• 1 J. J. Clauss, The Best of the Argonauts, Berkeley, University of California (...)

1Apollonius’ epic is poised between the heroic and his own Hellenistic poetic world. In fact, one of the main characteristics of the Argonautica is its generic pluralism and Apollonius’ way of approaching both earlier and contemporary poetic genres. The Argonautica is a poem rich in allusions to writers and works of various genres.1 The poet preserves and subverts the traditional values of highbrow poetic genres by drawing on his comprehensive knowledge of the generic characteristics of Hellenistic poetry. The Argonautica is thus a generic experiment, in which we can distinguish an interplay between epic and tragedy.

• 2 On the topic of Apollonius’ reception of tragic poetry see F. Stoessl, Apollonios Rhodi (...)
• 3 The term ‘hybridization’ with reference to the Apollonius’ blending of the two genres i (...)
• 4 In the Apollonian scholia the following tragedies are referred to by their (...)
• 5 E. Sistakou, op. cit., p. 142.
• 6 See J. J. Clauss, op. cit., p. 9, who mentions that Apollonius draws on tragic debate a (...)
• 7 Apollonius models Jason and Medea on the subsequent history of the story, b (...)
• 8 For a list of all the occurrences of the myth of the Lemnian women before Apollonius Rh (...)
• 9 For an in-depth analysis of the dramatic elements that can be found in the closed episo (...)

2Attic tragedy represents a significant intertext for the Argonautica.2 The Argonautic epic is not only a host to the genre of Attic tragedy, but there is a specific dynamic interaction between them. Apollonius blends the two genres, epic and tragic, by reconstructing and revising them, in such a way that the final result is a ‘hybridization’ of epic and tragedy.3 Tragedy appears as an intertext of the Argonautic epic gradually and in many ways throughout the poem. Sistakou makes a list of the most important ways in which Apollonius incorporates tragedy into his epic: through the reception of specific tragic plays,4 through the integration of dramatic strategies into the Argonautica, and through the portrayal of human passions and emotions, especially in Books 3 and 4.5 Within the Argonautica we find tragic reminiscences, such as tragic vocabulary, tragic debates and monologues.6 We also detect many plot details and characters from famous Attic tragedies. The most significant example is Medea, whose actions in the Argonautica serve as a prequel to the actions portrayed in Euripides’ tragedy Medea.7 Another example is the Lemnian episode (Arg. 1.609–909), which is famous from the tragic tradition.8 Despite the lack of an extensive textual background, several echoes of tragic poetry can be detected in this episode.9

• 10 E. Sistakou, op. cit., p. 160.

3One tragic episode develops in Books 2 and 3 between Jason, Argus, Aeetes and Chalciope as the dramatis personae. The tragic element lies in the confrontation between Aeetes and his grandsons, which resembles a tragic scene of three actors (3.598–605).10 This tragic scene functions as a continuation to the Attic tragedies that treat the adventures of Phrixus. In particular, the story of Phrixus and Helle was treated in the ‘Athamas tragedies’ by Aeschylus and Sophocles and possibly also by Euripides’ tragedy Phrixus. The part of the story dealing with Phrixus’ stay in Colchis is found also in early sources from the Hesiodic corpus and the epic poems Aegimios and Megalae Ehoiae. Hence, Apollonius as a poeta doctus revisits and redefines elements of the epic and tragic poetry and focuses on an alternative episode, which can be considered as a sequel of the Phrixus and Helle’s story.

• 11 For the elements that confirm the dramatization of Aeetes’ episode in the A (...)

4The specific episode is re-cast in a dramatic context. The dramatic elements that can be identified in this “closed” episode are the following.11 Firstly, Apollonius manipulates the notions of space and time in such a way so as to dramatize the Apollonian context. Concerning the space, the episode has specific space boundaries, that can be easily visualized by the readers as scenes of a drama. Aeetes’ palace is the central scene, which is described in many theatrical details. Except for the central scene, there are many other indoors places which function as alternating settings. Secondly, concerning the time of Aeetes’ episode it confronts to the Aristotelian reference that a tragic action happens in a day (Po. 1449b). More specifically, although the voyage of Argonauts lasts many days, their stay in Colchis lasts only four days. Thirdly, the plot during this episode is relatively static and there are many dialogues through which we can focus on the psychology of the characters.

• 12 M. Husain, Ontology and the Art of Tragedy. An Approach to Aristotle’s Poetics, New Yor (...)
• 13 J. M. Bremer, Hamartia. Tragic Error in Poetics of Aristotle and in Greek Tragedy, Amst (...)

6According to Aristotle’s Poetics, tragedy imitates actions that arouse fear and pity in the audience. For this purpose, a tragic figure must be characterized by some specific elements (Po. 1353^α).12 Firstly, he must be noble in his nature or an extraordinary person, different from ordinary people. Nobility, according to Bremer, is defined by possessing an illustrious name and impressive wealth. Tragic figures are famous for their aristocratic or even semi-divine blood and their possession of virtue or excellence (arete). Aristotle refers to Oedipus, Thyestes, Orestes, Alcmeon, Meleager and Telephus as ideal tragic figures.13

• 14 On the possible meanings of the adjective ἐπιεικής see C. H. Reeves, ‘The A (...)
• 15 From these two Aristotle’s statements it becomes clear that the tragic figure is define (...)

7Secondly, the tragic figure’s moral status must be characterized as occupying a middle ground. In other words, a tragic figure must not be either a good man (πρῶτον μὲν δῆλον ὅτι οὔτε τοὺς ἐπιεικεῖς ἄνδρας δεῖ μεταβάλλοντας φαίνεσθαι ἐξ εὐτυχίας εἰς δυστυχίαν),14 nor conspicuously evil (οὔτε τοὺς μοχθηροὺς ἐξ ἀτυχίας εἰς εὐτυχίαν). These two situations do not inspire fear and pity, because pity can be aroused by undeserved misfortunes (ἔλεος μὲν περὶ τὸν ἀνάξιον) and fear can be provoked when misfortunes happen to someone with whom we can identify (φόβος δὲ περὶ τὸν ὅμοιον).15 Hence, the intermediate kind of personage is the ideal tragic figure. This kind of man is neither distinguished by his virtues nor is he distinctively villainous, in such a way that he deserves his downfall (τοιοῦτος ὁ μήτε ἀρετῇ διαφέρων καὶ δικαιοσύνῃ μήτε διὰ κακίαν καὶ μοχθηρίαν μεταβάλλων εἰς τὴν δυστυχία). The tragic figure must not be perfect so that the audience can see themselves in him.

• 16 J. M. Bremer, op. cit., p. 22.
• 17 Hamartia can also be a moral dilemma. Tragedy is generated by the inevitable and insolu (...)
• 18 A tragic flaw is defined by W. Harmon, A Handbook to Literature, New York, (...)
• 19 The basic question is whether the figure is to blame for his hamartia or whether the ha (...)
• 20 J. M. Bremer, op. cit., p. 16. Similarly, J.‑P. Vernant, Mythe et société e (...)
• 21 P. Pavis, C. Shanz, op. cit., s.v. tragic.

8Thirdly, the tragic figure’s downfall is caused by a flaw (ἁμαρτία). Hamartia is the starting point for the figure’s peripeteia, which is causally connected with the events that lead to their disaster.16 Hamartia is an ambiguous term. It is defined by Aristotle as an error in judgment or a sin.17 The figure’s downfall arises from a misconception of his surrounding reality, a false belief or an error in his judgment (μεταβάλλων εἰς τὴν δυστυχίαν ἀλλὰ δι᾽ ἁμαρτίαν τινά).18 Bremer mentions the possible ways in which a hamartia can be committed. A figure can commit a hamartia because of his ignorance of the circumstances. In this case the hamartia is committed involuntarily. Furthermore, the figure may be in a situation where he cannot realize his actions. In this case, the figure cannot check or restrain himself.19 This error brings about a reversal of his fortune. Moreover, there can be an external force (god or Fate), who indicates that the figure’s downfall is predetermined by Fate. Concerning the role of divine necessity, Bremer suggests that a tragic figure may act in ignorance, until a superior purpose is revealed in the end.20 These two factors reduce his responsibility. In fact, the tragic flaw is re-evaluated during the tragic action, as it becomes clear that the figure is neither obviously guilty nor completely innocent.21

• 22 For an analysis of tragic emotions in Aristotle see E. Belfiore, Tragic Pleasures. Aris (...)
• 23 D. L. Munteanu, Tragic Pathos. Pity and Fear in Greek Philosophy and Tragedy, Cambridge (...)

9Fourthly, catharsis is defined by Aristotle as the poet’s ability to inspire in his audience emotions of pity and fear that result in emotional purification (Po. 1449^b27–28).22 Aristotle is the only author to associate pity and fear as facets of the audience’s response to tragedy with the notion of catharsis. However, Aristotle does not elucidate the term catharsis. For this reason, there is controversy around the exact significance of the term. Munteanu examines catharsis from the perspectives of earlier writers (Gorgias, Plato, Aristotle) as well as tragic figures. Earlier writers refer to pity and fear as the psychological responses of the spectators who watch the tragedy; they cannot modify it, but only contemplate it. On the other hand, the tragic characters experience pity and fear in the middle of the events, so they can react under the effect of these emotions.23

• 24 H. Fränkel, ‘Ein Don Quijote unter den Argonauten des Apollonios,’ MH 17, (...)
• 25 M. F. Williams, op. cit., p. 479.
• 26 J. Klooster, op. cit., p. 81 n. 12.
• 27 A. Mori, The Politics of Apollonius Rhodius’ Argonautica, Cambridge, CUP, 2008, p. 175. E (...)
• 28 E. Sistakou, The Aesthetics of Darkness: A Study of Hellenistic Romanticism in Apollonius (...)
• 29 This aspect is also mentioned by K. Thiel, Aietes der Krieger-Jason der Sieger, Zum Helde (...)

10Little attention has been paid to Aeetes as a character in the Argonautica. Generally, Aeetes is considered a figure of secondary importance, a mere obstacle in Jason’s expedition.24 Williams approaches Aeetes as an epic figure, and argues that Aeetes is a man who represents Homeric values, because he defends traditional values by being an honorable man who neither cheats, neither steals, kills nor dishonors the gods.25 On the other hand, Klooster argues that Aeetes is too negative to be compared to epic figures.26 However, the epic identity of Aeetes is a common view among the scholars, who mainly highlight his epic dimension with reference to the epic army with which he intends to confront the Argonauts (3.1224–44),27 and chases the Argonauts and his daughter (4.219–425). Except for the epic arming scene, Aeetes’ association with epic also emerges from his representation as a king. Aeetes is characterized with the noun ἄναξ (3.215), a term which is usually employed for Iliadic kings, such as Agamemnon (Il. 1.7). Two are the basic elements that highlight his identity as an epic king: his majestic palace, where he lives with his family, and his initial hospitable mood towards the Argonauts. Initially, the palace of Aeetes is a symbol of his tyrannical power and causes feelings of awe and fear in anyone who sees it.28 Regarding Aeetes’ initial hospitality towards the Argonauts, he follows the rules of hospitality which plays an important role in the Homeric world. Thus, at first glance Aeetes represents the epic king in the Argonautica.29

• 30 M. F. Williams, op. cit., p. 474.
• 31 On the uselessness of Aeetes’ epic armour see also P. Green, The Argonautica by Apolloniu (...)
• 32 About the role of Alcinous in the Argonautica see V. Knight, op. cit., p. 244–5 (...)
• 33 T. Phillips, Untimely Epic. Apollonius Rhodius’ Argonautica, Oxford, OUP, 2020, p. 271.

11Despite these elements which constitute Aeetes’ epic identity, other evidence points to his inappropriateness within the Argonautic narration. First of all, the description of his military equipment (3.1224–44) turns out to have no poetic usefulness, since, according to Williams, Aeetes is not involved in battle.30 Epic armor turns out to be as useless to Aeetes, since he eventually falls victim to Medea’s deceit.31 Moreover, Aeetes’ status as an epic king seems to be opposed to that of Alcinous, who is considered as the supreme model of an epic king.32 Regarding the palace, the description of Aeetes’ palace is similar to the account of Alcinous’ palace in the Odyssey (8.81–135). However, Aeetes, unlike Alcinous, does not show understanding and friendliness towards his family members and foreigners who arrive in his country. Indeed, he does not actually help his grandchildren, who are members of the Argonauts, and does not offer hospitality to Jason and his companions. Moreover, the fact that Alcinous at the end helps the Argonauts and Jason in dealing with Aeetes, creates a direct confrontation between Aeetes and Alcinous, proving the superiority of the values ​​served by the latter. Generally, Aeetes’ poetic presentation, physical appearance, and general lifestyle do not really fit with the Apollonian poetic environment. Aeetes seems to refuse to be integrated into the story’s events or its narration.33 Hence, his epic identity seems out of place in connection with the specific narrative and poetic circumstances.

• 34 P. Grimal et al., A Concise Dictionary of Classical Mythology, Blackwell, Cambridge (Ma (...)
• 35 M. F. Williams, op. cit., p. 464.
• 36 Aeetes is referred to in the Naupactia (4–9 Bernabé), the Odyssey (10.136–139) and Hesi (...)

13Nobility is the first element that constitutes the Aristotelian tragic figure. Aeetes meets this criterion on the basis of his noble origins, royal omnipotence, association with the gods, and dynamic presence in Colchis. Firstly, Aeetes is of a semi-divine descent, because he is a son of Helios. He was given the kingdom of Corinth by his father, but soon left for Colchis on the coast of the Black Sea. He is famous for ruling over Aea in Colchis.34 He appears as the protagonist of a folktale concerning a king who acquires a magical item, which gives them power.35 However, Aeetes is rarely mentioned in sources earlier than the Argonautica. The few mentions emphasize his basic biographical information, whereas there are no extensive references to his personality. First of all, Eumelus of Corinth (fr. 3 Bernabé) narrates an account of Aeetes’ voyage from Corinth to the Black Sea area. Aeetes is also mentioned in earlier versions of the Argonautic expedition. For example, Herodorus describes Aeetes’ fear of losing his power, whereas Pherecydes (FGH 3 F22a) recounts the story of how Cadmus gave the dragon’s teeth to Aeetes. Finally, Aeetes is mentioned by Mimnermus (fr.11.5), in reference to Jason’s voyage to Aea.36

• 38 LSJ, s.v. σημάντωρ. On the epithets that are given to Aeetes see J. Klooster, op. cit., (...)
• 39 J. Klooster, op. cit., p. 85 n. 15 notes the alliterations between Aeetes’ (...)
• 40 On the bulls’ craftmanship see T. Phillips, op. cit., p. 272–73.

15Aeetes is mentioned as the king of the land of Colchis (Κολχίδα γαῖαν). Aeetes is called σημάντωρ, which denotes a leader, commander, or man who gives the signal.38 This reference is neutral, and gives some basic information about the man who is going to play an important role in the Argonautic expedition.39 His palace is full of θέσκελα ἔργα, such as streams of milk, wine, and oil (3.223–27). Even the bulls are considered part of these artefacts (3.229–30), as they resemble machines and thus waver between nature and artifice.40

• 41 For Aeetes as a son of Helios see R. J. Clare, The Path of the Argo: Langua (...)

16Aeetes’ distinctiveness also emerges from his relationship with the gods, which gives him an impression of strength and superhumanity. As mentioned above, Aeetes is the son of Helios and has traveled with the chariot of his father (ἤλασεν, Ἠελίῳ τίνων χάριν, ὅς ῥά μιν ἵπποις/ δέξατο, 3.233–34).41 Additionally, Hephaestus has decorated his palace (3.229) and has given him the fire-breathing bulls in compensation for Helios’ saving of him during the battle against the Giants (3.228–29). Moreover, Argus compares Aeetes with the god Ares (καὶ δέ κεν Ἄρει/ σμερδαλέην ἐνοπὴν μέγα τε σθένος ἰσοφαρίζοι, 2.1205–6), who has given to Aeetes his breastplate.

• 42 The same observation is made by M. F. Williams, op. cit., p. 465.
• 43 On the metonymic identification of Aeetes with his land and his city see E. Sistakou, o (...)

17Finally, Aeetes is the most important figure of his country, as it emerges from the frequent references to his name within the Apollonian narrative, even when he is absent, and from the identification of various places and persons with him. The name of Aeetes is referred to 14 times before his appearance in the 3rd Book. These references are usually about his palace, his city, or his country, with which he is identified, as one can observe from 2.890: μετἀ πτόλιν Αἰήταο, 2.1164: ἐς πόλιν Αιήταο and 3.621: μετἀ πτόλιν Αἰήταο. We notice that the name Aeetes is usually found in epic-sounding clausula, which includes a spondaic fifth foot42. In addition, Aeetes’ name figures in the genitive form 42 times, usually together with the items and the people that belong to him. These items and people include the Golden Fleece (twice), Medea (seven times), Apsyrtus (twice), his wife (once), and his anger (three times). Aeetes is the most important feature of his homeland Aea. For this reason, the name Aeetes sometimes is used instead of Aea (1.337, 2.775, 1093–94, 2.1143).43

• 44 On the friendly speech that Aeetes addresses to the Argonauts, see also M. F. Williams, (...)

20The great respect of Aeetes towards hospitality is confirmed at the first meeting of Aeetes with the Argonauts. The first speech that Aeetes addresses to them is friendly44 and reminds us of the corresponding friendly behavior of Aeetes towards Phrixus. The speech is given in vv. 3.304–9:

• 45 M. Campbell, op. cit., ad. 3.304 mentions that Aeetes tries to create a goo (...)
• 46 On the ambiguous character of Aeetes see R. Hunter, op. cit., p. 91–92, who mentions th (...)

22Despite the positive image that is given here, Aeetes hides a dark personality.45 His positive image is shaken by the worries of Argos about the possible hostile mood that the king may show towards the Argonauts. In fact, the king’s kindness is contrasted with his menacing nature and warlike disposition (ἀλλ᾽ αἰνῶς ὀλοῇσιν ἀπηνείῃσιν ἄρηρεν / Αἰήτης, 2.1202–3). Aeetes’ martial mood is highlighted by his comparison with the god Ares (καὶ δέ κεν Ἄρει / σμερδαλέην ἐνοπὴν μέγα τε σθένος ἰσοφαρίζοι, 2.11205–6).46 From these connections, Aeetes is represented as a violent, ruthless and fearsome tyrant. His polite behavior towards Phrixus is proved to be hypocritical, something that Aeetes himself admits by saying that he would never have accepted Phrixus hospitably, if Zeus had not warned him through Hermes (εἰ μή οἱ Ζεὺς αὐτὸς ἀπ᾽ οὐρανοῦ ἄγγελον ἧκεν / Ἑρμείαν, 3.587–88). Thus, Aeetes seems to be a king capable of generosity only if it coincides with his plans. Finally, Aeetes’ dark personality is confirmed by his association with the chthonic domain through the elemental forces of his palace (2, 403-407), his guardian snake, which the Earth brings forth (2.1208–9) and his relationship with Typhaon (2.1211).

• 47 On the angry reactions of Aeetes towards the Argonauts, see M. F. Williams, op. cit., p (...)
• 48 V. Knight, op. cit., p. 1995 characterizes Aeetes as a Cyclops figure. On t (...)
• 49 M. F. Williams, op. cit., p. 473. In contrast to the politically correct Minos, Aeetes (...)

25The anger of Aeetes is captured in four different ways which evoke Homeric vocabulary (ἐπεχώσατο, χόλῳ, ἐπαλαστήσας, μενέαινε).47 However, the epic nature of his rage is undermined by the way he expresses it. Aeetes has been characterized as a Cyclops figure due to the brutal way in which he expresses his anger, which is manifested with bloodthirsty threats (3.377–79) that recall the corresponding threats of Polyphemus (Od., 9.287–90).48 This is also the point at which the downfall of Aeetes begins, since through his anger towards the Argonauts, he commits an act of ὕβρις and disrespects the institution of hospitality. Nevertheless, the ὕβρις of Aeetes is a result of a false belief of the king himself. Aeetes is convinced that the Argonauts came to steal his power and gain the control of his kingdom by acquiring the Golden Fleece. Thus, Aeetes becomes disrespectful because of a false suspicion. Williams mentions that another element which illustrates Aeetes’ false perception of the reality around him is his similarity with Minos. Minos was deceived by his daughter in the same way as Aeetes is now deceived by the facts.49

• 50 M. F. Williams, op. cit., p. 472 argues that the Aeetes’ fear of his power (...)
• 51 T. Gantz, Early Greek Myth: A Guide to Literary and Artistic Sources, I, Baltimore, Joh (...)
• 52 M. F. Williams, op. cit., p. 472.

26Aeetes’ false perception is triggered by his fear concerning his authority.50 His fear is caused by an ancient prophecy, according to which he is destined to lose his power by his offspring (3.594–602).51 Thus, fear towards the prophesy’s fulfillment, in combination with his suspicion for the Argonauts, causes his rage. This is further confirmed by the fact that the reference to fear (δέος, 3.603) is immediately followed by a reference to the rage that overwhelms Aeetes as soon as the Argonauts arrive (χωόμενος, 3.607), his threats (ἀπείλεε, 3.607), and the desire to protect himself from their supposed deceit (μῆτις, 3, 608). The fear (δέος) he feels, combined with his anger (χωόμενος) confirms the causal relationship between these two emotions. Aeetes himself fears the war and does not want to enter into a conflict with the Argonauts52. For this reason, he decides to change his attitude and proposes a specific contest to Jason. Aeetes’ fear of losing his power is also displayed by verses 3.579–583, where he boasts that when Jason will be defeated by the bulls, he himself will burn Argo and cut down the nearby grove.

• 53 D. L. Munteanu, Tragic Pathos. Pity and Fear in Greek Philosophy and Tragedy, Cambridge (...)

29The purpose of tragedy, as mentioned above, is to evoke fear and pity in the viewers for the entire tragic action and the suffering taking place in the play. Catharsis in the case of Aeetes is aimed at the pity that is produced as a psychological response to his fate. According to Plato, tragic pity is an emotion felt for another and can produce psychological mechanisms that encourage displays of sorrow caused by personal misfortune (R. 10.604-606).53 The comparison of Aeetes to a farmer who observes his ruined field in front of him plays a crucial role in the cause of pity, as we can see according to the simile of Book 3 (3.1402–6):

• 54 LSJ, s.v. ἄλγος.

30Immediately after his defeat by Jason, Aeetes is compared to a farmer (κλήρου σημαντῆρα). Here, we notice that the poet creates a positive image for Aeetes, inviting sympathy for the Colchian king. Apollonius emphasizes the psychological impact that Jason’s victory has on Aeetes by using several words indicative of mental pain. The adjective κατηφείη (3, 1402) denotes sadness and shame. Ἄλγος is a sign of not just physical but also mental pain.54 The phrase βαρεῖαι ὑπὸ φρένας ἦλθον ἀνῖαι, points to the mental dimension of Αeetes’ anguish, especially its internal character and the absence of its physical manifestation. His psychological disposition is also conveyed in the metaphorical use of the πορφύρων, which refers to the worries and thoughts that torment the king (ᾗ κέ σφι θοώτερον ἀντίόῳτο, 3, 1406) on his return to his city (ὑπότροπος, 3, 140).

• 55 J. Klooster, op. cit., p. 88.
• 56 M. F. Williams, op. cit., p. 479.

31The successful completion of Aeetes’ mission by Jason (3, 1406) reinforces the pre-existing fear which the king feels and which causes him sorrow (3, 1402–6). The sorrow of Aeetes inspires emotions of sympathy rather than emotions of distaste for the audience. The simile of Aeetes and the farmer makes Aeetes a sympathetic figure that invites the audience’s sympathy55. On this interpretation, his anger can be justified as a natural reaction to the possibility of losing his power. As the king of the Colchian land, Aeetes is the defender and protector of his country and proposes a contest to protect all those possessions.56 This allows his character to be presented in a more sympathetic light. Despite his initial negative portrayal, Aeetes concludes as a partially redeemed character of the Apollonian epic.