ウェルギリウス『アエネイス』における「非情」

概要

論文の詳細を見る
The purpose of this paper is twofold to observe how the central design announced in the proem-saeua Iuno forcing the hero to face tot laboresis unfolded in the course of the poem, and, based on these observations, to reexamine the last scene of the work We see the first half of the poem totally in accord with the design, as labores are almost exclusively those of Aeneas In the second, however, while again it is saeua Iuno (7 287, 592) who brings about the war, its labores are common to all, harassing both the Trojans and the Italians, and particularly revolve on Turnus (I have discussed the labores elsewhere see the summary at www bun kyoto-u ac jp/classics/HT/ebl html) As the frequent application of the epithet saeuus to war, weapons, death and the like shows, in the context of the battlefield in general it means "so merciless as to deprive of life" In this respect not just Juno, but also Aeneas is saeuus as he kills Lausus(10 813) and Mezentius(10 878), and faces Turnus (11 910, 12 107) with Jupiter following him (11 901) Therefore, this aspect of the hero may look like coming to a climax in the last scene, but for Turnus to be killed is not necessarily something saeuum, rather he feels it unendurable to survive in disgrace and does not hesitate to risk his life for glory (cf 10 668-79, 11 416-44, 12 632-49) Here, it may be helpful to look at uiolentia and mora as keywords Ardent with molentia (11 376, 12 9, 45) Turnus wants none of mora for his duel with Aeneas (12 11, 74), while the war was induced as mora to the realization of the fate by Juno (7 313-19), who, knowing who will win, contrives to put off the duel as long as possible, indeed with two successes Then, Juno may appear to help Turnus, but ironically this help is saeuitia for Turnus Looking at the last scene with this design in mind, my question is why Turnus makes a plea for his life This would have been an opportunity for him to acquire a glorious death, at the cost of which in 'the conciliation of Juno' the name of Latium has been promised to subsist and Troy to subside The result was that the plea was rejected and his life went off with grief and indignation (note the contrast between 12 952 and 12 645-49) Then, Turnus gives away the chance he had been after, and regrets after it was gone Noting the dissonance, you may wonder about the spear thrown by Aeneas, which is said to be 'fatal'(12 919, 924) (and parallels found of the wound suggest that it could be mortal) This, if literal, would make the plea meaningless, not just because it was no use for Turnus, but also because it was needless for Aeneas to stab This double futility recalls Allecto having urged Turnus to arms, saying 'tot incassum fusos patiere labores ?'(7 421), and every delay contrived by Juno is futile after all We also note the uprightness in the plea, with which Turnus submits himself in Aeneas' hands (12 931f), accepting his defeat (936f) and even death (935), and that should be what moved Aeneas to hold his hand on the sword The anger of Aeneas was triggered by the baldric of Pallas, which is called saeui monimenta doloris (12 945) To be reminded of somethng, you have to have it out of mind at least temporarily If, however, the dolor is of Pallas, should the hero forget it even for a fraction of a second ? In contarst the anger of Juno is ever mindful (1 4 , cf 1 25f) Turnus killed and stripped Pallas of the sword belt before donning it, for which Aeneas accuses him (12 947), but is it legitimate to call it a crime or sin (949) ? Yes, of course, from the eyes of the Romans, but definitely no, by the Homeric standard Looking at the baldric Aeneas seems to have thought that Turnus was a criminal (12 949), and the crime must be foedus ruptum, as Servius comments About this it is as unlikely as about Pallas that the hero should forget, but a difference is in that a person who commits such an act more than once would suffer a total loss of trustworthiness I think that is what the baldric admonished Aeneas of all that Turnus is saying is false, another trick to evade death and drag out the war The description of the hero's anger (12 946f)has a parallel (12 498f), where he was insidus subactus (494) and laesi testatus foederis aras(496), his denunciation 'eripiare mihi ?' recalls the approval Jupiter gave to Juno of her dolus in Bk 10 'instantibus eripe fatis' (624), as if to say 'not this time', and repeatedly Aeneas has been trying to get rid of mora (12 565, 570f, 699, 888f, cf 873f) According to this interpretation, Aeneas condemned Turnus as a principal minister of Juno machinating delays The judgement by Aeneas is simply right as far as he can see, but ironically mora was the very opposite of Turnus' nature, uiolentia In a little more time, the truth could have come out, about the wound-mortal or not-, and about the real intention of Turnus-he might not have wished to survive but to die in honor and dignity-, but Aeneas did not allow it, probably because the baldric put into him the thought of mora itself as evil The tragic irony seen here is so deep that we may be reminded of the cost and difficulty involved in founding Rome(1 33) even if the fates will find a way (3 395, 10 113)
2003-03-20

著者

高橋宏幸
京都大学

ウェルギリウス『アエネイス』における「非情」

スポンサーリンク

概要

著者

関連論文

スポンサーリンク