Beyond Neo-Analysis: Problems with the Vengeance Theory

Abstract

Beyond Neo-Analysis: Problems with the Vengeance Theory Jonathan Burgess Neo-analysis has attracted much attention in Homeric studies recently. 1 Modified by oral theory, it can usefully illuminate the mythical traditions in which the poet of the Iliad worked. Yet I believe that an idea central to many neo-analytical studies is flawed. This idea, which I call the “vengeance theory,” is that the Iliad is modeled on a story of Achilles slaying Memnon to avenge the death of Antilochus. 2 I do agree [End Page 1] that a traditional story about Achilles and Memnon was known to the poet of the Iliad. But vengeance was not necessarily the theme of this story. In fact it seems that the comparison between Antilochus and Patroclus actually obscures our ability to discern the Iliad’s use of a tradition about Achilles and Memnon. The Duel between Achilles and Memnon The date of the Aethiopis is controversial, but we may well agree with neo-analysts that the duel between Memnon and Achilles found in it was traditional and known to the poet of the Iliad. 3 Other evidence suggests that the tale was well known in antiquity from the Archaic Age onward, as the following citation of the most important sources indicates. Though the Iliad does not mention Memnon, the Odyssey knows of him, specifically as the slayer of Antilochus (cf. 4.187ff., 11.522). A fragment of Alcman (68 PMG) reveals that Memnon was also present in early lyric. Pindar repeatedly returns to the encounter between Achilles and Memnon (Ol. 2.82, Pyth. 6.28ff., Nem. 6.52–55, Isthm. 3.61–63, 5.39–41, 8.54), and it was the subject of the lost Psychostasia by Aeschylus. 4 One can find narration of it at Apollodorus Epit. 5.3 and book 2 of Quintus of Smyrna (the latter undoubtedly much less faithful to early sources than the former). The duel between Achilles and Memnon and the use of divine scales to signal its outcome were also popular with artists of the sixth century onward, and one seventh-century artifact may depict the duel. 5 So it seems that the Aethiopis narrated just one version of the tale within a multifarious and long-standing tradition about the Trojan War. Its account is valuable because it is early and because Proclus in his summary [End Page 2] of the poem provides a complete if too concise narration of the story. He tells us that Memnon killed Antilochus and Achilles killed Memnon: kaç symbol¶q genomªnhq |Ant¼loxoq æp̄ Mªmnonoq ½naireÁtai, e=peita |Axilleåq Mªmnona kte¼nei. We might indeed conclude that Achilles was angered by the death of his friend Antilochus when he killed Memnon. But it seems to me that neo-analysts, reading between the lines of Proclus, have greatly exaggerated the element of vengeance in the episode. This has led to an incorrect perception by them of the manner in which the story is reflected in the Iliad. The Vengeance Theory One idea intrinsic to the vengeance theory is that Achilles had withdrawn from battle before the death of Antilochus. For example, in Schadewaldt’s reconstructed “Memnonis,” his hypothetical poem largely identified with the Aethiopis, 6 Achilles withdraws from battle because of a prediction from his mother. It is possible that Thetis traditionally delivered a prophecy to Achilles before his death. At least there is a tantalizing reference to this in Proclus: kaç Uªtiq tö paidç t� kat� Mªmnona prolªgei. But Proclus says nothing about Achilles withdrawing from battle. In fact there is no ancient source that positively asserts that Achilles was holding back from battle with Memnon. Some artistic representations of the duel between Achilles and Memnon show the corpse of Antilochus on the ground between them, 7 which suggests that Achilles was present on the battlefield and killed Memnon immediately after the death of Antilochus. Indeed, the run of the narrative in Proclus 8 and at Apollodorus Epit. 5.3 supports this interpretation. [End Page 3] It is conceivable that through synopsis artists have joined two events that actually occur at different times and that the quickly moving summaries...