercules’ glorious deed into a mechanical slaughter. 88 Whereas in this Apollonian scene the Argonauts are compared to woodcutters, it is Hercules who is compared to a lumberman in the Latin epic, during the later fight against de Doliones:

86 Arg. 1.996-7: δὴ γάρ που κἀκεῖνα θεὰ τρέφεν αἰνὰ πέλωρα Ἥρη, Ζηνὸς ἄκοιτις, ἀέθλιον Ἡρακλῆι.. ‘For no doubt the goddess Hera, Zeus’ wife, had been nourishing those terrible monsters too as a labour for Heracles.’ 87 DeForest (1994) 60. 88 DeForest (1994) 61.

26 ac veluti magna iuvenum cum densa securi silva labat cuneisque gemit grave robur adactis iamque abies piceaeque ruunt, sic dura sub ictu ossa virum malaeque sonant sparsusque cerebro albet ager. Val. Fl. Arg. 3.163-7.

As a dense forest totters from men’s great ax, | and oak groans deeply when the wedge is driven, | and the fir tree and the pines are falling, | just so beneath hard blows [of Hercules’ club] men’s bones and jaws | crack, and the land turns white, spattered with brains.

From Homer onwards, dying warriors are compared with felled trees.89 However, Valerius Flaccus emphasizes that Hercules can cut down a whole forest on his own! It implies that he does not need others to succeed in his actions. And this it is exactly what Valerius’ Hesione episode shows: Hercules is able to fight evil without any help. Thus, Valerius Flaccus replaces Apollonius of Rhodes’ fight against the Earthborn men, where Hercules does not get the chance to show his individual strength, with a combat that demonstrates the force of this hero’s individual power. The Argonautic expedition is a team effort, as Lovatt illustrates.90 Therefore, the Hesione episode shows perfectly well that Hercules is not the right character to participate in this enterprise.

2. An Ovidian narrative structure Scholars have recognized long since that Valerius Flaccus reworks Ovid’s account of Perseus’ rescue of Andromeda (Met. 4.663-739) in Hercules’ fight against the sea monster.91 In both stories, Perseus and Hercules unexpectedly encounter maidens chained to the rocks, about to be devoured by sea monsters, and both heroes kill the monsters and save the women.92 The Ovidian Perseus is a suitable model for Valerius Flaccus’ Hercules, because the heroes have a common lineage.93 Valerius implicitly

89 See See Gärtner (1994) 106-7 on this specific comparison and equivalent comparisons from Homer onwards. 90 See Lovatt (2014) passim. 91 See for example Keith (2014) 273-5, Hershkowitz (1998) 72-78, Poortvliet (1991) 240-1, and Frank (1971). 92 See Keith (2014) 274 for an overview of intrinsic parallels between the two episodes. 93 Keith (2014) 274.

27 alludes to this at the beginning of the episode, through Hercules’ patronymic Alcides (2.451): his mortal grandfather Alcaeus was the son of Perseus. Moreover, Ovid endowed his Perseus already with Herculean resonances.94 Finally, Hesione’s name is not explicitly mentioned throughout the entire episode: it becomes clear due to allusion and periphrasis.95 Therefore, it is easy to think of Ovid’s Andromeda, while reading the passage. Frank stresses that the reader of Valerius’ Hesione episode is forced to compare Hercules with the Ovidian Perseus, because of the inclusion of the narrative structure of Perseus’ rescue of Andromeda. He states that the latter was a lesser hero than the former, and argues that Valerius portrayed by this Ovidian intertext ‘the moral greatness and physical might of Alcides more effectively than he could have done if he had related another Herculean adventure’.96 Indeed, the Ovidian interplay in this passage does force the reader to compare Hercules with Perseus. However, I do not think the contrast between them lies in the gradation of heroism. Instead, Valerius Flaccus exploits the Ovidian intertext to stress that his Hercules is an archaic epic hero who is not interested in love, in contrast to the Ovidan Perseus. I will now explain my argument. The linguistic style of Ovid’s narrative is mainly epic.97 Moreover, Andromeda is described as Perseus’ pretium et causa laboris (Ov. Met. 4.739), ‘his award and reason for the effort’. His liberation of Andromeda, therefore, resembles a heroic labour. Only, Perseus liberates the girl because he immediately fell in love with her at the moment they saw each other:

trahit inscius ignes et stupet et visae correptus imagine formae paene suas quatere est oblitus in aere pennas. Ov. Met. 4.675-677

He [Perseus] took fire unwitting, and stood dumb. Smitten by the sight of the beauty he sees, he almost forgot to move his wings in the air.

94 See Keith (1999). Valerius applies window allusion. 95 See Manuwald (2004) 160, Frank (1971) 325. 96 Frank (1971) 321. 97 See Barchiesi (2005) 334.

28 To emphasize his love, Perseus tells Andromeda that she deserves ‘chains that will link them as longing lovers together’ (4.679).98 Such amorous language is completely lacking in Valerius’ Hesione episode. Keith (2014) argues that ‘the opening description of the curve of the pleasant winding shore (litora blando anfractu sinuosa, 2.451-2) invites the reader to expect an Ovidian narrative of amatory desire’.99 If so, the expectation is turned down immediately, since there is no sign of love from Hercules’ side. When Hesione stops talking, the landscape is described as follows:

auxerat haec locus et facies maestissima capti litoris et tumuli caelumque, quod incubat urbi, quale laborantis Nemees iter aut Erymanthi vidit et infectae miseratus flumina Lernae. Val. Fl. Arg. 2.493-6

The place gave force to her [Hesione’s] words: the utter gloom | of a shore enslaved, the burial mounds, the sky | that lay so heavy on the city, just like | the journey he [Hercules] had known to Nemea | in its suffering or to Erymanthus, | or like his pity for the streams of poisoned Lerna.

By comparing the landscape with the ones Hercules recognizes from his former labours, it is clear that he sees the liberation of Hesione as another heroic endeavour. As is expected of an epic hero, he will defeat the sea monster and save the woman, but he is not motivated by love for her at all. Thus, Valerius Flaccus plays against the Ovidian expectations: the reader knows that Perseus liberated Andromeda out of love, and consequently, the elimination of love elements in Valerius’ story leads to a very contrasting image of Hercules and Perseus. They both perform a labour, but Hercules’ pretium et causa laboris is not love, but eternal glory.100

98 Met. 4.678-9: ‘o’ dixit ‘non istis digna catenis, sed quibus inter se cupidi iunguntur amantes’. ‘Oh! those are not the chains you deserve to wear, but rather those that link fond lovers together!’ 99 Keith (2014) 274. He bases his argument on Hinds’ article on Ovidian landscapes in Hardie (2002). 100 A significant change in Valerius Flaccus’ telling about the liberation of Hesione pertaining to Ovid’s account (Met. 11.194-220) supports this interpretation. For, Ovid’s account of the liberation of Hesione ends with the comment that the princess is rewarded to Telamon: ‘Nor did Telamon, the partner of his campaign, go without reward, and Hesione was given him.’ (nec, pars militiae, Telamon sine honore recessit Hesioneque data potitur, Met. 11.216). In Valerius Flaccus’ narrative, Telamon is introduced as Hercules’ comrade, which suggests he eventually might receive the same award as in

29 This interpretation is confirmed by the only reference to love in Valerius Flaccus’ narrative on Hercules’ fight against the sea monster:

qualis per pascua victor ingreditur, tum colla tumens, tum celsior armis taurus, ubi adsueti pecoris stabula alta revisit et patrium nemus et bello quos ultus amores. Val. Fl. Arg. 2.546-9

Just like a bull striding through pasture, | victorious when he goes back again | to the deep pens of his own familiar herd, | to ancestral woods and his loves avenged in war.

Hercules as well as the bull is victorious. The remaining part of the simile, however, disagrees with the narrative. As Gärtner puts it: ‘allerdings lässt sich nicht in jedem Punkt genaue Übereinstimmung feststellen, denn Hercules hat nicht mit einem Rivalen gekämpft und kehrt nicht zu heimatlichen Gefilden zurück. Das Motive der Rache (ultus, 2.549) kann der Held höchstens im weitesten Sinne als Rächer der Menschheit für sich in Anspruch nehmen.’101 Thus, the image in the simile is not applicable to Hercules’ situation, which creates a contrasting effect. Just as the Ovidian intertext does, this simile demonstrates that Hercules does not act out of love when he liberates the princess. Hercules’ non-amorous liberation of Hesione is striking, since earlier in book 2, in the Lemnos episode (2.311-427), love was a very prominent theme. In this episode, Hercules stays on the shore to watch the ships, while the rest of the Argonautic crew, including Jason, enjoys the company of the Lemnian woman. Hercules is the one who has to persuade Jason to continue the expedition (2.371-84). In his argument, he states that he only joined the expedition because of his ‘love for deeds’ (rerum … amor, 2.381). The Hesione episode is an inversion of this passage, because in this scene it is Hercules who goes into the countryside, while the other Argonauts stay near the ships (apart from Telamon). In the Lemnos episode, it is obvious that Hercules is not interested in physical love. All the other Argonauts, on the contrary, are. This way,

Ovid. The omission of this element, then, can be explained by Valerius’ effort to strip the story from all love elements. 101 Gärtner (1994) 94.

30 the Lemnos episode sets Hercules apart from his fellow crew members. The Hesione episode has the same effect: Hercules, who is not interested in love, is able to heroically defeat the sea monster on his own. It may suggest that the other Argonauts, who are interested in love, cannot. Although this opposition between Hercules and the others is already present in Apollonius of Rhodes’ epic, Valerius elaborates upon the difference, by staging the Hesione episode as an inversion of his Lemnos episode. Moreover, whereas the Apollonian Hercules is told to wait near the ships in Lemnos with some other comrades (1.855-6),102 this information is omitted in Valerius’ account (2.373-4).103 It indicates the stark contrast between Hercules and the other Argonauts. Hercules’ disinterest in love leads to his departure from the Argonautic expedition. In the Hylas episode (3.481-597), Hercules goes into the countryside again, into the woods, with Hylas.104 In this episode, Hercules as well as Hylas gets elegized: when Hercules finds out Hylas is gone, he is transformed from an epic hero into an elegiac lover.105 Because of Hylas’ disappearance, Hercules does not return to the Argo, whereupon the Argonauts decide to leave Mysia without Hercules.106 The episode suggests that Hercules has to leave the expedition, because he does not know how to cope with feelings of love. In this way, the impression is created that Hercules has to leave the Argonautic story, because he differs too much from the other Argonauts. Just as in Apollonius of Rhodes’ Argonautica, Hercules seems to be the wrong hero in the wrong epic. As soon as he finds out the Argo left without him, he continues his epic path, and decides to return to Troy.107

102 Arg. 1.855-6: Ἡρακλῆος ἄνευθεν, ὁ γὰρ παρὰ νηὶ λέλειπτο αὐτὸς ἑκὼν παῦροί τε διακρινθέντες ἑταῖροι. ‘Except for Heracles, for he was left behind by the ship of his own accord along with a few chosen comrades.’ 103 Arg. 2.373-4: donec resides Tirynthius heros non tulit, ipse rati invigilans atque integer urbis. ‘Until the Tirynthian hero could stand their sloth | no longer as he kept watch over the ship, | free of the city’s taint.’ 104 Hercules and Hylas are introduced together in the narrative (Arg. 1.107-11). See Chapter 1. 105 See Heerink (forthcoming) and Heerink (2015) 113-42. 106 See Chapter 3. 107 4.58-9: iamque iter ad Teucros atque hospita moenia Troiae flexerat Iliaci repetens promissa tyranni. ‘And as he turned his path now toward the Trojans | and the walls of Troy, his host, to claim the promise | made by Ilium’s king.’

31 All in all, the Ovidian intertext in the Hesione episode clarifies what the reader of the Argonautica concludes from reading the Lemnos and Hylas episode: Hercules is not interested in love, in contrast to the other Argonauts. His strictly epic interest does not correspond to the behaviour of his fellow Argonauts. Therefore, his character appears not to belong in the Argonautic expedition.

3. The archaic hero in archaic Troy The narrator presents Hercules’ liberation of Hesione as a crucial event in time, near the end of the episode:

namque bis Herculeis deberi Pergama telis audierat. Priami sed quis iam vertere regnis fata queat? manet immotis nox duria lustris et genus Aeneadum et Troiae melioris honores. Val. Fl. Arg. 2.570-3

For he [Laomedon] had heard that twice | to the arms of Hercules Pergamum must fall. | But who could turn the fate of Priam’s realm? | Another night yet waits: Aeneas’ children | and the glories of a better Troy.

It appears that Laomedon’s refusal to reward Hercules with the promised horses will not only result in the first sack of Troy, but it will also directly lead to the city’s final defeat in the Trojan War (Priami … regni fata, 2.571-2), and to the founding of Rome (genus Aeneadum, 2.573), which will be a ‘better Troy’ (Troiae melioris, 2.573). These events are in accordance with Jupiter’s plan, outlined in book 1, to shift the centre of power from Asia to Greece, and eventually to Rome.108 Most important, however, is the fact that these events will happen because of Hercules’ actions. In the Hesione episode, Valerius Flaccus links only this Argonaut directly with pre-Homeric Troy, which implies his ‘out-dated’ heroism. It is in this episode, in which Hercules plays the leading part, that many allusions to the ‘future’ Trojan War occur.109 His character seems to be very important in the Argonautica’s endeavour to present itself

108 See Manuwald (2004) passim on the liberation of Hesione as a crucial event for the implementation of Jupiter’s Weltenplan. On Jupiter’s Weltenplan (1.531-60), see for example Kleywegt (2005) 312- 313, and Hershkowitz (1998) 239-40. 109 Barchiesi’s (1993) ‘allusion in the future tense’. See also Introduction.

32 as the archi-epic, as the prequel to the events narrated in the Iliad, Odyssey and Aeneid.110 This appears immediately from the beginning of the episode:

Thessala Dardaniis tunc primum puppis harenis adpulit et fatis Sigeo litore sedit. Val. Fl. Arg. 2.445-6

Then for the first time | a Thessalian ship put in at Dardan sands | and rested on Sigeum’s shore as destined.

We can read that for the first time (primum, 2.445) a Thessalian ship lands on the Trojan shore. Just as in the proem of the Argonautica, it is a declaration of primacy.111 Although Homer had narrated long before about the landing of Greek ships on this shore, Valerius claims that his narrative tells about the very first time. However, his description of the ship’s landing recalls the same event in Homer’s Iliad, just as the following lines, where the Argonauts pitch up the camps (hinc levibus candentia velis castra levat, 2.447-8) do. After Hercules’ actual fight with the sea monster, two more instances of this ‘Iliadic prolepsis’ occur.112 The first one is when Laomedon comes to meet Hercules with his wife, while he leads his little son (parvumque trahens cum coniuge natum Laomedon, 2.551-2). Scholars agree that the parvum natum (2.551) must be Priam.113 Thus, many instances of ‘allusion in the future tense’ appear in this episode in which Hercules is the protagonist. He cleanses the pre-Homeric Troy from evil, which will eventually lead to Rome’s founding, many centuries later. It is not the first time that Hercules is associated with the founding of Rome. In Virgil’s Aeneid, he is told to have defeated the monster Cacus, who lived on the pre- Roman site (8.185-275). Because of this parallel function of Hercules’ fight in both poems, this Virgilian scene is immediately recalled in the Hesione episode. 114 Multiple verbal echoes to Virgil’s episode occur,115 and both events are constructed as

110 Deremetz (2014) 61-2. 111 See Introduction. 112 See Zissos (2008) xl-xlii on ‘Iliadic prolepsis’. 113 Poortvliet (1991) 284; Barnes (1981) 366. Harper-Smith (1988) 236 states it could also be Podarces. 114 Scholars have also detected parallels between the description of Valerius’ sea monster and the sea snakes that killed the Trojan priest Laocoön in the Aeneid (Aen. 2.202-27). Whereas Laocoön was a priest of Neptune in Virgil’s epic, it is this god that gives the signal to start the fight in Valerius’ poem. See Poortvliet (1991) 242 on verbal echoes to this Virgilian scene. 115 See Hershkowitz (1998) 75-8, Poortvliet (1991) 242.

33 an additional labour for the hero.116 Moreover, it is striking that the Virgilian text contains a reference to Hesione (Hesionae, 8.157), just before the Cacus episode begins. These cues make it likely that Virgil’s Cacus episode served as an intertextual model for Valerius Flaccus’ Hesione episode. Concerning the depiction of Hercules, Virgil’s scene comprises unquestionably ‘positive’ elements, but these are consistently balanced by ‘negative’ elements. 117 According to Hardie’s positive interpretation, the Cacus episode tells about a Gigantomachic fight, which point is to show that ‘the pest-free state of Italy … is the result of strenuous heroic activity in the past’.118 On the contrary, Putnam has focused on the negative, violent aspects of Hercules, for the hero kills Cacus with a personal motive: the latter stole the former’s beloved cattle.119 Morgan finds a middle course in the interpretation of Virgil’s Cacus episode. According to him, the extreme violence that Hercules uses can be read as constructive.120 At first sight, the heroic deed of Valerius Flaccus’ Hercules seems to be very heroic and should be interpreted in a positive light. However, his characterization in the fight against the sea monster contains echoes to parts of the Virgilian scene that have been interpreted in a negative way. For example, both heroes experience madness before the actual fight begins. Compare Virgil:

hic vero Alcidae furiis exarserat atro felle dolor. Verg. Aen. 8.228-30.

At this the wrath of Alcides furiously blazed forth with black gall. to Valerius Flaccus:

ecce ducem placitae furiis crudescere pugnae surgentemque toris stupet immanemque paratu Aeacides pulsentque graves ut terga pharetrae. Val. Fl. Arg. 2.509-11

116 Hershkowitz (1998) 76. 117 See Morgan (1998) 181. According to Braund (1997) 219, Virgil’s Hercules is a model ‘fraught with ambivalence’. 118 Hardie (1986) 215. See Hardie (1986) 110-118 on Gigantomachic imagery in Virgil’s Cacus episode. 119 Putnam (1995) 30-35. 120 See Morgan (1998) 185-7 on ‘constructive destruction’.

34 And now see | Aeacides [Telamon] is stunned when hero Hercules | turns fierce with rage, determined to enter battle, | his muscles bulging and his gear imposing, | as the heavy quiver slapped against his back.

The manic violence and frenzy that the Virgilian Hercules displays, which is repeated in the next lines (furens, 8.228), encouraged scholars to put the hero on the same level as the bestial Cacus, who was said to be full of frenzy (furiis, 8.205) too. When Valerius’ Hercules shows the same furor, the question arises, whether his heroism should also be interpreted in a negative way.121 Hershkowitz notes the difference between the gradations of rage in both narratives, for Virgil’s Hercules seems to be overwhelmed by his madness, whereas Valerius’ madness seems to be more psychological. 122 I think that these intertextual allusions to Virgil’s account of Hercules’ fight against Cacus remind the Valerian reader that Hercules is a hero that solves problems by brutal force. Because it will later appear in the Argonautica that this kind of power will not help the Argonauts to get the Golden Fleece, I think that the interplay contributes to the differentiation of Hercules from the other Argonauts.

4. Conclusion. All in all, I have demonstrated that intertextuality in the Hesione episode shows that Hercules clearly embodies the archaic hero, who seems to be very different from the other Argonauts. This archaic hero fits perfectly well in the pre-Homeric city of Troy, for this location helps to compose the Argonautica as a ‘belated’ archi-epic. The episode is full of deviations from, parallels with, and references to other epic literature. We have seen that Hercules’ glorious exploit against the Eartborn men in Apollonius of Rhodes’ poem was spoiled by the Argonauts’ unnecessary, unwanted assistance. In Hercules’ liberation of Hesione, this is not the case. Instead, the episode shows that Hercules can accomplish labours perfectly well on his own.

121 See also Arg. 2.543-5: Alcides vinclisque tenentibus aufert virgineas de rupe manus aptatque superbis arma umeris. ‘Alcides [Hercules] | … freed the girl’s arms | from the chains that held her, and he fits his weapons | to proud shoulders.’ The combination aptatque superbis has only been attested in Virgil’s description of the Shield of Aeneas, where Augustus is said to review the gifts of nations and to hang them on the proud portals (dona recognoscit populorum aptatque superbis postibus, Aen. 8.722-3). These words have nurtured the negative interpretation of Virgil’s Cacus-episode, because Cacus was said to nail the faces of man to his proud doors (foribusque adfixa superbis, Aen. 8.96). See Morgan (1998) 177-8. 122 Hershkowitz (1998) 76.

35 Furthermore, the interplay with Ovid’s rescue of Andromeda in his Metamorphoses (4.663-739), helps to illustrate that Hercules is a hero who is not interested in love: he only focuses on strictly epic endeavours. When you take the previous Lemnos episode (2.311-427) into consideration, it appears that Hercules’ behaviour is very different from the other Argonauts. Moreover, allusions to the upcoming Trojan War in the Hesione episode put this event at the beginning of a direct causal chain from the Argonautic expedition to this war, which will eventually lead to the Roman rule. These ‘allusions in the future tense’ allow the Argonautica to be presented as an archi-epic. This, combined with the fact that it is Hercules who is staged to fight at pre-Homeric Troy, just as he was the one to cleanse the pre-Roman site in Virgil’s Aeneid, underscores that he embodies the ‘out-dated’ hero. The absence of the other Argonauts in this episode, moreover, implies that Hercules is therefore different than the others.

36 3. Reflections on Hercules (Arg. 3.598-725)

This third and final case study deals with an episode where Hercules is not physically present, but where other characters in the narrative reflect on his person and on his value for the expedition.123 First, I will show that Valerius creates a strong contrast pertaining to Apollonius’ narrative regarding Jason’s and the Argonauts’ behaviour towards Hercules. Then, I will show that the structure of this scene recalls a specific Virgilian scene, which underscores the importance of Valerius’ debate for the continuation of the narrative. Moreover, I will illustrate that verbal echoes to Virgil’s Aeneid and Homer’s Iliad turn Telamon’s speeches in heavy epic discourses, whereas allusions to Hercules’ tragic side are present in Meleager’s words. I will argue that due to these intertexts, Telamon portrays Hercules as the epic hero that is according to him needed to accomplish the Argonautic quest. The tragic and negative allusions in Meleager’s speech, however, contribute to his argument that it is better to continue the expedition without him. Throughout this chapter, I will argue that this debate scene resembles a metaliterary reflection on Hercules’ character in the literary tradition, which leads to the conclusion that a hero such as Hercules does not belong in the Argonautic narrative. The scene can be interpreted as a mise en abyme: the passage reflects the work it contains.124 I will first explain the events in this episode. The situation, which arises after Hercules and Hylas have not returned from the woods in Mysia, is the following.125 Initially, the Argonauts wait faithfully for Hercules and Hylas (3.598-600). They especially care about Hercules and Jason’s concern is highlighted (3.600-10). When Juno sends a favourable wind, the helmsman Tiphys does not want to wait any longer, which results in Jason’s inquiry whether the Argonauts want to leave or not (3.611-27). It appears that the major part of the crew wants to leave (3.628-36). However, Telamon argues to wait for Hercules and warns the Argonauts that the expedition is going to be difficult without him (3.637-45).

123 Translations used in this chapter are by Barich (2009) for Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica, who bases his version on Ehler’s Teubner edition (1980). Other texts and translations used here derive from Race (2008) for Apollonius of Rhodes’ Argonautica, from Rushton Fairclough (2001) for Virgil’s Aeneid, and from Murray (1924) for Homer’s Iliad. 124 See also Chapter 1. 125 In the previous Hylas episode (Arg. 3.481-597), Juno’s enraged outburst at Hercules’ first appearance (Arg. 1.107-119, see Chapter 1) receives a follow-up. On her instigation, Hylas is abducted by a nymph, which results in Hercules’ futile search for him. Eventually, Juno succeeds to get rid of Hercules as an Argonaut.

37 In response, Meleager states that they can and should leave without Hercules (3.645- 89). The Argonauts are about to depart, but Telamon tries to convince them once more that they should stay (3.692-714). His words are in vain, and the Argo sets off, although the crew laments for Hercules and Hylas (3.715-25).

1. Divergences from Apollonius of Rhodes’ Argonautica Apollonius of Rhodes’ epic does contain a similar scene, in which the Argonauts hesitate to continue their expedition without Hercules. 126 In the Greek poem, Hercules and Hylas as well as Polyphemus have not returned from the woods. But, the Argonauts only find out they are missing these crew members after they have already left Mysia (1.1283). In their distress, they are only concerned about Hercules, referred to with ‘the best man’ (τὸν ἄριστον, 1.1285). Telamon accuses Jason of getting rid of Hercules deliberately (1.1290-5). The reader is informed that the Argonauts would have gone back to Mysia, had not Calais and Zetes restrained Telamon (1.1296-302).127 The narrator comments that Boreas’ sons will be punished for that action (1.1302-9). After this, the sea-god Glaucus appears and urges the Argonauts to continue their journey:

‘τίπτε παρὲκ µεγάλοιο Διὸς µενεαίνετε βουλὴν Αἰήτεω πτολίεθρον ἄγειν θρασὺν Ἡρακλῆα; Ἄργεΐ οἱ µοῖρ᾽ ἐστὶν ἀτασθάλῳ Εὐρυσθῆι ἐκπλῆσαι µογέοντα δυώδεκα πάντας ἀέθλους, ναίειν δ᾽ ἀθανάτοισι συνέστιον, εἴ κ᾽ ἔτι παύρους ἐξανύσῃ: τῶ µή τι ποθὴ κείνοιο πελέσθω.’ Ap. Rhod. Arg. 1.1315-20.

Why, in opposition to the plan of great Zeus, are you determined to take bold Heracles to Aeetes’ city? At Argos it is his destiny to toil for arrogant Eurystheus and accomplish twelve labours in all, and to dwell in the home of the immortals if he completes a few more. Therefore, let there be no remorse at all for him.

126 See Heerink (2015) 22-52, 113-43 on the Hylas episode in Valerius Flaccus and Apollonius of Rhodes. 127 According to DeForest (1994) 67- 9, Telamon’s attempt to turn the boat in Apollonius’ epic should be interpreted as a gesture symbolic of changing the course of the song: Telamon tries to prevent the turning of the epic into a love-poem. The Apollonian Argonauts favoured Hercules’ stay as an Argonaut, allowing the Argonautic expedition to continue as an epic enterprise.

38 Glaucus explains that the Argonauts should not be concerned about Hercules: his fate is to serve Eurystheus, to perform labours, and to receive apotheosis in the end.128 Moreover, Hercules’ departure from the expedition is part of Zeus’ plan (Διὸς … βουλὴν, 1.1315). After this, Glaucus prophesies the Argonauts what will happen to the comrades they have left behind (1.1321-8). In response, the Argonauts rejoice. Telamon apologizes to Jason for his behaviour, who forgives him (1.1329-43). Finally, the narrator briefly explains the fates of Hercules, Hylas, and Polyphemus (1.1345-57). Valerius Flaccus extended Apollonius of Rhodes’ account.129 The most striking divergence is Valerius’ elaborate inclusion of Meleager’s reply to Telamon’s speech. In Apollonius’ work, Meleager did not have a role during this debate.130 In the Greek poem, Calais and Zetes are reported to have restrained Telamon with harsh words (1.1301), but the content is not explicitly narrated.131 Meleager’s reply to Telamon in Valerius’ poem (3.649-89), on the other hand, is one of the longest speeches in the entire Argonautica.132 The roles of respectively Meleager in Valerius Flaccus’ epic and of Calais and Zetes in Apollonius’ narrative, however, are similar. Moreover, Meleager is reported to be punished for his actions later in the epic (4.34-5), just as Calais and Zetes are in Apollonius’ poem.133 A cue to Apollonius of Rhodes’ alternative version is present in the narrative, when Valerius Flaccus singles out Calais to be the first Argonaut who wants to loose the Argo’s cables (3.691-2). In Apollonius’ Argonautica, Jason remains silent throughout the whole scene: he is said to be stunned by helplessness (ἀµηχανίῃσιν, 1.1286). As a result, Telamon rebukes Jason that he deliberately left Hercules behind, because Hercules’ glory

128 See Feeney (1986) 58 on Hercules’ apotheosis as a reward for endurance, and for the beneficent cleansing of evils from the world. 129 Apollonius of Rhodes’ narrative comprises 77 lines (Arg. 1.1280-357), Valerius Flaccus’ 127 lines (Arg. 3.598-725). 130 However, Meleager was the only Argonaut linked to Hercules in Apollonius’ catalogue of crew members (Arg. 1.195-8, see Chapter 1). Moreover, in the literary tradition, Meleager and Hercules are connected with each other multiple times. For example, Bacchylides (Ode 5) recounts their encounter in the underworld. 131 Arg. 1.1300-1: εἰ µὴ Θρηικίοιο δύω υἷες Βορέαο Αἰακίδην χαλεποῖσιν ἐρητύεσκον ἔπεσσιν. ‘Had not the two sons of Thracian Boreas restrained Aeacus’ son with harsh words. 132 Manuwald (2015) 193. 133 For Meleager: verum cum gente domoque ista luet (Arg. 4.34-5), for Calais and Zetes: σχέτλιοι: ἦ τέ σφιν στυγερὴ τίσις ἔπλετ᾽ ὀπίσσω χερσὶν ὑφ᾽ Ἡρακλῆος, ὅ µιν δίζεσθαι ἔρυκον (Arg. 1.1302-3).

39 might put Jason in his shade (1.1291-2).134 In Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica, there is no reason for Telamon to rebuke Jason for leaving behind Hercules on purpose. Initially, the Latin Jason remains silent too, but only because he is struck by love for his good friend. 135 Moreover, Valerius’ Jason does take action, in contrast to Apollonius’ leader: he summons the Argonauts and shares a prophecy with them, which had not been mentioned before:136

agmine de tanto socium qui maximus armis adforet, hunc Iovis imperiis fatoque teneri ante procellosum scopulis errantibus aequor. Val. Fl. Arg. 3.619-21.

From this great squadron the comrade best in arms [Hercules] | would be by Jove’s command and destiny | held back before he came to the seas turned stormy | by the Moving [Clashing] Rocks.

It appears that by Jupiter’s command the greatest Argonaut in arms has to be left behind, before the Argonauts reach the Clashing Rocks. The collocation maximus armis takes up Apollonius of Rhodes’ τὸν ἄριστον (1.1285), while Jason’s comment that Hercules is to be left behind by Iovis imperiis fatoque resembles the Apollonian Διὸς … βουλὴν (1.1315). That it is fated to continue the expedition without Hercules is again emphasized at the end of the episode, when the Argonauts leave Mysia.137 So, although Jason’s speech in Valerius’ Argonautica recalls Glaucus’ prophecy in Apollonius, there is a great contrast between the epics in terms of the behaviour of Jason: while he remains silent in the Greek epic, he takes action in Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica. Notice also the different timing of the revelation that Hercules eventually has to be left behind: whereas Glaucus’ prophecy is situated near the end

134 Arg. 1.1291-2: σέο δ᾿ ἔκτοθι µῆτις ὄρωρεν, ὄφρα τὸ κείνου κῦδος ἀν᾽ Ἑλλάδα µή σε καλύψῃ. ‘It was from you that this plan originated, so that his glory throughout Hellas would not put you in the shade’. 135 See Hershkowitz (1998) 119 on Jason’s friendship for Hercules in general. 136 Valerius Flaccus tends to introduce details where they have the greatest impact in the narrative. See Manuwald (2015) 190. 137 Arg. 3.711: fata trahunt. Also in Apollonius of Rhodes’ work, Hercules’ departure from the expedition is expressed again at the end of the episode: Διὸς βουλῇσιν (Arg. 1.1345).

40 of the scene, Valerius’ Jason starts the debate with this statement.138 Another striking difference is visible regarding the Argonauts’ behaviour. For, the major part of the Argonauts immediately wants to leave Mysia, after Jason’s speech in Valerius’ Argonautica. They seem to be confident that one Argonaut less will not have influence:

unum tanto afore coetu, nec minus in sese generis dextrasque potentes esse ferunt. Val. Fl. Arg. 3.629-31

From that great throng, | they say, just one is missing; their own birth | was just as noble, their right arms as strong.

This reaction of the Argonauts is contrasting with their reaction in Apollonius’ work, where the majority of them want to return to Mysia, immediately after Telamon’s plea. Their behaviour in the Apollonian epic is in accordance with the Argonauts’ performance at the beginning of the Greek poem, when the Argonauts chose Hercules to be their initial leader of the enterprise, instead of Jason (1.336-50). Although this event is not narrated in Valerius’ Argonautica, Telamon refers to it in his reproachful speech:139

non hi tum flatus, non ista superbia dictis, litore cum patrio iam vela petentibus Austris, cunctus ad Alciden versus favor: ipse iuvaret, ipse ducis curas meritosque subiret honores. Val. Fl. Arg. 3.699-702.

138 See also Chapter 1 on Jupiter’s announcement of Hercules’ apotheosis at the beginning of the expedition, in contrast to Apollonius’ Glaucus, who prophecies this event at the moment that Hercules is not part of the Argonautic crew anymore. 139 In Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica, Jason was the elected leader of the expedition right from the start.

41 Zissos has shown that Valerius Flaccus signals the allusion to the specific Apollonian passage, because Telamon’s description of the situation recreates the scene narrated by Apollonius of Rhodes.140 Hercules’ appellation as leader (dux, 3.702), a term normally used for Jason, also emphasizes Telamon’s reference to the leadership election. His character has access to a version of the Argonautic myth that differs from the one the Valerian author chooses to tell.141 Supported by this metaliterary comment, it is tempting to interpret the Argonauts’ contrasting reaction in a metapoetical way: the Valerian characters seem to be aware that the Argonauts are able to complete the mission too without Hercules, for the quest’s completion has been described before in the literary tradition. Therefore, Valerius’ Argonauts might easier agree to continue the expedition without this hero.

2. A Virgilian narrative structure? Schenk aimed to show that the Virgilian scene, in which king Latinus assembles the Latins to discuss whether or not to conclude a treaty with Aeneas’ men (11.300-446), serves as a model for this Valerian episode.142 In this Virgilian scene, Latinus himself is in favour of a treaty with Aeneas, because he knows Aeneas’ victory is fated and the actual war is hopeless. However, he cannot simply concede, for Turnus is engaged with his daughter Lavinia. Therefore, he proposes a possible solution to the Latins and opens up a debate (11.300-35). After his speech, Drances challenges Turnus to face Aeneas in a single combat (11.336-75). In response, Turnus rebukes Drances for his arrogant speech and promises to do so, if this is the Latins’ wish (11.376-446). According to Schenk, Jason resembles Latinus, and the figure of Meleager is inspired by Drances. Moreover, the Argonauts are paralleled to the Latins, and Telamon assumes the role of Turnus in Valerius Flaccus’ epic. The invocation of the Virgilian scene, while reading the Valerian debate scene, is probable. For, both scenes are a kind of rhetorical agon,143 and Jason’s dilemma, to choose between loyalty for a friend (wait for Hercules) and the fates (leave without him), recalls the dilemma king Latinus had to face in the Aeneid. Their speeches are also staged at the same place in the overall debate, and have the same function for the

140 See Zissos (1999) 295-6. 141 See Malamud and McGuire (1993) 197-8. 142 Schenk (1986) 3. 143 See Manuwald (2015) 158, 192.

42 narrative structure.144 Moreover, Valerius’ divergence from Apollonius’ scene by the inclusion of Meleager’s verbal reply could be inspired by this Virgilian debate. According to Manuwald, the invocation of the rhetorical agon of Turnus and Drances in the Aeneid does not affect the course of events in Valerius’ narrative.145 I, however, do think that the Virgilian intertext adds extra meaning to the Valerian scene, because the Virgilian debate on concluding a treaty with Aeneas leads to Latinus’ eventual treaty with Aeneas’ men in the final book (12.161-215), and hence to the final outcome of the Aeneid. In a similar way, the outcome of the debate in Valerius’ epic is important for the continuation of the Argonautic, because no other Argonaut owes such strength as Hercules does. Without this hero’s participation, the continuation of the Argonautica will be different. So, the Virgilian intertext underscores the importance of Valerius’ debate for the eventual outcome of the Argonautica.

3. Telamon versus Meleager In the actual debate, Telamon argues to stay in Mysia and to wait for Hercules. He is presented as a loyal (pius, 3.637) friend. It reminds the reader of Virgil’s pius Aeneas and suggests that Telamon presents the ‘good’ side of the debate. Meleager, however, who argues to leave without Hercules, is introduced as follows:

rursum instimulat ducitque faventes magnanimus Calydone satus, potioribus ille deteriora fovens semperque inversa tueri durus et haud ullis umquam superabilis aequis rectorumve memor. Val. Fl. Arg. 3.645-9.

144 See Schenk (1986) 8. 145 Manuwald (2015) 158.

43 Meleager’s description is similar to that of Drances in the debate between him and Turnus in the Aeneid: just as Drances is introduced as a disputable character in the Virgilian scene, Meleager is immediately presented as the ‘bad guy’.146 Both speeches of Telamon (3.637-45, 3.697-714) are short compared to Meleager’s only speech (3.649-89). 147 The intertextual references in Telamon’s speech in relation to Meleager’s are from a very different kind. Whereas Telamon’s speeches are full of specific allusions to the epics of Homer and Virgil, Meleager refers in his speech to the literary tradition in general. The interplay in their speeches shows that Hercules is a hero that belongs to another poetic world. Moreover, their debate can be interpreted as a mise en abyme, in which the characters discuss whether the poem should continue its epic journey or whether it should change in direction. I will now examine their speeches. In Telamon’s speeches, allusions to specific sections of Homer’s and Virgil’s epic can be perceived. In his first speech, displayed in indirect speech, Telamon warns the Argonauts that there will be no other Hercules (non alium contra Alciden, 3.644). His exclamation reminds the reader of the Aeneid, where Aeneas has to confront ‘another Achilles’ (alius … Achilles, 6.89), Turnus, in Latium.148 Turnus will be an equal opponent for Aeneas. However, when Telamon expresses that there will be no other Hercules, it supports the notion that this hero cannot be substituted: Hercules’ force is exceptional. Telamon’s words imply that Hercules’ departure from the expedition will have major consequences for the continuation of the poem.149 In the second speech, after Meleager’s argument, Telamon seems to have realized that effectively a decision has been made already. His speech is very emotional, with many questions and exclamations. It is a speech full of allusions to the epic literary tradition. His first reaction is the following:

146 Aen. 11.336-40, 42: tum Drances idem infensus, quem gloria Turni oblique invidia stimulisque agitabat amaris, largus opum et lingua melior, sed frigida bello dextera, consiliis habitus non futtilis auctor, seditione potens … surgit. ‘Then Drances, hostile as before, whom the renown of Turnus goaded with the bitter stings of furtive-envy, lavish of wealth and valiant of tongue, though his hand was cold in battle, in council deemed no mean adviser, in faction strong … rises.’ See Schenk (1986) 19-20 on their corresponding introduction. 147 Telamon’s first speech contains 9 lines (Arg. 3.637-45), his second 18 (Arg. 3.697-714). Meleager’s speech lasts 41 lines (Arg. 3.649-89). 148 Manuwald (2015) 195. 149 This is supported by the reading of alium as a marker for metapoeticality. See Hardie (1993) 17.

44 ‘quis terris pro Iuppiter’ inquit ‘Achaeis iste dies! saevi capient quae gaudia Colchi!’ Val. Fl. Arg. 3.697-8.

‘My god, what a day this is for the land of Achaea,’ | he says, ‘what joy the savage Colchians will take | from this.’

The combination terris … Achaeis (3.697) is a Homeric phrase. Telamon’s exclamation is an adaption of Nestor’s in the Iliad, expressed when Achilles decides that he withdraws from the Trojan War at the start of the epic:

“ὢ πόποι, ἦ µέγα πένθος Ἀχαιίδα γαῖαν ἱκάνει· ἦ κεν γηθήσαι Πρίαµος Πριάµοιό τε παῖδες ἄλλοι τε Τρῶες µέγα κεν κεχαροίατο θυµῷ, Hom. Il. 1.254-6.

‘Well, now! Truly great grief has come upon the land of Achaea. Truly Priam would rejoice and the sons of Priam, and the rest of the Trojans would be greatly glad at heart.’

Telamon’s allusion to the Iliad suggests that leaving behind Hercules will have terrible consequences for the Argonauts. Because, the Valerian reader knows that Achilles’ withdrawal from the Trojan War had lead to terrible losses for the Greeks. The reader of the Argonautic narrative is aware of this consequence.150 Telamon concludes his emotional outburst with a solemn oath:

150 Manuwald (2015) 202 suggests that Telamon’s exlamation refers to the eventual conflicts between Asia and Greece: the reader knows that Jason has to accept Medea’s help, if the physical strong Hercules is no part of the Argonautic crew anymore, with all entailing consequences.

45 ‘hanc ego magnanimi spolium Didymaonis hastam, quae neque iam frondes virides nec proferet umbras, ut semel est evulsa iugis ac matre perempta fida ministeria et duras obit horrida pugnas, testor et hoc omni, ductor, tibi numine firmo: saepe metu, saepe in tenui discrimine rerum Herculeas iam serus opes spretique vocabis arma viri, nec nos tumida haec tum dicta iuvabunt.’ Val. Fl. Arg. 3.707-14.

By this spear I hold, | a trophy from the brave Didymaon, | which puts forth neither fresh green leaves nor shade, | once torn form the hillside where its mother died, | a faithful helper, bristling when it meets | tough battle, by this spear I swear to you, | my captain, and pledge by every god there is: | often in face of fear, often in crisis | when things are tight, you will call out | to Hercules for help, for this man’s arms | whom you have spurned, but it will be too late. | Then all these swollen words will do no good.’

Again, Homer’s Iliad appears to be a model, for this vow is a variation of Achilles’ oath after his quarrel with Agamemnon (1.234-44). In this oath, Achilles swears by his wooden sceptre, which will never put forth leaves or shoots anymore, that the Greeks will regret his withdrawal. In a similar way, Telamon announces that the Argonauts will one day miss Hercules in their fights. Hercules is paralleled to the Iliadic protagonist.151 Moreover, Valerius’ description of the sceptre also contains several verbal echoes to a Virgilian oath, in which Latinus confirms the powerful alliance between the Latins and Aeneas’ men, again with a wooden sceptre (12.206- 11). 152 This implies that Valerius Flaccus combined these two solemn oaths. However, Telamon swears by a spear, not by his sceptre. This item could have been borrowed from Idas’s pledge in Apollonius of Rhodes’ Argonautica, who witnesses by his spear that he will be the best ally for Jason (1.466-71). This way, three major models of Valerius are combined in one single vow.153 According to me, the allusions

151 See also Chapter 1. 152 Arg. 3.708-10: quae neque iam frondes virides nec proferet umbras, ut semel est evulsa iugis ac matre perempta fida ministeria et duras obit horrida pugnas. Aen. 12.207-9: numquam fronde levi fundet virgulta nec umbras, cum semel in silvis imo de stirpe recisum matre caret. 153 See also Manuwald (2015) 204-5 on Valerius Flaccus’ combination of Homer’s, Virgil’s and Apollonius of Rhodes’ oaths.

46 to the Homeric and Virgilian vows add extra meaning to Telamon’s oath, whereas the borrowing of Apollonius of Rhodes’ item could be a hint that Valerius is deeply indebted to his source model. The oaths by Achilles and Latinus are very emphatic and are located at the beginning of the Iliad and at the end of the Aeneid. Just like the Greeks regretted Achilles’ withdrawal in the Iliad, Telamon’s reference to this specific text hints that the Argonauts will regret leaving Mysia without Hercules.154 Moreover, the allusion to the Virgilian vow, which is also invoked by the verbal echoes to this oath, may imply that leaving Mysia will bring a definite end to Hercules’ participation in the expedition, since it is Latinus’ concluding oath in the Aeneid that ascertains that fate will be fulfilled and that the war will end. So, with these concluding words, Telamon takes leave from Hercules by way of allusions to the Homeric and Virgilian epics. In contrast to Telamon’s oration, Meleager’s speech contains hardly any specific allusions to Homer’s and Virgil’s epics. Instead, in his words a great many references to the extensive literary tradition, in which Hercules was no part of the Argonautic expedition, can be perceived. For instance, in the following passage, Meleager suggests that Hercules might have gone off to accomplish new labours:

tu comitem Alciden ad Phasidis amplius arva adfore, tu socias ultra tibi rere pharetras? non ea fax odiis oblitave numine fesso Iuno sui. nova Tartareo fors semine monstra at iterum Inachiis iam nuntius urget ab Argis. Val. Fl. Arg. 3.662-6.

154 Later in Valerius’ poem, it appears that Telamon is right that the Argonauts will regret their choice to leave Mysia without Hercules: when they have to fight Amycus, it is said that they are too late with longing for him (redit Alcidae iam sera cupido, Arg. 4.247). Also Jason in particular craves for Hercules, when he cries out loud: ‘Where is he who is a match for a stepmother and her monsters?’ (ubi monstriferae par ille novercae?, Arg. 5.43).

47 Meleager suggests that Hercules might have gone off to accomplish new labours. This could be a reference to Apollonius’ narrative, where Glaucus prophecies to the Argonauts that Hercules will go back to Eurystheus after his departure from the expedition (1.1347-8). However, the Valerian reader knows that his Hercules already accomplished his twelve labours at the start of the Argonautic expedition. 155 Therefore, Meleager’s statement might be a metaliterary hint that performing labours is what Hercules is expected to do. DeForest argued about Apollonius’ Hercules that he digresses from his own story, the performance of heroic labours, by joining the Argonautic expedition.156 Meleager’s allusion to Hercules’ labours in Valerius’ epic seems to confirm that Hercules’ participation in the Argonautic expedition is merely a digression from his other heroic activities. In his speech, Meleager repeatedly makes a distinction between Hercules and the other Argonauts. In doing so, he focuses on the negative and tragic aspects of Hercules in the literary tradition:

nempe ora aeque mortalia cuncti ecce gerunt, ibant aequo nempe ordine remi ille vel insano iamdudum turbidus aestu vel parta iam laude tumens consortia famae despicit ac nostris ferri comes abnuit actis. VF. Arg. 3.674-8.

The divine Hercules is too different from the other mortal Argonauts. The ordine remi (3.677) refers to the rowing contest, earlier in the book (3.459-80), in which Hercules broke his oar because of his exceptional power. This event already showed the extreme force of Hercules in relation the other Argonauts. Meleager now reinforces that this is not a positive thing.157 Moreover, Meleager’s indicates that Hercules is ‘now seething with mad urge’. Manuwald notes that this reference to Hercules’

155 See Chapter 1. 156 DeForest (1994) 67-8. 157 In Apollonius of Rhodes’ epic, Hercules’ rowing like a madman (Arg. 1.1153-71) has also been interpreted as a negative aspect of his participation in the Argonautic expedition. See for example DeForest (1994) 61-2 and Clauss (1993) 180-3.

48 insanity (insano, 3.677) might be an implicit reference to Seneca’s Hercules Furens.158 Whether it is a reference to this specific tragedy or not, Meleager’s words do recall the literary tradition, in which the tragic Hercules features. In addition, Meleager characterizes Hercules as an individualist, who does not want to share his glory with his comrades. Hercules’ epic past, which is recalled by Meleager’s words, confirms this statement. Thus, Meleager’s speech refers to Hercules as a character belonging to a different poetic world, in which the focus is on Hercules’ individual labours and the tragic side of this character. This view is very different from Telamon’s. Both Telamon’s and Meleager’s speeches contain allusions to the literary tradition. Therefore, it is likely to read their orations on a metaliterary level. Their debate constitutes a literary historical debate on the character of Hercules in the literary tradition. Their discussion is about the added value of his presence in the Argonautic expedition and hence what his presence would mean for the continuation of the Argonautica. Telamon’s words, that allude to Homer’s and Virgil’s epics, characterize Hercules as the archaic hero of the poetic past. In Meleager’s speech, on the other hand, interplay with the literary tradition implies that the Argonautic enterprise might not be the right place for a character as pluriform as Hercules. Because Hercules’ character embodies the archaic hero, he might embody the archaic epic genre on a metapoetical level. The scene is a mise en abyme, in which the characters discuss in which way the poem itself should continue. The departure of the archaic epic hero from the Argonautic narrative suggests that the Argonautica will not turn out to be an epic similar to those of the past. Because my research does not focus on scenes in which Hercules does not feature, I cannot draw conclusions on the exact implications of Hercules’ departure from the story for the continuation of Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica.

158 Manuwald (2015) 200.

49 4. Conclusion An intertextual analysis of the Valerian debate scene on whether or not the Argonauts should leave Mysia without Hercules, and therefore whether or not the poem should be continued without this hero, has led to the following results: The basic features of Apollonius of Rhodes’ corresponding scene are still present in Valerius Flaccus’ epic: the departure of the best man of the Argonauts from the expedition is in accordance with fate. The way in which Jason and the majority of the Argonauts cope with the absence of Hercules, however, is very different. Valerius Flaccus’ Jason shows more characteristics of a leader than his Greek equivalent in this scene. He is not portrayed anymore as someone who is afraid to stand in the shadow of Hercules, but as a good friend. Regarding the Argonauts, in Apollonius of Rhodes’ Argonautica the major part supports Telamon and initially wants to turn back to Mysia. In Valerius Flaccus’ poem, it seems to be the opposite way. Jason and, particularly, Telamon are in favour to wait and search for their ‘best comrade in arms’. The other Argonauts, on the other hand, do not seem to be troubled that much to leave Mysia without him. The divergences from Apollonius of Rhodes imply that the Valerian Argonauts are aware of Hercules’ different personality. Although they initially are not sure whether they can proceed without his exceptional strength, they seem to acknowledge immediately that they should leave Mysia without him. The Argonautica seem to have learnt from its Greek predecessor, where it appeared that Hercules does not belong in the Argonautic narrative. The scene attests Valerius Flaccus’ self-conscious awareness of his place in the literary tradition. The different structure of the debate in relation to Apollonius’ corresponding scene seems to be possible to explain by a Virgilian intertext. Jason’s dilemma shows similarities with the one king Latinus faces in the Aeneid (11.300-446). Apart from a structuring effect, the evocation of this Virgilian intertext underscores the importance of Valerius’ debate for the continuation and eventual outcome of his poem, since king Latinus’ council scene prepares the reader on the final outcome of the Aeneid. During the debate whether the Argonauts should leave or stay in Mysia, both Meleager and Telamon focus only on Hercules’ strength and whether the Argonauts need it or not to accomplish their mission. It is striking that Telamon’s speeches contain many allusions to important epic intertexts. Especially references to the Iliad (book 1) and to the Aeneid (book 6 and 12) emphasize his highly epic speech, and the implied characterization of Hercules as a hero of the past. Meleager’s speech, on the

50 other hand, does not contain these specific epic allusions. References to the literary tradition in which Hercules was no part of the Argonautic crew strengthen his argument. He clarifies that Hercules is too different from the other Argonauts and that his participation in the Argonautic expedition, which is a team effort, will not do the enterprise any good. He stresses that the remaining crew together is strong enough to complete the mission, and that the Argo should therefore leave without him. The debate between Telamon and Meleager can be interpreted as a metapoetical debate, as a mise en abyme in which the poet discusses how to continue the epic. Hercules’ departure from the Argonautic expedition suggests that the epic will change direction. Other studies will have to show, which exact effect the parting of the archaic hero has.

51 Conclusion

In this thesis, I have conducted three different case studies in order to examine how intertextuality adds meaning to episodes in Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica in which the character of Hercules plays a role. Although scholars have written on Hercules’ part in the Flavian epic, his character has hardly been studied in terms of its interrelationship with other texts and sources. The results of my research concern both Valerius Flaccus’ epic technique and the characterization of his Hercules. In this study, I have illustrated how Valerius Flaccus on several occasions appropriated and adapted Apollonius’ narrative. In book 1, most striking is Valerius’ presentation of the Argonauts in a later stage of their lives. This phenomenon can be interpreted as a metaphor of the poem’s self-consciousness of its own belated position pertaining to the literary tradition. Further, in general, a Valerian scene often contains cues that recall the Apollonian equivalent. This allows the reader to compare both stories and to discern a different focus. Moreover, the Latin epic hints several times to alternative versions of the Argonautic narrative, for instance in Telamon’s reference to the leadership election in book 3, which is not narrated in Valerius Flaccus’ narrative. These kind of metaliterary comments show that the Argonautica self- consciously reflects on and plays with the literary tradition. Studies on Apollonius of Rhodes’ epic have shown that the Greek Hercules embodied the archaic hero, who seems to be a misfit in the Argonautica. I have argued here that Valerius Flaccus further developed this characterization in his epic, and isolates the archaic Hercules even more from the other Argonauts: in every episode examined, Hercules is opposed to them. In Chapter 1, Hercules embodied a more advanced hero and he was the only one intertextually connected to Homer’s protagonist Achilles. Moreover, Hercules is explicitly said to be eventually awarded with apotheosis, unlike to most of the other Argonauts. In addition, in Chapter 2, the Hesione episode has demonstrated that Hercules is able to accomplish labours on his own. As this scene is staged as an inversion of the Lemnos episode, where Hercules was the only Argonaut not to go into the countryside, the impression is created that the Argonauts are not able to do this. Because of the many metaliterary comments in Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica, the Argonauts’ different reaction on Hercules’ absence in book 3, pertaining to Apollonius’ epic, suggests that the characters have learned from previous versions of

52 the Argonautic narrative: they are aware that they are able to accomplish this quest without Hercules. All in all, a comparative study on Valerius’ narrative in relation to his Greek major source model has led to insights into the way in which the Argonautica expresses its belatedness, into Valerius’ way of reacting on the Greek material, and into the manner in which the poem self-consciously comments on the available source material. Interplay with other Greek and Latin poetry, like Homer’s Iliad, Virgil’s Aeneid, and Ovid’s Metamorphoses, has shown to be effective for the understanding of the narrative structure in multiple scenes. For example, in the Hesione episode, the Ovidian subtext clarifies that Valerius’ Hercules is an epic hero who is not interested in love at all. Moreover, ‘allusions in the future tense’ to the Trojan War help to present the Argonautica as an archi-epic, and in that way as a ‘late proto-text’ for literature that has been already written. I have demonstrated in my case studies, that one passage often is interrelated to multiple literary models. I hope to have shown that intertextual research with a focus on one specific character yields multiple results both for the understanding of this character and for the study of Valerius Flaccus’ entire Argonautica. Based on the limited corpus of my study, I cannot draw comprehensive conclusions on the function of Valerius’ Hercules in the entire Argonautica. However, the emphasis on his disproportional heroism with regard to the other Argonauts, and Hercules’ fated departure from the narrative, suggest that Hercules’ heroism is not the kind that the Argonautic enterprise needs. He is staged as a foil for the other Argonauts. Because of the many intertextual correspondences between Hercules and the Homeric/Virgilian heroes, his character seems not only to represent the archaic hero, but also the old-fashioned epic genre. Considering this metapoetical reading, the archaic hero’s departure from the Argonautic expedition, then, suggests that Valerius Flaccus’ poem is different and distinctive from all previous epics. Although my research has shown how Valerius’ Hercules is portrayed as the archaic epic hero, I cannot draw firm conclusions on what kind of heroism the other Argonauts embody; however, I hope that my study will lead to future research into this topic, in order to get a better understanding of intertextuality in Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica and of the poem in its entirety.

53 This thesis did not have one simple hypothesis, so my conclusion does not contain one simple answer. Instead, I have applied a broad approach to the concept of intertextuality in this rich and complex text. Therefore, I hope to have given an insight into the many ways in which this type of research contributes to the understanding of Hercules’ character in Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica.

54 Appendix 1: Hercules’ presence in the Argonautica, both in real person and in references.

Book 1: - 1.27-37: Pelias’ difficulty to make up a quest: Hercules already killed all monsters - 1.107-119: Hercules and Hylas are the first to participate in the expedition; Juno is angry with him - 1.252-3: Hercules stands out during the meal - 1.262-3: Achilles examines Hercules - 1.353-5: Catalogue of Argonauts: Hercules and Telamon mentioned first - 1.374-6: Catalogue of Argonauts: Cepheus helped Hercules with the Erymanthian boar - 1.387-90: Catalogue of Argonauts: the Herculean row is signalled - 1.391-3: Catalogue of Argonauts: Philoctetes will once handle Hercules’ arrows - 1.433-5: Catalogue of Argonauts: Meleager is compared with Hercules - 1.561-7: Jupiter addresses Hercules and the Dioscuri - 1.634-5: Hercules in the storm: his club and arrows are useless

Book 2: - 2.371-84 Lemnos: Hercules guards the ship and wants to leave the island - 2.445-578 Hercules and Telamon: Hesione episode

Book 3: - 3.133-7 Cyzicus: Hercules kills Phlegyas with his bow - 3.161-72 Cyzicus: Hercules kills multiple Doliones with his club - 3.473-80 Rowing contest: Hercules breaks his oar - 3.481-740 Hercules and Hylas: Hylas episode

55 Book 4: - 4.1-14 Jupiter is mad at Juno because Hercules is out of the expedition - 4.17-37 Hylas appears in a vision to Hercules - 4.38-59 Hercules’ reaction and his final idea to go to Troy - 4.60-77 Latona and Diana beg Jupiter not to let Troy be destroyed - 4.78-81 Jupiter orders Hercules to free Prometheus - 4.82-9 The Argonauts lament Hercules’ loss, but forget soon - 4.247-8 Amycus: the Argonauts long for Hercules - 4.699-702 Comparison with Hercules after passing the Cyanean rocks

Book 5: - 5.43 Jason cries out the rhetorical question where Hercules is - 5.89-92 Sthelenus from the underworld: Hercules buried him - 5.113-5 Autolycus, Phlogius, Deileon: old comrades of Hercules - 5.128-39 Jason asks to tell about Hercules: Amazones - 5.156-76 Hercules liberates Prometheus - 5.483-8 Jason compares himself with Hercules - 5.571-5 Jason tells about Hercules to Aeson

Book 6 - 6.460-4 Juno begs Venus to help, mentions Hercules

Book 7: - 7.622-4 Comparison of Jason with Hercules and the Hydra

Book 8: - 8.124-6 Comparison of Jason with Hercules and the Nemean Lion - 8.228-31 Comparison of Jason at the banquet with Mars and Hercules

56 Bibliography

Secondary Literature: Adamietz, J. (1970) ‘Jason und Hercules in den Epen des Apollonios Rhodius und Valerius Flaccus’, Antike und Abendland 16: 29-38. ––––––– (1976) Zur Komposition der Argonautica des Valerius Flaccus. Munich. Agoustakis, A. (ed.) (2014) Flavian Poetry and its Greek Past. Leiden. Barchiesi, A. (ed.) (2005) Ovidio. Metamorfosi. Volume II (Libri III-IV). Milan. Barich, M. (1982) Aspects of the Poetic Technique of Valerius Flaccus. Diss. Yale. ––––––– (2009) Valerius Flaccus, Argonautica. Gambier, OH. ––––––– (2014) ‘Poet and Readers: Reflections on the Verbal and Narrative Art of Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica’, in Heerink and Manuwald (2014) 29-49. Barnes, W.R. (1981) ‘The Trojan War in Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica’, Hermes 109: 360-70. ––––––– (1995) ‘Virgil: The Literary Impact’, in Horsfall (1995) 257-92. Beye, C.R. (1969) ‘Jason as Love-hero in Apollonios’ Argonautika’, Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies 10: 31-55. Boyle, A.J. (ed.) (1990) The Imperial Muse. Ramus Essays on Roman Literature of the Empire. Bendigo. ––––––– (ed.) (1993) Roman Epic. London. Braund, S.M. (1997), ‘Virgil and the Cosmos: Religious and Philosophical Ideas’, in Martindale (1997) 204-21. ––––––– (2002) Latin Literature. London. Buckley, E. (2006) Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica: Post-Virgilian Literary Studies. Diss. Cambridge. ––––––– (2014) ‘Valerius Flaccus and Seneca’s Tragedies’, in Heerink and Manuwald (2014) 307-25. Castelletti, C. (2012) ‘Why is Jason Climbing the Dragon? A Hidden Catasterism in Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica 8’, Illinois Classical Studies 37: 141-65. ––––––– (2014) ‘A Hero with a Sandal and a Buskin: The Figure of Jason in Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica’, in Heerink and Manuwald (2014) 173-91. ––––––– (2014) ‘Aratus and the Aratean Tradition in Valerius’ Argonautica’ in Agoustakis (2014) 49-72.

57 Clauss, J.J., (1993) The Best of the Argonauts. The Redefinition of the Epic Hero in Book 1 of Apollonius’s Argonautica. Berkeley. Conte, G.B. (1986) The Rhetoric of Imitation. Genre and Poetic Memory in Virgil and Other Latin Poets. Ithaca. ––––––– (2009) Latin Literature. A History. (Translated by J.B. Solodow). Baltimore. DeForest, M. (1994) Apollonius’ Argonautica. A Callimachean Epic. Leiden. Depew, M., and Obbink, D. (eds.) (2000) Matrices of Genre: Authors, Canons, and Society. Cambridge, MA. Deremetz, A. (2014) ‘Authorial Poetics in Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica’, in Heerink & Manuwald (2014) 49-71. Edwards, M. (1999) ‘The Role of Hercules in Valerius Flaccus’, Latomus 58: 150-63. Ehlers, W.W. (ed.) (1980) Gai Valeri Flacci Setini Balbi. Argonauticon libros octo. Stuttgart. Feeney, D.C. (1986) ‘Following after Hercules, in Virgil and Apollonius’, Proceedings of the Virgil Society 18: 47-85. ––––––– (1991) The Gods in Epic. Poets and Critics of the Classical Tradition. Oxford. Frank, E. (1971) ‘An Ovidian episode in Valerius Flaccus' Argonautica’, Rendiconti dell’Istituto Lombardo. Classe di Lettere, Scienze Morali e Storiche 105: 320-9. Galinsky, G.K. (1972) The Herakles Theme: The Adaptations of the Hero in Literature from Homer to the Twentieth Century. Oxford. Galli, D. (2007) Valerii Flacci Argonautica 1: commento. Berlin. ––––––– (2014) ‘Dionysius Scytobrachion’s Argonautica and Valerius’ in Agoustakis (2014) 137-51. Garani, M., and Konstan, D. (eds.) (2014) The Philosophizing Muse: The Influence of Philosophy on Roman Poetry. Newcastle upon Tyne. Ganiban, R.T. (2014) ‘Virgilian Prophecy and the Reign of Jupiter in Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica’, in Heerink and Manuwald (2014) 251-68. Garson, R.W. (1964) ‘Some Critical Observations on Valerius Flaccus' Argonautica I’, Classical Quarterly 14: 267-79. Gärtner, U. (1994) Gehalt und Funktion der Gleichnisse bei Valerius Flaccus. Stuttgart.

58 Gransden, K.W. (1976) Virgil. Aeneid Book VIII. Cambridge. Hardie, P. (1986) Virgil’s Aeneid: Cosmos and Imperium. Oxford. ––––––– (1990) ‘Flavian Epicists on Virgil’s Epic Technique’ in Boyle (1990) 3-20 ––––––– (1993) The Epic Successors of Virgil: A Study in the Dynamics of a Tradition. Cambridge. ––––––– (ed.) (2002) The Cambridge Companion to Ovid. Cambridge. Hardie, P, Barchiesi, A. and Hinds, S. (eds.) (1999) Ovidian Transformations: Essays on Ovid’s Metamorphoses and its Reception. Cambridge. Harper-Smith, A. (1988) A Commentary on Valerius Flaccus' Argonautica II. Diss. Oxford. Harrison, S. (2007) Generic enrichment in Vergil and Horace. Oxford. Heerink, M. (2014) ‘Valerius Flaccus, Virgil and the Poetics of Ekphrasis’, in Heerink and Manuwald (2014) 72-95. ––––––– (2015) Echoing Hylas: A Study in Hellenistic and Roman Metapoetics. Madison. ––––––– (forthcoming) ‘Hylas, Hercules and Valerius Flaccus’ Metamorphosis of the Aeneid’, Harvard Studies in Classical Philology 108. Heerink, M., and Manuwald, G. (eds.) (2014) Brill’s Companion to Valerius Flaccus, Leiden. Hershkowitz, D. (1998) Valerius Flaccus' Argonautica: Abbreviated Voyages in Silver Latin Epic. Oxford. Hinds, S. (1998) Allusion and Intertext: Dynamics of Appropriation in Roman Poetry. Cambridge. ––––––– (2000) ‘Essential Epic: Genre and Gender from Macer to Statius’, in Depew and Obbink (2000) 221–44, 302–4. ––––––– (2002) ‘Landscape with Figures: Aesthetics of Place in the Metamorphoses and its Tradition’, in Hardie (2002) 122-49. Horsfall, N. (ed.) (1995) A Companion to the Study of Virgil. Leiden. Hunink, V. (1992) M. Annaeus Lucanus Bellum Civile Book III. A Commentary. Amsterdam. Keith, A. (1999) ‘Epic Masculinity in Ovid’s Metamorphoses’, in Hardie, Barchiesi and Hinds (1999) 214-39. ––––––– (2014) ‘Ovid and Valerius Flaccus’, in Heerink and Manuwald (2014) 269-89.

59 Kleywegt, A.J. (2005) Valerius Flaccus, Argonautica, Book 1: A Commentary. Leiden. Korn, M., and Tschiedel, H.J. (eds.) (1991) Ratis omnia vincet. Untersuchungen zu den Arganautica des Valerius Flaccus. Hildeshelm. Lovatt, H. (2014) ‘Teamwork, Leadership and Group Dynamics in Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica’, in Heerink and Manuwald (2014) 211-28. Malamud, M.A., and McGuire, D.T. (1993) ‘Flavian Variant: Myth. Valerius’ Argonautica’, in Boyle (1993) 192-217. Manuwald, G. (2004) ‘Hesione und der ‘Weltenplan’ in Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica’, in Spaltenstein (2004) 145-62. ––––––– (2015) Valerius Flaccus. Argonautica. Book 3. Cambridge. Martindale, C.A. (ed.) (1997) The Cambridge Companion to Virgil. Cambridge. Mehmel, H. (1934) Valerius Flaccus. Diss. Hamburg. Morgan, L. (1998) ‘Assimilation and Civil War: Hercules and Cacus (Aen. 8.185- 267)’, in Stahl (1998) 175-98. Nelis, D. (2001) Vergil’s Aeneid and the Argonautica of Apollonius Rhodius. Leeds. Pellucchi, T. (2012) Commento al libro VIII delle Argonautiche di Valerio Flacco. Hildesheim. Piot, M. (1965) ‘Hercule chez les poètes du 1er siècle après Jésus Christ’, Revue des Études Latines 43: 342-58. Poortvliet, H.M. (1991) C. Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica Book II: A Commentary. Amsterdam. Putnam, M. (1995) Virgil’s Aeneid. Interpretation and Influence. Chapel Hill. Radke, G. (2007) Die Kindheid des Mythos. Munich. Ripoll, F. (1998) La morale héroïque dans les épopées latines d’époque Flavienne: tradition et innovation. Louvain. Schenk, P. (1986) Die Zurücklassung des Herakles: ein Beispiel der epischen Kunst des Valerius Flaccus (Argonautica III 598-725). Stuttgart. Schubert, W. (1991) ‘socia Iuno. Zur Gestalt der Götterkönigin in Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica’, in Korn and Tschiedel (1991) 121-37. Spaltenstein, F. (ed.) (2004) Untersuchungen zu den Argonautica des Valerius Flaccus: Ratis Omnia Vincet III. Munich. Stafford, E. (2012) Herakles. London.

60 Stahl, H-P. (ed.) (1998) Vergil’s Aeneid: Augustan Epic and Political Context. London. Stover, T. (2012) Epic and Empire in Vespasianic Rome. A New Reading of Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica. Oxford. Thomas, R.F. (1986) ‘Virgil’s Georgics and the Art of Reference’, Studies in Classical Philology 90: 171-98. Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, U. von (1924) Hellenistische Dichtung in der Zeit des Kallimachos. Berlin. Wills, J. (1996) Repetition in Latin Poetry. Figures of Allusion. Oxford. Zissos, A. (1999) ‘Allusion and Narrative Possibility in the Argonautica of Valerius Flaccus’, Classical Philology 94: 289-301. ––––––– (2002) ‘Reading Models and the Homeric Program in Valerius Flaccus' Argonautica’, Helios 29: 69-96 ––––––– (2008) Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica Book 1. Edited with Introduction, Translation, and Commentary. Oxford. ––––––– (2014) ‘Stoic Thought and Homeric Reminiscence in Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica’, in Garani and Konstan (2014) 269-96.

Texts and translations from the Loeb Classical Library: Apollonius of Rhodes: Race, W.H. (2008) Apollonius Rhodius. Argonautica. Homer: Murray, A.T. (1919) Odyssey. Volume 1. Murray, A.T. (1924) Iliad. Volume 1. Ovid: Miller, F.J. (1916) Ovid. Metamorphoses, Volume 1. Seneca: Fitch, J.G. (2002) Seneca. Tragedies, Volume 1. Virgil: Rushton Fairclough, H. (1999) Virgil. Eclogues, Georgics, Aeneid: Books 1-6. Rushton Fairclough, H. (2001) Virgil. Aeneid: Books 7-12. Appendix Vergiliana.