Deflexus solito cursu: Phaethon between Ovid and Manilius

  • Stratis Kyriakidis Univ. of Thessaloniki, Athens, Greece
Palabras clave: Faetón, Manilio, Ovidio, Lucrecio, conocimiento, novum/novitas, solitum, miedo, athaumastia, athamvia, liber/libertas, didaxis

Resumen

En diálogo con los poetas y filósofos del pasado, en el libro primero de sus Astronomica Manilio utiliza el mito de Faetón como uno de sus aetia para la creación de la Vía Láctea: Faetón, el hijo del Sol, ha cogido el carro de su padre y, en frenética carrera, ha provocado la conflagración del universo; de ahí la creación de la Vía Láctea. Entre las versiones previas del mito, Manilio sitúa su historia en diálogo directo con el Faetón de las Metamorfoses de Ovidio, trazando una convergencia intencionada entre el poeta y su mítico personaje. Mediante una selección de palabras y frases, Manilio transmite sus propias ideas poéticas y filosóficas acerca del logro de conocimiento frente a una ignorancia pasiva (que puede comportar admiración y miedo) y frente al conflicto entre lo novum y lo solitum, la tradición. El DRN del epicúreo Lucrecio es el texto en el que el estoico Manilio se basa para desarrollar sus propios pensamientos tanto por la necesidad de respetar la tradición como por la importancia de la renovación del discurso poético. Lo novum era uno de los principales objetivos en la poesía de todos los grandes poetas de la época de Augusto, pero todo depende de cómo ese objetivo de lo nuevo “se mezcle” con lo solitum procedente del pasado.

Referencias

N. ADAMIDIS, forthcoming, The Wanderings of the Ovidian Io: Between Astronomy and Poetry, between Egypt and Rome.

F. AHL, 1985, Metaformations: Soundplay and Wordplay in Ovid and Other Classical Poets, Ithaca, NY.

M. ALGANZA ROLDÁN, 2012, “En torno a las metamorphosis ‘increíbles’” in M. C. ÁLVAREZ MORÁN – R.M. IGLESIAS MONTIEL (eds), pp. 29-47.

M.C. ÁLVAREZ MORÁN – R. M. IGLESIAS MONTIEL (eds), 2012, Y el mito se hizo poesía, Madrid.

W.S. ANDERSON, 1997, Ovid’s Metamorphoses. Books 1-5, Univ. of Oklahoma Press.

C. BAILEY, 1947, Lucretius, De Rerum Natura, 3 vols, Oxford.

A. BARCHIESI, 2005, Ovidio Metamorfosi, vol. I, libri I-II (trnsl. L. Koch), Roma.

A. BARCHIESI, 2009, “Phaethon and the Monsters” in P. HARDIE (ed.), pp. 163-188.

A. BARCHIESI – P. HARDIE, 2010, “The Ovidian career model: Ovid, Gallus, Apuleius, Boccaccio” in P. HARDIE – H. MOORE (eds), pp. 59-88.

R. BROWN, 1987, “The Palace of the Sun in Ovid’s Metamorphoses”, in M.WHITBY – P. HARDIE – M. WHITBY (eds), pp. 211-220.

EV. COCHRANE, 2017, Phaethon: The Star that Fell from Heaven, Iowa.

A.B. COOK, 1965, Zeus: A Study in Ancient Religion, vol. II, Part I, New York.

H. DIELS – W. KRANZ, 1951-1952 6, Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker, Berlin.

J. DIGGLE, 1970, Euripides Phaethon, Cambridge.

A.B. DRACHMANN, 1910/ 1997, Scholia Vetera in Pindari Carmina, vol. II: Scholia in Pythionicas, Leipzig.

B. DUFFALO, 2013, The Captor’s Image: Greek Culture in Roman Ecphrasis, Oxford.

T. S. ELIOT, 1917, “Tradition and the Individual Talent” in Selected Essays 1917-1932, New York, pp. 13-22.

H.R. FAIRCLOUGH, 1929, repr. 1978, Horace. Satires, Epistles and Ars Poetica (Loeb), Cambridge, Mass.

A. FELDHERR, 2016, “Nothing like the Sun: Repetition and Representation in Ovid’s Phaethon Narrative” in L. FULKERSON – T. STOVER (eds), pp. 26-46.

S. FERABOLI – E. FLORES – R. SCARCIA, 1996, Manilio. Il Poema degli Astri(Astronomica), vol. I, libri I-II, Roma.

D. FOWLER, 2002, Lucretius on Atomic Motion: A Commentary on De rerum natura 2.1-332, Oxford.

L. FULKERSON – T. STOVER (eds), 2016, Repeat Performances: Ovidian Repetition and the Metamorphoses, Wisconsin.

M. GALE, 1994, repr. 1996, Myth and Poetry in Lucretius, Cambridge.

M. GALE, 2000, Virgil on The Nature of Things: The Georgics, Lucretius and the Didactic Tradition, Cambridge.

M. GALE, 2011, “Digressions, intertextuality, and ideology in didactic poetry: The case of Manilius”, in S. GREEN – K. VOLK (eds), pp. 205-221.

M. GARANI, forthcoming, “Seneca as Lucretius’ sublime reader (Naturales Quaestiones 3 praef.)”.

M. GARANI – D. KONSTAN (eds), 2014, The Philosophizing Muse: The Influence of Greek Philosophy on Roman Poetry, Pierides III, Newcastle.

R. GIBSON, 2003, Ovid. Ars Amatoria, Book 3, Cambridge Classical Texts and Commentaries, 40, Cambridge.

R. GIBSON – S. GREEN – A. SHARROCK (eds), 2006, The Art of Love: Bimillennial Essays on Ovid’s Ars Amatoria and Remedia Amoris, Oxford.

I. GILDENHARD – A. ZISSOS, 2013, “The Transformations of Ovid’s Medea” in I. GILDENHARD – A. ZISSOS (eds), pp. 88-130.

I. GILDENHARD – A. ZISSOS, 2017, “Boreads and Boar Hunters: Cataloguing Argonauts in Metamorphoses 6-8”, in A. MICHALOPOULOS – S. PAPAIOANNOU – A. ZISSOS (eds), pp. 220-246.

I. GILDENHARD – A. ZISSOS (eds), 2013, Transformative Change in Western Thought. A History of Metamorphosis from Homer to Hollywood, London.

S. GILLESPIE – P. HARDIE (eds), 2007, The Cambridge Companion to Lucretius, Cambridge.

P. GLAUTHIER, 2017, “Repurposing the Stars: Manilius, Astronomica 1, and the Aratean tradition”, AJPh 138.2, pp. 267-303.

G.P. GOOLD, 1997, Manilius. Astronomica (Loeb), Cambridge, MA.

E. GOWERS, 2012, Horace: Satires Book I, Cambridge.

S. GREEN, 2014, Disclosure and Discretion in Roman Astrology: Manilius and his Augustan Contemporaries, Oxford.

S. GREEN – K. VOLK (eds), 2011, Forgotten Stars: Rediscovering Manilius’ Astronomica, Oxford.

R. GUARINO ORTEGA, 2012, “Mentiras y verdades a medias en algunos mitos ovidianos”, in M.C. ÁLVAREZ MORÁN – R.M. IGLESIAS MONTIEL (eds), pp. 177-195.

T. HABINEK, 2011, “Manilius’ conflicted Stoicism” in S. GREEN – K. VOLK (eds), pp. 32-44.

T. HABINEK – A. SCHIESARO (eds), 1997, The Roman Cultural Revolution, Cambridge.

Μ. HANNAY, 2016, Magnanimus Phaethon: The Sublime in Ovid’s Metamorphoses, Research Master Thesis, Leiden.

P. HARDIE, 2007, “Lucretius and later Latin literature in antiquity” in S. GILLESPIE – P. HARDIE (eds), pp. 111-127.

P. HARDIE, 2009a, Lucretian Receptions. History, The Sublime, Knowledge, Cambridge.

P. HARDIE, 2009b, “Introduction: Paradox and the Marvellous in Augustan Literature and Culture”, in P. HARDIE (ed.), pp. 1-18.

P. HARDIE, 2015, Ovidio Metamorfosi, vol. vi, libri xiii-xv, Roma.

P. HARDIE (ed.), 2009, Paradox and the Marvellous in Augustan Literature and Culture, Oxford.

P. HARDIE – A. BARCHIESI – S. HINDS (eds), 1999, Ovidian Transformations. Essays on Ovid’s Metamorphoses and its Reception, Cambridge.

P. HARDIE – H. MOORE (eds), 2010, Classical Literary Careers and their Reception, Cambridge.

Y. HASKELL, 1988, “Renaissance Latin didactic poetry on the stars: wonder, myth and science”, Renaissance Studies 12.4, pp. 495-522.

R. HICKS DREW, 2014, Letter to Menoeceus, Epicurus, The Univ. of Adelaide https://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/e/epicurus/menoeceus/ N. HOLZBERG, 1998, “Ter quinque volumina as carmen perpetuum: The division into books in Ovid’s Metamorphoses”, MD 40, pp. 77-98.

A.E. HOUSMAN, 1903, M. Manilii Astronomicon Libri, vol. I, London.

W. HÜBNER, 2006, s.v. ‘Manilius’, Brill’s New Pauly: Encyclopaedia of theAncient World, vol. 8, Leiden – Boston.

W. HÜBNER, 2010, Manilius: Astronomica Buch V, 2 vols, Berlin.

W. HÜBNER, 2011, “Tropes and figures: Manilian style as a reflection of astrological tradition”, in S. GREEN – K. VOLK (eds), pp. 141-164.

J. INGLEHEART, 2010, A Commentary on Ovid, Tristia, Book 2, Oxford.

P. KNOX, 1988, “Phaethon in Ovid and Nonnus”, CQ 38, pp. 536-551.

S. KYRIAKIDIS, 2004, “Middles in Lucretius’ DRN: The poet and his work”, in S. KYRIAKIDIS – F. DE MARTINO (eds), pp. 27-49.

S. KYRIAKIDIS, 2007, Catalogues of Proper Names in Latin Epic Poetry: Lucretius – Virgil – Ovid, Pierides I, Newcastle.

S. KYRIAKIDIS, 2012, “Manilian Middles”, in D. Nikitas (ed.), pp. 39-60.

S. KYRIAKIDIS, 2013, “Ovid’s Metamorphoses: The text before and after”, LICS 11.1, pp. 1-16.

S. KYRIAKIDIS, 2015, “Rome and the fata Asiae (Manilius, Astr. 1.512)”, in M. TZIATZI – M. BILLERBECK– F. MONTANARI – K. TSANTSANOGLOU (eds), pp. 265-285.

S. KYRIAKIDIS, 2016, “The universe as audience: Manilius’ poetic ambitions” in S. Kyriakidis (ed.), pp. 111-143.

S. KYRIAKIDIS (ed.), 2016, Libera Fama: An endless journey, Pierides VI, Newcastle.

S. KYRIAKIDIS – F. DE MARTINO (eds), 2004, Middles in Latin Poetry, Le Rane 38, Bari.

L. LANDOLFI, 2003, Integra prata: Manilio, i proemi, Bologna.

D. LIUZZI, 1995, M. Manilio Astronomica. Libro I, Lecce.

D. LOWE, 2014, “Heavenly and Earthly Elements in Manilius’ Astronomica”, Ramus 43, pp. 45-66.

A.J. MACLEANE, 1881, Quinti Horatii Flacci Opera Omnia, London.

R. MALTBY, 1991, A Lexicon of Ancient Latin Etymologies, Leeds.

W.-R. MANN, 2011, “On two Stoic ‘paradoxes’ in Manilius”, in S. GREEN – K. VOLK (eds), pp. 85-103.

R. MAYER, 1994, Horace. Epistles, Book 1, Cambridge.

S. McCARTER, 2015, Horace between Freedom and Slavery: The First Book of Epistles, Madison, Wisconsin.

A. MICHALOPOULOS – S. PAPAIOANNOU – A. ZISSOS (eds), 2017, Dicite Pierides: Classical Studies in Honour of Stratis Kyriakidis, Newcastle.

S. MUSSO, 2012, La Via Lattea dei Greci e dei Romani. Manilio, Astronomica,666-804, Vercelli.

K.S. MYERS, 1994, repr. 1997, Ovid’s Causes, Cosmogony and Aetiology in the Metamorphoses, Michigan.

D. NELIS, 2009, “Ovid, Metamorphoses 1.416-51: noua monstra and the foedera naturae” in P. HARDIE (ed.), pp. 248-267.

D. NIKITAS (ed.), 2012, Laus et Gratia, in memoriam Κωνσταντίνου Γρόλλιου, Thessaloniki.

J.L. PORTER, 2016, The Sublime in Antiquity, Cambridge.

I. RAMELLI, 2014, “Manilius and Stoicism”, in M. GARANI – D. KONSTAN (eds), pp. 161-186.

C. SALEMME, 20002, Introduzione agli Astronomica di Manilio, Napoli.

A. SCHIESARO, 1997, “The Boundaries of Knowledge in Virgil’s Georgics”, in T. HABINEK – A. SCHIESARO (eds), pp. 63-89.

A. SCHIESARO, 2014, “‘Materiam superabat opus’: Lucretius Metamorphosed”, JRS 104, pp. 73-104.

CH. SEGAL, 1971, “Ovid’s ‘Metamorphoses’: Greek Myth in Augustan Rome”, Studies in Philology 68.4, pp. 371-394.

A. SHARROCK, 1994, Seduction and Repetition in Ovid’s Ars Amatoria II, Oxford.

A. SHARROCK, 2006, “Love in Parentheses: Digression and Narrative Hierarchy in Ovid’s Erotodidactic Poems”, in R. GIBSON – S. GREEN – A. SHARROCK (eds), pp. 23-39.

FR. SOLMSEN, 1951, “Epicurus and Cosmological Heresies”, AJPh 72, pp. 1-23

J. STERN, 1996, Palaephatus – Περὶ Ἀπίστων: On Unbelievable Tales, Translation, Introduction and Commentary, Wauconda IL M. TZIATZI – M. BILLERBECK – F. MONTANARI – K. TSANTSANOGLOU (eds), 2015, Lemmata. Beiträge zum Gedenken an Christos Theodoridis, Berlin - Boston.

K. VOLK, 2003, “Manilius’ Solitary Chariot-ride (Astronomica 2.138-40)”, CQ 53, pp. 628-633.

K. VOLK, 2009, Manilius and his Intellectual Background, Oxford.

B. WEIDEN BOYD, 2012, “On Starting an Epic (Journey): Telemachus, Phaethon, and the Beginning of Ovid’s Metamorphoses”, MD 69, pp. 101-118.

D. WEST, 2000, Horace: The Complete Odes and Epodes. A new translation, Oxford.

S. WHEELER, 1999, A Discourse of Wonders. Audience and Performance in Ovid’s Metamorphoses, Philadelphia.

S. WHEELER, 2009, “Into New Bodies: The Incipit of Ovid’s Metamorphoses as Intertext in Imperial Latin Literature”, MD 61, pp. 147-160.

M. WHITBY – P. HARDIE – M. WHITBY (eds), 1987, Homo Viator: Classical Essays for John Bramble, Bristol.

V. M. WISE, 1977, “Flight myths in Ovid’s Metamorphoses”, Ramus 6, pp. 44-59.

M.R. WRIGHT, 1995, Empedocles: the Extant Fragments, London.

I. ZIOGAS, 2013, Ovid and Hesiod, Cambridge.

A. ZISSOS – I. GILDENHARD, 1999, “Problems of Time in Metamorphoses 2”, in P. HARDIE – A. BARCHIESI – S. HINDS (eds), pp. 31-47.
Publicado
30-01-2019
Sección
Artículos