Chapter III · THE AUGUSTAN AGE.
Reading edition
VIRGIL.
(1) LIFE.
Our chief authority for the life of Virgil, apart from his own writings and those of his contemporaries, is Donatus, whose work is probably based on Suetonius’ De Poetis. Donatus’ work, though not free from romance, is much more valuable than the Life by Probus[41] or the metrical account given by Phocas.[42] Some important details are given in the Life wrongly attributed to Servius, and in an account preserved in a Berne MS. of the tenth century.
The poet’s name is correctly given as P. Vergilius Maro in all the Lives. The balance of authority is decidedly in favour of the spelling ‘Vergilius’; it is always so written in the early MSS. and in inscriptions of the Republic and of the early centuries A.D. The traditional form in modern literature, ‘Virgil,’ is here retained.
Virgil was born 15th October, B.C. 70, at Andes (identified traditionally with Pietole)[43] near Mantua. Donatus, vit. Verg., ‘Natus est Cn. Pompeio Magno et M. Licinio Crasso primum coss. iduum Octobrium die, in pago qui Andes dicitur et abest a Mantua non procul.’
He was of humble extraction, his father being originally either a potter or a day-labourer.
Probus, vit. Verg., ‘Matre Magia Polla, patre rustico.’
Donatus, ‘Parentibus modicis fuit ac praecipue patre, quem quidam opificem figulum, plures Magi cuiusdam viatoris initio mercennarium mox ob industriam generum tradiderunt egregieque substantiae silvis coemendis et apibus curandis auxisse reculam.’ (Cf. Virgil’s treatment of bees in Georgic iv.)
His early years were spent at Cremona, whence in B.C. 55 he went to Mediolanum and then to Rome for his higher education. He studied philosophy, medicine, mathematics, and rhetoric; but his shyness prevented his being a success at the bar, where, we are told, he appeared only once.
Donatus, ‘Initia aetatis Cremonae egit usque ad virilem togam, quam xv. anno natali suo accepit isdem illis consulibus iterum duobus quibus erat natus, evenitque ut eo ipso die Lucretius poeta decederet. De Cremona Mediolanum et inde paulo post transiit in urbem ... Inter cetera studia medicinae quoque ac maxime mathematicae[44] operam dedit. Egit et causam apud iudices unam omnino nec amplius quam semel; nam et in sermone tardissimum ac paene indocto similem fuisse Melissus [a freedman of Maecenas] tradidit.’
The Berne MS. above referred to says: ‘Ut primum se contulit Romam, studuit apud Epidium oratorem cum Caesare Augusto.’[45] For his studies under the Epicurean Siron cf. Catal. 7, 8,
‘Nos ad beatos vela mittimus portus, magni petentes docta dicta Sironis, vitamque ab omni vindicabimus cura.’
Cf. also Ecl. 6, 31-40, where a brief sketch is given of the Epicurean theory of creation.
For a few years we hear nothing of his life, but we may suppose that he continued his studies in literature and philosophy, probably at his farm, if we can draw any inference from the language of Ecl. 1, especially l. 19 sqq. So far as is known, he took no part in the civil wars. In B.C. 41, when lands were assigned to the troops of Antonius, Virgil was dispossessed of his property. On the recommendation of Asinius Pollio, who was legatus of Gallia Transpadana, he went to Rome and obtained from Octavian the restitution of his land. The poet expresses his gratitude in Ecl. 1, 42,
‘Hic illum vidi iuvenem, Meliboee, quotannis bis senos cui nostra dies altaria fumant. Hic mihi responsum primus dedit ille petenti: “Pascite ut ante boves, pueri, submittite tauros.”’
Cf. also ll. 70-3.
Donatus, ‘Ad bucolica transiit maxime ut Asinium Pollionem, Alphenum Varum, et Cornelium Gallum celebraret, quia in distributione agrorum qui post Philippensem victoriam[46] veteranis triumvirorum iussu trans Padum dividebantur, indemnem se praestitissent.’
Virgil was evicted a second time in the following year, after the Bellum Perusinum, by the troops of Octavian. Conflicting accounts are given by the Lives regarding the persons who seized his land.[47]
Servius, vit. Verg., ‘Postea ortis bellis civilibus inter Antonium et Augustum, Augustus victor Cremonensium agros, quia pro Antonio senserant, dedit militibus suis. Qui cum non sufficerent, his addidit agros Mantuanos, sublatos non propter civium culpam, sed propter vicinitatem Cremonensium: unde ipse in Bucolicis (9, 28), “Mantua vae miserae nimium vicina Cremonae.”’
Virgil and his household found refuge on an estate which had once belonged to his old master Siron: Catal. 10,
‘Villula, quae Sironis eras, et pauper agelle ... Tu nunc eris illi [patri] Mantua quod fuerat quodque Cremona prius.’
Whether he recovered his old farm is uncertain: at all events he spent most of his time in the south of Italy. Besides a house in Rome, he seems to have had a country house near Nola, and we know that the Georgics (cf. iv. 563) were written at Naples.
Donatus, ‘Habuit domum Romae Esquiliis iuxta hortos Maecenatis, quamquam secessu Campaniae Siciliaeque plurimum uteretur.’
Gell. vi. 20, 1, ‘Scriptum in quodam commentario repperi ... Vergilium petivisse a Nolanis, aquam uti duceret in propinquum rus.’
He lived a retired life, seldom visiting Rome, and devoting most of his time to poetical composition, in which he was regular and painstaking.
Tac. Dial. 13, ‘Securum et quietum Vergilii secessum, in quo tamen neque apud divum Augustum gratia caruit neque apud populum Romanum notitia: testes Augusti epistulae, testis ipse populus, qui auditis in theatro Vergilii versibus surrexit universus et forte praesentem spectantemque Vergilium veneratus est sic quasi Augustum.’
Quint. x. 3, 8, ‘Vergilium paucissimos die composuisse versus auctor est Varius.’
Cf. his own expression, quoted by Gell. xvii. 10, 2, ‘parere se versus more atque ritu ursino’ (alluding to the notion that the bear licked its young into shape).
He was already an influential member of Maecenas’ literary circle, to which, in B.C. 39, he introduced Horace. Cf. Hor. Sat. i. 6, 54,
‘optimus olim Vergilius, post hunc Varius dixere quid essem.’
By Maecenas he was introduced to Augustus,[48] who treated him with liberality. Cf. Hor. Ep. ii. 1, 246,
‘Munera quae multa dantis cum laude tulerunt dilecti tibi Vergilius Variusque poetae.’
He was on intimate terms with Horace, who addresses Od. i. 3 to him on the occasion of a proposed visit to Greece. Cf. ll. 5-8,
‘Navis, quae tibi creditum debes Vergilium, finibus Atticis reddas incolumem, precor, et serves animae dimidium meae.’
In B.C. 37 he formed one of the party who travelled with Horace to Brundisium: Hor. Sat. i. 5, 40 (see under ‘Horace,’ p. 167).
For the rest of his life we hear little of Virgil in any public connexion. In B.C. 19 he started on a voyage to Greece and Asia, intending to spend three years on the revision of the Aeneid, but returned from Athens in bad health, and died at Brundisium on 21st September. His remains were buried near Naples. The epitaph quoted by Donatus is obviously not by Virgil: ‘Anno aetatis lii. impositurus Aeneidi summam manum, statuit in Graeciam et in Asiam secedere triennioque continuo nihil amplius quam emendare, ut reliqua vita tantum philosophiae vacaret: sed cum ingressus iter Athenis occurrisset Augusto ab oriente Romam revertenti destinaretque non absistere atque etiam una redire, dum Megara vicinum oppidum ferventissimo sole cognoscit, languorem nactus est eumque non intermissa navigatione auxit, ita ut gravior aliquanto Brundisium appelleret, ubi diebus paucis obiit xi. Kal. Octobr. Cn. Sentio Q. Lucretio coss. (21st September, B.C. 19). Ossa eius Neapolim translata sunt tumuloque condita ... in quo distichon fecit tale:
“Mantua me genuit, Calabri rapuere, tenet nunc Parthenope: cecini pascua, rura, duces.”’
His personal appearance and character are thus described by Donatus: ‘Corpore et statura fuit grandis, aquilo colore, facie rusticana, valetudine varia: nam plerumque a stomacho et a faucibus ac dolore capitis laborabat, sanguinem etiam saepe reiecit.’ (Cf. Hor. Sat. i. 5, 48,
‘Lusum it Maecenas, dormitum ego Vergiliusque; namque pila lippis inimicum et ludere crudis.’)
‘Cibi vinique minimi, libidinis pronior ... cetera sane vita et ore et animo tam probum constat, ut Neapoli Parthenias volgo appellatus sit, ac si quando Romae, quo rarissime commeabat, viseretur in publico, sectantes demonstrantesque se suffugeret in proximum tectum.’
(2) WORKS.
Minor Poems.—According to Donatus, these were: ‘In Balistam ... deinde Catalecton et Priapia et Epigrammata et Diras, item Cirim et Culicem, cum esset annorum xvi.’ Servius omits the boyish production ‘in Balistam,’ and adds the ‘Copa.’ The ‘Aetna,’ mentioned with doubt by Donatus, is, of course, not by Virgil. (1) Catalecta.-This seems better than Catalecton; either would mean “a collection of poems.” Some give Catalepton (= “trifles,” like Aratus’ work τὰ κατὰ λεπτόν). Ribbeck thinks Catalecta originally included the Priapea, Epigrammata, and Dirae, but came to be restricted to the fourteen short pieces given in our MSS. under that title. Some of these, e.g. No. 5, are spurious. Quint. viii. 3, 28 vouches for No. 2. Virgil’s friends, Tucca and Varius, are addressed in 1 and 9, and 10 (on Siron’s villa) refers to an event in Virgil’s life. In the vein of Catullus are 3, 4, and 8, the last being an extremely close parody of Catullus, c. 4. (2) Priapea, three in number. (3) Dirae, spurious. (4) Ciris. The writer’s reference to himself in l. 2, ‘Irritaque expertum fallacis praemia volgi,’ shows that Virgil is not the author. (5) Culex. That Virgil wrote a poem with this title is attested by Suetonius, Statius, and Martial; e.g. Mart. viii. 56, 19,
‘Protinus Italiam concepit et arma virumque qui modo vix Culicem fleverat ore rudi.’
The poem in its present form is accepted by Ribbeck, but it does not correspond exactly to the account given by Donatus of the contents. (6) The Copa Ribbeck accepts as genuine, but other critics find in it characteristics rather of Ovid or of Propertius. (7) The Moretum, though found in MSS., is not mentioned by Donatus or Servius, a strong argument against its being genuine.
Bucolica.—These ten poems are called in the MSS. Eclogae (“selected pieces”), and were composed B.C. 43-39. Probus, ‘Scripsit Bucolica annos natus xxviii., Theocritum secutus.’
Servius, ‘Tunc ei proposuit Pollio ut carmen bucolicum scriberet, quod eum constat triennio[49] scripsisse et emendasse.’
They were doubtless published separately as they were written, and afterwards collected into a volume with Ecl. 1 (Tityrus) coming first. Cf. Georg. iv. 565,
‘Carmina qui lusi pastorum, audaxque iuventa, Tityre, te patulae cecini sub tegmine fagi.’
The present order is certainly not the chronological order.
Ecl. 1 was written B.C. 41 as a thanksgiving to Augustus (see p. 150).
Ecl. 2 cannot be earlier than the end of 43 when Pollio was made governor of Gallia Transpadana, and possibly should not be put earlier than the summer of 42. The poem is written on his favourite slave Alexis (see Serv. ad loc.).
Ecl. 3 was probably written soon afterwards. Virgil refers in l. 84 to his intimacy with Pollio,
‘Pollio amat nostram, quamvis est rustica, Musam.’
Ecl. 2 and 3 are earlier than 5. Cf. 5, 86-7,
‘Haec nos “Formosum Corydon ardebat Alexim,” haec eadem docuit “Cuium pecus? an Meliboei?”’
Ecl. 4. The date is clear from l. 3,
‘Si canimus silvas, silvae sint consule dignae.’
It must have been written in 40, when Pollio was consul. This eclogue, which in the Middle Age was believed to be a prophecy of the Messiah’s coming, cannot be satisfactorily explained as referring to Pollio’s son Saloninus, or to the expected child of Augustus, Julia.
Ecl. 5. Spohn’s view is highly probable, that it was written for the first celebration of Caesar’s birthday in July, 42.
Ecl. 6, to Varus, probably written B.C. 40 from Siron’s villa.
Ecl. 7 contains no allusion to contemporary events: the tone is purely pastoral.
Ecl. 8 was written while Pollio was on his way back to Rome from his victory over the Parthini in Illyricum, for his triumph in B.C. 39. Cf. ll. 6 and 12.
In Ecl. 9, written B.C. 40 at Siron’s villa, the poet expresses his grief at the second expulsion from his farm.
Ecl. 10 entitled ‘Gallus’ was written B.C. 39. For details see under ‘Gallus,’ p. 182.[50]
Sources of the Eclogues.—Several of the Eclogues are modelled on Theocritus (cf. ‘Sicelides Musae’ 4, 1; ‘Syracosius versus’ 6, 1), e.g. Ecl. 8 on Theocr. 2 and 3; and close imitations are found throughout. The poet Euphorion of Chalcis (of third century B.C.) is alluded to in Ecl. 10, 50 in connection with Gallus. The names of the shepherds are mostly from Theocritus, as Tityrus, Mopsus, Damoetas. They are ‘Arcades’ (7, 4, etc.), but, like the scenery, exhibit traits both of Sicily and of North Italy. Thus the scenery never gives an accurate picture of any one locality: e.g. Ecl. 9, ll. 1-10, 26-7, 36, 59-60, present features of the district around Mantua, while in ll. 39-43 a Sicilian scene is introduced from Theocritus. The lofty mountains, e.g. 1, 84, are Sicilian, and so are many of the trees, as chestnut and pine, which are said not to be found near Mantua. For Mantuan scenery cf. e.g. 7, 12,
‘Hic virides tenera praetexit harundine ripas Mincius.’
The Georgics were written from B.C. 37 to 30 at the suggestion of Maecenas. Cf. i. 1.
Serv. vit. Verg. ‘Item proposuit Maecenas Georgica, quae scripsit emendavitque septem annis.’
The poem was finished by B.C. 29. Cf. Donatus, ‘Georgica reverso post Actiacam victoriam Augusto atque Atellae ... commoranti per continuum quadriduum legit.’ It was written at Naples. Cf. iv. 559,
‘Haec super arvorum cultu pecorumque canebam ... Illo Vergilium me tempore dulcis alebat Parthenope, studiis florentem ignobilis oti.’
The concluding part of Book iv., originally a dirge on Cornelius Gallus, was afterwards altered for the myth of Aristaeus, to please Augustus.
Serv. ad Ecl. 10, 1, ‘Fuit Cornelius Gallus amicus Vergilii, adeo ut quartus Georgicorum a medio usque ad finem eius laudes teneret, quas postea iubente Augusto in Aristaei fabulam commutavit.’
Sources of the Georgics.—Besides his own observation, Virgil used the following authorities:
1. Hesiod—mostly in Book i., e.g. ll. 276-286 (lucky and unlucky days). Cf. ii. 176,
‘Ascraeumque cano Romana per oppida carmen.’
2. Books of the priests; e.g. i. 269 sqq. (what is lawful on holy days), i. 338 sqq. (Ambarvalia).
3. For agriculture and natural history—Greek writers like Aristotle, Theophrastus, Democritus, and Xenophon; and Latin writers like Cato and Varro.
4. Alexandrian writers for science and mythology; e.g. Eratosthenes for i. 233, ‘quinque tenent caelum zonae,’ etc.; i. 351-465, signs of weather, from the Διοσημεῖα of Aratus; iii. 425 sqq., the Calabrian serpent, from the Θηριακά of Nicander, whose writings were also used for the subject of bees in Book iv.
5. Lucretius, to whom Virgil is chiefly indebted, ii. 475 sqq., especially 490 sqq., ‘felix qui potuit,’ etc., refers to Lucretius. The idea of Lucretius, cf. v. 206-217, that man has a perpetual struggle with nature, is reflected in Virgil, but modified by his acceptance of the argument from design. Cf. i. 99,
‘Exercetque frequens tellurem atque imperat arvis,’
and the whole passage i. 118-159. Lucretian science is borrowed in passages like i. 89,
‘Seu pluris calor ille vias et caeca relaxat spiramenta, novas veniat qua sucus in herbas’;
l. 415-423 (of the habits of birds); iii. 242 sqq. (on the passion of love). Notice also, with Munro, Lucretian phrases like principio, quod superest, his animadversis, nunc age, praeterea, nonne vides, contemplator, genitalia semina.
Political purpose of the Georgics.—The political purpose of the Georgics is to help the policy of Augustus, which aimed at checking the depopulation of the country districts. Cf. i. 498-514, and especially ll. 506-7,
‘Non ullus aratro dignus honos: squalent abductis arva colonis.’
The Emperor is introduced throughout as the object of veneration. Cf. i. 24-42.
Natural scenery.—Virgil dwells on Nature in her softer aspects. Cf. phrases like ii. 470, ‘mollesque sub arbore somni,’ and the passage ii. 458-540 in praise of a country life. For the praise of Italy see the beautiful passage ii. 136-176, where special districts are mentioned.
Aeneid.—Even before the Eclogues were written, Virgil had meditated the composition of an epic, perhaps, as Servius suggests, on the kings of Alba. Cf. Ecl. 6, 3,
‘Cum canerem reges et proelia, Cynthius aurem vellit et admonuit: “pastorem, Tityre, pingues pascere oportet oves, deductum dicere carmen.”’
The idea of a poem in honour of Augustus was present to his mind when he wrote Georg. iii. 46,
‘Mox tamen ardentes accingar dicere pugnas Caesaris.’
The Aeneid was commenced B.C. 29, and remained unfinished at Virgil’s death.
Servius, vit. Verg., ‘postea ab Augusto Aeneidem propositam scripsit annis undecim, sed nec emendavit nec edidit.’
His method of working at the poem is thus described by Donatus, ‘Aeneida prosa prius oratione formatam digestamque in xii. libros particulatim componere instituit, prout liberet quidque et nihil in ordinem arripiens. Ut ne quid impetum moraretur, quaedam imperfecta transmisit, alia levissimis verbis veluti fulsit, quae per iocum pro tibicinibus interponi aiebat ad sustinendum opus donec solidae columnae advenirent.’
In what order the Books were written it is impossible to decide; but Book vi. was not read to Augustus till after the death of the young Marcellus, B.C. 23.
Donatus, ‘Cui [Augusto] multo post perfectaque demum materia tres omnino libros recitavit, secundum quartum sextum, sed hunc notabili Octaviae adfectione, quae cum recitationi interesset ad illos de filio suo versus, “Tu Marcellus eris,” defecisse fertur atque aegre focillata est.’
Virgil, writing to the emperor, insists on the magnitude of the task he had rashly undertaken.
Macrob. Saturn. i. 24, 11, ‘Tanta incohata res est, ut paene vitio mentis tantum opus ingressus mihi videar, cum praesertim, ut scis, alia quoque studia ad id opus multoque potiora impertiar.’
Although in his will Virgil left instructions to Varius (and Tucca) to destroy all his unpublished manuscripts, Varius was expressly desired by Augustus to revise and publish the Aeneid.
Donatus, ‘Egerat cum Vario, priusquam Italia decederet, ut si quid sibi accidisset Aeneida combureret; sed is facturum se pernegarat ... Edidit autem auctore Augusto Varius, sed summatim emendata, ut qui versus etiam imperfectos sicut erant reliquerit.’
This account is corroborated by Pliny the elder, N.H. vii. 114, Gellius, and Macrobius.
The rules laid down to the editors by the Emperor were, according to Servius, ‘ut superflua demerent, nihil adderent tamen.’
It seems probable that the Aeneid was published B.C. 17, for it is in the Carmen Saeculare of that year that Horace first alludes to the story of Aeneas (cf. l. 50, ‘clarus Anchisae Venerisque sanguis’), and in the fourth Book of the Odes (four years later) it is more than once introduced.
The choice of the subject was influenced (1) by the personal desire of the Emperor; (2) by the connexion of the Caesarian house with Venus, through Iulus;[51] cf. the invention of Atys (Aen. v. 568) by Virgil to please Augustus, whose mother was Atia; (3) by Virgil’s design to write an epic on the greatness of Rome, in the manner of Homer.
The Aeneas Legend.—Stesichorus of Himera, among other writers, made Aeneas, a Homeric hero (cf. Il. xx. 307-8), settle in Italy; and Naevius is said to have adopted the legend in the form given by Timaeus, the Sicilian historian of the third century B.C. The legend probably arose from the worship of Aphrodite on the coasts of Italy, and was disseminated by the Greeks of Cumae to please the Romans. The connexion of Rome with Troy had been officially recognized for two hundred years (cf. Sueton. Claud. 25), and, though not a popular belief, had been accepted in literature from the time of Naevius.
Sources of the Aeneid.—1. Earlier Roman poets as Naevius, Ennius, Pacuvius, Accius, Lucilius, Hostius, Varro Atacinus, Lucretius. For details see under these names.
2. Cato’s Origines and Varro’s Antiquitates, for Italian legends and peoples.
3. Ius pontificium and ius augurale, as found in the books of sacred colleges (Macrob. i. 24, 16). Cf. the ritual meaning of porricio (v. 776), porrigo (viii. 274), the habit of praying with veiled head (iii. 405), prayer to Apollo of Soracte (xi. 785).
4. Greek sources: (a) particularly the Iliad and Odyssey, but also the Homeric Hymns and Cyclic Poems. Thus the games in Book v. = the games in honour of Patroclus in Il. xxiii.; the shield of Aeneas (viii. 626-731) = the shield of Achilles in Il. xviii.; (b) Apollonius Rhodius, for the passion of Dido = that of Medea; (c) Greek tragedies, e.g. the lost Laocoon of Sophocles for ii. 40 sqq.
Religion in the Aeneid.—1. The mythology is mainly from Homer. From Latin myths come Faunus, Saturnus, Janus, Picus. Euhemerism is shown by the last three being represented as originally kings of Rome.
2. The power of the gods is denoted by fatum or fata; cf. x. 112-3,
‘rex Iuppiter omnibus idem: fata viam invenient.’
3. The description of the lower world in Book vi. is from the descent into Hades in Od. xi., but is modified by Pythagorean ideas (vi. 748-751, metempsychosis), Stoic ideas (vi. 724 sqq., pantheism, cf. Georg. iv. 219-227) and Platonic myths (e.g. in the Gorgias, Phaedo, and Republic), and rendered more definite by the introduction of heroes of the Republic. Note that Virgil emphasizes its mythical nature by dismissing Aeneas through the ivory gate (of false dreams).
4. Other beliefs: (a) The golden bough (vi. 203-9) compared to the mistletoe, the symbol of the lower world with many Indo-European peoples; (b) Divinities attached to special places, e.g. viii. 349-354 of the religio attaching to the Capitol, ii. 351-2 guardian deities: cf. Carmentis, pater Tiberinus, etc.; (c) Worship of the dead, and belief in their continued influence on human affairs, iii. 66-8, 301-5.
Political significance.—1. The pre-eminence of the Julian race and of Augustus himself. Cf. i. 286,
‘Nascetur pulchra Troianus origine Caesar, imperium Oceano, famam qui terminet astris, Iulius, a magno demissum nomen Iulo.’
So vi. 789 sqq.
2. The idea of empire: cf. i. 33,
‘Tantae molis erat Romanam condere gentem’;
and of Rome as the conqueror and civilizer of the world: vi. 851,
‘Tu regere imperio populos, Romane, memento: hae tibi erunt artes, pacisque imponere morem, parcere subiectis et debellare superbos.’
3. The unity of Italy with Rome is seen in Aeneas and Turnus, representing respectively the pietas and the martial courage of a past age. This is brought out also by the introduction of local names. Cf. vii. 682-5, 710-7, 797-802.
4. Virgil shows here and there contempt for pure democracy: vi. 815,
‘iactantior Ancus nunc quoque iam nimium gaudens popularibus auris.’
Cf. also i. 148-9.
Authors influenced by Virgil.—Livy, Tacitus, Ovid, Tibullus, Propertius, Manilius, Lucan, Silius Italicus, Statius, Valerius Flaccus, Martial, Juvenal, the author of Aetna. See under each.
HORACE.
(1) LIFE.
Our chief source of information about Horace is his own works, and some important details are added in a life of him by Suetonius.
Horace’s full name is Quintus (Sat. ii. 6, 37) Horatius (Od. iv. 6, 44) Flaccus (Sat. ii. 1, 18). He was born 8th December, B.C. 65, at Venusia in Apulia, on the frontier of Lucania.
Sueton. vit. Hor., ‘Natus est vi. Id. Decembr. L. Cotta et L. Torquato coss.’
Ep. i. 20, 26-8,
‘Forte meum siquis te percontabitur aevum, me quater undenos sciat inplevisse Decembris collegam Lepidum quo duxit Lollius anno.’
Sat. i. 1, 34,
‘Lucanus an Appulus anceps: nam Venusinus arat finem sub utrumque colonus.’
There are a great many references to Apulia in Horace. So Od. iii. 4, 9 sqq.,
‘Me fabulosae Volture in Appulo nutricis extra limina Pulliae’ (his nurse’s name), etc.
All Roman virtues are attributed to the Apulians, as in Od. i. 22, 13; iii. 5, 9; Epod. ii. 39-42.
Horace, though free-born (Sat. i. 6, 7) was the son of a freedman, who was by profession a collector of debts, or, according to others, a fishmonger. To this last story Horace probably refers with proud humility in Ep. ii. 2, 60,
‘Bioneis sermonibus et sale nigro.’
Sueton. vit. Hor., ‘Patre, ut ipse tradit, libertino et auctionum coactore, ut vero creditum est, salsamentario.’
Sat. i. 6, 6,
‘Ut me libertino patre natum’;
ibid. 85,
‘Nec timuit, sibi ne vitio quis verteret olim, si praeco parvas aut, ut fuit ipse, coactor mercedes sequerer.’
Stories of his childhood are given, Od. iii. 4, 9 sqq.; Sat. i. 9, 29 sqq.; Sat. ii. 2, 112 sqq.
Horace speaks highly of his father, who took him from the village school to Rome for his education. After speaking of his own freedom from vice he says (Sat. i. 6, 71 sqq.),
‘Causa fuit pater his, qui macro pauper agello noluit in Flavi ludum me mittere, ... sed puerum est ausus Romam portare docendum artis quas doceat quivis eques atque senator semet prognatos. Vestem servosque sequentis, in magno ut populo, si qui vidisset, avita ex re praeberi sumptus mihi crederet illos. Ipse mihi custos incorruptissimus omnis circum doctores aderat.’
He received instruction, both in Latin and Greek, from Orbilius,[52] a teacher of conservative tendencies. Ep. ii. 1, 69,
‘Non equidem insector delendave carmina Livi esse reor, memini quae plagosum mihi parvo Orbilium dictare.’
Ep. ii. 2, 41,
‘Romae nutriri mihi contigit atque doceri iratus Graiis quantum nocuisset Achilles.’
His education was continued at Athens. Ep. ii. 2, 43,
‘Adiecere bonae paulo plus artis Athenae, scilicet ut vellem curvo dignoscere rectum atque inter silvas Academi quaerere verum.’
His studies were interrupted by the civil war; he joined Brutus (who came to Athens in August, B.C. 44), was by him appointed tribunus militum, and took part in the battle of Philippi, B.C. 42. Ep. ii. 2, 46,
‘Dura sed emovere loco me tempora grato civilisque rudem belli tulit aestus in arma Caesaris Augusti non responsura lacertis.’
Od. ii. 7, 9,
‘Philippos et celerem fugam sensi, relicta non bene parmula.’
In Sat. i. 7 Horace relates a scene at Clazomenae before Brutus and his staff; and in Ep. i. 11 he speaks, as if with personal knowledge, of places in Asia Minor and the islands of the Aegean, which he probably visited then. He refers to the hardships of war in Od. ii. 6, 7; ii. 7, 1; iii. 4, 26.
After the civil war his paternal property was confiscated, probably in B.C. 41, and his poverty compelled him to seek the post of a clerk in the quaestor’s office, and, as he says, to write verses. (Some satires and epodes were then written.)
Sueton. vit. Hor., ‘Victis partibus, venia inpetrata, scriptum quaestorium comparavit.’
Sat. ii. 6, 36,
‘De re communi scribae magna atque nova te orabant hodie meminisses, Quinte, reverti.’
Ep. ii. 2, 49,
‘Unde simul primum me dimisere Philippi, decisis humilem pennis inopemque paterni et laris et fundi paupertas inpulit, audax ut versus facerem.’
In the spring of B.C. 38 Horace was introduced to Maecenas[53] by Varius and Virgil, and became intimate with him in the winter of B.C. 38-7.
Sueton. vit. Hor., ‘Primo Maecenati, mox Augusto insinuatus non mediocrem in amborum amicitia locum tenuit. Maecenas quanto opere eum dilexerit satis testatur illo epigrammate:
“Ni te visceribus meis, Horati, plus iam diligo, tu tuum sodalem Ninnio videas strigosiorem”:
sed multo magis extremis iudiciis tali ad Augustum elogio: “Horati Flacci ut mei esto memor!”’
Sat. i. 6, 54,
‘Optimus olim Vergilius, post hunc Varius dixere quid essem ... Abeo, et revocas nono post mense iubesque (l. 61) esse in amicorum numero.’
In Sat. ii. 6, 40-58 Horace describes how intimate he was socially with Maecenas, who, however, did not make him a confidant in political matters. The most noteworthy event of this period is described in Sat. i. 5, viz. Horace’s journey to Brundisium in the train of Maecenas and Cocceius, who went to arrange some matters between Augustus and Antony. His companions were Virgil, Varius, Plotius, and the Greek rhetorician, Heliodorus. Plotius, Virgil, and Varius are thus referred to (Sat. i. 5, 41):
‘Animae quales neque candidiores terra tulit neque quis me sit devinctior alter.’[54]
In B.C. 34 Maecenas gave Horace an estate in the country of the Sabines. The question of its position was settled last century by the abbé Capmartin de Chaupy. The only place that suits Horace’s description is east of Tivoli, and in the neighbourhood of Vicovaro, which is the same as the Varia of Horace (Ep. i. 14, 3), the market-town of his tenants. Near it is the stream Licenza, the Digentia of Horace, on which stands Bardela (the Mandela of Hor.). Ep. i. 18, 104,
‘Me quotiens reficit gelidus Digentia rivus, quem Mandela bibit, rugosus frigore pagus.’
The site of his villa may be pretty closely determined from Ep. i. 10, 49,
‘Haec tibi dictabam post fanum putre Vacunae.’
Vacuna is a Sabine goddess, identified with Victoria: near the village an inscription has been found which was erected by Vespasian, ‘Aedem Victoriae vetustate dilapsam sua impensa restituit,’ and the natural inference is that this is the temple mentioned by Horace.[55] Horace stayed a great deal at his country-house, and his works contain many references to it.
Sueton. vit. Hor., ‘Vixit plurimum in secessu ruris sui Sabini aut Tiburtini, domusque eius ostenditur circa Tiburni luculum.’
Sat. ii. 6, 16,
‘Ubi me in mentis et in arcem ex urbe removi.’
Other references are Ep. i. 16, 1-14; Od. ii. 18, 14.
Augustus having tried unsuccessfully to induce Horace to become his secretary, was not offended at the poet’s refusal, but continued to bestow his favour upon him.
Sueton. vit. Hor., ‘Augustus epistularum quoque ei officium obtulit, ut hoc ad Maecenatem scripto significat: “Ante ipse sufficiebam scribendis epistulis amicorum, nunc occupatissimus et infirmus Horatium nostrum a te cupio abducere. Veniet ergo ab ista parasitica mensa ad hanc regiam et nos in epistulis scribendis adiuvabit.” Ac ne recusanti quidem aut succensuit quicquam aut amicitiam suam ingerere desiit ... unaque et altera liberalitate locupletavit.’
Horace composed for Augustus the Carmen Saeculare; Od. iv. 4; iv. 14, celebrating the victories of Augustus’ step-sons over the Rhaetians and the Vindelici; also Ep. ii. 1.
Sueton. vit. Hor., ‘Scripta quidem eius usque adeo probavit mansuraque perpetuo opinatus est, ut non modo Saeculare carmen componendum iniunxerit sed et Vindelicam victoriam Tiberii Drusique privignorum suorum eumque coegerit propter hoc tribus carminum libris ex longo intervallo quartum addere; post sermones vero quosdam lectos nullam sui mentionem habitam ita sit questus: “Irasci me tibi scito, quod non in plerisque eius modi scriptis mecum potissimum loquaris; an vereris ne apud posteros infame tibi sit, quod videaris familiaris nobis esse?” expresseritque eclogam ad se, cuius initium est:
“Cum tot sustineas et tanta negotia solus,”’ etc. (Ep. ii. 1).
Horace died 27th November, B.C. 8, and was buried near Maecenas. He appointed Augustus his heir.
Sueton. vit. Hor., ‘Decessit v. Kal. Decembris C. Marcio Censorino et C. Asinio Gallo coss. lvii. aetatis anno, herede Augusto palam nuncupato; ... et conditus est extremis Esquiliis iuxta Maecenatis tumulum.’
In personal appearance Horace was ‘brevis atque obesus,’ according to Suetonius, who quotes a joke of Augustus on the subject: ‘Vereri autem mihi videris ne maiores libelli tui sint, quam ipse es; sed tibi statura deest, corpusculum non deest.’ Cf. Hor. Ep. i. 20, 24,
‘Corporis exigui, praecanum, solibus aptum, irasci celerem, tamen ut placabilis essem’;
Ep. i. 4, 15,
‘Me pinguem et nitidum bene curata cute vises, cum ridere voles, Epicuri de grege porcum.’
Cf. also Ep. i. 7, 25; Od. iii. 14, 25.
(2) WORKS.
Chronology of the Works.—(1) Satirae, in two Books (called Sermones in all the MSS.).
Book i. It is clear from Sat. ii. 6, 40 that Horace was introduced to Maecenas in the spring of B.C. 38. Now all the references to Maecenas, with the exception of the prologue in Sat. 1 (written last), are in the second half of the book, there being no mention of him in Sat. 2; 3; and 4. It is therefore probable that these three Satires were written when Horace knew Varius and Virgil, but not Maecenas, i.e. B.C. 40-38. Sat. 2 is probably the oldest we have, as is shown by other considerations, and by the number of archaisms it contains. Sat. 5 (on the journey to Brundisium) was written shortly after the spring of B.C. 37, when the events recorded took place. The date of the publication of the book cannot be exactly fixed, the only clue we have being the reference in Sat. i. 10, 86, to Bibulus, the political agent of Antony, whose presence in Rome B.C. 35 may be referred to. It cannot be proved that Sat. i. 1, 114 sqq., is imitated from Verg. Georg. i. 512 sqq., published B.C. 35.
Book ii. and the Epodes were published in B.C. 30 about the same time. We have references to Actium (B.C. 31), as in Sat. ii. 5, 63; and Sat. ii. 1 (written last) speaks of Augustus (ll. 11-15) as the hero in war, not yet the bringer of peace, and was probably therefore composed before the temple of Janus was shut in the beginning of B.C. 29.
(2) Epodon liber, B.C. 30, as above. Epod. 9 was written shortly after the battle of Actium, 2nd September, B.C. 31, before it was known whither Antony had fled.
(3) Carmina (Odes) Books i.-iii., published B.C. 23. In Od. i. 12, 45,
‘Crescit occulto velut arbor aevo fama Marcellis,’
we have a reference to the marriage in B.C. 25 of Augustus’ daughter, Julia, to his nephew, Marcellus. Marcellus died in the autumn of B.C. 23, and the lines must have been written before his death. Od. ii. 10 and iii. 19 contain references to Licinius Murena, brother of Terentia, Maecenas’ wife. Murena was executed for his share in the conspiracy of Fannius Caepio in the end of B.C. 23, and it is improbable that Horace could have made these references after that event.[56]
(4) Epistles, Book i., published B.C. 20. The date is fixed by Ep. i. 20, 26-8, already quoted, p. 164.
The year referred to is B.C. 21, and the book was therefore composed in B.C. 20, before December of that year.
(5) Carmen Saeculare, composed for the Ludi Saeculares of B.C. 17 (see Sueton. quoted above). An inscription commemorating these games was discovered in 1890 on the left bank of the Tiber, and in it Horace is mentioned: ‘Sacrificioque perfecto pueri xxvi. quibus denuntiatum erat patrimi et matrimi et puellae totidem carmen cecinerunt eodemque modo in Capitolio. Carmen composuit Q. Horatius Flaccus.’[57]
(6) Odes, Book iv., published B.C. 13. Od. 4 and 14 celebrate the campaign of Drusus and Tiberius in Rhaetia and Vindelicia B.C. 15. Od. 2 and 5 were written just before Augustus’ return, B.C. 13, from Gaul, where he had been since B.C. 16.
(7) Epistles, Book ii. Ep. ii. 1, to Augustus, was written B.C. 14 in response (see the quotation from Suetonius above) to the emperor’s request for a poem addressed to himself, after seeing that no mention was made of him in Ep. ii. 2 and the Epistula ad Pisones. These are the sermones quidam (both, like Ep. ii. 1, on literary criticism) referred to by Suetonius, and not Book i. of the Epistles, where Augustus is frequently mentioned. The date is fixed by l. 15, ‘praesenti tibi maturos largimur honores,’ etc., referring to the worship of the numen Augusti, which was legalized B.C. 14, and by the reference in ll. 252 sqq. to the victories of Drusus and Tiberius, and their celebration in Od. iv. 4; iv. 14. Ep. ii. 2 (to Iulius Florus) was written B.C. 18. Horace hints (l. 25, ll. 84-6) that he has not yet returned to lyric poetry; the epistle was therefore written before B.C. 17. The Epistula ad Pisones or De Arte Poetica was probably written B.C. 17 or 16 after the Carmen Saeculare, but before Horace had entered on the composition of the fourth Book of the Odes.
The Satires are called Sermones in all the MSS., but as Horace gave this name both to his Satires (Sat. i. 4, 42) and to his Epistles (Ep. ii. 1, 4; 250) it is convenient to call them Satirae, the name which Horace also gives them (Sat. ii. 1, 1; 6, 17), and which represent their intended scope. Horace’s chief model is Lucilius, whom he wished to adapt to the Augustan age. Sat. i. 4, 56,
‘his, ego quae nunc, olim quae scripsit Lucilius.’
So Sat. ii. 1, 28 and 74. Lucilius’ influence is seen most in Sat. i. 2; 5; 7; 8; ii. 2; 3; 4; 8. Horace, after the reception Sat. i. 2 met with, did not, like Lucilius, attack individuals; nor did his position as a dependent (Sat. ii. 1, 60-79) allow him to do so. We find, therefore, no political satire in Horace, who confines himself to social and literary topics. He does not attack his contemporaries by name, but (a) takes some names from Lucilius, as Albucius (Sat. ii. 1, 48), Opimius (Sat. ii. 3, 142); (b) invents ‘tell-tale-names,’ as Pantolabus (Sat. i. 8, 11), Novius (Sat. i. 3, 21). In Sat. i. 4 and ii. 1 he defines the moral and social aim of his satire. In Sat. i. 4, 1-13 he criticizes Lucilius’ style; this seems to have given offence, and in Sat. i. 10 he gives reasons for his former criticism. Horace’s Epicureanism is more pronounced in Book i. than in Book ii. In Sat. i. 1 and i. 3 (cf. ll. 99-124) the influence of Lucretius is seen. In i. 3 he takes up an antagonistic position to Stoicism (cf. ll. 124-142). In ii. 3 he shows less hostility to Stoicism though he still criticizes it.[58] In Sat. ii. 7, where the slave Davus enunciates the Stoic doctrine, ὅτι μόνος ὁ σοφὸς ἐλεύθερος, Davus’ arguments from l. 75 onwards have been taken by Horace from Cic. Parad. 5.
Horace does not pretend that his Satires (or Epistles) are poetry, and makes several statements to that effect. Sat. ii. 6, 17,
‘Quid prius inlustrem satiris musaque pedestri?’
Ep. ii. 1, 250,
‘Sermones ... repentes per humum.’
So Sat. i. 4, 39-44.
The Epodes are called Epodi in the MSS. Ἐπῳδός was the name given to a piece composed of couplets, the first line of which is longer than the second. Horace calls them iambi (Epod. 14, 7; Od. i. 16, 3). Their style is an imitation of that of Archilochus of Paros. Ep. i. 19, 23-5,
‘Parios ego primus iambos ostendi Latio, numeros animosque secutus Archilochi, non res et agentia verba Lycamben.’
This is seen in the personal attacks made in many of them, as well as in the αἰσχρολογία employed, and also in the versification. The dates of several can be fixed. Epod. 16 was written B.C. 41, and refers to the Perusian war. Horace takes no part with either side, but advises his countrymen to leave Rome, like the Phocaeans of old. Epod. 7 was written B.C. 39; and Epod. 1, 9, and 14, about B.C. 31. The order is strictly metrical. Epodes 1-10 are simple iambics (trimeter and dimeter alternately); 11-16 more complicated forms; 17, the last, in iambic trimeters.
The Odes Horace himself calls carmina. The metres are nearly all taken from Sappho and Alcaeus, the two poets whose works Horace wished to present to his countrymen in a Roman dress. Cf. Od. iii. 30, 13-4,
‘Princeps Aeolium carmen ad Italos deduxisse modos.’
The metrical differences between himself and his originals are due to the difference in the genius of the two languages and to the fact that he adopted the views on metre current in his time. Catullus’ metre, on the other hand, was closely modelled on that of the Alexandrian poets. The odes are largely founded on the best Greek lyric poetry, with which Horace was thoroughly familiar; cf. his first intention to write in Greek (Sat. i. 10, 31-5). Alexandrian influence is little seen, and his mythological allusions are seldom obscure. Examples of imitation (which is commonest in Book i.) are: Od. i. 9, the beginning of which is from Alcaeus (so i. 10; 11; 18); i. 12 (beginning) is from Pindar; i. 27 from Anacreon. Bacchylides is imitated, e.g. in ii. 18.
Subjects of the Odes.—1. Love and wine form the themes of many. Od. i. 6, 17,
‘Nos convivia, nos proelia virginum sectis in iuvenes unguibus acrium cantamus.’
Cf. Od. ii. 1, 37-40; iii. 3, 69-72.
The love-poems show no trace of personal passion, and the names of the women whose charms are sung are taken from Greek; thus Pyrrha (a well-known name from Attic comedy) i. 5; Lydia, i. 13, etc.; Lalage, i. 22; ii. 5. Cinara (iv. 1; iv. 13) is probably the only one that represents a real person. Wine is celebrated, e.g. in i. 9; 18; 27; ii. 7; iii. 21. A tone of moderation is observed throughout the drinking-songs. It is highly probable[59] that in Od. i. 27, 1-4 the unrestrained bacchanalian spirit of Catullus (cf. c. 27) is reproved,
‘Natis in usum laetitiae scyphis pugnare Thracum est. Tollite barbarum morem verecundumque Bacchum sanguineis prohibete rixis.’
2. In Od. i. 24 we have the beautiful dirge on the death of Quintilius Varus.
3. On political subjects.—The chief of these are as follows: i. 2 (towards the end of B.C. 28); i. 12; i. 14; i. 35 (in B.C. 26); i. 37 (in B.C. 30); ii. 1. The most important, however, are Od. iii. 1-6, which form one whole, and are written on the new name of Augustus, and the ideas therewith connected. They were all written about B.C. 27.[60]
In iii. 1, which is general, the rising generation is addressed by the prophet of the empire; ll. 3, 4,
‘Musarum sacerdos virginibus puerisque canto.’
The lesson of the ode is ‘A moderate life is the best. Lucky is the man who is spared the trouble of managing the State.’
iii. 2 praises courage and honesty, but with special reference to two institutions of Augustus: (1) the professional soldier as opposed to the citizen-soldier of the republic. The officers were taken from the two privileged classes, and there was no promotion from the ranks. This is the explanation of ll. 1-4,
‘Angustam amice pauperiem pati robustus acri militia puer condiscat et Parthos ferocis vexet eques,’
lines which also refer to the resuscitation by Augustus of the citizen-cavalry. The soldier is not to trouble about politics (ll. 17-20), and must not fear death (l. 13). (2) The new imperial administrative officers, employed not only in collecting taxes, but in administrative business of every kind. Speaking of them, Horace pays a tribute to loyal silence, and emphasizes the curse that clings to breach of faith; l. 25,
‘Est et fideli tuta silentio merces’;
l. 31,
‘Raro antecedentem scelestum deseruit pede Poena claudo.’
iii. 3 touches intimately the political questions of the day. Pointed reference is made to Cleopatra; she is the mulier peregrina (l. 20), the Lacaena adultera (l. 25), who brought Troy low, and would bring Rome low, if she and her famosus hospes (l. 26) could raise Troy again. The reference here is to a report current about Antony, that he intended to make Troy the capital. It is certain that he intended to restore to Cleopatra her kingdom with extended frontiers, and to make himself ruler of the Eastern empire. This, which would have meant the subjection of Rome to the Greeks and half-Greeks, was prevented by the ‘iustum et tenacem propositi virum’ (l. i), who for his services is honoured as one of the gods; ll. 11-12,
‘Quos inter Augustus recumbens purpureo bibit ore nectar.’
In iii. 4 the poet’s personality comes out strongest. He describes his protection by the Muses in his early years, and this leads him to speak of one of the monarch’s chief works of peace, his encouragement of literature; ll. 37-40,
‘Vos Caesarem altum, militia simul fessas cohortes abdidit oppidis, finire quaerentem labores Pierio recreatis antro.’
iii. 5 is a defence of Augustus’ foreign policy. Publicly he kept up Caesar’s war policy, hence ll. 2-5,
‘Praesens divus habebitur Augustus adiectis Britannis imperio gravibusque Persis’;
but that this concealed his real policy of non-intervention is shown by his action regarding Parthia. Hence Horace, by a speech put into the mouth of Regulus (l. 18 sqq.) warns the Romans against trying to rescue the survivors of Crassus’ army, who, by becoming captives, had ceased to be citizens. That some of the Senate wished to interfere in this matter is probably shown by ll. 45-6,
‘Donec labantis consilio patres firmaret auctor numquam alias dato.’
iii. 6 refers (ll. 1-8) to Augustus’ policy in restoring the ancient religion, as is seen by the fact that he rebuilt 82 temples. Lines 21-32 refer to a law of Augustus on adultery, the date of which is unknown.
In Book iv., Odes 2, 4, 5, 6, 14, 15, are political. They show traces of adulation, and sing the praises rather of the imperial family than of the nation. Cf. iv. 2, 37 (of Augustus),
‘Quo nihil maius meliusve terris fata donavere bonique divi,’ etc.
The Epistles.—Sermones is the name given them by Horace; they are also called Epistulae in the MSS. Social, ethical, and literary questions are treated of, and the style is much more careful than that of the Satires. The motto, one might say, of the book is Ep. i. 1, 10.
‘Nunc itaque et versus et cetera ludicra pono: quid verum atque decens, curo et rogo et omnis in hoc sum.’
The dates of Ep. ii. 1, 2, have already been mentioned. Both treat of literary criticism, and the first deals particularly with that of the drama. Iulius Florus, to whom Ep. ii. 2 is addressed, was the representative of the younger literary school at Rome. The Epistula ad Pisones or De Arte Poetica is an essay in verse on literary criticism, specially pointing out how necessary art is to composition. In it, according to Porphyrion, Horace ‘congessit praecepta Neoptolemi τοῦ Παριανοῦ[61] de arte poetica, non quidem omnia, sed eminentissima.’ Horace probably was also indebted to Aristotle’s Poetics. Porphyrion says that Horace wrote the Ars Poetica ‘ad L. Pisonem qui postea urbis custos fuit eiusque liberos.’ This does not fit in with the probable date, B.C. 17 or 16, as L. Piso was born B.C. 49, and his sons could not have been old enough for the letter to be addressed to them. It is probable that Porphyrion is wrong, and that the A.P. was addressed to Cn. Piso, who served with Horace under Brutus, and his two sons.
Horace and nature.—Besides references to his Sabine villa, Horace refers to natural scenery in many passages. Such are Epod. 2; Od. i. 7, 10; ii. 6, 13; iii. 13, 9; Sat. ii. 6, 1 sqq.; Ep. i. 10, 6 sqq., i. 16, 1 sqq.[62] Horace is fond of comparing dangers to the plague of floods,[63] a plague from which Italy has always suffered. Cf. Od. i. 31, 7,
‘rura quae Liris quieta mordet aqua taciturnus amnis.’
So Od. iii. 29, 32 sqq., and many other passages.
Popularity of Horace.—Horace’s prediction that his works would become school-books, Ep. i. 20, 17,
‘Hoc quoque te manet, ut pueros elementa docentem occupet extremis in vicis balba senectus,’
was early fulfilled. Cf. Iuv. 7, 226,
‘Quot stabant pueri, cum totus decolor esset Flaccus et haereret nigro fuligo Maroni.’
CONTEMPORARY POETS:
The following writers were friends of Horace:
(a) C. Valgius Rufus, consul suffectus B.C. 12, belonged to the circle of Maecenas (Hor. Sat. i. 10, 82).
Valgius’ works, of which only a few lines are extant, included (1) Elegiae. Cf. Hor. Od. ii. 9, 9-12,
‘Tu semper urges flebilibus modis Mysten ademptum, nec tibi Vespero surgente decedunt amores nec rapidum fugiente solem.’
(2) Epigrammata, (3) Miscellanies, (4) A translation of Apollodorus’ τέχνη. (See Quint. iii. 1, 18.) (5) A book on herbs. (Pliny, N.H. xxv. 4.) An epic was also expected of him, but whether written is unknown. Tibull. iv. 1, 179,
‘Est tibi, qui possit magnis se adcingere rebus, Valgius; aeterno propior non alter Homero.’
(b) M. Aristius Fuscus, a poet and grammarian (Porphyr. ad Sat. i. 9, 60); Od. i. 22, and Ep. i. 10, are addressed to him.
(c) The Visci. Comm. Cruq. ad Sat. i. 10, 83, ‘Visci duo fratres fuerunt optimi poetae et iudices critici.’
(d) C. Fundanius, wrote comedies (Porphyr. ad Sat. i. 10, 40).
(e) Servius Sulpicius, a love poet (Ovid, Trist. ii. 441; Hor. Sat. i. 10, 86).
(f) Iulius Florus was ‘saturarum scriptor’ (Porphyr. ad Hor. Ep. i. 3, 1). Hor. Ep. i. 3 and ii. 2, are addressed to him.
(g) Titius wrote Pindaric odes, and tragedies, Hor. Ep. i. 3, 9-14.
(h) Albinovanus Celsus. See Hor. Ep. i. 3, 15-7.
(i) C. Iullus Antonius, B.C. 44-B.C. 2, was a son of the triumvir M. Antonius. The Schol. on Hor. Od. iv. 2, 2, says of him, “Heroico metro Diomedeam scripsit et nonnulla alia soluta oratione.”
(k) Furnius, an orator; died B.C. 37. He is mentioned by Hor. Sat. i. 10, 86.
Other poets contemporary with Virgil and Horace are:
(a) L. Varius Rufus (cf. Verg. Ecl. 9, 35). His works were:
(1) Epics (a) on the death of Julius Caesar (Macrob. Saturn. vi. 1, 39), (b) in praise of Augustus. Hor. Ep. i. 16, 27-29 is a quotation from this poem (Acron ad loc.), and it is probably referred to in Od. i. 6, 1 (to Agrippa),
‘Scriberis Vario fortis et hostium victor Maeonii carminis aliti, quam rem cumque ferox navibus aut equis miles te duce gesserit.’
(2) A tragedy, Thyestes, praised by Quint. x. 1, 98, ‘iam Varii Thyestes cuilibet Graecarum comparari potest.’
(3) Elegies: Porphyr. ad Hor. Od. i. 6, 1, ‘fuit L. Varius et ipse carminis et tragoediarum et elegiorum auctor.’
(b) Aemilius Macer was a native of Verona, and died B.C. 16: Jerome yr. Abr. 2001, ‘Aemilius Macer Veronensis poeta in Asia moritur.’ He was a friend of Virgil, and was the ‘Mopsus’ of Ecl. 5, according to Serv. ad loc. Ovid in his youth enjoyed his acquaintance; cf. Tr. iv. 10, 43, where three didactic poems are referred to: (1) Ornithogonia, on birds; (2) Theriaca, on venomous serpents; (3) De Herbis, on plants.
For his obligations to Nicander, see under ‘Virgil,’ p. 158. Quintilian calls him ‘humilis’ (x. 1, 87).
(c) C. Cornelius Gallus was born at Forum Iulii B.C. 70, and died by his own hand B.C. 27. Jerome yr. Abr. 1990, ‘Cornelius Gallus Foroiuliensis poeta ... xliii. aetatis suae anno propria se manu interficit.’ Having commanded a division in the war against Antony, he was appointed by Octavian the first prefect of Egypt, B.C. 30, but incurred his anger and was banished from Caesar’s house and provinces (Sueton. Aug. 66). The cause of his downfall was indiscreet language about Augustus, according to Ovid, Tr. ii. 445,
‘Non fuit opprobrio celebrasse Lycorida Gallo, sed linguam nimio non tenuisse mero’;
and Am. iii. 9, 63,
‘Tu quoque, si falsum est temerati crimen amici, sanguinis atque animae prodige, Galle, tuae.’
The tenth eclogue of Virgil is a testimony to his friendship for Gallus, l. 2,
‘Pauca meo Gallo, sed quae legat ipsa Lycoris, carmina sunt dicenda; neget quis carmina Gallo?’
Lines 44-49 are said by Servius, ad loc., to be quoted from Gallus (‘de ipsius translati carminibus’). For the tribute to Gallus in the original draft of Georgic iv. see under ‘Virgil,’ p. 157.
He wrote four Books of love-poems to Cytheris, the liberta who afterwards deserted him for Antony: Serv. ad Ecl. x. 1, ‘amorum suorum de Cytheride scripsit libros iv.’ According to Servius he also translated the poems of Euphorion of Chalcis. Cf. Verg. Ecl. x. 50,
‘Ibo et Chalcidico quae sunt mihi condita versu carmina pastoris Siculi modulabor avena.’
Compared with Tibullus and Propertius, he was ‘durior’ (Quint. x. 1, 93).
(d) Codrus, mentioned by Virgil, Ecl. 7, 22 and 26; 5, 11, was a contemporary poet (Serv. ad Ecl. 7), and was praised by Valgius (Schol. Veron. ad loc.), but nothing is known of his writings. The name is not Roman, and is probably a disguised form of Cordus. He is sometimes identified with the Iarbitas of Hor. Ep. i. 19, 15.
(e) Bavius and Mevius were enemies of Virgil and Horace. Verg. Ecl. 3, 90,
‘Qui Bavium non odit, amet tua carmina, Mevi.’
Horace, Epod. 10, prays for the shipwreck of Mevius. He wrote about the prodigal son of the actor Aesopus (Porphyr. ad Hor. Sat. ii. 3, 239). Bavius died B.C. 35, according to Jerome.
(f) Anser wrote a poem in praise of Antony, and was rewarded with a grant of land (Serv. ad Ecl. 9, 36; Cic. Phil. xiii. 11). He is mentioned by Ovid, Tr. ii. 435,
‘Cinna quoque his comes est, Cinnaque procacior Anser.’
Servius sees an allusion to him in Ecl. 9, 36,
‘Argutos inter strepere anser olores.’
(g) Domitius Marsus. His epigram on Tibullus (see p. 186) shows that he was alive in B.C. 19; he was, however, dead when Ovid was exiled in A.D. 8.
Ovid, Ex Pont. iv. 16, 3,
‘Famaque post cineres maior venit; et mihi nomen tunc quoque, cum vivis adnumerarer, erat, cum foret et Marsus, magnique Rabirius oris, Iliacusque Macer sidereusque Pedo.’
He was a member of Augustus’ literary circle. Mart. viii. 56, 21,
‘Quid Varios Marsosque loquar, ditataque vatum nomina, magnus erit quos numerare labor?’
His works were:
1. Cicuta, a collection of epigrams, often referred to by Martial. Cf. ii. 71, 3,
‘aut Marsi recitas aut scripta Catulli.’
2. Amazonis, an epic poem.[64] Mart. iv. 29, 7,
‘Saepius in libro memoratur Persius uno quam levis in tota Marsus Amazonide.’
3. Amores or Elegiae. Mart. vii. 29, 7,
‘Et Maecenati, Maro cum cantaret Alexin, nota tamen Marsi fusca Melaenis erat.’
4. Fabellae.
5. De Urbanitate (in prose). Quint. vi. 3, 102, ‘Domitius Marsus, qui de urbanitate diligentissime scripsit.’
(h) Pupius, a tragedian, sneered at by Hor. Ep. i. 1, 67, ‘lacrimosa poemata Pupi.’
(i) C. Melissus, a freedman of Maecenas, invented the trabeata, a variety of the togata.
Sueton. Gramm. 21, ‘Fecit et novum genus togatarum inscripsitque trabeatas.’
TIBULLUS.
(1) LIFE.
Albius Tibullus (his praenomen was perhaps Aulus, which, from the abbreviation A. being followed by Albius, was lost in the MSS.) seems to have been born near Pedum in Latium. (1) Horace, in Ep. i. 4, 2, addressed to Tibullus, asks, ‘Quid nunc te dicam facere in regione Pedana?’ apparently referring to the ‘sedes avitae’ of Tibullus (Tibull. ii. 4, 53). (2) The Life contained in the best MSS., and probably to be attributed to Suetonius, calls him ‘Albius Tibullus, eques Romanus’ (codd. Paris. and Lips. ‘regulis’). Bährens (Tibullische Blätter) holds that Romanus is an erroneous correction of regulis, for which he proposes to read R. (= Romanus) e Gabis (= Gabiis). Gabii was within a short distance of Pedum.
The date of his birth can be fixed only by indirect evidence.
(1) The Life says ‘obiit adulescens,’ and the epigram of Domitius Marsus, found in the best MSS., calls Tibullus ‘iuvenis’ at the time of his death, which must have occurred about the same time as Virgil’s, in B.C. 19,
‘Te quoque Vergilio comitem non aequa, Tibulle, mors iuvenem campos misit ad Elysios, ne foret aut elegis molles qui fleret amores aut caneret forti regia bella pede.’
(2) Ovid (Tr. iv. 10, 53) says of Tibullus,
‘Successor fuit hic tibi, Galle, Propertius illi.’
Since Gallus was born B.C. 70, and Propertius about B.C. 49, the birth of Tibullus must have fallen between those years.
(3) Tibullus accompanied Messalla when he left for Aquitania, B.C. 30 or 29, according to the Life: ‘Ante alios Corvinum Messallam oratorem dilexit, cuius etiam contubernalis Aquitanico bello militaribus donis donatus est.’ Cf. Tibull. i. 7, 9,
‘Non sine me est tibi partus honos; Tarbella Pyrene testis et Oceani litora Santonici.’
Putting together these references we may place the date of Tibullus’ birth in B.C. 54. (The statement of the Life in the Codex Guelferbytanus, ‘Natus est Hyrtio et Pansa coss.’ is clearly wrong).
He was of equestrian rank, and at one time possessed considerable wealth, apparently inherited from a long line of ancestors; i. 1, 41,
‘Non ego divitias patrum fructusque requiro quos tulit antiquo condita messis avo.’
Cf. ii. 1, 1; ii. 4, 53; Hor. Ep. i. 4, 7,
‘Di tibi divitias dederunt.’
His family property, however, had been greatly diminished; i. 1, 19,
‘Vos quoque, felicis quondam nunc pauperis agri custodes, fertis munera vestra, lares: tunc vitula innumeros lustrabat caesa iuvencos; nunc agna exigui est hostia parva soli.’
Cf. i. 1, 5 and 37.
It has been supposed that Tibullus suffered these losses in the agrarian disturbances of B.C. 41, and that his lands, like those of Virgil and Propertius, were confiscated. No town in Latium, however, is mentioned by Appian as having its territory thus assigned. Tibullus’ property may possibly have been restored to him through the influence of Messalla.[65] Cf. Hor. Ep. i. 4, 11,
‘Et mundus victus non deficiente crumena’;
also Tibull. i. 1, 77,
‘Ego composito securus acervo despiciam dites despiciamque famem.’
Of Messalla Tibullus always speaks with the greatest affection. He refused at first to accompany him to the East after the battle of Actium, but afterwards followed him, and was forced through illness to remain at Corcyra: i. 1, 53,
‘Te bellare decet terra, Messalla, marique, ut domus hostiles praeferat exuvias: me retinent vinctum formosae vincla puellae’;
i, 3, 3,
‘Me tenet ignotis aegrum Phaeacia terris.’
In the Aquitanian campaign he was Messalla’s contubernalis, and had military distinctions conferred on him (see p. 186).
No further particulars of Tibullus are known, save his love for his mistresses Delia and Nemesis, and the fact mentioned by Ovid, in a poem on his death, that his mother and sister survived him; Amor. iii. 9, 50,
‘Mater et in cineres ultima dona tulit. Hinc soror in partem misera cum matre doloris venit inornatas dilaniata comas.’
Delia’s real name was Plania (δῆλος = planus): cf. Apuleius, Apol. 10, ‘eadem igitur opera accusent ... Tibullum quod ei sit Plania in animo Delia in versu.’ She was a libertina, for the name is not known as a nomen gentilicium, and she had had a husband (i. 2, 41, ‘coniunx tuus’), who appears to have been serving with the army in Cilicia: i. 2, 65,
‘Ferreus ille fuit, qui te cum posset habere, maluerit praedas stultus et arma sequi. Ille licet Cilicum victas agat ante catervas,’ etc.
A divorce had probably taken place, as she was not entitled to wear the distinctive dress of the Roman matron; i. 6, 67,
‘Sit modo casta, doce, quamvis non vitta ligatos impediat crines nec stola longa pedes.’
Nemesis was a meretrix; ii. 4, 14,
‘Illa cava pretium flagitat usque manu.’
She appears to be the ‘immitis Glycera’ of Hor. Od. i. 33, 2, addressed to Albius (so Kiessling ad loc.). Both Delia and Nemesis are represented by Ovid as present at the funeral of Tibullus. Amor. iii. 9, 53,
‘Cumque tuis sua iunxerunt Nemesisque priorque oscula nec solos destituere rogos.’
Tibullus was on friendly terms with Horace, who addressed to him Od. i. 33 and Ep. i. 4. Horace was doubtless attracted by the frank nature of Tibullus (Ep. i. 4, 1, ‘Albi, nostrorum sermonum candide iudex’), and by the community of taste which led them both to imitate the classical Ionic rather than the Alexandrian elegy. Horace corroborates the statement of Life i. (‘insignis forma cultuque corporis observabilis’) that Tibullus had a fine presence; ibid. 1. 6,
‘Non tu corpus eras sine pectore: di tibi formam, di tibi divitias dederunt artemque fruendi.’
Ovid had met and admired him, and has numerous imitations of him in his poems; but the difference of age and the early death of Tibullus prevented any long acquaintance; Ovid, Tr. iv. 10, 51,
‘Nec amara Tibullo tempus amicitiae fata dedere meae.’
Of friendship between Propertius and Tibullus there is no evidence: they never mention one another.
(2) WORKS.
Four Books of elegiac poems are attributed to Tibullus, who ranks first among Roman elegists in the view of Quintilian, x. 1, 93, ‘Elegia quoque Graecos provocamus, cuius mihi tersus atque elegans maxime videtur auctor Tibullus.’
Book i., on the poet’s love for Delia and Marathus (El. 7 is to Messalla), was published by himself, and was apparently composed in the years B.C. 31-27. This agrees with Ovid, Tr. ii. 463,
‘Legiturque Tibullus et placet, et iam te principe notus erat,’
if we assume that ‘principe’ refers to the title of Augustus.
Book ii., the chief subject of which is Nemesis, appears to have been written several years later. It is unfinished, not having received the author’s final revision, and was probably published soon after his death, certainly several years before Ovid’s Ars Amatoria (cf. A.A. 535 sqq.).
Book iii. (six Elegies) is professedly the work of Lygdamus. No poet of that name is mentioned in ancient literature, and it has been suggested that the author may have been a young relative of Tibullus who used a Greek adaptation of the gentile name Albius (λύγδος = white marble). He speaks as a man of good social position (iii. 2, 22). From the fact that he belonged to the circle of Messalla, his poems came to be added to those of Tibullus, whom he constantly imitates. There are also many reminiscences of Horace, Ovid, and Propertius. The six Elegies are addressed to Neaera, who was probably the poet’s cousin and was married or betrothed to him (iii. 1, 23; 2, 12). Lygdamus was born in the same year as Ovid, B.C. 43; iii. 5, 17,
‘Natalem primo nostrum videre parentes, cum cecidit fato consul uterque pari.’
The remarkable coincidence between iii. 5, 15-20, and Ovid, A.A. ii. 669-70, Tr. iv. 10, 6, Amor. ii. 14, 23-4, is best explained by Hiller (Hermes, xviii. 360-1), who suggests that Lygdamus may have composed the poem in his earlier years merely to amuse Neaera, without publishing it, and that after Ovid’s works had appeared he may, to oblige a friend or patron (e.g. Messalinus), have published his collection of elegies, adding in the process of revision the lines copied from Ovid.
The remaining poems belong to Book iii. in the MSS., but in most editions are printed as a separate Book iv. iv. 1, in hexameters, is the Panegyricus Messallae, written in honour of Messalla’s consulship, B.C. 31. Its rhetorical exaggeration and want of taste forbid its being attributed to Tibullus, written, as it was, so shortly before he reached the summit of his powers. Its date puts Lygdamus out of question: doubtless it is by some young member of Messalla’s circle.
The rest of the Book has for its theme the love of Sulpicia, the daughter of Servius Sulpicius and Valeria, the sister of Messalla, for a young Greek named Cerinthus. El. 2-6 are apparently by Tibullus himself, who may have amused himself by turning into verse the letters of the young lovers. El. 7 is of disputed authorship; but it resembles the work of Sulpicia rather than that of Tibullus. El. 8-12 are by Sulpicia to Cerinthus. El. 13 purports to be by Tibullus. El. 14 is an epigram, of doubtful authorship.
Two Priapea are found in MSS. of Tibullus, but probably neither of them is by him.
PROPERTIUS.
(1) LIFE.
The name by which the poet designates himself is Propertius simply; the praenomen Sextus rests on the authority of Donatus. The additions in some MSS., ‘Aurelius’ and ‘Nauta,’ are clearly erroneous.
He was certainly a native of the district of Umbria, and probably of the town of Asisium (the modern Assisi). Cf. iv. 1, 121,
‘Umbria te notis antiqua penatibus edit, (mentior? an patriae tangitur ora tuae?) qua nebulosa cavo rorat Mevania campo, et lacus aestivis intepet Umber aquis, scandentisque Asisi consurgit vertice murus, murus ab ingenio notior ille tuo.’
‘Asisi’ in l. 125 is Lachmann’s emendation for ‘Asis’ of the MSS., and is rendered almost certain by the topography of the district. Asisium agrees better than Hispellum (the modern Spello) with the description in the passage quoted; with iv. 1, 65,
‘Scandentes quisquis cernet de vallibus arces, ingenio muros aestimet ille meo’;
and with the epithet ‘proxima’ in i. 22, 9, as Asisium is nearer than Hispellum to Perusia. Cf. i. 22, 3-10,
‘Si Perusina tibi patriae sunt nota sepulcra, Italiae duris funera temporibus, ... proxima supposito contingens Umbria campo me genuit terris fertilis uberibus.’
At Assisi, moreover, have been found several inscriptions of the Propertii, one of which, C. PASSENNO | C. F. SERG. |, PAULLO | PROPERTIO | BLAESO,[66] probably refers to the Passennus Paullus mentioned by Pliny, Ep. vi. 15, as ‘municeps Propertii.’
Propertius was younger than Tibullus, and older than Ovid. His birth, therefore, took place between B.C. 54 and 43 (Hertzberg gives 46, Postgate prefers 50). Cf. Ovid, Tr. iv. 10, 53,
‘Successor fuit hic [Tibullus] tibi, Galle; Propertius illi; quartus ab his serie temporis ipse fui.’
He came of a family well known in the neighbourhood (cf. iv. 1, 121, ‘notis penatibus,’ already quoted), but not ‘noble’ in the technical sense; ii. 34, 55,
‘Aspice me, cui parva domi fortuna relictast, nullus et antiquo Marte triumphus avi.’
His childhood was clouded by the early death of his father, and by the confiscation of his estate in B.C. 41; iv. 1, 127,
‘Ossaque legisti non illa aetate legenda patris; et in tenues cogeris ipse lares, nam tua cum multi versarent rura iuvenci, abstulit excultas pertica tristis opes.’
His mother then took him to Rome, where he studied law for a short time after assuming the toga virilis, but abandoned it in favour of poetry; iv. 1, 131,
‘Mox ubi bulla rudi demissast aurea collo, matris et ante deos libera sumpta toga, tum tibi pauca suo de carmine dictat Apollo et vetat insano verba tonare foro.’
Meanwhile he was engaged in his first love affair with Lycinna, who is otherwise unknown (iii. 15, 3 sqq.). In B.C. 29 or 28 his acquaintance with Cynthia began. Her real name was Hostia (Apuleius, Apol. 10, ‘Accusent ... Propertium, qui Cynthiam dicat, Hostiam dissimulet’), and she was possibly a grand-daughter of the poet Hostius (p. 65). Cf. iii. 20, 8,
‘Splendidaque a docto fama refulget avo.’
A courtesan of the higher class, she is represented by Propertius as possessed of great personal charms and varied accomplishments (i. 2, 30, ‘Omnia quaeque Venus quaeque Minerva probat’), combined with many faults of temper and character. She had a house at Rome in the Subura, and we hear of her also at Tibur, where she was buried (iv. 7, 15; 85). She was considerably older than Propertius; ii. 18, 19,
‘At tu etiam iuvenem odisti me, perfida, cum sis ipsa anus haud longa curva futura die.’
At the end of two years the unfaithfulness of Propertius led to twelve months of estrangement; iii. 16, 9,
‘Peccaram semel, et totum sum pulsus in annum.’
Cynthia was reconciled to him about the beginning of B.C. 25; but the passion on both sides gradually cooled until, in 23, Propertius harshly cast her off (iii. 24 and 25). Possibly there was a second reconciliation before her death (iv. 7). The five years of bondage (iii. 25, 3, ‘Quinque tibi potui servire fideliter annos,’) will thus be B.C. 28, 27, 25-23.
Propertius lived chiefly at Rome; but i. 18 was written near the Clitumnus, and in ii. 19 he promises to join Cynthia in that region. In iii. 21 he contemplates a voyage to Athens; l. 1,
‘Magnum iter ad doctas proficisci cogor Athenas, ut me longa gravi solvat amore via.’
A few years earlier he had refused to accompany his friend Tullus to Athens and Asia (i. 6).
Nothing is known of the subsequent life of Propertius, but from two passages in the younger Pliny it is natural to infer that he married, in obedience to the Lex Iulia of B.C. 18, and had issue. Pliny, Ep. vi. 15, ‘Passennus Paullus ... inter maiores suos Propertium numerat’; ix. 22, ‘Propertium ... a quo genus ducit.’
We cannot tell even when he died. He must have been alive in B.C. 16, because iv. 6 was written for the ludi quinquennales, which were held for the first time in that year; and iv. 11. 65, is an allusion to the consulship of P. Cornelius Scipio, also in B.C. 16.
In personal appearance Propertius was pale and thin, and rather fond of dress; i. 5, 21,
‘Nec iam pallorem totiens mirabere nostrum, aut cur sim toto corpore nullus ego’;
ii. 4, 5,
‘Nequiquam perfusa meis unguenta capillis, ibat et expenso planta morata gradu.’
He had been introduced to Maecenas after the publication of his first Book, but naturally was not on such intimate terms with him as older men like Virgil and Horace were. ii. 1 and iii. 9 are addressed to Maecenas. In the first of these poems Propertius declares that he is unequal to the composition of an epic, which his patron had urged upon him, but adds (l. 17)
‘Quod mihi si tantum, Maecenas, fata dedissent ut possem heroas ducere in arma manus, ... bellaque resque tui memorarem Caesaris, et tu Caesare sub magno cura secunda fores.’
For poems referring to Augustus cf. ii. 10, iv. 6 (on Actium), iii. 18 (on the death of Marcellus).
Horace and Propertius do not mention each other by name. Chronology forbids the identification of the bore in Hor. Sat. i. 9 with Propertius, who, on the same ground, cannot be meant in Sat. i. 10, 18,
‘Neque simius iste, nil praeter Calvum et doctus cantare Catullum.’
But Hor. Ep. ii. 2, 87-101, is undoubtedly aimed at Propertius. Cf. especially l. 99,
‘Discedo Alcaeus puncto illius; ille meo quis? quis nisi Callimachus? Si plus adposcere visus, fit Mimnermus et optivo cognomine crescit.’
Though both poets belonged to the same literary circle, they differed widely in temperament as well as in age. With Tibullus, who was a member of Messalla’s circle, Propertius may have had no personal acquaintance; at all events, neither alludes to the other.
For Virgil Propertius expresses warm admiration in ii. 34, written during the composition of the Aeneid. Ovid, who calls him ‘blandus’ (Tr. ii. 465) and ‘tener’ (A.A. iii. 333), was an intimate friend of his; cf. Tr. iv. 10, 45 (quoted p. 206). The minor poets to whom he writes are Ponticus (i. 7 and 9), Bassus (i. 4), and a tragic poet, Lynceus (a pseudonym, ii. 34, 25).
(2) WORKS.
The extant Elegies, divided in the MSS. into four Books, are probably all that Propertius ever wrote. On account of the disproportionate length of Book ii., and the number ‘tres’ (which, however, may be said in anticipation) in ii. 13, 25,
‘Sat mea sat magna est si tres sint pompa libelli, quos ego Persephonae maxima dona feram,’
some editors make Book ii. consist only of El. 1-9, and assign the remainder (10-34) to a new Book iii. Books iii. and iv. of the MSS. then become iv. and v. respectively. In the most recent editions, however, the MSS. arrangement is retained, and it is here followed.
Book i.—All the Elegies in Book i., except the last two, are amatory. El. 2-10 belong to the first months of the poet’s love, when Cynthia was gracious, though capricious. She had refused to accompany a rival of his, who was going to Illyricum as praetor (El. 8); but afterwards she left Rome for Baiae, and the rest of the Book is full of complaints of her harshness. El. 1, written after the year of separation, introduces the whole Book in a melancholy strain.
The clearest indication of date in Book i. is 8, 21, ‘Nam me non ullae poterunt corrumpere taedae,’ where Propertius protests that he will never marry, in spite of the Lex Iulia of B.C. 27. (He could not legally marry a woman of Cynthia’s class.) The Book was published probably in B.C. 25, under the title of ‘Cynthia.’ Cf. ii. 24, 1,
‘Cum sis iam noto fabula libro et tua sit toto Cynthia lecta foro.’
Her name was a recommendation for the Book, and it was probably her satisfaction at the fame which it brought her that caused her to relent towards Propertius. Cf. Mart. xiv. 189,
‘Cynthia, facundi carmen iuvenile Properti, accepit famam, nec minus ipsa dedit.’
At all events, a few months afterwards we find the old relations re-established; ii. 3, 3,
‘Vix unum potes, infelix, requiescere mensem, et turpis de te iam liber alter erit.’
Book ii.—Cynthia is the theme of nearly all the thirty-four poems of Book ii., which give lively expression to her lover’s varying moods. Only three Elegies (1, 10, and 31) are given to other subjects.
Of the few poems to which dates can be assigned, the earliest is El. 31 (on the dedication of the temple of the Palatine Apollo, B.C. 28), and the latest is El. 10, to Augustus (written shortly before the invasion of Arabia by Aelius Gallus in B.C. 24. Cf. l. 16, ‘et domus intactae te tremit Arabiae’). The Book was therefore published B.C. 24 at the earliest.
Book iii.—In this Book the poems on Cynthia form a far smaller proportion; 7, 12, and 22 show the warmth of the poet’s friendship; events of national interest are treated in 4, 11, and 18. In 5, 23-47, Propertius looks forward to spending his later years in the study of natural science (‘naturae perdiscere mores,’ l. 25).
There are few hints of the date of any of the poems in iii. El. 20 is apparently as early as B.C. 28; 18 certainly belongs to B.C. 23; 4 perhaps refers to the expedition against the Parthians planned in B.C. 22. The last-mentioned year is the earliest possible date of publication.
Book iv., in which there is no principle of arrangement, probably appeared after the author’s death. His archaeological tastes come out in four Elegies written, in imitation of the Αἴτια of Callimachus, on Roman antiquities—El. 2 on Vertumnus, 4 on Tarpeia, 9 on Cacus, 10 on Jupiter Feretrius. In this way Propertius fulfilled his promise to Maecenas, iii. 9, 49,
‘Celsaque Romanis decerpta Palatia tauris ordiar et caeso moenia firma Remo, eductosque pares silvestri ex ubere reges, crescet et ingenium sub tua iussa meum.’
El. 7 and 8 relate to Cynthia; in 7 her ghost appears to the poet. El. 3, a letter from Arethusa to Lycotas, possibly suggested to Ovid the plan of his Heroides, just as the antiquarian poems already mentioned may have suggested the Fasti. The Book ends with a lament for Cornelia, daughter of Scribonia, Augustus’ first wife (El. 11).
The date of 6 and 11 is certainly not earlier than B.C. 16, while 8 seems to have been written before the rupture with Cynthia. The antiquarian poems are considered by some to have been among Propertius’ earliest efforts.
Propertius was familiar with the whole range of Greek poetry—Homer (iii. 1, 25-34), Mimnermus (i. 9, 11), Pindar (iii. 17, 40), the dramatists, Theocritus, and Apollonius Rhodius. As his models he names especially the Alexandrians Callimachus and Philetas, whom he claims to follow more closely than any of his predecessors; iii. 1, 1,
‘Callimachi Manes et Coi sacra Philetae, in vestrum, quaeso, me sinite ire nemus. Primus ego ingredior puro de fonte sacerdos Itala per Graios orgia ferre choros.’
Cf. iv. 1, 64,
‘Umbria Romani patria Callimachi.’
In wealth of mythological illustration Propertius is peculiarly Alexandrian. He is continually drawing parallels and contrasts from Greek legend; e.g. i. 15, Cynthia how unlike Calypso! iii. 12, Aelia Galla a modern Penelope. Of Roman poets, he names as his predecessors in amatory verse Virgil, Varro Atacinus, Catullus, Calvus, and Cornelius Gallus (ii 34, 61-92). Once he dreams of writing an epic on the Alban kings in the vein of Ennius; iii. 3, 5,
‘Parvaque tam magnis admoram fontibus ora, unde pater sitiens Ennius ante bibit.’
In Propertius love of social pleasures appears side by side with a strain of deep melancholy e.g. in. 5, 21,
Me iuvat et multo mentem vincire Lyaeo et caput in verna semper habere rosa,
contrasted with the numerous passages where he is thinking of the grave, e.g. ii. 1, 71,
‘Quandocumque igitur vitam mea fata reposcent, et breve in exiguo marmore nomen ero.’
There is no greater patriot than Propertius. Cf. the denunciation of Cleopatra (iii. 11) and the frequency of the epithet ‘Romanus.’
OVID.
(1) LIFE.
Ovid’s own writings (especially Tr. iv. 10) supply nearly all the information we possess regarding his life. The biographies in the MSS. are valueless.
P. Ovidius Naso was his full name, in which the MSS. agree. He speaks of himself as Naso simply, and Statius and Martial refer to him by that name; Tacitus and the two Senecas use the nomen Ovidius.
He was born in Sulmo, one of the three divisions of the Paelignian country, B.C. 43—the year in which Hirtius and Pansa fell at Mutina. Tr. iv. 10, 3,
‘Sulmo mihi patria est, gelidis uberrimus undis, milia qui novies distat ab urbe decem. Editus hic ego sum; nec non ut tempora noris, cum cecidit fato consul uterque pari.’
His birthday was 20th March—the second day of the festival of the Quinquatria (cf. Fast. iii. 809-814), l. 13,
‘Haec est armiferae festis de quinque Minervae, quae fieri pugna prima cruenta solet.’
He belonged to an equestrian family, and he frequently contrasts himself with those who had reached that dignity by military service or by possessing the requisite fortune; ibid. l. 7,
‘Si quid id est, usque a proavis vetus ordinis heres, non sum fortunae munere factus eques.’
Cf. Am. i. 3, 7; iii. 8, 9; iii. 15, 5; Pont. iv. 8, 17.
Along with his elder brother, he received a careful education at Rome, and studied also at Athens. He practised rhetoric under Arellius Fuscus and Porcius Latro. Tr. iv. 10, 15,
‘Protinus excolimur teneri, curaque parentis imus ad insignes urbis ab arte viros.’
Tr. i. 2, 77,
‘Non peto quas quondam petii studiosus Athenas.’
Sen. Contr. ii. 10, 8, ‘Hanc controversiam memini ab Ovidio Nasone declamari apud rhetorem Arellium Fuscum, cuius auditor fuit, nam Latronis admirator erat, cum diversum sequeretur dicendi genus.’ Seneca says that Met. xiii. 121, and Am. i. 2, 11, were borrowed from Latro.
But, in spite of his father’s remonstrances, Ovid preferred poetry to public life. Tr. iv. 10, 19,
‘At mihi iam parvo caelestia sacra placebant, inque suum furtim Musa trahebat opus. Saepe pater dixit, “studium quid inutile temptas? Maeonides nullas ipse reliquit opes.” Motus eram dictis totoque Helicone relicto scribere conabar verba soluta modis: sponte sua carmen numeros veniebat ad aptos; quicquid temptabam dicere, versus erat.’
In due time he assumed the toga virilis, and with it the broad purple stripe worn by prospective senators. He also held two of the minor offices of the vigintiviratus, the preliminary to a senatorial career, being (1) triumvir capitalis or else triumvir monetalis, (2) decemvir stlitibus iudicandis. Tr. iv. 10, 28,
‘Liberior fratri sumpta mihique toga est, induiturque umeris cum lato purpura clavo’;
l. 33,
‘Cepimus et tenerae primos aetatis honores, deque viris quondam pars tribus una fui.’
Fast. iv. 384,
‘Inter bis quinos usus honore viros.’
In virtue of this second office he sat in the centumviral court;[67] and he also acted as an arbitrator. Tr. ii. 93,
‘Nec male commissa est nobis fortuna reorum lisque decem deciens inspicienda viris. Res quoque privatas statui sine crimine iudex.’
He sought no higher office, having neither strength nor inclination for the Senate; he assumed the narrow stripe of the eques, and devoted himself to poetry and pleasure. Tr. iv. 10, 35,
‘Curia restabat: clavi mensura coacta est: maius erat nostris viribus illud onus. Nec patiens corpus, nec mens fuit apta labori, sollicitaeque fugax ambitionis eram. Et petere Aoniae suadebant tuta sorores otia, iudicio semper amata meo.’
He made a tour in Asia (including Troy) and Sicily in the company of the poet Pompeius Macer: the date of this journey is unknown, but he was almost a year in Sicily. Pont. ii. 10, 21-29 (to Macer),
‘Te duce magnificas Asiae perspeximus urbes, Trinacris est oculis te duce nota meis, ... Hic mihi labentis pars anni magna peracta est.’
Fast. vi. 423,
‘Cura videre fuit: vidi templumque locumque,’
(of the temple of Pallas at Troy).
Towards the end of A.D. 8, Ovid was banished by imperial edict to Tomi, on the Black Sea, near the mouth of the Danube, the cause alleged being the publication of the Ars Amatoria. Ovid mentions this edict, but also hints at another reason, connected with the imperial family. Tr. ii. 207,
‘Perdiderint cum me duo crimina, carmen et error, alterius facti culpa silenda mihi; nam non sum tanti renovem ut tua vulnera, Caesar, quem nimio plus est indoluisse semel. Altera pars superest, qua turpi carmine factus arguor obscaeni doctor adulterii.’
He was guilty of no crime of his own, but was banished for witnessing the crime of another. Cf. Tr. iii. 5, 49,
‘Inscia quod crimen viderunt lumina, plector, peccatumque oculos est habuisse meum.’
It is probable that the real reason[68] of Ovid’s banishment was that he was privy to a guilty intrigue between D. Silanus and Julia, the grand-daughter of Augustus. Julia was banished in A.D. 9, and Tacitus (Ann. iii. 24) tells us of the intrigue, for which Silanus (like Ovid) suffered relegatio. His knowledge of the offence was betrayed by friends and domestics. Cf. Tr. iv. 10, 101,
‘Quid referam comitumque nefas famulosque nocentes?’
The date of his banishment is given Tr. iv. 10, 95,
‘Postque meos ortus Pisaea vinctus oliva abstulerat decies praemia victor equus, cum maris Euxini positos ad laeva Tomitas quaerere me laesi principis ira iubet.’
[Here an Olympiad is reckoned as five years.] His punishment was relegatio, involving banishment to a fixed spot, but not confiscation of property; Tr. ii. 135,
‘Adde quod edictum, quamvis immite minaxque, attamen in poenae nomine lene fuit; quippe relegatus, non exul, dicor in illo, privaque fortunae sunt ibi verba meae.’
In Tomi he spent the remaining years of his life, far from friends and books; Tr. v. 12, 53,
‘Non liber hic ullus, non qui mihi commodet aurem, verbaque significent quid mea norit, adest’;
suffering from illness (Tr. iii. 3) and the climate, and fighting against the barbarians; Tr. iv. 1, 71,
‘Aspera militiae iuvenis certamina fugi, nec nisi lusura movimus arma manu: nunc senior gladioque latus scutoque sinistram, canitiem galeae subicioque meam.’
On the other hand he learned the language of the people, and actually wrote poems in it; Tr. v. 12, 57,
‘Ipse mihi videor iam dedidicisse Latine: nam didici Getice Sarmaticeque loqui.’
Pont. iv. 13, 19,
‘A! pudet, et Getico scripsi sermone libellum, structaque sunt nostris barbara verba modis, et placui—gratare mihi—coepique poetae inter inhumanos nomen habere Getas! materiam quaeris? laudes de Caesare dixi.’
For his popularity with the natives cf. Pont. iv. 14, 53,
‘Solus adhuc ego sum vestris immunis in oris, exceptis si qui munera legis habent. Tempora sacrata mea sunt velata corona, publicus invito quam favor imposuit’;
also Pont. iv. 9, 101.
Ovid’s death took place in A.D. 18: Jerome yr. Abr. 2033, ‘Ovidius poeta in exilio diem obiit et iuxta oppidum Tomos sepelitur.’ He was thrice married; Tr. iv. 10, 69,
‘Paene mihi puero nec digna nec utilis uxor est data, quae tempus per breve nupta fuit; illi successit quamvis sine crimine coniunx, non tamen in nostro firma futura toro; ultima, quae mecum seros permansit in annos, sustinuit coniunx exulis esse viri.’
His third wife belonged to the gens Fabia. Cf. Pont. i. 2, 138 (to Fabius Maximus),
‘Ille ego, de vestra cui data nupta domo est.’
The filia mentioned Tr. iv. 10, 75, may have been either a daughter or step-daughter of Ovid’s. Some think that she is the Perilla of Tr. iii. 7.
Ovid’s social position was of the highest, as may be inferred from his relations with the palace. He was intimate with Messalla, the patron of Tibullus, and wrote an elegy on him (now lost). Cf. Pont. i. 7, 27 (to Messalinus),
‘Nec tuus est genitor nos infitiatus amicos, hortator studii causaque faxque mei: cui nos et lacrimas, supremum in funere munus, et dedimus medio scripta canenda foro.’
Among the friends to whom the Epp. ex Ponto are written may be mentioned Albinovanus, Carus, Rufus, Severus, Fabius Maximus Cotta, Tuticanus, the younger Macer, all poets; and other literary men of distinction, e.g. Graecinus, Atticus, Brutus, Sex. Pompeius, Gallio. For his intimacy with the learned Hyginus cf. Sueton. Gramm. 20, ‘fuit familiarissimus Ovidio poetae.’
He was old enough to have seen Virgil, and hear Aemilius Macer and Horace recite; with Propertius, Tibullus, Ponticus, and Bassus he was on terms of close intimacy (Am. iii. 9 is a lament for Tibullus), Tr. iv. 10, 41-52,
‘Temporis illius colui fovique poetas, quotque aderant vates, rebar adesse deos. Saepe suas volucres legit mihi grandior aevo, quaeque necet serpens, quae iuvet herba, Macer. Saepe suos solitus recitare Propertius ignes, iure sodalicii qui mihi iunctus erat. Ponticus heroo, Bassus quoque clarus iambis dulcia convictus membra fuere mei. Detinuit nostras numerosus Horatius aures, dum ferit Ausonia carmina culta lyra. Vergilium vidi tantum; nec amara Tibullo tempus amicitiae fata dedere meae.’
Besides the rura paterna at Sulmo, Ovid possessed an estate on the via Clodia, near Rome; Pont. i. 8, 41,
‘Non meus amissos animus desiderat agros ruraque Paeligno conspicienda solo, nec quos piniferis positos in collibus hortos spectat Flaminiae Clodia iuncta viae.’
He cannot have been poor, in spite of his complaints, e.g. Pont. iv. 8, 32,
‘Carpsit opes illa ruina meas.’
(2) WORKS.
1. Amores, at first in five Books, but in a second edition reduced to three; cf. the motto prefixed to the Book,
‘Qui modo Nasonis fueramus quinque libelli, Tres sumus.’
The poems are nearly all on Corinna, a name which probably does not stand for any real person, but merely for an abstraction around which Ovid groups his own fancies. To suppose, as Sidonius Apollinaris did (23, 157)[69] that Augustus’ daughter Julia was meant, is absurd, for Corinna is a meretrix. The identity of Corinna was unknown; Am. ii. 17, 28,
‘Et multae per me nomen habere volunt. Novi aliquam, quae se circumferat esse Corinnam’;
and twenty years afterwards Ovid could write (A.A. iii. 538),
‘Et multi, quae sit nostra Corinna, rogant.’
The Amores, in their original form, constituted Ovid’s earliest work, written in his youth. The extant poems are not all that he wrote on Corinna; Tr. iv. 10, 57,
‘Carmina cum primum populo iuvenilia legi, barba resecta mihi bisve semelve fuit. Moverat ingenium totam cantata per urbem nomine non vero dicta Corinna mihi. Multa quidem scripsi; sed quae vitiosa putavi, emendaturis ignibus ipse dedi.’
The lament for Tibullus (iii. 9) must have been written in Ovid’s twenty-fourth year.
2. Heroides.—Some of these at least were written before the second edition of the Amores, for in Am. ii. 18, 21-6 nine of them are mentioned by name. The title Heroides is due to the grammarian Priscian; in the MSS. they are called Epistulae, and so Ovid himself refers to them, A.A. iii. 345,
‘Vel tibi composita cantetur epistula voce: ignotum hoc aliis ille novavit opus.’
Of the twenty letters in our collection 1-14 are letters from heroines to their lovers; 15-20 are in pairs, e.g. Paris to Helen and Helen to Paris. The authenticity of these last six is doubted, partly because the title Heroides cannot apply to half of them, and also because of their inferiority in style. In the use of the epistolary form in love poetry Ovid had no predecessor, and he himself calls attention to the novelty (A.A. above). The style shows the influence of Ovid’s rhetorical training: the Epistles are suasoriae in verse, and of suasoriae we know that he was particularly fond (Sen. Contr. ii. 10, 12, ‘Declamabat Naso raro controversias et non nisi ethicas: libentius dicebat suasorias. Molesta illi erat omnis argumentatio.’). His matter he would naturally draw from Homer, the Cypria, Apollonius Rhodius, and the Greek tragedians.
3. Between the two editions of the Amores he wrote the lost tragedy Medea. It was later than Am. iii. 1, where he pictures the Muses of Elegy and Tragedy as contending for his homage, and he finally decides (ll. 67-8),
‘Exiguum vati concede, Tragoedia, tempus: tu labor aeternus; quod petit illa breve est.’
On the other hand, it was earlier than Am. ii. 18, 13,
‘Sceptra tamen sumpsi, curaque tragoedia nostra crevit, et huic operi quamlibet aptus eram.’
The drama enjoyed a high reputation in antiquity. Cf. Quint. x. 1, 98, ‘Ovidii Medea videtur mihi ostendere, quantum ille vir praestare potuerit, si ingenio suo imperare quam indulgere maluisset.’
4. Medicamina Faciei Femineae, an incomplete poem of 100 lines, giving directions for the toilet. Cf. A.A. iii. 205,
‘Est mihi, quo dixi vestrae medicamina formae, parvus, sed cura grande, libellus, opus.’
5. Ars Amatoria, a didactic poem in three Books, on the art of love-intrigue. The title given by the MSS. is doubtless correct: Ovid himself speaks of ‘ars amandi,’ or simply ‘ars’ or ‘artes.’ It was written about B.C. 2, from the allusion, i. 171, to the ‘naumachia’ in that year,
‘Quid, modo cum belli navalis imagine Caesar Persidas induxit Cecropiasque rates?’
The Ars must have been in view when he wrote Am. ii. 18, 19,
‘Quod licet, aut artes teneri profitemur amoris— ei mihi, praeceptis urgeor ipse meis!’
6. Remedia Amoris, written next, while professing to be a recantation of the last-named work, exhibits, if possible, a more immoral tone. Cf. l. 487,
‘Quaeris, ubi invenias? artes, i, perlege nostras.’
7. Ovid now produced a work of greater compass, the Metamorphoses, in fifteen Books of heroic verse. When it was composed is not known, but he had the idea of it in his mind when he wrote Am. iii. 12, 21-40. At the time of his banishment the poem had been written, but not revised. He committed his MS. to the flames, but copies were in the hands of friends; Tr. i. 7, 13-16,
‘Carmina mutatas hominum dicentia formas, infelix domini quod fuga rupit opus. Haec ego discedens, sicut bene multa meorum, ipse mea posui maestus in igne manu.
Quae quoniam non sunt penitus sublata, sed extant, (l. 23) pluribus exemplis scripta fuisse reor.
Ablatum mediis opus est incudibus illud, (l. 29) defuit et scriptis ultima lima meis.’
The poem consists of a collection of stories of the transformation of human beings into animals. Cf. i. 1,
‘In nova fert animus mutatas dicere formas corpora.’
The idea, title, and much of the subject-matter was borrowed from the Alexandrians, e.g. the Μεταμορφώσεις of Parthenius, the Ἑτεροιούμενα of Nicander.
8. In the Fasti, in six Books, Ovid furnishes a poetical calendar of the Roman year. Each month has a Book allotted to it, and he speaks of having written twelve Books; Tr. ii. 549,
‘Sex ego Fastorum scripsi totidemque libellos, cumque suo finem mense volumen habet. Idque tuo nuper scriptum sub nomine, Caesar, et tibi sacratum sors mea rupit opus.’
Probably the second six Books were never completed; but there are references to portions of them, e.g. iii. 57,
‘Vester honos veniet, cum Larentalia dicam; acceptus Geniis illa December habet.’
The Fasti had been written side by side with the Metam. and interrupted at the sixth Book by Ovid’s banishment. During his exile he added some passages, but found that his Muse was fit only for melancholy themes; iv. 81,
‘Sulmonis gelidi—patriae, Germanice, nostrae— me miserum, Scythico quam procul illa solo est!’
i. 540,
‘Felix, exilium cui locus ille fuit!’
The design is stated at the outset, i. 1-8,
‘Tempora cum causis Latium digesta per annum lapsaque sub terras ortaque signa canam ... Sacra recognosces annalibus eruta priscis, et quo sit merito quaeque notata dies.’
The work is thus a medley of religion, history, and astrology, and in its explanations of customs may be compared to the Αἴτια of Callimachus. For information about religious rites, and for derivations of names (e.g. Agnalia, i. 317-332), he would have recourse to Varro; for history, to Livy (cf. ii. 193-242, the story of the Fabii, from Livy, ii. 49, and vi. 587, etc., the story of Tullia, from Livy, i. 48); for astronomy, to Clodius Tuscus.
It was begun some time after Augustus regulated the Julian calendar in B.C. 8, and was originally addressed to Augustus, as Ovid himself says (Tr. ii. 552 above); ‘Caesar’ is addressed ii. 15, vi. 763, and elsewhere. After the death of Augustus, Ovid began to remodel it and dedicate it to Germanicus. Cf. i. 3,
‘Excipe pacato, Caesar Germanice, voltu hoc opus et timidae dirige navis iter.’
But the task was stopped by his death; and while Book i. has the remodelled form, Books ii.-vi. remain as first written.
Poems written in exile.—9. Tristia, five Books of letters to Augustus, to Ovid’s wife and friends (who, however, are not named), praying for pardon or for a place of exile nearer Rome. Book i. was written on the journey to Tomi, the other books not after A.D. 11 or 12, Cf. v. 10, 1,
‘Ut sumus in Ponto, ter frigore constitit Hister.’
10. The Ibis was written at the beginning of his exile. Cf. l. 1,
‘Tempus ad hoc, lustris bis iam mihi quinque peractis.’
The title was taken from the poem in which Callimachus attacked Apollonius Rhodius under the name of Ibis. Cf. l. 55,
‘Nunc, quo Battiades inimicum devovet Ibin, hoc ego devoveo teque tuosque modo.’
Ovid studiously conceals the identity of the enemy whom he attacks; l. 61,
‘Et quoniam, qui sis, nondum quaerentibus edo, Ibidis interea tu quoque nomen habe.’
He had once been a friend of the poet, but had proved false to him, doubtless in connexion with the circumstances which caused his banishment; cf. l. 85, ‘capiti male fido,’ l. 130, ‘perfide.’ He persecuted Ovid’s wife, and tried to get possession of his property.
The conjectures that the unknown was Messalla Corvinus or the poet Manilius may be dismissed at once. Many hold that Hyginus is meant; Prof. Ellis suggests the delator Cassius Severus (Tac. Ann. iv. 21), or T. Labienus (Sen. Contr. x. praef. 4), or the astrologer Thrasyllus (Tac. Ann. vi. 20). To the same person probably are addressed Tr. iii. 11, iv. 9, v. 8; Pont. iv. 3.
11. The Epistulae ex Ponto, in four Books, were written A.D. 12-16. In tone they resemble the Tristia, but the composition is more careless, and the friends to whom he writes are mentioned by name.
12. Halieuticon, a poem on fish, in hexameters, in a fragmentary condition. Ovid wrote this towards the end of his life.
Pliny, N.H. xxxii. 152, ‘His adiciemus ab Ovidio posita nomina quae apud neminem alium reperiuntur, sed fortassis in Ponto nascentium, ubi id volumen supremis suis temporibus incohavit.’
MANILIUS.
Manilius is not mentioned by any other writer, and his own poem gives no particulars of his life. There is uncertainty even as to the true form of his name, the MSS. giving variously M. Mallius, Manlius, or Manilius, with the addition in one case of EQOM (probably = equitis Romani). In some MSS. the poem is wrongly attributed to Aratus or Boetius, both of whom wrote on the same subject as Manilius.
Bentley conjectured that Manilius was an Asiatic Greek, but the poet speaks of Latin as ‘nostra lingua’ (ii. 889), while Greek is ‘externa lingua’ (iii. 40), and he uses no Greek constructions.
His poem, the Astronomica, in its present form, consists of five Books of hexameter verse: probably a sixth Book has been lost. It may have been wholly composed in the reign of Tiberius, or begun under Augustus. Book v. was written under Tiberius, if the burning of Pompey’s theatre in A.D. 22 is alluded to in ll. 513-515. The earlier Books contain nothing which might not have been written after the death of Augustus—the allusions to the disaster of Varus in A.D. 9 (i. 899), and to the sojourn of Tiberius at Rhodes (iv. 764). Either Augustus or Tiberius may be the ‘Caesar’ of i. 7 and i. 386. On the other hand, if Ovid is referring to Manilius (as Prof. Ellis suggests) in Tr. ii. 485,
‘Ecce canit formas alius iactusque pilarum, hic artem nandi praecipit, ille trochi,’