Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-25wd4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T10:37:11.943Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Valerius' Flavian Argonautica

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 February 2009

P. Ruth Taylor
P. Ruth Taylor
Affiliation:
University of Birmingham
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

‘[Valerius'] Argonautica is a story of high adventure, not a poème à thèse’: so stated Garson in 1965. Strand later added that the essential nature of this poem and the choice of subject-matter was determined by poetic inability; he describes the prooemium to Valerius' Argonautica as ‘a recusatio: the theme of the fall of Jerusalem is beyond his powers, and it would instead be treated by Domitian who was fit for such an arduous task; Valerius had to content himself with the theme of an old myth’. It is these two opinions that I wish to question in this article. Indeed, alarm bells immediately sound at Strand's interpretation of the poet's recusatio. It has long been recognized that the original Callimachean recusatio was twisted by the Augustan poets. Gordon Williams analyses their practice thus: ‘They sadly regret that their poor talents will not rise to great subjects – and the subjects to which they will not rise are not the old mythological tales but the great affairs of contemporary Roman history and, in particular, the deeds of Augustus. It is clear, however, that they are using this form of poem to enumerate and praise the great deeds of Augustus, under the guise of proposing their own inability.’ No-one hesitates to agree that Valerius was well versed in the Augustan poets. It is dangerous, therefore, to assume without question that he was deceived by their insincerity. There is in fact good reason to examine the alternative possibility, namely that Valerius understood well the practice of his literary predecessors, that he dared to tread in their footsteps and that he succeeded in the supreme duty of a poet, that is to say, the business of ensuring that ars celavit artem.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Classical Quarterly , Volume 44 , Issue 1 , May 1994 , pp. 212 - 235
Copyright
Copyright © The Classical Association 1994

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Garson, R. W., ‘Observations on Valerius Flaccus' Argonautica II’, CQ 15 (1965), 114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

2 Strand, J., Notes on Valerius Flaccus' Argonautica (Gothenburg, 1972), p. 37.Google Scholar

3 Williams, G., Tradition and Originality in Roman Poetry (Oxford, 1968), pp. 46–7.Google Scholar

4 Cf., e.g.,Summers, W. C., A Study of the Argonautica of Valerius Flaccus (Cambridge, 1894) pp. 26–33, 37–9Google Scholar; Hardie, P., ‘Flavian Epicists on Virgil's Epic Technique’, Ramus 18 (1989), 5–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

5 The text provided is my own. The sources recorded in the apparatus are taken from Giarratano, C., C. Valerii Flacci Balbi Setini Argonauticon Libri Octo (Naples/Milan, 1904)Google Scholar, ad loc. and Ehlers, W.-W., Gai Valeri Flacci Setini Balbi Argonauticon Libri Octo (Stuttgart, 1980)Google Scholar, ad loc. The sigla used conform with those used by Ehlers, ibid., pp. vi–xv.

6 Strand, op. cit. (n. 2), pp. 7–9.

7 Strand, op. cit. (n. 2), pp. 17–19.

8 Getty, R. J., ‘The Introduction to the Argonautica of Valerius Flaccus’, CPh 35 (1940), 264–7Google Scholar; cf. also Campbell, A. Y., ‘The Background of Valerius Flaccus, 1.10’, CR 55 (1941), 25–27.Google Scholar

9 Robertson, D. S., ‘Valerius Flaccus 1.10’. CR 55 (1941), 27.Google Scholar

10 Strand, op. cit. (n. 2), pp. 9–12.

11 Strand, op. cit. (n. 2), pp. 16–17.

12 See pp. 215–6.

13 Ehlers, , ‘Valerius Flaccus 1940 bis 1971’, Lustrum 16 (1971–1972), 115.Google Scholar

14 These emendations have been offered by, amongst others, Getty, art. cit. (n. 8), 259–73; Waszink, J. H., ‘Valerius Flaccus 1.13’, Mnemosyne 24 (1971), 297–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar; J. Strand, op. cit. (n. 2), pp. 7–22.

15 Syme, R., ‘The Argonautica of Valerius Flaccus’, CQ 23 (1929), 129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

16 Cf. also Poortvliet, H. M., ‘Valerius and the Last File’ in Korn, M. and Tschiedel, H. J. (edd.), Ratis omnia vincet (Hildesheim, 1991), pp. 35–43.Google Scholar

17 Two dissenting voices have challenged this communis opinio in recent times. Syme (art. cit. (n. 15), 135) states that lines 5–21 are ‘a palpable insertion’, added at the time when the poet came to publish or recite a part of his work. Ehlers has recently advanced the hypothesis that lines 5–21 of the prooemium are no more than an extension of the original prooemium (lines 1–4), which ‘zudem in seinem Umfang dem Prooemium des Apollonios genau entspricht’. He believes that this extension was prompted by the death of Vespasian (Ehlers, in Korn and Tschiedel (edd.), op. cit., p. 22). Ehlers' hypothesis is inextricably linked with his opinion, in my view erroneous, that ‘das Epos unabhängig von Vespasians Eroberung der Kaledonischen Ozeans konzipiert worden ist, das heisst, gar nicht im Blick auf Vespasian und seine Familie verfasst wurde’. Cf. below, pp. 217ff.Google Scholar

18 Useful synopses of the various conclusions reached by scholars on this matter are provided by Cambier, G., ‘Recherches chronologiques sur l'oeuvre et la vie de Valerius Flaccus’ in Bibauw, J. (ed.), Hommages à Marcel Renard, Collection Latomus 101 (Brussels, 1969), pp. 191–228Google Scholar and Stern, M., Greek and Latin Authors on Jews and Judaism I (Jerusalem, 1976), pp. 502–5Google Scholar. Cf. also Lefèvre, E., ‘Das Prooemium der Argonautica des Valerius Flaccus’, Abhandlungen der Akademie der Wissenschaften und der Literatur Mainz 6 (Wiesbaden, 1971)Google Scholar; Bardon, H., REA 74 (1972), 305Google Scholar; Wistrand, E., Gnomon 45 (1973), 497–8Google Scholar; Ehlers, , in Korn and Tschiedel (edd.), op. cit. (n. 16), pp. 19–22.Google Scholar

19 Syme, art. cit. (n. 15), 136.

20 For a description of this temple see Platner, S. B. and Ashby, T., A Topographical Dictionary of Ancient Rome (Oxford, 1929), p. 247Google Scholar. I have accepted here the date of construction as given by Scott, K., The Imperial Cult under the Flavians (Stuttgart, 1936), p. 66.Google Scholar

21 Terwogt, W. Meerum, Quaestiones Valerianae (Diss. Amsterdam, 1898)Google Scholar (I have not had access to this work); Getty, , ‘The Date of the Composition of the Argonautica of Valerius Flaccus’, CPh 31 (1936), 53–61Google Scholar; Smallwood, E. M., ‘Valerius Flaccus Argonautica 1. 5–21’, Mnemosyne 15 (1962), 170–2.Google Scholar

22 I have taken the date at which construction work on the templum Vespasiani began from Getty, art. cit. (n. 21), 56. A description of this temple is given by Platner and Ashby, op. cit. (n. 20), p. 556 and Nash, E., Pictorial Dictionary of Ancient Rome II (Tübingen, 1962), pp. 501–4.Google Scholar

23 Lefèvre, art. cit. (n. 18), 29ff. Against this theory, Ehlers rightly comments (art. cit. (n. 13), 116) that ‘Zu einer doch mit erheblichen Schwierigkeiten verbundenen Deutung, wie L[efèvre] sie vorbringt, sollte man m.E. erst Zuflucht nehmen, wenn alle konkreten Lösungsmöglichkeiten erschöpft sind’.

24 Strand, op. cit. (n. 2), p. 32.

25 Ehlers, op. cit. (n. 5), p.v. For Ehlers' current theory regarding the dating of the prooemium, see above, n. 17.

26 Ehlers, art. cit. (n. 13), 116. Against Syme's argument (art. cit. (n. 15), 130–3) that Valerius' allusion to Sarmatian military tactics and weapons was suggested by Domitian's Danube Wars (A.d. 89 and 92), see Wistrand, E., Die Chronologie der Punica des Silius Italicus (Gothenburg, 1956), p. 17 n. 2.Google Scholar

27 Strand, op. cit. (n. 2), pp. 29–30.

28 Strand, op. cit. (n. 2), p. 31.

29 The assumption that Titus would succeed his father and perform these services was only logical from Valerius' perspective. Getty (art. cit. (n. 21), 54–5) provides parallel examples where ille represents ‘not the principal subject, but, on the contrary, either the object, or a noun in an oblique case, or a subordinate subject in the preceding clause’. Cf. also Strand, op. cit. (n. 2), p. 26.

30 Scott, op. cit. (n. 20), pp. 22ff.

31 Scott, op. cit. (n. 20), pp. 23–4. Note that Titus had no male offspring.

32 Scott, op. cit. (n. 20), p. 39; Galinsky, G. K., The Herakles Theme (Oxford, 1972), p. 140.Google Scholar

33 Ehlers, art. cit. (n. 13), 115–16.

34 Ehlers, art. cit. (n. 13), 115. Ehlers later renounced this theory: (see above, n. 17).

35 I have printed here the text of F. Vian published in Vian, F. and É., Delage (edd.), Apollonios de Rhodes Argonautiques Tom. I (Paris, 1974)Google Scholar. The translation is my own.

36 McDonald, I. R. (The Flavian Epic Poets as Political and Social Critics (Diss. Univ. of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 1970), p. 57Google Scholar) notes that in Jason's exhortation to his men before the voyage little emphasis is placed on the fleece again.

37 Valerius clearly intends to flatter Vespasian by the exaggeration ‘Caledonius’. Momigliano, A. (‘Panegyricus Messallae and “Panegyricus Vespasiani”’, JRS 40 [1950], 41–2)Google Scholar cites this prooemium and passages from Silius Italicus and Josephus as evidence that ‘“Caledonius” was used loosely or at least irresponsibly in the first century A.d.’ and that in Flavian sources it does not ‘allude distinctly and truthfully in every instance to the territory north of the Forth-Clyde line’.

38 Ehlers, op. cit. (n. 5), p. v.

39 Ehlers in Korn and Tschiedel (edd.), op. cit. (n. 16), p. 22.

40 Cf., e.g. Pöschl, V., ‘Basic Themes’ in Commager, S. (ed.), Virgil: A Collection of Critical Essays (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1966), pp. 171–2Google Scholar; Binder, G., Aeneas und Augustus: Interpretations zum 8. Buck der Aeneis (Meisenheim am Glan, 1971), pp. 2–3.Google Scholar

41 Cf. Drew, D. L., The Allegory of the Aeneid (Oxford, 1927; reprinted New York/London, 1978)Google Scholar; Binder, op. cit. (n. 40); Hardie, P. R., Virgil's Aeneid: Cosmos and Imperium (Oxford, 1986), pp. 358–75Google Scholar; Powell, A., ‘The Aeneid and the Embarrassments of Augustus’ in id. (ed.), Roman Poetry and Propaganda in the Age of Augustus (London, 1992), pp. 141–74.Google Scholar Drew's use of the term allegory with respect to the Aeneid is now rightly discredited (cf. Pöschl, ibid.; Powell, op. cit., p. 162).

42 Cf. Drew, op. cit. (n. 41), pp. 60–85; Binder, op. cit. (n. 40).

43 Ahl, F. M., ‘Statius’ “Thebaid”: A Reconsideration’ ANRW 2.32.5 (1986), 2814.Google Scholar

44 Ahl, ibid., 2832–4.

45 Hardie, art. cit. (n. 4).

46 Cf., e.g., Summers, op. cit., pp. 26–33; Hardie, art. cit. (n. 4), 5–9.

47 Cf. White, P., ‘Amicitia and the Profession of Poetry in Early Imperial Rome’ JRS 68 (1978), 84Google Scholar; id., ‘Positions for Poets in Early Imperial Rome’ in Gold, B. K. (ed.), Literary and Artistic Patronage in Ancient Rome (Austin, 1982), p. 60Google Scholar; Williams, G., ‘Phases in Political Patronage of Literature in Rome’Google Scholar in Gold (ed.), ibid., pp. 3–27; Powell, op. cit. (n. 41).

48 Davis, M. A., Flight beyond Time and Change: A New Reading of the ‘Argonautica’ of Valerius Flaccus (Diss. Cornell University, 1980).Google Scholar

49 Mattingly, H., Coins of the Roman Empire in the British Museum 2 (London, 1930), pp. xxxii–xxxiii.Google Scholar

50 For further evidence of the emphasis placed by Vespasian on the dynasty that he would establish, see Scott, op. cit. (n. 20), pp. 22–25; Mattingly, op. cit. (n. 49), p. liii.

51 Hunter, R. L. (‘Medea's Flight: The Fourth Book of the Argonautica’, CQ 37 [1987], 138)Google Scholar observes that the link between Medea and Helen had already been established by Euripides and Apollonius.

52 Cf. Barnes, W. R., ‘The Trojan War in Valerius Flaccus' Argonautica’, Hermes 109 (1981), 360–1Google Scholar; Camps, W. A., An Introduction to Virgil's Aeneid (Oxford, 1969), pp. 14–16.Google Scholar

53 Cf. also Kröner, H.-O., ‘Zu den Künstlerischen Absichten des Valerius Flaccus’, Hermes 96 (1968), 737.Google Scholar

54 See below, p. 224.

55 Association with Hercules as a means of glorifying a ruler was first exploited in a literary context by Theocritus, Id. 17.20–33.

56 See Galinsky, G. K., ‘The Hercules–Cacus Episode in Aeneid VIII’, AJPh 87 (1966), 18–51Google Scholar; id., op. cit. (n. 32), pp. 141–9; Binder, op. cit. (n. 40). Cf. also Feeney, D. C., The Gods in Epic (Oxford, 1991), p. 161.Google Scholar

57 Cf. Galinsky, op. cit. (n. 32), p. 136.

58 Galinsky, op. cit. (n. 32), p. 140.

59 Cf. Galinsky, op. cit. (n. 32), pp. 136, 138, 140; Feeney, op. cit. (n. 56), p. 161.

60 Adamietz, J., ‘Jason und Hercules in den Epen des Apollonios Rhodios und Valerius Flaccus’, Antike und Abendland 16 (1970), 29–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

61 Adamietz, ibid., 30; cf. also Piot, M., ‘Herculechezles Poètes du ler Siècle après J.C.’, REL 43 (1965), 353–8.Google Scholar

62 Adamietz, ibid., 32–4.

63 Adamietz, ibid., 34.

64 Cf. Scott, op. cit. (n. 20), p. 32; Galinsky, op. cit. (n. 32), p. 140.

65 Cf., e.g. Scramuzza, V. M., ‘Claudius Soter Euergetes’, Harvard Studies in Classical Philology 51 (1940), 261–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

66 See above, pp. 216–17.

67 Cf. Hunter, , ‘“Short on Heroics”: Jason in the Argonautica’ CQ 38 (1988), 436–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

68 Adamietz, art. cit. (n. 60).

69 Adamietz, art. cit. (n. 60), 30.

70 Adamietz, art. cit. (n. 60), 31.

71 Adamietz, art. cit. (n. 60), 29.

72 See above, p. 223.

73 See above, p. 223.

74 Adamietz, art. cit. (n. 60), 29, 34.

75 See above, p. 223.

76 Adamietz, art. cit. (n. 60), 36.

77 Adamietz, art. cit. (n. 60), 37.

78 Adamietz, art. cit. (n. 60), 37.

79 Cf. Fordyce, C. J. (ed.), P. Vergili Maronis Aeneidos Libri VII–VIII (Oxford, 1977), pp. 224–5.Google Scholar

80 Mattingly, op. cit. (n. 49), p. xlix.

81 Mattingly, op. cit. (n. 49), p. xxxviii; Scott, op. cit. (n. 20), pp. 25–32. Cf. also Fears, J. R., ‘The Cult of Virtues’ ANRW 17.2 (1981), 899–901.Google Scholar

82 Cf Suetonius, Div. Vesp. 9; Scott, op. cit. (n. 20), p. 32.

83 Mattingly, op. cit. (n. 49), pp. xix–xx; cf. also ibid., p. xlvii.

84 See above, p. 225.

85 Cf. Harrison, S. J., Vergil, Aeneid 10 (Oxford, 1991), ad 261–2 and 270–5.Google Scholar

86 Harrison, op. cit., ad 261–2.

87 ‘Etiam si bella externa et obitas pro re publica mortes tanta casuum similitudine memorarem, meque ipsum satias cepisset aliorumque taedium exspectarem, quamvis honestos civium exitus, tristes tamen et continuos aspernantium: at nunc patientia servilis tantumque sanguinis domi perditum fatigant animum et maestitia restringunt’ (Tac. Ann. 16.16).

88 Bradley, K. R., Suetonius' Life of Nero: An Historical Commentary (Brussels, 1978), p. 176.Google Scholar

89 Scott, op. cit. (n. 20), pp. 32–3.

90 Bradley, op. cit. (n. 80), pp. 175–6.

91 Mattingly, op. cit. (n. 49), p. xxxix. lovis here is an old nominative form.

92 Platner and Ashby, op. cit. (n. 20), p. 300.

93 Hunter, (Apollonius of Rhodes: Argonautica Book III (Cambridge, 1989), 405–6n. and 594n.)Google Scholar observes that there is also some parallelism in Apollonius' treatment of these two tyrants.

94 See above, p. 225.

95 I find Hollis' argument (Hollis, A. S., Callimachus: Hecale [Oxford, 1990], p. 218Google Scholar) that the ’two “iuvenci” would most appropriately be the Cretan and Marathonian bulls’ unconvincing. The Marathonian bull is associated with Theseus. In this list of four monsters, the first two, the Nemean lion and Lernaean hydra, have specific reference to Hercules; a third, one of the two iuvenci (1.36) implicitly refers to Hercules, for there can be no doubt that the Cretan bull is meant. The fourth monster is not explicitly associated with any hero. It is, however, coupled with an implicit reference to Hercules. The poet, moreover, does not signal a change; nor is there an apparent motive for a sudden switch from Hercules to Theseus. In the context, such a switch could only jolt awkwardly. This fourth monster, then, must surely have reference to Hercules and can only be Achelous. It is true that the reference to Achelous in association with monsters tackled by Hercules is surprising. However, it is the surprise itself that alerts the reader to the significance of the statement and the parallelism it draws between Pelias and Aeetes.

96 Cf., e.g. Hunter, art. cit. (n. 51 [1987]), 133–4; id., art. cit. (n. 67 [(1988]), 440; id., op. cit. (n. 93), p. 30.

97 Cf. Lewis, B. E., “The Significance of the Location of Valerius Flaccus' Second Proem’, Mnemosyne 40 (1987), 420–2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

98 The two surviving fragments of Ovid's play are published by Lenz, F. W. (ed.), P. Ovidius Naso Vol. Ill Fasc. 2 Fastorum Libri VI, Fragmenta (Leipzig, 1932), p. 233.Google Scholar

99 Cf. Drew, op. cit. (n. 41), pp. 83–4. For Virgil's tact in handling other political embarrassments of Augustus see also Powell, op. cit. (n. 41).

100 Cf. Drew, op. cit. (n. 41), pp. 82–5.

101 Camps (op. cit. (n. 52), pp. 29–30) claims that the relationship of Cleopatra with Mark Antony also ‘coloured Virgil's story of the doings of Dido and Aeneas: they too are said to be “heedless of honour and dignity”, and rumour has it that they have become “slaves of a shameful infatuation, sunk in wanton pleasuring together all the winter long” [Aen. 4.221;4.193–4]’.

102 Mattingly, op. cit. (n. 49), p. xlvii; Mattingly, H. and Sydenham, E. A., The Roman Imperial Coinage II (London, 1926), p. 68 (no. 430).Google Scholar

103 Mattingly, ibid.; Mattingly and Sydenham, ibid., pp. 70, 79 (nos. 455–9, 547) et passim.

104 Mattingly and Sydenham, ibid., pp. 67, 68, 72 (nos. 418, 428–9, 474); Mattingly, ibid., p. xlviii. The last legend listed here appears on a posthumous type of Galba. Mattingly (ibid.) interprets it to mean ‘the Senate honours Vespasian for his piety towards his predecessor [Galba]’.

105 Wallace-Hadrill, A., ‘Civilis Princeps: Between Citizen and King’, JRS 72 (1982), 42–8.Google Scholar

106 See above, p. 218.

107 Garson, art. cit. (n. 1), 114.

108 I wish to thank the British Academy and the Swan Hellenic/P. & O. Company who have funded me during the period of this research. I wish also to express my gratitude to Dr. A. M. Wilson for her encouragement and invaluable advice during the preparation of this article.