#Neptolemus

[babyrdie]

ACHILLES ON SKYROS [PART 3]

Part 1 here. Part 2 here.

This text is a continuation of the previous one, therefore the warnings given in the previous one apply here. Reading the post before this one is recommended if you're interested in reading this one.

Posthomerica, by Quintus Smyrnaeus (4th century AD)

This is a source of Greek mythology. Posthomerica, or The Fall of Troy, is an epic poem that aims to tell what happened after what was narrated in The Iliad. For example, the death of Penthesilea by Achilles, the death of Antilochus by Memnon, the death of Memnon by Achilles, the death of Achilles, the search and arrival of Neoptolemus, etc etc. The part that is interesting for this post is that of Neoptolemus in Book 6 and Book 7, as they’re the ones that provide details about Skyros.

This part is too long to copy and paste entirely here, so I'll summarize it instead. However, I recommend reading at least Book 7 of Posthomerica for context. It's long for a post, but not long for a read, I promise!

[Book 6] Although the prophecy regarding Neoptolemus is usually given by Helenus after he was kidnapped by Odysseus, in Posthomerica the person responsible for the prophecy is Calchas, the seer of the Greeks. He tells the Greeks that they must send Diomedes and Odysseus to Skyros to bring Achilles' son, as he’s essential to the fall of Troy.

Menelaus tells Odysseus, if Neoptolemus accepts to fight in the Trojan War for the Greeks, he will marry him to his daughter, Hermione. He did this as a guarantee, as this marriage would be too promising for Neoptolemus to refuse, as it would connect him with the royalty of Sparta.

Odysseus and Diomedes leave for Skyros. The rest of Book 6 is unrelated to the post topic, so let's move on to Book 7.

[Book 7] While things were going on in Troy, Diomedes and Odysseus arrived on Skyros. As they approached the Palace of Skyros, they found Neoptolemus practicing. Upon seeing Neoptolemus, they were happy to find him and at the same time sad, as they immediately recognized him precisely because he looked a lot like Achilles thanks to his beauty and the way he practiced, which reminded them of their deceased friend. Neoptolemus then greeted them.

Odysseus greets Neoptolemus, introduces himself and Diomedes, praises him saying he’s similar to Achilles, offers the armor forged by Hephaestus that belonged to Achilles while explaining how he won it and informs him of the marriage promise offered by Menelaus. Neoptolemus accepts, saying if the oracles call for him then he will come, and invites them to enter.

They meet Deidamia, here called Queen Deidamia, who was immensely sad because she had already learned about Achilles' death. Neoptolemus introduced Diomedes and Odysseus to her, but decided to tell her the reason for their journey the next day to avoid increasing his mother's sadness.

There was a good reception for the guests and everyone slept well, except Deidamia. She noticed the names of Diomedes and Odysseus were the same names as the men who had convinced Achilles to leave her to go to the same war that made her a widow. Blaming them for the grief she and Peleus (Peleus is actually mentioned) feel, Deidamia cannot sleep because she knows they’re after her son and she’s afraid that Neoptolemus will suffer the same fate as his father, that is: leaving with Odysseus and Diomedes in search of a promised glory and never returning.

The next day, Deidamia tried to convince Neoptolemus not to leave, saying he was too young to go to such a cruel war, saying that if even someone as powerful as his father didn't survive she felt that Neoptolemus wouldn't survive either, accusing Diomedes and Odysseus of being cunning and saying there is no sadder fate for a woman than losing both her husband and her children.

Neoptolemus tells her not to have so many bad feelings, but he also said that only those who are destined die and that if his destiny is to die for the Greeks, then he will do so. Lycomedes, an elderly man here, doesn't try to convince him not to go, and instead says he looks like his father, gives him lots of advice and kisses him.

Neoptolemus is excited to leave, but Deidamia tearfully stops him to say goodbye. Despite her pain, she’s proud of her son. She kisses him several times, and then Neoptolemus leaves along with trusted men that Deidamia has chosen. After her son's departure, Deidamia goes to Neoptolemus' room and cries on his bed, on the doorpost, on top of his childhood toys, on top of his dart. 

Poseidon (“Raven-haired, the Lord of all the sea”), Thetis and the Nereid watch Neoptolemus' journey, pleased with his joy. Subsequently, the Book focuses on the reception of Neoptolemus by the Greeks, which is not the focus here.

Here, Deidamia and Achilles are apparently married, since she’s described as a widow. Her being described as “Queen” is curious to say the least, since this isn’t a title commonly given to her. 

The parallels between Achilles and Neoptolemus have always been obvious. The two had a prophecy that made them essential to the fall of Troy, they were both recruited in Skyros by Odysseus (according to the most popular versions of the myths. This varies, as I have already shown in this post), in both cases their mothers tried to stop them from leaving and in both cases they left anyway, in both cases they were too young for war, in both cases they were described as beautiful and great warriors, both committed the same sacrilege (attacking a supplicant inside a temple of a god), both were represented as sincere (in the case of Achilles this already appeared in The Iliad, in the case of Neoptolemus you can read Philoctetes for reference) and both died young (in the case of Neoptolemus, he survived the war). They even share similar names, since more than one source says that Achilles' feminine name on Skyros was Pyrrha and more than one source says that Neoptolemus' birth name was Pyrrhus, it was Pyrrhus, and in one of them Phoenix is ​​the one who renamed him precisely in honor of Achilles (because Neoptolemus means “new war”, thus referencing the youth of both Achilles and Neoptolemus). In a way, both were promising young men with an exceptional lineage who, eager for glory, entered a war at a very young age and, throughout that war, became corrupted to the point of committing sacrilege (Achilles kills Troilus inside the Temple of Apollo, Neoptolemus kills Priam inside the Temple of Zeus). In particular, I think that reading Iphigenia at Aulis by Euripides and Philoctetes by Sophocles it’s very easy to see how Achilles (in Euripides' case) and Neoptolemus (in Sophocles' case) were actually very young and innocent at the beginning of it all. On the other hand, reading the characters in sources that report their deeds in War, they’re definitely not innocent. Both were born for war, as the prophecies said, and they were "lost" in it. In the case of Neoptolemus, it is even in the etymology of his name.

In Greek mythology, the character of Achilles seems haunted by the prophecy (which the theme of this post emphasizes well, since the most common/famous tradition of Achilles + Skyros is that he was taken to Skyros because of the prophecy. Likewise, he left Skyros because of the prophecy. Likewise, he didn’t return to Deidamia because of the prophecy), but Neoptolemus' character seems haunted by the ghost of his father. He only participates in the Trojan War after the death of Achilles and, upon joining the army, ironically fills the role that previously belonged to his father as an impressive young and unstoppable offensive attacker. Often, praise directed at Neoptolemus is made by comparing him with Achilles, for example Philoctetes only trusts Neoptolemus because he trusted Achilles previously in Sophocles' play and in Posthomerica Quintus uses Achilles as a way of exemplifying Neoptolemus' beauty and skill. Deidamia is afraid of losing her son because she lost Achilles first. Neoptolemus seeks glory for himself and also for Achilles. Commonly, Neoptolemus also wears the iconic armor made by Hephaestus that previously belonged to Achilles. While Achilles aimed to be the strongest of his generation without thinking about a specific name, Neoptolemus aimed at his goal while thinking about Achilles.

However, Posthomerica seems dedicated to emphasizing these similarities. Neoptolemus is presented as being easily recognizable due to his similar appearance and practice skills as Achilles, for example. But the most interesting resemblance here is Deidamia, wife of one and mother of another. In Book 7, she’s the link between them. It's from her point of view that, seeing how Neoptolemus is being recruited, we learn that his father was recruited in a very similar way. In some sources Deidamia is portrayed as asking Achilles to stay (in visual representations of discovery of the disguise it’s also common for her to be depicted at his side), and here she does the same for Neoptolemus because she sees in him the dead husband who will become the dead son. More than that, ironically Deidamia reminds me of the way in which Thetis also tried to prevent his son's death because of a prophecy, an attempt that in myths is almost always the reason for Deidamia and Achilles to meet (depending on the source, Thetis is not mentioned . In an unusual version, it is Peleus). In a way, Posthomerica presents a little explored (at least in the surviving sources) vision of an older Deidamia. Not a princess, but a queen. Not a girl trying desperately to keep her boy from leaving, but a woman trying desperately to keep her beloved son from leaving. Throughout the text, Deidamia is in grief. If we were first introduced to a widowed Deidamia who mourns her husband, later we were introduced to a Deidamia who prematurely mourns the fate of her son. Thus, Deidamia is used as a way to emphasize the similarity between the two young heroes.

Bibliotheca, by Photius I of Constantinople (9th century AD)

This is a source of Greek mythology. Bibliotheca was dedicated to Photius' brother, and contains reviews of books he read. As such, the intention wasn’t to be a reference, as was the case with Pseudo-Apollodorus and Hyginus, but currently it has great importance because of the number of versions it offers. In addition, there is information about lost works that are now only found in the Bibliotheca. Anyway, it's because of things like this that I recommend not ignoring Byzantine sources.

Photius says that Aristonicus of Tarentum said that while Achilles was disguised as a girl, his name was Cercysera. Unfortunately, it isn’t possible to be sure which period Aristonicus belongs to and, therefore, there is no way to know which period this information is from. Photius then goes on to speak of other names attributed to Achilles, including Pyrrha.

Aristonicus of Tarentum said that Achilles, when he lived among the young girls at the house of Lycomedes, was called Cercysera; he was also called Issa and Pyrrha and Aspetos and Prometheus.

Bibliotheca, 190.9. Translation by John Henry Freese.

Photuis says, according to Ptolemy Hephaestion, Achilles and Deidamia hadn’t only Neoptolemus, but also Oneiros. As far as I know, this is the only source mentioning Oneiros and, like his brother, he was killed by Orestes. The difference is that in the case of Oneiros the death was accidental, while in the case of Neoptolemus it was deliberate. Due to a passage in the Suda, a Byzantine encyclopedia, Ptolemy Hephaestion is theorized to possibly be Ptolemy Chennus, a contemporary of Trajan and Hadrian. If he really was Chennus, then this is a version dating possibly to Roman Greece.

Achilles and Deidamia had two children: Neoptolemus and Oneiros; Oneiros was killed by Orestes, who didn't recognise him, while fighting with him in Phokis for a place to pitch a tent.

Bibliotheca, 190.20. Translation by John Henry Freese.

Visual Representantion

The oldest on record is a Greek painting made by Polygnotus of Thasos and belonging to the 5th century BC. It didn’t survive, but is attested by Pausanias. Another Greek painting was painted by Athenion of Maroneia and belongs to the 4th or 3rd century BC. It didn’t survive, but is attested by Pliny the Elder. Later, the Romans retracted this myth. According to Michel E. Fuchs: “The subject of Achilles on Skyros, showing Odysseus coming to look for Achilles in the court of king Lycomedes where it is hidden, disguised as woman, to try to escape its fate, is represented on about fifteen mosaics dated from the 2nd to the 4thc. These mosaics are as well in the western part as in the oriental part of the Roman Empire (Fig. 1). A group includes pavements of Gallia, Germania Superior, Iberic peninsula, North Africa and Britain; the second group is situated between Greece and the antique city of Zeugma.” (Achilles on Skyros: Crossing over Architecture, Mosaic and Wall Painting, pag 36). Thus, we certainly cannot say that this myth hasn’t become popular.

About the theme, Katherine Dunbabin says:

An enormous amount has been written about Achilles on Skyros, and there have been many subtle readings of the varied composition of these scenes and the different messages that they may have conveyed in their specific contexts. The fundamental sense of the Skyros episode is clearly the self-revelation of the hero, rejecting the life of soft luxury for that of manly virtue and his warlike destiny; but it can be tempered, to a greater or lesser degree, by the erotic elements: Achilles as the lover of Deidameia, who tries in vain to hold him back, or as the general object of female desire, surrounded and clutched by a bevy of maidens. In the eastern versions the ambivalent, feminine side of the disguised Achilles is much more apparent; emphasis is placed on the transformation, the male body emerging from the female clothing. My concern in this paper is not with the specific way(s) in which viewers might have read any one of these scenes, nor with the message that each patron may have been wishing to convey, but with the flexibility of the scene and its potential to be adapted to so wide a range of meanings. Nevertheless, a central core persists through all the changes and variations, which allows the underlying story to be identified, and is essential if the image is to have any meaning at all.

Transformations of Achilles on Late Roman Mosaics (Wandering Myths by Katherine Dunbabin, pg 362-363.

When analyzing the common characteristics between the representations (especially the Roman ones), Winsor also discusses about the gender aspect:

The second extra-textual consideration is the status of the myth of Achilles on Skyros to which Horace alludes in conclusion. As I have suggested, the rhetoric of the passage contains certain self-undermining implications, but the same might be said of the story itself. How seriously should we take Horace's comparison? As an item in heroic tradition, the story derives from the secondary epics rather than the Homeric mainstream, and was particularly favored by the deviant Alexandrians. Literary testimony reports that it was the subject of two Greek pictorial representations: one by Polygnotus and another by Athenion of Maronea who worked around 330 B.C. Descriptions of these provide insight into the kind of derogatory responses that the subject could provoke. Pausanias (1.22.6) deplores the earlier painting, declaring that Homer had done well to represent Achilles as the captor of Skyros, rather than saying he had lived there among the maidens as Polygnotus showed him. Pliny (HN 35.134) describes Athenion's rendering of the topic with emphasis on action and dress: "Achillem virginis habitu occultatum Ulixe deprendente et in una tabula VI signa.” Apparently what struck him was the incongruous costume, virginis habitus, meant for concealment.

The subject appears also in several Pompeian panels, primarily from the fourth style period and therefore post-Horatian, but conceivably mediated through earlier representations known at Rome (figs. 1-5, p. 341). Allowing for variations in the placement of figures we see common characteristics among these compositions, which unexceptionally depict the moment when Odysseus and Diomedes succeed in provoking Achilles to betray his disguise through their trick of offering arms; in three examples, these arms include a shield on which Achilles himself is depicted as Chiron's pupil. Like Athenion's rendering of the subject, all these paintings show Achilles in female dress, the drape parting to reveal a substantially fleshed thigh; yet one might say that the painters, as if interesting themselves in the credibility of the erstwhile successful disguise, had actually underplayed the incongruity between the revealed male figure and woman's clothes. Many features of Achilles' person in these paintings are effeminate. The details differ from one example to another but variously include long coiffed hair, rounded cheeks and light skin. Feminine characteristics are most explicitly developed in the Casa dei Dioscuri painting (fig. 1) where the hero's pale and fleshy limbs, emerging from a swirling voluminous chiton, contrast with Odysseus' bronzed, muscular physique. Beyond this, the posture of Achilles, whom Diomedes has grasped from the rear, is actually that of woman as the object of sexual aggression, as can be seen in several analogous portrayals: Hercules and Auge (fig. 6) ; Apollo and Daphne (fig. 7); Mars and Venus (fig. 8);  or a Satyr surprising a Maenad (fig. 9 [figs. 6-9, p. 342]). Here, then, is an Achilles whom cross-dressing has so successfully integrated into feminine society that his gender identity has become visibly questionable. Beneath appearances lies nonetheless another incongruity made clear by Deidamia's presence both in this and in other painted versions of the subject. In spite of Achilles' costume and gesture we must understand his identity as fully male because his liaison with the princess has confirmed his sexuality. The result is a comic view of crossdressing. This idea, which is adumbrated in Horace's phrase cultus virilis, as much applicable to costume as to education, may raise another question about Sybaris. Is he hiding because his habituation to the soft amorous life has made him genuinely effeminate? If so his healthy Roman recovery may seem less assured and the condition to which he has been reduced more serious.

Several recent studies by classical scholars have explored ways in which ancient literary and artistic representation of crossdressing highlights flexibility in gender definition and the recognition of gender as a primarily social construction. Examining the phenomenon across a broader chronological spectrum from the Renaissance to the present day, Marjorie Garber places cross-dressing within the Lacanian literary-cultural realm of the symbolic and notes its occurrence as calling attention to category crisis: cultural, social, and aesthetic dissonances. Insofar as the social construction of gender involves a complex of conditions programming the routines by which personal identity is validated, a foregrounding of gender indeterminacy may signal the disorientation of these routines by changed social circumstances. Although the general practice of cross-dressing is understood as a source of gratification to those who engage in it, all the same when cross-dressing also involves misidentification of gender, it discomforts persons who have a stake in keeping their gender identity clear. Thus Achilles' spontaneous and decisive response to Odysseus' trick makes his disguise appear comically awkward.

Horace Carmen 1.8: Achilles, the Campus Martius, and the Articulation of Gender Roles in Augustan Rome by Eleanor Winsor Leach, pg 339-340.

The figures she’s referring to are:

Achilles on Skyros (pag 341)

Women being assaulted (pag 342)

Synthesis

Fun fact: the reason Libanius' Oration 64 is only at the beginning of post 1 and is not among the sources and has no interpretation presented is that I simply couldn't find an accessible translation. All I got were academics arguing about the text and I don't know if this section at the beginning is the complete part that refers to Achilles in Skyros, so I didn't comment on it. I know there is a widely used translation by Margaret Molly and it's available on the Loeb website. The problem is: without having an institution that gives me access to Loeb, the first year of registration is $175 DOLLARS. My friends, my country's currency costs about 5 times less than the dollar. Can you imagine me paying for this subscription? You can't, right? Alright! So no Libanius here, but I still wanted to mention that this text exists, so I put it as a quote at the beginning of the post. I also know about Ioannis Malalas, who is theorized to be one of the sources for Ioannis Tzetzes, but I didn't really know what to do with him, so I didn't include him. Anyway, let's get to the synthesis.

VERSIONS: The following divisions are used in academia:

Option 1 (seems to be the most used)

There is a version where Achilles sacks Skyros (The Iliad)

There is a version where Achilles ends up on Skyros because of a storm (The Cypria and The Little Iliad)

There is a version that Achilles disguises himself as a girl on Skyros (most sources dealing with this topic)

Option 2

There is a version where Achilles ends up on Skyros because of a storm and plunders the island (The Cypria and The Little Iliad + The Iliad)

There is a version that Achilles disguises himself as a girl on Skyros (most sources dealing with this topic)

Option 3

There is a version in which Achilles disguises himself as a girl in Skyros at one point and, later (already in the army), accidentally ends up in Skyros because of a storm and sacks the island.

Interestingly, I didn't see Heroica considered in these divisions proposed by academics. I imagine, by purposely seeking to differentiate as much as possible from the most traditional version of the myth (especially Homer), it ends up presenting a completely new version that no previous author had used and is, therefore, a completely separate version. Thus, if we consider Heroic, it would be necessary to add one more version for each option, totaling: option 1 has 4 versions of the myth, option 2 has 3 versions of the myths and option 3 has 2 versions of the myth. Tzetzes' version is also not accounted for and, in fact, isn't present in any other source, but I think it may fit with Heroica's version due to the idea that “they were married and had a son, and Achilles went to the Trojan War of his own free will and the disguise never happened” even if unintentionally.

RELATIONSHIP: Although it's a constant Achilles had something sexual with Deidamia as the character of Neoptolemus exists, the nature of the relationship seems to change.

According to Homer, it isn't possible to have any information other than to assume that there was no marriage since Achilles is thinking about getting married. Any other idea is mere speculation.

According to the summary of Stasinus of Cyprus's work, it is possible to know that they got married. However, it isn't possible to know the development of this and theories of how the development happened are just theories.

According to the summary of the Lesches of Mytilene's work, it's possible to know that he uses the same version of Stasinus in which Achilles disembarks on Skyros because of a storm. However, nothing else is possible to know and anything else is just theory.

According to Euripides, it is not possible to know much because the play is fragmentary. However, there is a possibility that the rape element is present, not because it is stated in the surviving fragments but because there are textual elements similar to scenes in which a character becomes pregnant after a rape. Still, the fragmentary state allows us only speculation.

According to Lycophron, Deidamia is the adoptive mother of Neoptolemus, who is the son of Iphigenia, and Achilles actually disguised himself as a girl. However, there is no mention of a sexual/romantic relationship between Deidamia and Achilles. The rest is theory.

According to Bion of Smyrna, their relationship was consensual, flirtatious in nature, and possibly with a homoerotic subtext. The rest is theory.

According to Horace, Achilles disguised himself as a girl and there are no further details. The rest is theory.

According to Hyginus, it isn't possible to have any information other than that they were living under the same roof, had sexual intercourse and Deidamia became pregnant. The rest is theory.

According to Ovid, it's possible to know that a sexual thing occurred while Achilles was disguised as a girl, although it's ambiguous in terms of consent. The rest is theory.

According to Statius, the relationship began as a romance and was apparently reciprocal (in terms of feelings, not actions. Deidamia didn't want to date), but developed into a rape (it isn't ambiguous and isn't between the lines as may perhaps be the case with, it's actually abuse). The rest is theory.

According to Pseudo-Apollodorus, they lived together for several years once Achilles was taken to Skyros at the age of 9. When Achilles was around 14 or 15, Deidamia and he became involved and she became pregnant. There is no mention of marriage. The rest is theory.

According to Philostratus (the Athenian or the Elder), Deidamia and Achilles were married in an unusual version in which Achilles goes to Skyros to punish Lycomedes. The rest is theory.

According to Philostratus the Younger, Deidamia and Achilles were secretly involved. There is no mention of marriage. The rest is theory.

According to Tryphiodorus, Achilles and Deidamia had a son. The rest is theory.

According to Quintus Smyrnaeus, there was apparently a marriage before Achilles went with Odysseus and Diomedes to Troy and years later Deidamia is still mourning him. The rest is theory.

According to Photius, it isn't possible to have any information other than that they were living under the same roof and were sexually involved. Unlike the other versions, he offers a version where there are two children instead of one. The rest is theory.

According to Ioannis Tzetzes, there were versions of the myth in which Achilles disguised himself as a girl, but he believes the true version is that he was already married to Deidamia and had a son with her until he was called into the Trojan War and left. The rest is theory.

THEME: This myth was used for possible themes: military conquest (e.g. The Iliad), eroticization/romance (e.g. Epithalamium of Achilles and Deidameia), discussion of gender roles (e.g. The Skyrians), coming of age (possible interpretation in most versions in which Achilles is hidden in Skyros. Although the interpretation focuses on male coming of age through reaffirming masculinity, it's also possible to comment on female coming of age represented through Deidamia becoming a mother), subversion of the character Achilles (e.g. Alexandra ), reaffirmation of masculinity (e.g. Achilleid), ironization of social customs (e.g. Art of Love) and explanation of the existence of a character (the character is Neoptolemus. The only source in which this doesn't happen is Alexandra).

RAPE: Rape isn't actually present in most versions, but it's undeniably present in Achilleid and possibly in Art of Love (depends on academic interpretation) as a way of reaffirming masculinity. In versions like The Iliad, The Cypria, and The Little Iliad, any rape is speculation. In the case of The Skyrians, it's a possibility presented in academia, but there is no way to confirm it with certainty due to the fragmentary state of the work (however, if we consider that there is, it serves the same purpose as Achilleid). For the rest, there is no evidence of lack of consent. In Epithalamium, in particular, consent is an important narrative resource as a way of extolling romantic courtship and not typical masculine strength.

ACHILLES' FEELING ABOUT GENDER ROLES: In at least 2 versions, Achilles is initially comfortable with the idea of ​​playing female roles. Imagines and Epithalamium, both Greek. However, Imagines paints a scenario in which it appears that Achilles is beginning to be upset, not by the idea of ​​femininity but by the idea of ​​the repression of masculinity. In Epithalamium, the character continues in femininity and at no point appears uncomfortable with it. In Alexandra, Achilles is effeminate, but it isn't possible to know how he felt about this since the point of view is Cassandra's. Achilleid and Art of Love both represent a clear discomfort with the idea of the suppression of masculinity, although in Achilleid the feeling is Achilles's while in Art of Love the feeling is primarily the narrator's. In the rest of the versions, it isn't possible to know either because the author did not address this subject (for example, Quintus) or because the work is too fragmentary to know (for example, Euripides).

THETIS' ROLE: Considering the plot itself without further interpretation, Thetis is just an immortal mother worried about the imminent death of her mortal son. However, in terms of considering narrative resources, it's interesting Thetis is only visibly absent as a justification for Achilles' stay on Skyros in versions in which Achilles' character needs to have a greater association with femininity. That is, in Alexandra and Epithalamium. In the first case the absence of Thetis reinforces the idea that Achilles was so afraid of Hector he preferred to pretend to be a girl and in the second case the absence of Thetis reinforces the idea that Achilles is comfortable with the femininity he performs. In the other narratives, generally focused on Achilles somehow regaining his masculinity (in particular, when he is deceived by Odysseus and later decides to leave for Troy), Thetis is always used as a justification for why Achilles is there, as a kind of in a way of saying “hey, this hero is only doing this for his mother. He wouldn't do it willingly” in order to protect the character's traditional heroic image. This element is even more evident in the Achilleid narrative, in which other characters are shown to be opposed to Thetis' idea (e.g. Chiron, who is said to not have allowed her to take Achilles if he knew, and Calchas, by the way he describes as Thetis hides Achilles). If we consider the interpretation that the disguise myth concerns adulthood, Thetis can also be interpreted as the archetype of the mother who, afraid of the dangers of adult life, doesn't allow her son to grow up and tries to keep him in the safety of childhood. This second case is mirrored by Deidamia in Posthomerica.

GREEK DEIDAMIA: Combining ALL sources of Greek mythology (Ode I.VIII, Achilleid and Art of Love not included as they're Roman mythology), the information we have about Deidamia is:

She's the daughter of Lycomedes, king of the island of Skyros (a constant);

She's the oldest of the girls (Imagines);

If Achilles' courting manner seeks sincere praise, she is good at weaving (Epithalamium);

She and Achilles become involved sexually and in secret (portrayed consensually in Greek mythology);

In at least one source (Epithalamium) this interest appears to arise while she still thinks Achilles is a girl;

She usually becomes pregnant with one child, Neoptolemus (a constant. The exceptions are Alexandra, where she is Neoptolemus' adoptive mother, and Photius' Bibliotheca, where she has Neoptolemus and Oneiros);

She and Lycomedes raised Neoptolemus (constant);

When Odysseus came to get Neoptolemus, she didn't want to let him go for fear that he would suffer the same fate as his father (Posthomerica);

She's given in marriage to Helenus, the ex Trojan prince (Library).

ODYSSEUS/ULYSSES AND DIOMEDES: Regarding the presence of Odysseus and Diomedes, we have:

According to Homer, there was no disguise.

According to the summary of Stasinus of Cyprus's work, there was no disguise.

According to the summary of Lesches of Mytilene's work, there was no disguise.

According to Euripides, Odysseus is certainly present and appears to have an important role, since two lines in the fragments are Odysseus' reprisals directed at Achilles because of his unmanly and unhonorable behavior. Because of the fragmentary state of the piece, there is no way of knowing who he is accompanied by.

According to Lycophron, it isn't possible to know how Achilles was discovered.

According to Bion of Smyrna, it isn't possible to know about how Achilles was discovered.

According to Horace, the discovery isn't explored.

According to Hyginus, Odysseus is responsible for the discovery and there is no mention of Diomedes.

According to Ovid, Ulysses recruited Achilles.

According to Statius, Diomedes and Ulysses recruited Achilles.

According to Pseudo-Apollodorus, Odysseus discovered Achilles and there is no mention of Diomedes.

According to Philostratus (the Athenian or the Elder), there was no disguise.

According to Philostratus the Younger, Odysseus is responsible for discovering Achilles, but he was accompanied by Diomedes.

According to Tryphiodorus, it isn't possible to know the version of the myth.

According to Quintus Smyrnaeus, both Odysseus and Diomedes recruited Achilles.

According to Photius, the discovery isn't explored.

According to Ioannis Tzetzes, there was no disguise.

ART: There are at least two works of art attested from Classical Greece (one attested by Pausanias, another attested by Pliny the Elder), the rest are late works, mainly moisacos and wall paintings. In these works, it's well exemplified how the ancients (mainly Romans) saw the social construction of gender, since the representation of Achilles played with this idea, reaching the point that in at least one of them the position of Diomedes and Achilles resembled the position when a woman was harassed (Achilles being the woman here). The difference between how Achilles was painted in Skyros and how he was painted in Troy is evident, especially in his skin (in one pale, in another tanned) and in his hair (the curl was more pronounced in the female disguise). Generally the core consisted of Achilles, Deidamia, and Ulysses as characters, Achilles at least exposing his thigh, and Ulysses' trick weapons present. Deidamia was portrayed in certain instances as trying to stop Achilles, and could also serve as a reminder of their relationship (which, in turn, was a reminder that Achilles was, in fact, a man). In some cases, Achilles was surrounded by Lycomedes' daughters, as if he was attractive to them.

Sources

Myth texts:

The Iliad. Translated by Fagles, Robert. Penguin Books, 1991.

Hesiod, Homeric Hymns, Epic Cycle, Homerica. Translated by Evelyn-White, H G. Loeb Classical Library Volume 57. London: William Heinemann, 1914.

Flavius Philostratus: On Heroes. Translated by Ellen Aitken, Jennifer K. Berenson Berenson, Berenson. 2003.

Elder Philostratus, Younger Philostratus, Callistratus. Translated by Fairbanks, Arthur. Loeb Classical Library Volume 256. London: William Heinemann, 1931.

The Library of Photius, Volume 1.Translated by Freese, John. Society for promoting Christian knowledge, 1920.

Oppian, Colluthus and Tryphiodorus. Translated by Mair, A. W. Loeb Classical Library Volume 219. London: William Heinemann Ltd, 1928.

Quintus Smyrnaeus. The Fall of Troy. Translated by Way. A. S. Loeb Classical Library Volume 19. London: William Heinemann, 1913.

Ovid. Metamorphoses. Translated by More, Brookes. Boston, Cornhill Publishing Co. 1922.

P. Ovidius Naso. Ovid's Art of Love (in three Books), the Remedy of Love, the Art of Beauty, the Court of Love, the History of Love, and Amours. Anne Mahoney. edited for Perseus. New York. Calvin Blanchard. 1855.

The Natural History. Pliny the Elder. John Bostock, M.D., F.R.S. H.T. Riley, Esq., B.A. London. Taylor and Francis, Red Lion Court, Fleet Street. 1855.

Apollodorus. The Library. Translated by Sir James George Frazer. Loeb Classical Library Volumes 121 & 122. Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press; London, William Heinemann Ltd. 1921.

Pausanias. Pausanias Description of Greece with an English Translation by W.H.S. Jones, Litt.D., and H.A. Ormerod, M.A., in 4 Volumes. Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press; London, William Heinemann Ltd. 1918.

Statius, Thebaid, Achilleid. Translated by Mozley, J H. Loeb Classical Library Volumes . Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press; London, William Heinemann Ltd. 1928.

Libanius, Libanius and The Dancers. Trans. M.E. Molloy. 1996. Hildesheim, Zurich, New York.

Academic texts: 

Tsagalis, Christos. Cypria fr. 19 (Bernabé, West): further considerations. 2012. Tsagalis published it for free here.

Fantuzzi, Marco. Achilles in Love: Intertextual Studies. Oxford, 2012. Fantuzzi published the book for free here.

Fantuzzi, Marco. Brill’s Companion to Greek and Latin Epyllion and Its Reception.  Brill, 2012. Fantuzzi published the chapter he wrote for free here.

Funke, Melissa. Euripides and Gender: The Difference the Fragments Make. University of Washington, 2013. Melissa published it for free here. 

Warwick, Celsiana. Chthonic Disruption in Lycophron’s Alexandra. The Classical Quarterly . 2022 Warwick published it for free here. 

Leach, Eleanor Winsor. “Horace Carmen 1.8: Achilles, the Campus Martius, and the Articulation of Gender Roles in Augustan Rome.” Classical Philology 89, no. 4 (1994): 334–43. Eleanor published it for free here.

Diack, Jacqueline. Men, Marriage and Mistresses: Ovid’s use of Myth in the Ars Amatoria I-III. University of Johannesburg, 2018.

Fuchs, Michel. The proceedings of IV. International Mosaic Corpus of Turkiye. Uludag Universitesi Mozaik Arastirmalari Merkezi, 2008. Fuchs published  his part of the book for free here.

Davis, Peter. Allusion to Ovid and Others in Statius' Achilleid. Ramus, 2006. Davis published it for free here.

Dunbabin, Katherine. Transformations of Achilles on Late Roman Mosaics (Wandering Myths). 2018. Dunbabin published it for free here.

[fiordespinadispagna]

The source is The Aeneid. I guess?

And Neptolemus' behaviour is cruel even for the standards of a soldier fighting in a war. Which makes sense, because The Aeneid is all about the Trojans and the way they will go on to found Rome. Of course Virgil has no interest to make the Greeks look good.

But again, Neptolemus' behaviour specifically is just despicable.

"Then Priam, though on all sides death was nigh,

quit not the strife, nor from loud wrath refrained:

“Thy crime and impious outrage, may the gods

(if Heaven to mortals render debt and due)

justly reward and worthy honors pay!

My own son's murder thou hast made me see,

blood and pollution impiously throwing

upon a father's head. Not such was he,

not such, Achilles, thy pretended sire,

when Priam was his foe. With flush of shame

he nobly listened to a suppliant's plea

in honor made. He rendered to the tomb

my Hector's body pale, and me did send

back to my throne a king.” With this proud word

the aged warrior hurled with nerveless arm

his ineffectual spear, which hoarsely rang

rebounding on the brazen shield, and hung

piercing the midmost boss,- but all in vain.

Then Pyrrhus: “Take these tidings, and convey

message to my father, Peleus' son!

tell him my naughty deeds! Be sure and say

how Neoptolemus hath shamed his sires.

Now die!” With this, he trailed before the shrines

the trembling King, whose feet slipped in the stream

of his son's blood. Then Pyrrhus' left hand clutched

the tresses old and gray; a glittering sword

his right hand lifted high, and buried it

far as the hilt in that defenceless heart.

So Priam's story ceased. Such final doom

fell on him, while his dying eyes surveyed

Troy burning, and her altars overthrown,

though once of many an orient land and tribe

the boasted lord. In huge dismemberment

his severed trunk lies tombless on the shore,

the head from shoulder torn, the corpse unknown."

-The Aeneid, book 2

I love your blog and your hatred for TSOA. Besides the Thetis' dad name and the heroes-constellation thing (and the pressed olives spoof), are there other things she's gotten wrong? I'm new to mythology and want to be critical of what I read, but everywhere I visit it's just praises of her work

patroclus

just. his entire thing

patroclus is a soldier just like achilles. being older than achilles he had experience achilles did not and often counselled him in battle. he handled achilles divine horses and he participated in the war with troy. there is a reason achilles agrees to let him put on his armour and lead the myrmidons in his place: patroclus was good at war. he was a mortal man who managed to kill sarpedon son of zeus. he wasn't weak. he wasn't pathetic. he wasn't a healer. frankly i have no idea where madeline even got that from to include in her book. i tried looking up if there was any mythological info on patroclus as a healer and all i got was that, again, patroclus was a soldier. maybe it's because he was friendly with the camp physician??

also achilles. he loved both deidameia and briseis, or he at least he was attracted to them. madeline bending over backwards to make him gay gave us a blatant disrespect of deidameia which is the only part of the book that made me cry (out of frustration and anger). and turned them sleeping together into a rape scene???? orchestrated by thetis who is Also disrespected because all the women are in this fucking book.

madeline turned thetis into a homophobic mum who doesn't approve of her son's boyfriend, which... i don't think i have to say isn't what happens in the mythology. achilles liked women. he had sex with them. he liked having sex with them. this does not negate he had a romantic and possibly sexual relationship with patroclus.

thetis liked patroclus in the iliad. she offered to look after his corpse and keep it from decaying while achilles returned to battle. also: achilles was the one who asked her to make the achaeans lose because he was disrespected, not the other way around. i also feel the need to say the remaining conflict of shade!patroclus is so funny to me because there is an entire book in the iliad dedicated to his funeral games. the army liked him and gave him a proper burial lol

in regards to neoptolemus (achilles' son) from what i can see him being a heartless brutal killer seems to be a roman invention but this is only from a quick wikipedia read, i could be wrong. though i do remember him being portrayed as the compassionate one when i read philoctetes.

[feminism7]

Maybe just my opinion, but Neptolemus (son of Achilles and Deidamia) is a little piece of shit🙂

[goodqueenkaro]

First foggy idea for Eddard Stark / Sean Bean and Cersei Lannister / Lena Headey fic

I had to do at least moodboard just to take it off of my mind - 3rd idea for the future on my list. I swore that I start a new fic after I’ll finish at least one ;)

Role verse - Honourable!Cersei & Political!Ned loosely based on characters of Queen Gorgo, king Leonidas wife from “300″ and Andromacha from “Troy” and Odysseus from “Troy”.

ActorsAU Jaime persuading Ned to play AT LEAST ONE GUY WHO DOESN”T DIE (”Fuck off, that is NOT TRUE!”) and mercilessly laughing at Cers’ crush on Ned

Writer/ArcheologistAU Beautiful, popular romance writer is challenged to or offended and just wants to write “something more serious” and ends up with the most insufferable archeologist ever: my historical-freak soul sings XD

AncientWesterosAU - this is all crazy and twisted, but here’s the idea:

I thought about some version of Troian War and Ned saving Cersei against all odds. Remember poor Andromacha, Hector’s wife? Their little child Astynaaks was killed (GRRM wasn’t so original with Elia, wasn’t he, huh?) and Andromacha became a slave and lover of Neptolemus, Achilles’ son, quite a bad guy in the end. I would like to use also one of the concepts of - originally redhead and left-handed - Odysseus story and I want him saving Andromacha. I was thinking also of “making her” Helen with Baratheon brothers as versions of Agammemnon and Menelaos. See this: Political!Robert killing his poor niece Shireen-Ifigenia for the sake of war and Stannis hidden hatred? What would Odysseus do, when asked for help in sacrificing an innocent girl? I’m affraid of writing it, because it could be too ridiculous, but I could still use this ideas in Writer/ArcheologistAU.

I’d love to know, what would you like to see?

Photos of actors from “Troy”and “300″; others are Greek vases with images of Hector and Andromacha with their child and a Greek soldier; this golden crown or hairnet is an artifact from ancient city discovered by H. Schliemann. This city could be Homer’s Troy, but myths and real events are mixed, as it happens often.

[babyrdie]

ACHILLES ON SKYROS [PART 2]

Part 1 here. Part 3 here.

This text is a continuation of the previous one, therefore the warnings given in the previous one apply here. Reading the post before this one is recommended if you're interested in reading this one.

Metamorphoses and The Art of Love, by Ovid (1st century)

Both are sources of Roman mythology. Metamorphoses narrates the history of the world as a whole, going through various events up to the period contemporary with Ovid. Among the stories, there is an approach of the myths of the Trojan War. More specifically, in book 13 Ulysses and Big Ajax are competing for Achilles' weapons and giving their arguments. Ironically, both use Achilles as a way to prove their worth, Big Ajax by emphasizing the kinship between him and Achilles and Ulysses when saying that he was the one who brought Achilles and that, as Achilles was a key player in the Trojan War, Ulysses was also essential. In this way, we have a typical description of Achilles hiding among the girls at Thetis' desire and Ulysses tricking him into revealing himself.

"Achilles' Nereid mother, who foresaw his death, concealed her son by change of dress. By that disguise Ajax, among the rest, was well deceived. I showed with women's wares arms that might win the spirit of a man. The hero still wore clothing of a girl, when, as he held a shield and spear, I said `Son of a goddess! Pergama but waits to fall by you, why do you hesitate to assure the overthrow of mighty Troy?’ With these bold words, I laid my hand on him—and to: brave actions I sent forth the brave: his deeds of Bravery are therefore mine it was my power that conquered Telephus, as he fought with his lance; it was through me that, vanquished and suppliant? he at last was healed. I caused the fall of Thebes; believe me, I took Lesbos, Tenedos, Chryse and Cilla—the cities of Apollo; and I took Scyros; think too, of the Lyrnesian wall as shaken by my hand, destroyed, and thrown down level with the ground. Let this suffice: I found the man who caused fierce Hector's death, through me the famous Hector now, lies low! And for those arms which made Achilles known I now demand these arms. To him alive I gave them—at his death they should be mine.

Metamorphoses, 13.162-180. Translation by Brookes More.

We have no information about Deidamia in this part, although Neoptolemus exists. But there is more about Deidamia in another poem by Ovid, and here we enter a controversial scenario. The Art of Love (or Ars Amatoria) are instructive poems that sought to give tips about relationships, the first two books being aimed at male audiences and the third at female audiences. What we will analyze is in Book 1, so it’s aimed at the male audience. Unlike the other texts presented, here rape is part of the plot (although there is no explicit/graphic description of the moment), so be aware.

[...] To their dull mates, the noble ravisher. What Deidamia did in days of yore, The tale is old but worth the telling o'er. When Venus had the golden apple gain'd, And the just judge fair Helen had obtained; When she with triumph was at Troy receiv'd, The Trojans joyful, while the Grecians griev'd: They vow'd revenge of violated laws, And Greece was arming in the cuckold's cause; Achilles, by his mother warn'd from war, Disguis'd his sex, and lurk'd among the fair. What means Aeacides to spin and sew? With spear and sword in field thy valour show! And leaving this, the noble Pallas know. Why dost thou in that hand the distaff wield, Which is more worthy to sustain the shield? Or with that other draw the woolly twine, The same the fates for lector's thread assign? Banish thy falchion in thy powerful hand, Which can alone the pond'rous lance command. In the same room by chance the royal maid Was lodg'd, and, by his seeming sex, betrayed, Close to her side the youthful hero laid. I know not how his courtship he began; But, to her cost, she found it was a man. 'Tis thought she struggled, but withal 'tis thought Her wish was to be conquer'd, when she fought. For when disclos'd, and hast'ning to the field, He laid his distaff down and took the shield, With tears her humble suit she did prefer, And thought to stay the grateful ravisher. She sighs, she sobs, she begs him not to part; And now 'tis nature what before was art. She strives by force her lover to detain, And wishes to be ravish'd once again. This is the sex; they will not first begin, But when compelled, are pleas'd to suffer sin. Is there, who thinks that woman first should woo? Lay by thy self-conceit, thou foolish beau. Begin, and save their modesty the shame; 'Tis well for thee, if they receive thy flame. 'Tis decent for a man to speak his mind; They but expect th' occasion to be kind. Ask, that thou may'st enjoy; she waits for this: And on thy first advance depends thy bliss. E'en Jove himself was forc'd to sue for love; None of the nymphs did first solicit Jove. But if you find your pray'rs increase her pride, Strike sail awhile, and wait another tide. They fly when we pursue; but make delay. And when they see you shaken, they will stay. Sometimes it profits to conceal your end; Name not yourself her lover, but her friend. How many skittish girls have thus been caught? He prov'd a lover, who a friend was thought. Sailors by sun and wind are swarthy made; A tann'd complexion best becomes their trade. 'Tis a disgrace to ploughmen to be fair; Bluff cheeks they have, and weather-beaten hair. Th' ambitious youth who seeks an olive crown, Is sun-burnt with his daily toil, and brown; But if the lover hopes to be in grace, Wall be his looks, and meagre be his face. That colour from the fair compassion draws; She thinks you sick, and thinks herself the cause. [...]

The Art of Love, 1. Translation by Anne Mahoney.

You've certainly noticed that there's something different about Ovid's narrative compared to previous ones. In the case of The Iliad, it isn’t possible to know the nature of Achilles' relationship with his son's mother (she has no identity) and everything that is said is mere speculation. In the case of what we know about The Cypria, there is no rape narrative in the summary, the relationship being simply described as Achilles having arrived on Skyros and married Deidamia. In the case of The Little Iliad, no information is available about the nature of the relationship, although Achilles is also driven to Skyros by a storm and Neoptolemus is from Skyros. In the case of The Skyrians, the extremely fragmentary state of the text doesn’t allow conclusions to be drawn about the nature of the relationship with certainty. In Alexandra's case, Achilles and Deidamia's relationship doesn’t appear to exist and Achilles' confirmed romantic and/or sexual interests  (Iphigenia, Helen, Medea) don’t include any rape narrative (Iphigenia was a reciprocal and consensual love, Helen didn’t result in any relationship and Medea we only know that she’s his wife in the afterlife). In the case of Epithalamium of Achilles and Deidameia, the rape cannot happen because narratively it makes no sense with the proposal. In Horace's case, there isn’t even a clear approach to Achilles' relationship with Deidamia. In Hyginus' case, the relationship takes place, but there is no mention of rape. Here, in the case of Art of Love, rape is made evident. If in other texts rape didn’t happen or at most it could be discussed as a mere possibility, here for the first time it seems to be an undeniable element.

The controversy arises because of the part in which Ovid uses the myth of Deidamia and Achilles as an exemplification of a tip he’s giving to men, in particular regarding the idea that the man should take the first step even if the woman initially seems not to be willing (what we nowadays call rape, obviously) and he considers this to be part of the art of seduction and not necessarily something inappropriate in an expected relationship. He even has Deidamia desperately beg Achilles to stay with her, despite Ovid saying he raped her. The problem is: because of Ovid's social context, there is uncertainty in academia as to whether he was referring to what we understand today as rape. Jacqueline Diack, for example, proposes the possibility the rape isn’t as literal as it may seem to us, modern readers. In her argument, she uses the social context of Ovid plus the construction of the text as a whole.

She first analyzes the other tips offered by Ovid and concluded that none of them are presented in a violent way towards women. Even the more questionable ones, related to deception (basically, he says a man shouldn’t make a woman cry. Instead, the man should be the one who cries, as this will win the sympathy of the woman he desires) seem to be justified with the social context that the women were deceitful. Not necessarily because they were malicious, but because they were expected to lie about their interests in order to preserve modesty. Ovid also appears to disagree with Theseus' attitude towards Ariadne, possibly indicating that he didn’t view a man maliciously deceiving a woman as acceptable. In the original text, when entering the part that seems most doubtful in terms of consent, the language used still sounds ambiguous. Thus, Diack interprets that Ovid's intention wasn’t to portray a literal rape, but to tell the reader (a man seeking to conquer a woman) that to be a good lover he must learn to read women, including when they’re interested without being able to demonstrate that they’re interested.

[For the text below, keep it in mind: puella = young girl. There are other terms in Latin, but this one is essential that you understand because of how often it’s used]

The advice proceeds with oscula qui sumpsit, si non et cetera sumet, | haec quoque, quae data sunt, perdere dignus erit [he who has taken kisses, but does not also take the rest, will deserve to lose all things that have been given] (AA 1: 669-670). Ovid clearly addresses the willingness, or lack thereof, of the puella. According to Kennedy (2012: 193) it implies that she is willing to engage in aggression. Considering Ovid's advice in the previous couplet to be gentle when stealing kisses, it seems unlikely that Ovid depicts such a woman. Murgatroyd (1982: 134) considers the couplet to be outrageous for various reasons. He says, firstly, that it implies that kisses naturally lead to sexual intercourse. Secondly, he states that the resistance to being kissed is token as the kisses move from sumpsit (AA I: 669) to data sunt (AA 1: 670). Lastly, he considers the lines to imply that every reader's goal is sexual intercourse. The first and final critique seem to be examples of a modern moral being applied, rather than considering the contemporary context or the intratextual structure of the original text. Ovid introduces his list of locations to find a girl with the statement that, if his amator yearns for a long-term affair, he will not have one until he's found the right places to look for a girl (AA 1: 49-50). Ovid later suggests that the amator can find both a short- and long-term partner at the theatre (AA I: 91-93). The mythical long-term partner at the theatre (digressions discussed so far have all made an argument for persuasion rather than violence, as well as an increased female involvement in the erotic liaison.

Ovid also does not explicitly state that what would be given is sexual intercourse, even if it may appear to be implied. Ovid has given his reader options for the kind of relationship he can pursue with this skill set, ranging from something playful to something quite serious (AA I: 91-93). Kisses given willingly, as implied with data sunt (AA I: 670), indicate willingness of the female partner. Ovid evokes social convention, which requires that women feign resistance even when they are interested. Therefore, the amator is being instructed to decipher the conditioned social norm from the true desires of his puella, and if he can do so effectively and has the courage to pursue his desire, then he can have the puella. However, should he misread the sign of interest and give up, then he did not even deserve the kisses he did receive. He is not the ideal amator of the Ars because he lacks the sophistication of such a lover.

Ovid assigns giving up to rusticitas [lack of refinement] (AA I: 672) rather than modesty, recalling the idea of social convention. The use of rusticitas ties in with the idea of ars. The reader is already aware that rustic equates to lack of sophistication from the mythical digression of the rape of the Sabine women. The implication is that ars is required for success. Ei mihi [Oh my!] (AA II: 672) is an interjection frequent in early comedy, and occasionally also found in epic and tragedy (Hollis 1977: 137). It was intended as an exclamation of pain (Kennedy 2012: 194). The expression is also one Ovid uses often. With it he inserts an element of comedy into the subject matter of the lines. In this case it is a play on the idea that pudor [modesty] (AA II: 672) is a poor excuse for a young man lacking the skill to read the signs that indicated his puella was willing. Pudor, however, also means shame, which can as easily be implied here. Ovid appears to imply that the amator should be ashamed of his lack of skill, which he falsely asserts is modesty. Ovid often contrasts As such, a comparison can be made between these lines and the prologue of the poem. Ovid uses the word votum both here (AA I: 671) and in the prologue (AA 1: 90) to indicate desire, but then contrasts the lover's rusticitas (AA 1: 672) with the cultissima (AA I: 97) modern woman sophistication. Ovid concludes this instruction with the statement: vim licet appelles: grata ata est vis ista puellis:  quod iuvat, invitae saepe dedisse volunt [Although you call it force: that force is pleasing to girls: Which gratifies, to have given unwillingly often what they desire] (AA 1: 673-674)

The primary meaning of licet is "it is lawful, permitted" (Lewis & Short 1879 s.v. licet I). Followed by an implied ut with the subjunctive apelles: the meaning would be "it is permitted that you/you may call it force". However, using the transferred meaning of licet as a conjunction, meaning "although" (Lewis & Short 1879 s.v. II); the translation now becomes "although you call it force." Ovid's choice of licet is perhaps even more important than the word vis. Ovid uses it ambiguously here, as a conjunction is not required, but makes more sense than the primary meaning within the context. However, if Ovid says it is permitted that you call it force the immediate implication is that Ovid does not consider it force, which becomes clear from the context. The common use of vis in elegy is to depict the (usually) masculine exercise of strength for sexual gratification, which is in some cases clearly rape (Kennedy 2012: 193). On the other hand, velle is the verb used to indicate sexual willingness (Kennedy 2012: 193). Ovid uses both vis and velle in the couplet above, clearly indicating a mixed message, both to the audience, and from the puella. Vis (AA I: 673) implies the enforcement of the amator's will, just as volunt (AA I: 674) speaks to the wishes of the puella. Ovid thus continues to address the idea of willingness, contrasting it with social convention. Kennedy (2012: 193) investigates the concept and language of willingness, discussing actual aggression versus its appearance in elegiac poetry. He questions how the audience is to know the difference. For example, he asks when one can determine whether a woman's submission to her lover is truly unwilling. He (2012: 195) explains that vis can be both symbolic and physical in elegy, just as vis and gratus both bear sexual connotations. Ovid clearly uses syntax to indicate willingness and desire. Murgatroyd (1982: 136), however, argues that the pointed repetition of vis heightens the generalisation of puellis (AA I: 673), and in turn the outrageousness of the statement that force pleases girls. However, it is exactly such an outrageous generalisation which brings to the fore its own absurdity. It thus accentuates just how ludicrous the social custom of pretending to be unwilling is, which is in turn depicted in the couplet that follows (AA I: 677-678). Ovid makes use of the perfect infinitive dedisse (AA 1: 674), thus adding a temporal element to his explanation of the female's level of desire.

This is typically Ovidian, occurring also in the Amores (Hollis 1977: 137). The line indicates that, although unwilling to give something at the time, in hindsight the puella is pleased to have given it. However, this is a play on whether or not she was, in fact, objecting or pretending. What she is unwilling to give is encompassed in the phrase quod iuvat [what is pleasing] (AA 1: 674). The phrase is ambiguous as one cannot know whether what is given is pleasing to the male lover, his female conquest or to both of them (Kennedy 2012: 194). This, in turn, brings into question the willingness of the puella, and the true extent to which force actually occurred. In essence, the lines state the elegiac viewpoint, but the stylistic features, combined with the jest of the previous line and the following couplet, undermine any seriousness in the instructions. Instead, it seems Ovid is implying rather that, when the woman in question is the willing modern puella, all that is required is for the sophisticated male lover to be able to distinguish desire from protest. Through this ambiguity and the humour of the previous couplet Ovid simultaneously criticises the elegiac promotion of force, rather than the alternative.

Marriage and Mistresses: Ovid’s use of Myth in the Ars Amatoria I-III by Jacqueline Diack, pag 129-132.

Diack continues to argue the ambiguity of the text and how, placed in the proper social context, it perhaps doesn’t concern rape. She makes a comparison with the way Ovid writes this supposed rape with the way he describes other rape (Sabine women) and in the second case he has already shown to portray them negatively. This therefore implies the idea Ovid recognizes the negative consequences that rape can bring, which at the very least makes the portrait he composed of Deidamia in this text strange in comparison to the portrait he painted of other rape victims. Another similar case of ambiguity in Ovidian literature is his portrayal of the myth of Phoebe and Hilaira kidnapped by the Dioscuri, in which Ovid describes them as happy with the situation, thus indicating that the idea was possibly not about rape (in the sense of absence of sexual consent) but in the sense of a relationship that doesn’t follow the laws (as they were taken without the family's permission, regardless of whether the women themselves consented). Therefore, when talking about rape in Ovidian literature it’s necessary to consider the ambiguity. She argues that Ovid was possibly ridiculing the social norm that women should feign disinterest, which denies female sexual desire. By demonstrating female sexual desire (especially portrayed by Deidamia's reaction), Ovid would be criticizing the norms of his time by ironizing them. 

Therefore, regarding Deidamia's consent, Diack says:

The increased alliteration in the line accentuates voluit, thus highlighting the role of desire  within the context. The interjection of ita credere oportet (AA I: 699) places instant doubt on  the details of the myth. The phrase implies that perhaps Deidamia was not taken by force,  rather that she was a willing participant. This implication is supported by saepe ‘mane!’ dixit  [often she said “stay!”] (AA I: 701). Although Ovid says at the beginning of this instruction  that women want to be won by force, the implication is that the amator should persist  when he knows the puella is willing, as mentioned. Ovid contrasts the elegiac sentiment  mocked in that earlier statement by questioning both where that force is now (AA I: 703)  and Deidamia’s unwillingness to allow the auctorem stupri [perpetrator of her rape] to leave  for war (AA I: 704). This questioning informs the audience that they, too, should question  whether women are willing participants whose behaviour is simply dictated by social rules which themselves can be overcome, and women easily won, if approached with appropriate  art and skill. Ovid mocks Deidamia as well, to accentuate the absence of a rape and replace it with  consensual intercourse with a willing puella. The aforementioned questioning  (AA I: 703-704) implies that Deidamia has actually deceived us and that it was not rape,  which levels the playing-field between the lovers. Ovid also gives Deidamia a voice by  questioning her. He ensures she is an equal participant in the affair. After all, she tells  Achilles to stay. The imperative mane (AA I: 701) to an extent places her in a position of  control. It is notable that the only direct speech of this section of the poem is spoken by  women. Both Ovid’s questions and Deidamia’s instruction to Achilles create humour.  Murgatroyd (1982: 135) points out that Ovid is as interested in the comedy and incongruity  of the myth as he is in promoting his point. As a result the lines are funny without  dispensing with his skilful and neat composition. He increases the humour of the lines by  addressing the character of the lovers with what Murgatroyd (1982: 140) terms a “mocksolemn” rhythm. In doing so, Ovid is able to use the myth argumentatively. Instead of being  a victim, Ovid’s Deidamia is portrayed as a willing partner, calling for her lover to remain  with her. This is the primary aspect in which this retelling differs from the other mythical  digressions Ovid has related thus far.

Marriage and Mistresses: Ovid’s use of Myth in the Ars Amatoria I-III by Jacqueline Diack, pag 138-139.

Regarding the representation of Achilles as a man disguised as a girl and practicing feminine activities, Diack's interpretation of Ovid's stance is:

Ovid abruptly refers to Achilles’ shameful disguise as a woman (AA I: 689-690), which is even  more disgraceful in light of the fact that he is hiding while an oath is being fulfilled by the  other Greek soldiers. Ovid mentions that he did this at his mother’s request, but tribuisset [he had yielded] (AA I: 689) accentuates the shame. Not only is his feminine garb  inappropriate, but so too is his submission to his mother’s wishes, not to mention that he is  not soldiering (the skill for which he is known). Ovid’s use of the epic-style patronymic Aeacide [grandson of Aeacus] (AA I: 691) heightens the contrast between his current  occupation (weaving) and what he should be doing (fighting) (Hollis 1977: 140). Ovid  continues his insults with repeated and derogatory references to wool spinning in the  subsequent lines (AA I: 691-695, 702). First, he informs Achilles that spinning is not his work  (AA I: 691). He calls on Achilles to seek dignity by practicing the other skills of Pallas (Minerva) (AA I: 692), known for being the patron of spinning, but also a warrior goddess (Hollis 1977: 140). Ovid then refers to the baskets that the washed wool would be carried in  before it was spun (Hollis 1977: 140), chastising Achilles for using his arm for carrying a  basket when it should be wielding a shield (AA I: 693). Ovid asks why the hand that will kill  Hector is holding the wool weighed out for spinning in a day’s work (pensa) (AA I: 694). The implication that women provide a service is indicated by pensa, which recalls muneris (AA I: 676). Ovid’s questions are concluded with an imperative as he instructs Achilles to  refuse the spindles covered with worked wool (AA I: 695) and reminds him of his spear, cut  from Mount Pelion and only able to be brandished by his hand (AA I: 696). The euphemism  is unmistakably phallic, reminding Achilles he is a man and that his weapon is his penis. Ovid  clearly undermines Achilles’ masculinity. Ovid can safely insult a mythical figure, especially a  Greek hero, and takes full advantage of this scope. Ovid chastises Achilles for dressing and  behaving as a woman when he is a man and a soldier.

Marriage and Mistresses: Ovid’s use of Myth in the Ars Amatoria I-III by Jacqueline Diack, pag 135-136.

Therefore, despite the initial perception that Ovid is encouraging men to rape women, it is possible that the intention is in fact the opposite. Achilles, by neglecting his role as a man, is scorned and doesn’t represent an ideal lover. Through persuasion (and not force, as it may seem) he has a sexual involvement with Deidamia, which Diack interprets as being a consensual part, and it’s this ability of Achilles to take the attitude of an ideal lover (conquering a woman by persuasion and not by force) that makes him regain his masculinity. Not rape, but conquest. Deidamia, in turn, aims to represent a kind of ironization and criticism of the behavior of Roman women, who avoided showing interest because of social norms. Her facade falls when Achilles intends to leave, as in this case there is no time for social games, and so Deidamia openly expresses her desire in a way he hadn’t expressed before, which is almost exaggerated. However, Achilles has already fulfilled his role as a man in the sexual scenario by sleeping with Deidamia and must fulfill other roles, in this case as a warrior. He can't be with her anymore, even if she begs him in a way she never has before. If he neglected military activities for a woman, he wouldn’t be an ideal young man in Roman society.

It seems like I've put a lot of the text here, but oddly enough there's a lot more to read! The chapter goes from page 124 to page 144, totaling 20 pages (no pictures or tables or anything like that. It's all text) and I didn't even put full pages in. I personally recommend reading it, there are things mentioned by Diack that I didn't include here.

Natural History, by Pliny the Elder (1st century AD)

This is a Greco-Roman mythology source, but I’ll be using it for Greek mythology purposes. Natural History has an encyclopedic character and isn’t actually focused on mythology like Library, for example, but it’s possible to learn some mythological information here.

With Nicias has been compared, and indeed sometimes preferred to him, Athenion of Maronea, a pupil of Glaucion of Corinth. In his colouring he is more sombre than Nicias, and yet, with all his sombreness, more pleasing; so much so indeed, that in his paintings shines forth the extensive knowledge which he possessed of the art. [...] an Achilles also, concealed in a female dress, and Ulysses detecting him [...]

Natural History, 35.40.

This Athenion refers to Athenion of Maroneia, a painter who flourished between late 4th and early 3rd centuries BC.

Achilleid, by Statius (1st century AD)

This is a source of Roman mythology. Achilleid is an epic poem that was never completed because its author, Statius, died before it was finished. As the name suggests, the theme was Achilles, which included the part of the myth where he was on Skyros. I'm not going to put the entire text like in the other cases because it's very long, so read it if you want here, although I must warn you that the rape narrative is especially emphasized here. It isn’t speculative as in other texts or questionable as in Art of Love, it’s very evident rape.

Now, the summary:

[Book 1] Paris has already taken Helen and the war is about to begin. Thetis, watching Paris' ship depart, remembers the prophecy concerning Achilles Proteus had told her. Desperate, she begs Neptune (Poseidon's Roman counterpart) to drown the ship so the war doesn’t happen. However, Neptune rejects the request because he says it is a destiny that needs to be fulfilled.

Thetis goes to Pelion, where Chiron is educating Achilles. She tells Chiron that she wants to take Achilles back, but purposely omits her plan. Instead, she lies to Chiron Proteus advised her to purify Achilles a second time in the waters of the Styx. According to the narrator: “Thus spoke his mother in lying speech – nor would he have given him up, had she dared to confess to the old man the soft raiment and dishonourable garb.”

Chiron replies he had noticed that something was changing, as Achilles used to be an obedient student and in recent days he has been unstoppable. He agrees to have Thetis take him to the Styx. Then Achilles appears accompanied by Patroclus and, upon seeing Thetis, immediately runs to hugs her. At night, there is a joyful party.

While the others sleep, Thetis deliberates between different places to hide her son, until she decides on Skyros. She then deliberates how she will take Achilles, until she decides to call the pair of dolphins she nurtured. Thetis carries the sleeping Achilles in her arms while Chiron watches, already sad and hoping for a near return (as he thought she would just dip him in the Styx and soon Achilles would return).

The next day, Achilles wakes up and is worried to see that he isn’t on the Pelion, but Thetis reassures him. She explains the plan and tries to convince him, even naming men who have associated themselves with the feminine and remain powerful (Hercules, Bacchus, Jupiter, Caeneus) as a way of ensuring that clothes won’t make him weaker and promises that she won’t tell Chiron anything.

-

Achilles, however, isn’t convinced by the speech. But he sees the daughters of Lycomedes participating in a festive day in honor of Pallas and notices the one who leads the choir, Deidamia. She’s described in long lines as immensely beautiful and Thetis, noticing her son's attention directed towards the girl, begins to ask if it’s so difficult to have to spend time with these maidens. He then agrees to the plan to stay close to Deidamia.

Thetis dresses Achilles and teaches him to behave in a feminine manner so as not to be discovered, and then takes him to Lycomedes. She lies to Lycomedes Achilles is his sister who, like her brother, is proud. Thetis says her daughter was raised as an Amazon, rejecting marriage, but now that war is approaching Thetis thinks that having Achilles at risk is enough pain for a mother and she would prefer her daughter to be safe living like a common woman. Leaving her daughter in the care of Lycomedes and among his daughters, the daughter can learn how to lead an female life. Lycomedes accepts.

Lycomedes' daughters observe Achilles, noticing that he’s taller and broader than them and are impressed. However, none suspect that he isn’t a girl and they invite him to dance with them. Thetis says goodbye, still anxious about the fate of her son.

The Greeks prepare for war and only Achilles' home kingdom is absent, and the citizens lament that Peleus is too old and Achilles is too young and therefore they won’t be able to win glory in war (because it would be necessary for one of them to lead the army. If none of them are of the appropriate age, the army doesn’t leave).

In Aulis, the Greeks are eager for Achilles to join them and they gossip about the boy, about how incredible his lineage is, how exceptionally raised he was, how he was dipped in the Styx, etc etc. Seeing this, Protesilaus complains to Calchas, the seer of the Greeks, that although they have incredible warriors like Big Ajax among them the Greeks aren’t paying any attention and prefer to think about Achilles and therefore it seems that ideally they would get Achilles first. Saying that he wasn’t found with either Peleus or Chiron, he asks Calchas to tell them where the boy hid. Calchas sees Thetis taking Achilles to Skyros and hiding him among the girls. Then Diomedes tells Ulysses that they should go after Achilles and he agrees. The Greeks are really excited with the idea.

-

Meanwhile, on Skyros Deidamia discovered Achilles' secret in a way that is never really explained. She thinks her sisters know too and are just keeping quiet, but the reality is that only Deidamia knows because Achilles very clearly uses every opportunity to be close to her and doesn't interact that much with the other girls. They develop a friendship, Achilles even tells her things about his life, and Deidamia helps him maintain his disguise, teaching him things like dancing and weaving. They develop a friendship, Achilles even tells her things about his life, and Deidamia helps him maintain his disguise, teaching him things like dancing and weaving. Deidamia is amazed by Achilles, but still avoids him in every way from confessing to her (in this part, they are compared to Jupiter, the Roman counterpart of Zeus, and Juno, the Roman counterpart of Hera). This makes Achilles impatient.

A Bacchus (Dionysus) festival exclusively for women happens and, as Achilles is thought to be a girl, he’s among the participants. The narrative highlights that Deidamia is more impressive than the other women present, but Achilles is more impressive than her. Achilles thinks to himself about repressed masculinity due to his mother's fault and wonders if Patroclus is taking his place while Achilles is stuck doing feminine things. Having decided that he’s tired of this situation, Achilles rapes Deidamia in the woods. She screams, but no one notices the situation because of the Bacchus festival.

Achilles solaces Deidamia (seriously, that's the word used) saying that it was because of her that he subjected himself to this humiliation (that is, living like a girl), that he was given birth next to Jupiter (Zeus), that Deidamia is the daughter-in-law of a deity, that she will give birth to grandchildren from Olympus, etc. Basically, his consolation is to say something like “yes, I raped you, but look how amazing my lineage is and now you’re part of it. Plus you're so beautiful you made someone like me humiliate myself just to be with you”

-

Deidamia is horrified by the situation, but decides not to tell Lycomedes about the rape because fears Lycomedes will have a negative reaction to her and, oddly enough, she’s still in love with Achilles and doesn’t want him to be punished. She makes her nurse complicit in this while hiding the pregnancy. She bore a son.

Diomedes and Ulysses arrive on Skyros, and Ulysses tells Diomedes that he has a plan to trick Achilles if he’s actually there. Ulysses and Diomedes then speak to Lycomedes bringing news about the war. Ulysses notices that one of the girls doesn't seem to have feminine modesty and keeps that in mind.

Now with the girls present and the banquet served, Ulysses talks about the glory of war. Achilles is going to reveal himself, but Deidamia stops him. A dance is performed, but Achilles is no longer even trying to appear graceful, for he despises female life more than ever now. Meanwhile, Diomedes went to get the items for Ulysses' plan.

Ulysses offers the gifts and says the Lycomedes girls can choose whatever they want. While everyone was more interested in more typically feminine things, Achilles was interested in a shield. He hesitated after being embarrassed to see himself reflected in the metal, but Ulysses had already noticed him and came to whisper that he knew who he was.

At this moment, a war trumpet sounded. Achilles reacted immediately, removing his clothes, taking a spear and shield and positioning himself to fight. So his disguise was revealed and Lycomedes was shocked and felt a bad omen. Deidamia lamented the discovery, knowing that Achilles would leave (because, again, Statius wrote her still in love with Achilles despite the rape). Seeing this, Achilles decides to comfort Lycomedes by saying that now Lycomedes will have fame because of him, that he has the honor of participating in the great lineage of Achilles' family through Deidamia and that he should not blame Deidamia because there was no way for her to resist Achilles. So he takes his son and puts him at Lycomedes' feet and tells him to stop being angry because he’s already his father-in-law. He also convinces Lycomedes to marry Deidamia to him.

Deidamia is saddened by Achilles' departure and asks him to promise that he won’t have any children with another woman in Troy. Achilles comforts her and promises that he will bring her many gifts from Troy (i.e., the spoils of war).

[Book 2] Deidamia and Achilles are already married and the child's name is Pyrrhus. Both are saddened by the separation while Achilles leaves with Ulysses, who convinces Achilles to focus on the war (Ulysses even encourages Achilles by telling him to think of a plunderer taking Deidamia like Paris took Helen, which makes him blush with anger). Achilles feels that, through war, he will be able to compensate for the dishonor he suffered because of Thetis's plan. The rest is Achilles talking to Diomedes.

You have certainly noticed that Statius appears to be the author most concerned with ensuring Achilles' masculinity. For example:

Thetis is much more pronounced as the one responsible for the dishonorable situation (she lies to Chiron, she takes Achilles asleep, etc);

Chiron already comments on how uncontrollable Achilles is at such an age

Achilles is represented as actively refusing Thetis' idea and accepting it only because of lust (when seeing Deidamia);

Achilles' appearance being different from the other girls is noticed by the girls;

Thetis has to give a backstory that justifies his unfeminine behavior (life as an Amazon). Other references to Amazons are mentioned in the little text we have, which may be foreshadowing regarding Achilles' gender, since Amazons were women who lived a life considered masculine and Achilles is a boy living a feminine life.

Deidamia has somehow realized that he’s a boy and apparently finds it so obvious she thinks his sisters know too;

Achilles spends his time on Skyros trying to have something with Deidamia and appears to be bad at feminine activities;

Deidamia is amazed by his deep voice;

Achilles sees the flirtation he has with Deidamia as a weakness (because he feels trapped by her wishes) and rapes her;

Achilles is afraid that Patroclus will take his place (which could also be a reference to the future related to Patroclus' death);

Achilles tries to reveal himself when Ulysses talks about the war, before the trick is even applied;

Ulysses notices Achilles doesn’t have a modest behavior and has no difficulty identifying him;

Achilles had already been attracted to the shield even before the full plan with the trumpet,

Achilles is constantly bragging about having impregnated Deidamia and the glory of his lineage (Pyrrhus), etc;

Many of these elements aren’t found in any other source.

It’s commented in academic circles that Statius's writing appears to have a strong Ovidian influence. Therefore, it’s possible to consider that Statius included a rape because it was inspired by Art of Love, where there is the presence of a possible rape (yes, it’s possible that it wasn’t a literal rape, but it still has the possibility of having inspired versions with literal rapes). Achilleid probably began to be composed in 94 or 95 AD, while, in turn, the first book of The Art of Love/Ars Amatoria was published in 2 AD, thus making chronological sense the possibility that Ovid's version inspired Statius.

It has become a commonplace of Statian criticism that, if Thebaid invokes Virgil as model,' then Achilleid sees Statius using Ovid. Important work has been done in this field, most notably by Rosati and Hinds: Rosati has explored the relationships between Achilleid and several Ovidian texts, while Hinds has insisted on the centrality of Metamorphoses to understanding Achilleid: 'it is an epic: a markedly Ovidian, markedly metamorphic epic'. This essay aims to extend that discussion through consideration of the differences between Statius and his Ovidian models in his handling of a number of key episodes. The most obvious connection between Ovid's works and Statius' Achilleid is the story of Achilles' rape of Deidamia, for these are the only extant classical poets to narrate the story at any length. That Statius' account actually alludes to Ovid's account in Art of Love is clear. For example, both poets use marked alliteration when describing Achilles' violence.

Allusion to Ovid and Others in Statius' Achilleid by Peter Davis, pg 129-130.

Other similarities are listed by Davis as, for example, Achilles' courting attempts in Achilleid being similar to the advice given by Ovid in Art of Love (e.g. try to enchant her with music), also other similar forms of writing and the way in which both texts are concerned with Achilles' masculinity (in Art of Love, it’s the narrator who reprimands Achilles. In Achilleid, Achilles is the one who is bothered). However, there is a very clear difference between the texts and that is Deidamia and her voice regarding rape. If in Ovid's case the rape as a literal rape is ambiguous, Statius makes it quite obvious that it really is a rape. Yet he portrays Achilles and Deidamia as if she were romantically invested (for example, in how Deidamia doesn't tell Lycomedes the truth because she fears being punished and she fears Achilles will be punished. In other words, it’s not just herself that she wants to protect, she also wants to protect Achilles from the punishment of the crime committed), the rape here is literal and there aren’t many elements in the text that support the idea that Deidamia was consenting. Yes, she’s portrayed as being interested in Achilles previously despite avoiding his advances, but that doesn't mean she would necessarily consent to any sexual relations with him. Just because you're in love with someone doesn't mean you want to have sex with them, and if they force you despite that then it's still rape. There are academics who read this text as an example of a deeply erotic narrative and even those who theorize that Statius' intention in the next Books was to portray Achilles' erotic involvement with other women in Troy (which isn’t possible to be sure, since the work was never finished), but a deeply erotic narrative doesn’t necessarily erase the rape.

What then of wanting to be forced? As we have seen, the teacher could hardly be more explicit: the Ovidian Deidamia wanted to be overcome by strength (Ars 1.700). There is no suggestion in Statius' narrative that Deidamia wanted to be raped. Indeed in this poem there is only one character who wishes to be forced and that is Achilles himself: mulcetur laetumque rubet uisusque proteruos obliquat uestesque manu leuiore repellit. aspicit ambiguum genetrix cogique uolentem iniecitque sinus. (Ach. 1.323-26) He is caressed and blushes with pleasure and slants wanton glances and pushes away the clothes with lighter hand. His mother sees that he is ambiguous and wanting to be forced and throws the garments on him. As Dilke points out, the phrase cogique uolentem ('wanting to be forced') alludes to the Ovidian account of Deidamia's rape. The language used here to describe the interplay between Thetis and her son suggests nothing so much as lovers' games, for there are caresses, blushes and wanton looks, culminating in the desire to be forced and, finally, action. Indeed the language of this passage suggests that dressing Achilles in women's clothing is a kind of rape.

That the Statian Deidamia was not willing to be forced is clear both from the prelude to the rape and her reaction. First of all, Statius takes care to separate the innocent flirting of boy and girl from the rape itself. Indeed Deidamia herself attempts to prevent their relationship from advancing beyond innocent play: iam iamque dolos aperire parantem uirginea leuitate fugit prohibetque fateri. sic sub matre Rhea iuuenis regnator Olympi oscula securae dabat insidiosa sorori frater adhuc, medii donec reuerentia cessit sanguinis et uersos germana expauit amores. (Ach. 1.586-91) With a virgin's fickleness she flees him just when he is preparing to reveal the deception and forbids him to confess. So under mother Rhea the young ruler of Olympus gave deceitful kisses to his unsuspicious sister, still her brother, until respect for their shared blood gave way and the sister feared that their love had been transformed. The phrase uirginea leuitate ('with a virgin's fickleness') hardly suggests responsible behaviour. On the other hand, preventing Achilles from revealing his masculinity also prevents him from making sexual advances. But the simile makes plain that the balance of responsibility in this affair lies with Achilles, for the description of Jupiter's behaviour (oscula...dabat, 'was giving kisses') corresponds precisely to that of Achilles in the preceding lines (mille per oscula laudat, 'praises her though a thousand kisses', 1.576). In that case, the adjectives prove particularly telling, for Jupiter's kisses are insidiosa (‘deceitful”), while Juno remains secura ('unsuspicious').

Note too that Statius changes the location of the rape. The Ovidian Deidamia is raped in her own bedroom (1.697). A reader of Art of Love who was inclined to defend Achilles might take up the teacher's suggestion that Deidamia really wanted to be forced, that her 'no' was really 'yes'. No such excuse is open to the Statian Achilles, for the rape takes place at a Bacchic festival immediately after a soliloquy in which Achilles urges himself to rape Deidamia (1.624-39). And this Deidamia responds, not by wanting to repeat the experience, but by loud protest: uidit chorus omnis ab alto astrorum et tenerae rubuerunt cornua Lunae. illa quidem clamore nemus montemque repleuit. (Ach. 1.643-45) The whole chorus of stars saw from above and the tender-hearted Moon's horns blushed. Deidamia filled forest and mountain with her shouting. This is not a woman wanting to be forced. This interpretation is confirmed, moreover, by Achilles' own words to Lycomedes: quid enim his obstare lacertis,/qua potuit nostras possessa repellere uires? ('What could resist these arms of mine, how could she, in my possession, repel my strength?', 1.904f.). Note too that far from saying mane ('Stay!', Ars 1.701) to Achilles as he leaves, this Deidamia begins three successive lines (940, 941, 942) with the word i ('Go!'). The language of Achilles and Deidamia seems chosen to rebut the Ovidian teacher's account of Deidamia's rape and, by implication, of the nature of female sexuality.

At this point it is worth noting that while the Statian account of Achilles' rape of Deidamia seems to take issue with the version propounded in Art of Love, it actually has much in common with the rape stories found in Metamorphoses. First and most obviously, the tone is serious, not jocular. Second, there are common narrative elements: the girl's silence and sense of guilt or shame and the rapist's use of disguise. Third, there are particular connections, additional to those mentioned above, with the story of Leucothoe in Metamorphoses 4: the Bacchic context, the rapist being disguised as a woman and paternal anger against the girl (actual in Ovid, averted in Statius). This is perhaps not surprising if we recall that Metamorphoses and Achilleid are generically related as variants of epic, while Art of Love is a bizarre hybrid, a didactic elegy. The substance of Statius' account of Deidamia's rape may be drawn from Art of Love, but the treatment is more closely aligned with Metamorphoses.

Allusion to Ovid and Others in Statius' Achilleid by Peter Davis, pg 135-137.

Furthermore, unlike the bucolic poem Epithalamium, where a homoerotic reading from Deidamia's point of view is possible (especially because Achilles is conquering her through feminine practices), Davis argues Statius eliminates any possibility of a homoerotic reading by explaining that Deidamia already knew of the disguise a while ago and interacted with him while she knew he was a boy. At no point in the text does Deidamia's passion for Achilles occur without it being explained that she’s aware of the disguise.

So, if the interpretation that Deidamia consented is correct (something that Davis mentions is indeed a possibility and that I mentioned earlier using Diack) and Achilles regains his masculinity through conquering a woman sexually through courtship, in Achilleid such a possibility is denied. He follows the same advice presented in Art of Love, but Deidamia rejects the advances. Impatient and angry, Achilles rapes her and thus regains his masculinity through the use of force on a woman. Therefore, despite Ovid and Statius having similarities in their versions, there is a very important difference between them.

Library, by Pseudo-Apollodorus (1st or 2nd century AD)

Library, or Bibliotheca, is a work whose purpose is to collect different versions of myths. You see, it's not a play or a poem, but a sort of mythological encyclopedia. It had been attributed to Apollodorus of Athens, however such an attribution is now consensually considered erroneous for reasons of chronology. Because Library had already become known under the name of Apollodorus, “Pseudo” was simply added before the name, generally used to indicate an erroneous attribution (this case) or uncertain (the case of works attributed to Hyginus, for example). As already mentioned, it’s more of an encyclopedia and seeks to deal with a lot of myths, so Pseudo-Apollodorus didn’t waste time detailing every detail as would have happened if it were an epic, he just gave useful and succinct information.

According to a version given by Pseudo-Apollodorus, when Achilles was 9 years old, the seer Calchas (the same one who is with the Achaeans in the Trojan War) predicted his tragic destiny. His mother, Thetis, tried to prevent his premature death from happening by hiding him among the girls at Lycomedes' court. At one point, he had a thing with Deidamia, who got pregnant (Neoptolemus, hi). Odysseus, however, arrived at Skyros and then tricked Achilles into breaking out of his disguise. Achilles then left for Troy, and Pseudo-Apollodorus says he was 15 when he became admiral in the Achaean army. In other words, Achilles lived on Skyros for around 6 years, which easily explains the development of a relationship with Deidamia.

When Achilles was nine years old, Calchas declared that Troy could not be taken without him; so Thetis, foreseeing that it was fated he should perish if he went to the war, disguised him in female garb and entrusted him as a maiden to Lycomedes. Bred at his court, Achilles had an intrigue with Deidamia, daughter of Lycomedes, and a son Pyrrhus was born to him, who was afterwards called Neoptolemus. But the secret of Achilles was betrayed, and Ulysses, seeking him at the court of Lycomedes, discovered him by the blast of a trumpet. And in that way Achilles went to Troy.

Library, 3.13.8. Translation by J.G Frazer.

So Agamemnon in person was in command of the whole army, and Achilles was admiral, being fifteen years old.

Library, E.3.16. Translation by J.G Frazer.

Although this translation uses the term “intrigue”, which may suggest a secret relationship, the Greek text I saw apparently uses a word that doesn’t necessarily imply doing something in secret and is more along the lines of “lay with”. However, if it were secret it wouldn't be something new, since this, for example, happens in the bucolic poem I showed previously.

Furthermore, Library also gives us the future of Deidamia after Achilles dies. Neoptolemus is said to have given her in marriage to the former Trojan prince Helenus, who had apparently gone from being a common slave to ruling a city he himself founded.

Helenus founded a city in Molossia and inhabited it, and Neoptolemus gave him his mother Deidamia to wife. And when Peleus was expelled from Phthia by the sons of Acastus and died, Neoptolemus succeeded to his father's kingdom.

Library, E.6.13. Translation by J.G Frazer.

Description of Greece, by Pausanias (2nd century AD)

This is a source of Greek mythology. Description of Greece has a self-explanatory title. Basically, Pausanias traveled around Greece writing down things he learned in each region, which included mythological traditions and visual representations that portrayed myths — like paintings, for example — as they form part of local cultures. For this reason, although Decription of Greece isn’t a mythological encyclopedia like Pseudo-Apollodorus's Library, it’s possible to learn different versions of the myths through Pausanias' accounts.

At one point, he’s describing paintings of the entrance to the Acropolis of Athens. He then praises Homer, considering his choice not to include Polyxena's sacrifice a good decision and also preferred the version he presented of Achilles conquering Skyros, claiming it to be better than the version in which he is disguised. This alone was enough to indicate the myth, but Pausanias also says that the painter Polygnotus represented the disguise version.

[...] And there is Polyxena about to be sacrificed near the grave of Achilles. Homer did well in passing by this barbarous act. I think too that he showed poetic insight in making Achilles capture Scyros, differing entirely from those who say that Achilles lived in Scyros with the maidens, as Polygnotus has re presented in his picture.

Description of Greece, 1.22.6. Translation by W.H.S. Jones.

That Homer didn’t represent the sacrifice of Polyxena was possibly not an active decision by Homer to ignore the myth, but it may be that such a version of the myth wasn’t known to him. This is because, curiously, the sources that indicate Polyxena's sacrifice are later and don’t belong to Archaic Greece (Homer's period). The same possibility applies to the myth of Achilles disguised as a girl, since the sources we have for this myth are more recent than Homer. Does this mean I’m stating with 100% certainty that both myths ABSOLUTELY didn’t exist in Archaic Greece? No, after all we can only have access to physical-registred accounts and oral traditions don’t include this. But it’s possible that they developed around Classical Greece period. Anyway, it's at least funny that Pausanias, after saying that it was a good idea not to write Polyxena's sacrifice because it was a "barbarous act", talked about how it was also a good idea not to represent the version of Achilles is hidden in Skyros. It's almost as if the two things are comparable in terms of immorality.

The interesting part here isn’t Homer, but Polygnotus. He’s probably Polygnotus of Thasos (although he was adopted by Athenians and raised as one), who is from the 5th century BC. The 5th century BC begins in late Archaic Greece and continues into Classical Greece. In other words, this would make it possible for this myth to already exist during the transition between Archaic and Classical Greece depending on when Polygnotus was born (can't be sure).

Heroica, by Philostratus (2nd to 3rd century AD)

This is a source of Greek mythology. The authorship is disputed, being attributed to both Philostratus the Athenian and Philostratus the Elder (they were contemporaries, therefore regardless of who the author was, the work belongs to the same period). Heroica has the format of a dialogue, and proposes a discussion regarding the Homeric representation of the Trojan War. The historical context of Heroica makes it the type of work that purposefully wants to subvert the traditional version of the myth, for example by making Thetis and Peleus' relationship a consensual romance initiated by Thetis herself and by stating that Patroclus never wore Achilles' armor. More on this topic here.

This subversion also affects the meeting of Achilles and Deidamia. Here Achilles isn’t in Skyros to conquer it, nor does he accidentally end up there because of a storm, nor is he hiding from the war. In truth, he was sent by Peleus to avenge his father's friend Theseus, who had been killed by King Lycomedes. However, Achilles believes Lycomedes' defensive argument and spares him, even proposing to speak in his defense to Peleus. Then Achilles married Deidamia, and had with her Neoptolemus.

He says that after Theseus had fled from Athens because of the curse against his son, he died in Skyros by the hand of Lykomedes. Peleus, who had been Theseus's guest-friend and companion in the Calydonian deed, sent Achilles to Skyros to avenge Theseus. And after he set sail together with Phoenix, who by reason of old age knew only the deliberative arts, he overthrew Skyros, which was on high ground away from attack after it had been rebuilt on a rocky hill. He guarded Lykomedes and indeed did not kill him, but asked him what possessed him to kill a man better than himself. When Lykomedes said, "Because, Achilles, he came for unjust reasons and made an attempt on my dominion," Achilles released him, since he killed Theseus justly, and said that he would speak in his defense to Peleus. Achilles married Deidameia, daughter of Lykomedes, and there was born to them Neoptolemos, who was named this because of Achilles' youth when he rushed forward into war. Thetis appeared to Achilles while he was living there, and she attended to her son just as mortal mothers do. When the army was assembling at Aulis, she carried him over to Phthia because of the fates spun for him when she made Peleus the child's master. [...]

Heroica, 731-732. Translation by Jennifer K. Berenson Maclean and Ellen Bradshaw Aitken.

As for the mention of Neoptolemus being named in honor of Achilles' youth, it probably has to do with the etymology of the name since Neoptolemus means “new war” (see here). 

Imagines, by Philostratus the Younger (3th century AD)

This is a source of Greek mythology. Imagines is basically a series of descriptions of paintings, which are also accompanied by descriptions of the myths they depict. It isn’t possible to be sure whether all of these paintings actually existed, or whether Philostratus invented them as a narrative device to tell the intended myths. There are two series of Imagines with the same proposal, both written by a man called Philostratus. The difference is that one was attributed to Philostratus the Elder and the other was attributed to Philostratus the Younger. What I'm referring to concerns the younger one, who was even inspired by the older one, who was also his maternal grandfather.

In the first image, Philostratus comments on the myths of Achilles and Pyrrhus on Skyros. According to him, Thetis learned from her father Nereus (and not Calchas, as was the case in the version given by Pseudo-Apollodorus) about the prophecy of her son's death. She then hid Achilles among the girls of Lycomedes. He secretly became involved with Deidamia, described as the eldest of the girls, and she became pregnant. Achilles was later discovered and left for Troy.

Achilles here is between the feminine and the masculine. He's feminine enough to pass for a pretty girl, but masculine enough that there's a certain difference in the way he's painted compared to the others girls. Although Achilles claims to enjoy traditionally feminine activities like weaving, he still has an appreciation for traditionally masculine activities like being a warrior, which is why he fell into Odysseus' plan. In the end, Achilles chooses masculinity as his final decision after having lived in femininity, represented by the choice he made among the gifts offered by Odysseus. Furthermore, Achilles' expression is described in a way that indicates that he has some concern regarding the gender he plays (“girl who is tossing back her tresses, grim of aspect along with delicate grace will soon have her sex betrayed, and slipping off the character she has been forced to assume will reveal Achilles”). 

The heroine crowned with reeds – for doubtless you see the female figure at the foot of the mountain, sturdy of form and dressed in blue – is the island of Scyros, my boy, which the divine Sophocles calls “wind-swept.” She has a branch of olive in her hands and a spray of vine. And the tower in the foot-hills of the mountain – that is the place where the daughters of Lycomedes follow their maidenly pursuits with the seeming daughter of Thetis. For when Thetis learned from her father Nereus the decree of the Fates about her son – that one of two things had been allotted to him, either to live ingloriously or becoming glorious to die very soon – her son was put away among the daughters of Lycomedes on Scyros and now lives hidden there; to the other girls he seems to be a girl, but one of them, the eldest, he has known in secret love, and her time is approaching when she will bring forth Pyrrhus. But this is not in the picture. There is a meadow before the tower, for this part of the island is a garden made to produce flowers in abundance for the maidens, and you see them scattered here and there plucking the flowers. All are surpassingly beautiful, but while the others incline to a strictly feminine beauty, proving indisputably their feminine nature by the frank glances of their eyes and the bloom of their cheeks and their vivacity in all they do, yet yonder girl who is tossing back her tresses, grim of aspect along with delicate grace will soon have her sex betrayed, and slipping off the character she has been forced to assume will reveal Achilles. For as the rumour of Thetis’ secret spreads among the Greeks, Diomedes in company with Odysseus sets forth to Scyros to ascertain the truth of this story. You see them both, one keeping the glance of his eyes sunk low by reason, I think, of his craftiness and his habit of continual scheming, the other, Tydeus’ son, prudent, ready in counsel and intent on the task before him. What does the man behind them mean, the one who blows the trumpet? And what is the significance of the painting? Odysseus, shrewd and an able tracker of secrets, devises the following plan to test what he is tracking out; when he throws down on the meadow wool-baskets and objects suited to girls for their play and a suit of armour, the daughters of Lycomedes turn to objects suitable to their sex, but the son of Peleus, though he claims to find pleasure in baskets and weaving-combs, forthwith leaves these things to the girls,and rushing to the suit of armour he divests himself of the feminine attire he ahs been wearing…

…. And Pyrrhus is no longer a country boor nor yet growing strong amid filth like brawling sons of herdsmen, but already he is a soldier. For he stands leaning on a spear and gazing towards the ship; and he wears a purple mantle brought up from the tip of the shoulder over to his left arm and a white tunic that does not reach the knee; and though his eye is flashing, it is not so much the eye of a man in full career as of one still holding back and vexed at the delay; and his mind images something of what will happen a little later in Ilium. His hair now, when he is at rest, hangs down his forehead, but when he rushed forward it will be in disorder, following, as it tosses to and fro, the emotions of his spirit. The goats skipping about unchecked, the straying herds, and the shepherd’s staff with its crook lying among them where it has been thrown imply some such story as this, my boy: – Vexed with his mother and his grandfather for being kept on the island, since after the death of Achilles in fear for the boy they had sworn that Pyrrhus should not depart, he set himself over the goats and kine, subduing the bulls that scorned the herd – the bulls that may be seen on the mountain at the right. But when the oracle came to the Greeks that Troy would be captured by none other than the descendants of Aeacus, Phoenix is sent to Scyros to fetch the boy, and putting ashore he encounters him, each unknown to the other except in so far as the boy’s graceful and well-grown form suggested that he was Achilles’ son. And as soon as Phoenix recognized who he was, he himself be came known to Lycomedes and Deiodameia. All this is what art would teach us by means of this small picture, and it is so painted as to furnish to poets also a theme for song.

Imagines, 1. Translation by Arthur Fairbanks.

The Taking of Ilios, by Tryphiodorus (3rd or 4th century AD)

This is a source of Greek mythology. Similar to Quintus Smyrnaeus and Nonnus of Panopolis, Tryphiodorus is included among the late poets of Greco-Roman mythology. Tryphiodorus appears to have been immensely inspired by ancient Greek poets, although there is a possible influence from Virgil as well. Unlike other texts, The Taking of Ilios isn’t a detailed text and seems more like a poetic summary. As is notable, there isn't much here about Achilles and Skyros. Neoptolemus is the son of Achilles and Deidamia and that's it.

[...] From Scyros, too, leaving that city of fair maidens, came the son of Achilles and august Deidameia; who, albeit he mantled not yet on his goodly temples the down of manhood, showed the prowess of his sire, young warrior though he was. [...]

The Taking of Ilios. Translation by Mair, A. W.

Part 1 here. Part 3 here.

[anotheroceanid]

AGAIN WHY IS NEPTOLEMUS SO CUTEEEEEEEE 😭😭😭😭😭 this is so pretty, and the otteeeeers 😍😍😍😍😍

My boy Odysseus sending Astyanax to the one person he knows won’t raise a murderer 🗣️🗣️🗣️ RIGHT ON YOUR FACE ZEUS!!!!!!!!!!!!

Ok, but the arts of Perse saving Astyanax would absolutely eat omg. From her being very gently given the baby boy by Odysseus her former lover and great friend to arts of her catching him when he's thrown by Neoptolemus and (very likely) smitting the guy in the spot bc fuck you dude, that's a baby

And the fact that a good share of Perse’s myth would be her dragging demigods and legacies 😂😂😂 Like, yeah, she’s their patron and protector, but don’t think for a moment she won’t verbally destroy you if you do some dumb shit. Like Hercules being essentially exiled for demanding her hand in marriage.

The paintings of her just DRAGGING god’s descendes while they look like kids caught doing something wrong… oh, the flavour

[babyrdie]

ACHILLES ON SKYROS [PART 1]

The dancer displayed for you the many Lycomedian maidens and the work and tools of girls, the distaff, the spindle, the wool, the warp, the woof, and he has represented Achilles playing the part of a maiden. Don't worry. He won't stop the dance at this point, for Odysseus is coming to the door, and Diomedes with his trumpet, and the son of Peleus is revealing what he really is instead of what he seems to be.

Libanius and the Dancers, by Margaret E.Molly.

I decided to make a post with ancient sources that deal with the association of Achilles with Skyros in Greco-Roman mythology. For this, I’ll be using both Greek and Roman sources, but I’ll be making it clear which versions are Greek and which versions are Roman. Therefore, this post, in addition to serving to understand Achilles' associations with Skyros, in a way also serves as a group of sources for the character Deidamia and sources for the birth of the character Neoptolemus. This myth touches on topics such as gender roles in society, misogyny and rape (including depictions of glorified rape), so be aware of this if you intend to read the post.

When talking about "feminine" and "masculine" here I’ll be considering the traditional idea of ​​gender in antiquity, which doesn’t mean that all women and men were like this or even that all mythological characters were strictly idealized in this way. For example, cowardice was a characteristic more associated with the feminine, so much so that Aeschylus writing Aegythus as a coward makes him effeminate while writing Clytemnestra as the one who holds violent power masculinizes her. Does this stop Antigone from being brave without being masculine? No! But it doesn't change that cowardice, especially in the context of battle, was associated with the feminine and not the masculine, it's no wonder in The Iliad male characters call other male characters women as a form of offense by insinuating that they are cowards/aren't skilled warriors. Although there were female warrior characters like the Amazons, violence (and consequently war) was still a male attribute in the same way that weaving was a female craft (a very important one in the cultural context, including. This is why weaving was cited so often by writers as a feminine activity Achilles did while in disguise). As horrible as it’s to say that rape is a narrative device to exalt masculinity, this is how rape was treated in Roman sources like Achilleid. The perception of gender here is less about modern perception and more about ancient perception, and the traditional idea is used as a social reference and not the exceptions. This even applies to texts that subvert gender roles in some way, because, to recognize a subversion, you first have to recognize the traditional.

Furthermore, this post presents different interpretations/analyses from academics instead of being a post focused on my interpretations, as I believe they have more knowledge of the subject than I do. I’ll try to present different views, including those I don't necessarily agree with and I’ll avoid as much as possible (not entirely, however) giving an opinion on which interpretation is my favorite to avoid influencing whoever is reading it. Because they’re interpretations, it mean that they aren’t absolute truths, so it’s entirely possible for you to disagree and that’s okay.

And now, some details:

I use the spelling Skyros because I got used to it, although the most common in English is Scyros. Same about Deidamia/Deidameia.

I'm definitely not a classicist and this is purely a hobby, so don't expect anything super complex. If I make a mistake, let me know and I'll fix it! If you have anything to add that I didn't include, be free!

The dates refer to the likely periods of the authors, not the works themselves. It isn’t always possible to be sure of an author's lifetime, but if I were to try to organize the period in which the work was written it would be even more difficult.

There may be writing errors, as I’m not fluent in English and this is more evident in a long post.

The Iliad, by Homer (8th century BC)

This is a source of Greek mythology. The Iliad requires no introduction, I suppose. Homer doesn't give us many details on the subject, but Achilles' association with Skyros was already present in The Iliad, although it’s clear that it isn’t the most popular version of the girl disguise. So now I'll organize the chronology.

At some point we don't know when or how, Achilles had a son named Neptolemus, who continued to live on Skyros when Achilles left for Troy. We currently know the mother attributed to Neoptolemus is princess Deidamia, but in The Iliad the mother's name or status is never mentioned. Thus, it isn’t possible to know anything about the identity of Neoptolemus's mother or details about his conception — for example, how she and Achilles met.

[...] or the death of my dear son, reared for me in Scyros, if Prince Neoptolernus is still among the living [...]

The Iliad, 19.388-389. Translation by Robert Fagles.

Regardless of how or when Neoptolemus was conceived, the fact is: Achilles didn’t go from Skyros to Troy in the Homeric version. We know this because Odysseus explicitly says Peleus sent Achilles to Agamemnon directly from Phthia. I've read the argument that Odysseus, being the one who usually discovers Achilles' disguise, could be lying because a man dressing up as a woman to escape war wouldn't exactly do the best with Achilles' image. But besides me not considering this a concrete theory (if you see this as a headcanon, okay. But theory…well, I think it lacks some substance), Phoenix also says the same thing. So it's not just Odysseus who says it.

[...] Oh old friend, surely your father Peleus urged you, that day he sent you out of Phthia to Agamemnon [...]

The Iliad, 9.306-307. Translation by Robert Fagles.

[...] The old horseman Peleus had me escort you, that day he sent you out of Phthia to Agamernnon, a youngster still untrained for the great leveler, war, still green at debate where men can make their mark. [...]

The Iliad, 9.533-536 Translation by Robert Fagles.

At some point after he had already joined the Achaean army, Achilles conquered Skyros. From there he brought Iphis as a slave, whom he gave to Patroclus. That is, for Homer, Skyros was conquered by the Achaean army during the Trojan War events.

And over across from him Patroclus slept with the sashed and lovely Iphis by his side, whom Prince Achilles gave him the day he took the heights of Scyros, Enyeus' rocky stronghold.

The Iliad, 9.813-816. Translation by Robert Fagles.

I got the impression that Achilles and Neoptolemus' mother aren’t married in this version, since Achilles says that he thinks about Peleus choosing a wife for him.

[...] If the gods pull me through and I reach home alive.  Peleus needs no help to fetch a bride for me himself Plenty of Argive women wait in Hellas and in Phthia, daughters of lords who rule their citadels in power. Whomever I want I'll make my cherished wife-at home. Time and again my fiery spirit drove me to win a wife, a fine partner to please my heart. to enjoy with her the treasures myoid father Peleus piled high. [...]

The Iliad, 9.480-487. Translation by Robert Fagles.

I have placed the conception of Neoptolemus as the first part in the chronology, but it’s actually not possible to be certain. Because of the lack of clarity, Homeric Neoptolemus could have been conceived during the conquest of Skyros rather than before the Trojan War, as is usual in myths. This, in turn, could add some tension to the relationship aspect of Achilles and his son's mother, as she would have been a native of a conquered place (maybe a war-rape?). But this isn’t clear or explicit and, furthermore, I prefer to think that Neoptolemus was conceived before the Trojan War for age reasons. He's already very young in the pre-Trojan War version, I don't even want to think about how old he would have been when he was found by the Achaeans if he had been born during the Trojan War. But yes, it’s still a possibility.

Christos Tsagalis offers a possible link between Homer's version and a version of a Homeric scholia in which Achilles sacked Skyros before the Achaeans reached Troy, which would explain Neoptolemus' age and reinforces the possibility of a war-rape (a war-rape that, however, is practically never confirmed. Currently we can only deal with possibilities). He also comments on how, however, in antiquity there were attempts to make this version credible even considering the version in which Achilles receives hospitality in Skyros.

[...] another version (reported by an exegetical scholium ad Il. 9, 668b), according to which Achilles sacked the island of Scyros at the time of the first recruitment in Aulis, so as to subjugate the Dolopes who had revolted from the rule of Peleus. This last version featuring a heroic Achilles sacking Scyros is consonant with Il. 9,668, where it is said that Achilles sacked steep Scyros, the citadel of Enyeus (Σκῦρον ἑλῶν αἰπεῖαν, Ἐνυῆος πτολίεθρον). We do not need to get involved into fanciful explanations, of the kind entertained by ancient scholars who argued that the Scyros Homer is referring to in Il. 9.668 may have been a city and not the island on the NE of Euboea or that Achilles liberated the island from the Dolopes, who had revolted against Peleus. It is understandable that such explanations stemmed from the paradox of having Achilles sack the island where he had been of fered hospitality in the past. This paradox though is based on the belief that Achilles’ hiding and cross-dressing episode at Scyros formed part of the Cypria. According to this line of thought, Homeric poetry had downplayed such a cyclic episode, although it may have been very much aware of its existence. The episode of Achilles’ arrival at Scyros after a storm may have also formed part of the Ilias parva (dubitantibus Allen, Bernabé – assentientibus Davies [frr. 4A and 4B], West [frr. 4-5]), where in an analeptic reference, Odysseus may have told Neoptolemus, while they were still on Scyros, that part of his father’s past life which his mother Deidameia could not have possibly known, i.e. from his departure from Scyros until his death at Troy. Such a flashback may have included both Achilles’ forced landing on Scyros because of a storm after the abortive Teuthranian expedition (fr. 24 incerti operis, p. 82 Bernabé = Ilias parva fr.4A Davies = Ilias parva fr. 4 West) and the description of the famous ‘Pelian’ spear given to Peleus by Chiron and then passed on to Achilles (Ilias parva fr. 5 = Bernabé = Ilias parva fr. 4B Davies = Ilias parva fr. 5 West).

Cypria fr 19 (Bernabé, West): further considerations by Christos Tsagalis, pg 260-261.

Skyros here seems to serve to reinforce Achilles' ability (as it’s his achievement) and to explain the existence of an important character (Neoptolemus). Years later, a The Iliad scholiast mentioned the myth of Achilles disguised as a woman in Skyros, writing about the presence of Deidamia and also mentioning that Achilles left female life for weapons (you can see the text here, although it’s in Greek). One scholia about The Iliad presents Thetis as the person responsible for hiding Achilles, while another scholia presents Peleus. The version with Peleus is extremely unusual, so there is a theory in academia that it was a mistake on the part of the schoalist.

It’s argued that Achilles' association with Skyros has three different versions and that the one presented in The Iliad is a separate version from the other sources.

By scrutinizing the available ancient evidence concerning the association between Achilles and Scyros, it is argued that we should distinguish between three versions: (1) the version reflected in Il. 9, 666-668, according to which Achilles sacked and looted Scyros, and distributed the spoils to his allies; (2) the version represented by the Cypria and Ilias parva that is reported by the exegetical scholium ad Il. 19, 326a1-a2, according to which Achilles is forced to land on Scyros because of a storm after the abortive expedition to Teuthrania and the wounding of Telephus by Achilles; and (3) the version reported by scholium D ad Il. 19, 326, P.Berol. 13930, and the scholia ad Il. 9, 668b and Il. 19, 326, and some other sources, according to which Achilles was sent by Thetis (or Peleus) to hide at Scyros in an attempt to avoid going to the war, in which he was destined to die.

Cypria fr 19 (Bernabé, West): further considerations by Christos Tsagalis, abstract. 

There are those who consider the existence of two versions. The first being the sum of the version of The Iliad with the version of The Cypria and The Little Iliad (I'll explain them), thus causing Achilles to sack Skyros after being forced to land on the island because of a storm. The second being the version being the one where he was hidden as a girl on Skyros. There are those who also try to connect the three, interpreting that there was a first visit by Achilles to Skyros when hidden and a second when he sacked Skyros. Personally, I prefer the interpretation that there are three versions.

The Cypria, by Stasinus of Cyprus, and The Little Iliad, by Lesches of Mitylene (7th century BC)

This is a source of Greek mythology. The Cypria, commonly attributed to Stasinus of Cyprus, is, unfortunately, a lost epic poem. This means we’re unable to access the details, so the most I have to offer is a summary given by Proclus in Chrestomathy. It’s possible to know that the theme of The Cypria dealt with the pre-time to the Trojan War, things like the judgment of Paris, the kidnapping of Helen, etc.

In Stasinus' version, Achilles and Deidamia's meeting took place after he was already counted as one of the participants in the Achaean army, thus possibly not presenting the disguise version. At one point, a storm caused the Myrmidons to end up disembarking on Skyros. There, Achilles married/made love to Deidamia. In other words, here Neoptolemus' mother has a specified identity. But unfortunately, there's no way to know how this relationship developed.

[...] As they put out from Mysia a storm comes on them and scatters them, and Achilles first puts in at Scyros and married Deidameia, the daughter of Lycomedes, and then heals Telephus, who had been led by an oracle to go to Argos, so that he might be their guide on the voyage to Ilium. [...]

The Cypria, frag 1. Translation by. H.G. Evelyn-White.

Here Skyros seems to serve especially to explain the existence of an important character (Neoptolemus). Unlike Homer, there is no mention of Skyros being conquered, and unlike a lot of other sources there is no disguise. However, despite the absence of conquest or disguise, there are people who attempt to link Cypria with at least one of these versions. In the first case, to try to make Cypria make narrative sense with The Iliad, where the conquest happens. In the second case, to try to make Cypria make narrative sense with several other sources in which the disguise occurs. Regarding the possibility of Cypria dealing with the disguise episode, Tsagalis says: 

Kullmann is right that absolute precision on the part of Proclus is not to be sought, but it is very surprising that Proclus had decided not to refer at all to the recruitment of Achilles, the best of the Achaeans. The most reasonable explanation is that contrary to Odysseus’ ‘problematic and unheroic recruitment’, Achilles had been sent willingly by his father Peleus to Troy and that Proclus, who may well have regarded this episode as of minor importance (in the manner of the recruitment of Palamedes that is also not mentioned in his summary), decided to omit it. It is highly unlikely that the Cypria dealt with two ‘problematic and unheroic’ recruitments (Odysseus and Achilles) but Proclus decided to refer only to the former at the expense of the latter. This thematic predilection is against the principles governing his summarizing technique and can hardly be explained (unless, as argued above, Achilles’ case is not a ‘problematic’ recruitment). Moreover, Proclus refers to traveling all around Greece and gathering the Greek kings before (§ 21 Kullmann = 118-119 Severyns) turning to the episode of Odysseus (§ 22 Kullmann = 119-121 Severyns); in other words, if the episode of Achilles at Scyros really formed part of the Cypria, it may have been placed before the episode of Odysseus, which was the last in the list. If this was the case and Odysseus did not form part of the embassy to Peleus, we may start considering the possibility that the Cypria did not include the theme of Achilles hiding in Scyros at all. In a nutshell, if there is no Odysseus to reveal Lycomedes trick, then there may be – at this stage of the plot – no Lycomedes, and hence no Scyros.

Cypria fr 19 (Bernabé, West): further considerations by Christos Tsagalis, pg 264.

In another lost epic, The Little Iliad of Lesches of Mitylene, the same version with a storm is presented and that is why I’m putting the two together here. Unlike The Cypria, The Little Illiad was intended to deal mainly with myths after The Iliad, such as the death of Ajax, Helen's marriage to Deiphobus, and the search for Philoctetes and Neoptolemus. A Homeric scholia mentioned the link of Achilles and Skyros in The Cypria.

Eustathius on Homer, Il. 326: The author of the Little Iliad says that Achilles after putting out to sea from the country of Telephus came to land there: "The storm carried Achilles the son of Peleus to Scyros, and he came into an uneasy harbour there in that same night."

The Little Iliad, frag 5. Translation by. H.G. Evelyn-White.

Although there is no mention of Deidamia, a summary of Proclus (frag 1) says that “Odysseus brings Neoptolemus from Scyros”, thus still linking the birth of Neoptolemus to Skyros. Marco Fantuzzi mentions that this version was preferred by many because it didn’t “tarnish” Achilles' traditionally masculine heroic image, which happens in the version where he disguises himself as a girl (non-masculine) to avoid war (non-heroic). It was only later that the myth of disguise gained greater popularity, but it still generated reactions. As for when the disguise myth arose, unfortunately it isn’t possible to be sure. The oldest source belongs to Classical Greece, but there is a possibility that it existed in Archaic Greece and simply wasn’t the common version of the myth.

If we believe that the silence of Proclus is more reliable than Σ D Il. 19.326, we may instead suppose that the Iliad, the Little Iliad, and the Cypria knew of a version of the story — which perhaps existed before the transvestism version and was clearly an alternative to it — in which Achilles, already a member of the expedition against Troy, was blown to Scyros by a storm while sailing back from the land of Telephos, and on that occasion he had the opportunity of meeting Deidameia and having sex with her. In any case, at least in Homer and in the Little Iliad (we do not know for certain about the Cypria) neither the fact that the young Achilles was led to Scyros by an anxious protective parent nor the disguise of cross-dressing and its detection by Odysseus is attested. In the Little Iliad Achilles was simply “cast away” on the island by a tempest independently of his or his parent’s will. Therefore, there was no deliberate dodging of the draft, and Achilles’ heroic ethos and reputation were  not sullied by an implied suspicion of cowardice. Indeed, at least some  of the ancients embraced with sympathy this thoroughly heroic version commenting on Il. 9.667–668, the passage where Achilles’ conquest of  Scyros is mentioned, the schol. ex. T to line 668 observes:  Σκῦρον ἑλών· οἱ μὲν νεώτεροι ἐκεῖ τὸν παρθενῶνά φασιν, ἔνθα τὸν ᾿Αχιλέα ἐν παρθένου σχήματι τῇ ∆ηιδαμείᾳ †κατακλίνουσιν†, ὁ δὲ ποιητὴς ἡρωϊκῶς πανοπλίαν αὐτὸν ἐνδύσας εἰς τὴν Σκῦρον ἀπεβίβασεν οὐ παρθένων, ἀλ᾽ ἀνδρῶν δια- πραξόμενον ἔργα, ἐξ ὧν καὶ τὰ λάφυρα δωρεῖται τοῖς συμμάχοις.  “Having taken Scyros”: Post-Homeric poets say that there [= in Scyros] was the gynaeceum where they have Achilles, disguised as a girl, lie down in bed [?] with Deidameia. The poet, instead, dressed him up in his panoply in a heroic way and had him disembark on Scyros to do not women’s work, but that of men, and he [Achilles] also presents his comrades with spoils from these deeds.

Achilles at Scyros and One of his Fans: The Epithalamium of Achilles and Deidamia (Buc. Gr. 157f. Gow) by Marco Fantuzzi, pg 286.

Skyrians, by Euripides (5rd century BC)

This is a source of Greek mythology. I suppose Euripides needs no introduction, so let’s get to it. Like Aeschylus and Sophocles, Euripides wrote more plays than we have access to, as they’re unfortunately lost. For example, Aeschylus wrote a trilogy focusing on Achilles, of which only fragments survive. Sophocles wrote a play called Peleus, which also didn’t stand the test of time.

Among the lost plays of Euripides, there was one called Skyrians, which, as the name clearly suggests, was related to Skyros. The title, of course, doesn’t necessarily confirm that this is the myth of Achilles, after all Sophocles has a lost play with the same name whose theme is commonly believed to be about Neoptolemus and not Achilles, but in this case it really is about that myth. In the hypothesis, it’s possible to have an idea of ​​the content of the play (which is fragmentary), and the theme follows exactly the idea of ​​Thetis knowing the prophecy and hiding Achilles as one of Lycomedes' girls:

Skyrians, which begins, ‘O daughter of Tyndareus from Sparta…; the plot is as follows: Thetis, having learned of (the destiny) of her son Achilles, wanted (to keep) him out of the expedition (against Troy), and so (she concealed) him in a girl’s clothing (and deposited him) with Lycomedes the (ruler) of the Scyrians. Lycomedes was raising (a daughter) named (Deidameia) whose mother had died, and he brought (Achilles) up as a girl together with her, his real identity being unrecognized; and Achilles... seduced Deidameia and made her pregnant. Agamemnon and his comrades (were told) by an oracle not (to make their expedition) without Achilles...Diomedes...(they,) learning…

Hypothesis of Skyrians. 

The play opens with Deidamia realizing that she’s pregnant. Because the play is extremely fragmented, it isn’t possible to be completely sure if it was consensual or not. However, Melissa Karen Anne Funke argues that there are textual elements that imply a typical “rape and pregnancy discovery” storyline:

The play opens with a character, presumably Deidameia’s nurse, revealing to Lycomedes that Deidameia is ill, an act which recalls Canace concealing her own pregnancy with the excuse of illness. This is a conventional way to begin a play with a rape and recognition plot, however Achilles’ continued presence on Scyros departs from the usual brief encounter between the parthenos and the man who impregnates her, while the recognition centers not on the child, but on Achilles himself. Lycomedes’ response to the nurse exposes either just how effective Achilles’ disguise has been, or how confident Lycomedes has been of his success in segregating his daughter from outside influence: What is the cause? What ailment is overcoming her? Is some chill in her bile troubling her chest? (fr. 682)

Euripides and Gender: The Difference the Fragments Make, by Melissa Karen Anne Funke, pg 166-167.

Another possible argument to indicate the presence of rape is the fact that Euripides addresses gender in this play. Forced to hide like a girl, the more time passed, the more impatient Achilles became. By impregnating a woman, even by force, he would be reaffirming his supposedly repressed masculinity. The theme of femininity x masculinity continues, becoming even more evident when the character of Odysseus is present. When he discovers that Achilles is hiding from the war while living as a girl, he humiliates him by saying that such a situation tarnishes his status as a son of Peleus:

And you, extinguisher of your family’s brilliant light, are you combing wool– you, born of the most valiant father in Greece? (fr. 683a)

Thus, not only does he deny his masculine position as a warrior, but he also tarnishes Peleus' honor. A fragment attributed to Skyrians and believed to be possibly part of Odysseus' speech to convince Achilles to leave Skyros strengthens this idea:

Young men should get honours not amongst women but amidst arms and weaponry. (fr. 880)

Once again, the argument used by Odysseus is to state that, by remaining in Skyros, Achilles' masculinity is compromised. Even if Achilles, now revealed, lived as a man and played the masculine role of father to Neoptolemus, his masculinity would still be undermined by the decision to actively flee the war, an unmasculine attitude. And in doing so, Achilles wouldn’t only compromise his masculinity, he would also compromise his family, shaming his lineage by being less than a ideal man.

In a way, as Melissa's text addresses (I highly recommend reading pages 164-170, which are the part that deals with Skyrians), the play portrays how restrictive gender roles are. Deidamia is trapped in the role of mother and has no choice about it because that is her duty as a woman and refusing motherhood would be reprehensible, regardless of whether the relationship is consensual or not — even if it's not consensual, she still has to be a mother. In turn, the only way Achilles has to ensure masculinity is by going to the Trojan War. Now it’s no longer enough to live as a man after leaving the disguise, assuming the position of Neoptolemus's father or even Deidamia's husband, male positions. The only way is by going to the Trojan War, also a limiting choice. And if he doesn't do this, not only will his honor be compromised, but the honor of his family as well (represented by Peleus). Despite this, because of the fragmentary state of the play, it isn’t possible to know Achilles' thoughts on this. It’s somewhat intriguing that apparently Odysseus needed to persuade (the fragmentary speech) Achilles after discovering him, but it isn’t enough of an argument to be sure what Achilles thought of the play. Also, Euripides had a tendency to give female characters a significant voice, so I imagine there is a possibility the poem could have explored giving at least some voice to the character Deidamia.

Here, Skyros seems to serve to explain the existence of an important character (Neoptolemus), but also to discuss society (gender roles, adulthood).

Alexandra, by Lycophron (4th century BC)

This is a source of Greek mythology. Alexandra is a poem written in an enigmatic way, as it concerns the prophecies of the Trojan prophetess Cassandra, who is being observed by a slave and having her prophecies written because of Priam's orders. Because of how the text is written, it’s difficult to be sure of what is written and it needs to be interpreted a lot. As such, there is no way for me to guarantee the accuracy of the interpretations. Well, here we go:

And he shall come upon his homeward path, raising the tawny wasps from their holds, even as a child disturbs their nest with smoke. And they in their turn shall come, sacrificing cruelty to the blustering winds the heifer that bare the war-named son, the mother that was brought to bed of the dragon of Scyrus; for whom her husband shall search within the Salmydesian Sea, where she cuts the throats of Greeks, and shall dwell for a long space in the white-crested rock by the outflowing of the marshy waters of the Celtic stream; yearning for his wife whom at her slaying a hind shall rescue from the knife, offering her own throat instead. [...]

Alexandra. Translation by A.W.Mair.

And he shall come upon his homeward path, raising the tawny wasps from their holds, even as a child disturbs their nest with smok = Paris doing his chaotic things. The “raising the tawny wasps” is probably the Greeks reacting.

And they in their turn shall come, sacrificing cruelty to the blustering winds the heifer = The Greeks sacrifice Iphigenia so the wind returns.

that bare the war-named son, the mother that was brought to bed of the dragon of Scyrus; = “War-named son” is Neoptolemus, whose name means "new war", and “dragon of Scyrus” is maybe Achilles, related to his stay on Skyros. This implies that Achilles and Iphigenia actually lay together and it wasn't just fake, and from that Neoptolemus was born. Here Deidamia isn’t the mother.

…for whom her husband shall search within the Salmydesian Sea, where she cuts the throats of Greeks, = The version of the myth in which Iphigenia is taken by Artemis to Tauris, where she’s forced to use travelers (mostly Greeks) as sacrifice. Euripides wrote a play on this. The husband is Achilles because of the marriage, which in this version was apparently consumed judging by the previous line.

…and shall dwell for a long space in the white-crested rock by the outflowing of the marshy waters of the Celtic stream; = It's talking about White Island, also known as Leuke. It concerns the version of the myth in which Achilles and those dear to him don’t go to conventional Elysium, but to another form of paradise on an island. According to Antoninus Liberalis, Iphigenia was the wife of Achilles in the afterlife. However, by Charles McNelis and Alexander Sens' interpretation, here Iphigenia doesn’t literally become Achilles' postmortem wife, that role belongs to Medea (cited as Achilles' future wife elsewhere in the poem). For them, in Alexandra the idea of Leuke is subverted from a reward (an after-death paradise) to a loss (the actual loss of Iphigenia).

…yearning for his wife whom at her slaying a hind shall rescue from the knife, offering her own throat instead = “his” refers to Achilles, and “wife” refers to Iphigenia in reference to the marriage. This part talks about how Iphigenia offered herself as a sacrifice, but Artemis replaced her with a deer at the time, and how Achilles regrets it because in this version she’s his beloved. Euripides wrote a play on this.

Regarding the unexpected "the heifer that bare the war-named son, the mother that was brought to bed of the dragon of Scyrus", the Byzantine scholiast of Alexandra, Ioannis Tzetzes, says “according to some, Pyrrhus was born from her (Iphigenia) and Achilles. After her sacrifice, Achilles entrusted his son to Deidamia in Scyros. Therefore, Iphigenia is the first-born mother of Pyrrhus”, thus describing an unusual version in which Deidamia is actually the adoptive mother of Neoptolemus while Iphigenia is the biological mother. So there is no guarantee Achilles had something sexual with Deidamia in this version. Later, Tzetzes explains Neoptolemus' mother is generally Deidamia and the marriage of Achilles and Iphigenia is generally false. In any case, Tzetzes discards all these versions as mythological nonsense and tells another version, which isn’t the focus here. In another part of the text, when describing Polyxena's sacrifice at the hands of Neoptolemus, Cassandra says "sullen lion, child of Iphis", here Neoptolemus, is "imitating his dark mother's lustrations", a likely reference to Iphigenia's role as the priestess who sacrificed foreigners in Tauris.

At another moment, Cassandra makes a clear allusion to Achilles' disguise as a girl in the Court of Lycomedes, talking about a “trafficker in corpses” who hid in a female robe to avoid his fate. I don't know what the Greek text looks like, but the translator's decision to use the term "endure" certainly implies that the idea of a boy living as a girl is here treated as a burden to the boy. That is, Achilles and Deidamia really know each other and so it makes sense that Achilles entrusted Neoptolemus to her after the "death" of Iphigenia, even if Neoptolemus isn’t her son. Although I don't know if he did this because Deidamia is a trusted friend or if it's because she's a lover.

[...] even he, the trafficker in corpses, who, fearing beforehand his doom, shall endure to do upon his body a female robe, handling the noisy shuttle at the loom, and shall be the last to set his foot in the land of the foe, cowering, O brother, even in his sleep before thy spear.

Alexandra, 275-280. Translation by A.W. Mair.

Tzetzes claimed that this isn’t the correct version. Apparently he found this idea absurd. Judging by the way he wrote, I imagine that Tzetzes found the version of the myth in which the hero tries to escape the way of achieving glory (war) by dressing as a girl (something considered reprehensible) too humiliating to be believable. Instead, he tells another version that made Achilles similar to other male characters in the Trojan War, that is: a married man with a son who had to leave his wife and child behind to go to war. Thus, Tzetzes erases any possible debate about gender, since Achilles is inserted in a context perfectly typical of the male gender and resembles typically male characters like Agamemnon and Odysseus in this respect.

But these things have been fabricated and mythologized, the truth is this: Achilles, having just taken Deidameia, Lycomedes' daughter, to wife, was living with her in the bridal chamber and in the longing of a newlywed, hence they fabricated that he had assumed women's clothing. When Odysseus announced the expedition, he eagerly obeyed and rushed to war, even though he learned from an oracle that he would have a short life if he sailed to Troy. This announcement and the fear from the oracle they represented with swords and spindles; for Achilles did not show cowardice, but eagerly rushed to war, and Homer testifies in the L (767) rhapsody, introducing Nestor speaking to Patroclus: "I came, and divine Odysseus, gathering the people, to fair-womaned Achaea" and a little later (781) he says "I led - they were willing". All these things are allegorized, but this barbarian-tongued Lycophron accepts them more mythically. Therefore, it seems burdensome to me to allegorize in things not being allegorized, as I have often said.

Ad Lycophronem, 277.

Regarding gender roles, Celsiana Warwick interprets that in Alexandra the character of Achilles is subverted. Where in other myths his most exalted aspects are mainly traditionally masculine characteristics (be they positive ones like courage, or negative ones like violence), Alexandra makes him a figure considered effeminate. She interprets these three characters as being represented as "forces opposing Olympus", so to speak.

Achilles in the Alexandra also exhibits monstrous hybridity in that he transgresses the boundaries of masculinity and femininity. Cassandra describes the episode in which Achilles dresses as a girl on Scyrus to avoid being sent to war (276–80): νεκροπέρνας, ὃς προδειμαίνων πότμον καὶ θῆλυν ἀμφὶ σῶμα τλήσεται πέπλον δῦναι, παρ᾽ ἱστοῖς κερκίδος ψαύσας κρότων, καὶ λοῖσθος εἰς γῆν δυσμενῶν ῥῖψαι πόδα, τὸ σόν, ξύναιμε, κἀν ὕπνῳ πτήσσων δόρυ.  The corpse-seller, who fearing in advance his fate  Will dare to put a woman’s dress around his body,  Handling the rattling shuttle at the loom,  And cast his foot upon the land last of our enemies,  Cowering before your spear, brother, even in his sleep According to Cassandra, Achilles wears women’s clothes and performs women’s work because of a desire to avoid fighting, opening himself up to charges of effeminacy and cowardice. But by describing Achilles as ‘cowering before Hector’s spear’, Cassandra conjures up an image of a terrified female figure menaced by a warrior’s weapons. Similar imagery describes Xerxes later when he is said to fear the Greek fleet ‘like a girl fears the dark twilight … terrified by a bronze weapon’ (ὡς λυκοψίαν κόρη κνεφαίαν … χαλκηλάτῳ κνώδοντι δειματουμένη, 1431–3). Both images impugn the masculinity of a male character, but also resonate with the theme of female helplessness in the face of male violence. Crucially, while Xerxes is likened to a girl only with respect to his fear, Achilles undergoes a kind of temporary transformation by assuming the female role through his dress and actions. He is not only like a terrified girl at the loom, he actually takes on the lived experience of a woman, making him a hybrid figure, both savage warrior and frightened maiden. The passage thus has a double function—it undermines Achilles’ martial reputation, but also suggests that, in terms of the poem’s depiction of the conflict between male and female, Cassandra is presenting Achilles as conceptually allied with the female, just as Typhon is allied with the chthonic feminine in the Theogony. The Alexandra’s presentation of several key episodes suggests that the poem deliberately downplays Achilles’ role as an enactor of specifically patriarchal violence in the mythological tradition in favour of aligning him with the female and the chthonic. It would have been easy for the Alexandra to vilify Achilles by playing up myths in which he enacts violence against young women, such as his slaying of Penthesilea or his ghost’s demand for the sacrifice of Polyxena over his tomb. However, the Alexandra conspicuously does not do this; instead, it attributes the sacrifice of Polyxena to Neoptolemus only (323–6), who is said to perform the deed ‘imitating the sacrifices of his dark mother’ (μητρὸς κελαινῆς χέρνιβας μιμούμενος, 325). While the Alexandra does mention the death of Penthesilea (999–1001), this passage mentions Achilles not as her killer but as the avenger of the desecration of her corpse by Thersites, again positioning him as the champion of the female against the male. In a poem with such an emphasis on the victimization of women by male heroes, these details signpost Achilles’ unique role in the Alexandra’s thematic structure as a masculine figure aligned with chthonic feminine disruption. 

Chthonic Disruption in Lycophron’s Alexandra, by Celsiana Warwick, pg 547-548.

Fantuzzi also believes that the character of Achilles was deconstructed and reconstructed, although he gives a different motivation for this compared to Celsiana Warwick. While Warwick seeks to present an interpretation that links the characters of Cassandra, Clytemnestra and Achilles in a similar narrative role, Fantuzzi interprets that such a reinterpretation of Achilles happens because he’s an Achaean symbol since he’s the best Achaean warrior, and Alexandra's narrative seeks the Trojan point of view, in which the Achaean characters are much more negatively portrayed while the Trojan characters are exalted. Achilles, as a symbol of bravery, is transformed into a symbol of cowardice, which was mostly seen as a typically feminine trait. For example, Alexandra is apparently the only source in which Achilles is depicted as being afraid of Hector, who is usually the one who runs when he sees Achilles.

Lycophron's outlook reflects the usual anti-Greek bias with which the Trojan Alexandra/Cassandra describes the characters and deeds of the major Greek heroes at Troy; this bias is especially bitter in the case of Achilles, as he had killed her brother Hector. In an attempt to cast Achilles in as pejorative a light as possible, Alexandra even goes so far as to omit Thetis' role in her son's cross-dressing in Scyros. The idea that Achilles acquiesced in his cross-dressing adventure solely to assuage his mother's anxieties seems to (p.40) have been the most common apology entertained by the authors who passed judgement on this episode in his life, but did not want to be overly censorious [...] [...] We might certainly suppose that Lycophron omitted the agency of Thetis simply because of the brevity of his reference to the episode of Achilles' cross-dressing, or because in general he is cryptically elusive—in this case he could presuppose that every reader would assume Thetis' or Peleus' role in the hiding of the boy Achilles at (p.41) Scyros, as this role was present in every other version of the episode of the transvestite Achilles that we know before Lycophron. But in the context of Alexandra's words, brimming as they are with hatred, her silence on Thetis' responsibility surely magnifies the cowardice of which Alexandra most explicitly accuses him by suppressing every extenuating circumstance. As for the fact that Achilles defeated and killed Hector, Alexandra highlights both the cruel greed with which he demanded a very high ransom for Hector's body (only to suffer the same fate when he himself died) and the cowardice with which he originally tried to avoid Hector's spear (Al. 269–80). [...] [...] Lycophron's Alexandra cannot rewrite the story of the war or the death of Hector (the Iliad still exists), but at least she can acrimoniously re-read the story of these events with an anti-Iliad and anti-Greek perspective. It is impossible to establish whether this (p.43) spiteful deconstruction of Achilles' heroism relied on some source or not, or whether it was just the backbiting of a prophetess accustomed to manipulating the presentation of events. In the Iliad Achilles proudly maintains that, while he was fighting with the Greeks, 'Hector was never willing to push the battle away from the wall, but would come out no further than the Scaian gates and the oak-tree. There he once stood up to me alone, and barely escaped my attack' (9.352-5). Certainly, when Agamemnon tried to restrain Menelaus from fighting with Hector, he warned him that 'even Achilles shudders (pply') to meet this man [= Hector] in the fighting where men win glory, and he is a much better man than you' (7.113-14). But at least some of the ancients considered these lines a 'lie' invented by Agamemnon to 'deter' Menelaus from fighting: Σ minora II. 7.114 “ἔρριγ ̓ ἀντιβολῆσαι means 'he feared to encounter'. This was a lie; he said this to Menelaus in order to dissuade him (τοῦτο δὲ ἐψεύσατο· ἵνα δὲ ἀποστρέψηι τὸν Μενέλαον εinεv avτw)". Probably there were no other passages the ancients could bring to mind where Achilles was actually portrayed as frightened by Hector, or they applied their common protective concern for Achilles' heroism.

Achilles in Love: Intertextual Studies by Marco Fantuzzi, pg 16-20.

In the interpretation offered in “The Alexandra of Lycophron: A Literary Study”, there is greater agreement with Fantuzzi's interpretation in attributing Achilles' subversion to him being an Achaean symbol and, therefore, being the main target of ridicule. Like Warwick, this text also links Achilles' relationships as a way of minimizing him (by portraying him as being excessively passionate, as in the case of Iphigenia, or by portraying him as not being able to achieve the desired relationship, as in the case of Helen, or by erasing some of his relationships, as in the case of Deidamia). However, in addition, the writers draw a parallel between Achilles and Paris, a character who was commonly represented as not fulfilling the expectations of what a man ideally was — as he was often portrayed as effeminate, cowardly, not very skilled in fighting, vain and too involved in romance/eroticism in a way that wasn’t necessarily always connected to violent conquest. While Achilles and Paris were generally written as opposites when it came to "meeting social expectations of masculinity", in Alexandra they’re written more similarly.

The opening line of this narrative evokes Paris' account of the couple's initial lovemaking on Cranae at II. 3.442-7, where, having been rescued from his duel and beautified by Aphrodite, he takes Helen to bed: οὐ γάρ πώ ποτέ μ ̓ ὧδέ γ' ἔρως φρένας ἀμφεκάλυψεν, οὐδ ̓ ὅτε σε πρῶτον Λακεδαίμονος ἐξ ἐρατεινῆς ἔπλεον ἁρπάξας ἐν ποντοπόροισι νέεσσι, νήσῳ δ ̓ ἐν Κραναῇ ἐμίγην φιλότητι καὶ εὐνῇ, ὥς σεο νῦν ἔραμαι καί με γλυκὺς ἵμερος αἱρεῖ. ἦ ῥα, καὶ ἄρχε λέχοσδὲ κιών· ἅμα δ' εἵπετ ̓ ἄκοιτις. Not ever yet has such desire covered my wits, not even when first, having snatched you up, I sailed from lovely Lacedaemon in my sea- faring ships, and I mixed with you in love and the bed on the island Cranae, as now I desire you and sweet lust seizes me. So he spoke and he went and led her to bed, and his wife followed him.

In the Alexandra, Cassandra's narrative begins like the Homeric version (110 νήσῳ δ ̓ ἐνὶ δράκοντος ἐγχέας πόθον ~ Π. 3.445 νήσῳ δ ̓ ἐν Κραναῇ ἐμίγην φιλότητι καὶ εὐνῇ) but immediately thereafter takes a different tack. According to her version, Paris did not get to enjoy sex with Helen a second time, since she was taken from him by Proteus, leaving him only with a cold, empty embrace; the obvious reference here is to the famous story that Helen was replaced by a phantom. The version recounted by Cassandra seems to combine elements of the story reported by Herodotus, in which Proteus' moral outrage led him to send Paris away but retain Helen after the couple landed in Egypt on their way to Troy (2.112-15), with Stesichorus' Palinode, in which a phantom of Helen was sent to Troy in her stead. The Stesichorean palinode took specific issue with the veracity of the traditional account (cf. Chamaeleon POxy. 2506 fr. 26.i; Stesich. PMG 192 οὐκ ἔστ ̓ ἔτυμος λόγος οὗτος / οὐδ ̓ ἔβας ἐν νηυσὶν εὐσέλμοις / οὐδ ̓ IKEо Пéруaμа Tрoías "this story is not true, nor did you go in well- benched ships, nor did you reach the towers of Troy"), and the allusion to the Homeric version at the opening of Cassandra's narra- tive is thus particularly pointed, since it sets up expectations that are disappointed by what follows. Instead of simply following the Iliadic narrative, Cassandra's prophecy rationalizes two competing versions, the Homeric account in which the adulteress Helen made her way to Troy, and that attested in, for example, Euripides' Helen," where Helen's marriage remained inviolate: in the Alexandra, Helen will have sex with Paris, but only once. Moreover, the allusion to Paris' speech in which he describes his own sexual desire and persuades Helen to follow him to bed calls attention to the fact that, unlike in Homer, Lycophron's Paris will never have the opportunity to have sex with her a second time. In both theme and language, Cassandra's account of Achilles' marriage builds upon her own representation of Paris' relationship with Helen. At the verbal level, eg oveípov (172 "from dreams") resembles καξ ὀνειράτων (113), while ἐν δὲ δεμνίοις (171) recalls Séμva (114). Like Paris, the husband described in 171-3 sleeps only with a phantom (εἰδωλοπλάστῳ προσκαταξανει ῥέθει). In fact, Achil- les is husband to Helen only in his imagination, and in this sense the verbal echoes of the frustrated union between Paris and Helen are reinforced at the thematic level. This parallelism between Achilles and Paris is also reinforced in the structural design of the broader narrative. As we have noted (Chapter 4), verses 180-215 are framed as a diptych, in which the gatherings of the Greeks at Aulis are set in opposition first to Paris' return from Sparta and then to Achilles' travels in Scythia. Thus, Paris' return to Troy (180 x μèν паλμпóρ- ευτον ἵξεται τρίβον) is mirrored by Achilles' wandering (200 χώ μὲν TаτýσEι Xâроv aiálov Zкúony), while 183-4 and 202-4, each of which describes a ritual activity of the Greeks (the sacrifice of Iphi- genia, the oath), begin in a similar manner (183-4 oi d' av πрoуeνvý- τειραν... χερνίψαντες ~ 202-4 οἱ δ ̓ ἀμφὶ βωμὸν... ὅρκων τὸ SEUTEроûXov aрoavтes). Achilles, then, is presented as a doublet ofParis.

The Alexandra of Lycophron: A Literary Study by Charles McNelis and Alexander Sens, pg 105-106.

Epithalamium of Achilles and Deidameia, by Bion of Smyrna (1st or 2nd century BC)

This is a source of Greek mythology. The Epithalamium of Achilles and Deidameia has no confirmed authorship, although it’s mainly attributed to Bion of Smyrna, a bucolic poet. The term bucolic designates a pastoral type of poem, often celebrating rural life and describing rural customs. In Ancient Greece, many of these poets also referenced myths, since myths were a strong part of the culture. Unfortunately, like The Skyrians, this is a fragmentary work and only the beginning of the poem has been preserved to the present day. 

The title itself is significant, as it alone denotes the romantic and/or erotic nature of the poem. If you have never read the word Epithalamium before, the Collins Dictionary definition is “a poem or song written to celebrate a marriage; nuptial ode” and has its origins in the Greek epithalamion, from epi ‘upon’ + thalamos ‘bridal chamber’. Fantuzzi clarifies it’s more likely this title was added later rather than being the poet's original title.

Anyway, these are the lines we currently have access to (the rest are lost), showing that this poem is about the secret romance between Achilles and Deidamia while he disguises himself as a girl:

Myrson. Wilt thou be pleased now, Lycidas, to sing me sweetly some sweet Sicilian song, some wistful strain delectable, some lay of love, such as the Cyclops Polyphemus sang on the sea-banks to Galatea? Lycidas. Yes, Myrson, and I too fain would pipe, but what shall I sing? Myrson. A song of Scyra, Lycidas, is my desire, —a sweet love-story,—the stolen kisses of the son of Peleus, the stolen bed of love how he, that was a boy, did on the weeds of women, and how he belied his form, and how among the heedless daughters of Lycomedes, Deidamia cherished Achilles in her bower. [176] Lycidas. The herdsman bore off Helen, upon a time, and carried her to Ida, sore sorrow to Oenone. And Lacedaemon waxed wroth, and gathered together all the Achaean folk; there was never a Hellene, not one of the Mycenaeans, nor any man of Elis, nor of the Laconians, that tarried in his house, and shunned the cruel Ares. But Achilles alone lay hid among the daughters of Lycomedes, and was trained to work in wools, in place of arms, and in his white hand held the bough of maidenhood, in semblance a maiden. For he put on women’s ways, like them, and a bloom like theirs blushed on his cheek of snow, and he walked with maiden gait, and covered his locks with the snood. But the heart of a man had he, and the love of a man.  From dawn to dark he would sit by Deidamia, and anon would kiss her hand, and oft would lift the beautiful warp of her loom and praise the sweet threads, having no such joy in any other girl of her company. Yea, all things he essayed, and all for one end, that they twain might share an undivided sleep. Now he once even spake to her, saying— ‘With one another other sisters sleep, but I lie alone, and alone, maiden, dost thou lie, both being girls unwedded of like age, both fair, and single both in bed do we sleep.  The wicked Nysa, the crafty nurse it is that cruelly severs me from thee.  For not of thee have I... ’

Theocritus, Bion and Moschus Rendered into Enlish Prose. Love of Achilles. Edited by Andrew Lang.

The idea of hidden romance is especially noticeable due to the use of the word “stolen” which, according to Fatuzzi: “'Stolen', not only according to the traditional motif of sex as ontologically furtive, namely consummated in private, which dates from Hom. Il. 6.161 and Mimn. 7.3 Gentili-Prato = IEG 1.3 and is widespread in Latin love elegy (cf. most recently McKeown (1987–9) ii.101; Floridi (2007) 164-5); compare in particular Ps.- Theocr. 27.68 pápios evvá. In Epith. 6 the epithet is remotivated: the kisses and sex which Achilles enjoyed with Deidameia are 'stolen', since he acquired them thanks to his cross-dressing disguise”. That is, “stolen” here isn’t intended to refer to the lack of consent, but the way Achilles and Deidamia do it secretly and how Achilles was only able to court Deidamia because he approached her as a girl, if we take into account the same as in other versions apparently Lycomedes purposely keeps Deidamia out of contact with boys (like in The Skyrians).

Fantuzzi argues that, when comparing Lycophron's Alexandra with this poem, it’s possible to notice how, although both poems deal with Achilles' so-called non-heroic conduct in dressing up as a girl to escape war, Epithalamium sympathizes with this rather than portraying it in a completely negative way like Alexandra. Furthermore, Epithalamium, unlike most sources, has no intention of focusing on the way Achilles gives up the feminine (his disguise) for the masculine (war). Instead, the poem praises his stay on Skyros for its romantic aspect, which isn’t unexpected for a bucolic poem since some of them had love as their focus. This is shown in how the poet describes how other male characters are busy with war, and then immediately describes how Achilles is among the girls. Also in how he opens the story talking about the "stolen kisses of the son of Peleus" rather than "the rage of Peleus’ son" and goes on to describe romantic conquests instead than how many died because of his rage. The "cruel" used to describe Ares is also not simply one of his epithets, but an adjective from this poem specifically, which may sound like a kind of condemnation of war in comparison to the art of flirting.

The poem doesn’t even bother to mention that Achilles is forced there as in most texts, as the poem doesn’t seek to justify an attitude considered dishonorable, as the poet doesn’t condemn Achilles' attitude. In a way, Thetis' absence here serves the opposite of Alexandra, where Thetis' absence was perhaps intended to emphasize Achilles' negative cowardice, while her absence here is as a way of ensuring that not going to war and prioritizing Deidamia is positive and therefore doesn’t need to be justified, a vision influenced by the bucolic perspective. Not only is Thetis absent as a justification for Achilles' non-heroic attitude, but Achilles is clearly comfortable spending his days dressed as a girl, weaving and flirting, unlike other texts that somehow address his discontent or are neutral about this.

The fact that Achilles appears to be perfectly at ease in his cross-dressing and is deeply feminized is another antimilitaristic element that contributes to the erotic atmosphere and viewpoint of the Epith. Achilles is depicted as enjoying his situation, and fully complying with the demands of his disguise: he has white skin (16) and snowy cheeks (19) which blush shyly (19); he learns how to spin wool (16), he walks like a woman (19-20), and he wears a veil (20).96 In effect, as the author invites us to acknowledge, ἐφαίνετο δ' ήύτε κώρα· | καὶ γὰρ ἤ (p.56) σον τήναις θηλύνετο 'he looked like a girl. Womanlike as they he bore himself', 17-18. Furthermore, in the Epith. it is precisely this comfortable familiarity with his transvestism that Achilles exploits in the verbal strategies he uses to conquer Deidameia. We cannot rule out the possibility that he had been doing the same thing in other texts that narrate this episode of his life. In any case at least in the most detailed poetic treatment of the myth known to us, Statius' Achilleid, from the beginning (1.318-24) to the end (1.652-4) of his cross-dressing Achilles is aware that this disguise allows him to stay close to Deidameia and to wait for a good opportunity to satisfy his passion. But when he finally decides to engage with her sexually, he does so in the Achilleid through the violence of rape, which he views as his first male action after the extended repression of his manly temper under female clothes: cf. 1.638-9 quonam usque premes urentia pectus / vulnera, teque marem (pudet heu!) nec amore probabis? 'How long will you suppress the wound that burns your breast, nor even in love (for shame!) prove yourself a man?'97 And he was also supposed to have raped Deidameia in the brief account offered by Ov. Ars am. 1.681–704, where Achilles' conquest of Deidameia is presented as a paradigm of male force being used in the conquest of love objects. On the contrary, in the scene that concludes the surviving part of the Epith. (lines 25–30), Achilles tries to attain his goal by furthering his pretence of femininity to the most extreme point:

πάντα δ ̓ ἐποίει σπεύδων κοινὸν ἐς ὕπνον. ἔλεξέ νυ καὶ λόγον αὐτᾶι· “ἄλλαι μὲν κνώσσουσι σὺν ἀλλήλαισιν ἀδελφαί, αὐτὰρ ἐγὼ μούνα, μούνα δὲ σύ, νύμφα, καθεύδεις. αἱ δύο παρθενικαὶ συνομάλικες, αἱ δύο καλαί, ἀλλὰ μόναι κατὰ λέκτρα καθεύδομες..." and all his endeavour aimed that they should sleep together; indeed he said to her: ‘Other sisters sleep with one another, but I alone and you alone, maiden. Though both be girls of the like age and both fair, alone in our beds we sleep…’ Not without some awareness of the paradoxicality of this idea (cf. πάντα δ ̓ ἐποίει, ἔλεξέ νυ καί), the author ascribes to Achilles a speech (p.57) in which he appears to appropriate the female voice of Sappho or a Sapphic character: in an Aeolizing text usually ascribed to Sappho (168b Voigt), female voice, who is possibly, but not necessarily, the author, expresses distress over her nocturnal solitude in bed, perhaps implying that she hoped it would be otherwise: δέδυκε μὲν ἀ σελάννα καὶ Πληΐαδες· μέσαι δὲ νύκτες, παρὰ δ ̓ ἔρχετ ̓ ἄρα· ἔγω δὲ μόνα κατεύδω. The moon has set and the Pleiades. The night is at its midpoint, time passes, and I sleep alone.

This fragment (or could it be a complete short poem?) quoted by Hephaestion as an anonymous example of a metre (the ionic tetrameter), and is only ascribed to Sappho by Byzantine paromiographers. Therefore, its Sapphic authorship has sometimes been questioned. Regardless of whether it is by Sappho or by one of her imitators, however, the desire which it describes is erotic and the memorable έyw δὲ μόνα κατεύδω of the Aeolic text will have been easily perceived as the intertext in the background of Epith. 28: αὐτὰρ ἐγὼ μούνα, μούνα δὲ σύ, νύμφα, καθεύδεις (female voices expressing sexual desire must have been few in Greek poetry). The sense to be inferred from this intertextual connection is that Achilles, disguised as a girl, was trying to deceive Deidameia by taking on the additional disguise of a female homoerotic voice. At the same time, however, the Achilles of the Epith. challenges the phrasing of the Sapphic text, especially by twisting it to also function as a warning for Deidameia, when he suggests that the feeling of solitude is shared by (p.58) both himself and her. He thus transforms the original nostalgic sense of the erotic solitude of a single person into a paraenetic motivation for Deidameia to sleep in the same bed as another girl in order that they might overcome this shared solitude. In other words, through the allusion to Sappho Achilles hints at the erotic distress of his solitude, but at the same time, for the sake of Deidameia's innocent ears, he seems simply to suggest an innocent sharing of the bed for companionship. In the same twofold allusive interplay, Achilles' designation of the other girls who surround Deidameia as ovvoμάλɩkeç probably includes another connotation which is particularly well-suited (and of good omen) to Achilles' wishes, since Sappho had twice mentioned the vμάλɩkεç of the bride celebrating weddings in her epithalamia (30.7, 103.11), and Theocr. 18.22 (another epithalamium) had also defined—in a probable reference to Sappho-the singers of this poem as σvvoμáàɩKEÇ of Helen. Besides, výμça from line 28 of the Epith. is also charged with a convenient ambiguity whose promising connotations Achilles could be exploiting for himself without allowing Deidameia to understand, or to be disquieted by, his true intentions. Deidameia would have believed that she was being addressed as a 'marriageable maiden,' according to one of the two possible meanings of vúμôn. The word, however, is also quite a common designation of the bride-e.g. again, in the vocabulary of Sappho's epithalamia (frr. 30.4, 103.2, 103b.2, 116, 117)—and Achilles might thus be hinting at this other meaning as a sign of his wish, and an anticipation of his imminent erotic conquest. Amusingly enough, if any real sexual intention can be grasped from the supposedly innocent invitation spoken by Achilles to Deidameia, Achilles has to seem a homosexual wooer: he Achilles' impersonation of a female voice is objectively an effective stratagem of a male lover pursuing the target of his desire; but within the textual strategy of the Epith. it also contributes to the general picture of Achilles' compliant effeminacy. 

Achilles in Love: Intertextual Studies by Marco Fantuzzi, pg 31-35.

Here rape doesn’t happen not only for moral reasons, but mainly for narrative reasons. The poet, unlike other authors, doesn’t disapprove of Achilles' unmanly or unheroic attitude. On the contrary, he portrays it in a positive light. So Achilles is perfectly comfortable with the female condition and doesn’t feel repressed. Because he doesn’t feel repressed, there is no need to use rape as a narrative resource to "regain masculinity". Likewise, when Myrson is starting the story it’s already clear that "Deidamia cherished Achilles in her bower" and “bed of love how he”, that is, they slept (so even if we don't have the end of the text, we know Achilles was successful), but it isn’t important to immediately mention pregnancy as in other sources. This is because the sexual act here not only has no intention of reinforcing masculinity through violence (as in the case of versions with rape) but also has no intention of reinforcing masculinity through the idea of ​​getting someone pregnant (something emphasized even in versions without rape). This is because in other texts masculinity is intimately linked to the idea of achieving the glory of war, something that this text doesn’t exalt. Achilles' comfort with femininity is so great that, even though his courtship with Deidamia is described in the text as happening because "But the heart of a man had he, and the love of a man", the tactics used are feminine. He cannot bed Deidamia by reinforcing masculine acts, he can bed Deidamia by being so feminine that the courtship is almost homoerotic from Deidamia's point of view. Here, the poet is more interested in the idea of the sexual act as an erotic/romantic context than in the context of reinforcing a great warrior through violence or fertility. 

It’s currently not possible to be sure whether before this poem there were other Greek representations of the Achilles myth in Skyros that focused on the erotic aspect or that hyperfeminized Achilles in the same way. Because of this, this poem is considered by some to be the Greek version that possibly sparked a kind of "response" from Roman authors, who sought to reaffirm masculinity in opposition to hyperfeminization.

It is appealing to suppose that the experiment of the Epith., or some other version that is unknown to us in which Achilles was hyper-erotized/hyper-feminized in a similar way, attracted the attention of Ovid in the Ars amatoria (1.681–704) and triggered his reworking of the story. Dressed in the garb of grave moralism, which was surely more than half-jesting in the context of such a work as the Ars, Ovid’s silences and comments about the story of Achilles’ stay at Scyros parodically re-propose a critical discourse similar to the one which had been formulated in a more serious way by Horace (Ars poet. 119–122) about the opportunity for global coherence for some characters to whom the literary tradition had granted an especially monolithic characterization. A substantial dignification of Achilles’ stay at Scyros is also erected by Statius’ Achilleid, which may also have been at least in part a reaction to the Epith. or a similarly hypererotized version of the tale, and was most likely in tune with the need for epic consistency in Achilles’ biography, which Statius was going to write. After Statius, no other Latin text develops the story of an Achilles who appears to dodge the draft on his own initiative, while deeply enjoying his transvestism — transvestism which by the way was a rigid taboo for the Latin notion of masculinity. In a striking confirmation of Horace’s stylistic dictum, the feminised super-star of erotic poetry who starred in an epyllion like the Epith. in a role that belied his Iliadic future appears to have quickly lost his battle with the Achilles of Ovid and Statius, whose impatience for cross-dressing and virile rape were much more acceptable incunabula of the warlike hero sung by epic.

Achilles at Scyros and One of his Fans: The Epithalamium of Achilles and Deidamia (Buc. Gr. 157f. Gow) by Marco Fantuzzi, pg 305.

Ode I.VIII by Horace (1st century)

This is a source of Roman mythology. Useless information: Horace is presumed to be only a year older than the next writer on the list (he’s presumably from 65 BC and the next presumably from 64 BC), and I almost reversed them! But correction made, here we are. Among his many works was Odes, a collection of four books that contained lyric poems. Of these, the one we’re interested in here is Ode 8 of Book 1, as it’s the one mentioning Achilles in Skyros. More specifically, the girl disguise version.

Lydia, by all the gods, say why you’re set on ruining poor Sybaris, with passion: why he suddenly can’t stand the sunny Campus, he, once tolerant of the dust and sun: why he’s no longer riding with his soldier friends, nor holds back the Gallic mouth, any longer, with his sharp restraining bit. Why does he fear to touch the yellow Tiber? Why does he keep away from the wrestler’s oil like the viper’s blood: he won’t appear with arms bruised by weapons, he who was often noted for hurling the discus, throwing the javelin out of bounds? Why does he hide, as they say Achilles, sea-born Thetis’ son, hid, before sad Troy was ruined, lest his male clothing had him dragged away to the slaughter, among the Lycian  troops?

Odes, I.VIII. Translation by A. S. Kline.

This ode tells the story of the warrior Sybaris, who neglects the expected activities of young men (listed in the ode) because of a woman named Lydia. Horace ends the ode by comparing Sybaris' situation with that of Achilles, claiming Sybaris is hiding from male activities in the same way that Achilles did when he hid on Skyros. The description of Achilles as the son of Thetis may serve to indicate that, as in the case of Sybaris, Achilles' neglect of the male role was influenced by a female figure. Deidamia isn’t mentioned, but, according to Eleanor Winsor Leach, there is the possibility that Deidamia is a presence deduced by the Roman public and represents a parallel with Lydia, symbolizing a female character who seduced the young man away from his duties. This idea of the erotic as an obstacle to military activities, according to her, is consistent with the Augustine context. Winsor also mentions that, although the responsibility for the suppression of Achilles' masculinity is presumably attributed to Thetis, the terms used in the poem in the original language leave room for a possible interpretation that Achilles is or also is responsible.

Regarding Horace's Achilles, she concludes:

In Horace's poem, this indeterminate condition of gender, likewise painted with a comic touch, might be taken to reflect the somewhat ambivalent career prospects of the young Augustan male, who, while being encouraged to pursue an old-fashioned educational regimen, was actually being prepared to dedicate his energies to a new governmental regime where the rules and expectations of offices and rewards were in a state of change. Thus, let me suggest that Lydia's destructive blandishments and distractions are merely eliciting a condition that already exists in Augustan society and is especially highlighted by the posturing of the elegiac poets." elegiac poets. The exhibitionist lover who revels in effeminacy dramatizes the way in which he has been softened to play the role of the conquered. But Sybaris is not even posturing; the way in which the poetic speaker, by addressing his words to Lydia, talks around the young man brings out the passivity of his role.

Horace Carmen 1.8: Achilles, the Campus Martius, and the Articulation of Gender Roles in Augustan Rome by Eleanor Winsor Leach, pg 340-343.

Fabulae, by Hyginus (1st century)

This is a source of Greek mythology, but adapted to a Roman audience. Fabulae isn’t a poem or a play, but a treatise on mythology, which brings together versions of myths without writing a detailed narrative in the way other literary genres would. It’s commonly attributed to Hyginus, although some disagree and for this reason his authorship is sometimes described as "Pseudo-Hyginus".

According to Fabulae, Thetis somehow learned that Achilles would die if he went to Troy. Wishing he wouldn’t be recruited by the Achaeans, she hid him on Skyros among the girls of King Lycomedes' court. Because of the color of his hair, Achilles was nicknamed Pyrrha — yes, it's the female version of Pyrrhus, one of the names given to Achilles' son, Neoptolemus; see Library 3.13.8. Somehow the Achaeans learned Achilles was hiding there and asked Lycomedes to give him to them, but Lycomedes denied Achilles was there, although he permitted an inspection. Odysseus then deceived Achilles, causing him to ruin his own disguise. After that, Achilles left for Troy. Additionally, Neoptolemus is listed as the son of Deidamia, who we know is Lycomedes' daughter. However, Hyginus doesn’t give us details of the relationship.

ACHILLES: When Thetis the Nereid knew that Achilles, the son she had borne to Peleus, would die if he went to attack Troy, she sent him to island of Scyros, entrusting him to King Lycomedes. He kept him among his virgin daughters in woman's attire under an assumed name. The girls called him Pyrrha, since he had tawny hair, and in Greek a redhead is called pyrrhos. When the Achaeans discovered that he was hidden there, they sent spokesmen to King Lycomedes to beg that he be sent to help the Danaan. The King denied that he was there, but gave them permission to search the palace. When they couldn't discover which one he was. Ulysses put women's trinkets in the fore-court of the palace, and among them a shield and a spear. He bade the trumpeter blow the trumpet all of a sudden, and called for clash of arms and shouting. Achilles, thinking the enemy was at hand, stripped off his woman's garb and seized shield and spear. In this way he was recognized and promised to the Argives his aid and his soldiers, the Myrmidons.

Fabulae, 96. Translation by Mary Grant.

NEOPTOLEMUS: Neoptolemus, son of Achilles and Deidamia [...]

Fabulae, 123. Translation by Mary Grant.

Part 2 here.

[ravingdionysius]

An Arrow's Flight by Mark Merlis is a very modified retelling of the contributions of Neptolemus to the Teojan War. But the Torjan War is set in a modern context in the middle of the Aids epidemic and everything is pretty wonderfully gay. Probably best left for a mature audience.

After talking to a friend yesterday about our mutual love of TSOA and how she wished there were more classics-y fiction type books, I’m here to relay the good news that there are!

So here’s a list of books that retell classical stories from different (and potentially feminist!!) perspectives.

1. Circe- Madeline Miller

- the life of Circe, the witch from the Osyssey and the Aeneid, told in her own words

2. The silence of the girls- Pat Barker

- a retelling of the Iliad from the perspective of Briseis, a priestess of Apollo.

3. Lavinia- Ursula K. Le Guin

- a retelling of the Aeneid through the eyes of Lavinia, the daughter of the kind of Latium

4. The children of Jocasta- Natalie Haynes

- a retelling of the Oedipus and Antigone myth with a focus on Jocasta and Ismene

5. Autobiography of Red- Anne Carson

- slightly different to the rest, more of a reimagination than an interpretation of the relationship between Hercules and Geryon in poetry.

6. For the winner- Emily Hauser

- a retelling of the myth of Jason and the Argonauts, with an added appearance from our girl Atlanta.

7. A thousand ships - Natalie Haynes

- a retelling of the Trojan war from a female perspective. Also gives one of the most underappreciated women of the Aeneid, Creusa, a voice!

8. For the immortal- Emily Hauser

- a retelling of Hercules’ 9th labour in which he’s accompanied by Admete, daughter of the king of Tiryns

9. Galatea- Madeline Miller

- a short story retelling the myth of Pygmalion and Galatea

10. For the most beautiful- Emily Hauser

- similar to ‘The silence of the girls’ this book retells the Trojan war through the stories of Krisayis and Briseis

11. The Penelopiad- Margaret Atwood

- a retelling of the Odyssey focusing on the story of Penelope, Odysseus’ wife

12. The horror of the Helmet- Victor Pelevin

- a radical reinvention of the myth of Theseus and the Minotaur presented through modern internet exchanges.

13. Girl meets boy- Ali Smith

- a modern reinvention of the story of Iphis, taken from Ovid’s metamorphoses.

14. Weight- Jeannette Winterson

- a modern retelling of the myth of Atlas and Hercules. An examinration of choice and coercion.

15. Where three roads meet- Sally Vickers

- Set partly in pre-war London and partly in Ancient Greece feauturing Sigmund Freud as Oedipus and a stranger as Tiresias. A complete reimagination of the Greek myth of Oedipus and Freud’s Oedipus complex.

16. The fire gospel- Michel Faber

- more of an analogy for the myth of Prometheus than a retelling but still excellent.

17. The memoirs of Helen of Troy- Amanda Elyot

- our girl Helen finally given a voice in this exploration of the events leading up to the Trojan war

18. XO Orpheus: fifty new myths- Kate Bernheimer

- a collection of short retellings of myths, very similar to Galatea by Madeline Miller (which is feautured in the book)

19. Home fire- Kamila Shamsie

- a modern retelling of the story of Antigone that centres around an immigrant family. A modern Greek Tragedy.

20. For her dark skin- Percival Everett

- super funny retelling of the myth of Jason and Medea. Out of print so copies are insanely expensive but you can get it on kindle for £6 :)

21. House of names- Colm Tóibín

- an exploration of the story of the house of Atreus from the sacrifice of Iphigenia to the murder of Clytemnestra

22. The autobiography of Cassandra, princess and prophetess of Troy- Ursule Molinaro

- retelling of the story of Troy through the eyes of Cassandra

I’ll be adding to this list the more I find but feel free to add your own x