The above reveals not only the generous application of magic and the supernatural to the plot of the Argonautica, but the presence in Apollonius’ epic of characters strongly identified with Cyclic poetry as well. The Argonautica, then, appears to bear rather strong similarities with Cyclic poetry in terms of content. What I aim to propose, is that Apollonius drew inspiration from the structure of the entire poetic construct of the Trojan Cycle as well. A brief reference to the structure of the Argonautica will be of help. Apollonius separates his story into four books; the same structural unit as the one found in the Homeric epics. Interestingly, however, unlike Homer who includes a proem only at the beginning of the first book to introduce the content of his poem, Apollonius includes proems at the beginning of three out of the four books. This rather puzzling innovation reflects the thematic segregation of the three stages of the Argonautic mission. Books 1 and 2 recount the outward journey of the Argonauts, from their departure from Iolcus to their arrival to Colchis. Book 3 covers the adventures of the Argonauts at Colchis: the meeting of Jason and Medea and the execution of the seemingly impossible task. Book 4 recounts the return journey of the Argonauts to Iolcus. The three proems, then, at the beginning of Book 1, Book 3 and Book 4, signify the commencement of the distinct phases of the mission. It is the proem of Book 3 (1–4) which is particularly interesting for my argument:
ἔνθεν ὅπως ἐς Ἰωλκὸν ἀνήγαγε κῶας Ἰήσων
Μηδείης ὑπ᾿ ἔρωτι· σὺ γὰρ καὶ Κύπριδος αἶσαν
Possible references and allusions to poems belonging to a variety of genres have been put forward by scholars.  I would like to suggest that there is a particular fragment of poetry (Aristoxenus fr. 91 Wehrli), thus far overlooked in scholarship, which is most likely alluded to by Apollonius in the proem of Book 3:
ὅππως δὴ μῆνις τε χόλος θ᾽ ἕλε Πηλεΐωνα,
Λητοῦς τ᾽ ἀγλαὸν ὑιόν · ὁ γὰρ βασιλῆι χολωθείς
The similarities between the two proems are particularly noticeable—especially the structural ones. Both proems feature an invitation by the primary narrator to the Muse to tell, ἔνισπε/ἔσπετε, now, νῦν, to the narrator, μοι, in the first line, followed by an indirect question introduced with ὅ(π)πως in the beginning of the second line. Both indirect questions are completed with the caesura in the third foot of the third line, and they are immediately succeeded by explanatory sentences, whose second word is γάρ (ὁ γάρ/σὺ γάρ).  Although there are undeniable dissimilarities between the two proems, I argue that Apollonius closely observes the structure of this particular fragment and maps the structure of his own proem onto this alternative proem to the Iliad; the reason he does so is no other than Cyclic poetry, as I will demonstrate.