Sense and Sensibility
An examination of the intertextual relationship
between Virgil’s Dido and Valerius Flaccus’
Hypsipyle
Universiteit van Amsterdam Classics and Ancient Civilizations: Ancient Studies
Vera Talens veratalens@live.nl 10764194
Supervisor: Mark Heerink Second Assessor: Piet Gerbrandy 12-08-2020
‘In the first place, Cranford is in possession of the Amazons; all the holders of houses above a certain rent are women. If a married couple come to settle in the town, somehow the gentleman disappears; he is either fairly frightened to
death by being the only man in the Cranford parties, or he is accounted for by being with his regiment, his hip, or closely engaged in business all the week in the great neighbouring commercial town of Drumble, distant only twenty miles on a railroad. In short, whatever does become of the gentlemen,
they are not at Cranford.’
Statement of authenticity
I hereby declare that this dissertation is an original piece of work, written by myself alone. Any information and ideas from other sources are
acknowledged fully in the text and notes.
Index
Introduction 1
Valerius Flaccus
Composition of the Argonautica
Interpretations of the Argonautica: Valerius Flaccus’ literary models Existing scholarship
Research goal Chapters
Methodology: intertextuality and close reading Methodology: gender
Chapter One: Hypsipyle and Dido as rulers 10
Introduction
Hypsipyle as a ruler Dido as a ruler
Pietas and furor
Dido as the Other Conclusion
Chapter Two: Relationships with the hero 27
Introduction
The development of the relationship The influence of the gods
Hypsipyle and contemporary ideas of womanhood Conclusion
Chapter Three: Interpreting Hypsipyle 44
Introduction Medea and Dido
Furor Pietas
An elegiac threat?
Genre Conclusion
Chapter Four: Lemnos, Hypsipyle and Roman politics 53
Introduction
The Flavian political climate Dedication of the Argonautica Pia Hypsipyle and Pius Aeneas
Conclusion
Conclusion 62
Preface
After being introduced to Valerius Flaccus during a course earlier this year, I became intrigued by the character of Hypsipyle. Hershkowitz described her as the ‘Sense to Dido’s Sensibility’.1 As a fan of Jane Austen, Hershkowitz’
words made me very curious to learn more about Hypsipyle. It is often said that the two heroines are alike, but how exactly, and to what extent does the intertextual relationship shape our understanding of Hypsipyle and the way we should read the Lemnos episode?
In undertaking this thesis, I took something of a gamble: throughout both my Bachelor and Master degrees I consistently favoured prose over poetry. But in this thesis I nevertheless stayed close to home (literally,
thanks to COVID-19) by looking at epic from a gender perspective, a method I have frequently used in both my degrees.
I would like to offer my thanks to my supervisor Mark Heerink for the excellent help and the many Skype calls over the past months. I also want to thank my family and friends for patiently listening to me consistently telling them that my thesis was ‘really almost finished now’.
Vera Talens
Zaandam, 12-08-2020.
Introduction
Research goalThe main purpose of this thesis will be to research to what extent the Lemnos episode and in particular the character of Hypsipyle and her
relationship with Jason are influenced by the presence of the Aeneid intertext and especially the character of Dido. I will examine both texts with gender as a methodological tool. Dido and Hypsipyle are both sole female rulers of foreign nations and, in that sense, transgress the boundaries of Roman views on gender. Do their gender and their foreign background impact the writer’s colouring of the respective characters, and if so, to what extent, and how does this influence the way the text could be read?
My interest in the topic was sparked by Hershkowitz’ 1998 monograph on Valerius Flaccus, in which she discusses the influences of Dido on the characterisation of Hypsipyle, describing Dido as ‘the Sense to Hypsipyle’s Sensibility’,2 but the fact that the questions ‘how’ and ‘why’ remain mostly
unanswered has led me to write this thesis in the hopes of being able to answer this question. Other researches have also linked the two characters together, but without examining the relationship in detail. That is what I hope to achieve in this thesis.
Chapters
In the first chapter, my aim will be to examine the political role that Hypsipyle and Dido play in their respective epics. They are both women of royal descent who have sole reign of their own realms. This is remarkable in a world where a rigid division between the private and public sphere ensured that only men were awarded leadership positions. That is not to say that there were no female leaders: Cleopatra and Boudicca come to mind. However, it is
important to note that these were considered un-Roman. How do Dido and Hypsipyle transgress these gendered boundaries and to what extent are they othered as either or both woman and foreigner? Are they considered
successful leaders?
In the second chapter I will be comparing and contrasting the relationships that Hypsipyle and Dido have with Jason and Aeneas
respectively. To what extent is the development similar and which forces play a role in that? I will first describe the development more or less
chronologically, and then I will go back to examine it further from different angles. For Dido and Aeneas, an important factor in the relationship’s development is divine intervention. Is this also the case for Jason and
Hypsipyle or does the relationship develop organically? Besides this, how do contemporary notions of womanhood and romanitas play into the description of the relationship, as well as the characterisation of both heroines?
In the third chapter, I will concern myself with trying to answer the main question that arises from comparing and contrasting Dido and Hypsipyle: why does Valerius Flaccus evoke the Dido intertext so clearly, whilst also often inverting Hypsipyle’s characterisation. If Hypsipyle is made out to be
something of an anti-Dido, what does the invocation of Virgil do to the interpretation of the Lemnos episode and perhaps, by extension, to the
Argonautica in its entirety? I will also be looking at Medea and how she fits within this discussion, as there is also a clear intertextual relationship between Dido and Medea.
The fourth and final chapter will be a continuation of the third. Here, I will try to situate the Argonautica within its contemporary political context of Vespasian’s reign. The Lemnos episode is coded as Roman, with its emphasis on regime change and political restoration after civil war and the invocation of Aeneas as an important intertext for Hypsipyle. Can reading the Lemnos episode tell us how the epic in its entirety could or should be read?
Methodology: intertextuality and close reading
In this thesis I will be looking at Hypsipyle from an intertextual standpoint. As a tool, comparison between texts is as old as classical literature itself, but more recent is the understanding that we can do something with similarities (and following on that: differences) between two or more texts and that an allusion to an earlier work can greatly alter the meaning of a text.3
Intertextuality as a concept poses that a text has inherent meaning because it forms a part of a matrix of earlier and contemporary texts that inevitably construct each other’s meaning.4 Interpretation of meaning
happens at the reader’s end, who has their own individual matrix of
understanding in which a text is read. Hinds argues that because of this, no text will ever be read in the same way twice.5
In order to establish intertextual relationships between two texts, in my case Virgil’s Aeneid and Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica, I will employ close reading of given passages, as well as looking at broader thematic echoes of the Dido episode that can be found in the Hypsipyle episode.
Methodology: gender
A framework that is important to my research is gender, especially with an intersectional approach. Intersectionality, a term coined by Kimberlé
Crenshaw in 1989, is a theoretical framework with which we can examine degrees of privilege and oppression created by the intersection of different socio-political aspects of an individual’s identity, for example race, class, sexuality or gender.6
3 Fowler (1997) 14. 4 Fowler (1997) 14-15. 5 Hinds (1998) 47. 6 Crenshaw (1989)
Sociologists generally agree that there is a difference between sex and gender: sex being a biological reality based on reproductive organs, whereas gender is a socially constructed set of values that we associate with
biological sex.7 From birth, we are taught to be in accordance with the traits
that come with our gender.8 Not only does the perceived gender binary
between men and women serve to distribute power, it also paints as
transgressive those who do not adhere to the set of traits assigned to their gender.9 Those who transgress boundaries of gender are seen as Others. In
this sense, gender becomes a tool of social stratification.
The answer to the question why should we use gender as a tool for researching ancient texts and societies seems obvious to me: to attempt to unearth women’s voices and realities from underneath a wealth of male-dominated writing, both contemporary and in scholarship through the centuries after. We question normativity and the ‘status quo’: how do
pervasive gender norms characterise individuals and groups in our texts and what does it mean for those characters to transgress the boundaries of gender?
But there is another reason why, especially now, critical evaluations of classical texts and their subsequent treatment and reception are vital. To move forward into the 21st century, classicists must acknowledge that they
work within a field that has ‘a history of deliberate racism, sexism and elitism’10 and work to dismantle those structures.
7 American Psychological Association (2020):
https://apastyle.apa.org/style-grammar-guidelines/bias-free-language/gender.
8 Butler (1990): Butler argues that gender is performative. By unconsciously acting in
accordance with gender norms, we ‘become’ the gender.
9 Lorber (1994) 26-30
10 Hanink (2017):
Valerius Flaccus
Valerius Flaccus is something of an enigmatic figure. Aside from having
written the Argonautica, we know very little about his life, origin, and status. There are no indications for Valerius Flaccus’ date of birth, but Quintilian mentions his death in book 10 of the Institutio Oratoria: multum in Valerio Flacco nuper amisimus, (‘we have lately lost a great deal in Valerius Flaccus’ 10.1.90). This was published in 96 CE, so that same year is generally agreed upon as the terminus ante quem,11 and the proem’s references to all three
Flavian emperors seem to corroborate Quintilian’s statement and confirm that Valerius Flaccus was alive between 69 and 96 CE.12
Valerius Flaccus’ place of origin is impossible to establish. Occasionally, he gets the additional names of Setinus Balbinus, implying his place of origin to be Setia. But, as Zissos argues, there were at least three different places called Setia in the Roman Empire during this time, so this does not help us in uncovering Valerius Flaccus’ identity.13
The lack of biographical information available has led to people
construe Valerius Flaccus’ life and status from the few autobiographical hints in the texts. In 1.5-7, the narrator invokes Apollo.
Phoebe, mone, si Cymaeae mihi conscia vatis stat casta cortina domo, si laurea digna fronte viret.
Phoebus, be my guide, if in a pure home the tripod that shares the secrets of the Cymaean prophetess stands, if the green laurel lies on a worthy brow.
11 Harper Smith (1987) xviii; Stover (2012) 8; Though Zissos (2008, xvii) notes that the
Institutiones were probably composed a few years earlier than 96.
12 Manuwald (2015) 4. 13 Zissos (2008) xiii.
(Argonautica 1.5-7)14
The invocation of Apollo and especially the mention of the tripod has led some to believe that Valerius Flaccus was a quindecimvir, and therefore of considerable social standing.15 Because the duties of the quindecimviri
included the supervision of foreign cults, this could account for the interest in and knowledge of foreign cults such as that of Bacchus and Cybele the
narrator shows in book 2.16 But the invocation of Apollo and of the
quindecimviri could also be a device to confer literary authority upon the narrator17, so we must be wary to attach too much importance to these lines.
Composition of the Argonautica
The date of the composition of the Argonautica is equally difficult to
pinpoint. As mentioned, Valerius Flaccus alludes to all three Flavian emperors in his proem. One interpretation of the text is that the proem was written after the rest of the poem and that the allusions to Vespasian’s deification indicate that the proem was written during Domitian’s reign (81-96 CE)18, but
this is unlikely. Zissos argues that such an invocation of the emperor was commonplace in epic by this time19, and Kleywegt suggests that it is both
improbable and unheard of in Roman literature for a poet to dedicate their work to an already deceased emperor, especially because Valerius seems to address Vespasian as though he were still alive.20 Stover concludes that
nothing in the dedication ‘so much as hints that Vespasian is already dead and deified’.21
14 Mozley (1934)
15 Deremetz (2014) 54; Harper Smith (1987) i; Syme (1958) App. 22.; Zissos (2008) xiv. 16 Harper Smith (1987) i.
17 Deremetz (2014) 55-56; Zissos (2008) xviii.
18 Harper Smith (1987) xviii; Libermann (1997) xix-xx; Syme (1929) 135. 19 Zissos (2008) xv.
20 Kleywegt (2005) 19. 21 Stover (2012) 17.
There are two clear references to contemporary events. Firstly,
Valerius Flaccus mentions Titus’ expedition to Jerusalem in 70 CE, thus giving us a terminus post quem.22 Secondly, he possibly alludes to the eruption of
the Vesuvius in 79.23 Apart from this, Valerius Flaccus’ allusions to
contemporary politics are vague and indirect. Bernstein argues that Valerius’ political allusions are more to do with a general Zeitgeist than events that can be specifically pinpointed in time.24
Because the poem was never entirely finished, the general consensus is that the poet was still writing the poem as late as the 90s CE, and that his death prevented him from concluding the work.25
Interpretations of the Argonautica: pessimistic versus optimistic views
In attempting to interpret the Argonautica, opinions are divided. Stover sees the Argonautica as a positive epic and reads Valerius Flaccus’ writing as ‘the poetics of rebirth and reconstruction’, a literary movement that corresponds to the political changes that were occurring as a consequence of Vespasian’s rise to power in 69 CE26. Vespasian was generally considered to bring peace
and stability to the Roman Empire after Nero27, and Stover argues that the
text indicates that Valerius Flaccus propagates this in the Argonautica.28
But the majority of researchers agree that the text holds many indications of Valerius Flaccus’ negative worldview, arguing that Valerius Flaccus does not believe in an imperium sine fine and in restoration after civil war29, and pointing out that the voyage of the Argo through a chain of
22 Heerink (2014) 4. 23 Heerink (2014) 4 24 Bernstein (2014) 156.
25 Taylor (1994) 214; Zissos (2008) xvii. 26 Stover (2012) 77.
27 Boyle (2003) 1-68, Nicols (2016) 60-75. 28 Stover (2012) 76.
events eventually leads to the Trojan War.30 The Argonautica presents a
world where monarchy is synonymous with tyranny and hostility instead of a world that is entering a peaceful period of restoration.31
As for my own reading of the epic, by focusing only on the Lemnos episode I hope to break this impasse. By looking at one specific episode, I hope to be able to shed light on possible interpretations of the work in its entirety.
Valerius Flaccus’ literary models
Though the Argonautica is the result of a complicated web of intertexts and models, Apollonius Rhodius’ Argonautica is Valerius Flaccus’ primary model for his own epic. Though he lengthens and shortens, adds to and detracts from episodes at times, he still largely follows the plot of his predecessor’s version.32 Language, structure and themes, as well as an interest in a more
psychological and subjective approach to his characters are influenced by Valerius Flaccus’ other important model: Virgil’s Aeneid.33 Especially in the
episode that I will be discussing, Dido is an important model for Hypsipyle.
Existing scholarship on Hypsipyle and Dido
There is not much research done specifically on the intertextual relationship between Virgil’s Dido and Valerius Flaccus’ Hypsipyle. I am indebted to
Hershkowitz’ 1998 monograph on Valerius Flaccus, in which she investigates Valerius Flaccus’ dealings with his predecessor Virgil. Part of this research deals with the intertextual relationship between Dido and Hypsipyle.
Hershkowitz points out several verbal and thematic connections and her conclusion is that Hypsipyle is a ‘Romanised daughter and wife’. The fact that
30 Bernstein (2014) 160-1. 31 Bernstein (2014) 166.
32 Harper Smith (1987) xvi; Zissos (2008) xxv-xxvi. 33 Zissos (2008) xxxiii-xxxix.
Hershkowitz leaves the question of why a ‘recycled’ Dido has been
transformed to a typically Roman Hypsipyle unanswered, has sparked my own interest and has led me to do further research.
Other works that I have frequently used are Brill’s Companion to Valerius Flaccus (2014), and in particular the articles written by Clauss and Fucecchi – the former dealing with myth and the latter with the incorporation of elegiac themes in the Argonautica; Syed’s article on Dido as a gendered and foreign Other (2005); and several works by both Zissos (2008, 2012, 2016) and Stover (2003, 2008, 2012). The works I mentioned occasionally mention the intertextual relationship between Hypsipyle and Dido, but do not exclusively deal with the two heroines. Finally, the commentaries by Harper-Smith, Spaltenstein and Poortvliet on Argonautica book 2 have been very useful in finding and interpreting allusions.
Citations from the texts are in the Argonautica’s case taken from the 1934 Loeb edition by Mozley, whose translations I have updated to more modern language to fit the rest of my text. I have done the same with
translations of the Aeneid, for which I have used Fairclough and Goold’s Loeb edition (1999).
Chapter One: Hypsipyle and Dido as rulers
Introduction
In this chapter, I will examine the royal status of both Hypsipyle and Dido. How did these women transgress the boundaries of gender and to what extent are they deemed successful as leaders? At first glance, Dido and
Hypsipyle are set up to be in very similar positions. However, they turn out to be governed by two very different principles. Dido falls prey to furor, which leads to the downfall of her realm, whereas Hypsipyle is led by her pietas
throughout the Lemnos episode.
As mentioned in my introduction, the premise of this thesis is based on the general consensus among scholars that Hypsipyle in Valerius Flaccus’
Argonautica is not only a reiteration of Apollonius Rhodius’ Hypsipyle, but also inspired by Virgil’s Dido. This can be noted throughout the narrative: they are both queens who welcome a traveller, begin an affair, only to be left by themselves when the traveller resumes his journey; these are at its most ‘zoomed-out’ level the basic similarities between Hypsiyple and Dido.
Upon closer look, the intertextual relationship between the two
strengthens, but the effect that this has is complex and nuanced: while Dido and Hypsipyle share many similarities, their differences become increasingly clear and contrasting.
The purpose of this chapter is to investigate the intertextual
relationship between Dido and Hypsipyle in their office as queens. They are in unique positions as they are both women who are the sole rulers of their respective realms. How are they judged? As I have explained in my
introduction, gender is a social construct in the sense that socially
determined characteristics are considered intrinsic to biological sex. Gender is used as a tool to distribute power and place people of opposite genders into a hierarchical structure. For Classics, this hierarchical character of views on
gender is easily exemplified by the fact that we have very few female voices: almost all of literature, ranging from poetry to historiography, was created by and for men.
To Romans, especially those of the upper class, there was a clear gender binary that dealt in opposites: whatever man was, woman was the opposite. Thus, the public and political sphere was a place for men, while the private and domestic sphere was that of women. We have no way of
determining the extent to which these views on the gender binary were actually enforced, but the fact that it features prominently in literature tells us that the exclusion of women from political power was of great concern. Hypsipyle and Dido are already flagged as ‘Other’ because they transgress typically Roman views on gender boundaries, as they are women holding political power.
Orientalism is the other axis that should be considered when looking at Hypsipyle and Dido. Especially for Dido, the intersection of gender and
orientalism can prove for a fruitful research angle. Researchers have long since agreed that there are strong links between Cleopatra and Dido34, and
Dido is thought to be a part of the contemporary public discourse on the Egyptian queen.35 In Augustan propaganda, Cleopatra and Egypt were
deliberately declared as the enemy, rather than Mark Anthony, who was really Octavian’s opponent. By declaring war to Cleopatra, Octavian could shift the focus from what would be essentially a civil war to a dispute between two opposing forces: the west versus the east.36 Augustan propaganda blew up
the differences between the two, and Cleopatra was made into a figurehead for eastern decadence and effeminacy.37
34 Cf. Benario (1970), Ganiban (2013) 324, Syed (2005), Wyke (2009). 35 Syed (2005) 178.
36 De la Bédoyère (2018) 57. Ganiban (2013) 5, Syed (2005) 178-181, Wyke (2009) 345,
349.
Why should we concern ourselves with Roman standards when
Hypsipyle and Dido are clearly not Roman women? I imagine that it is virtually impossible for a person to read a text without doing so from a preconceived set of moral codes, values, opinions and experiences. Both the Argonautica
and the Aeneid were written by Romans for Romans. So whereas neither Hypsipyle nor Dido is Roman, and they may be seen and judged as such, I think it is impossible that contemporary Romans did not interpret and judge both characters from their Roman set of values.
In comparison of the two women and their respective positions, how does the intertext hold up? How do they fit in with contemporary discourse on women, power and romanitas?
Hypsipyle as a ruler
The first half of the Lemnos episode (2.72-305) involves the Lemnian women murdering the male inhabitants of the island. They are inspired by Venus, who tricks the Lemnian women into thinking that their places will be taken by the Thracian women their husbands have recently brought back from their
travels. They are all caught up in a divine fury, except for Hypsipyle, the king’s daughter, who recognises their fury and refuses to participate in it and rescues her father.
After the massacre, the Lemnian women set about restoring the
political order of their island. As they assume that their king, Thoas, has been killed by his daughter Hypsipyle in the furor brought on by Venus, they are in need of a new ruler and a new normal, and they attempt to find both in a passage that is filled with allusions to Roman political practice.
Arcem nata petit, quo iam manus horrida matrum congruerat. rauco fremitu sedere parentum
iura novant; donant solio sceptrisque paternis ut meritam redeuntque piae sua praemia menti.
(…)
rapitur subito regina tumultu conciliumque vocat.
His daughter went to the citadel, where an unkempt throng of women had gathered together. With harsh clamour they sat where fathers and sons had sat before, and amid the buildings of the empty city they make new laws: on Hypsipyle they bestow the throne and
sceptre of her father as by right, and a fitting reward for her pious mind.
(…) the queen suddenly starts, and calls councillors to her side.
(Argonautica 2.306-313)38
Lemnos thus becomes a place of ‘constitutionality and genuine political
process’39 – a Roman ideal, which is ironic, given the fact that it is women who
now assume power. In taking up arms against their husbands, they have transgressed the boundaries of gender. According to Romans, women were consigned to the private sphere. They raised and educated children, while politics and war were a man’s domain.
Afterwards, the women continue in their masculine roles: they convene at the island’s citadel and form a senate ‘where fathers and sons had sat before’ (Arg. 2.307-8).40 The women restore law and order on the island, and
38 Fairclough (1999) 39 Zissos (2009) 361 n.39 40 Mozley (1934)
collectively choose Hypsipyle to be their queen, and when the Argonauts’ ship is spotted, a council is called to debate whether Lemnos should extend
hospitality to the Argonauts. The transgression of gender boundaries is a theme that runs through these lines: the senate is described as a horrida manus matrum, surely a word play on patres in its meaning of ‘senators’41; the
double entendre of vacuae, meaning both ‘widowed’ and ‘without
government’42; the use of novare, which according to Harper Smith suggests
revolutionary practice.43
Hypsipyle’s appointment as queen is shown to be a result both of her bloodline and of a democratic decision made by the senate. Still, Valerius Flaccus shows the passage as ambiguous, because the Lemnian women are convinced that Hypsipyle has killed Thoas. According to Spaltenstein,
Hypsipyle’s act of patricide is the primary reason why the senate bestows the title on her.44 Hypsipyle has committed both patricide and regicide at once – or
so the Lemnian women think –, and this is what makes her uniquely suited to be appointed as the queen and what makes her merita of the position. But to the reader, the fact that she has actually saved Thoas by disguising him and helping him escape the island is what makes her suitable as a ruler.45 Hypsipyle
is actually rewarded for her filial piety; a theme that runs through the Lemnos episode and which I shall argue in the following chapters. Besides this, it should not be forgotten that Hypsipyle has divine blood, as she is the granddaughter of Bacchus.
Regardless of the reasons for electing Hypsipyle, there is an air of legality and stability to the process that must have appealed to Roman readers. She is chosen by the senate, and the Lemnian women bestow the
41 Harper Smith (1987) 140. 42 Harper Smith (1987) 140. 43 Harper Smith (1987) 140. 44 Spaltenstein (2002) 391-2. 45 Spaltenstein (2002) 391-2.
throne and sceptre on her, ‘visible symbols of power’.46
Contrary to the Aeneid, Valerius Flaccus gives almost no attention to Hypsipyle’s role as queen after the Argonauts arrive, and passes no
judgement on the quality of her rulership. As soon as the Argonauts land on the island, the focus shifts away from the massacre’s immediate
consequences as well as from Hypsipyle’s perspective. Hypsipyle’s rulership is not shown to deteriorate when she begins her affair with Jason, and there would probably have been no reason for Valerius Flaccus to do so: the
relationship between the Lemnian women and the Argonauts were practical in nature. They had, after all, killed all the men on their island, and the
Argonauts proved useful in helping them repopulate their island. Amor has become turned into something good and necessary in the Argonautica,
instead of the recipe for disaster that it is in the Aeneid. Hypsipyle could even be argued to be ‘doing her bit’ for her people by entering into an affair. Her relationship with Jason becomes an act of pietas.
Hypsipyle’s reign is shown to be a good one, but still as a temporary measure after the massacre. When the Argonauts are about to depart, the women cry out for them not to leave. Apparently, they were under the
impression that the Argonauts would take over the government of the island, and, as an argument to persuade them, point out that it will be many years until their new-born sons will be of an age to take back political control from their mothers. It was undesirable for Roman women to seek political influence directly, but they could exert influence by arranging politically advantageous marriages for their children or pushing their sons into the line of imperial succession. This enabled woman of the elite to seek indirect political power, while still remaining within their respectable gender boundaries.47 Hypsipyle’s
reign is rationalized and made acceptable for Roman readers on the basis that
46 Harper-Smith (1987) 140. 47 De la Bédoyère (2018) 9.
from the start the women considered it a temporary measure. Hypsipyle becomes queen and the rest of the Lemnian women form the senate out of necessity until their sons grow old enough to take over again.
Dido as a ruler
Dido’s ascension as queen is also born out of a family tragedy. After Dido’s husband Sychaeus is murdered by her brother Pygmalion, his ghost appears to her in a dream, she flees the city together with others who have an odium crudele tyranni (‘hatred of the cruel tyrant’ Aeneid 1. 361).48 After buying
some land from neighbouring kingdoms, she founds the city of Carthage. She is presented as the head of a civilized and organised state, though it is still in the process of being built.
iura dabat legesque viris, operumque laborem partibus aequabat iustis aut sorte trahebat:
She gave laws and ordinances to
her people; she adjusted their tasks in equal shares or assigned them by lot;
(Aeneid 1.508-9)49
While Dido and Hypsipyle are both (at first) represented as just queens of countries with functioning political systems, Hypsipyle received the position partly due to her birth right, and partly as the result of a decision made by the senate. She became a queen of an island that was already built and already had a long history. Dido, on the contrary, had to literally build Carthage from scratch.
48 Ganiban (2013) 196. 49 Fairclough (1999)
Like Hypsipyle, Dido is first presented as a good queen. When Aeneas and Achates look down on Carthage from the top of a hill, they marvel at all the building activity. Carthage has city walls, a port, a theatre, and at least one lavishly decorated temple, dedicated to Juno. Furthermore, the
Carthaginians are up to date on major events going on in the world, as Juno’s temple bears images of the Trojan War. It makes Aeneas emotional to see the fame of the Trojans known throughout the world, and surely it must signal to the Trojans that they have found themselves in a thoroughly civilized city. The city and its government are described in typical Roman terminology50:
iura magistratusque legunt sanctumque senatum.
They choose laws, magistrates and a sacred senate. (Aeneid 1.426)51
Virgil’s description of Carthage is striking for two reasons: firstly because of the focus on Roman-coded urban landscape and inhabitants, and secondly because the city is not yet finished when the Trojans arrive on the scene.
There is a myriad of ways to define an ancient city, but for
contemporary Roman readers, a city deserving of the title would have to include ‘the presence of central squares or plazas, paved streets, defensive walls and gates, public architecture for religious, political or
ceremonial/entertainment purposes and some element of town planning.’52 Our
first proper look at Carthage is through Aeneas’ eyes, who looks down upon the city and marvels at the building activities.
50 Ganiban (2013) 200. 51 Fairclough (1999) 52 Zuiderhoek (2006) 5-6
miratur molem Aeneas, magalia quondam, miratur portas strepitumque et strata viarum. instant ardentes Tyrii, pars ducere muros molirique arcem et manibus subvolvere saxa, pars optare locum tecto et concludere sulco; hic portus alii effodiunt, hic alta theatri
fundamenta locant alii, immanisque columnas rupibus excidunt, scaenis decora apta futuris.
Aeneas marvels at the massive buildings, mere huts once; he marvels at the gates, the din and paved high-roads. Eagerly the Tyrians press on, some to build walls, to rear the citadel, and roll up stones by hand; some to choose the site for a dwelling and enclose it with a furrow. Here some are digging harbours, here others lay the deep foundations of their theatre and hew vast columns out of the cliffs, fit decorations for the future stage.
(Aeneid 1.421-28)53
Carthage has a distinctly un-Carthaginian feel to it. While the
abovementioned requirements for a city were not restricted to Roman conceptualization of urbanism, Edmondson argues that the ploughing of the furrow that Aeneas observes is a typically Roman practice that symbolizes the foundation of a new city.54 To Roman readers, Carthage must read as a
Roman city, not in the least because of Aeneas’ professed admiration for it. The theme of building and reconstructing is one that runs throughout the Aeneid and Morwood argues that the ‘un-Carthaginian picture’ of the city can be explained by examining Augustus’ building activities of the 20s BCE. 55
53 Fairclough (1999) 54 Edmondson (2006) 251. 55 Morwood (1991) 212.
Carthage had been destroyed in 146 BCE, and in the early days of Augustus’ reign, he sent thousands of settlers to Carthage to start rebuilding it as a Roman colony.56 Dido’s building activities in the mythological Carthage must
have reflected those of Augustus in the present-day colony. According to Zanker, ‘Virgil’s description of the building activity in Dido’s royal City of Carthage mirrors the excitement and optimism that must have permeated Rome in the 20s B.C., with new buildings going up all over.’ Especially
because Carthage was Rome’s archnemesis: the description of all the grand building activities may have added to Rome’s sense of pride in having
conquered the Carthaginians and in replacing the city with a Roman colony. Valerius Flaccus places no such emphasis on the urban landscape of Lemnos. Sure enough, the Argonauts arrive at a city that has a citadel, a harbour, places of supplication, defensive structures and a palace, but the urban landscape is less explicitly coded as Roman. The comparatively small amount of time the Argonauts spend at Lemnos does not allow for an
extensive description of the city’s structure, and its foundation and structure may simply not be very important to the story, as Lemnos is shown to be an already long-established community.
Pietas and Furor
So far, we have been presented with two leaders who are similar in their royal status and their legitimacy as rulers, whose realms and governments are to slightly varying degrees coded as Roman. But the difference between them lies in two contrasting traits: pietas and furor.
Dido’s status as a good leader plummets almost as soon as she lets the Trojans enter her city. The previously ‘Romanized’ city and queen now
become a backdrop against which Virgil can contrast the rapid decline. Dido
falls prey to a furor that has her aimlessly wandering around her city, growing more and more obsessed with Aeneas.
non coeptae adsurgunt turres, non arma iuventus exercet portusve aut propugnacula bellotuta parant; pendent opera interrupta minaeque
murorum ingentes aequataque machina caelo.
The towers, once begun, no longer rise, no longer do young men exercise with weapons, or work hard at the harbours or bulwarks for safety in war; the works are broken off and idle—great menacing walls and cranes that touch the sky.
(Aeneid 4.86-90)57
Dido has neglected the city and empire she was so proudly building before the arrival of Aeneas and his fellow Trojans. Not only does Dido turn into a heroine who obstructs the hero’s duty because their relationship prevents Aeneas from travelling on to Italy, she also sabotages her own duty as a queen by giving way to passions and engaging in an affair with Aeneas. Her claim of pietas towards her dead husband Sychaeus is long forgotten in favour of her newfound furor: ‘nec famam obstare furori’ ‘and that (concern for her) reputation does not stand in the way of Dido’s mad passion.’ (Aeneid
4.91).58
The affair is not only detrimental to the building activities that were taking place in Carthage, but also to Dido’s relations with surrounding African cities and kingdoms. Fama spreads rumours around the world that Dido and
57 Fairclough (1999) 58 Ganiban (2013) 331.
Aeneas are spending the winter together.
nunc hiemem inter se luxu, quam longa, fovere regnorum immemores turpique cupidine captos.
now they spend the entire winter in luxury together, heedless of their realms and caught up in shameless passion.
(Aeneid 4.191-2)59
The rumour reaches king Iarbas, who had expected to marry Dido because he had cheaply granted her some land. He is angered that Dido refused him, and that she marries Aeneas instead. This goes to show that Dido not only
neglects her own people by leaving the city unfinished, but also greatly endangers her subjects by making enemies of their neighbours.
So, throughout book 4, Dido becomes a progressively worse ruler. Her act of suicide is presented as an ultimate act of neglect of her people and her city, because she condemns them to the wrath of the Romans.
non aliter, quam si immissis ruat hostibus omnis Karthago aut antiqua Tyros, flammaeque furentes culmina perque hominum volvantur perque deorum.
as though all Carthage or ancient Tyre were falling before the
approaching enemy, and fierce flames were rolling over the roofs of men, over the roofs of gods.
(Aeneid 4.696-671)60
59 Fairclough (1999) 60 Fairclough (1999)
Hypsipyle, on the other hand, has already demonstrated that she is capable of not succumbing to furor because she is the only woman on the island who refuses to participate in the massacre Venus initiates. From the beginning of the episode, she is a positive character defined by her pietas in every
respect: towards her family, towards her people, and towards her realm; her
pietas is strong enough for her to break free from the cruel furor of Venus.61
In this, she is as far from being like Dido as she can possibly be. In fact, the character from the Aeneid that she most resembles in this respect is Aeneas, I will be discussing the intertextual relationship between Hypsipyle and
Aeneas below.
Dido as the Other
Virgil shows us that Dido’s rulership is ultimately untenable for two reasons: as a woman in a position of power, and an eastern one at that, she is an anomaly, and she lets herself be led by emotions.
Dido’s status becomes especially evident when looking at one of Virgil’s prime models for the Carthaginian queen: Cleopatra.62 It has often been said
that there are many similarities between the two women63. They are both
female rulers of eastern empires that have historically been enemies of Rome (Cleopatra through the enmity resulting in the battle of Actium, Dido through the Punic Wars). Militant women (and Virgil describes Dido as dux femina
(1.364)) were traditionally seen as transgressive. They threatened the upheaval of the status quo: a woman with political and or military power was considered a non-woman.64
61 Fucecchi (2014) 120 62 Keith (2000) 68.
63 Cf. Wyke (2009), Syed (2005), Keith (2000). 64 Wyke (2009) 353; Keith (2012) 394.
While Dido is not a dux femina in the sense of actually being militant, she is written as being responsible for war and military action.Dido, in her dying words, curses the Trojans by proclaiming that their people will forever be at odds with Carthage. Thus, Virgil makes her an aetion for the Punic Wars.65 Syed demonstrates that Virgil consistently blames women for military
conflicts throughout the Aeneid;Helen as the woman who instigated the Trojan War; Lavinia as responsible for the wars in Latium and Cleopatra for Actium.66
Aditionally, Cleopatra and Dido were both eastern women. The east was traditionally characterised by luxury, opulence and effeminacy and sexuality. The fact that the feminine east threatened the masculine west was
considered problematic. According to Syed, the characterisation of Dido fits within contemporary discourse on Cleopatra and the battle of Actium.67
During the conflict between Mark Antony and Augustus, the latter declared war on Cleopatra rather than his fellow countryman. The conflict became one of the east versus the west; femininity versus masculinity; ‘a feminised east represented by an Egyptian queen who has enslaved Antony and threatens to enslave all Roman men’68 versus Augustus as a liberator of the Republic and a
protector of masculinity. Cleopatra was an easy, natural enemy, and it prevented the conflict turning openly into yet another civil war.69 According
to Wyke, libertas became something of an Augustan slogan after Actium.70
Augustus had not ‘simply’ won a civil war, he had liberated the Republic from the threat of an eastern woman seeking power over Rome.71
65 Syed (2005) 183. 66 Syed (2005) 183. 67 Syed (2005) 199. 68 Keith (2000) 78. 69 De La Bédoyère (2018) 57. 70 Wyke (2009) 349.
71 Wyke argues that the east being characterised as feminine as opposed tot he west’s
James argues that Dido and Cleopatra fulfil the same function: they both form a military and political threat to Rome because of their sexuality.72
Dido is to Aeneas what Cleopatra is to Mark Antony. But as opposed to the Roman Mark Antony who was corrupted into becoming more eastern, Aeneas is a Trojan, and therefore as much Roman in the ethnical sense as Dido
herself is. Yet Aeneas is still considered to be the quintessential Roman hero because of his future, the ultimate proto-Roman. His character arc can be read as one of ‘ethnic progress’, in which Aeneas is constantly progressing towards shedding his eastern past in favour of his western (read: Roman) future.73 Dido hinders this progress. She literally prevents him from reaching
Italy by engaging in an affair with him and suggesting the Trojans remain in Carthage and join forces.74
vultis et his mecum pariter considere regnis? urbem quam statuo vestra est; subducite navis; Tros Tyriusque mihi nullo discrimine agetur.
Or do you want to settle with me on even terms within these realms? The city I build is yours; draw up your ships; I shall treat Trojan and Tyrian in the same way.
(Aeneid 1.572-4)75
The hope that the Trojans will remain at Carthage is later also expressed by Dido’s sister Anna: ‘Teucrum comitantibus armis,Punica se quantis attollet
72 James (2012) 370. 73 Reed (2007) 85. 74 Reed (2007) 88. 75 Fairclough (1999)
gloria rebus!’ ‘With Teucrian arms beside us, to what heights will Punic glory soar?’ (4.50-1).76
Dido thus proves to be a threat to Rome, if a more abstract one than Cleopatra. If Aeneas stays in Carthage he will keep his eastern identity, and if he leaves he can reach his Roman destiny.
Virgil shows us throughout book 4 that Aeneas is increasingly in danger of not becoming Roman. Fama spreads the rumour that Aeneas and Dido are spending the winter together in luxury (4.191-2, see above). King Iarbas describing Aeneas in very negative terms, drawing on stereotypes of
effeminate Trojans and calling Aeneas ‘Paris’, suggesting that Aeneas too is a warrior only occupied with women.77
et nunc ille Paris cum semiviro comitatu, Maeonia mentum mitra crinemque madentem subnexus, rapto potitur:
And now that Paris with his eunuch companions, his chin and perfumed locks bound with a Lydian turban, grasps the spoils;
(Aeneid 4.215-7)78
When Mercury arrives in Carthage because Jupiter has ordered him to tell Aeneas to resume his journey, Mercury encounters Aeneas building Carthage dressed as a Carthaginian. These scenes show Aeneas to be much more eastern than western, very much like the depictions of Mark Antony in Augustan propaganda.79
76 Fairclough (1999) 77 Ganiban (2013) 337. 78 Fairclough (1999)
In the end, Aeneas does what Mark Antony could not do: he does not let himself be overpowered and emasculated by the east and chooses to travel on to Italy. Essentially, though he does not know it himself yet, he chooses to become a Roman. By doing that, Aeneas’ leaving Dido, tragic as it is, can be equated with Augustus’ victory over Mark Antony and Cleopatra, because the west trumps the east; masculinity trumps femininity.
Conclusion
Both women have transgressed the boundaries of gender as they were envisioned by Romans, but whereas Hypsipyle is almost presented as masculine in her rationality, Virgil shows us that a woman such as Dido reigning over a city will lead to its downfall, as she proves incapable of withstanding furor. Additionally, Hypsipyle is governed by the very Roman principle of pietas, whereas Dido is shown to be a thoroughly Eastern character, who is, from a Roman standpoint, a source of opulence and
decadence. That is not surprising given Dido’s primary model: Cleopatra. Dido is meant to serve as a reminder that an Eastern queen is doubly un-Roman, and therefore, twice as dangerous.
Chapter Two: relationships with the
hero
Introduction
In the previous chapter, I have looked at Dido and Hypsipyle’s positions as female rulers and how they are evaluated within the text. There are clear similarities, but even bigger differences between the two women. In this chapter, I shall examine and compare the relationships between Jason and Hypsipyle, and Dido and Aeneas. The development of Hypsipyle and Jason’s relationship closely follows that of Dido and Aeneas and I will show that there are clear narrative, thematic and verbal allusions to the Aeneid. How can we interpret these allusions? More importantly, many of the allusions end up inverted. To what effect might this be done? To try and answer these
questions, I will first, briefly, describe the development of both relationships. I will examine each of them more closely by looking at the relationship from several different angles. What role do the gods play in the relationships? And how do contemporary notions of womanhood and romanitas versus
orientalism (and especially the intersection between these factors) influence the narrative and the characterisation of Dido and Hypsipyle?
In the previous chapter we have already seen that as ruler, Dido is considered as a good queen at first, but someone who quickly deteriorates when she gives way to furor, her love for Aeneas. On the other hand, Hypsipyle is consistently characterised by her pietas. This psychological distinction between the two characters continues to run through the narratives and continues to inform the intertext and how Hypsipyle as a character might be read. Hershkowitz aptly calls Hypsipyle the Sense to Dido’s Sensibility.80
The development of the relationship
In this section, I will sketch out the development of both relationships. The development of Hypsipyle and Jason’s relationship largely follows the narrative structure of the Aeneid, which is made especially clear at times when Valerius Flaccus deviates from his Apollonian model and alludes to Virgilian scenes.
After the Lemnian women restore political order to their island following the violent massacre of their husbands, sons, and fathers, a boatload of young heroes conveniently appears on the horizon. They are invited to stay at the island, because priestess Polyxo presents a convincing case to the assembly of the Lemnian women: the Argonauts can assist the Lemnians in repopulating the island.
‘Venus ipsa volens dat corpora iungi, dum vires utero maternaque sufficit aetas.’
Freely does Venus herself allow us to mate with them, while our wombs have strength and our years are not past child-bearing.
(Argonautica 2.324-5)81
As soon as the Argonauts land, they are taken on a tour of Lemnos, just as Aeneas is shown around Carthage by Dido.82 The two scenes also share verbal
similarities, which strengthen the intertextual relationship and signal to the reader a connection between the respective relationships.
81 Mozley (1934)
moenia tum viresque loci veteresque parentum
iactat opes.
Next she proudly points to their bastions, to the strength of the island, and the wealth of her ancestors from olden times.
(Argonautica 2.340-1)83
nunc media Aenean secum per moenia ducit Sidoniasque ostentat opes urbemque paratam.
Now she leads Aeneas with her through the middle of the city, and displays her Sidonian wealth and the city she built.
(Aeneid 4.74-5)84
We have seen in the previous chapter that both queens impress their guests with their leadership and their hospitality, a theme which continues when in both the Aeneid and the Argonautica the tour is followed by a banquet in the guests’ honour. The banquet in the Argonautica is in a way a Virgilian
expansion of the Apollonian model: Apollonius does briefly mention a banquet (Argonautica 1.857-858), but it is not the setting where Jason and Hypsipyle fall in love with each other and it is of no great importance to the
development of the story. Instead, the banquet in Valerius Flaccus’
Argonautica is an explicit evocation of Dido’s banquet for the Trojans. The pillows of ‘Tyrian purple’ that Jason and Hypsipyle sit on, show Lemnos’ great wealth, but they also remind us of Dido, who was a Tyrian woman herself.85
83 Mozley (1934) 84 Fairclough (1999)
Both Dido and Hypsipyle fall in love with the heroes during the banquets held in their honour. Although the banquet is said to go on throughout the night, the scene in the Argonautica is very short, whereas Virgil’s version takes up a significantly larger amount of space in the
narrative, as Aeneas’ narrative of his adventures comprises all of the books two and three; the banquet does not end until the first words of the fourth book. Perhaps the difference in narrative length has something to do with the fact that Jason has only just started out on his expedition and does not yet have an extensive portfolio of adventures for Valerius Flaccus to narrate. But, as Spaltenstein argues, Valerius speeds up Hypsipyle falling in love with Jason during this banquet, because it is a theme that he explores further with
Medea.86
The night is filled with conversation, and though it is not made explicit, it is implied that the person primarily speaking is Jason, because Hypsipyle expresses her admiration for his adventures and continues to ask him questions. Besides, as the night wanes on, Hypsipyle is said to haeret | adloquio ‘she hangs upon his words’ (Argonautica 2.353-4).
The stories that Jason tells are the reason that Hypsipyle starts to fall in love with Jason, in the same way that Dido falls in love with Aeneas in the
Aeneid. Harper-Smith sees haeret adloquio as an allusion to Aen. 1.717: haec oculis, haec pectore, toto haeret ‘With her eyes, with all her heart she clings to him.’ This is the scene in which Cupid, disguised as Aeneas’ son Ascanius, sits on Dido’s lap in order to make her more susceptible to Aeneas’ advances. Harper-Smith understands haereo to mean ‘to fasten the senses to…’; in Dido’s case that is visual, whereas with Hypsipyle the application is auditory.87
86 Spaltenstein (2002) 405. 87 Harper-Smith (1987) 157.
But it seems to me that there is a much clearer and more direct allusion to Aeneid 4, as Hershkowitz and Poortvliet also argue:88
nunc eadem labente die convivia quaerit, Iliacosque iterum demens audire labores exposcit pendetque iterum narrantis ab ore.
Now, as day comes to an end, she seeks that same banquet, again in her madness craves to hear the sorrows of Troy and again hangs on the speaker’s lips.
(Aeneid 4.77-79)89
In these lines, we are told that time and again, Dido requests to hear Aeneas recount the flight from Troy, and that she ‘hangs on the speaker’s lips’ ‘pendet ab ore’. There is something to be said for Harper-Smith’s suggestion and the two interpretations are by no means mutually exclusive, but in my opinion, haeret | adloquio alluding to pendet ab ore is much obvious than Harper-Smith’s suggestion that the scene alludes to Aeneid 1.717. The subject that engages Dido’s senses in 1.717 is Cupid disguised as Aeneas’ son Ascanius. Ascanius is not why Dido falls in love with Aeneas; he is the spark that makes her more open to the possibility, but she starts to properly succumb to her passion when Aeneas talks about his adventures. Valerius’
adloquio haeret alluding to these lines in Aeneid 4 fits in with the rest of the scene: Hypsipyle, like Dido, constantly asks questions about the hero’s
journey. Overall, it is more obvious that Valerius’ phrase alludes to 4.77-79. The stay at Lemnos following the banquet is made possible by divine intervention in the form of a storm. In Apollonius Rhodius there is no such
88 Hershkowitz (1998) 140, Pootvliet (1991) 200. 89 Fairclough (1999)
storm to keep the Argonauts there. Within the context of a by now already clearly established intertextual relationship between the Argonautica and the
Aeneid, it is easy to recognise this storm as a Virgilian addition. The storm allows the Argonauts and the Lemnian women to viduisque vacantes |
indulgent thalamis ‘and free from toil give themselves up to the marriage-bed’ (Argonautica 2.370-371).That is essentially what happens in the Aeneid too, although, as I shall discuss later, the reason for the storm is vastly different in the Aeneid.
During this storm in the Aeneid, an ambiguous wedding ceremony takes place, which is considered to be the beginning of doom for Dido: ille dies primus leti primusque malorum causa fuit ‘That day the first of death, the first of calamity was cause’ (Aeneid 4.169-70). Fama then spreads the rumour of Aeneas’ and Dido’s supposed wedding, which eventually leads to Jupiter
intervening and sending Mercury to tell Aeneas he should resume his mission. The Argonauts, meanwhile, continue to enjoy their stay without much meddling from the gods, enjoying it so much that they Zephyros audire vocantes dissimulant ‘pretend not to hear the calling Zephyrs’ (Argonautica
2.372). Both Poortvliet and Harper-Smith see a reference to Aeneid 4.562 here90: nec Zephyros audis spirare secundos? ‘Do you not hear the kindly
breezes blowing?’. This is the moment when Mercurius admonishes Aeneas for ignoring the favourable winds that would allow him to sail away from Carthage.
In the Argonautica, Hercules takes on the role of Mercury in reminding Jason of their mission, and from then on things go very swiftly. The
Argonautica follows the Aeneid, in the sense that there is a goodbye speech and an exchange of gifts in both texts before the respective heroes finally leave. When Jason announces his departure, Hypsipyle ingemit et tali compellat Iasona questu ‘she groans and appeals to Jason with complaints
such as these’ (Argonautica 2.402), similar to Dido who ‘appeals to Aeneas with these words in addition to everything else’ ‘his Aenean compellat
vocibus ultro’ (Aeneis 4.304)91. But whereas Dido is overcome with emotions
of grief and anger which will ultimately lead to her suicide and her
condemnation of the Romans, Hypsipyle remains rational and resigned: she appears to accept that Jason has to leave her, wishing him well and giving him gifts to remember her by.
‘accipe’ ait, ‘bellis mediaeque ut pulvere pugnae sim comes, Aetnaei genitor quae flammea gessit dona dei, nunc digna tuis adiungier armis.
i, memor i terrae, quae vos amplexa quieto prima sinu; refer et domitis a Colchidos oris vela per hunc utero quem linquis Iasona nostro.’
‘Take it,’ she said, ‘that I may be by your side in wartime and in the dust where the battle is thickest, the flaming gift of Aetna’s god that my father carried; it is worthy to be worn now along with your own
weapons. Go now, go, but do not forget the land that first folded you to its peaceful bosom; and once Colchis’ shores are conquered bring your sails back here, for this Jason who you leave in my womb.’
(Argonautica 2.419-24)92
In the exchange of gifts there is another inversion: in the Aeneid, Aeneas gives Dido his sword, the very sword with which she kills herself a short while later. In the Argonautica it is Hypsipyle who gives Jason her father’s sword.
91 Hershkowitz (1998) 142. Interestingly, Harper Smith (1987) does not mention this
allusion in her commentary, and neither does Poortvliet (1991).
Not only does this ensure that Jason will remember her after he leaves her, but it also clearly signals that Hypsipyle ‘will not follow the same path as Dido.’93 This moderation of emotions, combined with her priority of pietas at
all times, is what makes Hypsipyle a Roman heroine, whereas Dido is consistently characterized as un-Roman.94
The departure of the Argonauts means the end of Hypsiyple’s story. She is never explicitly mentioned explicitly again, only implicitly when Jason places the cloak she gave him on Cyzicus’ pyre, and later in the epic she is evoked in the Medea-episode.
The influence of the gods
The degree to which the gods are involved in the relationship between the two couples differs greatly. How this plays out in the two respective works is for a great part due to the overall role the gods play in the epic. Feeney argues that Valerius Flaccus often inverses the function that the gods traditionally have in epic. This can be seen, for example, in the role Venus plays in the Lemnos episode: instead of inspiring romantic love or passion in humans, she drives them towards a violent massacre of their husbands.95
Central to understanding the role the gods play in the Argonautica is,
according to Manuwald, the fact that Valerius’ characters are mostly unaware of the divine plan: Jupiter wants to open up the seas and make an end to the Golden Age. According to him, sending out ships will bring about the wars that characterise the Silver Age (Argonautica 1.531-560). Whenever
characters are made aware of a prophecy, it is almost always incomplete or vague. This unawareness makes the characters think that they have made
93 Hershkowitz (1998) 143.
94 McLeish (1972) 133. McLeish argues that while we modern readers may greatly
sympathise with Dido’s emotions, the Romans valued moderation. ‘To them Dido’s behaviour must have seemed excessive and overdramatic.’
decisions independently, though ‘actions of the Argonauts relevant to the grand scheme of things are predetermined by the gods’.96
As the Argonautica, the Aeneid also has Jupiter’s divine plan as one of its overarching themes. For Virgil, Jupiter’s divine plan ‘presents Augustus’ reign as the culmination of world history’.97 But the plan is constantly
thwarted by Juno, who, as a staunch supporter of Carthage, does everything in her power to prevent the growth and expansion of Rome. It can be said that this tension is the origin of the problems the characters in the Aeneid
keep encountering.98 Besides this, Aeneas is at least partly aware of being an
important part of the divine mission. Even though he does not know the plan in full at the start of the work,99 he is explicitly told by Venus to flee Troy
and found a new city elsewhere.
Within the Lemnos episode, the presence and involvement of the gods wanes after the massacre. Venus incites the divine fury in the Lemnian
women with the help of Fama because its inhabitants have stopped
worshipping her, siding with Vulcan in the dispute between husband and wife. Only Hypsipyle is strong enough to withstand the cruel forces of the
goddess, even though she confesses that she doubts her own strength (2.252). Her pietas carries her through however, and she successfully saves her father, with the added help of her grandfather Bacchus. It is important to keep this in mind when comparing Dido and Hypsipyle: Hypsipyle is a woman whose pietas towards her father and her fatherland is strong enough to withhold her from succumbing to divine influences.
After the massacre and before the Argonauts arrive, Venus has made peace with her husband Vulcan, and now actually wants the Lemnians to start affairs with the Argonauts.
96 Manuwald (2008) 589, 590 n11 97 Ganiban (2013) 14
98 Ganiban (2013) 15.
Venus ipsa volens dat corpora4 iungi
dum vires utero maternaque sufficit aetas.
Freely does Venus herself allow us to mate with them, while our wombs have strength and our years are not past child-bearing.
(Argonautica 2.324-5)100
What is more, Venus does not just approve of the relationship, she actively undertakes steps to ensure the Lemnian women will be seen in a favourable light, ‘tollitque loco Cytherea timorem’ (‘banishing all fear of the island’
Argonautica 2.328). According to Harper Smith, the use of Cytherea here is applied deliberately to ‘conjure up thoughts of love’.101
Venus is not the only deity looking favourably upon Hypsipyle and Jason’s relationship. After receiving a tour of the island and enjoying a
banquet in their honour, the Argonauts are detained on the island by a storm caused by Jupiter, who ‘grants a respite and a time for love’ (‘deus ipse moras spatiumque indulget amori’ Argonautica 2.356). We see here that the gods look favourably upon Hypsipyle, Jason and their relationship. This is very different when it comes to Dido, who can be seen as a victim of the strife existing between the gods, most notably Venus and Juno. Juno, as a staunch supporter of Carthage, plots to make Aeneas stay with Dido, hoping to
prevent the prophesied ruin of Carthage (Aeneid 1.21-22). Venus sees
through Juno’s attempts to thwart the divine plan and takes matters into her own hands:
100 Mozley (1934)
quocirca capere ante dolis et cingere flamma reginam meditor, ne quo se numine mutet sed magno Aeneae mecum teneatur amore.
Therefore I plan to outwit the queen with guile and encircle her with love’s flame, so that no power can change her, but on my side she will be held fast in strong love for Aeneas.
(Aeneid 1.673-75)102
Dido is consequently shown to fall prey to a furor that she cannot resist. Nor does she know that she is being targeted by Venus. This furor eventually leads to her downfall and her death. Unlike Hypsipyle, Dido was unable to withstand the forces of Venus. Even though Juno professes to favour
Carthage and Dido, Dido nonetheless becomes a victim of the conflict that is taking place at the divine level. This also becomes clear during the ‘marriage ceremony’ in the cave, which will be discussed below.
Hypsipyle and contemporary ideas of womanhood
Another thing to examine in the characterisations of both Hypsipyle and Dido
and their relationships with the respective heroes is whether contemporary ideas of Roman (and therefore un-Roman) womanhood influence their
characters. Neither of these women are Romans themselves, but it should be kept in mind that it was written by Romans for Romans who all inevitably had a set of Roman values ingrained in them. They would look at Dido and
Hypsipyle with their ‘Roman glasses’ on, just as we do today from our modern, western point of view.
Romans were greatly concerned with sexual morality and especially with policing women’s sexuality. The Augustan marriage laws of the 20s BCE
played a large part in this: while they portended to protect women’s lives and reputations, they essentially served to make women adhere more strictly to conventional views of womanhood in order not to risk irreparable loss of their reputations.103 In Rome of the early Principate, pudicitia was one of the
defining traits of a Roman elite woman.104 Epigraphic sources show that the
seven most frequent descriptions on Roman women’s tomb stones are
dulcissima, pia, bene merens, sua, carissima, optima and sanctissima.105
Though these do not necessarily show the historical reality, they can at least help us understand the type of characteristics that were considered ideal or desirable in Roman women.
A Roman woman could demonstrate her virtue by using her skillset to support her husband or children. This was the case especially for women of the elite, who themselves were incapable of exercising political power, but could nonetheless do so by supporting the career of their husbands and children.106
Producing legitimate children was one of the primary reasons for marriage.107 It is not surprising then that a large part of the woman’s
reputation rested on whether or not she had children. Not only is this reflected in Augustan laws that granted certain legal rights to women who had more than three children,108 but also in the fact that childlessness could
sometimes be seen as a sign of moral failures.109 An elite Roman woman then
was someone who lived in service of her husband and children. In the previous chapter, we have already seen Hypsipyle as a queen who is able to remain rational, whereas Dido easily succumbs to furor when the Trojans take refuge
103 Langlands (2006) 18. Once a matrona lost her status as a ‘good’ woman, she would be
unable to regain it.
104 Langlands (2006) 2 105 Strong (2016) 19 106 De la Bédoyère (2018) 9. 107 De la Bédoyère (2018) 29, Gutting (2006) 263. 108 McGinn (1998) 76. 109 Langlands (2006) 332
in her city. Her island, its inhabitants, and her father are always the first priority to Hypsiyple. In fact, Hypsipyle beginning a relationship with Jason can be seen as an act of pietas in itself. Her whole island has been recently deprived of its male population, and her people will die out if they do not repopulate the island, as priestess Polyxo says, ‘while our wombs still have strength’ (Arg. 2.324).
Hypsipyle succeeds in her self-imposed task and is pregnant when the Argonauts depart. She has done two things: not only has she done her part in producing a new generation of Lemnians, she has also created a legitimate heir for Jason.110
Dido, again, is a different story. After quickly falling for Aeneas after the banquet during which Aeneas recounts his past travels, Dido is still
hesitant to act on her feelings because she had decided never to marry again after Sychaeus’ death at the hands of her own brother. Dido is intent on remaining a univira,111 but is nevertheless in the tightening grip of an erotic
madness. A univira was a woman who chose to remain widow after the death of their husband, an ideal of pietas towards a dead spouse that was
especially celebrated in times of frequent divorces and remarriages.112 But
with the support of her sister Anna, she overcomes her qualms and decides to give in to her emotions.113 After the storm orchestrated by Juno, Dido and
Aeneas are forced to take shelter in a cave, where an ambiguous marriage ceremony takes place. According to Ganiban, ‘Vergil’s passage suggests either a wedding or a parody of a wedding, and the event is described in such
110 Because Hypsipyle asks Jason to return to her after going to Colchis, it seems that
Hypsiyple does not want to shut Jason out of the child’s life. Hypsipyle thinks beyond the repopulation of Lemnos.
111 Gutting (2006) 265
112 Dixon (1992) 77, 89. It became more rare in the late Republic and the early Empire, when
remarriage became more common.
113 Though it has to be noted that while Dido’s heart is said to be inflamed and burning with
love, Anna does give Dido advice of a more pragmatic nature: if Troy and Carthage joined forces, Carthage’s power would reach unprecedented heights (Aen. 4.48-49)
