Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T08:27:56.943Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Greek Chronography in Roman Epic: The Calendrical Date of the Fall of Troy in the Aeneid

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 February 2009

A. T. Grafton  and
N. M. Swerdlow
A. T. Grafton
Affiliation:
Princeton University
N. M. Swerdlow
Affiliation:
The University of Chicago
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The last chapter of Politian's first Miscellanea dealt with the amica silentia lunae through which the Greeks sailed back to Troy (Aen. 2.255). He argued that the phrase should not be taken literally, as a statement that Troy fell at the new moon, but in an extended sense, as a poetic indication that the moon had not yet risen when the Greeks set sail. This reading had one merit: it explained how Virgil's moon could be silent while the Greeks were en route but shine during the battle for the city (Aen. 2.340). Yet Politian's effort to identify the phase of the moon described by Virgil was anything but clear:

Non igitur aut sera fuerit aut pernox luna, tum nec lunae quidem omnino coitus, sed tempus arbitror potius quamdiu illa non luceret.

Accordingly, though his arguments were sometimes repeated by commentators and teachers, they won little assent from scholars who occupied themselves seriously with the passage. In his Adversaria Turnebus took silentia lunae as referring ‘ad noctis taciturnitatem…non ad interlunium’. In the first chapter of his De rebus per epistolam quaesitis Giano Parrasio sharply criticised the fuzziness of Politian's explanation: ‘Ambages istae sunt, ambages’. More important, he quoted a line from the Little Iliad:

νὺξ μ⋯ν ἔην μέσση, λαμπρ⋯ δ' ⋯πέτελλε σελήνη.

This he rendered ‘Nox erat intempesta, nitebat et aurea coelo Luna’, and inferred from it that the moon had been up when Troy fell. In his Virgilius collation scriptorum Graecorum illustratus, finally, Fulvio Orsini published a scholium on Euripides' Hecuba, one which quoted both the line from the Little Iliad and an analysis of it by the Peripatetic Callisthenes. He too took the line as refuting Politian.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Classical Quarterly , Volume 36 , Issue 1 , May 1986 , pp. 212 - 218
Copyright
Copyright © The Classical Association 1986

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Miscellanea 1.100 (1489) [o vir — pv], repr. e.g. in Lampas, ed. Gruter, J., 1 (1602), 116–17Google Scholar; quoted and analysed by di Prima, A., ‘Tacitae per amica silentia lunae’, Paideia 6 (1951), 277–90 at 285–6Google Scholar; cf. Cram, R. V. in CP 31 (1936), 253–9Google Scholar. Politian's point is that silens luna is normally a technical term for the moon's conjunction with the sun or interlunium, as in Pliny, N.H. 16.190.

2 Miscellanea (1489) pr.

3 Politian's argument is tacitly accepted by C. Landino ad loc. (ed. Venice, 1520) [HH vr] and simply incorporated word for word into the standard commentary by Jodocus Badius Ascensius (ed. Paris, 1507), fo. 261v. It was also accepted by Hortensius, L., Enarrationes [1559] (ed. 1596), col. 321Google Scholar, and an annotated copy of the Tiguri 1547 Virgil now in Princeton (VRG 2945.1547) contains the note: ‘silente pro non lucente’.

4 In what follows we treat arguments in the order of their appearance in print; in this case Turnebus, A., Adversaria (1564–1565), 12. 5Google Scholar, accepted by G. Vaillant ad loc. (1575), 204, whose summary we quote.

5 Parrasio, A. G., De rebus per epistolam quaesitis 1 [publd. 1567]Google Scholar, in Lampas, ed. Gruter, , 1, 725–8Google Scholar = di Prima (n. 1 above), 286–9, drawing on schol. Lyc. 344.

6 Ed. 1747, 273–4, quoting the scholium to Eur. Hec. 910 (modern text in the OCT Homer, [1961], v.132 [Ilias parva 12] = FGrHist 124 F 10 = Jacoby, F., Das Marmor Parium [1904], 148–9)Google Scholar.

7 Ed. 1580, 231. For a Meyen see Schneider, B., Vergil. Handschriften and Drucke der Herzog August Bibliothek (1982), 79–81Google Scholar. His edition first appeared in 1576; this note is clearly provoked by Parrasio or Orsini, and rewrites Politian.

8 Scaliger, , De emendatione temporum (1629 3), 376–80Google Scholar as summarised by Fr. Taubmann ad 2.255 (1618), 451.

9 Cf. the first Schrevelius variorum (1646), 355, Farnaby (1650), 129, and the second Schrevelius (1652), 324.

10 See e.g. the comms. on Aen. 2 by V. Ussani jr. (1952) and R. G. Austin (1964) ad loc.; the former is more helpful.

11 Thus Allen's collection of passages in the OCT Homer (n. 6 above) omits Dion. Hal. R.A. 1.63, which, as will appear, is crucial for the chronological argument; Jacoby by contrast has Dionysius but omits Virgil. Böckh, A. used all the texts in CIG 2 (1843), 327–30Google Scholar, as the foundation for a brilliant reconstruction which we discuss below (and which we regretfully reject).

12 Scaliger (n. 8 above) 378. For this sense of the word see LSJ s.v., (B).

13 For the text see the editions cited in n. 6.

14 See Casaubon on Dion. Hal. R.A. 1.63 (1588); Scaliger, , Thesaurus temporum (1658 2) Συναγωγή 376Google Scholar.

15 For Dionysius and his sources Bickerman, E. J., ‘Origins Gentium’, CP 47 (1952), 65–81Google Scholar remains fundamental; further references appear below.

16 Camill. 19.7 = FGrHist 124 F 10 b.

17 FGrHist 239 A 24.

18 The standard explanation is that the two dates actually refer to the same night, the one between 23 and 24 Thargelion; the difference would then reflect different starting-points for the day rather than a substantive disagreement. But since all the names associated with the dating are those of Greeks who would start the day from sunset — and since starting the day at midnight would not in fact produce this disagreement — the explanation has no merit.

19 Professor Momigliano informs us that in Southern Italy the number 17 is considered extremely unlucky.

20 What can be known about Damastes is set out by E. Schwartz in P.-W., s.n. Damastes (3). Rather more than can be known is set out by Mazzarino, S., Il pensiero storico classico (1966), i.203–7Google Scholar; see the gentle but definitive rebuttal in Ambaglio, D., ‘L'opera storiografica di Ellanico di Lesbo’, Ricerche di storiografia antica 2 (1980), 145Google Scholar. For the fragments and testimonia see FGrHist 5, though the texts on Homer that we associate with him are found at FGrHist 124 and elsewhere.

21 See in general Ambaglio (n. 20 above) and FGrHist 4. The exact nature of Hellanicus' work on the voyage of Aeneas and the origins of Rome remains controversial. The chief text is Dion. Hal. R.A. 1.72.2 = FGrHist 4 F 84. For contrasting discussions see Ambaglio 92, Horsfall, N., ‘Some problems in the Aeneas legend’, CQ 29 (1979), 372–93 at 376–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and Momigliano, A., Settimo Contributo (1984), 107–9, 443–4Google Scholar.

22 Strabo 1.3.1 = FGrHist 5 F 8; Schwartz (n. 20 above) col. 2050. For Meton see G. J. Toomer in Diet. Sci. Biogr. s.n. Meton; as Toomer there points out, Meton's work was meant for astronomical, not civil, use.

23 On this whole subject the most thorough and interesting discussions remain Böckh, , CIG 2, 327–30Google Scholar; Jacoby, , Das Marmor Parium, 146–9Google Scholar; Schwartz, E., ‘Die Königslisten des Eratosthenes und Kastor’, Abh. Ges. Wiss. Göttingen, phil.-hist. Kl. 40 (1895)Google Scholar. Professor Momigliano suggests that Damastes may have wished to establish calendar dates for the ritual observance of anniversaries.

24 Scaliger (n. 8 above) 21; Jacoby, on FGrHist 124 F 10Google Scholar.

25 Hydriotaphia (1658), chap. 5, in Selected Writings, ed. Keynes, G. (1968), 149Google Scholar.

26 The Suda does ascribe to Damastes a work in two books on the ancestors of those who fought at Troy; but cf. Schwartz (n. 20 above).

27 There may thus be precision as well as justice in Strabo's remark that anyone who would use the testimony of Damastes would also use that of Euhemerus (1.3.1 = FGrHist 5 T 7). Cf. in general Bickerman (n. 15 above).

28 Dionysius has the Trojans leave at around the autumnal equinox. Perhaps Damastes and Hellanicus disagreed on this point too, and Virgil follows one and Dionysius the other; or perhaps this is Dionysius' own invention. At all events, he makes clear that there was ample debate in the scholarship he used at every point (1.63.1, 1.72.1).

29 Cf. Schlunk, R. R., The Homeric Scholia and the Aeneid (1974)Google Scholar.