| This dissertation is a re-evaluation of the figure of Achilles, the greatest of the Iliadic heroes, in the Aeneid. Given the shift of emphasis between the two halves of the poem, the investigation falls into two parts. The first examines the evocations of the Greek hero in Books 1-5, and the portrait which they create--a portrait which is not as clear-cut as it might seem. Full analysis of the references to Achilles, including their contexts, reveals that the Vergilian Achilles is actually a more complex figure than some scholars have believed. If it is taken into consideration that almost all of the allusions made in Books 1-5 are made not by Vergil speaking in his role as narrator but by characters who are neither omniscient nor impartial, we will discover that the savage warrior is not the Achilles of the Aeneid, but rather simply one aspect of that character. The differing views of Aeneas, Priam, and Neptune, as well as that of Vergil himself, provide a rich composite image of the Homeric figure.;The "new" Achilles foretold by the Sibyl in Book 6 is the subject of the second part of the dissertation. It begins with an analysis of the Sibyl's curious prophecy of alius Achilles, and continues with a study of Turnus as that new Achilles, starting with the Rutulian's first appearance and going on to the battle in which Turnus explicitly claims the role of Achilles for himself. Next is an examination of Aeneas in Books 8-11, especially his Achillean shield and the pattern of vengeance motifs emerging in Book 10, which firmly establish Aeneas as an Achilles figure. The conclusion of the dissertation analyzes Book 12, in which the two Achilles-figures of the Aeneid finally come face to face with one another, and considers the implications of Vergil's use of Achilles for the Aeneid as a whole. |
