Treść książki

Przejdź do opcji czytnikaPrzejdź do nawigacjiPrzejdź do informacjiPrzejdź do stopki
28
THEMINIATUREEPICINVANDALAFRICAANDTHEHERITAGEOFA.NON-GENRE’
readybyTeocritus,67Medea,therapeofHelen,exploitedalsobyColluthusofLycopo-
lis.68AbitsurprisingmayonlyseemthedecisiontoelaboratetheOresteiathemeinsuch
aform,yeteveninthiscaseonecouldarguethatwedealwith“uneprédilectionpourles
histoirescriminelles.”Tepseudo-DracontianAegritudoPerdicae,withitsostensibly
zhistorical,protagonists,isreallydevelopedbasingfullyonzliterary,motifsand,inaddi-
tion,clearlyevokesoneofthemostzhorrible,lovestoriesofOvid,sMetamorphoses.Tese
fewfactsshouldsufcetoconvinceusthatthetwopoetswerequiteawareofwhatthey
intendedtocompose,eveniftheydidnotknowthetermzepyllion,
,andeveniftheywere
notquitecertainwhetheritshouldbeinterpretedasazgenre,ormerelyasaznarrativestyle,
.
Atthesametime,Dracontius,spoems,Hylas,69DeraptuHelenae,70orMedea,71seem
bynomeansasortofre-writingsoftheearlierepyllia(atleast,asweshouldadd,ofthose
stillextant).Similarly,theAegritudoPerdicaeaworkbyaversifier,notwhollyunskillful
67ApartfromTeocritus,sId.13(only75-verseslongpoem),certainexamplesofzepyllia,treat-
ingtheHylastheme,yetinsertedintoawiderstructure,canbefoundinApollonius,sArgonautica1;
asfortheLatinliterature,inPropertius,selegy1.20(aztale,insertedinanelegiacaddresswritten
inwarningtoGallus)andinValeriusFlaccus,sArgonautica3.Anexcellentreviewofancienttexts
treatingthegureofHylasisgivenbyWeber(1995)inhereditionoftheepyllion,seeinparticular
thechapterdevotedtotheHylasstoryasathemeofHellenisticlittleforms(pp.61-71).Onthe
Hylasthemeinancientliterature,seealsoMauerhofer2004.
68Infact,asregardsthechronologywearestillfarfromcertainwhetherColluthusshouldbe
seenasanteriororposteriortoDracontius,seemostrecentlySantini2006:13.
69AveryusefulcomparativeanalysisofcommonmotifsinDracontiusandotherpoetstreat-
ingtheHylasthemeisgivenbyMauerhofer2004:373-379.TeproblemofDracontius,ssources
hasofcoursebeentreatedmanytimesbyearlierscholarsanddiferentconclusionshavebeen
proposed,especiallyasfarasDracontius,sknowledgeofGreekisconcerned.
70SomescholarshaveemphasizedanalogiesbetweenDracontius,sDeraptuandColluthus,s
RapeofHelen.Certaindetailsincommoncanpossiblybefound,asarguedquiteconvincinglyby
DePrisco(1977:295-298),butasSantini(2006:13)notes,duetothedisputablechronology,it
cannotbedeterminedwhetheritwasDracontiustodrawuponColluthusortheotherwayaround.
Nevertheless,theoverallstructureandthechoiceofmotifstobeelaboratedandhighlightedare
substantiallydiferentinthetwotexts.
71Dracontius,sMedeaisquiteuniqueinoferingwithinonepoemacombinationoftwoseg-
mentsofthestorynormallytreatedseparately:(1)theeventsinColchis,thefemaleprotagonist
ofwhichistheyoungMedea,agure,sotospeak,almostztakenfromtheromancetradition,
,
whohavingfalleninlovewithJasonhelpshimgaintheGoldenFleeceand,consequently,letsthe
bravenewcomerkidnapher,i.e.themotifsexploitedinepicversionsbuiltuponthethemeofthe
argonautikà(ApolloniusRhodius,ValeriusFlaccus);(2)theactionsofMedeafurens,thefilicide,
portrayedwillinglybyplaywrights,tomentiononlyEuripidesandSeneca.Tistextassuchnds
onesignificantparallelwithintheearlierRomanliterature,namelyOvid,sMedeaepisodeinthe
Metamorphoses7(ll.7-424).Whatisparticularlyinteresting,however,isthefacthowutterlydif-
ferentthesetwotreatmentsare.ItismorethanobviousthatOvidwasoneofDracontius,smost
importantauctores(andcertaindetailsofDracontius,spoemhavetheOvidianavor,especiallythe
settingofthesceneshowingMedeapraythegodsoftheUnderland,seeSchetter1980:214=1994:
319-320),yetatthesametimeitisalsoquiteclearthattheAfricanpoetfoundhisveryownwayof
interpretingthispeculiartheme.Isupplysomefurthernotesbelow,stillIhavefocusedspecifically
onacomparativeanalysisofthetwotreatmentsinWasyl2007a.