Dissertation for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Latin presented at Uppsala University in 1998
ABSTRACT Henriksén, C., 1998. Martial, Book IX. A Commentary. Vol. 1. Acta. Univ. Ups., Studia Latina Upsaliensia 24:1. 223 pp. Uppsala. ISBN 91-554-4293-5. This dissertation consists of a commentary on Book 9 of the Epigrams of M. Valerius Martialis (ca. 40–104 AD). The book, with its 105 epigrams one of the longer in Martial’s production, was published in late 94 or early 95 and presents the reader with Martial’s characteristic variety of subjects drawn from contemporary Roman society and everyday life. Notable is that Book 9 contains a markedly higher frequency of poems focusing on the emperor Domitian than any other of Martial’s books. The tendency towards a greater attention to Domitian is obvious already in Book 8 (published in early 94) and is likely to have been continued also in the last book published under his reign, the now lost first edition of Book 10 (published in 95). In Book 9, this tendency is also reflected in the increase of references to Domitian simply as Iuppiter or as Tonans, of the application to the emperor of epithets originally belonging to divinities, and of comparisons of Domitian with gods, particularly with Jupiter, the Sun, and Hercules. The book as a whole is set within an imperial framework, marked at the beginning by poems 1, 3, 5 and 7, and by poem 101 at the end. The present commentary consists of an introduction discussing the date, general characteristics, structure and themes of Book 9 (with special regard to matters concerning the emperor), followed by a detailed commentary on each of the 105 poems, placing them in their social, historical and literary context. Key-words: Martial, epigram, Domitian, Silver Latin, panegyric, Statius, Ovid, Greek Anthology. C. Henriksén, Department of Classical Philology, Uppsala University, Box 527, SE-751 20 Uppsala, Sweden.
© Christer Henriksén 1998 ISSN 0562-2859 ISBN 91-554-4292-7 (vols. 24:1–24:2) ISBN 91-554-4293-5 (vol. 24:1) ISBN 91-554-4294-3 (vol. 24:2) Printed in Sweden by Textgruppen i Uppsala AB 1998 Distributor: Uppsala University Library, Box 510, SE-751 20 Uppsala, Sweden
Susannae longi laboris consciae
Preface and Acknowledgements A new commentary on Martial needs little justification. Since the publication of Friedländer’s commentary on the complete works of Martial in 1886, our ability to understand the Epigrams has greatly improved, thanks to the increasing amount of modern scholarly work. Silver Latin poetry, long considered to be baroque in comparison with its Augustan precursors, has been re-assessed. The emperor Domitian, who for a very long time was looked upon as a ruthless tyrant, has obtained some redress, which is bound to be reflected on the poets who put their talents to his service. For all that, there will always be some lines or poems in the text of Martial which will remain enigmatic, single distichs that are obviously witty jokes or savage satire but which will elude our understanding. No matter how much progress is made in the field of classical studies, we shall never be able to fully attain the frames of reference of a late-first-century Roman. In such cases, we can but suggest an explanation and argue in favour of it, but probably never conclusively demonstrate its correctness. The first modern commentary, by Mario Citroni on Book 1, appeared in 1975. Since then, commentaries have been published on Book 1 (1980) and Book 5 (1995) by Peter Howell, on Book 11 by Nigel Kay (1985), on Book 14 by Tim Leary (1996), and on Book 6 by Farouk Grewing (1997). To all of these, I freely acknowledge my debts. Besides, commentaries on some of the books exist in the form of unpublished Ph.D. theses in Britain. For the current state of research into Martial, I refer the reader to the surveys by Grewing in the introduction to his commentary (pp. 11–16) and in his preface to F. Grewing (ed.), Toto notus in orbe. Perspektiven der Martial-Interpretation, Stuttgart 1998, pp. 7–13. I would here like to express my cordial thanks to Professor Hans Helander, who has firmly guided me through the writing of this commentary, scrutinized my text and purged it from many an error, while always sharing generously his profound knowledge of Greek and Latin literature. Docent Monica Hedlund has followed my work with great interest and often put stray reasoning back on the path of common sense. Professor Sten Eklund has, as always, not only advised me on philological matters, but also assisted me with financial and technical concerns. To all of these, I offer my sincere gratitude, not least for believing that this work was possible in the first place. My thanks are also due to Henrik Vitalis, M.A., who patiently read the manuscript from cover to cover, and to Dimitrios Iordanoglou, B.A., who kindly undertook the task of proof-reading the Greek. My English has been corrected by Neil Tomkinson, B.A., and has also benefited from the valuable advice of Denis Searby, Ph.D.
Uppsala, 24 September 1998 C.H.
Contents
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 1. The date of Book 9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 2. General characteristics and metres . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 3. The structure of Book 9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 3.1. The general pattern . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 3.2. Cycles and pairs of epigrams in Book 9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 4. Themes and motifs in Book 9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 4.1. General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 4.2. Domitian the commander . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 4.2.1. Domitianus Germanicus: The war against the Chatti . . . . 23 4.2.2. The Second Pannonian War . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 4.3. Domitian the god . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 4.3.1. Comparisons with Jupiter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 4.3.2. Comparisons with other divinities and Domitian as deus . . 32 5. Some notes on the tradition of the manuscripts and on the text of Book 9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 6. A note on the use of this commentary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 7. Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 7.1. Editions of Martial: A selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 7.2. Modern commentaries on Martial . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 7.3. Commentaries on other Greek and Latin authors . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 7.4. Works referred to by abbreviation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 7.5. Secondary literature referred to in this commentary . . . . . . . . . . 41
Text and Commentary: Praefatio and poems 1–47 . . . . . . . . . 45
Introduction 1. The date of Book 9 We know, with a reasonable degree of certainty, that Book 8 appeared at the beginning of the year 94 and that the first edition of Book 10 appeared in (the December of ?) 95.1 These dates, obviously, are the definitive termini post quem and ante quem for the publishing of Book 9. From the mid-eighties, Martial’s books of epigrams had appeared at fairly regular intervals (usually about a year, never more than two), so there is reason to suppose that the publication of Book 9 fell midway between these two termini. Similarly, it must be assumed that the majority of the poems in the book were written in 94 or else would have appeared in Book 8. This is, however, not conclusive, as will be demonstrated below. Friedländer (pp. 61 f.) placed the publishing of Book 9 in the late summer or early autumn of 94. As evidence for this dating, he produced two poems in particular, 9, 84 and 9, 40. In the former, Martial states that the addressee of the epigram, Norbanus, had been absent from Rome (viz. in the office of equestrian procurator of Rhaetia) for six years when it was written. The opening lines of the poem (Cum tua sacrilegos contra, Norbane, furores | staret pro domino Caesare sancta fides) mention the revolt of Saturninus, which broke out about the turn of the year 88–89. Friedländer, who was not aware that Norbanus was stationed in Rhaetia as procurator, connected his departure from Rome with the outbreak of the revolt and concluded that 9, 84 was written in the autumn of 94 (“ohne Zweifel konnte M. von einem Zeitraum von 6 Jahren sprechen, wenn auch noch einige Monate daran fehlte”). However, Norbanus did not likely leave Rome in order to suppress the revolt but to enter upon his office as procurator. The problem is, though, that it is not known precisely when he arrived in Rhaetia, only that he was there by the time of Saturninus’ revolt. If he entered upon his office in 87 (as did Lappius Maximus, the governor of Germania inferior, who led the suppression of the revolt), this would place 9, 84 in 93 instead of 94. The only objection that can be made to such an assumption is that 9, 84, had it been written in 93, would probably have appeared in Book 8. However, such an argument is far from cogent, as is sufficiently demonstrated by 9, 31. In this poem, Martial commemo1 I follow here the dating of Books 8 and 10 given by Citroni in his article “Marziale e la Letteratura per i Saturnali (poetica dell’intrattenimento e cronologia della pubblicazione dei libri)”, ICS 14 (1989), pp. 201–226. Sullivan (Martial, p. 40) erroneously sets the date for the publication of Book 8 in December 94 on the basis of 8, 66, in which Martial congratulates Silius Italicus’ elder son L. Silius Decianus on his consulship. It is true that Silius Decianus was suffect consul from the 1st of September 94, but 8, 66 was in all likelihood not written to congratulate him on his entrance upon office but on his designation, probably in early January 94 (see R. Hainslink, “Die neuen Fastenfragmente von Ostia in ihrer Beziehung zu gleichzeitigem epigraphischem und literarischem Material”, WS 63 [1948], pp. 117–135 [here p. 127]; Citroni, op. cit, p. 224, n. 40). As a consequence of his dating of Book 8 to December 94, Sullivan puts the publishing of Book 9 in the spring of 95. Hainslink (op. cit., pp. 126–129) also argued in favour of the publication of Book 9 in early 95, but his argument was partly based on the dating of 9, 84 to late 94, which cannot be ascertained with the requisite certainty (see below). Hainslink’s dating of the Second Pannonian War to 93–94 instead of 92–93 is, while of no consequence for the dating of Book 9, obviously mistaken, since this war is alluded to also in Book 7, which was published in 92.
11
rates a vow performed by a certain Velius, in all probability C. Velius Rufus, on the return of Domitian from the Second Pannonian War. The emperor returned from this war in January 93; the vow is likely to have been performed and 9, 31 written shortly afterwards (cf. 9, 31, 9 f. quae litat argento pro te, non sanguine, Caesar, | victima, iam ferro non opus esse docet). Yet it did not appear in Book 8, perhaps because Martial wanted the imperial theme of Book 8 to focus entirely on the celebration of the emperor’s return, while saving the aspect of Domitian as a Prince of Peace for Book 9 (see section 4.2.2 below). More useful is 9, 40, which relates to the Capitoline games, instituted by Domitian in 86 and held in the summer every fourth year (see note on 9, 3, 8). The poem tells of the Alexandrine poet Diodorus, who left Alexandria for Rome to participate in the games but was shipwrecked and forced to return. It must reasonably have been written in connection with (probably after) the games of the summer of 94. 9, 35 would have been written slightly before these games, when the question of who was going to win the oak-wreath was still a matter of gossip (see 9, 35, 10). A handful of poems can be assigned to a certain time of the year, i.e. 39 (written for the birthday of Caesonia on the 24th of October), 52 and 53 (written for the birthday of Q. Ovidius on his birthday on the 1st of April), 54 and 55 (for the Caristia on the 22nd of February), 60 in the early summer (“in der Rosenzeit”, Friedländer, p. 62), and perhaps also 90 (ibid.). Poem 98, finally, alluding to the wine harvest, would have been written in the autumn. Of these poems, Friedländer attributes nos. 39 and 98 to the year 93, the rest to 94. However, there is really nothing in the poems to support such a division, and it is just as likely that all of them were written in 94. Of great importance for dating the publishing of Book 9 are poems 43 and 44, on the Hercules statuette in the possession of Novius Vindex. This statuette is made the subject also of Statius’ silv. 4, 6, and it is most likely that all three poems were written for one and the same dinner party (see 9, 43 intro.), which, according to Statius, took place on a winter’s night; see silv. 4, 6, 12–16 nobis verus amor medioque Helicone petitus | sermo hilaresque ioci brumalem absumere noctem | suaserunt mollemque oculis expellere somnum, | donec ab Elysiis prospexit sedibus alter | Castor et hesternas risit Tithonia mensas. H.-J. van Dam (“Notes on Statius Silvae IV”, Mnemosyne 45 [1992], p. 216) has suggested that Statius, in mentioning alter Castor, hints at the date of Vindex’ dinner-party (“or rather the morning after the day before”), viz. January 27, the date of the dedication of the temple of Castor and Pollux. But is this the January of 94 or of 95, or even of 93? In her commentary on Silvae 4, Coleman (p. xxii) states that silv. 4, 6 “can be dated after the publication of Books 1–3”;1 the terminus ante quem is obviously the publishing of Silvae 4 in the summer of 95 (Coleman, pp. xix ff.). Hardie (p. 65) goes one step further, saying that “the nine poems which now make up the fourth book all seem to have been written between the end of 94 and mid-95”. Silvae 3 is traditionally dated to the late summer or the autumn of 1
Coleman supports the hypothesis that Silvae 1–3 were published together and not separately (see her commentary, pp. xvi ff.). In his commentary on Silvae 2 (p. 3), van Dam took the opposite view, viz. that the books were published separately. This complicated and, it would seem, indeterminable issue is luckily of no importance to the dating of silv. 4, 6.
12
94; see Wissowa in Friedländer, Sittengeschichte 4, p. 296, and H. Frère, Stace, Silves, Paris 1961, p. xxi. Hardie (p. 64) puts it in 93–94, and van Dam, while commending Frère’s chronology, cautiously places it “after the summer of 93” (commentary, p. 3). However, I think it is safe to assume a date in 94 for the publication of Silvae 3, because silv. 3, 4, written to commemorate the hair-offering of Earinus, must be contemporaneous with the Earinus cycle in Book 9, which is likely to have been written in that year. There is always the danger of begging the question when using poems in the Silvae to date poems in the Epigrams and vice versa. If, however, as it seems reasonable to assume, Silvae 3 was published in 94, and all the poems in Silvae 4 were written after the publishing of Book 3, silv. 4, 6, and consequently Martial’s 9, 43 and 44, must have been written for a dinner-party given at Vindex’ house in the winter of 94–95. In such a case, Book 9 cannot have been published earlier than, say, December 94. Furthermore, if van Dam’s theory, that the dinner was given on the 26th of January, is correct, then Book 9 cannot have been published in 94, but must have appeared in early 95. Accordingly, there may be reason to advance Friedländer’s dating of the publishing of Book 9 by half a year or so to December 94 or even to early 95. One or two poems may be dated to the year 93, but the book as a whole should be considered a product of the year 94, in which the majority of the poems would have been written.
2. General characteristics and metres Book 9 consists of a preface (containing an introductory epigram), followed by 104 epigrams (no. 95 being divided into 95 and 95 b). These 105 epigrams contain altogether 855 lines, giving an average length of 8.14 lines per epigram. Ten epigrams consist of only two lines (nos. 10, 15, 33, 63, 69, 78, 80, 89, 95 and 96; apart from no. 33, these are exclusively written in elegiacs). Nine poems have more than 12 lines (no. 57 [13 lines]; 2, 3, 27, 43, 65 [14 lines each]; 22 [16]; 11 [17]; 90 [18]), three have more than 20 lines (59 and 61 [22 lines each]; 101 [24]). With regard to the number of epigrams, Book 9 is the third longest of Books 1–12; only Books 1 (119 epigrams, including the one in the preface) and 11 (108 epigrams) contain more poems.1 As regards the number of lines, Book 9 is only surpassed by Book 10 (second edition, published in the year 98), which contains 878 lines.2
1
The average number of epigrams in Books 1–12 (including the epigrams found in the prefaces of Books 1 and 9) is 97.9. Grewing (p. 24) sets the average number at 97.7, not counting, I suppose, the epigrams found in the prefaces. The figures for the other books are as follows: Book 2, 93 epigrams; Book 3, 100; Book 4, 89; Book 5, 84; Book 6, 94; Book 7, 99; Book 8, 82; Book 10, 104; Book 11, 108; Book 12, 98. Not included in these statistics are the fragmentary Liber de spectaculis (37 poems in Shackleton Bailey’s edition) and Books 13 and 14. Book 13, the Xenia, consists of 127 poems, apart from nos. 1–3 exclusively single elegiac couplets, Book 14, the Apophoreta, of 223 poems, of which all except nos. 1 and 2 are single elegiac couplets. These books were published prior to Book 1, probably in 83–84 and 84–85 respectively. 2 See Grewing, p. 24, n. 32, for the lengths of Books 1–8 and 11–12.
13
The metres used in Book 9 are roughly representative of Martial’s metres in general. The elegiacs are distinctly predominant (87 poems ≈ 82.8%); 11 poems (≈ 10.5%) are written in hendecasyllables (9, 11, 19, 40, 42, 44, 52, 57, 62, 87 and 90) and 6 (≈ 5.7%) in choliambics (1, 5, 27, 33, 75 and 98).1 Metrical peculiarities are few. Note, however, the versus spondiacus in 9, 59, 9 and the diaeresis following the third foot of the hexameter in 9, 60, 3, which splits the verse into two equivalent halves (see notes ad locc.). The only “metrical experiment” is to be found in 9, 77, which is in iambic epode, a metre which Martial uses also in 1, 49; 3, 14; and 11, 59; see further 9, 77 intro. Metres used elsewhere by Martial but missing in Book 9 are hexameters (found in 1, 53; 2, 73; 6, 64; and 7, 93), iambic trimeters (11, 77, possibly also 6, 12, see Grewing’s note on 6, 12, 2); choliambics with alternating dimeters (1, 61), and sotadics (3, 29).2 For Martial’s use of metres see also the excellent survey in Friedländer, pp. 26–50; C. Giarratano, De M. Val. Martialis re metrica, Naples 1908; Siedschlag, Form, pp. 127–133. A notable feature of Martial’s elegiacs is their obvious dependence on the verse of Ovid. Martial frequently uses verse-endings and turns of phrase (usually with the same metrical position) directly borrowed from Ovid.3 These are, naturally, for the greater part quite conscious borrowings, even though the possibility should not be excluded that some, and lesser similarities in particular, are simply unconscious echoes of the Latin metrical artist par excellence. I think, though, that Martial’s dependence on Ovid on the purely metrical level is greater than has been previously recognized, and to illustrate this, I give here a selective list of instances in which a phrase or verse-ending of Ovid’s surfaces again in Martial’s Book 9 without intermediaries; for details, the reader is referred to the commentary on the respective line. 9, praef., 2 sed, puto 9, 12, 1 Nomen habes 9, 18, 1 Est mihi — sitque precor 9, 20, 7 crepitantibus armis 9, 23, 1 contigit auro 9, 23, 3 Aspicis en 9, 24, 2 imagine vultus 9, 29, 11 mollique … harena 9, 38, 2 non tamen efficies 9, 38, 6 celeres vela negata Noti
1
Ov. am. 2, 15, 25; 3, 7, 55; 3, 11b, 34; rem. 556; Nux 57 Ov. am. 3, 6, 91; ars 3, 536; met. 5, 461; 9, 665; 13, 570; fast. 2, 132 Ov. epist. 1, 111; fast. 6, 219; trist. 1, 10, 1 Ov. met. 1, 143; 15, 783. Ov. epist. 3, 59; met. 15, 416; 15, 497 Ov. met. 13, 264; Pont. 4, 7, 3 Ov. trist. 1, 7, 1; Pont. 2, 8, 21 Ov. am. 2, 11, 47, cf. met. 2, 577; Ib. 422 Ov. Pont. 2, 2, 24; cf. met. 13, 64 Ov. fast. 5, 686; Ov. epist. 2, 100; am. 2, 16, 22
The figures for the entire corpus of Martial are as follows: elegiac distichs: 79%; hendecasyllables: 15%; choliambics: 5% (see Sullivan, Martial, p. 227, n. 22). Sullivan, loc. cit. 3 For Martial’s dependence on Ovid, see A. Zingerle, Martial’s Ovid-Studien, Innsbruck 1877; E. Siedschlag, “Ovidisches bei Martial”, RFIC 100 (1972), pp. 156–161; Sullivan, Martial, pp. 105–107; R. A. Pitcher, “Martial’s Debt to Ovid” in F. Grewing (ed.), Toto notus in orbe. Perspektiven der MartialInterpretation, Stuttgart 1998, pp. 59–76. 2
14
9, 38, 8 ventus et unda 9, 41, 2 amica manus 9, 55, 6 and 68, 10 grave est 9, 56, 10 bona fata manent 9, 58, 6 Pegasis unda 9, 65, 12 Tartareumque canem 9, 79, 3 Auguste tuorum 9, 84, 7 non infitiatus amicum 9, 86, 5 quae stabat proxima fratri 9, 86, 6 Tu quoque vulnus habes 9, 90, 17 candidas ... aras 9, 101, 8 cum cane 9, 102, 3 Quaere alium
Ov. epist. 7, 44; am. 2, 16, 46 .T CNGQR RPGQR
Ov. am. 2, 4, 6; trist. 4, 8, 4 Ov. fast. 4, 156 Ov. trist. 3, 7, 15 Ov. ars 3, 322 Ov. met. 1, 204; trist. 2, 1, 509 Ov. Pont. 1, 7, 27 Ov. met. 8, 367; 12, 14 Ov. epist. 4, 20; ars 1, 166; met. 13, 497; Pont. 1, 7, 50; Ib. 344 Ov. fast. 6, 394; Pont. 3, 2, 53 Ov. ars 2, 484; Nux 118 Ov. met. 5, 181; am. 3, 11a, 28
Apart from these instances, there is a large number of Ovidian phrases which appear in other poets before finding their way into the epigrams of Martial. In such cases, the immediate influence of Ovid on Martial, while very likely, cannot be demonstrated with certainty. Such instances, of course, are noted in the commentary.
3. The structure of Book 9 3.1. The general pattern No book of Martial’s Epigrams is the product of arbitrary compilation. The poet took care in arranging the poems in the book, perfectly aware that excellent epigrams can very well be put together to make up a bad book; in 7, 85, 3 f., he states that facile est epigrammata belle | scribere, sed librum scribere difficile est. This does not mean that every single poem has its given place within the book that cannot be altered without disturbing the whole (cf. Grewing, p. 26); such an arrangement in a book which contains well over a hundred poems, many of them not exceeding a single distich, would presumably be neither effective nor perceptible to the reader. Rather, Martial aims at variatio, by distributing his themes over the book and also by varying the metres. Within this main principle of variation in motif and metre, there are usually some features designed to hold the book together. As regards Book 9, there is a clearly defined beginning, consisting of poems 1, 3, 5, and 7. These poems have a common basic theme (the emperor Domitian), they are arranged at an interval of one poem and also correspond metrically to one another (choliambics–elegiacs– choliambics–elegiacs). It is quite obvious, I think, that their purpose is to inaugurate the Emperor theme of Book 9 and to lay down its most prominent motifs: first and foremost, the newly finished Templum gentis Flaviae (poem 1), then Domitian as builder and restorer of temples (poem 3, varying the otherwise solemn tone by its humorous approach) and finally Domitian as the guardian of mor-
15
als (poems 5 and 7). While it may perhaps be an exaggeration to speak of Book 9 as programmatic, there can be little doubt that the book as a whole was composed, as it were, ad maiorem Caesaris gloriam. The imperial theme of Book 9 is more extensive than in any other book in the whole of Martial’s production (see section 4.1 below), and all motifs found in the introductory poems surface again at various points of the book. The end of the book is equally clearly marked in this respect by 9, 101, a grand comparison of the deeds of Domitian to the Labours of Hercules. Representing a miniature Res Gestae of the emperor, this poem, the longest of the book, summarizes the imperial theme and provides, together with the opening poems, a frame for the book as a whole. Within these bounds, the panegyrics of the emperor are distributed at fairly regular intervals throughout the book. Apart from this general structure — a variation of subjects framed by an overarching main theme — the book is held together by linking epigrams into pairs or cycles.
3.2. Cycles and pairs of epigrams in Book 9 There are in Book 9 several poems which are connected by a common theme. Depending on the number of poems in each of these groups, I refer to them either as “pairs of epigrams” or as “cycles”.1 Following essentially the definition formulated by Grewing (pp. 30 f.), I regard as cycles such groups (1) as consist of at least three poems with a common theme, (2) as develop the common theme either linearly (focusing on the end of the group) or concentrically (the last poem of the cycle looking back to the first) and (3) in which each poem has a distinctive position which cannot be arbitrarily altered. Before examining the poems of Book 9 on the basis of these criteria, it is necessary to discuss in some detail the views expressed on this matter by Karl Barwick and John Garthwaite, who both discerned an “imperial cycle” throughout Book 9. In his paper “Zyklen bei Martial und in den kleinen Gedichten des Catull”, Philologus 102 [1958], pp. 284–318, Barwick suggested a “cycle” consisting of epigrams 1; 3; 5; 7; 18; 20; 34; 36; 39; 64; 65; 79; 83; 91; 93; and 101.2 Among these poems, he makes out three subdivisions, thus: 1; 3; 5; 7 – 20; 34; 36; 39 – 79; 83; 91; 93. Each of these subdivisions is united primarily by the internal arrangement of the respective poems, as follows: in the first group, a poem in choliambics (nos. 1 and 5) is followed by one in elegiacs (nos. 3 and 7). In the second, a longer poem alternately follows a shorter. In the third group, two shorter poems are enclosed by two longer. In this division, the contents of the respective 1
Such an arrangement of the poems in a book is likely to have been found in Hellenistic collections of epigrams, which suggested its use to Catullus. In arranging his epigrams in pairs or in cycles, Martial was probably influenced by Catullus and certainly by his Hellenistic precursor. This method of arrangement was obviously also applied in such collections of Greek and Latin epigrams as appeared after Catullus; thus, Burnikel (Struktur, pp. 93 f.) has shown that Lucilius was an important pattern to Martial in this respect. See also Barwick, Zykeln, p. 318 (full title below). 2 For reasons not given, Barwick omits nos. 23–24, 28, 31 and 71. He also includes no. 36, while leaving out the rest of the Earinus cycle.
16
poems are obviously of minor importance. Within the first group, though, poems 1 and 3 are connected by references to the building of temples, while 5 and 7 deal with Domitian’s moral legislation. In the second group, nos. 20 and 34 concentrate on the Flavian temple, 36 and 39, being, according to Barwick, connected by the fact that both poems flatter also a second person apart from the emperor (Earinus and Caesonia respectively). In the third group, an internal division with regard to the contents of the poems is not possible. This highly technical method of discerning cycles within a book has been justly criticized by Citroni, saying that “Le corrispondenze individuate dal Barwick sono per lo più molto incerte e spesso del tutto inconsistenti ... Talvolta poi il Barwick estende questo tipo di analisi a gruppi di epigr. di carattere assai diverso tra loro, e che hanno in commune, ad es., solo l’identità del destinatario, il che me pare senz’altro illegitimo” (pp. xxvii f.; see also Burnikel, Struktur, pp. 87 f.). In an article (“The Panegyrics of Domitian in Martial Book 9”, Ramus 22 [1993], pp. 78–102) based upon the corresponding section of his dissertation (Court Poets, pp. 43 ff.), John Garthwaite has attempted to distinguish a general imperial cycle in Book 9, using criteria different from Barwick’s. Garthwaite understands a “cycle” as a series “of epigrams written as elaborations on a particular theme and spread intermittently throughout the volume”. This is essentially a correct approach. However, Garthwaite holds that by considering all the panegyrics of Domitian in Book 9 as one large cycle, it becomes apparent that these “epigrams not only interact subtly with several other poems in the book but also assume ... an altogether different significance when sewn into the larger context of the volume than they would have had as a self-contained booklet”. Garthwaite’s theory needs to be discussed here at some length. Garthwaite considers poems 1, 3, 5 and 7 to be programmatic, containing references to the imperial motifs subsequently found in the book. The last poem of the series, 9, 101, he calls a “concluding synopsis” with an “index of the imperial themes of Book 9” in lines 21 f. So far I agree, but in my opinion, the first four of these poems inaugurate the imperial theme of Book 9 (see above), not the imperial “cycle”. The programmatic character which Garthwaite sees in 9, 1 is as follows: the reference to the month of October in line 1 introduces Domitian’s birthday, recurring in 9, 39; the Rhine and the title Germanicus mentioned in lines 3 f. point to his military victories (a very general statement which applies regardless of whether or not one chooses to consider the poems as introducing a vast cycle);1 the Capitol, mentioned in line 5, entails a reference to Domitian’s restoration of Iuppiter Optimus Maximus, explicitly celebrated in 9, 3; the motif of the Templum gentis Flaviae in line 7 is echoed in 9, 20 and 9, 34.2 Garthwaite concludes his analysis by stating the “the reference in the last line to the celestial nature (caeli est) of Domitian’s building programme provides the bridge for the continuation of 1 On p. 81, Garthwaite suggests that it “recalls the emperor’s return in only the previous year from his latest Northern campaigns”, which seems highly unlikely and surely cannot have been Martial’s primary intention. The title Germanicus was connected with the triumph over the Chatti in 83, not with the Second Pannonian War. 2 As will be obvious from the commentary on this poem, I do not subscribe to such a division. It is quite clear from the structure of 9, 1 that the motifs mentioned do not have the same status; the series of dumclauses leads up to what is the prime object of glorification, viz. the Templum gentis Flaviae.
17
the imperial theme in 9, 3”. The programmatic nature of this latter poem must needs be of much less significance; Garthwaite actually only manages to gather a link with 9, 23 and 24 (on Domitian’s Alban games in honour of Minerva) from such a line as 9, 3, 10 Pallada praetereo: res agit illa tuas (which would rather refer to the temples of Minerva restored or erected by the emperor; he actually adduces lines 8–10 as evidence, but line 8 refers to the Capitoline games and line 9 to Juno, and thus has no connection whatsoever with 9, 23 and 24). 9, 3, 11 quid loquar Alciden is obviously prompted by Domitian’s temple to Hercules on the Appian Way (which is the theme of 9, 64–65 and provides the frame of 9, 101). 9, 5 and 9, 7 introduce the motif of Domitian as a guardian of morals, which surfaces briefly also in 9, 28 and 9, 79. Now the principal reason why Martial took up this motif in Book 9 was probably the prohibition of the prostitution of children, which is likely to have been passed in or shortly before 94 (see 9, 7 intro.); in this context, it is only natural to mention also Domitian’s previous achievements in this field, viz. the edict against castration passed perhaps in 86–87 (see 9, 5 intro.) and his renewal of the Lex Iulia de adulteriis. However, the juxtaposition of 9, 28 (which touches upon the topic of morality) and 9, 27, a poem attacking the hypocritical moral philosopher Chrestus, suggests to Garthwaite that the theme of moral hypocrisy (appearing also in nos. 41 and 47; I would not add no. 70 to this group, as does Garthwaite) is “consciously linked with the poems on Domitian’s moral leadership”, meaning, I suppose, that Martial is hinting that Domitian himself is a moral hypocrite. Moreover, the fact that there are only a few poems separating 9, 7 from the Earinus cycle leads Garthwaite to even more astounding conclusions. “Here indeed”, Garthwaite says, “the topics of child prostitution and castration are echoed most strongly, for ... Martial stresses two features about Earinus: first, that he was Domitian’s catamite and, second, that he had also suffered castration”. But Martial does not “stress” the fact that Earinus was a eunuch (see note on 9, 11, 6) and the almost certain existence of a sexual relation between Domitian and Earinus has got nothing to do with the street prostitution of children; on the contrary, this was quite the normal relation between the cupbearer and his master. Consequently, Garthwaite’s suggestion that the inclusion of the topic of moral legislation in Book 9 “was actually prompted by its relevance to the figure of Earinus” is preposterous. As suggested below, the drastic increase of imperial panegyrics in Book 9 may have been due to a desire on Martial’s part to appear as mainly a court poet, perhaps in competition with Statius. Needless to say, a person who takes pains to win the attention and approval of the emperor does not do so by suggesting that he was as a moral hypocrite. Furthermore, if there was an element of irony in these poems, it must have been conceivable to the readers. If conceivable to the readers, it was naturally conceivable to the emperor.1 And while Domitian certainly could take a good joke (compare section 4.3.1 below), he would not have appreciated a poet who made
1
Domitian was sensitive to such innuendoes, as is emphatically demonstrated by the fact that he had Helvidius the Younger put to death for having written a mythological farce in which the emperor suspected allusions to his own divorce, and by the execution of Hermogenes of Tarsus propter quasdam figuras in his history (Suet. Dom. 10, 4); see K. M. Coleman, “The Emperor Domitian and Literature”, ANRW 32:5, pp. 3111 ff.
18
fun of his moral legislation.1 Martial himself was certainly aware of the danger of criticising Domitian; this kind of awareness made Juvenal keep his mouth shut until his detested emperor had been assassinated. Ovid had been exiled under Augustus because of his carmen et error (trist. 2, 207). Under Domitian, a carmen alone would probably have done the trick. As is obvious, neither Barwick’s nor Garthwaite’s attempts to detect a general imperial cycle in Book 9 conform with the definition of the term “cycle” given at the beginning of this chapter. The fact that the poems in question concentrate on Domitian is in itself not enough for them to make up a cycle. Barwick’s suggestion focuses too much on metrical and positional technicalities and takes too little heed of the contents of the poems, while that of Garthwaite is, in my opinion, based too much on an overinterpretation of several of the poems under discussion. It is also important to consider whether or not the reader would be able to perceive such subtle allusions, often placed far apart from each other (cf. Burnikel, Struktur, p. 87). Instead, I would argue that Book 9 contains not one vast imperial cycle, but an imperial theme, in which two cycles may be discerned, viz. the Templum gentis Flaviae cycle and the Earinus cycle. The cycle on the Templum gentis Flaviae consists of three linearly arranged poems, nos. 1, 20, and 34. The temple, a dynastic mausoleum of the Flavian family, had in all probability been finished in or shortly before 94; it must obviously have suggested itself as one of the major motifs of Book 9, and Martial was naturally ready to comply. The first poem of the cycle, an elevated glorification of the temple, is given a prominent position at the very beginning of the book. Poem 20 is concerned with the location of the temple, on the site of Vespasian’s house on the Quirinal. The concluding poem, no. 34, is one of the easy and humorous pieces which will be discussed below (section 4.3.1). The Earinus cycle, also linear in its structure, is longer and more elaborate, being divisible into two subsections, which I refer to as the “name series” (poems 11–13, celebrating the name Earinus) and the “offering series” (16–17, hymning the offering of Earinus’ newly shorn locks to Aesculapius). Like the temple cycle, it is concluded by a humorous epigram comparing Domitian and Earinus to Jupiter and Ganymede. This cycle will be discussed in greater detail in the commentary. It is not possible to form poems 5, 7, 28 and 79 into a cycle on Domitian as the guardian of morals, because the latter two do not focus on this theme, nor is the order of the poems of such significance as is required in a cycle; instead, poems 5 and 7 should be considered a “pair of epigrams”. Poem 31 I would refer to the huge cycle suggested below, extending over Books 7 to 9, on the Second Pannonian War. The juxtaposition of nos. 64 and 65 also suggests them as a “pair of epigrams” (see below) and not as a cycle including also no. 101, the position, length and contents of which indicate that it was intended as a concluding summary of the imperial theme in Book 9.
1
For the related topic of the cycle in Book 6 on the reinforcement of the Lex Iulia and the various ways in which people bypassed it, see Grewing pp. 31 ff. (characterizing it as “Gesellschaftskritik” and not criticism of Domitian).
19
It remains now to have a closer look at the “pairs of epigrams” in Book 9. The basic examination of the works of Martial is here Karl Barwick’s article “Zur Kompositionstechnik und Erklärungen Martials”, Philologus 87 (1932), pp. 63– 79; an elucidative survey is also given in Burnikel, Struktur, pp. 88–95.1 The poems in Book 9 concerned are nos. 5–7; 23–24; 43–44; 52–53; 54–55; 64–65; 74–76; 94–96; and 95–95b. As is evident, Martial in such pairs uses particularly juxtaposition but also separation; in the latter case, the poems are, as a rule, not placed very far apart, so as not to obscure the connection between the epigrams in question (there are, however, exceptions to this rule; thus, there is a slight possibility that 9, 91 forms a pair with 8, 39; see 9, 91 intro.). In some cases, there is no perceptible line running through the pair; the latter epigram simply provides a variation of the motif of the former (which is sometimes also needed for the understanding of the latter); thus, the pair on Domitian’s moral legislation (poems 5 and 7), on doctors (94 and 96), and on the picture of Camonius (nos. 74 and 76, the former acting as an introduction to the latter). Other pairs seem to postulate some kind of imaginary reaction to the first poem, causing Martial to write a second epigram in reply to this reaction; instances in Book 9 are poems 52 and 53 (where Ovidius’ [feigned] unwillingness to be properly celebrated provokes the second piece, which is contrasted with the heartily sincere tone of the former by its joking sullenness), 54 and 55, and 95 and 95 b.2 Burnikel (loc. cit.) sorts poems 43 and 44 (on the Hercules statuette of Novius Vindex) under the heading “Steigerung oder Überbietung”. I would rather suggest that no. 44 is written as a humorous counterbalance to the more serious 9, 43 (see 9, 44 intro.). A similar relation is that between poems 64 and 65, on the statue of Hercules (bearing the features of the emperor) in the temple on the Appian Way. While 64 treats the motif on a serious basis, its sequel adopts an easier approach, playing with the myth and adjusting it to the new guise of the hero. As intensifying in relation to its predecessor, I would regard poem 24, which, like no. 23, deals with the olive wreath won by a certain Carus in the Alban games and the effect which Carus’ bust of Domitian had on it. In the former poem, we are told that the olive wreath (symbolizing Minerva) has of its own accord placed itself on the bust of the emperor (her protégé). In the latter, it is revealed that not only the wreath but also the bust itself has been given by Minerva.
1
In the classification of the pairs of epigrams given below, I often differ from that of Burnikel, loc. cit. Notable are couples in which the former epigram stands out by its exceptional length or coarse language, while in the latter, Martial defends himself against the criticism aroused by the former; cf. 1, 34 and 35; 109 and 110; 3, 82 and 83; 6, 64 and 65.
2
20
4. Themes and motifs in Book 9 4.1. General The themes and motifs found in Book 9 are representative of Martial’s works as a whole. What are not representative are the proportions of these motifs in relation to one another: no less than twenty-six epigrams are devoted to the emperor (below), which is about as many as are bestowed on patrons and friends (26, 30, 42, 43, 44, 45, 49, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 58, 60, 72, 74, 76, 77, 84, 89, 90, 98, 99, and 103). This number of imperial poems is matched only by Book 8. As a consequence, obscenity and sexual allusiveness are kept at a comparatively low level (4, 21, 33, 40, 63, 66, 67, 69), although obscenity is an important element also of the vetula scoptics (29, 37, 62) and of the epigrams on moral hypocrisy (27, 41, 47, 57; poem 70 falls into this group but does not allude to sexual morality). Closely related to the vetula scoptics are such poems as deal with marriage to wealthy hags (10 and 80, perhaps also 95). Various kinds of stinginess and meanness, often involving criticism of the client system, are treated in a number of epigrams (2, 6, 8, 9, 25, 46, 48, 75, 82, 85, 88, 100, 102). Particularly notable are those on legacy-hunting or captatio (8, 48, and 88) and on dinner-hunting (14, 19, and 35). More drastic ways of getting hold of a legacy appear in poems 15 and 78 (on murdering spouses); the manipulation of a will is the motif of 87. The greed and insolence of Greco-Roman doctors are mocked in 94 and 96. A slightly philosophical criticism of excessive luxury is found in poems 22 and 92; pretended wealth and frustration at not being able to live in luxury are combined in the character of Mamurra in poem 59. In 73 the poet airs his grudge against a shoemaker who has inherited the entire estate of his patron, while envy of Martial’s own success is scorned in 97. In poems 50 and 81, he defends himself against attacks from another poet probably writing in the epic genre. These poems are important arguments for a possible dispute between Martial and Statius in the mid-nineties. Separate poems treat Martial’s preferences in his mistress (32), the marvellous art of a skilled juggler (38), a plane-tree in Cordoba planted by Julius Caesar (61), and the vociferous schoolmaster (68). Twenty-six epigrams, or 25% of Book 9, focus in various ways on the emperor Domitian; among these poems are also one major and one minor cycle, the former being made up of the poems in celebration of the hair-offering of Domitian’s eunuch Earinus and the latter of those on the newly finished Flavian Temple on the Quirinal (see above). In addition, the emperor figures in another handful of poems without being the addressee or without the epigram primarily having been written in his praise1 (see 42, 6; 70, 7 f.; 84, 1 f.; 86, 8; 97, 5; these poems are not included in the statistics below).
1
I have made the following distinction for the relevant poems in Book 9: poems focusing on the emperor: nos. 1, 3, 5, 7, 11–13, 16–17, 18, 20, 23–24, 28, 31, 34, 36, 39, 64–65, 71, 79, 83, 91, 93, and 101;
21
With these twenty-six epigrams, Book 9 contains relatively more Domitianic poetry than any of its predecessors. The figures for Books 1–8 are approximately as follows: Book 1: 7.6%; Book 2: 4.3%; Book 4: 6.7%; Book 5: 10.7%; Book 6: 7.5%; Book 7: 10.1%; Book 8: 24.4%.1 This may be expressed in a diagram, thus: 25 20 15 Percentage 10 5 0 Book 1 Book 2 Book 3 Book 4 Book 5 Book 6 Book 7 Book 8 Book 9
As there is a substantial difference between Book 8 and 9, on the one hand, and Books 1 to 7, on the other, as regards the relative number of poems devoted to the emperor, there is also a difference in the motifs of the poems in question. Now the poems on the emperor in Books 1 through 7 are mostly of a general nature; there is praise of his shows, his laws and his building activity, as well as petitions for the ius trium liberorum and wishes that Domitian may read Martial’s poetry with a benignant attitude. With Book 8, the situation is very different; here, the all-pervading motif is the return of Domitian from the Second Pannonian War. Some of this still lingers in Book 9, but here, the exultation at the triumphant return of the emperor is turned into a rendering of Domitian as a “Prince of Peace” (see further section 4.2.2 below). But in Book 9, there is also a slight increase of references to Domitian’s warlike achievements in general, as compared with Books 1 through 8. The Chatti, over whom Domitian celebrated a triumph in 83, and the honorary title Germanicus, which he adopted in connection with the triumph, are alluded to in 9, 1, 1 f. (dum grande famuli nomen adseret Rheni | Germanicarum magna lux Kalendarum); 9, 5, 1 (Domitian is referred to as Rheni domitor); 9, 93, 8 (nomen, ab Odrysio quod deus orbe tulit); 9, 101, 20 (victor Hyperboreo nomen ab orbe tulit); the campaigns against Dacians and the Sarmatians are mentioned in 9, 101, 17 f. (cornua Sarmatici ter perfida contudit Histri, | sudantem Getica ter nive lavit equum), and his triumphs (three in all) in line 19 of the same poem (saepe recusatos parcus duxisse triumphos). Other poems deal with Domitian’s moral legislation (9, 5; 9, 7), some with his building activity (9, 3); among the latter may be counted the small cycle on the Templum gentis Flaviae on the Quirinal (9, 1; 9, 20; 9, 34; the temple is alluded to also in 9, 93, 6 and 9, 101, 22). The new temple of Hercules on the Appian Way (see 9, 64 intro.), poems mentioning or alluding to the emperor but not included in the present statistics: nos. 42 (line 6), 70 (lines 7 f.), 84 (lines 1 f.), 86 (line 8), 97 (line 5). 1 It is notable that Book 3, which was published from Forum Cornelii in modern Lombardy, does not mention Domitian at all (except for a mention of Caesar uterque in 3, 95, 5; see note on 9, 97, 5 f.). Note also that Book 5 contains a cycle of poems based on the motif of Domitian’s regulations concerning the seats in the theatre, some of which have not been taken into account in the figures presented above as not having been written in praise of the emperor nor mentioning him explicitly.
22
which contained a statue of the hero with the features of the emperor, provides the motif of 9, 64 and 65, and also forms the basis of the monumental comparison of Hercules and Domitian in 9, 101. A bust of Domitian in the house of Carus, winner of the Alban games perhaps of 94, is credited with two poems (9, 23–24). Members of the imperial household appear in a number of poems, particularly the eunuch Earinus, whose hair-offering to Aesculapius forms the theme of the Earinus cycle (9, 11–13; 16–17; 36). 9, 28 is an epitaph on the mimic actor Latinus, who was employed at the court, while 9, 79 holds up Domitian’s influence on the members of the familia Caesaris in general. Among separate poems are found Martial’s petition for water for his city house (9, 18), the poem on the birthday of Rufus’ wife Caesonia, which coincided with that of the emperor (9, 39), the humorous 9, 83, which states that the foremost merit of Domitian’s games is that they keep the reciting poets off the streets, the hypothetical dinner invitation in 9, 91, and the pledge to Caesar Domitianus Germanicus in 9, 93. Apart from these poems, the emperor figures also in 9, 42, 7; 9, 84, 2; 9, 86, 7 f.; and 9, 97, 5. Given this emphasis on Domitian throughout the book, it is justifiable here to give a short account of the historical background to some of the recurring motifs. This will concern the wars mentioned in Book 9, notably the campaigns against the Chatti and the Second Pannonian War, and the all-pervading presentation of Domitian as a living god. Any modern scholar occupying him- or herself with the reign of Domitian is necessarily much indebted to two recently published biographies, each of them excellent in its own right: Brian W. Jones’ The Emperor Domitian (London 1993) and Pat Southern’s Domitian. Tragic Tyrant (London 1997). Much of what is said about Domitian below, particularly in sections 4.2.1 and 4.2.2, owes its origin to these books.
4.2. Domitian the commander 4.2.1. Domitianus Germanicus: The war against the Chatti The Chatti were a German tribe whose homelands lay around Kassel in modern Hesse (which probably derives its name from the tribe), north-east of the Taunus Mountains by the Rhine (Southern, p. 82). They were a formidable and warlike people, even like the Romans in manners and conduct. Tacitus wrote about them in his Germania (30, 2 f.): Multum, ut inter Germanos, rationis ac sollertiae: praeponere electos, audire praepositos, nosse ordines, intellegere occasiones, differre impetus, disponere diem, vallare noctem, fortunam inter dubia, virtutem inter certa numerare, quodque rarissimum nec nisi Romanae disciplinae concessum, plus reponere in duce quam in exercitu. Omne robur in pedite, quem super arma ferramentis quoque et copiis onerant: alios ad proelium ire videas, Chattos ad bellum. Rari excursus et fortuita pugna. Equestrium sane virium id proprium, cito parare victoriam, cito cedere:
velocitas iuxta formidinem, cunctatio propior constantiae est. This people had been matched against Roman forces and defeated a couple of times before Domitian, first during the German expedi-
23
tion of Drusus in 11–9 BC, and again by Germanicus, who celebrated a triumph de Cheruscis Chattisque (Tac. ann. 2, 41) in 17 AD. In the reign of Claudius, a campaign against them was conducted by Sulpicius Galba (the future emperor) in 41, and in 50 an attack on Mainz was repelled by the legate Pomponius Secundus. After a second, unsuccessful attack by the Chatti on Mainz in 69, Vespasian strengthened the Roman defences by building a line of forts from Mainz-Kastel north-eastward to Friedberg. An account of Domitian’s campaign against the Chatti meets with a number of difficulties; indeed, owing to the almost complete lack of substantial evidence, it is impossible to say for certain when it began, why it was conducted, when it was ended and what it achieved. The range of possible datings for the commencement of hostilities stretches from late 81 to mid 83; Southern (p. 79) suggests a date in the spring or early summer of 82 as likely for the first moves towards armed conflict. From an important passage in Frontinus’ Strategemata, we know that Domitian himself was present on the Rhine and gathered troops, all under the pretext of conducting a census in Gaul; see Frontin. strat. 1, 1, 8: Imperator Caesar Domitianus Augustus Germanicus, cum Germanos, qui in armis erant, vellet opprimere nec ignoraret maiore bellum molitione inituros, si adventum tanti ducis praesensissent, profectioni[s] suae census obtexuit Galliarum: sub quibus inopinato bello affusus contusa immanium ferocia nationum provinciis consuluit. According to this passage, the Chatti were already in armis and, while they had not yet begun any hostile actions, they would have posed a threat to Roman interests in the area. Domitian’s census was thus a stratagem designed to forestall the Chatti and get the advantage of a surprise attack, a scenario very different from Suetonius’ description of the expedition as having been undertaken by Domitian sponte rather than necessario (Dom. 6, 1). It is not known when the initial attack on the Chatti was launched, nor is there a record of the course of the war. What is known is that Domitian celebrated a triumph as early as 83, a decision which incurred much scorn and derision from Tacitus, who spoke of Domitian’s conscientia derisui fuisse nuper falsum e Germania triumphum, emptis per commercia, quorum habitus et crinis in captivorum speciem formarentur (Agr. 39, 2) and made remarks like proximis temporibus triumphati magis quam victi sunt (sc. Germani; Germ. 37, 6). It is true that a triumph at such an early date may convey the impression of having been premature. But it is important to bear in mind that this triumph need not have been meant to indicate the completion of the campaign. Rather, it may have been celebrated at a time when the outcome of the war was inevitable even though final victory was not yet achieved; in the very same manner, Vespasian and Titus had celebrated a triumph over Judaea in 71, after the fall of Jerusalem, although several fortresses still remained to be taken. The Chattan war, then, may well have been a lengthy process which lasted another couple of years before final victory was brought about in Domitian’s absence by his subordinates.1
1
Southern (pp. 80 f.) suggests that the war up to Domitian’s triumph may have been conducted as a winter campaign in 82–83. She points out that the Chattan territory was very suitable for guerrilla warfare and that a winter campaign, while arduous also for the aggressor, would nonetheless provide certain advantages; systematic and constant destruction of food supplies and refuges would be enough to wear the enemy down.
24
Contemporary coinage suggests that the war against the Chatti was concluded in late 84–85. At the end of 84, there appeared coins with the impression of a woman with bowed head, representing the subdued German people; in 85, there are legends like Germania capta, Victoria Augusti and De Ger(manis). This goes well with Martial’s reference to the pax ... certa ducis in 14, 34, 1, published in (December) 84–85 (see Leary’s discussion of the date of Book 14, pp. 9 ff.). The main achievement of the war was that a line of defence systems could now be established from the Rhine by the Taunus Mountains south–eastward towards the Neckar. Perhaps the creation of the two German provinces of Germania superior and Germania inferior was immediately connected with the victory over the Chatti and the remodeling of the frontier, but since these areas are not recorded as “provinces” earlier than the year 90, this cannot be definitively asserted. Like everything else connected with the Chattan war, it is not known exactly when Domitian adopted the honorary title of Germanicus. Braunert (“Zum Chattenkriege Domitians”, BJ 153 [1953], pp. 98 f.) maintained that is was first recorded at some time between 9 June and 28 August 83, basing this theory on the evidence of one coin, an inscription and two papyri. Even though this evidence has been questioned, and in spite of the title’s not regularly appearing in inscriptions before 86 (see P. Kneissl, Die Siegestitulatur der Römischen Kaiser, Göttingen 1969, pp. 4 ff.), Martial’s first mention of the title (13, 4, 1) strongly supports a date in 83. Thenceforth, Martial regularly mentions Domitian as Germanicus or otherwise alludes to the title; cf. 14, 170, 1 f. (nomina Rhenus | vera dedit); 2, 2, 3 (nobilius [sc. nomen] domito tribuit Germania Rheno); Germanicus: 5, 2, 7; 5, 3, 1; 5, 19, 17; 7, 61, 3; 8, praef. (Imperatori Domitiano Caesari Augusto Germanico Dacico, where Dacicus is not an official title but merely a mark of flattery); 8, 4, 3; 8, 26, 3; 8, 39, 3; 8, 53, 15; 8, 65, 11; for references in Book 9, see above. In like manner, Statius uses the title on eleven occasions in his Silvae (except in the lemmae of silv. 4, 1 Septimus decimus consulatus imp. Aug. Germanici and 4, 2 Eucharisticon ad imp. Aug. Germ. Domitianum);1 the only other poet to mention it is Silius (3, 607 tu transcendes, Germanice, facta tuorum; cf. the introduction to 9, 101).2 As a victory title, Germanicus was a novelty; previous emperors (viz. Caligula, Claudius and Nero) had adopted the title not because of their military achievements, but to indicate descent from Germanicus Caesar. However, Domitian soon found followers in this respect; his successor Nerva adopted the title Germanicus, and by his death in 117, Trajan was not only Germanicus but also Dacicus and Parthicus. Such epithets were to multiply in the titles of the emperors of the second century. The Chatti were defeated in 84–85, but by no means conquered. Domitian was to deal with them also in 89, when they teamed up with the governor of Germania Southern argues that “It is comparable to taking a city block by block; if external help can be eliminated, there comes a point at which the outcome is inevitable but the final capitulation takes time to bring about”. 1 See silv. 1, 1, 5; 1, 4, 4; 3, praef. (Germanici nostri libertus referring to Earinus); 3, 3, 165; 3, 4, 49; 4, praef. (septimum decimum Germanici nostri consulatum); 4, 1, 2; 4, 2, 52; 4, 9, 17; 5, 1, 105; 5, 2, 177. 2 The readiness of the poets to emphasize his new title would presumably have appealed very much to Domitian, who obviously was very fond of titles, whether this, as Southern thinks possible, reflected “a deep inner insecurity that required constant reassurance” or simply because “titles ought to have conferred on him a certain gravitas and created a respectful distance between him and his subordinates” (Southern, p. 36).
25
superior, L. Antonius Saturninus, in his revolt against the emperor (the sacrilegi furores mentioned in 9, 84, 1; see note ad loc.). The rebellion having been suppressed, Domitian again sent his legions against the Chatti, who were now defeated and made to sign a peace treaty (Jones, Domitian, p. 150). In November 89, the emperor celebrated a double triumph over the Chatti and the Dacians. For the Chattan war, see further Jones, Domitian, pp. 128–131, and Southern, pp. 79–91.
4.2.2. The Second Pannonian War The Indo-European Sarmatians roamed, during the greater part of antiquity, over the area from Hungary to the lower Volga. As their western branch, the Iazyges and Roxolani, gradually moved westwards, they came to pose a real threat to Rome on the Danube (cf. Ovid’s references to these tribes and their crossing of the Danube in trist. 3, 10, 33 f.; 3, 12, 29 f.; Pont. 4, 7, 9 f.), and various measures were taken to control them. Vespasian made great efforts to strengthen the defences on the Danube, a policy which was continued by Domitian right from the beginning of his reign (see Jones, Domitian, pp. 135 ff.). However, in 92, Domitian was forced into military conflict with the Sarmatians, as the Iazyges joined the German Suebi in the Second Pannonian War. According to Dio (67, 5, 2), the discontent among the Sarmatians and the Suebi was due to the fact that Domitian had sent a troop of a hundred cavalrymen to Moesia to assist the Lugii in a war against some of the Suebi. Sarmatian-German forces were preparing to cross the Danube. Domitian sent a force consisting of vexillations from nine legions (which was allowed to march through the kingdom of the Dacian king Decebalus so as to attack the Iazyges from the rear, cf. note on 9, 35, 5), but the initial onslaught ended in disaster and an entire legion, probably the XXI Rapax, was annihilated. In May 92, the emperor himself appeared on the Danube and apparently managed to repel the attacks, but it is not known how this was done, nor to what degree the campaign was a success. He returned to Rome in January 93; for the dates, see 9, 31 intro. Domitian celebrated no triumph after the Second Pannonian War, only an ovatio, dedicating a laurel wreath to Iuppiter Capitolinus (Suet. Dom. 6, 1), a ceremony that was part of a regular (iustus) triumph; this may perhaps indicate that he was not completely satisfied with the outcome. It is all the more remarkable that this war attracted far more of Martial’s attention than any other war, even those that resulted in regular triumphs. The way was paved by some epigrams in Book 7, published in December 92, which opens with a couple of generally warlike poems on Domitian’s cuirass, “impenetrable by Sarmatian arrows” (7, 1–2), followed by a handful marked by eager expectation of the emperor’s return from the war (7, 5–8) and referring to the Danube as captivus Hister (7, 80, 11) and Hister iacens (7, 84, 3). In Book 8, published in early 94 and as a whole dedicated to Domitian, there is a series of exultant poems on his return from the war, the games and the banquet given on the occasion (see in particular 8, 2; 4; 8; 11; 15; 21; 26; 30; 50; 55; 65; 78). The ovation is passed off as secreti triumphi (8, 15, 5) and Stella, who arranged games on the occasion (see 9, 42 intro.), is referred to as 26
Hyperborei celebrator ... triumphi (8, 78, 3) and Domitian as Victor Histri (8, 2, 2). Domitian’s refusal of a triumph made Martial speak of saepe recusatos ... triumphos (9, 101, 19); Statius ascribed it to the emperor’s clemency, quae modo Marcomanos post horrida bella vagosque | Sauromatas Latio non est dignata triumpho (silv. 3, 3, 170 f.), later urging Domitian not to decline further triumphs: mille tropaea feres, tantum permitte triumphos (silv. 4, 1, 39). In Book 9, the exultation at the triumphant return of the emperor is turned into a rendering of Domitian as a “Prince of Peace”; willing sacrificial animals reveal that there is no more need for bloodshed (9, 31), insania ferri no longer prevails and there is a pax certa (9, 70, 7 f.), since Domitian has given otia ferro (9, 101, 21); perhaps also 9, 71, on the miraculous concord of a lion and a ram, should be read as an allegory and counted among these poems. It is tempting to speak of a vast cycle in Martial on the Second Pannonian War, beginning with the expectant poems of Book 7, continuing with the celebration of the emperor’s return in Book 8, and concluding with the motif of Domitian as “Prince of Peace” in Book 9.1 Indeed, it may seem curious that a war which was not among Domitian’s most glorious nor most important military achievements should generate such a number of verses from a poet who was being even more enthusiastic than usual. Considering the drastic increase of imperial poetry in Books 8 and 9, as compared with previous Books, perhaps Martial had now seriously set his heart upon being a “court poet”, ready to celebrate whatever deeds the emperor accomplished without too much consideration of the level of success they had actually achieved. Clearly, Martial’s picture of Domitian was now that of a hero returning after having pacified the horrid north once and for all. There was at least some of truth in this; from the end of the Second Pannonian War to the murder of Domitian in 96, the empire in fact enjoyed a period of peace (see Southern, pp. 111 ff., for a summary). Towards the end of his reign, though, there are signs of preparations for yet another campaign on the Danube, presumably as the Sarmatians had again teamed up with neighbouring German tribes to confront Rome. There is epigraphic evidence for a concentration of troops in Upper Moesia in the first half of 96, which, regardless of whether or not Domitian entered into an armed conflict, shows that he did not feel that his affair with the Sarmatians had been settled (Jones, Domitian, pp. 153 ff.). However, the inclusion in Book 9 of a poem like no. 70 (which in lines 7 f. speaks of nulla insania ferri and pax certa) shows that, at the time when it was written, and in all likelihood by the publication of the book, a third campaign in the north could not yet have begun. Whether or not Roman forces resumed hostilities with these tribes in the reign of Domitian, he never managed to finish a Third Pannonian War; hostilities on the Danube were to continue through the reign of Nerva and were not concluded until Trajan. See further Jones, Domitian, pp. 152 ff.; Southern, pp. 111 ff.
1 In such a case, there may be reason to speak not merely of a “theme” but of a linearly arranged cycle. On the other hand, it may be doubtful whether all the poems in Book 8 on the Second Pannonian War really occupy a given position which cannot be altered without disturbing the whole (see the definition of “cycle” given in section 3.2 above).
27
4.3. Domitian the god When evaluating the religious respect shown to Domitian and the poets’ acknowledgement of him as deus and Iuppiter noster, it is important to bear in mind that this was essentially nothing new. It is the proportions of this kind of flattery of Domitian, particularly in connection with his alleged insistence on being addressed as dominus et deus, that has given offence. The conception of the emperor as a god had its origin in the ruler cult, which had developed from the heroization of prominent men, who were considered an intermediate stage between gods and human beings. As the heir of the Pharaohs, Alexander the Great was recognized by the Egyptians as son of Ammon and acknowledged as a god also by the Greeks (albeit not without a certain resistance; cf. Kaerst in RE 1, s.v. Alexandros 10, 1433). In the Hellenistic kingdoms formed after his death, the cult of the sovereign became a cult of the state, in which the ruling monarch was worshipped together with his ancestors and provided with cultic epithets such as , , and . The first Roman citizen to be made the object of such veneration was T. Quinctius Flamininus, whose philhellenic politics earned him the name of in Greece; similar marks of honour were given to, for example, Sulla, Pompey, and Caesar.1 At Rome, formal worship was originally given only to those rulers who had been deified after their deaths, beginning with Julius Caesar (deified in 42 BC). While emperors in the first century wisely declined to be venerated as gods in their lifetimes, they could not break the tradition in the Hellenistic world of worshipping the monarch; thus, temples were erected already to Augustus (together with Roma) in, for example, Pergamum and Epidaurus. But this concerns the East; in Rome, living emperors were not worshipped during the first century, and no temples were erected for them; this applies also to Domitian. However, what has been standing in his way in this respect is the unfortunate dominus et deus, a formula with which he was supposed to have begun an official letter which he was dictating in the name of his procurators (dominus et deus hoc noster fieri iubet; Suet. Dom. 13, 2). This formula will be discussed on 9, 66, 3; here, it may suffice to note that there is no evidence whatsoever that Domitian actually demanded to be addressed as dominus et deus, no matter what later, highly anti-Domitianic writers (like Aurelius Victor and Orosius) have had to say on the subject. Suetonius states that it afterwards became the custom not to address the emperor otherwise in speech or in writing. But this may just as well, or perhaps even rather, be due to the zeal of unscrupulous flatterers as to imperial instructions. Domitian himself must surely have been well aware that it would have been most unwise to order such an address. Furthermore, one might ask to whom the letter mentioned by Suetonius was addressed; if to the eastern provinces, an opening such as dominus et deus hoc noster fieri iubet could very well have been the rule rather than an exception. What is most remarkable is that contemporary antagonists, such as Tacitus, Pliny and Juvenal, did not take advantage of what would have been a considerable lack of discernment on Domitian’s part. This indicates, perhaps, that VZWU
H¸HUJyWKM
xSLIDQM
VZWU
1
For a brief summary of the cult of the sovereign, see H. Volkmann in KP 2, s.v. Herrscherkult, 1110 ff., with further references.
28
there was in fact much less to Domitian’s use of dominus et deus than would appear from Suetonius and later writers. If the ruler cult is the foundation on which Martial’s celebration of Domitian as deus ultimately rests, there is a more immediate source to be found in the panegyrical tradition. In first-century Rome, the comparison of the ruling emperor to divinities and the acknowledgement of him as a god were restricted to various works within this genre. Here, the emperor, regardless of his nature, obviously emerges as an optimus princeps who enjoys the favour of the gods and on the whole is in close contact with the divine sphere; for panegyrical authors, it was natural to compare him to the gods themselves (see here the summary in M. Mause, Die Darstellung des Kaisers in der lateinischen Panegyrik, Stuttgart 1994, pp. 219 ff.). Plutarch makes an amusing remark on the panegyrical comparison of the monarch to divinities (de adul. 56 F): , ' , ' Rb G| SROORg
R¸N
G
$S±OOZQHM
Q
P|Q
SDODdVZVL
Q
PLQXUdVZVL
SURVDJRUHX±PHQRL
·S´ W M NRODNHdDM x[JRQWDL
'L±QXVRL NDg
G
Q
FDdURQWHM
WÍQ
PHTXVTÍVLQ HcM
SDVDQ
EDVLOyZQ
C+UDNOHjM DcVF¹QKQ
In this respect, Martial had great precursors in the field of poetry, who were scarcely passed over by the epigrammatist. Horace offers concrete examples; see, for instance, carm. 1, 2, 45 serus in caelum redeas; 1, 12, 49 ff. gentis humanae pater atque custos, | orte Saturno, tibi cura magni | Caesaris fatis data: tu secundo | Caesare regnes; 3, 5, 1 ff. (quoted below). There are extensive comparisons between Augustus and Jupiter in Ov. met. 15, 858 ff. (Bömer notes ad loc.: “Die Parallel- oder gar Gleichsetzung Iuppiter und Augustus ist für Ovid und auch für viele seiner Zeitgenossen beinahe selbstverständlich”; see his commentary with further references).2 This kind of flattery, it is true, is commoner in Martial than in the Augustan poets, and he sometimes goes further then they did in this respect (see, for example, the elaborate comparison of Domitian and Hercules in 9, 101). One wonders, though, whether at least some of the scorn of Martial for excessive cringing actually sprang from the fact that Domitian was for a very long time considered a “bad” emperor, whereas Augustus always has been a “good” one.
4.3.1. Comparisons with Jupiter The comparison, or even equation, of Domitian with certain deities appears throughout Books 1 to 9. Most notably the emperor is compared to Jupiter: Domitian is Palatinus Tonans, just as Jupiter is Tarpeius Tonans (9, 86, 7); this is the very same idea that is found, for example, in Hor. carm. 3, 5, 1 ff. Caelo tonantem credidimus Iovem | regnare: praesens divus habebitur | Augustus. It is in such instances, in which the emperor himself is referred to as Iuppiter etc., that 1 “And is not almost any king called an Apollo if he can hum a tune, and a Dionysus if he gets drunk, and a Heracles if he can wrestle? And is he not delighted, and thus led into all kinds of disgrace by the flattery?” (translation by C. Babbit, Loeb). 2 For a survey of the ruler cult in Roman poetry, see K. Thraede, “Die Poesie und der Kaiserkult”, in: E. Bickerman (ed.), Le culte des souverains dans l’Empire romain (Entretiens sur l’antiquité classique 19), Geneva 1973, pp. 273–303.
29
this comparison finds its most marked expression. In Book 9, there are five epigrams in which Domitian appears as Iuppiter or Tonans; see 9, 28, 10 suus (i.e. Romae) Iuppiter; 9, 39, 1 and 9, 86, 7 Palatinus Tonans (and cf. line 8 uterque Iuppiter of Jupiter and Domitian); and 9, 65, 1 Latius Tonans; 9, 91, 6 meus Iuppiter. This is a decidedly higher frequency than in any other book; the first occurrence is to be found in 4, 8, 12 (matutinus Iuppiter), then 5, 6, 9 (Iuppiter serenus), 6, 10, 9 and 7, 56, 4 (noster Tonans), and 7, 99, 1 (Tonans). Thus, of eleven references in the works of Martial to Domitian as Iuppiter or Tonans, five are to be found in Book 9. There is a similar tendency in Martial’s application to Domitian of epithets and attributes normally belonging to Jupiter: the epithet summus first appears in 6, 83, 2 (summe ducum, obviously modelled on summe deum found, for example, in Verg. Aen. 11, 785), then in 7, 7, 5 (summe mundi rector; compare Ov. met. 13, 599 summe deum rector) and in 9, 5, 1 (summe Rheni domitor); Domitian is hailed as parens orbis in 7, 7, 5 and 9, 5, 1 (cf. Lucan 4, 110 summe parens mundi of Jupiter), and called Ausonius pater in 9, 7, 6 (with which compare aetherius pater in 9, 35, 10 and 9, 36, 7). The epithet invictus balances on the verge between victorious commander (for example, Hor. sat. 2, 1, 11; Ov. trist. 4, 2, 44) and god (for example, invictus Iuppiter Ov. fast. 5, 126); Martial applies it to Domitian in 7, 6, 8 (in connection with his eagerly awaited return from the Second Pannonian War) and twice in Book 9, both times in poems which do not focus on Domitian as commander and therefore suggest a stronger implication of divinity (9, 1, 10 invicta manus and 9, 23, 6 invictum caput). The emphasis on the emperor’s manus in 9, 1, 10, recurring also in 9, 20, 3 f. felix o, ... quas | vidit reptantis sustinuitque manus (of the house in which Domitian was born), also implies divinity; the hands of Domitian are the earthly counterpart of fulminantis magna manus Iovis (Hor. carm. 3, 3, 6); compare here also 4, 1, 6; 4, 8, 10; 4, 30, 5; and 6, 1, 5. Further comparisons between Domitian and Jupiter are to be found in the following poems: 9, 18, 8, in which Martial says that the water supplied by the emperor will be as dear to him as Iovis imber (see note ad loc. for the meaning of the expression). 9, 20, 5 f. compare the house in which Domitian was born to Crete, birthplace of Jupiter: hic steterat veneranda domus, quae praestitit orbi | quod Rhodos astrifero, quod pia Creta polo, and in 9, 24 a bust of Domitian is said to recall Iovis ora sereni: | sic tonat ille deus, cum sine nube tonat (lines 2 f.). In 9, 91, Martial states that he would prefer an invitation to dine with the emperor to an invitation to dine with Jupiter himself (9, 91, 6 me meus in terris Iuppiter ... tenet). The comparisons in the Earinus cycle between Earinus, cupbearer of Domitian, and Ganymede, cupbearer of Jupiter, naturally also imply a comparison of their respective masters; see 9, 11, 7; 9, 16, 6; 9, 36. The poem 9, 36 brings a related matter to the fore, viz. the question whether Martial in some poems depicts Domitian not only as the equal of, but even as superior to Jupiter. Apart from 9, 36, this concerns 9, 3, and in principle also 9, 34. However, in the latter poem the object of comparison is not Jupiter himself but his divine children (viz. Mars, Apollo, Diana, Hercules and Mercury); in it, the supreme god, tipsy with nectar, looks down from Olympus on the Templum gentis Flaviae and compares it with his own alleged humble tomb in Crete, which naturally cannot rival the splendid marble and gold of the Flavian mausoleum. Saying
30
to his assembled children Gnosia vos nobis monumenta dedistis: cernite, quam plus sit, Caesaris esse patrem, he suggests that they have been outdone by the emperor and, accordingly, that he is superior to them. In 9, 3, a handful of gods, and in particular Jupiter, are presented as being indebted to Domitian for the temples built by him in their honour, a debt so large that they could have no hopes of ever settling it. In 9, 36, written after the hair-offering and manumission of Earinus, Ganymede is complaining to Jupiter that he too should be released from his office as cupbearer, being now rather a young man than a handsome boy. Jupiter finds this impossible and explains why to Ganymede: Domitian has a thousand starry-eyed ministri, and his palace, however big, can scarcely hold them. Jupiter, on the other hand, has only Ganymede; if he was to allow him to cut his hair and receive his freedom, who would then mix the nectar for him? Now there are several points which are crucial for a correct understanding of these poems. Most importantly, these are humorous pieces; the situations depicted are paradoxically absurd and the poet did not expect anyone to take them seriously. In spite of the flattery of ingratiating poets, Domitian, being deeply religious, obviously knew that he was not a god himself (see Jones, Domitian, p. 109); serious attempts at depicting him as the superior of Jupiter may very well not have met with his approval. Martial, for his part, was naturally aware of the fact that Jupiter was the supreme deity; it is sufficient to refer to 9, 20, 19 f. te protexit superum pater, et tibi, Caesar, | pro iaculo et parma fulmen et aegis erat (the infant Jupiter was under the protection of the Curetes, whereas the infant Domitian was protected by Jupiter himself). Also in 9, 36 there are signs of Jupiter’s supremacy: Ganymede talks to Jupiter of Domitian as tuus Caesar (line 3), and Jupiter himself mentions him as Caesar noster in line 9. These were matters obvious to everyone and therefore also the basic conditions which made it safe to write such poems as 9, 3 and 9, 36. These poems should not be understood as attempts to make Domitian stand out as Jupiter’s superior. Rather, they seize upon the rigidity of ancient Greco-Roman mythology, which was not an inviolable matter in Martial’s day. The reason why Jupiter cannot release Ganymede and pick another cupbearer is not that he would be inferior to Domitian, but that mythology hinders him. Domitian is not obstructed by mythology and is free to act as he chooses; Jupiter’s freedom of action is blocked by the res ipsa (9, 36, 8); he is forever married to Juno, and Ganymede is forever his cupbearer (see further the introduction to 9, 36). Nevertheless, it may perhaps seem hazardous to adopt such a tone in a poem on the achievements of a sovereign who has been described as “both superstitious and suspicious, completely lacking a sense of humour” (Jones, Domitian, p. 198), but this description is not altogether true; that Domitian had in fact a sense of humour is suggested, apart from 9, 34 and 36, also by 9, 83 (see the introduction ad loc.), 1, 5 (with Howell’s introduction) and 5, 19, 17 f. As 9, 3; 34; and 36 all deal with Domitian and the gods and with Jupiter and his envy of Domitian in particular, the humorous air in these poems may perhaps be regarded as Martial’s way of playing down a matter which he felt not to be really serious, viz. his own and his fellow poets’ rendering of Domitian as the earthly Jupiter. Such jokes involving the emperor (but naturally not made at his expense) could not have been made unless Martial was sure about Domitian’s reaction. Apparently they had his
31
consent, a fact which, if anything, demonstrates that he knew that he was not in fact a god himself. In this context, it may therefore not be inappropriate to speak of Martial not as a “court poet”, but as a “court jester”.
4.3.2. Comparisons with other divinities and Domitian as deus Book 9 also contains some epigrams comparing Domitian to gods other than Jupiter, in particular to the Sun and to Hercules. Martial’s comparison of Domitian to the Sun has previously been little heeded; most of the instances given by Sauter (pp. 137 ff.) refer not to the Sun, but to stars. The comparison of the ruler to the Sun, the supreme star which illuminates the world with its life-giving rays, was naturally at home in the oriental ruler cult; applied to Alexander, it lived on in the Hellenistic cult and was thence adopted into Roman panegyrical literature and applied, for example, by Horace to Augustus (see E. Doblhofer, Die Augustuspanegyrik des Horaz in formalhistorischer Sicht, Heidelberg 1966, pp. 86 ff.; H. Halfmann, Itinera principum. Geschichte und Typologie der Kaiserreisen im Römischen Reich, Stuttgart 1986, pp. 148 ff.; for further instances from Latin poetry, see note on 9, 20, 6). Comparisons between Domitian and the Sun are completely lacking in Books 1 through 7. The first sign appears in 8, 21, 11 f. Iam, Caesar, vel nocte veni: stent astra licebit, | non deerit populo te veniente dies, which presumably alludes to the emperor as a second Sun. Still, there are more evident instances to be found in Book 9, most obviously in 9, 20, 5 f. (quoted above), in which the house in which Domitian was born is compared not only to Crete as the birthplace of Jupiter, but also to Rhodes, birthplace of the Sun-god. In 9, 24, 3, Martial, marvelling at the beauty of a bust of Domitian, compares it to mundi facies (“the face of heaven”) and to Iovis ora sereni; this recalls 9, 20, 6, in which Jupiter and the Sun are mentioned as objects of comparison. In 9, 34, 5, finally, there is a possible comparison, one of the few in Martial, between the emperor and Apollo; the god is here mentioned as Phoebus (the name proper to Apollo as sun-god), and I have assumed that he appears in this context partly as representing Domitian as connoisseur and patron of literature and partly as the Sun; see further note ad loc. and cf. also note on 9, 1, 9. Like Jupiter and the Sun, the comparison of the ruler with Hercules, the model of the victorious hero, has Hellenistic origins (see the introduction to 9, 64). Comparisons between Domitian and Hercules, however, are surprisingly few, not only in Martial but also in Statius. But, in this respect, Book 9 occupies a place apart. Previous to this book, Hercules appears only in 5, 65, a poem comparing his deeds unfavourably with Domitian’s games in the arena, for which the emperor, like Hercules before him, will receive heaven as a reward. In Book 9, though, there are three poems occasioned by the newly finished temple to Hercules on the Appian Way, in which there was a statue of the hero bearing the features of Domitian. The epigrams in question are 9, 64, which concentrates on the statue and may not be much of a comparison, and 9, 65, which proclaims that, had these been his features in his lifetime, Hercules would not have had to serve under Eurystheus nor under Omphale, nor would he have had to be purified of his mortal elements 32
in the fire of Oeta, but safely would have entered into the Heavens without having to suffer those ordeals. But all of this appears as rather modest as compared with 9, 101, the longest poem of the book and the height of Martial’s eulogies of Domitian. In this poem, the deeds of Hercules, called minor Alcides, are almost systematically compared with the acta of Domitian, maior Alcides. This leaves no doubt about the order of precedence; Domitian is the greater of the two. Consequently, also his deeds surpass those of the Argive hero; Herculeum tantis numen non sufficit actis, Martial says in the concluding distich; Tarpeio deus hic commodet ora patri. The only god who may be compared to Domitian is Jupiter. Hercules also appears among the children of Jupiter mentioned in 9, 34 (line 6; see note ad loc.). Domitian is seldom brought into connection with other gods than Jupiter, the Sun and Hercules. In Book 9, further deities are introduced only in 9, 34; Apollo has been mentioned above (on the Sun); see also 9, 34, 4 mentioning Mars (a god elsewhere connected with Domitian in 7, 2, 1 f. and 8, 65, 11, both poems dealing with the Second Pannonian War), and 9, 34, 6, introducing Mercury who probably represents the emperor as (see note ad loc.). An even more obvious manifestation of the divinity ascribed to Domitian is provided by instances in which the emperor is not compared to any deity but is simply mentioned as deus. The first instance appears in 4, 1, 10 (pro tanto quae sunt inproba vota deo?) and is followed by a couple in Book 5 (5, 3, 6 and 5, 5, 2). The frequency increases in Book 7 (see 7, 2, 6 nostri ... dei; 7, 5, 3 deum; 7, 8, 2 victor ... deus, all with reference to the Second Pannonian War; also 7, 40, 2 utrumque deum [“our God in either mood”]), and falls again in Book 8 (two instances, 8, 8, 6 reducem ... deum and 8, 82, 3 deum), but reaches its peak in Book 9, which offers in all six instances; see 9, 28, 8; 9, 65, 2; 9, 66, 3; 9, 93, 3; 9, 93, 8; and 9, 101, 24. To sum up, in no other book of Martial’s is there, expressed in percentages, such a large number of poems on Domitian as in Book 9. As we have only the second edition of Book 10 (published in 98), Book 9 now represents the climax of a development towards a greater degree of attention to the emperor which was begun in Book 8 and which was probably continued in the first edition of Book 10 (published in 95). This does not only imply that there are more “Emperor poems” in Book 9 as compared with its predecessors; Martial here also pays more attention to the divine aspect of the emperor. Much effort is made to present the emperor as the earthly counterpart to Jupiter, by means of comparison and by referring to him as Tonans or Iuppiter and providing him with epithets appropriately belonging to the supreme god. While nothing of this is new, there are generally more instances in Book 9 than in any of Books 1 through 8; for example, in the entire corpus of Martial, Domitian is referred to as Tonans or Iuppiter in ten epigrams; five of these appear in Book 9. Particularly notable is the comparison between the emperor and the Sun, which first appears in 8, 11 and is exploited in four poems in Book 9. Significantly more room is also provided for the comparison of Domitian with Hercules; this device, used by Martial only once prior to Book 9, here provides the frame for the climax, as it were, of Martial’s imperial eulogies on the whole (9, 101). %DVLOH¼M VZWU
33
One can but speculate on the reason for this drastic increase in Martial’s attention to Domitian. It seems clear that it was connected with the emperor’s return from the Second Pannonian War but, given the course and outcome of this war, it cannot in itself have been the reason. Rather, the small success of the war suggests that the reason was really something else. Of course, it is possible that Martial had simply decided that he now wanted to appear mainly as a court poet. But it is interesting to note that the increase roughly coincides with Statius’ beginning publication of the Silvae. I have elsewhere argued that Martial, as the Silvae began to appear, may have felt that Statius was encroaching on a genre which hitherto had been his own domain, viz. that of occasional verse. As Statius in these poems often addresses the very same men whose friendship Martial had been cultivating for years, the result was very likely a hardened competition between the two poets; there are signs of such a development in the Epigrams as well as in the Silvae.1 Perhaps Statius’ publishing of his occasional verses would account also for Martial’s increasing flattery of Domitian; he now had to keep pace with a poet who celebrated the emperor in such poems as silv. 1, 1 (Equus maximus Domitiani imp.), 1, 6 (Domitian’s games on the Kalendae Decembres), 3, 4 (Capilli Flavi Earini), 4, 1 (Septimus decimus consulatus imp. Aug. Germanici), 4, 2 (Eucharisticon ad imp. Aug. Germ. Domitianum), and 4, 3 (Via Domitiana).
5. Some notes on the tradition of the manuscripts and on the text of Book 9 The text of the Epigrams of Martial owes its current state primarily to the efforts of two distinguished philologists: F. G. Schneidewin, who divided the manuscripts into three groups, and W. Lindsay, who, guided by L. Friedländer, showed that these three groups derive from three ancient editions, the archetypes of which he designated AA, BA and CA (W. M. Lindsay, Ancient Editions of Martial, Oxford 1903). In his Teubner edition of 1925, Heraeus adopted the designations , , and for these same archetypes; in the following, as in the commentary below, I use Heraeus’ designations. Since Lindsay’s Ancient Editions, the tradition of the manuscripts has been discussed in several editions, commentaries and articles (most recently by Grewing in his commentary on Book 6, pp. 51–55; a minute description of the manuscripts is given in Citroni’s edition of and commentary on Book 1, pp. xlv–lxxiii; see also Friedländer, pp. 67–96; M. D. Reeve in L. D. Reynolds, Texts and Transmission, Oxford 1983, pp. 239–244). It may therefore be sufficient to give only a brief survey here. D
E
J
D
1
represented by the three florilegia H (Hauptii florilegium Vindobonense 277, early 9th century), R (Vossianum florilegium Leidense Q 86, 9th–10th century), and T (Thuaneum florilegium Parisinum 8071, 9th–10th century). The archetype was probably a two-volume MS belonging to a French monastery and containing the complete works of Martial; thus, these MSS are the only
See here Henriksén, Martial und Statius, pp. 111 ff.
34
ones to contain the Liber de spectaculis. H is without relevance for Book 9, though, as it contains only epigr. 19–30; 1, 3; and 1, 4. Lindsay (Ancient Editions, pp. 8 ff.) characterized this group as an “edition ‘in usum elegantiorum’”, because it uses euphemisms for the grosser words, like monstrum for cunnus, salire for futuere. E
represented by L (Lucensis bibl. reg. Berolinensis fol. 612, 12th century; optimus testis stirpis), P (Palatinus Vaticanus 1696, 15th century), Q (Arondellianus Musei Britannici 136, 15th century), and f (Florentinus chartaceus bibl. Laur. XXXV 39, 15th century). The L MSS did not appear until the year 1900 (see W. M. Lindsay, “The new ‘codex optimus’ of Martial”, CR 15 [1901], pp. 413–420), and was first used by Lindsay in his Oxford edition (1903). The archetype of the -group, probably a 9th- or 10thcentury MS written in Beneventan script, contained the Epigrams (except for the Liber de spectaculis) in a “recension” completed in 401 by Torquatus Gennadius, as appears from the “subscriptions“ found at the beginning of each of Books 2–14 in the L and Q MSS (for example, at the beginning of 13, 4: EMENDAVI EGO TORQUATUS GENNADIUS IN FORO DIVI AUGUSTI MARTIS CONSULATU VINCENTII AT FRAGUITII VIRORUM CLARISSIMORUM FELICITER; a complete list of the subscriptions will be found in Lindsay, Ancient Editions, pp. 3 f.). E
J
represented by E (Edinburgensis bibl. Facultatis Advocatorum, early 10th century; optimus testis), A (Vossianus Leidensis primus Q 56, 11th century), X (Putaneus Parisinus lat. 8067, 10th century), and V (Vaticanus 3294, 9th or 10th century). The archetype of this group (labelled “the ‘vulgate’ edition” by Lindsay) was probably found in a French MSS written in the 8th– 9th centuries in early Carolingian minuscule (Lindsay, Ancient Editions, p. 7). Less important text witnesses belonging to this group are B, C, F, G, and N (all written between the 12th and the 15th centuries).
There was no contamination between these groups before the 12th century, when contamination between and can be seen in France, spreading thence to Renaissance Italy (see Reeve, pp. 241 f.). D
J
The text of Book 9 given in the following commentary is essentially that found in I. Borovskij’s editio correctior of Heraeus’ Teubner edition (Leipzig 1976). Shackleton Bailey’s Teubneriana (Stuttgart 1990) is not based upon a new collation of the MSS1 and thus makes no claim to contribute anything to the establishment of the text in this respect. However, Shackleton Bailey has inserted a number of emendations, both his own and those of others, which obviously makes his text different from, though not necessarily better than, that of Heraeus. Here, I have chosen to adopt a more conservative attitude, generally following the principle of 1
For his edition of and commentary on Book 1, Citroni made new collations of all the important manuscripts. This, however, did not lead to any significant improvements of the text; it did, though, enable Citroni to give a much fuller apparatus than the one in Heraeus’ edition (see J. Delz’s review in MH 34 [1977], p. 259).
35
allowing emendations into the text only when the evidence of the MSS cannot be defended with reason or when the emendation provides a decidedly better meaning. In most cases, this means that, if the transmitted text is grammatically correct but does not seem to convey an immediately acceptable meaning, before having recourse to emendations, every effort within the limits of reason should be made to uncover a meaning in the text as it has been transmitted. In my opinion, many of the emendations admitted by Shackleton Bailey into the text of Book 9 are unnecessary. In some cases, he has chosen another reading in the MSS where I prefer to keep the text of Heraeus. I give here a list of the more significant instances in which I have kept the text as printed by Heraeus rather than accepted that of Shackleton Bailey: 9, 3, 14
quod Heraeus following the MSS : quo Shackleton Bailey following Duff 9, 25, 6 petat Heraeus T : tegam Shackleton Bailey 9, 42, 11 nata Heraeus MSS : lecta Shackleton Bailey 9, 44, 1 Alciden … Vindicis Heraeus : Alcides … Vindicem Shackleton Bailey following Gilbert 9, 45, 3 Promethei Heraeus : Prometheae Shackleton Bailey 9, 47, 5 serum Heraeus T : carum Shackleton Bailey 9, 48, 8 callida Heraeus MSS: pallida Shackleton Bailey following Dousa (this emendation was adopted also by Borovskij in his editio correctior) 9, 61, 17 deiecta Heraeus PQ : delecta L f : †delecta† Shackleton Bailey 9, 70, 6 Caeciliane Heraeus T : M(a)eciliane Shackleton Bailey 9, 73, 3 decepti regna Heraeus : defuncti rura : decepti rura Shackleton Bailey, following Schneidewin (and Friedländer) J
E
E
J
E
E
J
J
E
E
DJ
Divergences in the text presented in this commentary from that printed by Heraeus are fewer and less radical, as follows: 9, praef. Heraeus put lines 5–8 of the prefatory poem in italics; like Shackleton Bailey, I put these lines within inverted commas. In line 6 of the same poem, I follow Shackleton Bailey’s punctuation sed, puto, rather than Heraeus’ sed puto,. 9, 21, 4 I accept here Gaselee’s emendation arat for the amat found in the MSS. 9, 44, 6 Like Shackleton Bailey (following Housman), I print here the reading Lysippum of the MSS, instead of , which was introduced in the editio Aldina and has been kept by most modern editors. 9, 48, 8 In his editio correctior of Heraeus, Borovskij printed Dousa’s emendation callida for pallida. I keep pallida in the text. 9, 57, 12 I follow Shackleton Bailey’s punctuation res una est tamen — ipse non negabit — instead of Heraeus’ res una est tamen: ipse non negabit,. 9, 59, 19 I agree here with Shackleton Bailey in printing the emendation veros of the editio Aldina for vero of 9, 89, 2 I take the words Licet scribere nempe malos as an utterance not of Stella but of Martial, and thus do not put it within inverted commas. /XVdSSRX
E
36
9, 95, 1
I print, with the MSS, Alphius and Olphius for Heraeus’ Alfius and Olfius.
6. A note on the use of this commentary In the following pages, the commentary follows immediately on the poem upon which it comments. I believe that this will reduce the turning of leaves to a minimum. The commentary on each poem consists of (1) a short introduction, meant to provide the social, political and literary context in view of which the poem should be read, and (2) a line-by-line commentary, explaining the poem on a more detailed level. No critical apparatus is appended to the text. Instead, textual variants are discussed in the commentary as they occur. References to Latin authors are made according to the system of the Thesaurus Linguae Latinae. For references to Greek authors and their works, I have not used the system of abbreviations of LSJ, which tends to give up instant comprehensibility for the sake of brevity. Instead, I have used a system of my own, which I hope will be self-explanatory. The Real-Encyclopädie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft is referred to by volume, entry and column (for example, RE 16, s.v. Molorchos 13). RE 2:8 denotes Reihe 2, Band 8, and RE Suppl. 3 supplementary volume 3. References to the Thesaurus Linguae Latinae are made to entry, column and line (for example, TLL, s.v. leo 1169, 41 ff.). Similar systems are used for other major encyclopaedias and lexica. Titles of periodicals are abbreviated according to the system of L’Année philologique.
7. Bibliography The following bibliography lists only such works as are referred to on several occasions in the commentary. Editions of Martial’s works are presented in a selective list. Of the editions published before Schneidewin, I have included only such as are mentioned in the commentary.
7.1. Editions of Martial: A selection Calderini Aldina Gruterus
Scriverius
Schneidewin
D. Calderini (Domizio Calderini), Domitii Calderini Veronensis Commentarii in M. Valerium Martialem, Venetiis 1482. Editio Aldina, Venetiis 1501. I. Gruterus (Jan Gruytere), Epigrammaton libri XV. M. Val. Martialis. Mille amplius locis serio correcti atque emendati a Iano Grutero, Francofurti 1602. P. Scriverius (Peter Schryver), M. Val. Martialis. Nova editio. Ex Museo Petri Scriverii, Lugduni Batavorum 1619. F. G. Schneidewin, M. Val. Martialis libri, 2 vols., Grimae 1842 (ed. maior).
37
F. G. Schneidewin, M. Val. Martialis libri. Ex recensione sua denuo recognita edidit, Lipsiae 1853 (ed. minor). Gilbert W. Gilbert, M. Valerii Martialis epigrammaton libri, Lipsiae 1886; editio stereotypa emendatior 1896. Friedländer L. Friedländer, M. Valerii Martialis epigrammaton libri. Mit erklärenden Anmerkungen, 2 vols., Leipzig 1886 (reprinted Amsterdam 1967). Lindsay W. M. Lindsay, M. Val. Martialis epigrammata, Oxonii 1903; 2nd ed. 1929. Duff J. D. Duff, M. Valerii Martialis epigrammata (Corpus poetarum Latinorum a J. P. Postgate aliisque editum, vol. 2, pp. 431–531), London 1905. Ker W. C. A. Ker, Martial, Epigrams. With an English Translation, 2 vols., London & Cambridge Mass. 1919–1920 (Loeb). Giarratano C. Giarratano, M. Valerii Martialis epigrammaton libri I–XIV, Augusta Taurinorum 1919–1921; 3rd ed., ibid. 1951. Heraeus W. Heraeus, M. Valerii Martialis epigrammaton libri, Lipsiae 1925. Izaac H. J. Izaac, Martial, Épigrammes. Texte établi et traduit, Paris 1930– 1933 (Budé). Dolç M. Dolç, M. Valeri Marcial. Epigrames, vol. 1, Barcelona 1949. Heraeus–Borovskij W. Heraeus, M. Valerii Martialis epigrammaton libri. Editionem correctiorem curavit I. Borovskij, Lepizig 1976. Shackleton-Bailey D. R. Shackleton-Bailey, M. Valerii Martialis epigrammata post W. Heraeum edidit D. R. S.-B., Stutgardiae 1991. —— D. R. Shackleton-Bailey, Martial, Epigrams. Edited and translated, 3 vols., Cambridge Mass. & London 1993 (Loeb). ——
7.2. Modern commentaries on Martial Citroni Friedländer
Grewing Howell —— Kay Leary
M. Citroni, M. Valerii Martialis Epigrammaton Liber Primus, Florence 1975. L. Friedländer, M. Valerii Martialis epigrammaton libri. Mit erklärenden Anmerkungen, 2 vols., Leipzig 1886 (reprinted Amsterdam 1967). F. Grewing, Martial, Buch VI. Ein Kommentar, Göttingen 1997. P. Howell, A Commentary on Book One of the Epigrams of Martial, London 1980. P. Howell, Martial, The Epigrams Book V, Warminster 1995. N. M. Kay, Martial Book XI. A Commentary, London 1985. T. J. Leary, Martial Book XIV. The Apophoreta, London 1996.
7.3. Commentaries on other Greek and Latin authors Austin —— ——
38
R. G. Austin, P. Vergili Maronis Aeneidos liber primus. With a Commentary, Oxford 1971. R. G. Austin, P. Vergili Maronis Aeneidos liber secundus. With a Commentary, Oxford 1964. R. G. Austin, P. Vergili Maronis Aeneidos liber sextus. With a Commentary, Oxford 1977.
C. Bailey, Titi Lucreti Cari De rerum natura libri sex. Edited with Prolegomena, Critical Apparatus, Translation and Commentary, 1–3, Oxford 1947. Booth J. Booth, Ovid, The Second Book of Amores, Warminster 1991. Brandt P. Brandt, P. Ovidi Nasonis Amorum libri tres, Leipzig 1911 (reprinted Hildesheim 1963). —— P. Brandt, P. Ovidi Nasonis De arte amatoria libri tres, Leipzig 1902. Brink C. O. Brink, Horace on Poetry. The ‘Ars poetica’, Cambridge 1971 (abbreviated Brink, Hor. ars). —— C. O. Brink, Horace on Poetry. Epistles Book II: The letters to Augustus and Florus, Cambridge 1982 (abbreviated Hor. epist. II). Bömer F. Bömer, P. Ovidius Naso, Metamorphosen, Heidelberg 1969–86. —— F. Bömer, P. Ovidius Naso, Die Fasten, Heidelberg 1957–58. Coleman K. M. Coleman, Statius, Silvae IV. Edited with an English translation and commentary, Oxford 1988. Courtney E. Courtney, A Commentary on the Satires of Juvenal, London 1980. van Dam H.–J. van Dam, P. Papinius Statius, Silvae Book II. A Commentary, Leiden 1984. Fordyce C. J. Fordyce, Catullus. A Commentary, Oxford 1961. —— C. J. Fordyce, P. Vergili Maronis Aeneidos Libri VII–VIII. With a Commentary, Oxford 1977. Friedländer L. Friedländer, D. Junii Juvenalis Saturarum libri V. Mit erklärenden Anmerkungen, Leipzig 1895. Goodyear F. R. D. Goodyear, The Annals of Tacitus, Books 1–6. Edited with a commentary, Cambridge 1972–. Gow A. S. F. Gow, Theocritus. Edited with a translation and commentary, 2 vols., Cambridge 1950. Hollis A. S. Hollis, Ovid , Ars Amatoria, Book I. Edited with an introduction and commentary, Oxford 1977. Kiessling & Heinze Q. Horatius Flaccus, Oden und Epoden. Erklärt von Adolf Kiessling. Achte Auflage von Richard Heinze, Berlin 1955. Q. Horatius Flaccus, Satiren. Erklärt von Adolf Kiessling. Sechste —— Auflage von Richard Heinze, Berlin 1957. Q. Horatius Flaccus, Briefe. Erklärt von Adolf Kiessling. Fuenfte —— Auflage von Richard Heinze, Berlin 1957. Kißel W. Kißel, Aules Persius Flaccus, Satiren. Herausgegeben, übersetzt und kommentiert, Heidelberg 1990. Koestermann E. Koestermann, Cornelius Tacitus, Annales. Erläutert und mit einer Einleitung versehen, 1–4, Heidelberg 1963–1968. Lejay F. Plessis & P. Lejay, Oeuvres d’Horace. Satires … par Paul Lejay, Hildesheim 1964. Luck G. Luck, P. Ovidius Naso, Tristia. Herausgegeben, übersetzt und erklärt, Heidelberg 1967–77. Lucke C. Lucke, P. Ovidius Naso, Remedia amoris, Kommentar zu Vers 397–814, Bonn 1982. Mayor J. E. B. Mayor, Thirteen satires of Juvenal, 4th ed., London 1889. McKeown J. C. McKeown, Ovid: Amores. Text, prolegomena and commentary in four volumes, Liverpool 1987–. Mooney G. W. Mooney, C. Suetoni Tranquilli de vita Caesarum, libri VII– VIII, repr. New York 1979. Bailey
39
Mynors Nisbet & Hubbard —— Norden Pease —— Quinn Sherwin-White Smolenaars Töchterle Warmington Venini Williams Vollmer
R. A. B Mynors, Virgil, Georgics. Edited with a commentary, Oxford 1994. R. G. M. Nisbet & M. Hubbard, A Commentary on Horace: Odes Book I, Oxford 1970. R. G. M. Nisbet & M. Hubbard, A Commentary on Horace: Odes Book II, Oxford 1978. E. Norden, P. Vergilius Maro, Aeneis Buch VI, 2nd ed., Leipzig and Berlin 1916. A. S. Pease, M. Tulli Ciceronis De natura deorum, Darmstadt 1968. A. S. Pease, Publi Vergili Maronis Aeneidos liber quartus, 2nd ed., Darmstadt 1967. K. Quinn, Catullus, The Poems. Edited with introduction, revised text and commentary, Hampshire & London 1973. A. N. Sherwin-White, The Letters of Pliny. A historical and social commentary, Oxford 1966. J. J. L. Smolenaars, Statius, Thebaid VII. A Commentary, Leiden etc. 1994. K. Töchterle, Lucius Annaeus Seneca, Oedipus. Kommentar mit Einleitung, Text und Übersetzung, Heidelberg 1994. B. H. Warmington, Suetonius, Nero, Bristol 1977. P. Venini, P. Papini Stati Thebaidos liber XI, Florence 1970. R. D. Williams, Publi Papini Stati Thebaidos liber decimus. Edited with a commentary, Leiden 1972. F. Vollmer, P. Papinii Statii Silvarum libri, Leipzig 1898.
7.4. Works referred to by abbreviation ALL ANRW AP CIL CLE IG ILS KP LSJ
NP OLD PIR1 PIR2 RAC RE TGL
40
Archiv für lateinische Lexikographie und Grammatik, 1–15, Leipzig 1884–1908. Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt. Geschichte und Kultur Roms im Spiegel der neueren Forschung, Berlin 1972–. Anthologia Palatina Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum, Berlin 1863–. Carmina Latina epigraphica, ed. F. Buecheler, Leipzig 1895–97 (reprinted Stuttgart 1982). Inscriptiones Graecae, Berlin 1873–. Inscriptiones Latinae selectae, ed. H. Dessau, Berlin 1892–1916 (reprinted Berlin 1954–55). Der kleine Pauly. Lexikon der Antike auf der Grundlage von Pauly’s Realencyclopädie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft, Munich 1964–1975. H. G. Liddell & R. Scott, A Greek–English Lexicon, 9th ed., revised by H. Stuart Jones with the assistance of R. McKenzie, with a revised supplement, Oxford 1996. Der neue Pauly. Enzyklopädie der Antike, Stuttgart 1996–. Oxford Latin Dictionary, ed. P. G. W. Glare, Oxford 1982. Prosopographia imperii Romani saec. I.II.III, 3 vols., Berlin 1897–98. Prosopographia imperii Romani saec. I.II.III, 2nd ed., Berlin & Leipzig 1933–. Reallexikon für Antike und Christentum. Sachwörterbuch zur Auseinandersetzung des Christentums mit der antiken Welt, Stuttgart 1950–. Paulys Real-Encyclopädie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft, neue Bearbeitung, ed. G. Wissowa, Stuttgart 1894–1978. Thesaurus Graecae linguae ab Henrico Stephano constructus, Paris 1831–1865.
TLL
Thesaurus Linguae Latinae, Lepizig 1900–.
7.5. Secondary literature referred to in this commentary J. N. Adams, The Latin sexual vocabulary, London 1982. R. Bauman, “The Resumé of Legislation in Suetonius”, ZRG 99 (1982), pp. 81–127. Blake, Construction M. E. Blake, Roman Construction in Italy from Tiberius through the Flavians, Carnegie Institution of Washington Publication 616, Washington 1959. Blümner, Privataltertümer H. Blümner, Die römischen Privataltertümer, Munich 1911. Blümner, Technologie H. Blümner, Technologie und Terminologie der Gewerbe und Künste bei Griechen und Römern, vol. 1, 2nd. ed., Leipzig 1912, vols. 2–4, Leipzig 1875–1887. Brecht, Spottepigramm F. J. Brecht, Motiv- und Typengeschichte des griechischen Spottepigramms, Philologus suppl. 22:2, Leipzig 1930. Bruchmann, Epitheta C. F. H. Bruchmann, Epitheta deorum quae apud poetas Graecos leguntur, Leipzig 1893. Burnikel, Struktur W. Burnikel, Untersuchungen zur Struktur des Witzepigramms bei Lukillios und Martial, Wiesbaden 1980. Carter, Epitheta I. B. Carter, Epitheta deorum quae apud poetas Latinos leguntur, Leipzig 1902. Citroni, M. Citroni, “Marziale e la Letteratura per i Saturnali (poetiLetteratura per i Saturnali ca dell’intrattenimento e cronologia della pubblicazione dei libri)”, ICS 14 (1989), pp. 201–226. Cook, Zeus A. B. Cook, Zeus. A Study in Ancient Religion, 3 vols., Cambridge 1914–1940. Crusius F. Crusius, Römische Metrik, 2nd ed., Munich 1955. Curtius E. R. Curtius, Europäische Literatur und lateinisches Mittelalter, Berne 1948. Duncan-Jones R. Duncan-Jones, Economy of the Roman Empire, Cambridge 1974. Emanuele, Aes Corinthum D. Emanuele, “Aes Corinthum, fact, fiction and fake”, Phoenix 43 (1989), pp. 347–358. Ernout–Meillet A. Ernout & A. Meillet, Dictionnaire étymologique de la langue Latine. Histoire de mots, 4th ed., Paris 1959 (reprinted with additions and corrections Paris 1994). Forbes, Studies R. J. Forbes, Studies in ancient technology, 9 vols., Leiden 1955–1964. Totius Latinitatis Lexicon opera et studio Aegidii Forcellini Forcellini, Lex. lucubratum ... amplissime auctum atque emendatum cura et studio Vincentii De-Vit, 6 vols., Prato 1858–1875. Totius Latinitatis Lexicon opera et studio Aegidii Forcellini Forcellini, Onomast. lucubratum ... curantibus F. Carradini et I. Perin ... emendatius et auctius melioremque in formam redactum, vols. 5– 6, Padua 1940. Friedländer, L. Friedländer, Darstellungen aus der Sittengeschichte Sittengeschichte Roms, 4 vols., neunte neu bearbeitete und vermehrte Auflage besorgt von Georg Wissowa, Leipzig 1919–21. Garthwaite, Court Poets J. Garthwaite, Domitian and the Court Poets Martial and Statius, diss. Cornell University, 1978. Adams Bauman
41
Garthwaite, Censorship Gsell Hardie Henderson Henriksén, Martial und Statius Heuvel
Hofmann Hofmann, Motivvariationen Hofmann–Szantyr
Housman, Class. pap.
Housman, Corrections Housman, Draucus Housman, Heraeus Housman, Notes Jones, Domitian Jones, Senatorial order Joepgen Kajanto, Cognomina Kaser Privatrecht Kaser, Zivilprozessrecht Keil Keller, Tierwelt Kühner–Stegmann
Latte Lindsay, Ancient Editions Löfstedt, Synt.
42
J. Garthwaite, “Martial, Book 6, On Domitian’s Moral Censorship”, Prudentia 22 (1990), pp. 13–22. S. Gsell, Essai sur le règne de l’empereur Domitien, Paris 1894. A. Hardie, Statius and the Silvae, Liverpool 1983. J. Henderson, The Maculate Muse. Obscene Languange in Attic Comedy, New York 1975. C. Henriksén, “Martial und Statius” in F. Grewing (ed.), Toto notus in orbe. Perspektiven der Martial-Interpretation, Stuttgart 1998, pp. 77–118. H. Heuvel, “De inimicitiarum, quae inter Martialem et Statium fuisse dicuntur, indiciis”, Mnemosyne 4 (1936–37), pp. 299–330. J. B. Hofmann, Lateinische Umgangssprache, Heidelberg 1926. W. Hofmann, “Motivvariationen bei Martial. Die Mucius Scaevola- und die Earinus-Gedichte”, Philologus 134 (1990), pp. 37–49. Hofmann, J. B. & Szantyr, A., Lateinische Syntax und Stilistik. Verbesserter Nachdruck der 1965 erschienenen ersten Auflage, Munich 1972. The Classical Papers of A. E. Housman, collected and edited by J. Diggle and F. R. D. Goodyear, 3 vols., Cambridge 1972. A. E. Housman, “Corrections and explanations of Martial”, JPh 30 (1907), pp. 229–65. A. E. Housman, “Draucus and Martial XI 8 1”, CR 44 (1930), pp. 114–116. A. E. Housman, “W. Heraeus, M. Valerii Martialis Epigrammaton libri”, CR 39 (1925), pp. 199–203. A. E. Housman, “Notes on Martial”, CQ 13 (1919), pp. 68– 80. B. W. Jones, The Emperor Domitian, London 1993. B. W. Jones, Domitian and the senatorial order, Philadelphia 1979. U. Joepgen, Wortspiele bei Martial, diss. Bonn 1967. I. Kajanto, The Roman cognomina, Helsinki 1964. M. Kaser, Das römische Privatrecht, 2 vols., Munich 1955– 59. M. Kaser, Das römische Zivilprozessrecht, Munich 1966. H. Keil, Grammatici Latini, 8 vols., Leipzig 1857–1878. O. Keller, Die antike Tierwelt, 3 vols., Leipzig 1909–1920. R. Kühner & C. Stegmann, Ausführliche Grammatik der lateinischen Sprache, zweiter Band: Satzlehre, Hannover 1912–14. K. Latte, Römische Religionsgeschichte, Munich 1960. W. M. Lindsay, Ancient Editions of Martial, Oxford 1903. E. Löfstedt, Syntactica. Studien und Beiträge zur historischen Syntax des Lateins, vol. 1, 2nd ed., Lund 1942, vol. 2, Lund 1933.
Marquardt Marquardt, Staatsverwaltung Mommsen, Staatsrecht Mommsen, Strafrecht Norden, Kunstprosa Otto Pape Platner & Ashby Preller–Robert Richlin Riewald Roscher Rudd Sauter Schmidt, Geburtstag Schmoock Schneider Scott Shackleton Bailey, Corrections Shackleton Bailey, More Corrections Siedschlag, Ovidisches Siedschlag, Form Southern Sullivan, Martial Sullivan, Nero Sullivan, Satyricon Syme, Tacitus Toynbee, Animals
J. Marquardt, Das Privatleben der Römer, 2 vols., Leipzig 1879–1882. J. Marquardt, Römische Staatsverwaltung, 1–2, Leipzig 1873–76, 3, 2nd ed., Leipzig 1885. Th. Mommsen, Römisches Staatsrecht, 3 vols., 3rd ed., Leipzig, 1887–1888. Th. Mommsen, Römisches Strafrecht, Leipzig 1899. E. Norden, Die antike Kunstprosa, Leipzig 1898. A. Otto, Die Sprichwörter und sprichwörtlichen Redensarten der Römer, Hildesheim 1962. W. Pape, Wörterbuch der griechischen Eigennamen, 3rd ed., Braunschweig 1863–70. S. Platner & T. Ashby, A Topographical Dictionary of Ancient Rome, Oxford 1929 (reprinted Rome 1965). L. Preller, Griechische Mythologie, vierte Auflage erneuert von Carl Robert, 2 vols., Berlin 1887–1926. A. Richlin, The Garden of Priapus. Sexuality and aggression in Roman humor, New Haven & London 1983. P. Riewald, De imperatorum Romanorum cum certis dis et comparatione et aequatione, diss. Halle 1912. Ausführliches Lexicon der griechischen und römischen Mythologie, hrsg. von W. H. Roscher, Leipzig 1884–1937. N. Rudd, The Satires of Horace, Cambridge 1966. F. Sauter, Der römische Kaiserkult bei Martial und Statius, Stuttgart & Berlin 1934. W. Schmidt, Geburtstag im Altertum, Gießen 1908. R. Schmoock, De M. Valeri Martialis epigrammatis sepulcralibus et dedicatoriis, diss. Weida 1911. G. Schneider, De M. Valerii Martialis sermone observationes, diss. Breslau 1909. K. Scott, The Imperial Cult under the Flavians, Stuttgart & Berlin 1936. D. R. Shackleton Bailey, “Corrections and explanations of Martial”, CPh 73 (1978), pp. 273–297. D. R. Shackleton Bailey, “More corrections and explanations of Martial”, AJPh 110 (1989), pp. 131–150. E. Siedschlag, “Ovidisches bei Martial”, RFIC 100 (1972), pp. 156–161. E. Siedschlag, Zur Form von Martialis Epigrammen, Berlin 1977. P. Southern, Domitian. Tragic Tyrant, London 1997. J. P. Sullivan, Martial: The Unexpected Classic, Cambridge 1991. J. P. Sullivan, Literature and Politics in the Age of Nero, Cornell 1985. J. P. Sullivan, The ‘Satyricon’ of Petronius. A literary study, London 1968. R. Syme, Tacitus, 2 vols., Oxford 1958. J. M. C. Toynbee, Animals in Roman Life and Art, London & Southampton 1973.
43
Walde–Hofmann
Weaver Weinreich, Studien White, Amicitia White, Aspects White, Dedication White, Friends Wissowa, Religion
44
A. Walde, Lateinisches etymologisches Wörterbuch, 3., neubearbeitete Auflage von J. B. Hofmann, 2 vols., Heidelberg 1938–1954. P. R. C. Weaver, Familia Caesaris, Cambridge 1972. O. Weinreich, Studien zu Martial. Literarhistorische und religionsgeschichtliche Untersuchungen, Stuttgart 1928. P. White, “Amicitia and the profession of poetry in early imperial Rome”, JRS 68 (1978), pp. 74–92. P. White, Aspects of Non-Imperial Patronage in the Works of Martial and Statius, diss. Harvard 1972. P. White, “The presentation and dedication of the Silvae and the Epigrams”, JRS 64 (1974), pp. 40–61. P. White, “The Friends of Martial, Statius, and Pliny, and the Dispersal of Patronage”, HSPh 79 (1975), pp. 265–300. G. Wissowa, Religion und Kultus der Römer, Munich 1902.
Text and Commentary Praefatio and poems 1–47
Have, mi Torani, frater carissime. Epigramma, quod extra ordinem paginarum est, ad Stertinium clarissimum virum scripsimus, qui imaginem meam ponere in bibliotheca sua voluit. De quo scribendum tibi putavi, ne ignorares, Avitus iste quis vocaretur. Vale et para hospitium. Note, licet nolis, sublimi pectore vates, cui referet serus praemia digna cinis, hoc tibi sub nostra breve carmen imagine vivat, quam non obscuris iungis, Avite, viris: “Ille ego sum nulli nugarum laude secundus, quem non miraris, sed, puto, lector, amas. Maiores maiora sonent: mihi parva locuto sufficit in vestras saepe redire manus.”
5
Martial opens the book with a short preface, in which he explains to his friend Toranius the identity of the Avitus of the following epigram. This epigram, which stands extra ordinem paginarum and thus does not belong to the actual book, Martial wrote to be placed on his own bust or portrait, which the consular Stertinius Avitus had recently placed in his library. Stertinius had perhaps asked for a poem suitable for the purpose. In the second part of the first century AD, it became fashionable to head collections of poetry with a dedicatory prose preface in the form of a letter (epistula). The idea, as such, was not new: epistolary prefaces were first used by Archimedes, and the practice was continued by other Hellenistic scientific writers;1 in Latin, the earliest instance preserved is the preface to Hirtius’ De Bello Gallico, Book 8, followed by the preface to Seneca’s Controversiae.2 However, in the case of poetry, there are no examples of epistolary prefaces prior to Martial and Statius; epic works, like the Punica of Silius Italicus and the Argonautica of Valerius Flaccus, lacked a preface, and while it is possible that the tragedies of Seneca (cf. Mart. 2, praef.; Quint. inst. 8, 3, 31) and even Statius’ Thebaid (cf. Stat. silv. 4, praef.) had such prefaces attached to them,3 these are now lost, making the five epistolary prefaces of Martial and the five of Statius, one for each book of the Silvae, the earliest instances preserved.4 The prose prefaces of Martial, apart from the present one, are to be found in Books 1, 2, 8 and 12 (the books lacking a preface open, in a more traditional way, with an introductory or dedicatory poem). Of these prefaces, only those of Books 8 and 12 are proper (or “serious”) dedications, to Domitian and to Terentius Priscus respectively.5 The preface to Book 1 is the only one to lack even an explicit addressee, being something of a literary manifesto, in which the poet expresses a wish that he has been successful in writing a book which no one will find either 1
T. Janson, Latin Prose Prefaces, Stockholm 1964, pp. 19 ff. Ibid. p. 106. Ibid. p. 109. 4 Besides using the preface for the purpose of dedication, Statius also uses it as a kind of “table of contents” of the book and as a brief commentary on the circumstances under which each of the poems in the book was written (see van Dam, pp. 51 ff.; Coleman, pp. 53 ff.). 5 For a detailed discussion of the “dedication” of books at Rome, see White, Dedication. 2 3
47
personally or morally offensive, since he is merely writing in a genre; in this respect, this preface stands out against the other four. That of Book 2 is an amusing parody of the dedicatory epistolary preface. It opens with a salutation of the addressee, Val. Martialis Deciano suo sal., but Martial is at once interrupted by Decianus, saying that he fails to see the point in writing an epistula. The poet admits that he meant to write quite a long preface, but Decianus has made him change his mind; for this, thanks will be due to him on behalf of the readers, quod ad primam paginam non lassi pervenient. The prefaces of Books 1, 2, 8 and 12 have one thing in common: they are all directed to one person1 and are followed by an epigram, either being no. 1 of the book or lacking a number (i.e. standing extra ordinem paginarum, see below), addressed to the same person as the preface2 or to the book itself;3 thus, there is no doubt as to whom the book is directed.4 The present book, however, opens with a prose part to Toranius, followed by an epigram extra ordinem paginarum to Stertinius Avitus, neither of which contains any hints that the book as a whole is directed to the person addressed. The prose preface of Book 9 is very much shorter than any of the others; it does not say anything in defence of Martial’s choice of genre, like that of Book 1, no information is given to elucidate the character of the book, like those of Books 8 and 12, and it is not witty, like that of Book 2. Indeed, it does not have the character of a preface at all, but rather of a brief note, a short letter, simply to notify Toranius of the identity of Avitus. In this respect, it reminds us of the origin of such prefaces, i.e. the practice of sending a manuscript to a friend to receive comments, along with a letter intended to be published as the preface of the book.5 Martial may well have sent the manuscript of Book 9 to Toranius to get his comments and friendly criticism, but presumably this does not imply that he meant Toranius also to be the dedicatee. As for the epigramma extra ordinem paginarum directed to Stertinius Avitus, it is clearly the central point of the preface as a whole. Stertinius was an important figure, senator as well as consular, and Martial had further reason to dedicate a book to him, as this prominent man had placed a bust or a portrait of the poet in his library; if Martial received a request for a poem to go with his picture, he would have been likely also to have taken the opportunity to court Stertinius as a possible patron. Yet there is nothing, not even a mention of liber or libellus, to indicate that he is the dedicatee of the book as a whole, only the mention of hoc carmen in line 3, indicating that he is the recipient of this particular epigram. Thus, though it may seem probable that the consular Stertinius was the one to whom the book was directed and Toranius 1 The preface to Book 1, while having no explicit addressee, is obviously directed to the reader, lector; some MSS even have the heading Valerius Martialis lectori suo salutem added to this preface (see e.g. Citroni, ad loc.). 2 So Books 1 (lector) and 12 (Terentius Priscus). 3 So Books 2 (preface to Decianus, epigr. 1 to liber) and 8 (preface to Domitian, epigr. 1 to liber). 4 For the books lacking a preface, the case is as follows: Book 3 is directed to Faustinus (3, 2), Book 5 to Domitian (5, 1), and Book 6 to Iulius Martialis (6, 1); Book 10 lacks an addressee other than the lector (10, 1; 2), and Book 11 opens with a poem mentioning Parthenius without being directly addressed to him; the opening poem of Book 4 celebrates Domitian’s birthday but does not address the emperor, whereas 7, 1 invites Domitian to wear a cuirass resembling the aegis of Minerva for his campaign against the Sarmatians. 5 Janson, op. cit, p. 109. This is the evident purpose, for example, of Statius’ preface to Silvae 2 and of Martial’s dedicatory poem to Iulius Martialis (6, 1), but less so in his prefaces, except for that of Book 12.
48
was simply the recipient of a manuscript, this is not an irrefutable conclusion. Perhaps it is safer to say that the preface pays honour both to Toranius and to Stertinius but that there is no dedicatee, in the modern sense of the word, of Book 9 as a whole. To the Romans, the explicit dedication of a book may not have been of such importance as it is to us; it was the mention in a literary work that brought honour and “to be named at the beginning of a book brought the greatest honour of all”.1 Another problem is posed by the interpretation of the phrase extra ordinem paginarum, indicating that the epigram to Stertinius Avitus, and necessarily also the prose part, are somehow separated from the rest of the book. The easiest way to explain the expression is to claim that its only significance is that the epigram to Stertinius is not to be counted among those which properly constitute the book, but extra ordinem seems to be too definite an expression to be of such vague significance. Important in this case is the preface to Book 2, where Martial proclaims that he is abstaining from writing a long preface, lest the reader should be exhausted when he arrives ad primam paginam. So, when Martial in two of his prefaces applies terms which imply that they stand before the beginning of the actual book (which began, then, on the pagina prima, being the beginning of the ordo paginarum), we have reason to believe that this applied also to his other prefaces and that the epigram attached to the preface of Book 1 is also an epigramma extra ordinem paginarum. A further indication that prefaces generally were placed before the pagina prima is to be found in Bass. Rufin. gramm. VI 555, 27 ff. est in Eunucho Terentii statim in prima pagina hic versus trimetrus, “exclusit, revocat, redeam? non, si me obsecret”. The line quoted is the fourth of the first act, thus standing at the very beginning of the actual play; as Bassus denotes this as being statim in prima pagina, the prologue of the play must have stood before the pagina prima, thus presumably extra ordinem paginarum. What, then, was the difference between the ordo paginarum and that which was extra ordinem? Since pagination was very rarely found in book-rolls,2 the explanation cannot be as easy as that;3 it seems, that we must first grasp the mean1
White, Dedication, p. 50. Ambiguities concerning the person to whom a book is actually directed by its author can be observed, for example, in Vergil’s Georgics (georg. 1, 2 addresses Maecenas but invokes Augustus in lines 24 ff.) and Quintilian’s Institutio oratoria, in the preface of which he writes opus, Marcelle Vitori, tibi dicamus, but which is headed by a letter to Trypho. White (Dedication, p. 55) explains this by the fact that, whereas modern dedications are usually exclusive and “a recognized place and form is allocated to the dedication ” in a modern book, “the ancient practise, being less formally conceived, admitted of occasional ambiguities. Roman writers possessed several forms by which to signify their desire to honour a given person, and sometimes, in different ways, they honoured more than one”. 2 Th. Birt (Das antike Buchwesen in seinem Verhältniss zur Litteratur, Berlin 1882, p. 158) produces one paginated book-roll, containing the Commentarium cottidianum municipi Caeritum of 114 BC. He adds that the counting of pages never seems to have become common practice and that the page, as such, was indeed of very little importance, since quotations were made with reference to verses or, in extreme cases, to letters. That pagination was utterly rare in antiquity is also shown by the fact that there are no instances of secunda pagina, tertia pagina, etc., but only of prima or extrema pagina; in addition to the above examples, see also Mart. 4, 89, 6, Cic. orat. 41, and Ov. trist. 2, 304. Cic. fam. 16, 4, 1 mentions the pagina prior and pagina altera of a letter. 3 There is no reason to assume that here Martial is referring to a codex (in which case, the pagina as a unit would perhaps be of greater significance). Martial, it is true, elsewhere mentions the codex (1, 2; 14, 184; 188; 190; 192), obviously an innovation in his day, stressing its advantages as being lighter and smaller than the liber (thus a sort of “paperback” easy to keep and suitable for travelling), but it seems most unlikely that he would have chosen this medium for the publication of a new book. Moreover,
49
ing of the word pagina in this context. It must be noted, that the sheet of papyrus, in connection with book-rolls, was of no importance to the Romans, other than those who put the roll together. For it was only at this stage that the pagina as an entity was of any significance. Once they were put together to form a roll, the scribe who wrote on them totally neglected the joints between the papyrus sheets; he wrote in columns, and his writing frequently ran over the junctions.1 While there are instances in Martial in which pagina may have the sense of “sheet of papyrus”,2 the word should in this case certainly be taken as meaning “column”, which is the normal sense of the word at this time.3 A possible explanation would be that the ordo paginarum was the running columns; the text extra ordinem paginarum might have been written at the beginning of the roll in such a way that, when the preface or prologue was inscribed, the rest of the column was left blank. The proper text of the book was then begun in a new column, and the columns then ran uninterrupted throughout the roll.4 Clausulae As has been shown by Havet and Gonzalez de la Calle,5 Martial writes a highly metrical prose, with clausulae before almost every punctuation mark; even in this short passage, at least five, probably seven (depending on whether or not one chooses to read with elision or synaloephe), such metrical sentence endings can be shown. Havet identified five clausulae in this passage, as follows: DPÑRÕP AÑPÙQQÚK× (molossus with creticus), a subsection to acatalectic dicreticus ( ), in its turn a subsection to catalectic dicreticus ( ), which constitutes 25 per cent of the clausulae in the speeches of Cicero.6 AJ?PGQQGKK TÚPK QAPÙNQÚKSQ acatalectic dicreticus . @G@JGMRFCAÑ QÑ TJÚR, catalectic dicreticus, the trochee having been resolved. OSÙQ TAÑPÕRSP catalectic dicreticus .
ÕR NÒPÑ FQNÚRÚK CGRFCP ?L ?A?R?JCARGA BGAPCRGASQ RFC DGL?J JMLE QWJJ?@JC F?T
GLE @CCL PCQMJTCB MP UGRF CJGQGML ÕR NÒP? FQNÚRÚK ? A?R?JCARGA BGAPCRGASQ UGRF PCQMJSRGML MD RFC RFGPB JCLERF 3FC OSCQRGML MD UFCRFCP MP LMR MLC QFMSJB AMLQGBCP RFC NMQQG@GJGRW MD CJGQGML MP QWL?JMCNFC GL KCRPGA?J NPMQC F?Q @CCL QS@ HCAR RM BGQASQQGML 3FCPC GQ FMUCTCP QMKC CTGBCLAC GL D?TMSP MD GR AD CE "GA MP?R
Quod (i.e. a careful arranging of the words) quidem Latina lin-
contemporary writers are silent about it, and it was only in the 3rd and 4th centuries that the codex came into wider use as a means of literary publication (see C. H. Roberts & T. C. Skeat, The Birth of the Codex, London 1983, pp. 24 ff., Howell’s introduction to 1, 2, and Leary on 14, 183–96, p. 247). 1 See F. G. Kenyon, Books and readers in ancient Greece and Rome, Oxford 1951, p. 55. 2 For example, 4, 10, 1 f. Dum novus est nec adhuc rasa mihi fronte libellus, | pagina dum tangi non bene sicca timet… 3 Martial offers a number of instances of pagina in this sense, e.g. 2, 6, 2, f. Lectis vix tibi paginis duabus | spectas eschatocollion, Severe, | et longas trahis oscitationes; 10, 59, 1 f. Consumpta est uno si lemmate (i.e. epigram) pagina, transis, | et breviora tibi, non meliora placent. 4 It has also been suggested that the prefaces of Martial were written on the outside of the roll, as was apparently the case with those of Polybius and Hieronymus (see Birt, op. cit., pp. 141 f.). But in silv. 4 praef., Statius says that his preface was written in libro, which may indicate that it was written inside the roll (Janson, op. cit., p. 108, n. 7). 5 L. Havet, “La prose métrique de Martial”, RPh 27 (1903), pp. 123-124; P. U. Gonzalez de la Calle, “Algunas observaciones acerca de la prosa de Marcial”, Emerita 3 (1935), pp. 1-31. 6 See Crusius, § 185 A, pp. 134 f.
50
gua sic observat, nemo ut tam rusticus sit quin vocalis nolit coniungere,1 and Martial probably intended his prose to be read with elision; in the case of et para hospitium, the ?A?R?JCARGA BGAPCRGASQ UGRF PCQMJSRGML MD RFC DGL?J JCLERF K?W RFSQ @C ?TMGBCB ? AJ?SQSJ? NCQQGK? MAASPPGLE MLJW RFGPRW CGEFR RGKCQ GL 2
RFC QNCCAFCQ MD "GACPM
To the clausulae identified by Havet may be added NÑEÚLÑPK ÕQR, a so-called hypodochmius (trochee followed by creticus). Gonzales de la Calle reads with elision (paginarum (e)st), thus getting a creticus followed by a ditrochaeus, a clausula more common in Cicero than the hypodochmius. He also adds RG@Ù NRÑTÙ
?
NJ?GL
BGRPMAF?CSQ
RFMSEF
UGRFMSR
RFC
SQS?JJW
NPCACBGLE
APCRGASQ
KMJMQQSQ MP QNMLBCC
The epigram extra ordinem paginarum falls into two parts. First, in lines 1-4, Martial turns to Stertinius, whom he addresses as vates; presumably, Stertinius was an amateur writer of epic poetry and consequently one of the maiores mentioned in verse 7. Apparently, he himself did not want to make any fuss about his writings, but Martial assures him that it is no good trying to escape the fame which will inevitably come to him; if not sooner, death will surely lend him the laurel which he refused while living. Then, in lines 5-8, follows the epigram to be placed on Martial’s picture in Stertinius’ library. It opens in an epigraphic manner (ille ego sum), and continues in the grandiose style with a kind of recusatio (see 9, 50 intro.); letting those who have the ability speak of greater matters, Martial writes nugae, but in this art, he is second to none. He does not expect his audience to admire his work as much as that of a Vergil yet is confident that they will appreciate it for what it is, down-to-earth poetry on subjects close to everyday life. His praemia are the reader’s honest appreciation and sincere love, not the audience’s admiration for profound learning and depth of thought. But, unlike Catullus, who in the humble opening poem to his liber does not seem to understand why Nepos regards his nugae as something more than mere trifles, Martial displays a firm self-confidence in his role as epigrammatic poet, which after all had acquired him a place next to Vergil and Ovid and other viri non obscuri in the library of Stertinius. Have: Martial has exclusively the form with h,3 which also seems to be the etymologically correct form. The word, which is not to be regarded as the imperative of avere but as probably derived from the Punic greeting F?UÕ JMQR GRQ F GL NMNSJ?P QNCCAF ? DMPK UFGAF U?Q RFCL ?BMNRCB ?JQM @W NMJGRC QMAGCRW AD 0SGLR
From this passage it is clear, however, that the initial h had again established itself in the popular speech of Martial’s day, GLQR UGRF D?JQC CRWKMJMEW
1
Cf. Norden, Kunstprosa, p. 932, n. 6; H. Aili, The Prose Rhythm of Sallust and Livy, Stockholm 1979, p. 48. 2 Th. Zielinski, Der constructive Rhythmus in Ciceros Reden. Der Oratorischen Rhythmik, vol. 2, Leipzig 1914, p. 9. 3 Also 1, 55, 6; 1, 68, 6; 3, 95, 1 and 14; 4, 78, 4; 5, 51, 7; 7, 39, 2; 9, 6, 2; 14, 73, 2. The infinitive havere, used only by Martial, Quintilian (inst. 1, 6, 21) and the grammarians (cf. Citroni on 1, 108, 10 and Kay on 11, 106, 1) appears in 1, 108, 10; 3, 5, 10; 9, 6, 4 and 11, 106, 1. 4 TLL, s.v. ave 1300, 40 ff.
51
and probably it was never completely dispelled even from the conversational language of the educated; cf. Cic. fam. 8, 16, 4. Torani: This person is mentioned also in 5, 78, five years earlier than this occurrence, in a dinner invitation. Apart from these two instances, he is completely unknown, but he seems to have been a dear friend of Martial’s, as is indicated by the intimate phrase frater carissime.1 Friedländer suggested that Toranius was living away from Rome, perhaps in Spain (“und M. trug sich schon damals mit dem Gedanken an die Heimkehr”), when the book was published, as Martial asks him to para hospitium and as otherwise he would have known who Avitus was without Martial having to explain it to him; the latter reason may be refuted with reference to White’s interpretation (below on Stertinium). Stertinium: usually identified with L. Stertinius Avitus,2 consul suffectus with Ti. Iulius Celsus Polemaeanus between the first of May and the last of August 92, and perhaps the descendant of the L. Stertinius who successfully took part in Germanicus’ campaigns of 15 and 16 AD. An Avitus appears in six other epigrams, ranging from Book 1 to Book 12,3 but the varying tones of these, especially the “flippant” tone of 6, 84, made White suspect that they were not all directed to the same person;4 he thus concludes that the phrase de quo ... putavi “implies that Stertinius is new to the pages of the Epigrams, and should be distinguished from anyone else bearing the same cognomen”. This seems more plausible than Friedländer’s interpretation of the phrase, for even if Toranius did not live in Rome, he would still have been familiar with Avitus from the mentions of him in 1, 16 and 6, 84, and there would have been no call for a further explanation in this particular case. However, the possibility of Stertinius also being the Avitus of 1, 16 cannot be ruled out on the basis of the content (on the difficulty of composing a homogeneous book), which is the case also with 12, 24 (on a chaise suitable for private conversation); the sexual innuendo of 10, 102 and 12, 75 offers no argument in either direction, whereas 10, 96 must be directed to a fellow-client, making an identification impossible. clarissimum virum: the attribute vir clarissimus had been used of senators as an unofficial title since the end of the republic (for example, by Cicero of Brutus in fam. 12, 15, 1), but it was not until the reign of Trajan that it became an official title (extended to apply also to the senator’s wife, clarissima femina, and children, c. iuvenis, puer, puella).5 imaginem meam: it was customary to place not only busts, but also paintings of famous writers in private libraries. Thus, for example, Pliny the Younger was 1
Cf. TLL, s.v. carus 504, 74 ff. PIR1 S 659; Groag in RE, 2:3, s.v. Stertinius 12, 2453; Syme, Tacitus, p. 597, n. 4 suggests that he might have been from Africa. 3 1, 16; 6, 84; 10, 96; 102; 12, 24, 9; 75. 4 White, Aspects, pp. 56 f. 5 Thus, it is used as a title by Pliny (epist. 3, 8, 1; 9, 13, 19; 10, 56, 2; 10, 61, 5; 10, 77, 1; 10, 87, 3; paneg. 50, 3; 90, 3); see M. Bang in Friedländer, Sittengeschichte 4, pp. 77 ff. 2
52
asked to order paintings of Cornelius Nepos and the Epicurean philosopher T. Catius for the library of Herennius Severus (epist. 4, 28, 1); cf. also Iuv. 2, 4 ff. referring to would-be philosophers filling their houses with busts of their famous role-models. Whether Stertinius’ picture of Martial was a painting or a bust is impossible to say, but we know that his portrait was painted for Caecilius Secundus, commander on the Danube (7, 84, 1 f.): Dum mea Caecilio formatur imago Secundo | spirat et arguta picta tabella manu.1 scribendum putavi: a verbum putandi with the gerundive not only expressing the will of the writer, but also being a circumlocution for the action desired as having been carried out after careful consideration on behalf of the writer.2 Martial, in writing scribendum putavi, says “I have written this to you, because I thought it necessary for your proper understanding of the epigram”. The list of such instances, mainly found in letters, can be made quite long; of the in all forty-one instances in Cicero, no less than twenty-five are found in his correspondence. iste: the pronoun iste had in Martial’s day practically lost its connection with the second person, a development which had begun quite early and was supported by its use in vulgar language. Already Catullus was capable of writing iste meus stupor (17, 21), but it was not until the Silver Latin epoch that the use became more regular;3 Martial has two instances of iste coupled with meus, 9, 84, 8 and 11, 2, 8 iste liber meus est. That iste, once freed from the intimate connection with the second person, is closer to hic than to ille, appears also from such instances, in which the classical hic … ille (“the latter … the former”) is replaced by iste … ille. Thus, for example, 4, 49, 10 laudant illa (the works of the Greek poets), sed ista (my epigrams) legunt; Quint. inst 8, 5, 34 veterem illum horrorem dicendi malim quam istam (= hanc) novam licentiam.4 Avitus iste quis vocaretur: probably a colloquial contamination of two expressions such as Avitus iste quis esset and Avitus quis vocaretur. That expressions involving vocari and esse were easily contaminated is indicated by Plaut. Mil. 436 quis igitur vocare?, a mixture of quis es and quid vocare. 1. sublimi pectore: For pectus as the source of higher poetic ability, cf. 9, 77, 4; Ov. Pont. 4, 2, 25 f. Inpetus ille sacer qui vatum pectora nutrit; Lucan. 1, 63; 5, 208 (both with the same ending as here); Sil. 1, 686 f.; TLL, s.v. 915, 35 ff. 2. serus: often used of things that happen in vain, too late, etc.; cf. 1, 25, 8 cineri gloria sera venit; OLD, s.v. serus 1, but in this case, it would rather convey a sense of relief, “at last, in the end”; cf. Ov. met. 15, 384 on the bees that are born
1
See Friedländer, Sittengeschichte 3, pp. 55 ff. See O. Hey, “Aus dem kaiserlichen Kanzleistil”, ALL 15, pp. 55 ff. According to Hey, a phrase like edicendum putavi (Cic. Att. 6, 1, 15) is equal to edixi, quia necessarium (consentaneum) putavi. 3 Hofmann-Szantyr, § 105 b, p. 183; Wölfflin-Meader, “Zur Geschichte der Pronomina demonstrativa”, ALL 11, pp. 382 ff. 4 Wölfflin-Meader, op. cit., pp. 384 f. 2
53
without limbs and are said to seros pedes serasque adsumere pinnas; Tib. 1, 9, 4 Sera tamen tacitis Poena venit pedibus. cinis: the usual metonymy for mors, cf. 5, 13, 4; 6, 85, 4; 7, 44, 8 (TLL, s.v. cinis 1074, 11 ff.). 3. tibi … vivat: vivere alicui usually takes a personal subject, as in Cic. Marcell. 25, and Sil. 17, 612. In 1, 88, 8 hic tibi perpetuo tempore vivet honor, the subject is inanimate, but as the honor consists of a box and a vine, that instance is less harsh than the present one. 5. Ille ego sum: also in 9, 28, 2; 10, 53, 1. The phrase, which occurs already in Plaut. Aul. 704 (ego sum ille rex Philippus), is first used in dactylic verse by Tib. 1, 6, 31, followed by Prop. 4, 9, 38. It becomes especially popular with Ovid (ars 2, 451; met. 4, 226; fast. 3, 505; trist. 4, 5, 12; Pont. 1, 2, 33; 1, 2, 129; 4, 3, 11– 17; Ib. 247). Silius has it three times (9, 128; 15, 59–61), and Statius once (Theb. 11, 165). Of the phrase with only ille ego, there is one instance in Vergil, two in Tibullus, seventeen in Ovid, four in Silius, two in Valerius Flaccus, five in Statius, and one in Juvenal. Cf. also the alternative, though probably false, opening of the Aeneid (Ille ego, qui quondam gracili modulatus avena | carmen), which, it has been suggested, was actually intended as an inscription beneath a portrait of Vergil on the front page of a copy of the work.1 nugarum: on the model of Catullus (1, 3 f.), Martial frequently refers to his epigrams as nugae, “trifles” (1, 113, 6; 2, 1, 6; 4, 10, 4; 4, 72, 3; 4, 82, 4; 5, 80, 3; 6, 64, 7 f.; 7, 11, 4; 7, 26, 7; 7, 51, 1; 8, 3, 11; 10, 18, 4; 12 praef.; 13, 2, 4; 14, 183, 2).2 6. quem non miraris, sed … amas: a somewhat concise expression for “whom you do not exactly admire, but yet love”. Martial means that he is not the kind of poet that one admires for his gallant prosody or wide learning, like Vergil or Ovid (the maiores of the following line); still, his readers love him for his easiness of access. sed, puto: sed followed by paratactical puto (a colloquialism, Hofmann, pp. 105 ff.) only here and in Ov. am. 2, 15, 25; 3, 7, 55; 3, 11b, 34; rem. 556 (with Lucke’s note); Nux 57 (always with iambic shortening: NR 7. Maiores etc.: note the rhythm underlining the content, the heavy spondees of K?ÙMPÕQ K?ÙP? DMJJMUCB @W RFC NJ?WDSJ B?ARWJQ GL KÚFÚ NÑPTÒ JAR 3FC
FCNFRFCKGKCPCQGQ GQ TCPW QRPMLEJW DCJR
1
See R. G. Austin, “ille ego qui quondam ...”, CQ 18 (1968), pp. 107–15; cf. Mart. 14, 186 (Vergilius in membranis) Quam brevis inmensum cepit membrana Maronem! | Ipsius vultus prima tabella gerit. 2, 86, 9 is a general reference to epigrammatic writing. For its frequency in other authors, see Citroni on 1, 113, 6.
2
54
maiores: referring to ability and talent, synonymous with sublimes (TLL s.v. magnus 134, 72 ff.). The persons meant are those who are better able to produce maiora, i.e. epic writers like Vergil, Ovid and Silius. maiora: “more lofty, elevated, important”; cf. Horace’s words of the tragic genre, which is said to magnum ... loqui nitique cothurno (ars 280). He who talks of maiora does so magno ore (cf. Ov. ars 1, 204 f. Auguror, en, vinces; votivaque carmina reddam, | et magno nobis ore sonandus eris; TLL, s.v. magnus 135, 23). sonent: for the solemn poetical use of sonare in the sense of dicere, canere, cf. e.g. Hor. epod. 17, 39 f. sive mendaci lyra | voles sonare: “tu pudica, tu proba …”, and Ov. ars 1, 205 f. cited above. mihi parva locuto etc.: “for me, who have talked of small matters”. Note the contrast of maiores/mihi, maiora/parva and sonent/locuto: whereas the maiores sonant maiora, Martial loquitur parva. The expression seems to be modelled on Tib. 2, 6, 11 f. Magna loquor, sed magnifice mihi magna locuto | excutiunt clausae fortia verba fores (Tibullus has decided to become a soldier [the magna which he has spoken of in the preceding lines], but the sound of a door being shut makes him recall that his place is under the banner of Love, talking of parva).
1 Dum Ianus hiemes, Domitianus autumnos, Augustus annis commodabit aestates, dum grande famuli nomen adseret Rheni Germanicarum magna lux Kalendarum, Tarpeia summi saxa dum patris stabunt, dum voce supplex dumque ture placabit matrona divae dulce Iuliae numen: manebit altum Flaviae decus gentis cum sole et astris cumque luce Romana. Invicta quidquid condidit manus, caeli est.
5
10
Book 9 opens with a celebration of Domitian’s newly finished Templum gentis Flaviae, here referred to as altum Flaviae decus, which, according to the poet, will stand forever and is compared to the standard Roman images of eternity, given in a row of future dum-clauses: the constant return of the years, the supremacy of Rome, the Capitol, the cult of the gods, and the cosmos. The model is naturally Hor. carm. 3, 30, 8 f., though only the Capitol and the cult are mentioned; for similar lists, usually less elaborate and with varying objects of comparison (often motifs from nature), cf. Verg. ecl. 5, 76 f.; Aen. 1, 607 f.; 9, 448 f.; Tib. 1, 4, 65; Hor. epod. 15, 7 f.; Ov. am. 1, 15, 9 ff.; Ib. 135 ff.; Sil. 7, 476 ff. These stock images Martial has adapted to the glory of the emperor Domitian. He appears as god of the calendar, next to Janus and Augustus, and he is closely 55
related to the Capitol; such a notion is present also in Stat. silv. 1, 6, 102 f., in which the poet prays that the festival given by Domitian on the Kalends of December will abide dum ... terris | quod reddis Capitolium manebit, referring to the temples built and restored on the hill by Domitian (notes on 9, 3, 7 and 9; 9, 101, 21). He also seems to be involved in the comparison with the sun and the stars, that is, if there is a reference to Domitian himself in sol in line 9 and the astra are not only the stars, but the deified Flavians; such an interpretation would at least not be inappropriate, considering the reference to the dynastic mausoleum in the preceding line. If so, Martial, using the standard Roman images of eternity, has managed to turn them all into an eulogy of Domitian. Book 9 contains a small cycle on Domitian’s Templum gentis Flaviae (cf. the introduction, p. 19); it forms the theme also of 9, 20 and 9, 34 and is mentioned in 9, 93, 6 as sacrae nobile gentis opus. These poems are the earliest references to the temple, suggesting that it was completed in the year 94. Contrary to what might be expected, Statius does not devote a whole poem to the newly finished temple, but mentions it only twice and in passing: silv. 4, 3, 18 f. genti patriae futura semper | sancit lumina Flaviumque caelum; 5, 1, 240 f. aeternae modo qui sacraria genti | condidit inque alio posuit sua sidera caelo (both of Domitian). Suetonius mentions it apropos of Domitian’s building activities (Dom. 5, 1 item Flaviae templum gentis [sc. Domitianus excitavit]) but also provides more substantial information: the temple was located on the spot where stood the house in which Domitian was born (Dom. 1, 1 Domitianus natus … regione urbis sexta ad Malum Punicum, domo quam postea in templum gentis Flaviae convertit), it was struck by lightning in 96 (15, 2) and, after Domitian’s assassination, his ashes were brought here by his nurse Phyllis and mingled with those of Julia (17, 3). After Suetonius, there is no mention of the temple until the 4th century Chronogr. a. 354 chron. I p. 146, 17, with similar entries in the Notitia regionum urbis XIV and Curiosum urbis regionum XIV;1 apparently, by this time the temple was known simply as gens Flavia. The last references are found in the Historia Augusta, in which Trebellius Pollio, referring to the temple as gentes Flaviae, states that it had once been the house of Titus (Hist. Aug. trig. tyr. 33, 6 [gentes Flaviae] que [sc. domus] quondam Titi principis fuisse perhibetur) and that it was enlarged by Claudius Gothus (Hist. Aug. Claud. 3, 6).2 As appears from 9, 20 and from Suet. Dom. 1, 1, the Templum gentis Flaviae stood on the plot where Domitian was born, reasonably in the house of Vespasian (afterwards perhaps the house of Titus), on the street called ad Malum Punicum (now the Via delle Quattro Fontane) on the Quirinal south of the Alta Semita.3 Although no certain traces of the temple have been found, it is probably located under San Carlo alle Quatro Fontane.4 For want of archaeological evidence, the outer features of the temple remain uncertain. Judging from 9, 20, 1, it seems to have been a marble structure with gold ornaments, the same materials that were used in Domitian’s magnificent restoration of the temple of Iuppiter Capitolinus 1
See H. Jordan, Topographie der Stadt Rom im Althertum, vol. 2, Berlin 1871, p. 549. For the supposed reference to the temple in Val. Fl. 1, 15, see J. Strand, Notes on Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica, Gothenburg 1972, pp. 23 ff. 3 Jones, Domitian, p. 87. 4 Ibid., pp. 87 f. 2
56
(cf. 9, 3, 7 note). If Suetonius (and Pollio) are right in stating that the house of Vespasian was actually converted into the temple, this would still imply that the greater part of the domus would have had to be torn down, but perhaps it may suggest that the temple preserved the square shape of a domus.1 There was probably no dome, as domes by this time were mostly found on tombs, villas, palaces and thermae, although it is possible that Stat. silv. 4, 3, 19 Flavium caelum implies that the ceiling was decorated with stars (see Coleman, ad loc.; cf. 9, 101, 22), as was that of the triclinium in Domitian’s palace (see 9, 91, 1 note and intro.). It is obvious that Domitian meant the Templum gentis Flaviae to be the dynastic mausoleum of the Flavian family, corresponding to the mausoleum Augusti of the Julio-Claudians. From Suet. Dom. 17, 3 (above), it appears that the ashes of Julia were kept in the temple, and that those of Domitian himself were brought there after his death (as mentioned above). 9, 34, 7 f. presuppose that the temple housed the ashes of Vespasian, and it is logical to assume that at least also Titus rested there. The idea of a dynastic mausoleum appears also from Statius’ statement that Domitian “placed his stars in a different heaven” (silv. 5, 1, 241). Domitian being the last of the Flavians, the temple was no longer used as an imperial burying-place after his death; his successor Nerva was buried in the Augustan mausoleum, the ashes of Trajan were placed in the base of his column in the Forum Trajani, and subsequently the mausoleum of Hadrian became the great sepulchre of its founder and of the Antonine emperors; see O. Hirschfeld, “Die kaiserlichen Grabstätten in Rom”, in Kleine Schriften, Berlin 1913, pp. 463 ff. 1 f. Ianus ... Domitianus ... | Augustus: the months January, October and August. Domitian had changed the name of the month of October to Domitianus, his birthday being on the 24th, and also that of September to Germanicus (see below), since he had ascended the throne on the 14th of September 81 (cf. Suet. Dom. 13, 3).2 By changing the names of the months, Domitian hoped to join his predecessors Divus Iulius and Divus Augustus as “gods of the calendar”, but his arrangements were not to last, and after his assassination in 96, the months regained their previous names (cf. Plut. Num. 19, 4).3 2. commodabit: “lend”, cf. 4, 14, 10 nostris otia commoda Camenis; 7, 72, 14; 8, 52, 5; 9, 101, 24. Also in malam partem 5, 51, 4; TLL, s.v. 1919, 11. 3. famuli … Rheni: cf. 5, 3, 1 2 famulis Histri ... aquis; Ov. fast 1, 286 famulas ... Rhenus aquas. The reference is to Domitian’s campaign against the Chatti, see 1
Jordan, op. cit., vol. 1:3 (bearbeitet von Ch. Hülsen, Berlin 1907), p. 426, n. 91, and Platner & Ashby, loc. cit., suggest that the temple was probably round in shape, with reference to 9, 3, 12; 9, 34, 2; Stat. silv. 4, 3, 19. There is, however, nothing in these lines to support such a view. 2 It is not certain when the months received their new names, but, judging from epigraphical evidence, the change occurred in 88 or 89; Scott treats the matter at length on pp. 158-165. 3 In this respect, he rather joined such emperors as Nero, who named the month of April Neroneus (Suet. Nero 55, 1), and Caligula, who called the month of September Germanicus in memory of his father (Suet. Cal. 15, 2), neither of which names remained after the deaths of their inventors. Other emperors had acted more wisely; thus, Tiberius had forbidden the month of September to be called Tiberius and the month of October Livius (Suet. Tib. 26, 2).
57
the introduction, pp. 23 ff. For Rome’s everlasting sovereignty, see Verg. Aen. 1, 278 ff.; 9, 446 ff. nulla dies umquam memori vos eximet aevo, | dum ... imperium ... pater Romanus habebit. Famulus is adjectival (synonymous with serviens), the construction thus being an example of the so-called ab urbe condita construction with adjectives: the main sense of the expression is conveyed not by the substantive Rheni, but by the adjective famuli. Heick, who has treated the construction mainly with regard to participles, offers only one example from Martial with an adjective, 1, 35, 8 f. Quis Floralia vestit et stolatum | permittit meretricibus pudorem?1 Helander, who discerned five types of the ab urbe condita construction, has produced some instances of this construction with adjectives,2 from which it appears that the instances involving the genitive are often attached to fama or rumor,3 comparable to the present instance with nomen. Other examples from Martial are 7, 32, 1 Attice, facundae renovas qui nomina gentis; 9, 20, 2; 9, 26, 7; 11, 9, 1. Mostly used with animate objects (cf. TLL, s.v. 269, 37 ff.), the adjectival famulus indicates that the Rhine here, as often, is regarded as a river-god, cf. 4, 11, 7; 5, 37, 7; 7, 7, 3; 8, 11, 1; 10, 7, 1; Stat. silv. 1, 4, 89 Rhenum ... rebellem. The idea of the enslaved Rhine occurs also in Stat. silv. 1, 1, 50 f. vacuae pro cespite terrae | aerea captivi crinem tegit ungula Rheni. 4. Germanicarum magna lux Kalendarum: the first of September (cf. note on line 1 above). Domitian adopted the honorary title of Germanicus in connection with the triumph over the Chatti in 83, see the introduction, p. 25. 5. Tarpeia … saxa: the Tarpeian rock on the Capitol, called after the Vestal virgin Tarpeia, who, according to legend, was killed there by the Sabinians. Prisoners sentenced to death were thrown from this rock.4 The plural may be considered poetical but may also be due to the fact that Martial does not allude to the Tarpeian rock only, but to the whole of the Capitol (not one rock but several rocks;5 cf., e.g., Sil. 2, 33 f.). Martial uses the adjective Tarpeius exclusively of things connected with Jupiter; apart from the present instance, all other instances refer either to Jupiter himself or to the oak-wreath awarded the winner at the Capitoline games (note on 9, 3, 8). Of the in all eight occurrences, five appear in Book 9: of Jupiter in 7, 60, 1 Tarpeiae venerande rector aulae; 9, 86, 7 and 13, 74, 1 Tarpeius Tonans; 9, 101, 24 Tarpeius pater; of the oak-wreath in 4, 54, 1 Tarpeias … quercus; 9, 3, 8 Tarpeiae frondis honore; 9, 40, 1 Tarpeias … coronas.
1
O. W. Heick, The ab urbe condita construction in Latin, Lincoln, Nebraska 1936, p. 54. This instance he places, unnecessarily, among those he considers dubious, because the accusative depends “on verbs which also allow the accusativus cum infinitivo construction” (p. 52). Heick’s few additional instances of the construction with adjectives are to be found on pp. 68-69. 2 H. Helander, On the Function of Abstract Nouns in Latin, Uppsala 1977, p. 28. Examples on pp. 67, 89, and 120. 3 Tac. hist. 2, 16, 1 fama victricis classis; ibid. 2, 93, 2 sinistrum lenti itineris rumorem; ann. 12, 29, 3 fama ditis regni. 4 Varro ling. 5, 41; see Höfer in Roscher, s.v. Tarpeia. 5 See Löfstedt, Synt. 1, p. 29.
58
As regards the Capitol as the symbol of everlasting stability, cf. Horace’s famous lines crescam laude recens, dum Capitolium | scandet cum tacita virgine pontifex (carm. 3, 30, 9 f.); Verg. Aen. 9, 447 f. dum domus Aeneae Capitoli immobile saxum | accolet; Stat. silv. 1, 6, 102. The Capitol is in fact pignus imperii (Tac. hist. 3, 72). In addition to these obvious ideas, the association with Domitian’s work of restoration (mentioned above) must have presented itself immediately. summi … patris: sc. Iovis, also 9, 65, 10 and 11, 4, 4; cf. Verg. Aen. 1, 665 nate patris summi qui tela Typhoea temnis; Stat. Theb. 9, 22. 6. voce supplex ... ture placabit: cf. Hor. carm. 1, 36, 1 f. Et ture et fidibus iuvat | placare; voce supplice in Tib. 1, 2, 13 f.; Ov. met. 2, 396; 6, 33; Pont. 4, 6, 10; 4, 8, 22 (cf. Pont. 2, 9, 5 supplicis ... vocem). Offerings to the gods are expected to continue while Rome stands; the idea is to be found in Hor. carm. 3, 30, 9 f., quoted above, but whereas the religious act in Horace concerns the Capitoline triad, the offering here is to Julia, daughter of Titus and deified by Domitian (note on line 7 divae … Iuliae below). placabit: cf. Hor. carm. 1, 36, 1 ff. Et ture et fidibus iuvat | placare et vituli sanguine debito | custodes Numidae Deos, with the note by Nisbet and Hubbard: “gods are potentially hostile”, and need to be mollified, hence placare. 7. dulce … numen: dulcis in the sense of “beloved”; TLL, s.v. 2194, 29. Julia’s numen is dulce, yet it has to be propitiated for the reason just mentioned (cf. Ov. Pont. 2, 2, 109 Mite, sed iratum merito mihi numen). divae … Iuliae: Julia Augusta, daughter of Titus and his wife Marcia Furnilla, niece of Domitian.1 She had been offered to Domitian in matrimony by her father, but as he declined, she was married to T. Flavius Sabinus, nephew of Vespasian. After her marriage, Domitian was seized with passion for her, and after the death of her father, he had her husband assassinated, got rid of his own wife Domitia on the pretext of adultery, and openly entered into an extra-marital liaison with her. In the end, he also caused her death by forcing her to have an abortion (cf. Suet. Dom. 22, 1; Iuv. 2, 32 f.). Her ashes were later moved to the Templum gentis Flaviae (see the introduction above). In the reign of her father, Julia had been given the honorific name Augusta, and after her death, which probably occurred in 89, she was deified, presumably in the year 90.2 She is mentioned yet twice in the Epigrams, in 6, 3, 6 (Julia, and not the Fates, shall spin the life-threads of Domitian’s expected child) and in 6, 13, 1, on a statue of her. matrona: in art and on coins, Julia is occasionally depicted with a peacock, the bird of Juno, an indication that she was assimilated to the goddess. Domitia had been depicted in the same way and the reason for this is obvious; as Domitian 1 2
See Jones, Domitian, pp. 38 ff. Scott, pp. 75-77.
59
is the earthly Jupiter, his consort must be the earthly Juno. When Domitia had left the scene, her place having to some extent been taken by Julia, it was natural that she also should be associated with Juno.1 Above all others, Juno was the goddess of women, the ideal image of the Roman matrona (cf. 9, 3, 9 matrona Tonantis); offerings to her were made by the matrons, who also celebrated the great feast of the Matronalia on the first of March.2 Consequently, as the matrons made offerings to Juno, they would also make offerings to Julia. 8. altum Flaviae decus gentis: decus in the sense of honos, gloria (cf. TLL s.v. 238, 36 ff.; cf. also note on 9, 28, 1). The allusion is to the Templum gentis Flaviae, the dynastic mausoleum of the Flavians built by Domitian and probably completed in 94 (see above). The expression altum decus may be used with reference to buildings as well as to people, e.g. in Verg. Aen. 2, 448 auratasque trabes, veterum decora alta parentum; Sen. Tro. 15 alta muri decora; Ag. 395 telluris altum ... Argolicae decus (of Agamemnon; cf. Tarrant, ad loc.); Stat. Theb. 5, 424 magnorum decora alta patrum (of the Argonauts), or abstractly (“heights of glory”, “high renown”), so Sen. Herc. O. 391 Vides ut altum famula non perdat decus? (“glorious charm”, Miller’s Loeb translation); Sil. 3, 144; 6, 124. Note that the singular altum decus appears only in iambic verse (the only instances apart from the present one being Sen. Ag. 395 and Herc. O. 391). The Flaviae decus gentis is the glory of the Flavian family, as manifested in the Templum gentis Flaviae. This interpretation is strongly suggested by the concluding line, which indicates that the reference is to something founded by Domitian. If altum Flaviae decus gentis is taken to mean “the glory of the Flavian dynasty” exclusively, the invicta manus would be that of Vespasian as conditor gentis, which, while perhaps not impossible, is most unlikely, as both Martial and Statius use invictus only of Domitian and (once) of Titus (see below). The context also argues in favour of the reference being to the temple; it is preceded by a mention of Julia, one of the deified Flavians whose ashes were kept in the temple, and followed by the astra, in which there is certainly at least a notion of the deified Flavians (below). 9. cum sole et astris: the cosmos is for obvious reasons often produced as an image of eternity, cf. Verg. Aen. 1, 608 polus dum sidera pascet; Tib. 1, 4, 66; Sen. Oed. 503 ff. (with Töchterle); Sil. 7, 476 f.; Stat. silv. 1, 1, 93 f. stabit (sc. Domitian’s equestrial statue), dum terra polusque. The sun, the moon and the stars are also among the attributes of Aeternitas as a goddess (see Aust in RE 1, s.v. 694 ff.; Graf in NP 1, s.v. 206 f.). Given the reference to the Templum gentis Flaviae in the preceding line, it is possible that there is an allusion here to Domitian as the Sun. This is obviously the case in 9, 20, 6 (see note ad loc.), and the idea of the emperor as the Sun may perhaps explain 8, 21, 11 f. Iam, Caesar, vel nocte veni: stent astra licebit, | non deerit populo te veniente dies; cf. Stat. silv. 4, 1, 3 f. (on the inauguration of 1 2
Ibid. Roscher in Roscher, s.v. Iuno 583 f.
60
Domitian as consul for the seventeenth time) oritur (sc. Domitianus) cum sole novo, cum grandibus astris | clarius ipse nitens et primo maior Eoo (with Coleman); cf. Sauter, pp. 138 f. and see the introduction, p. 32. The astra are very likely the deified Flavians (see 9, 101, 22, note); the ceiling of the temple was probably also decorated with stars (see the introduction above). luce Romana: the splendour, the glory of Rome (TLL, s.v. lux 1915, 46); cf., e.g., Cic. Catil. 4, 11 hanc urbem, lucem orbis terrarum; leg. agr. 2, 71 hac luce rei publicae. Statius has a similar expression (though probably not with the same significance) in silv. 1, 1, 94 (stabit) dum Romana dies. 10. invicta … manus: invictus of Domitian also 7, 6, 8; 9, 23, 6; Stat. silv. 3, 1, 155; 4, 7, 49; 4, 8, 61. Martial uses it also once of Titus (epigr. 20, 4) and once of Julius Caesar (9, 61, 7).1 Originally, invictus was used as an honorary title of victorious commanders (cf., e.g., Cic. Verr. II 4, 82) and hence also of the Roman people as invictus populus (Cic. Catil. 2, 19), but, more importantly, it was used as an epithet of gods, above all, of Jupiter and Mars, but also of Hercules. Of the Roman rulers, it is first applied by Cicero to Caesar the dictator (Marcell. 12), which was probably due primarily to his military achievements; the case is the same in Hor. sat. 2, 1, 11 Caesaris invicti res dicere (referring to an epic on the deeds of Augustus); Ov. trist. 4, 2, 44 (Germania) ducis invicti sub pede maesta sedet (of Tiberius). The first instance in which invictus is used of the emperor as an “adulatory epithet”, with reference to the emperor not only as commander but as majesty, is Ov. trist. 5, 1, 41 f. lenior invicti si sit mihi Caesaris ira, | carmina laetitiae iam tibi plena dabo. The emperors from Tiberius to Vespasian are not mentioned as invicti.2 caeli est: “originates from heaven”,3 i.e. “is divine”; whatever the manus invicta of Domitian has created has a trace of divinity in it, its creator himself being a god.
1
For a detailed account of invictus as an epithet of the emperor, see Sauter, pp. 153-159; on its use in connection with gods and emperors, see M. Imhof, “invictus”, MH 14 (1957), pp. 197–215. 2 Tiberius was offered the title invictus, having suppressed the rebellion in Pannonia; cf. Suet. Tib. 17, 2 censuerunt etiam quidam ut Pannonicus, alii ut Invictus, nonnulli ut Pius cognominaretur. 3 ; Kühner–Stegmann 1, § 86, 1, p. 452. Cf. Gr. HlQDL JdJQHVTDd WLQRM
61
2 Pauper amicitiae cum sis, Lupe, non es amicae, et queritur de te mentula sola nihil. Illa siligineis pinguescit adultera cunnis, convivam pascit nigra farina tuum; incensura nives dominae Setina liquantur, nos bibimus Corsi pulla venena cadi; empta tibi nox est fundis non tota paternis, non sua desertus rura sodalis arat; splendet Erythraeis perlucida moecha lapillis, ducitur addictus, te futuente, cliens; octo Syris suffulta datur lectica puellae, nudum sandapilae pondus amicus erit. I nunc et miseros, Cybele, praecide cinaedos: haec erat, haec cultris mentula digna tuis.
5
10
Greedy and ignorant patrons and stingy friends, indeed every failure to show appropriate respect and gratitude, are recurring targets of mockery in Martial’s works; in the present book, cf. epigrams 6, 8, 9, 46, 48, 85, 88, and 100.1 The voluptuous miser Lupus is even worse than most, being greedy to his clients but lavish to his mistress. The poem is throughout built on antithetic arrangements; through five distichs, Martial contrasts the way Lupus mistreats the former with his fawning on the latter: she gets the finest foods and the most delicate wine; his guests dine upon coarse bread and a wine no one has ever heard of. On her, he heaps expensive presents, and she gets estates as payment for not even a whole night’s pleasure, while the tenant farmer ploughs land which is not even his own, and his client, unable to pay his debts, is handed over to the creditor. She is carried around in a luxurious sedan, whereas the one time his “friend” will not have to walk is when he gets carried away on the bier. The epigram closes with a wish that Lupus may be deprived of the cause of this discrimination, his mentula. Note that Martial constantly refers to Lupus’ mistress by a different word: in line 3, she is called adultera, in line 5 domina, in line 9 moecha, and in line 11 puella. Martial has certainly chosen the various designations with regard to the context. Thus, in line 3, he writes adultera because of its obscene and negative ring, which goes well with the following cunnis. The loftier style of line 5, with the reference to the noble Setian wine, makes him choose the word domina, whereas the word Erythraeis in line 9, being a Latin transcription of the Greek , causes him to call the mistress moecha, derived from the Greek . Also the references to his clients vary: line 4 conviva, (6 nos,) 8 sodalis, 10 cliens, 12 amicus. Whereas the significance of cliens is unmistakable, also sodalis and amicus may be used of a client; indeed, the Romans themselves preferred such terms to the more outspoken cliens, and the relationship between the patron and the client was generally referred to as amicitia (see White, Amicitia, pp. 81). xUXTU±M
1
Cf. Sullivan, Martial, pp. 122 f.
62
PRLF
A client dining at his patron’s house would naturally be a conviva. Thus, there is a further contrast in the euphemistic denomination (perhaps imagined as originating from Lupus himself) of the clients and the way Lupus actually treats them. Finally, note the contrasts between line 3 pinguescit/4 pascit, 5 dominae liquantur/6 nos bibimus, 7 fundis/8 rura, 9 perlucida/10 addictus, and 11 lectica/12 sandapilae. 1. Pauper: with the dative in the sense of “greedy”; cf. Stat. silv. 3, 1, 102 f. mihi pauper et indigus uni | Pollius?; Iuv. 5, 113; TLL, s.v. 845, 30 ff. amicitiae: metonymically for amicis, cf. 9, 99, 6; 10, 44, 10 teque tuas numeres inter amicitias; 11, 44, 1 f. The usage is found from Cicero onwards (e.g. dom. 27; see Hofmann-Szantyr, § 23, I b, p. 747; TLL, s.v. 1893, 51 ff.). The word is used here with special reference to clients (see above). Lupe: the name is commonly used by Martial of misers, for whom the name was very suitable, because of the wolf’s proverbial rapacity.1 Practically all eleven instances of the name in Martial are pseudonyms,2 as is also the case here. 3. siligineis … cunnis: a pastry in the shape of a cunnus, made of the very finest wheat-flour, the siliginea farina (cf. Plin. nat. 18, 86; Blümner, Technologie, pp. 76 f.). The practice of forming the dough into obscene shapes apparently existed already among the Greeks,3 but in Greek and Latin literature evidence is scarce. Apart from the present instance of siliginei cunni, the sole mention of such bread in the form of a cunnus, Martial has a distich in the Aphophoreta on a Priapus siligineus (14, 70 [69 Leary]): Si vis esse satur, nostrum potes esse Priapum: | Ipsa licet rodas inguina, purus eris (with Leary’s note), and Petronius mentions a similar pastry (60, 4): iam illic repositorium cum placentis aliquot erat positum, quod medium Priapus a pistore factus tenebat, gremioque satis amplo omnis generis poma et uvas sustinebat more vulgato. 4. pascit nigra farina: “coarse bread” (TLL, s.v. farina 283, 17 ff. “i. q. massa ex aqua sim. subacta, depsta”); cf. 11, 56, 8 stipula et nigro pane carere potes. Also denoted as durus (Sen. epist. 18, 7), ater (Ter. Eun. 939), etc.; Blümner, Technologie, p. 79. The simple nourishment goes well with pascit in the sense of “feed” (of animals, slaves, troops, etc., cf. OLD s.v. 1).
1
Cf. Kay on 11, 55, 1. The name appears also in 1, 59, 3; 2, 14, 12; 5, 56, 1; 6, 79, 2; 7, 10, 7, 8; 10, 40, 3; 10, 48, 6; 11, 18, 1, 25; 11, 55, 1, 6; 11, 88, 1; 11, 108, 3. Kay thinks that the Lupus of 11, 88, is probably real, being the addressee of an epigram, the target of which is a person other than the addressee, and suggests that he is the same Lupus (perhaps an amateur poet) whom Martial invites to dinner in 10, 48. 3 Comica Adespota (Comicorum Atticorum Fragmenta, ed. Th. Kock, vol. 3, Leipzig 1888, p. 589) , a loaf in the shape of a (i.e. a leather penis “quo improbae tribades mentions an prurientem libidinem fallunt”, TGL, s.v.; cf. Suda 169). 2
°OLVERN±OOL[
³OLVERM
R
63
5. incensura: alluding to the colour of the Setian wine, which would have been dark yellow, fulvus, or light red, sanguineus.1 Cf. also 9, 22, 8, (Falerna) faciant nigras … nives. Setina: The city of Setia, some 70 km south-east of Rome, which had earlier played a certain political role as a Latin colony,2 was in Martial’s day exclusively mentioned for its wine, which was rated among the very best and said to have been the favourite of Augustus.3 On its character, cf. Plin. nat. 23, 36 virium plus Surrentino, austeritatis Albano, vehementia minus Falerno. dominae ... liquantur: to get rid of the dregs contained as a result of the relatively primitive method of production, even in better wines, the wine was strained before drinking through a colander, colum, or a saccus. In this process, snow was placed in the colander to cool the wine; cf. 9, 22, 8; 14, 103 colum nivarium and 14, 104 saccus nivarius.4 6. pulla venena: “rot-gut”. Pullus may signify simply that the wine is of poorer quality, such as is drunk by ordinary people; cf., e.g., Varro ling. 9, 33 pullus sermo, “vulgar language”, Quint. inst. 6, 4, 6 turba pullata, and pullati used as a noun by Suetonius (Aug. 40, 5 and 44, 2). However, in this case there is certainly a notion of “dusky, dark-coloured”: whereas expensive wines are strained for Lupus’ mistress, his friends must be contented with wine of the worst sort, which is not even strained but is still dusky from the dregs. Corsi … cadi: the cadus, originally a vessel for Greek wine but also used for storing oil, figs, salted fish, etc., is, as regards Roman goods, usually identical with the amphora.5 Editors have been at pains to try to see the point in this expression, which would seem to have some negative implication; Friedländer even felt compelled to make the conjecture Tusci for Corsi (cf. 13, 118, 2 haec genuit Tuscis aemula vina cadis), since the Tuscan wine in antiquity was considered of lesser quality.6 However, there is at least some negative ring to Corsus, since in the empire Corsica was still considered a less civilized place, suitable for deportations;7 its wine is not mentioned anywhere else in the whole of classical literature, and perhaps this is Martial’s point: Lupus’ friends get wine from an out-of-the-way spot, wine such as nobody has ever heard of. Perhaps there is also an allusion to the fact that tar was found in abundance on Corsica and was among the things which the Etruscans demanded as tribute of the inhabitants during their domination of the island (Diod. Sic. 5, 13, 4). 1
Cf. Blümner, Privataltertümer, p. 201. Philipp in RE 2:2, s.v. Setia 1, 1924 f. 3 Cf. Plin. nat. 14, 59 ff. Despite the judgement of Pliny, Martial has a preference for the Falernian, which he mentions twenty-six times, whereas the Setian is mentioned only seven (cf. 9, 22, 8 faciant nigras … Falerna nives with note). 4 Blümner, Privataltertümer, pp. 402 f. 5 Marquardt, p. 628. 6 Marquardt, p. 436. 7 See Hülsen in RE 4, s.v. Corsica 1659. 2
64
7. empta tibi etc.: note the arrangement of the line, with the words non tota paternis effectively placed at the end; Lupus buys a single night, and the payment is an estate, but it is not even a whole night, and the payment is not just any estate, but the very estate which has been handed down from father to son. Non … totus in the sense of “not even a whole” also in 5, 80, 1 ff. Non totam mihi, si vacabis, horam, | dones; and 9, 3, 5; cf. non … unus in the same sense as ne … quidem (e.g. Prop. 2, 9, 19 f. at tu non una potuisti nocte vacare, | impia, non unum sola manere diem).1 8. non sua desertus rura ... arat: chiastically placed in relation to non tota paternis. Non sua indicates that Lupus’ sodalis has to make a living as a tenant farmer, colonus, renting a piece of land from a large landed proprietor. Such coloni led a humble life (cf. Hor. carm. 1, 35, 5 f. te pauper ambit sollicita prece | ruris colonus; ibid. 2, 14, 11 f. sive reges | sive inopes erimus coloni), which could be rather troublesome, if he was unable to pay his rent. A colonus in debt was tied to the estate like a slave, until he managed to pay off the debt with interest and compound interest, a fact which often led the jurists to equate the coloni with vilici and actores.2 , 9. Erythraeis … lapillis: the Erythraeum mare ( being the Greek word for “red”) originally signified the Red Sea3 but was extended to include the whole ocean surrounding the Arabian peninsula and washing the shores of India, i.e. the sea from Suez to Sri Lanka.4 This sea had several localities important for pearl-fishing, both in India (especially the strait between the Indian mainland and Sri Lanka) and in the Persian Gulf, and from the references in Martial to Erythraei lapilli (gemmae), it is clear that he means the Indian pearls.5 Garthwaite claims that Martial “most frequently mentions Indian pearls in an amatory context”,6 which is a qualified truth. What Martial really does is to use these pearls as an example of redundant wealth and luxury, sometimes also of pure beauty (cf. 1, 109, 4; 5, 37, 4; 8, 28, 14; 9, 12, 5; 10, 17, 5; 10, 38, 5). Of these, perhaps two (5, 37, 4 and 9, 12, 5) may be said to occur in an amatory context, whereas it is clear that all of them can easily be interpreted as expressions for something very expensive and dear to those who own them. This, at least, is the prevalent notion in Ov. ars 3, 129 f. Vos quoque nec caris aures onerate lapillis, | quos legit in viridi decolor Indus aqua; and Tib. 3, 3, 11 ff. Nam grave quid prodest pondus mihi divitis auri, | … quidve in Erythraeo legitur quae litore
(UXTU
1
TODVVD
xUXTU±M
Hofmann-Szantyr, § 241 A, Zus. , p. 448. Blümner, Privataltertümer, pp. 542 ff. 3 Berger in RE 6, s.v. , 6, 592 ff. 4 Goodyear on Tac. ann. 2, 61, 2; also Forcellini, Onomast., s.v. Erythraeum. 5 1, 109, 4 Issa est carior Indicis lapillis; 5, 37, 4 cui (sc. puellae) nec lapillos praeferas Erythraeos; 8, 28, 14 Cedet (sc. Palatinae togae) Erythraeis eruta gemma vadis; 9, 12, 5; 10, 17, 5 Quidquid Erythraea niger invenit Indus in alga; 10, 38, 5 f. O nox omnis et hora, quae notata est | Caris litoris Indici lapillis. Cf. 8, 26, 5 Vincit Erythraeos tua, Caesar, harena triumphos, alluding to the Indian triumph of Bacchus, and 13, 100 on a wild ass: Pulcher adest onager: mitti venatio debet | dentis Erythraei: iam removete sinus. 6 Garthwaite, Court Poets, p. 77. G
2
(UXTU
TODVVD
65
concha | … et quae praeterea populus miratur? In illis | invidia est: falso plurima volgus amat. Finally, the sole mention in Statius of Erythraei lapilli, very similar to 10, 38, 5, lacks any kind of erotic allusion, as Statius is talking of a night spent discussing art with his friend Vindex: nox et Erythraeis Thetidis signanda lapillis | et memoranda diu geniumque habitura perennem (silv. 4, 6, 18 f.; see Coleman, ad loc.). perlucida: in the sense of splendens, like 12, 38, 3 Crine nitens, niger unguento, perlucidus ostro; Cic. div. 1, 57 inlustris et perlucida stella; Tib. 3, 12, 13 Adnue purpureaque veni perlucida palla. 10. ducitur addictus … cliens: Lupus’ client is indebted and has not been able to repay the debt at the prescribed time. He would then be brought before the praetor, who would grant the creditor addictio, if he could find no reason for a closer investigation (which could occur, for example, if the debtor denied his debt). The creditor was allowed to take away the debtor, now his addictus, if necessary by force, and keep him locked up until the debt was fully paid; if after sixty days the debt was still not paid, the addictus could be sold as a slave or even killed.1 In such a case, a client could normally count on the aid of his patron, but not Lupus’ client. 11. octo Syris suffulta … lectica: a sedan, carried by eight bearers, a so-called octophoros; the person carried was lying instead of sitting. Syrian bearers were common in Rome in Martial’s day; cf. 7, 53, 10 munera, quae grandes octo tulere Syri and 9, 22, 9 with my note. As can be gathered from the mention in 7, 53, they were sturdily built and thus apt for this service; cf. also Iuv. 6, 351 quae longorum vehitur cervice Syrorum. For the same reason, we may presume, they were women’s favourites; Martial in 12, 58, 2 refers to a girl as lecticariola, and Eros occurs twice in inscriptions (CIL 6, 9505 and 33368) as the name of such bearers.2 12. nudum … pondus: the corpse was normally dressed up in the toga; see note on 9, 57, 8. sandapilae: a simple, wooden, funeral bier, carried by four bearers (cf. 8, 75, 9), on which the poor, as well as gladiators and criminals, were cremated; cf. 2, 81 Laxior hexaphoris tua sit lectica licebit: | cum tamen haec tua sit, Zoile, sandapila est; 6, 77, 9 f. Invidiosa tibi quam sit lectica, requiris? | Non debes ferri mortuus hexaphoro. amicus erit: cf. 1, 78, 10; 1, 93, 6; 9, 14, 4; 11, 43, 10; 14, 87, 2; Prop. 1, 13, 12; 2, 4, 18; Ov. ars 1, 580.
1 2
See Leist in RE 1, s.v. addictus, 352 f.; Kaser, Zivilprozessrecht, pp. 101 f. See Lamer in RE 12, s.v. lectica, 1056 ff.; on the lecticarii, ibid. 1095 ff.
66
13. I nunc et: the formula i nunc (et) followed by a second imperative is often used by Martial; cf. epigr. 22, 12; 1, 42, 6; 2, 6, 1 and 17; 8, 63, 3; 11, 33, 3. Further instances lack nunc, having only the imperative i followed by a second imperative or by a hortative subjunctive, such as 1, 3, 12 I, fuge; sed poteras tutior esse domi; 4, 10, 3; 5, 82, 4; 7, 2, 7; 7, 89, 1; 10, 12, 7; 10, 20, 4; 10, 96, 13. Originally a colloquialism,1 almost with the force of an interjection, it appears in higher poetry for the first time in Verg. Aen. 7, 425 i nunc, ingratis offer te, inrise, periclis, emphasizing the imperative offer. In Aen. 4, 381, Dido’s words clearly show the irony and indignation which were to make the construction so popular with later satirists: i, sequere Italiam ventis, pete regna per undas. Thus, the Aeneid already displays the two prevalent notions of the construction, the emphasizing and the ironical/indignant, the latter being the commoner in Martial (as in Juvenal, see 6, 103; 10, 310; 12, 57).2 miseros: miser in the sense of turpis, pravus; cf. 2, 83, 1 Foedasti miserum, marite, moechum; TLL, s.v. 1104, 74 ff. , literally a sodomite. Martial alludes to the galli, cascinaedos: Gr. trated priests serving in the cult of Cybele, brought to Rome from Asia Minor, where eunuch priests were an ancient phenomenon.3 In Rome, however, eunuchs were very ill reputed,4 and the priests of Cybele were often derided, called cinaedi and depicted as addicted to unnatural vices. They are ridiculed by Martial in quite a number of passages, airing his contempt for them (e.g. 3, 81 Quid cum femineo tibi, Baetice Galle, barathro? | Haec debet medios lambere lingua viros. | Abscisa est quare Samia tibi mentula testa, | si tibi tam gratus, Baetice, cunnus erat? | Castrandum caput est: nam sis licet inguine Gallus, | sacra tamen Cybeles decipis: ore vir es; 11, 72 Drauci Natta sui vocat pipinnam, | collatus cui Gallus est Priapus).5 As Kay points out (on 11, 72, 2), the Galli had presumably been rid not only of their testicles but also of their penises, since this seems necessary to “make the comparison effective” in 11, 72, 2. Among the instances produced by Kay in support of this view is the present epigram,6 and indeed it seems vital to the point of this epigram that such was the case. NdQDLGRM
14. haec erat, haec: cf. Verg. Aen. 12, 259 “hoc erat, hoc votis” inquit “quod saepe petivi”; Ov. met. 11, 694; Stat. Theb. 10, 812. As in the impersonal expres-
1
And thus frequent in Plautus and Terence; see Hofmann, p. 189. See E. B. Lease, “I nunc and i with another imperative”, AJPh 19 (1898), pp. 59–69, listing the occurrences in a large number of authors; note, however, the misprint on p. 66 l. 2 concerning Martial, which reads IX 21, 3 instead of IX 2, 13. Lease is also mistaken in listing 10, 104, 3 as an instance of i with et, since that verse does not contain an imperative at all; perhaps he means 10, 104, 1 I nostro comes, i, libelle, Flavo, which, however, would be equally erroneous, since that i is a real exhortation to the book to go. See also Citroni on 1, 42, 6. 3 Latte, pp. 259 f.; Cumont in RE 7, s.v. Gallos 5, 674 ff.; Sanders in RAC 8, s.v. Gallos 984 ff. 4 Hug in RE Suppl. 3, s.v. Eunuchen 453 f. 5 Cf. also 1, 35, 15; 2, 45; 3, 24, 13; 3, 91; 5, 41, 3; 7, 95, 15; 9, 20, 8; and 13, 63 and 64, in which capons are compared to Galli. 6 The others being Catull. 63, 5 f., Hor. sat. 1, 2, 45, and Mart. 2, 45. He also points to Hopfer, Das Sexualleben der Griechen und Römer, Prague 1938, pp. 421 f. 2
67
sions aequum, melius, satius erat, the indicative is due to the fact that the reality of the opinion, however subjective, is stressed.1 cultris: culter with special reference to the cult of Cybele also in 3, 24, 8; 11, 84, 3; Prop. 2, 22, 15; Iuv. 2, 116; cf. 2, 45, 2; 3, 24, 10; 3, 47, 2; 3, 91, 8; Stat. Theb. 10, 171; 12, 227. The Galli mostly performed the castration with a piece of Samian pottery (which, according to Plin. nat. 35, 165, was the only way to perform it without other effects than those desired; cf. 3, 81, 3 quoted above; Iuv. 6, 514) or with a sharp stone (Catull. 63, 5; Ov. fast. 4, 237 [with Bömer]; Sanders, op. cit. 1004).
3 Quantum iam superis, Caesar, caeloque dedisti si repetas et si creditor esse velis, grandis in aetherio licet auctio fiat Olympo coganturque dei vendere quidquid habent, conturbabit Atlans, et non erit uncia tota, 5 decidat tecum qua pater ipse deum: pro Capitolinis quid enim tibi solvere templis, quid pro Tarpeiae frondis honore potest? Quid pro culminibus geminis matrona Tonantis? Pallada praetereo: res agit illa tuas. 10 Quid loquar Alciden Phoebumque piosque Laconas? Addita quid Latio Flavia templa polo? Expectes et sustineas, Auguste, necesse est: Nam tibi quod solvat non habet arca Iovis. This epigram celebrates Domitian’s achievements as builder and restorer of temples but does so in a humorous way, depicting the gods, and especially Jupiter, as being in debt to Domitian, a debt so large that it would be quite impossible for them to settle it, even if they were to sell everything they own (lines 1-6). For a similar humorous treatment of Domitian’s relation to the Olympic gods (and to Jupiter in particular), compare 9, 34 and 9, 36 and see the introduction, pp. 30 ff. It is noteworthy that Martial leaves Minerva out of the list of debtors. In the same way, she does not appear among the gods mentioned in 9, 34. These omissions indicate that there was in fact a limit to what a poet could allow himself in this respect; the tutelary goddess of Domitian was no joking matter. In lines 7-12, Martial lists almost every god whom Domitian had credited with a temple. First, he refers to Jupiter and his temples on the Capitol, i.e. the great temple of Iuppiter Optimus Maximus, the restoration of which also made Juno and Minerva indebted to Domitian, the temple of Iuppiter Custos and perhaps also that of Iuppiter Tonans; Jupiter also owes the emperor for the Capitoline games, 1
Hofmann-Szantyr, § 183 b, p. 327.
68
the agon Capitolinus. Next comes Juno, who is in debt for also another temple, apart from that to Iuppiter Optimus Maximus, presumably for a restoration of the temple of Iuno Moneta on the Arx. The second goddess of the Capitoline Triad, Minerva, would likewise be indebted for the temple to Iuppiter Optimus Maximus and for a couple of other temples as well, but is passed over as being Domitian’s patron deity. After a short reference to the temple of Hercules on the Appian Way, that of Apollo on the Palatine and the temple of the Dioscuri on the Forum Romanum, Martial adds also the Templum gentis Flaviae to his list, which in fact implies that he makes also Domitian’s father, brother and niece indebted to the emperor, but it also means that he equates the gods created by Domitian with the traditional gods. For Domitian as builder and restorer of temples, see also note on 9, 101, 21. 1. caeloque dedisti: for the prosody, cf. Ov. trist. 5, 2, 55; Stat. Theb. 12, 576; silv. 1, 2, 66; 1, 4, 24; 3, 5, 30; 4, 2, 63; 5, 3, 213; Iuv. 14, 70. The word preceding the enclitic que in this phrase is usually disyllabic (exceptions in Statius’ Thebais and Juvenal). 2. esse velis: frequent at the end of the pentameter, cf. 1, 8, 2; 2, 5, 2; 2, 64, 2; 13, 2, 6; Prop. 2, 17, 10; 2, 28, 48; 3, 8, 28; Tib. 3, 20, 2; Ov. am. 3, 14, 40; epist. 3, 74; 13, 96; 16, 82; rem. 274; 750; fast. 4, 226; trist. 5, 12, 42; 5, 14, 8; Pont. 1, 2, 6; 1, 2, 34; 3, 3, 108; 3, 6, 38; 4, 3, 2; Priap. 82, 4. 3. aetherio … Olympo: a Vergilian expression, appearing four times in the Aeneid (6, 579; 8, 319; 10, 620; 11, 867), but lacking in Hor., Ov., Sil., Val. Fl., Stat., etc. Apart from the obvious meaning of “sky-high” (as in Sil. 3, 480 f. montis | aetherii), there is also a notion of “divine”; cf. 3, 6, 3 aetherios ortus; 4, 8, 9 aetherio ... nectare; 9, 35, 10; 9, 36, 7; 13, 4, 1 Serus ut aetheriae Germanicus imperet aulae. 5. conturbabit: “go bankrupt”. Absolute also in, for example, Petron. 38, 16 cum timeret ne creditores illum conturbare existimarent; Iuv. 7, 129; TLL, s.v. 808, 6. Atlans: metonymy for heaven as the abode of the gods,1 i.e. “the Heaven would go bankrupt”, but certainly also with a notion of the myth according to which Mt. Atlas in north-western Africa was formed when Perseus, with the head of Medusa, turned the enormously rich king Atlas into stone.2 The notion of the wealthy king thus improves the effect of conturbabit. non … uncia tota: “not even a whole uncia”, an extremely small amount of money (uncia = 1/12 as). For non … totus in the sense of “not even a whole”, see note on 9, 2, 7. 1
Mt. Atlas was regarded as supporting the heaven and the stars; according to Herodotus, it was called , “the pillar of heaven” (4, 184). For other metonymies in Martial involving names of gods, see Friedländer on epigr. 12, 1 Caesareae … Dianae. 2 See Furtwängler in Roscher, s.v. Atlas 707, 34 ff. The story is told by Ovid in met. 4, 621-662 (influenced by Verg. Aen. 4, 246 ff.; see Bömer ad. loc.); cf. Lucan. 9, 654 ff. NdRQD R¸UDQR¿
69
6. pater ipse deum: Ciris 269 (with different position in the verse). 7. Capitolinis … templis: Domitian concerned himself with at least two, perhaps three, temples of Jupiter on the Capitol.1 He had restored the great temple of Iuppiter Optimus Maximus (cf. Plut. Vit. Publicol. 15, 3),2 which burnt down for the third time in 80,3 a work which was begun the same year and completed probably in 82, when the dedication seems to have taken place. This temple greatly surpassed the earlier in magnificence, having columns of Pentelic marble, doors plated with gold and a roof with gilt tiles.4 On the Capitol, Domitian had also erected a temple to Iuppiter Custos.5 Built during the reign of Vespasian as a sacellum to Iuppiter Conservator (“the saviour”), on the site of the porter’s house in which he had hidden from Vitellius and his supporters in 69 (cf. note on 9, 101 13), Domitian enlarged it upon his accession into a proper temple to Iuppiter Custos (“the preserver”; Tac. hist. 3, 74). It has been argued that the temple of Iuppiter Tonans on the Capitol also suffered in the fire of 806 and that Domitian restored it, but this is uncertain.7 For other references in Martial to Domitian and his concern for the temples of Jupiter, see 6, 10, 2; 13, 74; cf. Sil. 3, 622 ff.; Stat. silv. 1, 6, 102; 4, 3, 160 f. 8. Tarpeiae frondis honore: a wreath of oak-leaves8 was awarded the winner at the Capitoline games, the agon Capitolinus (or Capitolia, Gr. ), a Roman counterpart to the Olympic games.9 Instituted by Domitian in 86,10 in honour of Iuppiter Capitolinus, the agon was held during the summer every fourth year and is described by Suetonius as triplex, i.e. contests were held in each of the events usually found at Greek : music (with Greek and Latin poetry), horse-racing and athletics (Suet. Dom. 4, 4).11 Domitian himself acted as judge, assisted by the flamen dialis and the Flavian college of priests, the sodales Flaviales. The emperor wore a Greek garment and sandals, and on his head rested a golden crown with pictures of the Capitoline Triad, Jupiter, Juno and Minerva; the priests were dressed in the same way, except for the crown, which in their case NDSLWÇOHLD
JÍQHM
1
Cf. Suet. Dom. 5, 1 Plurima et amplissima opera incendio absumpta restituit, in quis et Capitolium, quod rursus arserat; sed omnia sub titulo tantum suo ac sine ulla pristini auctoris memoria. Novam autem excitavit aedem in Capitolio Custodi Iovi. 2 Plut. Vit. Publicol. 15, 3: (“The fourth temple ... was both completed and consecrated by Domitian”; transl. by B. Perrins, Loeb). 3 The temple had previously burned down in 83 BC and during the civil war of 69; cf. Jones, Domitian, p. 92. 4 Platner & Ashby, pp. 300 f.; Jones, loc. cit.. 5 Platner & Ashby, p. 292, Jones, Domitian, p. 88. 6 Dio Cass. 66, 24; the temple of Iuppiter Capitolinus with the surrounding temples was burned down completely in this fire. 7 The suggestion is based on the interpretation of one of the temples shown in the Haterii Relief as the temple of Iuppiter Tonans; see Blake, Construction, pp. 101 f.; Jones, Domitian, p. 92. 8 The sacred tree of Jupiter; see Olck in RE 5, s.v. Eiche 2051 f. For the epithet Tarpeius, see note on 9, 1, 5. 9 Cf. Cens. 18, 4 quare agon et in Elide Iovi Olympio et Romae Capitolino quinto quoque anno redeunte celebratur. 10 Cens. 18, 15 duodecimo eius et Servi Corneli Dolabellae consulatu. 11 Subsequently, more events were added; see Wissowa in Friedländer, Sittengeschichte 4, pp. 276 ff. C2
70
G|
WyWDUWRM
RÀWRM
·S´
'RPHWLDQR¿
NDg
VXQHWHOyVTK
NDg
NDTLHUÇTK
also carried the picture of Domitian. For the musical and poetical contests, Domitian built the Odeum on the Campus Martius, an impressive construction with a capacity of about 5,000 spectators, which in the fourth century was still considered one of the most conspicuous monuments in Rome.1 Just north of the Odeum was erected the Stadium (the modern Piazza Navona), meant for the athletic contests and holding a good 15,000 people; like the Odeum, it was in later times still looked upon as one of Rome’s most excellent buildings.2 The agon Capitolinus was probably still in existence in the fourth century, since Ausonius almost certainly alludes to the contests in 4, 5, 5 ff. Prete Tu paene ab ipsis orsus incunabilis Dei poeta nobilis, sertum coronae praeferens Olympiae puer celebrasti Iovem.3 The oak-wreath is commemorated by Martial also in 4, 1, 6; 4, 54, 1; 9, 23, 5; 9, 35, 10; 9, 40, 1; 11, 9, 1. Much coveted as it was, the oak-wreath of the Capitoline games was won neither by Martial nor by Statius, though at least the latter participated in the contest.4 9. culminibus geminis: culmen as metonymy for templum,5 but presumably also in the sense of “mountain-top” (of the Capitol, e.g., Sil. 3, 510; 6, 102 f.; Suet. Dom. 23, 2). The two temples would then be situated on the two summits of the Capitol; on one summit, that of Iuppiter Optimus Maximus (above), dedicated also to Juno and Minerva, and, on the other (the northern summit, the Arx), the temple of Iuno Moneta. It is likely that also the latter was among those restored by Domitian after the great fire of 80; even though there is no explicit indication that this was the case, it is not contradicted by Suetonius’ vague reference to the Capitolium (Dom. 5, 1, quoted above), nor by Dio Cassius’ allusion to “the temple of Iuppiter Capitolinus with surrounding temples” (66, 24). matrona Tonantis: see note on 9, 1, 7 matrona and cf. Ov. fast. 6, 33 dicor matrona Tonantis; met. 2, 466 magni matrona Tonantis; Anth. 939, 1 Matronam magni ... Tonantis. For the ending, cf. also Ov. met. 5, 508; 6, 581. 10. Pallada: apart from the restoration of the temple to Iuppiter Optimus Maximus on the Capitol (in which Minerva was also worshipped as part of the Capitoline Triad), there is some evidence which connects Domitian also with two other temples of his patron goddess, the templum Minervae and Minerva Chalcidica. The first is attributed by the Chronographus anni 354 to Domitian and described, rather oddly, as templum Castorum et Minervae,6 a name which occurs also in the
1
Amm. 16, 10, 14, tells of Constantius arriving in Rome: quicquid viderat primum, id eminere inter alia cuncta sperabat: Iovis Tarpei delubra … et Pompei theatrum et Odeum et Stadium, aliaque inter haec decora urbis aeternae; Jones, Domitian, p. 86; Platner & Ashby, p. 371. 2 Amm. loc. cit.; Jones, Domitian, pp. 86 f.; Platner & Ashby, pp. 495 f. 3 See Wissowa in RE 3, s.v. Capitolia 1527 ff.; Friedländer, Sittengeschichte 2, pp. 148 f. 4 Probably in 90, see Hardie, p. 62; van Dam, p. 14, n. 16; cf. Stat. silv. 3, 5, 31 ff.; 5, 3, 231 f. 5 For culmen in the sense of “the summit of a building, a roof”, cf. 7, 73, 1 f.; TLL, s.v. 1290, 56 ff. 6 Th. Mommsen, Monumenta Germaniae Historica. Chronica minora saec. IV. V. VI. VII, vol. 1, Berlin 1892, p. 146.
71
Curiosum urbis Romae.1 From the latter, it is clear that it was situated in the Forum Romanum, but the identification of the temple is “one of the most vexed problems” in the list of the Chronographer.2 Earlier attempts to locate the temple next to that of Divus Augustus in the Forum or in the Forum Transitorium have now been rejected on the basis of archaeological investigations; the theory that the Chronographer’s reference to the temple by so curious a name was due to the fact that Domitian had restored the temple of the Dioscuri on the Forum (which apparently he did; see below) and then rededicated it both to the Dioscuri and to Minerva has not met with any acceptance. Thus, the question is better left open. To judge from the Chronographer’s reference, though, it would appear that it was situated close to the temple of the Dioscuri in the Forum Romanum. The same Chronographer includes among the buildings erected by Domitian the temple of Minerva Chalcidica, situated in the Campus Martius. In the Severan Marble Plan, there is a temple of Minerva next to the Porticus Divorum and apparently linked to it by a flight of steps, and it seems plausible that Domitian had erected this temple of Minerva, his patron goddess, near the Porticus, the sanctuary of his divine father and brother.3 In honour of Minerva, Domitian also instituted the Alban games; see 9, 23 intro. res agit … tuas: “minds your affairs”. Domitian had chosen Minerva to be his patron goddess, and, according to Suetonius, he worshipped her “with a superstitious reverence” (Dom. 15, 3; cf. Dio Cass. 67, 1, 2). In 8, 1, 4, Martial mentions her as Pallas Caesariana, and Quintilian, speaking of Domitian’s poetical abilities, refers to the goddess as Domitian’s familiare numen (inst. 10, 1, 91); compare also Stat. silv. 1, 1, 5 f. and 4, 1, 2. It appears that Domitian even claimed to be her son, for, according to Philostratus (vita Apoll. 7, 24), he had a man persecuted because he, in the prayers at a public sacrifice in Tarentum, had omitted to mention that Domitian was the son of Minerva. In his bedroom in the Palatina domus he kept a statue of the goddess (Dio Cass. 67, 16, 1) and, before his assasination, he dreamt that she departed from her shrine and declared that she could no longer protect him, because she had been disarmed by Jupiter (Suet. loc. cit.); in Dio’s version of the dream, Minerva had thrown away her weapons and plunged into an abyss, mounted on a chariot drawn by black horses (Dio Cass. loc. cit.). Domitian’s choice of Minerva was perhaps inspired by the goddess’ warning to Augustus on the eve of Philippi, by which the future emperor escaped a certain death (see note on 9, 34, 5 Phoebum); he may also have chosen this particular goddess because she, as the patron of the arts, naturally suggested herself as the patron deity of a self-practising poet like Domitian (see Sauter, pp. 91 f.). It has 1 There is no mention of the temple in the somewhat earlier Notitia regionum urbis XIV, which only knows of a templum Castorum; see H. Jordan, Topographie der Stadt Rom im Althertum, vol. 2, Berlin 1871, p. 553. 2 J. C. Anderson, Jr., “A Topographical Tradition in Fourth Century Chronicles: Domitian’s Building Program”, Historia 32 (1983), pp. 93–105 (pp. 100 f.), which is also the best summary of the problem; cf. Jones, Domitian, p. 91; Platner & Ashby, pp. 342 f. 3 Anderson, op. cit., p. 97; Platner & Ashby, p. 344; Jones, Domitian, p. 88.
72
been suggested, as a deeper cause for his intimate relation to Minerva, that this to a certain extent may have compensated for the loss of his mother Flavia Domitilla, who died when Domitian was still quite young (probably before 66; see Southern, pp. 9 f.). Domitian was clearly very serious about his devotion to Minerva, which is the reason why Martial leaves her out when joking with the gods; see the introduction above and cf. 9, 34 intro. The phrase res agere may also have a legal sense (“look after one’s legal business”); both senses are to be found in 5, 61, 7 and 13 f., see Howell ad. locc. 11. quid loquar: a common form of rhetorical praeteritio, very frequent in Cicero but found also in poetry; cf. 8, 55, 21; Verg. ecl. 6, 74; Ov. trist. 2, 399; Manil. 2, 596; TLL, s.v. 1672, 68. Cf. also Verg. Aen. 6, 123 Quid memorem Alciden, which occurs immediately after Aeneas’ words about the Dioscuri quoted below. Alciden: Domitian built a temple to Hercules on the Appian Way; see 9, 64 intro.; 9, 65; 9, 101. Phoebum: Martial may be alluding to the temple of Apollo on the Palatine hill, in which there are traces of a restoration perhaps undertaken by Domitian;1 cf. note on 9, 42, 5 Palatia. piosque Laconas: the reference here is to Domitian’s restoration of the temple of Castor and Pollux in the Forum Romanum, a restoration for which the sole evidence is that of the Chronographus anni 354, which mentions it as templum Castorum et Minervae (see above on line 10 Pallada).2 Martial refers to Castor and Pollux by the adjective Lacones, “the Spartans”, as they were the sons of the Spartan Leda, also in epigr. 26, 5 and 1, 36, 2. They are called pii because of their proverbial brotherly love (cf., e.g., Ov. trist. 4, 5, 30 pius affectu Castora frater amat), and their pietas is manifested most clearly in the myth. Castor, son of Tyndareus and mortal, has been killed by Idas, and Pollux, the immortal son of Zeus, is allowed by his father to choose between a life among the gods and sharing life and death with his brother and living half his life in heaven and half in the underworld. Pollux chooses without hesitation the latter alternative.3 In Verg. Aen. 6, 121 f., Aeneas, himself the model of pietas (Verg. Aen. 1, 220 et passim), mentions Pollux’ sacrifice for his brother: si fratrem Pollux alterna morte redemit | itque reditque viam totiens. Martial alludes to this myth in two epigrams on the brothers Domitius Tullus and Domitius Lucanus, whose brotherly pietas is praised in 5, 28, 3 and 9, 51. 12. Addita ... Latio … polo: “given to the Latin gods”, i.e. to the deified Flavians. The expression is unparalleled, but cf. 9, 34, 2 Augusti Flavia templa poli.
1
Blake, Construction, p. 118; cf. Platner & Ashby, p. 18. Platner & Ashby, pp. 102 ff. 3 See, for example, Bethe in RE 5, s.v. Dioskuren 1115. 2
73
The context requires polus not to be understood as the usual metonymy for the abode of the gods (like, e.g., 5, 65, 1), but as metonymy for those abiding there. Flavia templa: the templum gentis Flaviae; see 9, 1 intro. 13. sustineas: this absolute use of sustinere, unparalleled, is due to an ellipse of a word meaning something like “the circumstances”, i.e. “you must put up with the situation as it is”.1 14. quod: against the reading of the MSS, Shackleton Bailey has adopted Duff’s conjecture quo, supported also by Housman, Heraeus, p. 201 (= Class. pap., p. 1102). However, this conjecture seems unnecessary, as solvo frequently has the accusative in the sense of “to give something in payment” (e.g., Cic. Verr. II 3, 165 permultis civitatibus pro frumento nihil solvit omnino; cf. OLD, s.v. solvo 19 b). If solvo is taken as meaning simply “give in payment”, instead of “settle the debt (with something)”, in which case the ablative would be necessary, the transmitted text may be accepted as correct.
4 Aureolis futui cum possit Galla duobus et plus quam futui, si totidem addideris: aureolos a te cur accipit, Aeschyle, denos? Non fellat tanti Galla. Quid ergo? Tacet. The contents of this epigram are slightly reminiscent of AP 5, 126 (Philodemus): 3yQWH
GdGZVLQ
wQ´M
W¬
GHjQD
¯
GHjQD
WODQWD
_
NDg
ELQHj
IUdVVZQ
NDd
P
W±Q R¸G| NDOQ _ SyQWH G xJÊ GUDFP
M WÍQ GÇGHND /XVLDQVV9 _ NDg ELQÍ SU´M WØ NUHdVVRQD NDg IDQHUÍM _ SQWZM WRL xJÊ IUyQDM R¸N {FZ W± JH ORLS´Q _ WR¼M NHdQRX SHOyNHL GHj GLG¹PRXM IHOHjQ
.2
1. aureolis … duobus: for the ablative of price denoting the price for sexual services, cf. 7, 10, 3 centenis futuit Matho milibus; 10, 29, 6 muneribus futuis ... meis; CIL 4, 2193 Arphocras hic cum Drauca bene futuit denario; for the extended use of this ablative, see Hofmann–Szantyr § 80 a, p. 129. The diminutive aureolus appears only in Martial (also 5, 19, 14; 10, 75, 8; 11, 27, 12; 12, 36, 3). Two aureoli, corresponding to 50 denarii or 200 IIS (800 asses), was an almost absurdly high price for a prostitute. In the brothels and inns, the prostitute’s services would cost her client anything from two asses (cf. 2, 53, 7
1
For the word sustinere in the sense of “put up with, endure”, cf. OLD, s.v. 7. “So-and-so gives so-and-so five talents for once, and possesses her in fear and trembling, and, by Heaven, she is not even pretty. I give Lysianassa five drachmas for twelve times, and she is better-looking, and there is no secret about it. Either I have lost my wits or his testicles ought to be chopped off and removed hereafter”. 2
74
si plebeia Venus gemino tibi vincitur asse),1 to sixteen asses (= 4 IIS; thus, CIL 4, 1751; 2193); the price of one as, mentioned by Martial in 1, 103, 10, is absurdly low and presumably to be considered abusive (see Howell, ad loc.). Prostitutes who were not attached to a brothel or an inn were usually more expensive. If young and beautiful, fairly well educated and of good manners (boni mores are often emphasized in the advertising graffiti), so as to be able to provide their customers with pleasant company in addition to their sexual favours, the prices were high.2 If two aureoli were indeed Galla’s normal charge, she would belong to the cream of this category, but perhaps it is more reasonable to consider the two aureoli a fancy price. Cf. also 2, 63, in which Milichus spends 100,000 IIS on the purchase of Leda in the Via sacra. Galla: Martial mentions a Galla in another fifteen epigrams, about half of which may allude to one and the same person, presumably a concubine, who had obviously won the poet’s affection, since he constantly complains that she does not keep her promises and never gives him that for which he is begging. The poems, rarely exceeding a single distich, are found in Books 2–4 (5); cf. 2, 25 numquam, semper promittis, Galla, roganti. | Si semper fallis, iam rogo, Galla, nega; 3, 51; 3, 54; 3, 90; 4, 38; probably also 5, 84. The present Galla is, however, one of those who are for the most part clearly prostitutes; cf. 2, 34; 4, 58; 7, 18, 4; 7, 58; 9, 37; 9, 78 (a poisoner); 10, 75; 10, 95; 11, 19 (with Kay’s note). 3. Aeschyle: the name is used also in 9, 67 in connection with oral sex. Friedländer (p. 21, n. 1) suspected that this name was of particular significance in these two epigrams, a thought which was elaborated by Killeen (p. 234). Thus, if the diphthong ae was pronounced as e, aes- would be heard as es (of edo); in the second half, the h was not pronounced at all, while the y differed little from an u, giving a pronunciation similar to culus. This would generate esculos, “you eat buttocks”. denos: in the full sense of the word, i. e. “ten aureoli each time”. 4. Non fellat tanti Galla: Martial, seemingly failing to understand the reason for the high price, intentionally ruins Aeschylus’ strategy of silence by noising the fellatio abroad. For the genitive, cf. 2, 63, 3 Miliche, luxuria est, si tanti dives amares (Hofmann–Szantyr, § 57, p. 73). Tacet: Galla is being silent about her doings with Aeschylus, and that is what she is being paid for. For Martial’s disgust at oral sex, which was obviously widely practised in his day,3 see 9, 27 intro.; 63; 67; 92, 11.
1
The price of two asses for sexual services is often mentioned in Pompeian graffiti (cf. CIL 4, 1969; 3999; 4023; 4150; 4592; 5105; 5372); Duncan-Jones, p. 246, notes that “this is no more than the cost of a loaf of bread, but it is possible that some of the graffiti represent abuse rather than advertisement”. 2 Schneider in RE 15, s.v. meretrix 1025; Blümner, Privataltertümer, pp. 367 ff 3 Cf. Sullivan, Martial, p. 189.
75
5 (6) Tibi, summe Rheni domitor et parens orbis, pudice princeps, gratias agunt urbes: populos habebunt; parere iam scelus non est. Non puer avari sectus arte mangonis virilitatis damna maeret ereptae, nec quam superbus conputet stipem leno, dat prostituto misera mater infanti. Qui nec cubili fuerat ante te quondam, pudor esse per te coepit et lupanari.
5
From very early in his reign, Domitian showed great interest for the moral conduct of his subjects, striving, it seems, to set a limit to the moral decay, taking measures above all against sexual license and depravity. Apparently, he wanted to bring Rome back to the moral standards of the Augustan days, not, however, as a mere display of his absolute power, but because he seems to have been sincerely concerned to make Rome an empire unblemished instead of a state addicted to moral corruption.1 To this end he took various legal measures, of which the present epigram mentions three: the edict against castration, a prohibition of the prostitution of children, and the revival of the lex Iulia de adulteriis coercendis. See further Suet. Dom. 8 and note on 9, 101, 21 mores populis. Castration was in Martial’s day obviously practised exclusively on slave boys; cf. note on line 4 below; 9, 7, 7; and the case of Earinus (9, 11 intro.). Domitian prohibited it by edict,2 the first reference to which is in 2, 60 (in a context hardly ingratiating), published in 86–87 and providing a terminus ante quem for its promulgation. As Domitian became censor in the April of 85, and towards the end of the same year, censor perpetuus, censor for life, it would seem plausible that he issued the ban on castration by virtue of his censorship; this seems to be the implication also of Stat. silv. 4, 3, 13 ff. fortem vetat (sc. Domitianus) interire sexum | et censor prohibet mares adultos | pulchrae supplicium timere formae. Against the dating of the edict to 85–87 argue the accounts in two later chronicles, that of Jerome’s Latin translation of the Chronicon of Eusebius (3rd–4th century), placing it in the year of Abraham 2096, i.e. between October 81 and September 82, and that of the 7th century Chronicon Pascale, placing it in 83.3 Garthwaite, who, following the chronicles, advocates a date in the early eighties, argues that, since Statius wrote silv. 4, 3 about a decade after the events referred to in lines 13 ff., his memory of the edict may not have been the clearest,4 but the combined evidence of Martial and Statius, however vague, would nevertheless be as reliable as the precise evidence of chronicles written several hundred years later, all the more so as the chronicles do not agree between themselves. A dating to 86–87 is perhaps also suggested by Martial’s reference to the edict in 9, 7, 7 as having been 1
Jones, Domitian, p. 99. So Bauman, p. 117 n. 171. 3 R. Helm, Die Chronik des Hieronymus, 2nd ed., Berlin 1956, p. 190; L. Dindorff (ed.), Chronicon Pascale, vol. 2, Bonn 1832, p. 465; cf. Jones, Domitian, p. 107. 4 Garthwaite, Court Poets, p. 23; cf. id., Censorship, p. 14. 2
76
passed nuper. Suetonius’ references to the edict are of little value as regards its dating. The fact that it is mentioned in Dom. 7, 1, among the things which Domitian in communi rerum usu novavit, and not in Dom. 8, 3, dealing with his censorial acts, does not exclude the possibility of the edict against castration being censorial; the account immediately preceding the mention of the edict concerns the prohibition of actors appearing on stage, which presumably was promulgated by Domitian as censor.1 The edict is also mentioned by Dio Cassius (67, 2, 3), Philostratus (Vita Apoll. 6, 42) and Ammianus Marcellinus (18, 4, 5), none of which mentions is of relevance to the dating. It was renewed by Nerva and Hadrian and further tightened up by Constantine and Justinian (see Hitzig in RE 3, s.v. Castratio 1772 f.). Martial’s next mention of the edict against castration is to be found in Book 6, which comprises a proper cycle of epigrams on Domitian’s moral legislation.2 While mainly focusing on his renewal of the Julian law against adultery, the edict is mentioned once, in 6, 2, a poem of much the same tone as the present. Finally, the reference in 9, 7, 7 f. is the last mention in Martial of the edict. Apart from 4, 3, 13 ff., quoted above, Statius’ only mention of the edict appears in silv. 3, 4, 74 ff. (excusing the castration of Earinus). In lines 6 f., Martial alludes to a prohibition of Domitian’s against child prostitution, on which see 9, 7 intro. Here, it may be sufficient to note that the prohibition of the prostitution of children was probably the foremost reason for Martial to take up the subject of Domitian’s moral legislation in Book 9; since the present epigram is the first (and, together with 9, 7, the only) one to mention the prohibition, it must have been passed in or shortly before 94. The poem closes with a reference to the Lex Iulia de adulteriis coercendis. Passed by Augustus in 18 BC,3 it was renewed by Domitian, probably in 89, since Martial in 6, 7, 1 ff. states that the renewal took place thirty days ago, at the most: Iulia lex populis ex quo, Faustine, renata est | atque intrare domos iussa Pudicitia est, | aut minus aut certe non plus tricesima lux est, | et nubit decimo iam Telesilla viro. As mentioned above, the law against adultery is the subject of a cycle of epigrams in Book 6, apart from 6, 7, also 2; 22; 45 and 91. To these may be added 6, 4, which does not explicitly mention the Lex Iulia but concerns Domitian’s moral legislation in general; the emperor is addressed as censor maximus, and Martial claims that Rome, while being indebted to Domitian for his triumphs, his building activity, his shows and so on, is now even more so, since he has made her pudica.4 The law against adultery is also mentioned once by Statius (silv. 5, 2, 102). 1. summe etc.: Domitian is addressed with the epithet summus also in 6, 83, 2 summe ducum (likewise Stat. silv. 3, 3, 155; cf. Sil. 7, 16 [of Fabius]), clearly modelled on the summe deum (of Jupiter) in Verg. Aen. 11, 785 (also Ov. met. 2, 1
Jones, Domitian, p. 107. See Garthwaite, Censorship; Grewing, pp. 31 ff. 3 See, for example, The Cambridge Ancient History 10, Cambridge 1934, pp. 443 ff. 4 For Martial’s cycle in Book 6 on Domitian’s moral legislation, see Garthwaite, Censorship, arguing that 6, 2 and 4 are probably ironic, since the remaining poems deal with the ways in which people tried to avoid following the law, thus pointing to the vanity of trying to force morality upon people by legal means. 2
77
280; 13, 599; Sil. 15, 362; Stat. Theb. 11, 210; cf. Lucan. 1, 632 f.), and in 7, 7, 5 Te, summe mundi rector et parens orbis, influenced by Ov. met. 13, 599 summe deum rector. Rheni domitor: on Domitian’s achievements in Germany, see the introduction, pp. 23 ff. The word domitor had been used of victorious commanders since Cicero (rep. 1, 5 Miltiadem, victorem domitoremque Persarum1), but was not so used in poetry before Manil. 1, 793 Pompeius ... orbis domitor, then Lucan. 9, 1014 terrarum domitor, Romanae maxime gentis (of Caesar); Octavia 500 gentium domitor (Caesar); Sil. 15, 642 domitor telluris Hibernae (Hannibal). The instances from poetry are thus few, and Martial’s applying it to Domitian was probably suggested by the commoner usage of domitor as an epithet of gods and major mythological figures; cf. Verg. Aen. 5, 799 domitor maris ... alti (Neptune); Hor. epist. 1, 2, 19 domitor Troiae (Odysseus), Ov. trist. 2, 1, 397 domitore Chimaerae (Bellerophon); Sen. Herc. f. 619 domitor orbis (Hercules); 903 Lycurgi domitor et rubri maris (Bacchus); Herc. O. 1989 domitor magne ferarum (Hercules); Sil. 9, 291 domitor tumidi ... maris (Neptune). A similar development can be observed concerning invictus (see 9, 1, 10, note). Domitor would perhaps also have a ring of Fate in it, emanating from the idea of Rome itself and the Roman soldier as domitor mundi (Plin. nat. 36, 118; Lucan. 7, 250; 8, 553). parens orbis: cf. 7, 7, 5 quoted above; Stat. silv. 4, 2, 14 f. regnator terrarum orbisque subacti | magne parens. Parens and pater are applied to the emperor partly as a paraphrase of the title pater patriae and partly to compare him to Jupiter as parens mundi.2 This may be illustrated by Ov. fast. 2, 127–132 (of Augustus): Sancte pater patriae, tibi plebs, tibi curia nomen | hoc dedit, hoc dedimus nos tibi nomen, eques. | Res tamen ante dedit: sero quoque vera tulisti | nomina, iam pridem tu pater orbis eras. | Hoc tu per terras, quod in aethere Iuppiter alto, | nomen habes: hominum tu pater, ille deum. Apart from the present instance and 7, 7, 5, Martial mentions Domitian as pater/parens also in 9, 7, 6, probably with reference primarily to the emperor as the earthly Jupiter, here perhaps also, as the context actually suggests, as a “father of the world”, to whom the cities owe their populations. 4. avari … mangonis: cf. Anth. 1, 109 incertum ex certo sexum fert pube recisa, | quem tenerum secuit mercis avara manus. The mangones were merchants who falsified their merchandise or made it look better than it actually was; from Pliny we know of mangones who dealt in perfumes, wine, and gems.3 There were also mangones dealing in slaves, for example, Sen. epist. 80, 9, and Quint. inst. 2, 15, 25. Particularly high prices were paid for eunuchs, which was reason enough for 1
Then frequently in prose, cf., for example, Liv. 21, 43, 15 domitor Hispaniae Galliaeque (Hannibal); 38, 53, 1 domitor ille Africae Scipio; 45, 39, 8 L. Paulum ... domitorem Graeciae; Val. Max. 6, 7, 1 domitorem orbis Africanum (Scipio); Mela 2, 34 Philippus Graeciae domitor; Curt. 3, 12, 19 gentium ... domitores (of Alexander’s companions); Sen. contr. 7, 2, 6 Cn. Pompeius terrarum marisque domitor; 9, 1, 6 orientis ... domitor (Alexander); Hygin. grom. p. 141, 12 divus Iulius, vir acerrimus et multarum gentium domitor. 2 Cf. Sauter, pp. 28 ff. 3 Nat. 12, 98; 23, 40 and 37, 200 respectively.
78
the mangones to produce eunuchs themselves by means of castration1 and for Domitian both to forbid castration and also to moderate the prices (Suet. Dom. 7, 1).2 sectus: of a castrate, also 5, 41, 3 sectus … Gallus. arte: “tricks” (TLL, s.v. 658, 46 ff.). 5. virilitatis: of the male genitals, cf. Plin. nat. 7, 36; Bell. Alex. 70 neque interfectis amissam vitam, neque exsectis virilitatem restituere posse; Dig. 48, 8, 4, 2 qui (sc. spadones) virilitatem amiserunt; OLD, s.v. 1 b. damna: cf. Phaedr. 3, 11, 3 damnum … amissi corporis eunuchi. 6. Nec quam superbus etc.: various interpretations have been given of this and the following line. Housman, dissatisfied with the transmitted text, suggested that it be altered to nec, quam superbus, conputat, stipem leno | det prostituto, misera mater, infanti; the mother, says Housman, would reckon how much the child would earn, which is what Domitian has now forbidden.3 Housman’s suggestion, making the mother a consenting party, was rightly rejected by Shackleton Bailey,4 who explains: “Before the new edict, a child, presumably of a slave mother, might be ‘snatched from the breast’ and sold to a leno against the mother’s will … The mother keeps track of him and gives him money, so that he does not have to beg for it or be punished by his master for not getting it”. This explanation may be accepted, though with one small correction: Shackleton Bailey’s suggestion, based on his interpretation of vagitu posceret in 9, 7, 4 (see note ad loc.), that “the children were merely put out to beg, not prostituted in the ordinary sense”, seems less plausible. The mother may keep track of her child and give him money, so that he will not have to beg for it or be punished for not getting it, but above all so that he will not have to gain it by means of prostitution in the ordinary sense. stipem: originally, stips in the cult was an offering of money, a development of which was the collection of money gifts for religious purposes. In these cases, the word stips alludes to a small amount of money, and in the same sense it is also used of the small gifts given to beggars,5 for example, Sen. clem. 2, 6, 2 dabit … egenti stipem; benef. 4, 29, 2. However, this does not support Shackleton Bailey’s theory of the child begging in the street (see note on 9, 7, 4 vagitu posceret), since stips is also used of the payment to a prostitute; cf. Sen. contr. 1, 2, 3 (on a vestal charged with unchastity) castam te putas quia invita meretrix es? … Inpensius stipem rogasti quam sacerdotium rogas.
1
Cf. Anth. 1, 108 and 109. Cf. Hug in RE 14, s.v. mango 1107 and in RE Suppl. 3, s.v. Eunuchen 449 ff. 3 Housman, Corrections, p. 246 (= Class. pap., p. 724). 4 Shackleton Bailey, Corrections, p. 284. 5 Cf. Hug in RE 2:3, s.v. stips 2538 ff. 2
79
8 f. cubili ... lupanari: cubile “marriage bed” (cf. Iuv. 6, 118); the allusion is to Domitian’s reinforcement of the Lex Iulia de adulteriis (see above). For a similar line of thought in the concluding lines, cf. 9, 7, 9–10.
6 (7) Dicere de Libycis reduci tibi gentibus, Afer, continuis volui quinque diebus Have: “non vacat” aut “dormit” dictum est bis terque reverso. Iam satis est: non vis, Afer, havere: vale. Martial wants to pay his salutations to one of his patrons, Afer, who has recently returned from a voyage to Africa, but is not admitted, even though he keeps trying for several days. Finally, Martial has had enough and airs his disappointment in the concluding line, the ambiguity of which is essential to the epigram.1 For Martial’s criticism of ignorant patrons, see 9, 2 intro. 1. Libycis: most probably simply in the sense of “African”; in antiquity, Libya referred to northern Africa in general (see Forcellini, Onomast., s.v.; cf. also 9, 35, 8; 9, 43, 9; 9, 56, 1). For the opening of the line, cf. 2, 56, 1. Afer: the name appears seven times in Martial (also 4, 37 and 78; 6, 77; 9, 25; 10, 84 and 12, 42), all applied to targets of Martial’s satirical wit. Perhaps Martial has chosen it here because of the connection with Africa. 2. continuis … quinque diebus: not to be taken literally, but as “for several days”; “five days” was the set phrase for a short period; cf. Iuv. 11, 206 with Courtney’s note; Hor. sat. 1, 3, 16; epist. 1, 7, 1. Have: the client’s formal greeting to his patron at the salutatio; cf. 1, 55, 6 matutinum ... Have; 4, 78, 4; 7, 39, 2; see also note on 9, praef. Have. 3. bis terque: like quinque diebus used of an undetermined amount, i.e. “again and again”; cf. 7, 92, 1 f. “Si quid opus fuerit, scis me non esse rogandum” | uno bis dicis, Baccara, terque die; 5, 14, 3; 6, 64, 15; in the same place of the hexameter also in Ov. met. 4, 517; Sil. 2, 616; 15, 143; Stat. Ach. 1, 773. Similar expressions are to be found in 4, 81, 3 semel rogata bisque terque neglexit; 6, 66, 7 et bis terque quaterque basiavit; cf. Brink, Hor. ars, pp. 366 f.; Coleman on Stat. silv. 4, 2, 58; OLD, s.v. ter 1 b. This is a good example of the vagueness of the expressions quinque diebus and bis terque, since, taken literally, they do not match (bis terque would mean not “five times”, but “two and even three times”).
1
As is the case, for example, in 9, 9; 9, 15; 9, 21; see Siedschlag, Form, pp. 87 f.
80
4. Iam satis est: with the same placing as here, Hor. sat. 1, 1, 120; 1, 5, 13; epist. 1, 7, 16; with different meaning also Ov. fast. 2, 844 iam satis est virtus dissimulata diu; cf. Ov. epist. 21, 245; Lucan. 3, 388. Martial has it four times (also 4, 89, 1 and 9; 7, 51, 14), the present being the only one in which it occurs in this metrical position. non vis … havere: vale: the infinitive havere, formed on have on the analogy of salve/salvere and vale/valere, is found only in Martial,1 in Quint. inst. 1, 6, 21 and in Char. gramm. p. 333, 11,2 making the poet the only one to use it outside a context of grammatical analysis. Its basic meaning would have been “to be (fare) well”,3 from which emanated the secondary meaning “to be greeted”; thus, 11, 106, 1 si vacas havere, “if you have time to be greeted”. Compare also 3, 5, 10 Marcus havere iubet with the common phrase salvere iubeo.4 In the pun here, Martial plays on both meanings of havere, interacting with the likewise ambiguous vale. This may be taken as an allusion to the threefold vale presented as a last good bye to the deceased at the funeral,5 as in 5, 66 Saepe salutatus numquam prior ipse salutas: | sic eris? Aeternum, Pontiliane, vale6 (Catull. 101, 10 atque in perpetuum, frater, ave atque vale). This provides a pretty contrast: “you do not want to be well, Afer: good-bye forever (i.e. ‘die’)”. But vale could also be used as an insult, cf. Serv. Aen. 11, 97 f. Varro in libris logistoricis dicit, ideo mortuis “salve” et “vale” dici, non quod aut valere aut salvi esse possunt, sed quod ab his recedimus, eos numquam visuri. Hinc ortum est ut etiam maledicti significationem interdum “vale” obtineat, ut Terentius valeant qui inter nos discidium volunt, hoc est ita a nobis discedant, ut numquam ad nostrum revertantur aspectum. The quotation from Terence is Andria 696 f., on which Eugraphus says “valeant” est acyrologia (“incorrect phraseology”), id est pereant (Eugraph. Ter. Andr. 696); for this sense of vale, cf. also Mart. 6, 78, 5. For the purpose of the present pun, this would be rendered as “you do not want to be greeted: go to hell”.
1
Also 1, 108, 10; 3, 5, 10; 11, 106, 1. Completely equating it with salve: Sunt quaedam verba in quibus tantum imperativo modo declinamus in secunda persona singulariter et pluraliter, item infinito modo praesentis tantum temporis. Et haec sunt duo, ave salve, et declinantur hoc modo: … infinitivo modo praesentis temporis avere te volo et vos et illos. See also Citroni on 1, 108, 10, who, however, takes no account of the occurrence in Quintilian, probably because his etymology, explaining ave as the imperative of avere, is false (see note on 9, praef. have). 3 This is the meaning given by LS, s.v. 2. aveo, whereas OLD, s.v. ave, gives the, as it seems, secondary meaning “to be greeted”. 4 OLD, s.v. salve1 2. 5 Cf. Blümner, Privataltertümer, p. 509. 6 I follow here the punctuation of Housman, Notes, pp. 70–71 (= Class. pap., p. 985). 2
81
7 (8) Tamquam parva foret sexus iniuria nostri foedandos populo prostituisse mares, iam cunae lenonis erant, ut ab ubere raptus sordida vagitu posceret aera puer: inmatura dabant infandas corpora poenas. Non tulit Ausonius talia monstra pater, idem qui teneris nuper succurrit ephebis, ne faceret steriles saeva libido viros. Dilexere prius pueri iuvenesque senesque, at nunc infantes te quoque, Caesar, amant.
5
10
Like 9, 5, this poem deals with the moral legislation of Domitian, focusing on an edict (or law) against the prostitution of children, probably passed in or shortly before 94, as it is not mentioned previous to Martial’s Book 9; it also mentions the prohibition of castration (lines 7–8), on which see the introduction to 9, 5. The edict against the prostitution of children is completely unattested in any other author than Martial, who refers to it only here and in 9, 5, save for a possible reference to it by Statius, who, in connection with the edict against castration, says nec lege sinistra | ferre timent famulae natorum pondera matres (silv. 3, 4, 76 f., unless this also concerns castration). The situation before the prohibition had obviously become totally precarious; procurers did not refrain from snatching infants from the very cradle and prostituting them. Allowing for some poetical exaggeration on Martial’s part, it is easy to understand that Domitian felt compelled to intervene. A notable feature of the poem is the strong emphasis on males throughout. The pattern is set already in the first line, where Martial speaks of the iniuria sexus nostri, alluding to the prostitution of grown-up men; female prostitution would not have upset any contemporary Roman.1 The reference only to ephebi in line 7 is quite natural, as the subject there is castration, but it is worth noticing that Martial in line 3 f. speaks of the prostitution of children only as a contumely against his own sex, mentioning only the raptus puer. While Domitian’s prohibition would probably have concerned children in general, it was obviously only the prostitution of small boys (and not of girls, if it existed at all) which was a big enough problem to attract notice; cf. also Quint. inst. 7, 1, 55, quoted below on line 3. 1. iniuria nostri: for the ending, cf. Verg. Aen. 3, 604; Ov. epist. 20, 93; met. 3, 267; trist. 4, 4, 23.
1 Martial’s disapproval of male prostitution is to be seen in connection with his contempt for male homosexuality (see Sullivan, Martial, pp. 188 f.). Female prostitution, on the other hand, does not in the first place necessarily imply any sexual deviations on the part of the male; female prostitutes also had a natural place in Roman society, Martial himself took advantage of their services, and the brothels played a part in more or less every young Roman’s sexual education (see Kay’s introduction to 11, 45; Sullivan, op. cit., pp. 168 f.).
82
2. foedandos populo prostituisse: “prostitute for the people to desecrate”; populo should be taken with prostituisse; cf. Plaut. Pseud. 179 cras populo prostituam vos. As in Plautus, the use of populus expresses contempt; the allusion is to the vilest form of prostitution, like that of the public brothels; cf. also Sen. contr. 1, 2, 12 servavit te leno, quam prostituturus erat in libidinem populi?1 mares: of male prostitutes since Ov. met. 10, 83 f. ille etiam Thracum populis fuit auctor amorem | in teneros transferre mares (see Bömer ad loc.), then Livy (39, 15, 9; 39 15, 13), Phaedrus (4, 15, 1), and others; cf. 9, 36, 10 and TLL, s.v. 423, 18 ff. 3. ab ubere raptus: cf. here Verg. Aen. 6, 426 ff., a passage which obviously has influenced also the following line: Continuo auditae voces vagitus et ingens | infantumque animae flentes, in limine primo | quos dulcis vitae exsortis et ab ubere raptos | abstulit atra dies; the reminiscence of Vergil’s description of the deceased children in Hades is very effective in this context. The same ending as here also in Aen. 7, 484; also Ov. fast. 4, 459; cf. Stat. Ach. 1, 858. Shackleton Bailey comments: “... a child, presumably of a slave mother, might be ‘snatched from the breast’ and sold to a leno against the mother’s will”.2 That this could befall slave mothers is confirmed by Stat. silv. 3, 4, 76 f. (cited in the introduction above). Presumably, it did not usually happen among the free; Quint. inst. 7, 1, 55 mentions such a case (all the more horrible, since it is the father who sells his own child) as a subject for controversiae, which largely drew their material from the most horrifying and absurd stories: it is often a matter of issue, says Quintilian, whether or not a son is to be disinherited, who fails to appear in court for a neglectful father, in such controversies in quibus petuntur in vincula qui parentis suos non alunt, ut eam quae testimonium in filium peregrinitatis reum dixit, eum qui filium lenoni vendidit. 4. sordida vagitu posceret aera: “crying asked for his sordid pay”, the money being called sordidus because it is given as payment for a sordid service. For aera poscere of a prostitute who demands her pay, cf. Iuv. 6, 125 excepit blanda intrantis atque aera poposcit. Shackleton Bailey, however, takes the words vagitu posceret as an indication that “the children were merely put out to beg, not prostituted in the ordinary sense”,3 thus, it seems, understanding aera as synonymous with stips in the sense of “alms”. But whereas there seems to be no reason for the alms of an unsuspecting giver to be called sordida, it is a fitting description of the money given to the prostituted child by his client after the act. Shackleton Bailey’s explanation is further contradicted by the infandas … poenas of the following line. 5. infandas … poenas: cf. Val. Fl. 2, 173, where infanda foedera = paelicatum; Sen. Phaedr. 115 ff. infando malo | correpta pecoris efferum saevi ducem | audax 1 TLL, s.v. foedo 997, 78 f., erroneously explains foedandos as “castrandos”, whereas the correct explanation (“de scortis masculis”) is given s.v. mas 423, 18. 2 Shackleton Bailey, Corrections, p. 284. 3 Ibid.
83
amasti; Ps. Quint. decl. 3, 9 infando nexui; further instances in TLL, s.v. infandus 1345, 27 ff. The phrase leaves little doubt that children were prostituted in the full sense of the word and thus refutes Shackleton Bailey’s suggested explanation mentioned in the preceding line. 6. Ausonius … pater: cf. Stat. silv. 4, 8, 20 Ausoniae pater augustissimus urbis. For Domitian as pater, see note on 9, 5, 1 parens orbis. The present expression is probably meant to parallel aetherius pater as an epithet of Jupiter (cf. 9, 35, 10; 36, 7; Stat. Theb. 11, 207; silv. 3, 1, 108; 186) in the same way as Palatinus Tonans parallels Tarpeius Tonans in 9, 86, 7 (see note ad loc.). The adjective Ausonius is used by the Latin poets, on the pattern of Hellenistic writers (e.g. Apoll. Rhod. 4, 553 = ), as synonymous with Italicus.1 Martial has the adjective sixteen times (whereof five in the present book), apart from this occurrence, yet three times with direct reference to Domitian and his court; thus 8, 21, 10 Ausonius dux (of Domitian also Stat. silv. 4, 4, 96; used of Tiberius by Ovid in trist 2, 171; of Scipio in Sil. 17, 619; cf. Verg. Aen. 10, 267); 9, 36, 1 Ausonius minister (of Earinus); 12, 5, 3 Ausonia aula (of the imperial palace). PId
WH
JDjDQ
$¸VRQdKQ
PId
WH
JDjDQ
,WDOQ
monstra: of sexual perversions, like Ov. met. 9, 735 ff. ne non tamen omnia Crete | monstra ferat, taurum dilexit filia Solis, | femina nempe marem; TLL, s.v. 1435, 30 ff. 7. nuper: the line refers to Domitian’s edict against castration, issued presumably in the mid-eighties (see 9, 5 intro.). If any conclusions can be drawn from the vague nuper concerning the uncertain dating of the edict, it would be placed in 85–87 rather than in 81–83. teneris … ephebis: the same juncture also Stat. Theb. 1, 423. As in 7, 80, 9 Mitylenaei roseus mangonis ephebus, the Greek word indicates that slave-boys are meant (see 9, 5 intro.; cf. TLL, s.v. ephebus 655, 1 ff.). Note also the parallel position to steriles … viros in the following line. 8. saeva libido: with an obvious implication of disgust; cf. Cic. Phil. 2, 45 puer emptus libidinis causa; 13, 45 eius pueritia pertulerat libidines eorum, here emphasized by saevus with reference to the mutilation implied. 9. iuvenesque senesque: with this position in the metre also 1, 3, 5; 7, 71, 5 (7, 35, 5 immediately following the penthemimeresis); cf. Verg. Aen. 9, 309; Ov. met. 7, 612; 8, 526; 12, 464; 15, 210; Epiced. Drusi 203; Lucan. 7, 37; Stat. Theb. 5, 149. For a similar line of thought, cf. 9, 5, 8–9.
1
Ausones was the Greek term ( ) for the Aurunci, a tribe living in southern Latium (Dion. Hal. 1, 22, 3); see TLL, s.v. 1537, 32 ff.; Hülsen in RE 2, s.v. 2561; Bömer on Ov. fast. 1, 55.
84
$»VRQHM
8 (9) Nil tibi legavit Fabius, Bithynice, cui tu annua, si memini, milia sena dabas. Plus nulli dedit ille: queri, Bithynice, noli: annua legavit milia sena tibi. Legacy-hunting, captatio,1 was a favourite target of the satirists from Horace onwards; Martial deals with it also in 1, 10; 2, 32, 6; 2, 40; 4, 56; 5, 39; 8, 27; 9, 48 (in which Martial himself acts as captator); 9, 88 (where he is the victim); 11, 44; 11, 55; 11, 83; 12, 40; 12, 90. The legacy-hunters (captatores or heredipetae; cf. 9, 14, intro.) tried to make their way into the wills of, above all, the childless rich by means of excessive obsequiousness and extraordinary generosity;2 cf. Sen. benef. 4, 20, 3: faciat licet omnia, quae facere bonus amicus et memor officii debet: si animo eius obversatur spes lucri, captator est et hamum iacit (for the metaphor of the hook, cf. Mart. 4, 56, 5). The practice was widely spread; in Petron. 116, 6, a farm-bailiff in the city of Croton complains that quoscumque homines in hac urbe videritis, scitote in duas partes esse divisos. Nam aut captantur aut captant. Notable is a passage from Tacitus (ann. 13, 52), as it gives an idea of the proportions which captatio could take on. Two proconsulars of the province of Africa, Sulpicius Camerinus and Pompeius Silvanus, stood accused of misconduct in their office but were acquitted by Nero: Camerinum (sc. absolvit Caesar) adversus privatos et paucos, saevitiae magis quam captarum pecuniarum crimina obicientis: Silvanum magna vis accusatorum circumsteterat poscebatque tempus evocandorum testium; reus ilico defendi postulabat, valuitque pecuniosa orbitate et senecta quam ultra vitam eorum produxit quorum ambitu evaserat.3 Eventually, the senate felt compelled to intervene: Captatorias institutiones non eas senatus improbavit, quae mutuis affectionibus iudicia provocaverunt, sed quarum condicio confertur ad secretum alienae voluntatis (Dig. 28, 5, 71). However, among the targets of the captatores were also those who, like Fabius, took advantage of the eagerness of the legacy-hunters, encouraging their gifts and attendance while having no intention of inserting them in their wills; cf. 2, 40; 5, 39; 9, 48; 12, 40. By Book 12, this has given Martial a certain wisdom: Heredem tibi me, Catulle, dicis. | Non credam, nisi legero, Catulle (12, 73). Pliny (epist. 2, 20) presents the captator par excellence, a certain Regulus, who had tried to trap in turn Veronia, the widow of Piso, Velleius Blaesus, a rich consular, 1 On the captatio as a whole and its origin, see Rudd, pp. 224 ff.; V. A. Tracy, “Aut Captantur and Captant”, Latomus 39 (1980), pp. 399–402; Friedländer, Sittengeschichte 1, pp. 246 ff. Cf. Citroni and Howell on 1, 10 and Kay on 11, 44. 2 The victims of the captatores were not necessarily the childless. The legacy-hunter could also pick a man who had a son and try to be appointed second heir, a position which could be equally profitable should anything happen to the son (see Rudd., p. 226). Also old and rich widows were attended by captatores; cf., e.g., 1, 10; 4, 56, 9, 100 and AP 11, 65. For advice to the would-be captator, see Hor sat. 2, 5. Suitable gifts to the victims were, apart from money, for example, old and precious wines (Mart. 2, 40), cakes flavoured with honey from Hybla (5, 39), a boar (9, 48), turtle-doves and the barbel of a mullet (Iuv. 6, 38), quails (Iuv. 12, 97) or sweet fruits (Hor. sat. 2, 5, 12). 3 Cf. here Hor. sat. 2, 5, 28–31 Magna minorve foro si res certabitur olim, | vivet uter locuples sine gnatis, inprobus, ultro | qui meliorem audax vocet in ius, illius esto | defensor; fama civem causaque priorem | sperne, domi si gnatus erit fecundave coniux.
85
and the distinguished lady Aurelia. From Blaesus, though, he got ne tantulum quidem. In epist. 8, 18, Pliny tells of the enormously wealthy Cn. Domitius Tullus,1 who, in spite of having encouraged legacy-hunters (cum se captandum praebuisset), nevertheless left his money to his adopted daughter, which gave rise to varii tota civitate sermones; to leave someone who had paid you attention completely disinherited was certainly taken as an injury, even in the case of captatores.2 In the present epigram, Bithynicus has bestowed an annual gift of 6.000 IIS on Fabius, and still he gets nothing in return. Martial tries to comfort him: Fabius did not bequeath a larger amount on anyone. Obviously, Bithynicus has made a misjudgement: Fabius has simply run through his money and probably had no intention of ever leaving anything to anyone; there is a similar situation in 7, 66 (see note on Fabius below). Nevertheless, Bithynicus will save 6.000 IIS each year, no longer having to give it to Fabius, and thus has got off rather well. 1. Nil tibi ... Bithynice: note the parallel alteration of nil tibi to plus nulli in l. 3, the repetition of the vocative Bithynice following the hephthemimeresis,3 and also the almost identical pentameters (annua | milia sena . For the name Bithynicus as a pseudonym in an unflattering context, see also 2, 26, 3; 6, 50, 5; 12, 78, 1.
Fabius: cf. 7, 66, in which the captator Labienus complains about his legacy being too small, although Fabius has made him sole heir. Another Fabius, in 8, 43, uses up his wives in a suspicious way. 2. si memini: in dactylic verse, either at the beginning of the line (1, 19, 1; Hor. sat. 2, 8, 21; Prop. 2, 1, 49) or, as here, immediately before the penthemimeresis of the hexameter or the diaeresis of the pentameter. All three occurrences in Ovid occupy this position (am. 3, 1, 33; fast. 3, 248; 5, 646).
9 (10) Cenes, Canthare, cum foris libenter, clamas et maledicis et minaris. Deponas animos truces, monemus: liber non potes et gulosus esse. Anyone who wants to be invited to his patron’s table has to adapt himself to his demands. There is no room for socializing on equal terms, and certainly none for independence; one cannot behave as if among equals, nor indulge in food and drink. An occasional invitation to dine with his patron was among the few bene1
Cf. 9, 51; also 1, 36; 3, 20, 17; 5, 28, 3. Cf. Rudd, p. 226. According to Schneider, pp. 56 ff., this is the usual position of vocatives corresponding to Ionici a maiore in Martial.
2 3
86
fits of the clientship (cf. 9, 85), and apparently one much appreciated; when Martial in 2, 53 tries to convince Maximus that being independent is not worthwhile for the likes of him, the dinner out is his principal argument: Liber eris, cenare foris si, Maxime, nolis, | Veientana tuam si domat uva sitim, | si ridere potes miseri chrysendeta Cinnae (2, 53, 3 f.). This hope of a free dinner was shared, as he reluctantly admits, also by Martial himself; cf. 2, 18; 11, 24 (with Kay’s introduction). From Iuv. sat. 5, it appears that the clients, if invited at all (Iuv. sat. 1, 132 ff.), were not always met with kind treatment nor provided with good food; cf. also Mart. 3, 60, Plin. epist. 2, 6. The epigrams on clients and their hopes of dinners are to be distinguished from those on professional dinner-hunters, cenipetae, on whom see 9, 14 intro. 1. f. Cenes, Canthare ... minaris: Adamik suggested the the alliteration (Cenes, Canthare, cum foris libenter, | clamas et maledicis et minaris) would serve to illustrate “das ständige Murren des hochtönenden Kritikers”.1 Canthare: the name occurs also in 11, 45, 8, but nowhere else in Latin litera,a ture,2 although fairly common in Greek.3 It is derived from the Greek kind of a drinking-vessel with a long stem and ears,4 and the name may in this case be translated as “Drunkard”.5 Furthermore, the cantharus was the characteristic cup of Bacchus or Liber, and the god is associated with such a vessel in art (CIL 11, 3586) as well as in literature; cf. Plin. nat. 33, 150; Macr. Sat. 5, 21, 16 scyphus Herculis poculum est, ita ut Liberi patris cantharus. Obviously, there is a play on the name Cantharus and the word liber (Liber) in l. 4 (see below). NQTDURM
2. clamas etc.: Cantharus’ behaviour is explained by the fact that he is drunk; apparently, he is unable to hold his liquor. Such a guest was a nightmare to the host Nasidienus in Hor. sat. 2, 8, who turned pale when he noticed that one of his guests, Vibidius, called for larger cups, fearing nothing as much as heavy drinkers, vel quod male dicunt liberius, vel | fervida quod subtile exsurdant vina palatum (sat. 2, 8, 37 f.). 3. animos truces: “your harsh ways”, animus in this sense usually in the plural; cf., e.g., Verg. Aen. 11, 366; Sen. Tro. 1158; epist. 4, 2; TLL, s.v. 104, 46 ff.
1
T. Adamik, “Die Funktion der Alliteration bei Martial”, ZAnt 25 (1975), pp. 69–75. Plautus (Epid. 567) and Terence (Ad. 353 and Andr. 769) have the feminine form Canthara. On Andria 769, G. P. Shipp (P. Terenti Afri Andria, Melbourne 1960) comments: “The name is formed as a fem. to cantharus, name of a kind of drinking-vessel, and suits the companion of Lesbia and Archylis”. K. Schmidt, “Die griechischen Personennamen bei Plautus”, Hermes 37 (1902), p. 181, points to the similarity with the name Scapha in Plautus’ Mostellaria. 3 See Pape, s.v. 4 See Marquardt, p. 633. 5 Kay (on 11, 45, 8) offers a different interpretation of the name. 6 Marquardt, loc. cit. 2
.QTDURM
87
monemus: Martial mostly uses moneo and monemus paratactically, followed either by the imperative or by the subjunctive, which in most cases is bare.1 This parataxis, essentially a colloquialism, is Proto-Italic, although there are no preserved instances of monere with the bare subjunctive earlier than Terence.2 4. liber etc.: “you cannot be both independent and gluttonous”. The point is twofold, depending on the two obvious senses of the word liber: (1) “free” as opposed to being a client and (2) “bold”, because of Cantharus’ being constantly drunk (as suggested by his name); for a similar play on the word liber, see 1, 67,3 and cf. 4, 42, 12. In the present case, there may be a third possibility of interpreting liber as “a Liber” (a “Bacchus”, i.e. a drunkard), which likewise would interact with his name Cantharus. On ambiguous conclusions, see 9, 6 intro.
10 (5) Nubere vis Prisco: non miror, Paula: sapisti. Ducere te non vult Priscus: et ille sapit. Cf. 10, 8: Nubere Paula cupit nobis, ego ducere Paulam | nolo: anus est. Vellem, si magis esset anus. Old women seeking marriage with younger men for their own pleasure and presumably also as a kind of status symbol are among the targets of the “vetula-Skoptik” (see 9, 37 intro.), appearing also in 3, 93; 10, 8; 11, 23. In the Greek Anthology, cf. in particular 11, 71 (Nicharus): s+NPDVH
NJÊ P|Q
OyJZ
RÁQ
NPDVH
PHjM
R¸N
G D¸W
_
RfGDPHQ
QdND OO
'HXNDOdZQ
²WL
WD¹WKQ
_
SOHWRQ R¸N
HlGHQ
QGUD
1LNRQ±K
ºGZU
]KWHjQ
_
WD¿WD
Q¿Q
{GHL
.4 For a young man, however, there was little reason to marry an old woman, apart from the fact that such a marriage might provide a way out of poverty, if the woman was rich. But this was by no means the optimal solution to financial problems; cf. AP 11, 65 (Parmenion): OO
WIRQ
/LPR¿
NUdVLM
UJDOyRQ
P|Q
_
SHLQ Q
NRdWK
G
{VW
NDg
°GXQKURWyUD
JUDdKM
_
SHLQÍQ
FDOHS H»FHWR
.5 The man entering into such a marriage also ran the risk of being subjected to his wealthy wife, which, of course, made it impossible for Martial to consider such a marriage: Uxorem quare locupletem ducere nolim, | quaeritis? Uxori nubere nolo meae. | Inferior matrona suo sit, Prisce, marito: | non aliter fiunt femina virque JUD¿Q
1
NRLPÇPHQRM
H»FHWR
OLP´Q
_
)dOOLM
fG
NOURX
SDLG´M
QZPDOdKQ
The imperative is found also in 4, 30, 1; 6, 73, 9; 8, 44, 1; 14, 103, 1 and 14, 178, 1; the subjunctive in 1, 116, 5; 5, 56, 3; 8, 40, 4; 9, 90, 10; 12, 14, 1; 13, 15, 2 and 14, 98,1. With conjunction in 1, 116, 5 and 4, 86, 2 (where the the influence of exhortor should be considered). 2 Hofmann-Szantyr, § 289 i, pp. 529 ff. 3 Although the interpretation of this epigram is not completely obvious, see the commentaries by Citroni and Howell. 4 “Niconoe was once in her prime, I admit that, but her prime was when Deucalion looked on the vast waters. Of those times we have no knowledge, but of her now we know that she should seek not a husband, but a tomb”; translated by W. R. Paton, Loeb 5 “It is difficult to choose between famine and an old woman. To hunger is terrible, but her bed is still more painful. Phillis when starving prayed to have an elderly wife; but when he slept with her he prayed for famine. Lo the inconstancy of a portionless son”; W. R. Paton’s translation, Loeb.
88
pares (8, 12).1 If the woman was not only rich but also of good family, the situation might become even “worse” for the husband,2 at least as long as the wife was alive. Hence Martial’s sarcastic view of the grief of Saleianus, whose wife has recently died and left him a million (2, 65), and of the alleged self-possession of Paetus, whose late wife has left him twenty million (5, 37, 20 ff.). 1. Prisco: a pseudonym, like most occurrences of the name in Martial. In some cases, though, it refers to Terentius Priscus,3 and once (7, 79) perhaps to Q. Peducaeus Priscinus, consul in 93. Paula: apart from 10, 8 quoted above, Martial uses this name of an adulteress in 1, 74; 6, 6; 11, 7. sapisti: present perfect, “you have made a wise decision”, expressing the same thought as novi;4 this use of sapisti is found in 3, 2, 6 and 11, 106, 4.
The Earinus cycle (11–13, 16–17, 36) There are six epigrams in Book 9 occasioned by a hair-offering by the eunuch Earinus, Domitian’s favourite. The epigrams principally fall into two subdivisions: nos. 11-13 celebrate the name Earinus and may be referred to as the “name series” and nos. 16-17, “the offering series”, consider the actual offering; these five epigrams were presumably written at the time of the event they celebrate. 9, 36, in which Jupiter and Ganymede are contrasted with their earthly counterparts, Domitian and Earinus, is separated from the others not only in space, but presumably also in time; the differences in tone and approach to the subject indicate that it was not among the poems written primarily to celebrate the event, but rather as a humorous offset to the others when incorporated into Book 9. On the same occasion, Statius wrote a poem in hexameters on the locks of Earinus, published as silv. 3, 4, which is the primary source of our knowledge of Earinus; the sole mention of him outside the works of Martial and Statius, Dio Cassius 67, 2, 3 (mentioning Earinus apropos of Domitian’s legislation against castration), has no value as a source of information.5 From Statius, it appears that Earinus was sent as a boy to Rome from his native Pergamum (silv. 3, 4, 12 ff.; cf. 81 f.) and that, because of his beauty, he seems from the very beginning to have been destined for Domitian the emperor 1
For the discussion, whether Martial himself was married or not (which he most certainly was not), see L. Ascher, “Was Martial really unmarried?”, CW 70 (1977), pp. 441-444; J. P. Sullivan, “Was Martial really married? A reply”, CW 72 (1978-79), pp. 238-239; see also Kay’s introduction to 11, 23. 2 Cf. Friedländer, Sittengeschichte 1, p. 278. 3 See the index nominum in the editions of Heraeus and Shackleton Bailey, s.v. Priscus and Terentius respectively; Lippold in RE 23:1, s.v. Priscus 11, 4 f. 4 Hofmann-Szantyr, § 178 a, p. 318. 5 For a detailed discussion of Earinus on the basis of the evidence from Martial and Statius, see C. Henriksén, “Earinus: An Imperial Eunuch in the Light of the Poems of Martial and Statius”, Mnemosyne 50 (1997), pp. 281–294.
89
(silv. 3, 4, 26 ff.; 38). On his arrival, he was castrated, no doubt to make his youthful beauty last as long as possible by eliminating the onset of puberty.1 Afterwards, he was installed as Domitian’s cupbearer and attendant, vini minister (cf. 9, 36, 1), a duty that usually befell handsome youngsters, who sometimes also had to serve as their master’s concubine.2 Earinus’ relation to Domitian is guardedly given an erotic implication through the references to Ganymede in 9, 11, 7; 16, 6; nectar in 9, 11, 5; honey in 9, 11, 3; 12, 2; and amber in 9, 12, 6. In the year 94 (as indicated by the inclusion of the Earinus cycle in Book 9), it was decreed that Earinus was to be allowed to cut his hair. As a minister, he would have worn it long, falling over his neck and on his shoulders (cf. 9, 17, 8), which was also the normal hair style of free-born children, until they began to wear the toga virilis;3 since cupbearers kept this haircut regardless of age, they were considered to be “caught in boyhood”.4 The decision was obviously made primarily on the basis of his age: from Statius, it is quite clear that Earinus, had he not been a eunuch, would now have been a young man (silv. 3, 4, 79) and would not have sent unum gaudens Phoebea ad limina munus (ibid. 80) but two, his locks and his first beard. As it is, patrias nunc solus crinis ad oras naviget (ibid. 81 f.); the hair-offering thus corresponds to the depositio barbae, which was impossible in the case of a eunuch. He would now have been 16–18 years old (cf. note 1 above) and eagerly awaited the release from boyhood. The hair was placed in a golden box decorated with jewels (Stat. silv. 3, 4, 91; silv. 3 praef.), which obviously was the usual practice,5 and sent along with a mirror set in jewelled gold (9, 17, 5; Stat. silv. 3, 4, 94) to the Asklepieion at Pergamum, where it was 1
In silv. 3, 4, 65 ff., Statius is at pains to explain how a castration could be performed in the house of Domitian, who himself had legislated against it. To this end, he has Aesculapius himself perform the operation tacita ... arte | leniter haud ullo concussum vulnere corpus (silv. 3, 4, 69 f.), thereby toning down the cruelty of the act while also giving it divine sanction. Vollmer’s suggestion (ad loc.), that haud ullo concussum vulnere corpus implies that Earinus was in fact a thlibias, i.e. that the castration was performed without surgery by pressing the testicles until they evanesced (cf. Paul. Aeg. 6, 68), is not unlikely but largely depends on the age at which the castration took place. According to Paul. Aeg. 6, 68, , which, to have any significance in this context, must refer to the method was practised on infants, not above the age of four or five years. The termini post and ante quem for the castration itself is Domitian’s ascension to the throne in 81 and the latest possible date for his edict against castration (86–87; see 9, 5 intro.); furthermore, it appears that Earinus’ hair-offering was a kind of substitute for the depositio barbae, and he would therefore have been somewhere between sixteen and twenty years old at the hairoffering in 94 (see below). Assuming that Earinus was at least sixteen in 94 and that the castration took place at the earliest possible date, i.e. in 81, he would have been three years old at the time of the castration, a perfectly acceptable age for a ; perhaps he could have been made a thlibias even at the age of four or five (in which case he would have been seventeen or eighteen at the time of the hair– offering). On the other hand, if he was castrated at the latest date possible, in 86 or 87, his having been made a thlibias seems much less likely: assuming that he was and that this operation was not performed on boys older than five, he would have been 11–12 years old in 94, an age presumably too young for the depositio barbae. Most likely, then, Earinus was castrated in 81–83 at the age of 3–5, and 16–18 years old at the hair-offering in 94. 2 Cf. 12, 96; Sen. epist. 47, 7 (quoted below); 95, 24 (quoted on 9, 36, 5); Blümner, Privataltertümer, p. 396. 3 Blümner, Privataltertümer, p. 271 4 Sen epist. 47, 7 may be quoted here in full: Alius vini minister in muliebrem modum ornatus cum aetate luctatur: non potest effugere pueritiam, retrahitur, iamque militari habitu glaber retritis pilis aut penitus evulsis tota nocte pervigilat, quam inter ebrietatem domini ac libidinem dividit et in cubiculo vir, in convivio puer est. 5 The use of such a precious box was naturally restricted to the imperial family and the very rich; cf. Suet. Nero 12, 19; Dio Cass. 61, 19, 1; Petron. 29, 8. QSLD SDLGdD
SDLGdRQ
90
QSLRQ
consecrated to Aesculapius, presumably with some dedicatory verses accompanying it, like those found in AP 6, 198 (Antipater of Thessalonica), 278 (Rhianus) and 279 (Euphorion).1 That either Statius’ or Martial’s poems were meant to accompany Earinus’ offering as dedicatory poems, is, however, improbable, as such poems would have been likely to have been written in Greek. Subsequently, Earinus was also manumitted, and it is a curious fact that neither Statius nor Martial takes advantage of this opportunity to flatter the emperor in their poems on the hair-offering. The explanation seems to be that, when the poems were written, Earinus had not yet received his freedom: 9, 36 seems to imply that Earinus is no longer in the service of Domitian, but the sole explicit mention of Earinus as freedman is found in the preface to Silvae 3 (see below). However, neither 9, 36 nor the preface to Silvae 3 was written on the event of the hair-offering, but when the respective books were put together for publishing.2 Consequently, at that time, Earinus had been manumitted, but presumably he had not been when the poems celebrating the hair-offering were written, which may have been at any time between the beginning of 94 and the autumn of the same year.3 Of the conception of the Earinus poems, we know only as much as Statius tells us in the preface to Silvae 3, that Earinus had asked him to celebrate his dedication in verse: Earinus praeterea, Germanici nostri libertus scis quamdiu desiderium eius moratus sim, cum petisset ut capillos suos quos cum gemmata pyxide et speculo ad Pergamenum Asclepium mittebat, versibus dedicarem. Statius, then, has written his poem at the direct request of Earinus himself, that is, indirectly at the request of the emperor.4 Hence, the question arises whether Mar1
Vollmer, p. 422, points out that the cult of the home town was usually preferred at such offerings (cf. Hom. Il. 23, 144 ff.; Stat. Theb. 6, 610; Sil. 4, 200). Naturally, Earinus had also a specific reason to choose Aesculapius as the recipient of his offering: through his castration, he had made closer contact with the god of medicine, who had a major sanctuary in his home town of Pergamum, a sanctuary which, while still at the beginning of its period of greatness, was already competing with the other gods of Pergamum, Zeus, Athena and Dionysus. It may even be that Earinus had chosen Aesculapius as his patron deity, as Minerva was that of Domitian (see note on 9, 3, 10 res agit … tuas). See further Henriksén, op. cit., pp. 289 ff. 2 Practically at the same time, probably in the second half of the year 94; see the introduction, pp. 12 f. 3 The termini post and ante quem are set by the publication of Martial’s Book 8, probably at the beginning of 94 (Citroni, Letteratura per i Saturnali, pp. 223 f.) and of Book 9 in the autumn of the same year. The manumission need not be taken as a reason for letting Earinus cut his hair. It is true that slaves upon manumission might cut their long hair, the insignia of slavery, and offer it to the gods (cf. Plaut. Amph. 462; Serv. Aen. 8, 564), as an old fisherman offers his tools to the sea–gods (as in AP 6, 27) or a worn–out soldier offers his arms to Ares (AP 6, 81). However, manumission was not a requirement, as is shown by the case of Encolpos, the slave–boy of Martial’s friend the centurion Aulus Pudens: in 1, 31, the locks of Encolpos are vowed to Apollo for Pudens’ promotion to primipilus; in 5, 48, at last, Encolpos is allowed to cut his hair, presumably without Pudens having got his promotion. Probably, Encolpos was tired of waiting and, eager to be recognized as an adult, had persuaded his master to permit the cutting of his locks; but neither in 1, 31 nor in 5, 48 is there a word to indicate that Encolpos could look forward to manumission in connection with the cutting of his tresses (cf. also 12, 24 f.). 4 Statius’ statement, that he had delayed the composition of the poem, indicates that, in one way or another, he had problems in composing it. Garthwaite (Court Poets, pp. 94 ff.) ascribes this to the difficulties presented by the subject, above all, the fact that Earinus was the eunuch of an emperor who had himself forbidden castration, but the reason would rather be that Martial divulged his poems first and that this caused Statius problems. As Heuvel (p. 324) has pointed out, Statius in the case of Earinus completely abstains from facetious etymologies, of which he is otherwise very fond (cf. Vollmer on silv. 1, 1, 6) and this abstinence is probably explained by the fact that Martial had already exhausted the possibilities of etymological play on Earinus’ name. However, Garthwaite is, I think, right in rejecting Vessey’s theory that Statius’ delay “does not imply any diffidence in executing it, but is merely an expression of affected
91
tial received a similar request or whether he composed the poems of the Earinus cycle on his own initiative. It has mostly been agreed that Martial, like Statius, wrote his poems at an imperial command1 or that he at least knew of Statius’ commission and felt compelled to write something similar.2 But there is also a third possibility to be considered: if the offering of Earinus was such a notable event as we may suspect, then it seems likely that contemporary poets would have come forward spontaneously to celebrate it, whether or not they knew of other poets doing the same thing or having been commissioned to do so (cf. note on 9, 11, 13). Consequently, Martial, knowing or not knowing of Statius’ work, would certainly not have missed such an opportunity to commemorate an important happening within the palace, regardless of whether or not he had got an imperial commission for his poems. His reason for writing them cannot, and need not, be established with greater certainty than that. Statius was asked to compose a poem which was not intended to accompany the locks of Earinus to Pergamum, but to celebrate and commemorate the event. Martial’s aims, whether he had been commissioned to write the poems or not, would have been much the same, and so the poets celebrated the offering each in his own significant way, Statius by composing a large poem in the epic style with quasi-mythological elements and Martial by writing several smaller pieces and presenting them to the emperor and Earinus as a libellus (see 9, 16 intro.). Except for the note in Dio Cassius (above), Earinus is not mentioned either before or after Martial’s Earinus cycle and Statius’ Silvae 3, 4. This fact, in addition to the absence of “sentimental epithets (Earinus meus, carissimus, etc.) which would argue for familiarity and friendship with him”,3 suggests that he was not one of the close acquaintances of either poet.
modesty, which stresses the fact that in composing verses for Domitian’s eye special care and preparation were necessary” (D. Vessey, Statius and the Thebaid, Cambridge 1973, pp. 28 f.; see Garthwaite, Court Poets, pp. 91 ff.). Likewise, Garthwaite is right in defusing Vessey’s stress on the fact that Domitian’s baldness would have presented a problem in a poem about hair, for, as Garthwaite (Court Poets, p. 94) says, “if Domitian was as acutely sensitive on the subject of hair as Suetonius suggests, he would hardly have commissioned the poem in the first place”. It is also worth noting that Domitian himself had in fact written and published a book on baldness (Jones, Domitian, p. 13). 1 So White, Friends, p. 290; Garthwaite, Court Poets, p. 64. 2 Hofmann, Motivvariationen, p. 45. 3 White, Friends, pp. 290 f.
92
11 Nomen cum violis rosisque natum, quo pars optima nominatur anni, Hyblam quod sapit Atticosque flores, quod nidos olet alitis superbae; nomen nectare dulcius beato, quo mallet Cybeles puer vocari et qui pocula temperat Tonanti, quod si Parrhasia sones in aula, respondent Veneres Cupidinesque; nomen nobile, molle, delicatum versu dicere non rudi volebam: sed tu syllaba contumax rebellas. Dicunt Eiarinon tamen poetae, sed Graeci, quibus est nihil negatum et quos decet sonare: nobis non licet esse tam disertis, qui Musas colimus severiores. q$UHM s$UHM
5
10
15
The first poem of the Earinus cycle opens with a series of paraphrases of the name Earinus (a Latin transcription of the Greek adjective , “of spring”),1 successively providing the reader with more and more information, until the name is finally revealed in line 13, not even then in its correct Latin form, but in Greek. First, Martial lets us know that the name was “born with violets and roses”, suggesting a connection with spring. The notion of pleasure is further increased by references to honey and fragrances, followed by a series of highly charged topics: nectar, Attis and Ganymede, concluding with an allusion to the passer Catulli. Through the reference to the imperial palace, the much discussed Veneres Cupidinesque and a series of charged adjectives, the reader is brought to the turning-point of the poem: the rebellious syllable, which prevents Martial from fitting the name Earinus into his verse. The second section forms a glaring contrast to the former; the lyrical Martial has turned into a small-minded grumbler expressing his disdain for the lax prosody of the Greeks. Yet, by this device, he accomplishes something important: he reveals to the reader the identity of his object, whose name he even manages to fit into his verse as an example of the licentious practice of the detested Greeks, thereby avoiding any metrical errors on his own part. Thus, he fulfils both of the wishes expressed in line 11: the name of the emperor’s favourite appears in the poem, and yet his verse is non rudis. xDULQ±M
1. violis: in Greece as in Rome, the violet was considered a messenger of spring. According to Theophrastus hist. plant. 6, 8, 1, the gillyflower was the first to appear, where the air is mild, even as soon as winter comes. A similar account is given by Pliny (nat. 21, 64): Florum prima ver nuntiat viola alba, tepidioribus vero locis etiam hieme emicat; cf. also Ov. trist. 3, 12, 1 ff. and AP 5, 144, 1 f. 1
Such paraphrases of a specific name can be observed also in Greek epigram (see Schmoock, p. 91).
93
(Meleager). The violet was also associated with Attis (see note on Cybeles puer below): according to Arnobius 5, 7, Attis castrated himself beneath a spruce; out of his blood, violets shot forth.1 Presumably, Martial had this story in mind, even though Attis is not properly introduced until line 6. rosisque: the rose was the last flower to bloom (Plin. nat. 21, 65).2 Mentioning it together with violets, Martial marks off the spring, violets being its beginning and roses its end, but the two would also convey a sense of pleasure; cf. Cic. Tusc. 5, 73: (A) Etiamne in cruciatu atque tormentis? (M) An tu me in viola putabas aut in rosa dicere? where “among violets and roses” (used at banquets as stuffing for pillows) is equal to “amidst the highest pleasure”. Roses are otherwise generally mentioned with violets in connection with wreaths and garlands (see note on 9, 60, 1). 3. Hyblam quod sapit … flores: conveying a sense of sweetness and pleasure, as in 5, 37, 10, where Erotion’s breath is described as being as fragrant as the first honey of Attica; cf. also AP 12, 133, 6 (Meleager), likening the kiss of the fair Antiochus to a drink of ... (“the sweet honey of the soul”). There is some erotic implication in the word, though less than in nectar (below). The very best and sweetest honey was that which was produced in Attica,3 especially on Mt. Hymettos, which also has its own distich in the Xenia (13, 104). The second best was that of Mt. Hybla in Sicily; Martial mentions it side by side with that of Attica also in 7, 88,8 and 11, 42, 3, and alone in 2, 46, 1; 5, 39, 3; 9, 26, 4 and 13, 105. The finest honey was that extracted from thyme (Plin. nat. 11, 38), but violets and roses also played a part in its production; cf. Colum. 9, 4, 4 Mille praeterea semina … flores amicissimos apibus creant … At in hortensi lira consita nitent candida lilia, nec his sordidiora leucoia, tum puniceae rosae luteolaeque. \XF M G¼
PyOL
4. nidos ... alitis superbae: the Phoenix, superbus meaning “grand” or “proud”. This epithet applied to the Phoenix is found only in Martial, who uses it also in 6, 55, 2, again with allusion to the Phoenix’ nest being full of fragrances. The idea of the Phoenix building its nest of fragrant material first appears in an account by the senator Manilius (beginning of 1st century BC4), from whom Pliny drew his information in nat. 10, 4 f. It is elaborated by Ovid in met. 15, 392 ff.; see Bömer, ad loc., pp. 357 ff. The plural nidos may refer to the Phoenix building not one single nest, but one nest every five hundred years; the name of Earinus “smells of all the nests of the Phoenix”. 1
The death of Attis as a consequence of his castration and the violets growing from his blood symbolize the turn of the seasons, the violets symbolizing spring; cf. Rapp in Roscher, s.v. Attis 716 ff. 2 Cicero makes use of the late blooming of the rose to slander Verres (Verr. II 5, 27): Cum autem ver esse coeperat (cuius initium iste [sc. Verres] non a Favonio neque ab aliquo astro notabat, sed cum rosam viderat, tum incipere ver arbitrabatur) dabat se labori atque itineribus. See also Levens’ interpretation of this passage (R. G. C. Levens, Cicero, The Fifth Verrine Oration, London 1944). 3 On honey in antiquity, see Schuster in RE 15, s.v. mel 367 ff. 4 See Münzer in RE 14, s.v. Manilius 4, 1115. Pliny, nat. 10, 4, describes him as senator ille maximis nobilis doctrinis doctore nullo.
94
5. nectare … beato: this juncture only here and in Stat. silv. 3, 1, 26 f. The epithet alludes to its connection with the gods;1 cf. 8, 39, 3 sacrum nectar (also Stat. silv. 4, 2, 54), 4, 8, 9 aetherium nectar (AP 9, 404, 8 ), Ov. met. 4, 252 caeleste nectar. Similar epithets are to be found in Greek, for example, AP 7, 31, 6 ; Nonn. Dionys. 40, 421 . Besides having a symbolic value as the drink of the gods, nectar is often used in an erotic context and usually in connection with Ganymede (see below) as a metaphor for kisses. Cf. AP 12, 133 (Meleager), where the poet says, that in summer, when he was thirsty, he “kissed the tender-fleshed boy” (i.e. his darling Antiochus) and was relieved of his thirst. He then calls to Zeus: “Father Zeus, do you drink the nectareous kiss of Ganymede, and is this the wine he tenders to your lips?”.2 See note on 9, 36, 12 with further instances. DcTHUdRX
QyNWDURM PEURVdRX
QyNWDURM
QyNWDU PEURWRQ
6. Cybeles puer: The story of Attis occurs in different versions, the most common being the one related by Ovid in fast. 4, 223 ff. (see Bömer ad loc.). Here, Attis is a beautiful youth, with whom the goddess Cybele falls in love and has him make a vow of chastity. Attis breaks the vow with the nymph Sagaritis, who is then killed by Cybele, whereupon Attis goes mad, cuts off his genitals and dies beneath a spruce.3 Some sources (e.g. Diod. 3, 58–59) state that Attis rose from the dead, a symbol of spring returning after the winter, symbolized by Attis’ death (on Attis and violets, see note on violis above). This association of Attis with springtime was very old in Phrygia, where a special feast was celebrated in springtime. Once the cult of Attis was brought to Rome, the spring feast was magnificently celebrated from Claudius onwards, beginning on the 22nd of March and culminating on the 24th with the dies sanguinis, when the galli castrated themselves.4 The introduction of Attis, associated with springtime as well as with castration, is thus ingenious, making it possible to allude not only to the notion of spring in Earinus’ name, but also quite irreproachably to the fact that he, like Earinus, was a eunuch. Probably Martial, like Statius, felt that such an allusion had to be made but also that extreme caution had to be exercised, as Domitian himself had legislated against castration; there could be no better solution than the introduction of Attis, by which castration could be alluded to under the cloak of springtime. Statius, who in silv. 3, 4 refrains from any mention of spring, had to solve the problem in a more strained way (silv. 3, 4, 65 ff.). 7. qui pocula … Tonanti: Ganymede is naturally the model for the cupbearer (cf. 7, 50, 3; 9, 103; 10, 66, 7), and his relation with Jupiter the model for the sexual relationship between the cupbearer and his master in general (cf. Sen. epist. 47, 7; Lucian. dial. deor. 10; the word “catamite” is etymologically derived from the 1 Beatus is thus in this case synonymous with divinus. The listing of the TLL, s.v. beatus 1915, 33 ff., of this occurrence under the heading “de rebus vel ipsis felicibus vel homines reddentibus felices” can hardly be correct. 2 Translation by W. R. Paton, Loeb. 3 Except for the emasculation, none of this is mentioned in the most famous single Latin poem on Attis, Catull. 63. 4 See Cumont in RE 2, s.v. Attis 2247 ff.
95
name, via the Latin variant Catamitus, cf. OLD, s.v.), but the comparison is here of special significance, as Ganymede, the cupbearer of the heavenly Tonans, parallels Earinus, the cupbearer of the earthly. Erotic epigrams likening fair boys to Ganymede or alluding to Jupiter’s relation with him are common in the Greek Anthology,1 and Martial uses the theme or hints at it in several other epigrams, for example, 2, 43; 3, 39, 1; 5, 55; 7, 47; 8, 46; 9, 22, 12; 10, 98; 11, 26; 11, 43; 11, 104, 19 ff.; cf. note on 9, 36, 12 qui nectar misceat. 8. Parrhasia: = Palatina. Originally, Parrhasia was used of the region in Arcadia in which the town of Parrhasia lay; thus, for example, Callimachus’ Hymn 1, 10, where is equivalent to . Subsequently, Parrhasius came to be used of things or persons with any connection with Arcadia; thus, for example, Ov. met. 8, 315 Parrhasius Ancaeus (of Ancaeus of Tegea, referred to simply as Arcas in met. 8, 391); Lucan. 9, 660 Parrhasiae pinnae (of the wings of Mercury); Val. Fl. 4, 138 Parrhasium galerum (of Mercury’s hat). Callisto is frequently referred to as Parrhasia or Parrhasis (the latter being a Grecism introduced by Ovid; cf. Bömer on met. 2, 460); Parrhasia ursa is hence the Great Bear. Parrhasius may be substituted for Palatinus because of the Palatine’s connection with Evander, who came from Arcadia (Ov. fast. 1, 478 deserit Arcadiam Parrhasiumque larem) to Italy and settled on the Palatine hill, which he named Palatium after his home town Pallantium in Arcadia.2 xQ
3DUUDVd9
xQ
$UNDGdY
aula: of the imperial palace also epigr. 2, 10; 5, 6, 8 (sanctior); 7, 40, 1 (Augusta); 9, 16, 3; 9, 36, 10; 12, 5, 3 (Ausonia); cf. Stat. silv. 3, 3, 67 (Tibereia) and 4, 2, 23; cf. 9, 35, 3 Arsacia ... aula of the royal palace of the Parthians. Martial uses it with the epithet Parrhasia also in 7, 99, 3; 8, 36, 3; 12, 15, 1; cf. 7, 56, 2 Parrhasia domus. sones: not “sing the praises of”, but synonymous with voces or clames; cf. 2, 72, 5 f. auctorem criminis huius | Caecilium tota rumor in urbe sonat; OLD, s.v. 7. 9. Veneres Cupidinesque: cf. 11, 13, 5 f. omnes Veneres Cupidinesque | hoc sunt condita, quo Paris, sepulchro. Venus and her suite are, of course, closely connected with springtime (see the introduction to 9, 12), but the reference to Catullus (3, 1 lugete o Veneres Cupidinesque, on the death of Lesbia’s sparrow; also 13, 12) is obvious, and intentionally so. Garthwaite writes: “We are so strongly reminded of Catullus’ grieving Venuses and Cupids that we sense a rather mournful response. But why should Martial suggest that these deities weep for 1
For example, 12, 69 (anonymous)
GyUNHX
WKO±THQ
R¸
ITRQyZ
_
Hc
=H¿ G|
SURWyUZ
Ed9
W´Q
WyUSRX
NDO´Q
*DQXPGHm
SRdVHDL
W´Q
R¸NyW
G
xP±Q
QHNWÍM
ÏQD[ _
_
'y[DQGURQ
GHVS±]HLM
SdWZ
(“Take thy delight, Zeus, with thy former Ganymede, and look from afar, O King, on my Dexandrus. I grudge it not. But if thou carriest away the fair boy by force, no longer is thy tyranny supportable. Let even life go if I must live under thy rule”; transl. by W. R. Paton, Loeb). Other examples are AP 5, 65; 12, 37; 12, 68; 12, 70; 12, 133; 12, 194; and 12, 221. 2 So Pliny nat. 4, 20; see Robert in RE 6, s.v. Evandros 839 ff. NDg
96
W´
ELR¿Q
xSg
VR¿
Earinus when they hear his name? The answer, perhaps, lies in what Martial thought they were weeping for in Catullus’ poems on the death of the sparrow.”1 There is little doubt that this is a hint in the right direction, since the passer of Catullus’ poem is nothing but an euphemism for his own penis.2 This was, of course, evident to Martial, who himself frequently refers to the passer Catulli (1, 7, 3; 1, 109, 1; 4, 14, 14; 7, 14, 4; 11, 6, 16) with an obscene implication.3 Consequently, the Venuses and Cupids would let the name Earinus echo through the Palatine halls as a sign of mourning for the boy’s lost virility, and the line is yet another reference to Earinus’ being a eunuch, hidden behind the deities of love. The word-for-word interpretation, that the genii of love respond when the name Earinus is sounded in the halls of the imperial palace simply because Earinus is dear to them, simply provides the cover.4 10. nobile: Martial would refer to the name Earinus as nobile because of its qualities listed above rather than because Earinus himself is the attendant of Domitian, as suggested by Garthwaite.5 The epithet stands out against the other adjectives in this line; the lofty word, effectively placed just before the caesura, is contrasted with the following molle and delicatum, which may have a more charged meaning (see below). molle: “sweet”; cf. Cic. off. 1, 37 quid ad hunc mansuetudinem addi potest, eum, quicum bellum geras, tam molli nomine appellare, but also “effeminate”; cf. Ov. fast 4, 243 mollesque ministri (sc. Cybeles) and see note on 9, 25, 3 mollem. delicatum: = elegans, almost synonymous with molle. Note, however, that also this word is capable of bearing a meaning in malam partem, like 3, 58, 32 et delicatus opere fruitur eunuchus; there are instances of its being used side by side with mollis in the negative sense, for example, Cic. fin. 1, 37; 5, 12; Sen. epist. 66, 49; see TLL, s.v. 444, 80 ff. 11. versu dicere: also 10, 64, 5 lascivo dicere versu; cf. Hor. sat. 1, 5, 87 oppidulo, quod versu dicere non est (of a town the name of which cannot be accommodated in verse [Aequum Tuticum? Asculum Apulum?], see Lejay ad loc.). non rudi: rudis means “roughly fashioned, unpolished” and alludes to the quality of the verse. If Martial was to incorporate the name ¸ÒPÚLSQ GLRM FGQ TCPQC FC UMSJB K?IC GR KCRPGA?JJW CPPMLCMSQ rudis. volebam: with regard to the following rebellas, this could be considered imperfectum praesens of an action begun in the past but continuing in the present 1
Court Poets, p. 70. As demonstrated by G. Giangrande, “Catullus’ lyrics on the passer”, MPhL 1 (1975), pp. 137-146. He is joined by Y. Nadeau, “O passer nequam (Catullus 2, 3)”, Latomus 39 (1980), pp. 879-880. 3 Garthwaite, op. cit., pp. 70 ff.; Y. Nadeau, “Catullus’ Sparrow, Martial, Juvenal and Ovid”, Latomus 43 (1984), pp. 861-868. 4 Hofmann, Motivvariationen, p. 46, takes account only of this interpretation. 5 Op. cit., p. 69. 2
97
time;1 the use is colloquial, as in Plaut. Asin. 392 quid quaeritas … Demaenetum volebam. 12. syllaba contumax: the ¸
GL
¸ÒPÚLSQ
.TGB F?Q RFC Q?KC NPM@JCK GL /MLR
? NMCK ?BBPCQQCB RM ? ACPR?GL 3SRGA?LSQ GL UFGAF RFC NMCR PCEPCRQ RFC GKNMQ
’s name, 3RÚAÑLSQ, into his elegiacs. Such humorous problems can be said to form a small topos; cf. Hor. sat. 1, 5, 87 quoted above (with Lejay’s note); Manil. 2, 897. Cf. also the name ¼TÚBÚSQ which can only be fitted into dactylic verse or hendecasyllabic in the vocative; hence Martial’s description of Ovid as Paelignus ... poeta in 2, 41, 2. QG@GJGRW MD ECRRGLE RFC ?BBPCQQCC
; the Greek poets from Homer on 13. Eiarinon: instead of the usual form allow themselves to lengthen certain syllables in words which otherwise would not fit the metre, so-called productio epica;2 cf., e.g., Hom. Il. 16, 643 . White suggested that the line indicates that also Greek poets took upon themselves to celebrate Earinus.3 This is, of course, quite possible, and Martial, considering his views of the Greeks (see 9, 40 intro.), would probably not have welcomed such competition. xDULQ±M
ÈU9
xQ
HcDULQ¬
q$UHM s$UHM:
from Hom. Il. 5, 31 and 5, 455 (“Ares, Ares, bane of men, blood-stained stormer of walls”). There is an echo of it in AP 11, 191, an epigram on a careless barber (“ ” 4 ), and Lucilius (fragm. 345 ff. Krenkel) mentions it in discussing quantities: aa primum longa, a brevis syllaba: nos tamen unum | hoc faciemus et uno eodemque ut dicimus pacto | scribemus “pacem”, “placide”, “Ianum”; “aridum”, “acetum”, | Graeci ut faciunt. For other examples of the Greek poets’ licence in changing the quantities of the vowels to fit the metre, see Korzeniewski, loc. cit. 15.
PLDLI±QH
q$UHM
q$UHM s$UHM EURWRORLJy PLDLI±QH
R¸NyWL
s$UHM
EURWRORLJy
WHLFHVLSO WD
SR¿
PH
SD¹HR NRXUH¿ _ WyPQZQ R¸ J
U {FHLM
WHPHjM
q$UHM
s$UHM
16. nobis … disertis: cf. Ov. epist. 14, 64 quo mihi commisso non licet esse piae?; 15, 134 et siccae non licet esse mihi. The dative of the adjective is in these cases due to assimilation to the case of nobis etc., which since Plautus is the regular construction when licet stands with mihi, tibi, etc. (the accusative, which occurs from Cicero and Caesar onwards, is more rarely used).5 The wide extension of this construction in Greek made Löfstedt suspect at least some Greek influence on authors like Ovid and Horace (who has the dative also with active dare; cf. epist. 1, 16, 61 da mihi fallere | da iusto sanctoque videri) in this respect.6
1
Hofmann–Szantyr, § 176, Zus. a, p. 316. Cf. Hjalmar Frisk, Griechisches etymologisches Wörterbuch, Heidelberg 1960, vol. I, p. 433. Of the phenomenon in general, see D. Korzeniewski, Griechische Metrik, Darmstadt 1968, p. 23. 3 Friends, p. 291, n. 37. 4 “‘Ares, Ares, destroyer of men, blood-fiend,’ cease, barber, from cutting me, for you have no place left in which to cut me”; translation by W. R. Paton, Loeb. 5 Hofmann–Szantyr, § 191, II Zus. , p. 349. 6 Synt. 2, pp. 107 f. 2
E
98
12 (13) Nomen habes teneri quod tempora nuncupat anni, cum breve Cecropiae ver populantur apes; nomen Acidalia meruit quod harundine pingi, quod Cytherea sua scribere gaudet acu; nomen Erythraeis quod littera facta lapillis, gemma quod Heliadum pollice trita notet; quod pinna scribente grues ad sidera tollant; quod decet in sola Caesaris esse domo.
5
The second epigram of the cycle resembles the first section of 9, 11, inasmuch as Martial’s concern is still the celebration of the sweet name of Earinus, a task to which he can now devote himself entirely, having got rid in the previous poem of the problem that it cannot be fitted into Latin verse. One obvious difference between this epigram and 9, 11 (as indeed the other Earinus poems as well) is that Martial now, for the sake of variation, turns to address Earinus directly. Still, he keeps a notable distance; there is no sign of familiarity, not even a vocative of the elevated kind used by Statius (silv. 3, 4, 60 care puer); cf. the introduction to the Earinus cycle. The first lines of the poem, referring to Earinus’ connection with springtime, recalls the opening of 9, 11, but Martial has now added a bitter-sweet notion of the brevity of springtime: it explodes in cascades of beauty and flowers, and then fades away, having been exploited to the point of bursting by bees, who know that the spring is short and that the opportunity must be seized. This is probably an allegory of the fate of a eunuch;1 for a short time, he is in the prime of his youth, during which he is exploited by his master, just as the flowers of the short spring are savaged by the bees in their search for nectar.2 As he gets older, he turns into a fat and disgusting sexless being; cf. the complaints of Pythias in Ter. Eun. 687 ff. ad nos deductus hodiest adulescentulus, | quem tu videre vero velles, Phaedria. | hic est vietu’ vetu’ veternosus senex,| colore mustelino; Hor. epod. 9, 13 f. spadonibus … rugosis; Lucian. Am. 21 .3 Claud. 18, 469 mixta duplex aetas (sc. eunuchi); inter puerumque senemque nil medium.4 In line 3, Martial introduces a new approach to the name of Earinus by mentioning five different ways in which the name should be depicted: with a pen made of a reed from the fountain of the Graces, with the embroidery needle of Venus, with a figure of Indian pearls, with rubbed amber, and by the formation of a flock of cranes in flight. The first two references, to the Acidalian pen and the needle of Venus, are warranted by the connection of the goddess of love and the Graces with springtime; cf., e.g., Hor. carm. 1, 4, 5-7 (see Nisbet & Hubbard, p. W´
J UDM
D¸WR¼M
PDUDdQHLQ
G
xQ
QH±WKWL
SDUDPHjQDQ
QTRM
HcM
SU±ZURQ
1
Garthwaite, Court Poets, p. 76, suggests that the metaphor alludes to Earinus’ experience of his castration. 2 Cf. the erotic notion of nectar in 9, 11, 5. 3 “The bloom that has lingered with them in their youth makes them fade prematurely into old age”; translation by M. D. Macleod, Loeb. 4 Cf. Hug in RE Suppl. 3, s.v. Eunuchen 453.
99
59, and notes ad locc.) The significance of the following lines is less obvious. Martial continues with the statement that the name is worthy of being represented by a letter, made of the precious Indian pearls, which Martial often applies as an example of redundant luxury as well as pure beauty.1 Amber is likewise used as a symbol of luxury but carries a stronger amatory meaning (see below). As for the cranes, there is no notion of love, beauty or luxury and, indeed, there is no need for them. The fact that nature herself lets Earinus’ initial (however, in Latin) be seen in the firmament, the domain of Jupiter, is in itself more than enough; suggesting that Earinus is also the favourite of the gods, it prepares the ground for the conclusive verse: there is no place on earth for Earinus, except in the palace of the earthly Tonans, Domitian. 1. Nomen habes: at the beginning of the hexameter also 13, 78, 1; Ov. am. 3, 6, 91; Ov. ars 3, 536; met. 5, 461; 9, 665; 13, 570; fast. 2, 132. nuncupat: very rare in poetry, found only here and in Ov. met. 14, 608 (see Bömer, ad loc.); fast. 1, 246. 2. cum breve etc.: cf. 2, 46, 2 cum breve Sicaniae ver populantur apes. breve … ver: also Ov. met. 1, 116; 10, 85. As in Ovid, the meaning is “the all too short springtime” (cf. Bömer on met. 1, 116). In this case, ver is used metonymically, meaning not only the springtime as an abstraction, but, as indicated by populantur, also the luxuriant flora it brings in its train. Cecropiae … apes: the bees of Attica produced what was considered the best honey (cf. note on 9, 11, 3). They are mentioned also in 6, 34, 4 and 11, 42, 4 (cf. Verg. georg. 4, 177). 3. Acidalia … harundine: i.e. a calamus or reed-pen, like 1, 3, 10, neve notet lusus tristis harundo tuos, and 14, 209, 2 inoffensa curret harundo via. Acidalius, derived from the Fons Acidalius in Boeotia, the fountain of the Graces, is found only four times in classical Latin literature. Whereas the present instance is perhaps best taken as alluding to the Graces (with the following line devoted to Venus), the other three occurrences all refer to the goddess; thus, 6, 13, 5 Acidalius nodus (the cestus); Verg. Aen. 1, 720 mater Acidalia; Laus Pis. 91 Acidalia ales (the dove).2 Austin (on Aen. 1, 720) presumes that Vergil borrowed
1 Garthwaite complicates the matter, saying that “Martial appears to be thinking of a specific letter or shape commonly associated with, or formed from, pearls and having some connection with Earinus’ name”. 2 dicunt, vel certe Cf. Serv. Aen. 1, 720 Acidalia Venus dicitur vel quia inicit curas, quas Graeci a fonte Acidalio qui est in Orchomeno Boeotiae civitate, in quo se Gratiae lavant, quas Veneri esse constat sacratas; it is, however, doubtful whether the Greeks actually used the word in the sense of curae; cf. TGL, s.v. 1208, 1 ff. (the word is missing in LSJ). Servius’ note appears to be the source of similar information in [Mythogr.] 2, 36; Vib. Seq. geogr. 164; Gloss. V 615, 49. NLGDM
NdGHM
$NdGHM
100
the adjective from some Hellenistic source, even though there is no preserved instance of applied to Aphrodite.1 Acidalia harundo may signify either a pen made of reed from the Graces’ fountain or one made of reed from Cnidus, a centre of the cult of Aphrodite in south-western Asia Minor, both suppliers of high-quality reed to be used in pens (Plin. nat. 16, 157). For the connection of Venus and the Graces with spring, see the introduction above.
$NLGDOdK
pingi: the usual word with harundo or calamus is naturally scribere. The use of pingere here suggests that ornamental writing is meant. 4. scribere … acu: “embroider”, also Sil. 14, 660 scribuntur acu. Whereas the normal expression is pingere acu (e.g. 8, 28, 17 f.; cf. Verg. Aen. 11, 777; Ov. met. 6, 23), the use of scribere in the present case may be due to the fact that the reference is to the embroidering not of shapes, but of letters; note, however, that Greek occasionally has (e.g. Arist. Ran. 938). Martial associated the art of embroidering with the Babylonians (8, 28, 17; 14, 150), and Pliny ascribes it to the Phrygians (nat. 8, 196), even though it was much older than that, going back to the earliest peoples of the East; see Hug in RE 2:3, s.v. Stickerei 2490 ff.; Blümner, Technologie, pp. 218-222. JUIHLQ
5. Erythraeis … lapillis: on the costliness of Indian pearls, see note on 9, 2, 9. The practice of marking happy days (or nights) on the calendar with a pearl (as an expensive substitute for the ordinary chalk; cf. 10, 38, 5; Stat. silv. 4, 6, 18) seems to be of no particular relevance here. 6. Gemma … Heliadum pollice trita: according to the myth, the Heliades, daughters of the sun-god Helios, were transformed into poplars mourning their brother Phaeton. They continued to weep even after the metamorphosis, and from their tears, amber arose; Ap. Rhod. 4, 595 ff.; Ov. met. 2, 340 ff.; Verg. Aen. 10, 189 (with Servius). Like Indian pearls, amber was used as a model of costliness; in 4, 59, Martial considers a viper, accidentally encapsulated in amber, to be buried in a nobler tomb than Cleopatra, and in 6, 15, an ant which met with the same accident is regarded as funeribus facta … pretiosa suis. But amber also has a marked amatory implication; cf. 3, 65, 5 ff. quod sucina trita ... hoc tua, saeve puer Diadumene, basia fragrant; 5, 37, 9 ff. fragravit ore (sc. Erotion) … quod sucinorum rapta de manu glaeba; 11, 8, 6 ff. Sucina virginea quod regelata manu ... Hoc fragrant pueri basia mane mei; cf. also Iuv. 6, 573. All mention the amber as rubbed with the fingers or tepid from having been rubbed, the reason for which is that amber from a special kind of pine, now extinct, was used as a perfume for the hands;
1
The word is equally rare in Greek; cf. Pind. fr. 244 mentioning the Graces as coming magnum and Suda, s.v. SU´M
s2OXPSRQ
FHjU
$NLGDOdDM
$NLGDOdKM
S´
; Menophilus in Stob. 4, 21a, 7, ; cf. also Etymologicum SKJ M
101
when rubbed with the fingers, it emitted a fragrance of pine and camphor.1 It was also rare and expensive; see Kay’s note on 11, 8, 6. notet: “you have a name, which a letter made of pearls etc. may present”; for the expression, cf. Suet. Aug. 97, 2 centum … quem numerum C littera notaret; Quint. inst. 1, 7, 29 “Subura” cum tribus litteris notatur. The hortative subjunctive expresses the same thought as meruit in line 3. 7. pinna scribente grues: the letter v ( ), the first letter of the word ver, which, according to the myth, got its form from the triangular formation of a flock of cranes in flight. The mythological inventor Palamedes, who is credited with the invention of the alphabet or at least of some of its letters,2 was considered to have got the forms of the letters from the flight and behaviour of birds, especially of the crane; cf. 13, 75 (Grues): Turbabis versus nec littera tota volabit, | unam perdideris si Palamedis avem; Auson. 16, 13, 25 Prete; Philostr. Her. 10, 3; 10, 1. X
8. Caesaris esse domo: cf. Ov. Pont. 4, 9, 105 f. videt hospite terra | in nostra sacrum Caesaris esse domo. The words Caesaris esse occur, with the same placing, also in 4, 3, 8; 9, 34, 8; Prop. 3, 18, 12.
13 (12) Si daret autumnus mihi nomen, Oporinos essem, horrida si brumae sidera, Chimerinos; dictus ab aestivo Therinos tibi mense vocarer: tempora cui nomen verna dedere, quis est? This epigram, the last of the cycle to be devoted to the name Earinus, approaches its subject in yet another way. It is a straight forward riddle, in which the answer to the final question is made evident from the preceding examples, a series of “names”, all of them derived in the same manner as Earinus from the Greek adjectives of the seasons. The epigram totally lacks the glorifying tone of the two preceding poems. Still, its plainness and simplicity provide a sense of relief after the elaborate innuendo of nos. 11 and 12, making a fitting conclusion to the “name series” of the cycle.
1
When rubbed, it also behaved like a sort of magnet, attracting straw, dry leaves and linden bark (Plin. nat. in Greek, from which word the phenomenon 37, 48). This was due to static electricity; amber is of electricity got its name. 2 The first author to credit him with the whole alphabet was apparently Stesichoros (Anecdota Graeca, vol. 2, ed. Becker, Berlin 1816, p. 783, l. 16 f.); also Gorg. Pal. 30; Schol. Eur. Or. 432; Dio Chrys. 13, 21; et al. According to others, he invented only certain letters, for example, Pliny (nat. 7, 192), who ascribes to Palamedes the invention of the letters and ; Serv. Aen. 2, 81 credits him with * F …cum h aspiratione. OHNWURQ
]
102
X
I
[
, “of autumn” ( 1. Oporinos: Gr. , is attested in an inscription.1 °SZULQ±M
°SÇUD
). A Greek version of the name,
2SZUHjQRM
2. horrida … sidera: sidus is used metonymically in the sense of “season”; cf., e.g., Ov. Pont. 2, 4, 25 f. longa dies citius brumali sidere noxque | tardior hiberna solstitialis erit; OLD, s.v. sidus 5 a. The winter is commonly referred to as horridus; cf. 7, 95, 1; TLL, s.v. horridus 2992, 11 ff. brumae: bruma is actually the winter solstice2 but is more often used as a metonymy for “winter”; cf. Ov. Pont. 2, 4, 25 quoted above; TLL, s.v. bruma 2208, 23 ff. This use of bruma can be observed (although not yet fully developed) already in Lucr. 5, 746 f. tandem bruma nives adfert pigrumque rigorem | reddit, where bruma signifies the early winter, as opposed to a following hiemps (see Bailey, ad loc.). “that which is born Chimerinos: modelled on the Greek adjective or has taken place during the winter ( )”. There appears to be no similar name in Greek. FHLPHULQ±M
FHjPD
, “of summer” ( 3. Therinos: from instances of Greek versions of the name ( THULQ±M
TyURM
). Pape, s.v. / ).
4yULQRM
, gives three
4yULQRM 4HUjQRM
tibi: should probably be taken as an ethic dative, “named after a summer– month, I would be Therinos to you”, perhaps with a tinge of the dative of agent: “named after a summer-month, you would call me Therinos”.3
14 Hunc, quem mensa tibi, quem cena paravit amicum, esse putas fidae pectus amicitiae? Aprum amat et mullos et sumen et ostrea, non te. Tam bene si cenem, noster amicus erit. A reproach to a victim of a dinner-hunter not to be so credulous as to think that the dinner-hunter dines with him for the sake of friendship, since the only thing he is interested in is the costly dishes on his table. The dinner-hunters (cenipetae4) 1
Pape s.v., also giving three instances of the woman’s name . TLL, s.v. bruma 2207, 1 ff. Although the dative of agent is mostly used with a perfect participle or a gerundive (cf. Hofmann–Szantyr, § 67 d, p. 96), there are instances of its being used with a finite verb, for example, Acc. trag. 284 ne cui cognoscar noto; Cic. inv. 1, 86 illa nobis alio tempore … explicabuntur; Verg. Aen. 1, 440 neque cernitur ulli with Servius’ note. 4 The word is formed on the model of agripeta (cf. Cic. Att. 16, 1, 2), heredipeta (Petron. 124, 2), lucripeta, etc. and is found only in a lemma on 2, 37; cf. TLL, s.v. 783, 17. There is also the humorous word laudiceni, formed by Pliny as a play on Laodiceni (epist. 2, 14, 5; see Sherwin-White, ad loc., and TLL, s.v. laudiceni 1041, 80 ff.).
2SÇUD
2 3
103
were professional parasites who had made the quest for dinner invitations into an art,1 spending whole days on the Campus Martius,2 watching for suitable victims, whose tables they knew to be loaded with food and drink. Their distinctive feature was greed: when Santra manages to get an invitation, he stuffs his napkin with food and sells it the day after (7, 20), and Philo, if not invited, does not eat at all. Their means was largely flattery: the notorious dinner-hunter Selius presents the reciting Martial with an Effecte! Graviter! Cito! Nequiter! Euge! Beate! (2, 27, 3; cf. 6, 84) to get a seat at his table,3 as the Sabellus of 9, 19 praises the baths of the gourmet Ponticus; that they were quite unabashed liars is indicated by the Philomusus of 9, 35. Naturally, the friendship offered by the dinner-hunter was quite worthless; cf. also 9, 35; 12, 19; 12, 82. 2. fidae pectus amicitiae: cf. Stat. silv. 4, 4, 102 f. almae | pectus amicitiae;4 for pectus used per periphrasin for homo, see TLL, s.v. 916, 66 f. It is frequently determined by fidus, for example, Hor. carm. 2, 12, 16; Ov. met. 9, 248; trist. 3, 3, 48; Stat. Theb. 2, 364; silv. 3, 2, 99. 3. Aprum ... ostrea: these delicacies are mentioned, by themselves or in different combinations, throughout the epigrams as instances of exquisite dishes, for example, 2, 37; 3, 45; 3, 77; 7, 20, 7, 78; 10, 37; 12, 17; 12, 48. They all have their own distich in Book 13 (boar 13, 93; mullet 79; udder 44; oysters 82). Aprum: the Romans had a special liking for game, the boar being in a class of its own; it is also the delicacy mentioned most often by Martial when referring to dinner-parties, at which it was a must on the table; a skimpy dinner is that at which a nudus aper, sed et hic minimus is placed before the guests (1, 43, 9), and the poet is disappointed when, invited to dine on a boar, he is presented with a pig (8, 22). Delicious boars, of different qualities due to the variation in their feeding, came from the forests of Lucania (e.g. Hor. sat. 2, 8, 6), Umbria (ibid. 2, 4, 40), Tuscany (Mart. 7, 27, 1 f.; 12, 14, 9; generosior Umbro Stat. silv. 4, 6, 10) and from the region of Laurentum on the coast of Latium (9, 48, 5 with note; 10, 45, 4).5 mullos: the red mullet appears in literature from Cicero and Varro. It was rather small, rarely weighing more than two librae (approx. 0.6 kg; cf. 11, 49, 9 mullus bilibris) but highly esteemed, the best kind having the flavour of an oyster (Plin. nat. 9, 64). That a mullet of three librae (≈ 1 kg) was large enough to at1 , on which see O. Ribbeck, Kolax, Eine ethologische They correspond to the Greek Studie (Abhandlungen der philologisch-historischen Classe der königlich Sächsischen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften 9), Leipzig 1884. The Greek Anthology has a number of epigrams mentioning these flatterers in the same contemptuous tone as Martial, for example, AP 9, 43, 3; 9, 119; 9, 394, 1; 10, 86; 11, 323; 11, 346. 2 The chief hunting-ground for the dinner-hunters (cf. 2, 14), but they also frequented the baths (12, 19), and even the public toilets (11, 77). 3 Selius is Martial’s dinner-hunter par excellence, appearing also in 2, 11; 2, 14; 2, 69, 6. 4 In the passage from Statius, parcus has been suggested for pectus, an emendation which is unnecessary and rightly rejected by Coleman (p. 157) with reference to this instance. 5 Blümner, Privataltertümer, pp. 175 f. N±OD[SDUVLWRM
104
tract notice if thrown back into the sea appears from 10, 37, 6 f.1 (cf. Hor. sat. 2, 2, 33), and in 10, 31 Calliodorus sells a slave for 200.000 IIS, so that he may for once be able to dine well on a mullet of 4 librae (≈ 1.3 kg). A giant mullet weighing 6 librae (≈ 2 kg) is mentioned by Juvenal (4, 15 f.) and there are even such fantastic weights as the mullet of 80 librae (≈ 26 kg), which, according to Plin. nat. 9, 68, was captured in the Red Sea. A sign of the high esteem in which the fish was held is the high, even enormous sums paid for big specimens. Seneca (epist. 95, 42) mentions a mullet of four and a half librae (≈ 1.5 kg) which was bought for 5000 IIS, the 6-pound mullet in Iuv. 4, 15 is described as aequantem sane paribus sestertia libris, i.e. its price was 6000 IIS, and during the reign of Caligula, the consular Asinius Celer is said to have provoked all spendthrifts by paying 8000 IIS for a mullet (Plin. nat. 9, 67).2 sumen: together with the matrix, the liver and the glandula,3 the sow’s udder was considered the most delicious part of the pig. The best udder was that of a sow slaughtered the day after farrowing, whereas the worst was that of a sow which had had a miscarriage (Plin. nat. 11, 211). ostrea: the Romans had early developed a certain taste for oysters, the fishing for which is mentioned already by Plautus (Rud. 297). In favourable locations, like the Gulf of Baiae (whence came oysters of high quality; cf. 10, 37, 11; Iuv. 11, 49), certain ponds were constructed for their cultivation, as in the Lacus Lucrinus4 (cf. 3, 60, 3; 6, 11, 5; 12, 48, 4; 13, 82; Hor. epod. 2, 49) and in the Lacus Avernus (Plin. nat. 32, 61).5 The quality and taste of oysters vary from place to place, but it was generally agreed that the best were those which were spissa nec saliva sua lubrica, crassitudine potius spectanda quam latitudine, neque in lutosis capta neque in harenosis, sed solido vado, spondylo brevi atque non carnoso, nec fibris laciniosa ac tota in alvo (Plin. nat. 32, 60). Like the mullet, oysters were a luxurious dish and commanded high prices; cf. 13, 82, 2 luxuriosa (sc. concha), Lucil. fragm. 448 f. Krenkel ostrea milibus nummum | empta. 4. amicus erit: see note on 9, 2, 12.
1
The point is that Maternus, the addressee of the epigram, is supposed to drag it up from the Spanish ocean; Martial the patriot can see no reason to keep it — in those waters there are much bigger specimens. 2 Marquardt, pp. 418 f., Blümner, Privataltertümer, pp. 182 f. 3 It is uncertain which part of the animal is to be understood by the word glandula; see Blümner, Privataltertümer, p. 174, n. 7. 4 The first pond in this location was built aetate L. Crassi oratoris, ante Marsicum bellum (i.e. before 91 BC) by C. Sergius Orata (Plin. nat. 9, 168). 5 Marquardt, pp. 426 f., Blümner, Privataltertümer, pp. 188 f.
105
15 Inscripsit tumulis septem scelerata virorum “se fecisse” Chloe. Quid pote simplicius? Wife- and husband-murderers are recurring characters in Martial; cf. 4, 69 (Papylus has poisoned four wives); 8, 43 (Fabius and Chrestilla would make a nice couple, both having murdered their former consorts); 9, 78; 10, 43 (Phileros has murdered seven wives). Since divorce in Martial’s day was possible on the part of both the man and the woman,1 resorting to murder would have been due to an eagerness for the inheritance; a divorce was not lucrative for either party.2 Thus, the individual who made a habit of remarrying and poisoning the spouse may be seen as a brutal form of the captator (9, 8 intro.). But marrying for the purpose of murdering the spouse for the inheritance would have required great care in the choice of the victim. Failure of the wife to become her husband’s appointed heir would result in her getting nothing but her own dowry;3 for want of appointed heirs, the legacy would go to the spouse (husband or wife) only if there were no liberi, legitimi or cognati (all terms of a wide significance).4 1. scelerata: an ironical reference to the frequent use of sceleratus of the survivors in funerary inscriptions, for example, CIL 6, 9961 Annius Hilarus et Annia Helpis mater scelerata ... filio dulcissimo fecerunt; 15160 filiis suis infelicissimis … fecit mater scelerata; 35769 Myseri posuimus hic immaturu parentes … scelerati; 35769; 10, 310; cf. 6, 13353. In these cases, the parents are called “guilty” because they still remain among the living and do not follow their children in death; the same usage can be observed regarding impius, crudelis, iniquus, etc.5 In applying it to Chloe, who is scelerata also in the usual sense of the word, Martial achieves a brilliant ambiguity. 2. “se fecisse”: Chloe’s inscriptions might have read something like d. m. [the husband’s name in the dative] coniugi carissimo Chloe fecit. Naturally, what Chloe means is that she has built the tombs for her husbands, but Martial, reading between the lines, hints at a totally different interpretation (not theoretically contradicted by the inscription), viz. that Chloe has taken the lives of her seven hus1
See Kaser, Privatrecht 1, pp. 278 ff. The increase in divorces during the Principate offered a welcome target for satirists to attack; their targets remarried and divorced indiscriminately; cf. 6, 7; 10, 41; Iuv. 6, 229; see Friedländer, Sittengeschichte 1, pp. 283 ff.; for the possibility of exaggeration on the part of the sources, see S. Treggiari, “Divorce Roman Style: How Easy and how Frequent was it?” in B. Rawson (ed.), Marriage, Divorce, and Children in Ancient Rome, Oxford 1991, pp. 31–46. Dissatisfaction with the marriage and the impossibility of getting a divorce may naturally account for earlier cases of poisoning within the marriage, in a time when the divorce regulations were more rigorous; in 329 BC., 170 matrons were found guilty of having poisoned their husbands (Liv. 8, 18; Val. Max. 2, 5, 3); the consul Piso was poisoned by his wife Quarta Hostilia in 180 (Liv. 40, 37), and in 154 two noble ladies, Publilia and Licinia, were convicted of having poisoned their husbands, who were both consulars (Liv. perioch. 48); cf. Marquardt, pp. 66 ff. 2 Kaser, loc. cit., pp. 287 ff. 3 Ibid., p. 289. 4 Ibid., pp. 582 ff. 5 See H. Armini, “Till de romerska gravskrifternas fraseologi”, Eranos 19 (1920), pp. 50 ff.
106
bands (“Chloe did it”). A third possibility is that Martial also is alluding to the signature of the type Apelles faciebat on the work of painters and sculptors;1 Chloe would then be a poisoner, hardened enough even to have signed her work. Chloe: Martial has two more epigrams aimed at a woman of this name, 3, 53 and 4, 28. Whereas these may perhaps be aimed at the same woman,2 they clearly have nothing to do with the present Chloe. Quid pote simplicius: this is the sole occurrence in Martial of the archaic pote, which is equally rare in contemporary authors; entirely lacking in Lucan, Silius, Statius and Juvenal, it is found once in Persius and once in Valerius Flaccus. Among the poets of the late republic and the Augustan era, the situation is much the same: pote is found five times in Catullus and twice in Propertius, while there are no instances in Vergil, Horace, Tibullus and Ovid. The alternative form potis (probably the masculine/feminine form corresponding to the neutral pote) occurs four times in Catullus and three in Vergil, and, among Silver Latin poets, once in Persius and once in Silius Italicus. Martial’s use of the word should probably not be designated as an archaism,3 but regarded as a “Catullianism”, a direct borrowing from Catullus, in which metrical considerations presumably also played a part. Probably it was not an archaism for Catullus either but rather, as in the letters of Cicero,4 a colloquialism.
1
Or fecit, depending on whether or not the artist considered his work unfinished (as did the great ones) or not (as did the lesser, cf. Plin. nat. praef. 26 f.); W. Stuart Messer, “Martial IX, 15”, CJ 36 (1940-41), pp. 226-229. E. Post suggested that there is also a reference to the legal term for condemnation, fecisse videtur (Selected Epigrams of Martial, Boston 1909, joined by Stuart Messer, op. cit.), but I fail to see what this would add to the point, “Chloe is guilty” being equal to the obvious translation of “Chloe did it”. 2 In 3, 53, Martial expresses his contempt for Chloe’s whole being: Et voltu poteram tuo carere | et collo manibusque cruribusque | et mammis natibusque clunibusque, | et, ne singula persequi laborem, | tota te poteram, Chloe, carere. This may indicate,that her face, neck, hands, legs, bosom, etc. were generally appreciated by other men. In 4, 28, he reproaches her for giving loads of expensive presents to a young boy named Lupercus; the combined information of these two epigrams would perhaps suggest a femme fatale entangling young boys. 3 See Manu Leumann’s valuable definition of the word “archaism” in “Die lateinische Dichtersprache”, MH 4 (1947), pp. 116-139. On pp. 125 f., Leumann writes: “Ein Wort, das zu Ennius’ Zeit bereits aus der lebenden Sprache geschwunden ist, ist ein Archaismus des Ennius. In spätere Dichtung sind Archaismen meist Ennianismen: Ein sonst verschollenes Wort, das Vergil aus Ennius übernimmt, ist für Vergil ein Archaismus oder Ennianismus, ohne für Ennius schon ein Archaismus gewesen sein zu müssen … Ein Wort, das spätere Dichter aus Vergil übernehmen, ist für diese nur ein poetisches Wort, ganz gleichgültig, ob es für Vergil oder gar für Ennius ein Archaismus war”. 4 For example, Att. 13, 38, 1 hoc quidquam pote inpurius; Hofmann-Szantyr, p. 769.
107
16 Consilium formae, speculum, dulcisque capillos Pergameo posuit dona sacrata deo Ille puer tota domino gratissimus aula, nomine qui signat tempora verna suo. Felix, quae tali censetur munere tellus! Nec Ganymedeas mallet habere comas.
5
The second series of poems in the Earinus cycle deals with the actual offering of Earinus’ tresses and may be referred to as the “offering series”. It comprises two epigrams, 9, 16 and 17, both very different from those of the “name series”, not only regarding the subject, but also in approach. The sexual implication is strongly defused (present here only in the reference to Ganymede, in 17 totally abolished) and replaced by a serious and almost religious tone. In this poem, the reason for the poems on Earinus is at last revealed to the reader: he has offered his locks and his mirror to the Pergamenic Aesculapius. What could be inferred from 12, 8 is now explicitly said: of the servants in the imperial palace, Earinus is the emperor’s particular favourite. The purpose of line 4, simply restating the idea of 12, 1 and 13, 4, can hardly be to bring etymological play on Earinus’ name into this poem as well; the subject would by now seem rather trite and require a drastically new turn to be taken any further. Nor is Martial driven by an urge to mention Earinus explicitly in each and every one of the poems in the cycle, since there is no such mention in the following poem. Now it is reasonable to presume that the Earinus cycle, before it was incorporated into Book 9, was presented to the emperor and to Earinus as a libellus, containing only the poems of the cycle (apart from 9, 36; see the introduction to that epigram);1 it would naturally have been self-evident that all the poems in such a libellus were written in celebration of the same event. In incorporating the present epigram into Book 9, with two epigrams separating it from 9, 13, Martial may have felt it necessary to emphasize that this epigram is again about Earinus and, accordingly, he may have substituted line 4 for a former line to connect the epigram with 9, 13. Perhaps it is even possible that the entire poem was written only to appear in Book 9, as it provides the reader with some important information which otherwise might have been unknown to him, thus paving the way for 9, 17, in which the poet can then allow himself to be less precise and more poetic.
1
There is a handful of epigrams indicating that Martial presented patrons and friends and even the emperors with small collections of poems (libelli) both prior to publication and as selections from his published works. Thus, 12, 4 was written to introduce an abridgement of Books 10 and 11 presented to Nerva, and the timidam brevemque chartam of 5, 6, 7 may allude to a libellus to Domitian. 1, 44 indicates that Martial had sent two collections of poems, each containing an epigram from the hare–lion cycle, to Stella, and the cycle itself was probably presented to Domitian in the form of a libellus (Weinreich, Studien, pp. 106 f.). In 2, 91, 3 f., the poet mentions festinati libelli sent to Domitian, and in 1, 101, 2, he refers to the hand of his copyist Demetrius as nota Caesaribus, indicating that Titus also had received such collections of poems; cf. also 4, 82; 7, 26; 11, 106; 12, praef.; White, Dedication, pp. 44 ff. However, the importance of such libelli vis-à-vis the published books should not be overstated; see D. P. Fowler, “Martial and the Book”, Ramus 24 (1995), pp. 31–58.
108
In the concluding lines, Pergamum is praised as being lucky to receive the offering of Earinus (cf. 9, 20, 3 f.); indeed, it would not rather have the tresses of Ganymede. But the comparison is not really between the two cupbearers; Pergamum prefers that which comes from Domitian to that which comes from Jupiter himself. 1. Consilium formae: Earinus offers to Aesculapius his golden mirror, an insignia of his previous life as an imperial eunuch (see the Earinus cycle intro.). The mirror is represented as Earinus’ advisor on his beauty (cf. 9, 17, 6); cf. Ov. ars 3, 135 f., where women are exhorted to ask their mirror for advice, speculum consulere, before deciding what ornamentation will suit them best. The TLL, s.v. 453, 19 ff., does not give any exact parallels to consilium used as abstractum pro concreto of a thing in the sense of conciliarius, but there are instances referring to persons (e.g., Ov. fast. 3, 276 illa [sc. Egeria] Numae coniunx consiliumque fuit; epist. 17, 267 f.; trist. 4, 2, 31 f. [with Luck’s note]). Cf. also the cases in which things are represented as giving consilium (e.g., Ov. am. 1, 4, 54). speculum: the mirror dedicated by Earinus was of jewelled gold (cf. Stat. silv. 3, 4, 94). Hand-mirrors (by far the most usual mirror in antiquity) were otherwise usually made of bronze, which was sometimes covered with silver;1 there were also mirrors of solid silver.2 The mirror was almost exclusively a woman’s accessory, used when she made herself up or fixed her hair. It was often one of her most precious belongings and sometimes was even given as an offering, especially to Aphrodite,3 but there is also evidence of mirrors being given to Hera, Artemis and others.4 “Real” men did not use mirrors, except at the barber’s, and the effeminate who did make use of them supplied welcome material to the satirists; cf. Iuv. 2, 99 f. speculum, pathici gestamen Othonis, | actoris Aurunci spolium. As a eunuch, Earinus is likely to have adopted such female habits as the use of the hand-mirror. There is no other evidence of a mirror dedicated to a god instead of a goddess, and Earinus’ offering may perhaps be seen as a manifestation of the eunuch’s uncertainty of his sexual identity.5
1
Cf. Sen. nat. 1, 17, 6. 29 ff. On the mirror in antiquity, see v. Netoliczka in RE 11, s.v. 3 AP 6, 1 (Plato); 18 and 19 (Iulianus) on the aged Lais, who dedicated her mirror to Aphrodite. Cf. Philostr. imag. 1, 6, 304 on a shrine, established by the Nymphs for Aphrodite, in which hangs, among other things, a silver mirror, a gift of the Nymphs. 4 According to Apul. flor. 15, the great temple of Hera on Samos had a donarium deae perquam opulentum: plurima auri et argenti ratio in lancibus, speculis, poculis et huiuscemodi utensilibus. A mirror dedicated to Artemis is mentioned in Corpus inscriptionum Atticarum II: 2, 754. In AP 6, 210 (Philetas of Samos) and 211 (Leonidas of Tarentum), two women offer bronze mirrors to Cypris. In both cases, the mirrors are accompanied by other offerings, among which are women’s accessories and locks of their hair. 5 This uncertainty is apparent, for example, in the poets’ presentation of the emasculated Attis: in poem 63, Catullus begins to refer to Attis as a woman immediately after the emasculation, although in 63, 27 he calls him notha mulier; Kroll, ad loc., compares Ov. Ib. 455 deque viro fias nec femina nec vir, ut Attis; AP 6, 217, 9 . 2
NWRSWURQ
PLJ¹QDLND TH M OWULQ
109
2. Pergameo … deo: the epithet Pergameus of Aesculapius does not occur nearly as often as Epidaurius,1 the only literary instances being the present line and Statius’ preface to silv. 3 (the variant Pergamenus); there are also some occurrences in inscriptions, for example, IG IV 1262 (from the Asklepieion of Epidaurus) ; ILS 3854 (from Sarmizegetusa) Aescul. Pergam. | et Hygiae | sacrum | C. Spedius Hermias | flamen col. sarm. | pos.2
$UQM 0L>V _ $VNOKSLR¿ _ 3HUJDPKQR¿
posuit: “dedicated”; cf. Sen. suas. 5, 2, haec ego tropaea dis posui; OLD, s.v. pono 8 c. 3. tota … gratissimus aula: strictly grammatically, the ablative RMRÑ w ?SJÑ is an ablativus loci in adnominal position to the superlative gratissimus; cf. 7, 64, 1 tota notissimus urbe. The construction is relatively unusual but occurs a number of times in Ovid (am. 2, 11, 55 caelo nitidissimus alto; ars 2, 561 toto notissima caelo; met. 4, 664 caelo clarissimus alto; 9, 47 toto nitidissima saltu; 14, 696 tota notissima Cypro; trist. 1, 3, 71 caelo nitidissimus alto).3 Aula may signify the imperial palace (as in 9, 11, 8) but may also be taken as a metonymy for the servants of the imperial household, as in Hor. carm. 1, 29, 7 puer … ex aula; TLL, s.v. 1458, 13 f. Such an interpretation lends a strong partitive connotation to the ablative, approximating it to the equally rare construction involving de with the ablative for the partitive genitive (thus, Ov. epist. 18, 37 de rapidis inmansuetissime ventis; met. 3, 623 f.; 5, 431; 12, 586 [with Bömer]; 13, 529). 4. nomine etc.: cf. 9, 11, 2; 12, 1; 13, 4. 5. censetur: “is renowned”; cf. 1, 61, 3 censetur Aponi Livio suo tellus; 8, 6, 9 Hi duo longaevo censentur Nestore fundi; TLL, s.v. 789, 28 ff. munere: of gifts to the gods, cf. TLL, s.v. 1666, 50 ff. Catullus (66, 38) applies it to the lock vowed by Berenice for the safe return of her husband Ptolemy III from the invasion of Syria. 6. Ganymedeas: for Earinus and Ganymede, see 9, 11, 7 note.
1
Cf. Cic. nat. 3, 83; Hor. sat. 1, 3, 27; Prop. 2, 1, 61; Ov. met. 15, 723; Pont. 1, 3, 21. This is due to the earlier status of the shrine at Epidaurus as the centre of the cult of Aesculapius (Plin. nat. 29, 72). It was from Epidaurus that the god was fetched to Rome to combat the plague in about 293 BC (cf. Ov. met. 15, 622 ff. with Bömer, pp. 417 ff.). 2 ”, Philologus 88 (1933), p. 98, n. 41. See H. Hepding, “ 3 Bömer on met. 9, 47, “Adnominale Stellung eines Abl. locat. (toto saltu) zu einem Superlativ (‘im ganzen Walde der schönste’) ist ungewöhnlich; nur entfernt vergleichbar sind Stellen wie IV 89 niveis uberrima pomis … und adnominale Verwendungen praepositionaler Begriffe wie V 587 sine vertice aquae”, is thus misleading. C5RXIdQLRQ s$OVRM
110
17 Latonae venerande nepos, qui mitibus herbis Parcarum exoras pensa brevesque colos, hos tibi laudatos domino, rata vota, capillos ille tuus Latia misit ab urbe puer; addidit et nitidum sacratis crinibus orbem, quo felix facies iudice tuta fuit. Tu iuvenale decus serva, ne pulchrior ille in longa fuerit quam breviore coma.
5
The concluding poem of the Earinus cycle is by far the most elevated and religious in its tone and is completely lacking in any kind of sexual innuendo. Its opening has the features of a hymn to Aesculapius, beginning with a vocative, clearly resembling and probably influenced by the first line of Horace’s hymn to Mercury (carm. 1, 10) Mercuri, facunde nepos Atlantis. There is no mention of the god’s name; instead, Martial invokes Aesculapius by an allusion to his ancestry,1 followed by a relative clause relating the god’s powers, corresponding to Horace’s carm. 1, 10, 2-4 qui feros cultus hominum recentum | voce formasti catus et decorae | more palaestrae.2 The following four lines, opening with a demonstrative pronoun and describing the gifts of Earinus, break off the traditional form of the hymn and suggest a dedicatory inscription; Martial uses the same device in 1, 31, 1 f. (on the hair-offering of Encolpos) hos tibi, Phoebe, vovet totos a vertice crines | Encolpos, domini centurionis amor; see Citroni ad loc. The hymnal character is taken up again in line 7, a concluding prayer, missing in Horace but occurring, for example, in the conclusion of Catullus’ hymn to Diana (carm. 34, 21-24) sis quocumque tibi placet | sancta nomine, Romulique, | antique ut solita’s, bona | sospites ope gentem. The prayer in this poem does not necessarily express a wish of Earinus, but is rather a stock prayer for continuing youth. The same theme is to be found also in 1, 31 and 5, 48, where the poet asks Apollo to retain Encolpos’ youthful beauty, although his locks have been newly shorn, and in 7, 29, where Martial expresses the wish that Thestylus may remain positis formosus … capillis.3 The epigrams in AP 6 involving offerings of hair by youths, although usually less elaborated than the present epigram, generally display the same arrangement (invocation, dedication, prayer).4 Regarding the concluding prayer, though, there is usually an acceptance of the fact that the donor is growing older, and the prayer is not for eternal youth as much as for a long and happy life (cf., e.g., AP 6, 198; 278; 279), even though wishes for youth occur, for example, in AP 6, 76 (Agathias Scholasticus). 1 As in Horace, such mentions of ancestry usually stand in apposition to the god’s name (cf., e.g., Catull. 34, 5 O Latonia maximi magna progenies Iovis). E. Norden, Agnostos theos, Leipzig and Berlin 1913, p. 148, gives instances from Greek as well as Latin. 2 Cf., e.g., Lucr. 1, 2 ff. alma Venus, caeli subter labentia signa | quae mare navigerum, quae terras frugiferentis | concelebras; Norden, op. cit., pp. 168 ff. 3 Note that in Statius’ poem, the prayer at the end (silv. 3, 4, 99-106) is for eternal, youthful beauty and a long life for Domitian. 4 See Schmoock, pp. 33 ff.
111
1. Latonae … nepos: Aesculapius is called the “descendant of Latona” as the son of the mortal Coronis and Apollo, son of Latona.1 The same reference is found in Stat. Theb. 1, 577 sidereum Latonae … nepotem, but is otherwise unusual; Bruchmann (Epitheta s.v. , p. 52) gives only one instance from Greek (Hesiod fragm. 51 ), to which add AP, app. 4, 29, 2 and 52, 2, where Aesculapius is invoked as , “son of Leto’s child”.
$VNOKSL±M
/KWRdGKM
/KWRdGRX SDj
mitibus herbis: “lenient herbs” (cf. Ser. med. 633 sanguine mite columbae; Paneg. 4, 9, 2 mitior medicina; TLL, s.v. mitis 1158, 56 ff.). The discovery of the use of herbs in medicine was made by Apollo and Aesculapius (according to Pythagoras: Plin. nat. 25, 13); cf. Ov. Pont. 1, 3, 21. The same ending is found in 9, 71, 5; cf. Ov. met. 14, 690. 2. Parcarum exoras pensa: as the god of healing, Aesculapius is said to be able to avert death. Pensum is, strictly speaking, the quantity of wool which a slave was supposed to spin in one day,2 but it is often used with reference to the term of life allotted to each human by the Fates; cf. 4, 54, 9; 4, 73, 3; 7, 96, 4; 9, 76, 7; TLL, s.v. pendo 1048, 43 ff. brevesque colos: colus, literally “distaff”, is used here de ipso fato; cf. Sen. Herc. f. 559 Parcarumque colos non revocabiles; TLL, s.v. 1744, 63 ff. Martial also has the accusative plural of the 4th declination in 7, 47, 8 raptas … colus. 3. laudatos: cf. Stat. silv. 3, 4, 6 Accipe laudatos, iuvenis Phoebeie, crines. Laudatos may simply mean that the locks are generally praised for their beauty, but perhaps there is a notion of their having been praised in verse, i.e. versibus laudatos (cf. 9, 19, 1 Laudas balnea versibus trecentis; 11, 80, 3 f.; TLL, s.v. 1043, 53 ff. domino: predicative attribute to be taken with tibi. Aesculapius is Earinus’ dominus, as Earinus is his puer (line 4); perhaps the terms are used here because Earinus may have considered Aesculapius his patron-god (see the Earinus cycle intro.). rata vota: “due offerings”, cf. Ov. Ib. 97 nulla mora est in me: peragam rata vota sacerdos. Friedländer (1, 31 intro.) suggested that these words imply that such boys often vowed their locks to a god. 4. Latia … urbe: the circumlocution of Latia urbs for Rome is not found in the poets of the late republic or the Augustan era but appears to be a Silver Latin phenomenon; cf. 6, 58, 9; 10, 96, 2; 12, 60, 4; 12, 62, 8; Stat. silv. 1, 4, 95; Val. 1 Nisbet & Hubbard (on Hor. carm. 1, 10, 1) point out that “nepos has none of the prosaic note of English ‘grandson’” and give Ov. fast. 5, 663 Clare nepos Atlantis and Claud. Rapt. Pros. 1, 89 Atlantis Tegeaee nepos as comparable instances. 2 Blümner, Technologie, p. 122.
112
Fl. 1, 21. Cf. Ausonia urbs first used by Ovid Pont. 3, 2, 101; 4, 8, 86; then Lucan. 7, 33; Mart. epigr. 4, 5; Stat. silv. 4, 8, 20. The same two epithets are also used alternately of the Appian Way (see 9, 64, 2 and 9, 101, 2 with notes). 5. nitidum … orbem: Earinus’ mirror; cf. 9, 16, 1. For orbis as a metonymy of a mirror (perhaps a Grecism1), see also Sen. nat. 1, 17, 6; epist. 86, 6; cf. TLL, s.v. 907, 75 ff. Nitidum may perhaps suggest that the mirror was of high quality, plain and highly polished, so as to avoid distortion and give as accurate a reflection as possible of the viewer (cf. note on tuta below). That mirrors in antiquity were often deficient in this respect appears from the famous passage in the first letter of Paul to the Corinthians (Cor. 1, 13, 12) ' , (videmus nunc per speculum in aenigmate: tunc autem facie ad faciem), which seems to imply that antique mirrors often gave an unclear and distorted view of the objects reflected in them; cf. AP 6, 210 (Philetas of Samos), where a certain Nicias is said to have offered to Cypris, among other things, her bronze mirror, which “did not lack accuracy” ( 6, 210, 3 f.). EOySRPHQ
DcQdJPDWL
W±WH
G|
SU±VZSRQ
SU´M
J
U
UWL
GL
xV±SWURX
xQ
SU±VZSRQ
W´Q G| GLDXJ _ FDON±Q NULEHdKM R¸N SROHLS±PHQRQ
6. quo … iudice: the only instance of a mirror being called the “judge” of someone’s beauty. Concrete objects are, on the whole, rarely referred to as iudices; for abstract things, cf., e.g., Cic. Phil. 5, 50 res publica, Liv. 21, 10, 9 eventus belli, Sen. dial. 6, 4, 4 fama; see TLL, s.v. 603, 11 ff. Note, however, that the mirror is referred to as consilium formae in 9, 16, 1. felix facies: for felix in the sense of “beautiful” of things which are a delight to the eye, the ear, etc., cf. 9, 44, 2; Hor. carm. 4, 13, 21 f. felix post Cinaram notaque et artium | gratarum facies; Stat. silv. 5, 1, 54 et felix species multumque optanda maritis. I find it difficult to join Garthwaite (Court Poets, pp. 79 f.) in his assumption that the word felix includes an ironical notion of fertility, alluding to the contrast between the significance of his name and his actual physical state. tuta: “safe from adverse judgement”; cf. Prop. 2, 13, 14 nam domina iudice tutus ero; Ov. trist. 5, 11, 22 tuta suo iudice causa mea est. Earinus’ safety depends on the high quality of his mirror (see note on nitidum … orbem above). 7. iuvenale decus: “juvenile beauty”, which largely consisted in his intonsi capilli; cf. Ov. met. 1, 564 meum intonsis caput est iuvenale capillis with Bömer’s note. The juncture is found only here, but cf. Stat. silv. 2, 1, 155 puerile decus; 2, 6, 38 femineum.
1
So Schmoock, p. 35, with reference to AP 6, 18, 6 (Iulianus), where there is a similar use of
GdVNRM
.
113
18 Est mihi – sitque precor longum te praeside, Caesar – rus minimum, parvi sunt et in urbe lares. Sed de valle brevi, quas det sitientibus hortis, curva laboratas antlia tollit aquas: sicca domus queritur nullo se rore foveri, 5 cum mihi vicino Marcia fonte sonet. Quam dederis nostris, Auguste, penatibus undam, Castalis haec nobis aut Iovis imber erit. At the time of the publication of Book 9, Martial possessed a small house on the Quirinal in Rome (cf. 9, 97, 8; 10, 58, 10; 11, 1, 91) and had, at least since the early eighties, a small farm at Nomentum (2, 38, 1; 6, 43; 7, 31; 93; 9, 54; 10, 44; 58; 92; 94; 12, 57; 13, 15; 42), 20 km north-west of Rome, at the modern Castali. Seneca had an estate in the same location (see epist. 104, 1; 110, 1), and it seems likely that Martial received his estate as a gift from Seneca himself or, more probably, from his heirs.2 The location of his urban domus on the Quirinal appears from 10, 58, 10 and 11, 1, 9, and it was further specified by C. H. Hülsen (“Jahresbericht über neue Funde und Forschungen zur Topographie der Stadt Rom 1889–1890”, MDAI [R] 6 [1891], p. 121) as being between the Via Rasella and the Via del Tritone, west of the Via delle Quattro Fontane. Previously, Martial had rented an apartment ad Pirum, likewise on the Quirinal (1, 108, 3), making it dubious whether 5, 22, 3 (Tiburtinae sum proximus accola pilae) and 6, 27, 1 f. (tu [sc. Nepos] quoque proxima Florae | incolis et veteres tu quoque Ficelias) refer to the domus or to the cenacula. The lack of mention of a domus among Martial’s possessions in 8, 61 may perhaps indicate that he had just moved in in mid-94.3 In this epigram, Martial makes a request to the emperor for a steady supply of water, presumably not for both the estate and the domus, as suggested by Friedländer (on 9, 18, 7), but only for the latter.4 The arguments in favour of Friedländer’s suggestion are virtually non-existent (the plural penatibus in line 7 and the fact that Statius had recently received a supply of water to his estate at Alba5), and there are, moreover, several objections to it: (1) Lines 3–4 clearly show that there was a water-supply at Nomentum, if not from an aqueduct. (2) At 1
Perhaps there are earlier references to the domus; cf. Citroni, p. 330 and 357, and Howell, pp. 349 f. See Sullivan, Martial, p. 4, n. 8. For Martial’s relations to the Annaean family, ibid., p. 3. See Citroni on 1, 108, 3, and Howell on 1, 117, 6 and 5, 22, 4. 4 Cf. Forbes, Studies 1, p. 170: “The emperor could grant any syndicate or person (even for life) the right to tap the mains for his own use, but generally the aquarii who were in charge of each castellum delivered water to customers and charged them according to the only standard known then, a nozzle or ajutage, taking the maximum throughput per day of such a nozzle as a basis for their calculations”. The nozzle (calix) was inserted into a conduit or reservoir; service pipes were attached to it, which led the water to the house of the receiver (Frontin. aq. 36, 3). 5 At Alba, some 20 km south of Rome on the Via Appia (cf. silv. 3, 1, 61 ff), Statius was the neighbour of the emperor himself, who had his favourite villa in the same location. As the imperial villa comprised aqueducts, reservoirs and baths (Jones, Domitian, pp. 96 ff.), it would have been natural for Statius to turn to Domitian for water, and a small thing for the emperor to grant his request. The villa of Statius may originally have belonged to his father (see Hardie, pp. 12 f.). 2 3
114
Nomentum, unlike Alba, there were no imperial holdings, only the villa of the Senecas (if it was still in their possession at this time). If there was indeed a shortage, it would have been more natural to turn to them for water than to the emperor. (3) From the references in Book 13 (above), it appears that Martial possessed his Nomentan estate already in the December of 83 or 84. If there was no water-supply at Nomentum, this would have been the situation for at least ten years, before the thought of making a request for one crossed Martial’s mind. (4) Martial frequently mentions the shortcomings of his estate: it lacked fire wood (13, 15), the land was not fertile (10, 58, 9), it produced no livestock (7, 31, 8) and the fruits were poor (10, 94, 4), but nowhere is there a mention of a water shortage. Now these complaints need not be taken too seriously; in 7, 31, for example, the poet says that there are no chickens at Nomentum, whereas in 9, 54, he sends Nomentan chickens to Flaccus (cf. note on 9, 54, 11), and in 7, 49 eggs and apples to Severus. Thus, there would have been water at Nomentum, at least as much as was needed to satisfy Martial’s needs; he obviously had no ambition as a farmer. Still, the granting of water to Statius’ Alban estate may have acted as a stimulus to Martial to ask for water to be supplied to his city-house, a comparatively small favour, especially since his house was situated near the Aqua Marcia. This may also explain the sed at the beginning of line 3, and the epigram may be summarized thus: “I have a small estate in the country and a tiny habitation in the city. But, in the country, I have water” (there is no need for Domitian to get upset; Martial’s petition is not for the favour granted to Statius); “my city-house, on the other hand, is dry” (a small thing as compared with a dry estate in the country). 1. Est mihi sitque precor: cf. 1, 108, 1 Est tibi – sitque precor multos crescatque per annos – | pulchra quidem, verum transtiberina domus (sc. of Gallus). The opening of the hexameter with a monosyllabic word followed by mihi or tibi is a favourite especially of Propertius and Ovid; cf., e.g., Prop. 1, 20, 5; Ov. epist. 4, 163;1 with parenthetical sitque precor also Ov. epist. 1, 111; fast. 6, 219; trist. 1, 10, 1; Epiced. Drusi. 471. Citroni (on 1, 108, 1) suggests that it is derived from a common augural formula, remodelled by Ovid into a poetic expression and then adopted by Martial, who also made the emphatic addition multos crescatque per annos. In this case, though the words are different, the content of Martial’s addition is exactly the same. longum: as an adverb in the sense of diu, also 1, 31, 7; 8, 38, 15. Longum in this sense first appears in Plautus (Epid. 376 nimis longum loquor; 665; Pers. 167; Pseud. 687) and is taken up by Vergil (ecl. 3, 79; Aen. 10, 740); cf. Hor. ars 459,2 Ovid. met. 5, 65; particularly frequent in Statius (e.g., Theb. 2, 269; 707; silv. 1, 3, 13; 1, 4, 15; 2, 3, 72; 3, 2, 58); cf. TLL, s.v. 1643, 34 ff.
1
Cf. Hübner, “Das Epicedion Drusi”, Hermes 13 (1878), p. 180. See Brink, Hor. ars, ad loc. Hofmann-Szantyr, § 45 d, p. 40, take no account of the occurrences in Vergil.
2
115
te praeside: thus of Titus epigr. 2, 11; of Domitian also 6, 2, 5; 8, 80, 5; of Nerva 11, 2, 6. 4. curva … antlia: an antlia was a mechanism used for raising water (cf. Gr. , “draw water”) to be used in irrigation (Gr. , “for irrigation”, see LSJ, s.v.), apparently in the shape of a wheel with bailers attached to it. Its function appears from Anth. 284 (De antlia): Fundit et haurit aquas, pendentes evomit undas, | et fluvium vomitura bibit. Mirabile factum! | Portat aquas, portatur aquis. Sic unda per undas | volvitur et veteres haurit nova machina lymphas. From this epigram, it is obvious that the antlia was placed in a river and set in motion by the current (that it was not driven by hand is indicated by lines 2 f.), thus lifting up the water with shovel-like blades and presumably emptying the shovels into some kind of furrow. The present epigram and Anth. 284 are the only sources for the antlia and its use in agriculture; Suetonius’ mention of a man in antliam condemnatus (Tib. 51) probably refers to a treadmill (cf. Mau in RE 1, s.v. 2565). QWOyZ
QWOKWLN±M
$QWOdD
laboratas: used transitively in the sense of “troubled, afflicted” (perhaps “put to work”), viz. by the wheel (cf. above Anth. 284, 3); note the spondees underlining the content. This use of laboratus is very rare and is presumably suggested by labor in the sense of “trouble, pain”; cf. Stat. Theb. 1, 341 grata laboratae referens (sc. Somnus) oblivia vitae; Val. Fl. 5, 224 f. Scythica senior iam Solis in urbe | fata laborati Phrixus compleverat aevi. A transitive use of laboro can be observed also in Verg. Aen. 1, 639 arte laboratae vestes (with Austin); 8, 181 dona laboratae Cereris; Hor. epod. 5, 59, f. quale non perfectius | meae laborarint manus; Stat. Theb. 10, 579 laboratasque premunt ad pectora ceras (with Williams); silv. 3, 2, 143 quaeve laboratas claudat mihi pagina Thebas. However, such instances are not directly comparable to the present, since they rather seem to convey a sense of “carefully elaborate” (cf. elaboro) or “laboriously obtain”. 5. foveri: “refresh”; cf., e.g., Plin. epist. 5, 6, 20 aqua … platanos et subiecta platanis leni aspergine fovet; TLL, s.v. 1220, 33 ff. 6. mihi … sonet: i.e. mihi obstrepat, “rushes in my ears”. Marcia: the Aqua Marcia (also mentioned in 6, 42, 18; 11, 96, 1), built in 144–140 BC by Q. Marcius Rex. It ran for about 90 km from the springs to the city, supplying 194,635 m3 of water in twenty-four hours. The terminal castellum was just inside the Porta Collina, north-east of the Quirinal, but, as indicated by the present poem, it also ran to the Quirinal itself.1 fonte: used of flowing water also, for example, in Lucan. 3, 235; Stat. Ach. 1, 180; see TLL, s.v. 1024, 38 ff.
1
Platner & Ashby, pp. 24 ff.
116
7. nostris … penatibus: simply “my house”; there is nothing in the plural to indicate that Martial means both his Nomentan villa and his house in Rome; cf., e.g., Cic. Quinct. 83 at hic quidem iam de fundo expulsus, iam a suis dis penatibus praeceps eiectus; Ovid. Fast. 4, 531 illa soporiferum, parvos initura penates; TLL, s.v. 1026, 73 ff. 8. Castalis: cf. 7, 22, 4 Castaliae … aquae; 12, 2, 13 Fons … Castalius. The form Castalis (also 4, 14, 1; 7, 12, 10) for the usual Castalius is a Grecism formed on (cf. Theocrit. 7, 148) and appears only in Martial. Castalia is a (still extant) well at Delphi at the foot of Mt. Parnassus, sacred to Apollo and the Muses; cf. 4, 14, 1 Castalidum … sororum; 7, 12, 10 Castaliumque gregem; Theocrit. 7, 148 ; Hor. carm. 3, 4, 61 f. (Apollo) rore puro Castaliae lavit | crinis solutos; Ov. am. 1, 15, 35 f. mihi flavus Apollo | pocula Castalia plena ministret aqua; Bömer on Ov. met. 3, 14. Its water was sweet to drink and pleasant to bathe in (Pausan. 10, 8, 9), and was also used for religious purification (e.g., Eur. Phoen. 220 ff.; Ov. met. 1, 369 ff.). From the beginning of the Principate, the Latin poets use the adjective Castalius not only of things directly related to the well, but of all things connected with Delphi and Apollo (e.g. Prop. 3, 3, 13 C. arbore; Tibull. 3, 1, 16 C. umbram; Sen. Oed. 709 C. nemus; Stat. Theb. 7, 96, C. altaribus) or even of poetical activity; thus, 8, 66, 5 Castaliam domum of the house of Silius Italicus. .DVWDOdM
1¹PIDL
.DVWDOdGHM
Iovis imber: the water supplied by Domitian will be as dear as the rain of Jupiter. Coupled with the Castalian well, Iovis imber must obviously signify something more than ordinary rain. Perhaps there is an allusion to referring to the life-giving rain of Zeus (Hom. Od. 9, 111; 9, 358) or to the golden rain in which Jupiter approached Danaë. Otherwise, Iovis imber (as ; cf. Hom. Il. 5, 91; 11, 493; 12, 286) is usually brought in connection with tempests; cf., e.g., Hor. epod. 2, 29; Stat. silv. 1, 6, 25 ff. ducat nubila Iuppiter per orbem | et latis pluvias minetur agris, | dum nostri Iovis hi ferantur imbres (where the rain of sweets which Domitian let fall on the spectators in the amphitheatre is contrasted with the rain of Jupiter). 'L´M
³PEURM
'L´M
³PEURM
19 Laudas balnea versibus trecentis cenantis bene Pontici, Sabelle. Vis cenare, Sabelle, non lavari. The cenipeta Sabellus celebrates the baths of the gourmet Ponticus in countless verses; but he does not want to bathe, he wants to dine. For the cenipetae and their methods, see 9, 14 intro. It may be noted, if only as a curiosity, that both Martial himself and Statius, presumably in 90, had written poems on the baths of the wealthy Claudius Etruscus (6, 42 and silv. 1, 5), the poem of Statius comprising 65 verses and written intra moram cenae (silv. 1 praef.), probably a party to 117
inaugurate the baths. Even though there may have been quarrels between Martial and Statius in 94,1 it is unlikely that this epigram would have been aimed at Statius; an allusion to the baths of Etruscus would have had little effect four years after the event, and Statius’ poem, being short even for a Silva, cannot really be said to contain “innumerable verses”. Moreover, Martial is likely to have been present at the same party himself, and 6, 42 (comprising 24 verses, long for an epigram) would have been written under similar circumstances.2 1. trecentis: as an indeterminately large number, also 2, 1, 1; 3, 22, 1; 3, 93, 1; 4, 61, 11; 7, 48, 1; 11, 35, 1; 12, 70, 7. The expression is frequent in Catullus (9, 2; 11, 18; 12, 10; 48, 3) and occurs also in Tibullus (1, 4, 69), Vergil (e.g., Aen. 8, 716), Horace (carm. 2, 14, 5; 3, 4, 79; sat. 1, 5, 12; 2, 3, 116) and Silius (7, 56).3 2. cenantis bene: the bona cena is to Martial a mere display of the wealth of mean patrons (3, 12; 4, 68; cf. 9, 2 intro.) and those dining well are presented as dewy-eyed victims of shrewd captatores (9, 14). To make a show of being a gourmet, Papylus, while dining himself on lizard-fish and beans, sends luxurious dishes as presents (7, 78), and the Calliodorus of 10, 31 sells a slave in order to be able to buy a large mullet (cf. 9, 14, 3), so as to be able for once to bene cenare. But, to Martial, this it not to “dine well”, since Calliodorus in fact eats a man, not a fish; a similar reflection on the meaning of bene cenare is made by Cicero fin. 2, 24 f., arguing that a gourmet may indeed dine pleasantly (libenter), but never well (bene), as long as the principal dish is not a bonus sermo; cf. also Hor. epist. 1, 6, 56 ff. Pontici: Martial mostly attaches this name to bad patrons (2, 32; 3, 60; 4, 85; perhaps also 5, 63) or masters (2, 82); the Ponticus of 9, 41, 1 is the only one criticized for sexual perversion. Sabelle: used in 7, 85 of a poet who has problems in writing at length but is witty and elegant in his short pieces. Also of a sodomite in 3, 98; 6, 33; of a lawyer in 4, 46; of a dandy in 12, 39; of a man with a predilection for obscene verse in 12, 43; and of a severe patron in 12, 60, 7.
1
See Henriksén, Martial und Statius, pp. 111 ff. Cf. White, Friends, p. 277; Henriksén, op. cit., pp. 94 ff. 3 See E. Wölfflin, “Sescenti, mille, centum, trecenti als unbestimmte und runde Zahlen”, ALL 9, pp. 188 ff. 2
118
20 Haec, quae tota patet tegiturque et marmore et auro, infantis domini conscia terra fuit, felix o, quantis sonuit vagitibus et quas vidit reptantis sustinuitque manus: hic steterat veneranda domus, quae praestitit orbi 5 quod Rhodos astrifero, quod pia Creta polo. Curetes texere Iovem crepitantibus armis, semiviri poterant qualia ferre Phryges: at te protexit superum pater, et tibi, Caesar, pro iaculo et parma fulmen et aegis erat. 10 In this epigram, the second of the Templum gentis Flaviae cycle, the ground on which the Flavian temple stands is praised as being lucky in having witnessed the infancy of the future emperor Domitian and seen and sustained as tender the hands which were to become the magnae manus of a divine monarch. It is compared to Rhodes and Crete, the one probably as the birth place of the Sun, the other certainly as that of Jupiter. But whereas the infant Jupiter was protected by the Curetes beating their shields with their spears, Domitian was under the protection of the thunderbolt and aegis of Jupiter himself. For the Templum gentis Flaviae, see the introduction to 9, 1. 1. patet: probably implies that the area surrounding the temple has been cleared of buildings. The ground on which the house of Vespasian stood has become a temple-court, a temenos. tegiturque et marmore et auro: for gold and marble as the typical materials for lavish temples, cf. Prop. 2, 31, 1 f. (on the inauguration of the temple of Apollo on the Palatine) aurea Phoebi | porticus; ibid. 9 claro ... marmore templum; for the idea of the earth being concealed or “hidden” by the marble, cf. Ov. medic. 7 f. Auro sublimia tecta linuntur, | nigra sub imposito marmore terra latet; met. 8, 699 ff. illa vetus dominis etiam casa parva duobus | vertitur in templum: furcas subiere columnae, | stramina flavescunt aurataque tecta videntur | caelataeque fores adopertaque marmore tellus; 11, 359 f. (with Bömer); 15, 672. 2. infantis domini conscia: with verbal force, “witnessed our lord as a child”; the construction is of the ab urbe condita type with an adjective (see 9, 1, 3 note), infantis thus being equal to infantiae. This may account for the genitive of the person, which is rare with conscius in this sense, mostly appearing with inanimate attributes (cf. TLL, s.v. 371, 49 ff.). domini: to the Romans of the republic, the word dominus had been odious, like anything that reminded them of autocracy. But, during the early empire, through oriental influence, dominus came to be used in daily life as a civil form of address, not only by freedmen towards their former masters, but among the freeborn towards their official or social superiors. Seneca (epist. 3, 1) relates that 119
people used to address those whose names they had forgotten as dominus. Martial himself used it so often that he would even return a slave’s greeting with domine1 (cf. 5, 57). Thus, Martial’s single address of Domitian as domine in the preface of Book 8 is not a sign of excessive flattery of a despot; even Pliny on no less than 70 occasions in Book 10 of his Epistulae addresses Trajan (who was careful about not appearing as an absolute monarch) as domine. It seems clear that dominus in the vocative had lost most of its semantic content. More conspicuous are the many references in the third person to Domitian as dominus, which may have played a part in paving the way for the more daring, and more rarely used, dominus et deus (which appears a couple of years later; see note on 9, 66, 3). Still, being on different levels, the two should not, I think, be discussed in immediate connection with one another,2 dominus being to some degree established in contemporary social language, while dominus et deus would incontestably be the title of a divine autocrat. Suetonius himself obviously did not find Domitian’s delight in being called dominus quite as repulsive as his use of dominus et deus (Dom. 13, 1–2). Even though the early empire shows sporadic instances of dominus in the third person from the private sphere (Seneca, for example, refers to his brother as dominus meus Gallio in epist. 104, 1), the emperors generally avoided it (even though Caligula demanded to be thus addressed; see Svennung, op. cit., p. 343). But in Martial and Statius, it is quite frequently used as a kind of title of Domitian. As Sauter (p. 34) pointed out, the instances of dominus with a genitive attribute (like terrarum dominus in 7, 5, 5) should not be taken into account as being equivalent to expressions like parens orbis etc. But this still leaves a number of instances in which dominus is used absolutely,3 as in Martial 2, 92, 4; 4, 67, 4; 5, 2, 6; 5, 5, 3; 6, 64, 14; 7, 12, 1; 8, 1, 1; 8, 31, 3; 8, 82, 2; 9, 20, 2; 9, 23, 3; 9, 24, 6;4 in Statius silv. 3, 3, 103; 3, 3, 110; 4 praef.; 5, 1, 42; 5, 1, 74; 5, 1, 94; 5, 1, 112; 5, 1, 261. Clearly, both Martial and Statius were initially more cautious in referring to Domitian as dominus; they were, of course, aware of the negative connotation of the word. Martial never used it of Nerva or Trajan and also had second thoughts about his having applied it to Domitian; of Trajan, he says non est hic dominus sed imperator (10, 72, 8).5 In Statius, the first instance appears in 1
This is usually taken as referring to the greeting as domine of someone whose name one had forgotten or as an indication that the original notion of “lord” was completely lost; see M. Bang, “Über den Gebrauch der Anrede domine” in Friedländer, Sittengeschichte 4, p. 86; J. Svennung, Anredeformen, Lund 1958, p. 342; Howell’s introduction to 5, 57. But if dominus was so faint as to retain nothing of its original meaning, it would hardly have been very startling when used of the emperor. Perhaps in 5, 57 Martial means to express his weariness of the client’s constant greeting of the patron as dominus (a custom of which he complains elsewhere; cf. 1, 112; 2, 68) , which for Martial’s part, as the everlasting client, had now resulted in his unintentionally greeting everybody as dominus. 2 As done by Scott, pp. 102–112; Sauter, pp. 31–40, is more strict on this point, though not as much as would be desired. 3 The instances in which a slave–master relationship is apparent should not be taken into consideration here; this is the case in the poems to Earinus (Mart. 9, 16, 3; Stat. silv. 3, 4, 35; 3, 4, 101) and Latinus (Mart. 9, 28, 7). 4 In some of these instances, Martial may be using dominus of the emperor as his patron, as would any client. 5 Martial’s statement in line 3 of that poem, dicturus dominum deumque non sum, refer to his having called Domitian dominus et deus, which implies going much further than calling the emperor dominus and is thus not immediately comparable.
120
silv. 3. Previously, he had been anxious to point out that Domitian forbade the people to call him dominus when they saluted him thus in the amphitheatre (silv. 1, 6, 83 f.). Both poets use dominus contemptuously (= “tyrant”) of Nero; thus, Mart. epigr. 2, 12; Stat. silv. 2, 7, 61 (cf. Plin. epist. 4, 11, 5 dominus tyrannus of Domitian). But even if Statius at the beginning was more restrained than Martial, in time he gave way to this form of flattery. The reason for this was presumably that Domitian, to begin with, wanted, like Augustus and Tiberius before him, to be considered princeps and not dominus. Rather early, in 86–87 (as indicated by Mart. 2, 92), it became apparent that, though he did not encourage it, Domitian still did not decline and even liked to be called dominus.1 The poets, Statius somewhat more guardedly than Martial, naturally complied with his wish. But there are no signs of Domitian’s prescribing that he should be addressed as dominus. 3 f. quas ... manus: of the hands of the emperor 4, 30, 5 (manus) qua nihil est in orbe maius; 6, 1, 5 magnas Caesaris … manus (with Grewing); cf. 4, 1, 6 manus tantas; 4, 8, 10 ingenti ... manu. Sauter, p. 104, derives the usage from the as the helping and healing hand of a god, but it rather seems to be an epithet suggesting power and strength; cf. of Jupiter Hor. carm. 3, 3, 6 fulminantis magna manus Iovis; Ov. met 1, 595 f. caelestia magna | sceptra manu teneo; of Mars Sil. 9, 488, etc. See also Ov. met. 14, 8 inde manu magna Tyrrhena per aequora vectus, in which manu magna is explained by Bömer as “adverbial formelhaft und terminologisch im Bereich übermenschlicher Wesen” (cf. Verg. Aen. 3, 624; 5, 241). FHgU
THR¿
5. veneranda domus: the house is “venerable” as the birthplace of Domitian; cf. 1, 70, 5 veneranda … Palatia (as the site of the imperial palace, cf. Citroni, ad loc.); 9, 101, 1 venerandus … Caesar of Domitian himself. The word naturally belongs in the religious vocabulary; cf. 7, 60, 1, of Jupiter; 9, 17, 1, of Aesculapius; 12, 2, 7, of the temple of Divus Augustus on the Palatine (see Scott, pp. 99 f.). 6. Rhodos: mentioned here as the birthplace of the Sun; cf. Cic. nat. deor. 3, 54. The suggestion was first made by Housman,2 rightly refusing Friedländer’s suggestion (accepted by Sauter, p. 66) that the god alluded to would be Neptune, who was brought up on Rhodes by the Telchines (Diod. 5, 55). To Housman’s argument, that Neptune “has no particular connection with astrifer polus”, it may be added that Domitian is in fact nowhere compared to Neptune; indeed, Martial never mentions Neptune at all. On the other hand, previous emperors had been likened to the Sun (Housman compares Manil. 4, 756 f.; Buc. Eins. 1, 27; AP 9, 178), and an important argument, though unknown to Housman, is that there is further evidence that Domitian was also in fact compared to the Sun (see 9, 1, 9; 1
Cf. Suet. Dom. 13, 1 Adclamari etiam in amphitheatro epuli die libenter audiit: “domino et dominae feliciter!”. Sauter (p. 32) over-interprets these lines when he states that “Domitian den Titel dominus sowie den Doppeltitel dominus et deus ausdrücklich für sich beanspruchte”. 2 Housman, Notes, p. 75 (= Class. pap., p. 989).
121
9, 24, 3; 9, 34, 5; and the introduction, p. 32). Presumably, the mention of Rhodes would have made the reader think of the Sun also because of the celebrated colossus of the Sun-god, considered to be one of the wonders of the world. Toppled by an earthquake in 224 BC, its enormous fragments still excited wonder in the time of Pliny. In silv. 1, 1, 103 f., Statius implies that Rhodes would prefer the equestrian statue of Domitian to the colossus of Helios (Phoebus): tua sidereas imitantia flammas | lumina contempto mallet Rhodos aspera Phoebo Scott (p. 139) made the suggestion that the god meant would perhaps be Neptune but might also be Minerva, unfortunately without offering any evidence in favour of the latter.1 A reference to Minerva, the patron goddess of Domitian, obviously seems very attractive, but nevertheless has to be disregarded. While her connection with Rhodes is guaranteed by the great temple at Lindos, there is nothing to suggest that she would actually have been considered to have been born or brought up on the island, although Zeus let a golden snow-shower fall on the Rhodians on her birth (see Pind. Ol. 7, 33 ff.; Philostr. imag. 2, 27; AP 8, 220, 1; cf. Preller–Robert 1, pp. 190 f.). astrifero … polo: polus here in the proper sense of the word; the juncture is singular. pia Creta: Crete was considered the birthplace of Jupiter,2 and is commonly referred to as such in poetry, for example, Verg. Aen. 3, 104 Creta Iovis magni; Ov. am. 3, 10, 20 Crete nutrito terra superba Iove; epist. 4, 163 Iovis insula, Crete; met. 8, 99 Iovis incunabula, Creten; cf. also note on 9, 34, 1. 7. Curetes … crepitantibus armis: in order to save him from the fate of his brothers and sisters, who had all been devoured by their father Kronos, Rhea took the infant Jupiter away and placed him under the protection of the Curetes, Cretan semi-deities or daemons. The divine child was hidden in a cave, and the Curetes drowned his cries by clashing their lances against their shields; cf. Lucr. 2, 633 ff.; Verg. georg. 4, 151 f.; Ov. fast. 4, 207 f.3 The juncture crepitantia arma is Ovidian; cf. met. 1, 143; 15, 783. 8. semiviri … Phryges: the Curetes were not castrates, nor had they any connection with Phrygia. However, from Phrygia originated the Corybantes, who, like the Curetes, were semi-deities or daemons and were frequently confused with them. The cult of the Corybantes was ecstatic, involving orgiastic dancing, shouting and also self-castration,4 features which at an early stage brought them into connection with Cybele. Through this connection, they became known to the Romans (cf., e.g., 1, 70, 9 f.), who also inherited their confusion with the Curetes.
1 Scott is joined by Garthwaite, Court Poets, p. 48, n. 56, who, while offering no other evidence than that Minerva “was supposed to have been born” on Rhodes, states that the mention of the aegis in line 10 (see below) makes a reference to the goddess “almost certain”. 2 See Ziegler in Roscher 6, s.v. Zeus 578 ff. 3 Schwenn in RE 11, s.v. Kureten 2206 f.; Immisch in Roscher 2, s.v. Kureten und Korybanten 1593 ff. 4 Schwenn in RE 11 Korybanten, 1442.
122
This confusion was very old, and the ancients themselves were not sure whether the names Curetes and Corybantes (or, indeed, the Cabeires, Dactyli and Telchines) in fact alluded to the same beings or whether they really designated different semi-gods of similar character, brought into connection by a common feature, such as the “weapon-dance”. I quote here the definition given by Immisch, op. cit., p. 1594: “Kureten wie Korybanten sind von Haus aus halbgöttlichdämonische Wesen, nicht nur menschliche Priester oder deren mytische Vertreter. Die Kureten unterschieden sich von den Korybanten so, dass diese ursprünglich nach Asien, jene nach Kreta, diese zu Kybele, jene zu Rhea und Zeus gehören, bei diesen ändlich gemäss ihrer barbarischen Herkunft das orchestisch-entusiastische, zugleich aber auch mytische Element des Kultus von Anfang an mit weniger Mass und Zurückhaltung vorwaltet als bei jenen”. When the Corybantes are not, as here, presented as wholly identical with the Curetes, they are mentioned alongside them as the protectors of the infant Jupiter; cf. Ov. fast. 4, 209 f. pars clipeos sudibus, galeas pars tundit inanes: | hoc Curetes habent, hoc Corybantes opus (see Bömer, ad loc.). poterant qualia ferre: with a concessive sense, “but it was such weapons as half-men could bear to carry”, as opposed to the fulmen and aegis of Jupiter. For the prosody, cf. Prop. 3, 8, 30. 10. iaculo et parma: the weapons of the Curetes are unsophisticated and humble, the light iaculum and the parma, a shield such as may be used by jugglers like Agathinus in 9, 38 (cf. note on 9, 38, 2). The contrast with the mighty thunderbolt and the aegis of Jupiter is sharp. fulmen et aegis: the mention of the aegis does not indicate that Martial means both Jupiter and Minerva; for Jupiter wielding the aegis, cf. Verg. Aen. 8, 352 ff.; Val. Fl. 4, 520 f. fulmina ... aegidaque ... gerens; Sil. 12, 719 ff. Sed enim aspice, quantus | aegida commoveat nimbos flammasque vomentem | Iuppiter et quantis pascat ferus ignibus iras. The contrast between the crepitantia arma and the real divine power of Jupiter may remind the reader of Vergil’s description of Salmoneus’ attempt to initiate thunder and lightning, as opposed to Jupiter’s bolt with all its force: demens, qui nimbos et non imitabile fulmen | aere et cornipedum pulsu simularet equorum. | At pater omnipotens densa inter nubila telum | contorsit, non ille faces nec fumea taedis | lumina, praecipitemque immani turbine adegit (Aen. 6, 590 ff.).
123
21 Artemidorus habet puerum, sed vendidit agrum; agrum pro puero Calliodorus habet. Dic, uter ex istis melius rem gesserit, Aucte: Artemidorus arat, Calliodorus arat. There are two other epigrams in Martial on a person who has sold an estate and bought catamites for the money; thus 12, 16 Addixti, Labiene, tres agellos; | emisti, Labiene, tres cinaedos: | pedicas, Labiene, tres agellos; 12, 33 Ut pueros emeret Labienus vendidit hortos. | Nil nisi ficetum nunc Labienus habet. A similar idea is found also in 10, 31: Calliodorus has sold a slave to buy a large mullet; consequently, he eats a man. 1. Artemidorus: a common Greek name (see Pape, s.v.), appearing also in 5, 40, of an unsuccessful painter, in 6, 77, 3, of an athlete, and in 8, 58, of a person (perhaps the same as in 6, 77; see Howell on 5, 40, 1) who may be called Sagaris because of his thick cloak (cf. sagum, “thick military cloak”). Here, the name is naturally fictitious, and there is nothing to suggest a connection with any of the former. is used only by 2. Calliodorus: the Latin transcription of the Greek Martial, and in various satirical contexts; thus 5, 38; 6, 44; 10, 11 and 10, 31 (see above).1 Howell (on 5, 38, 1) suggests that Martial’s fondness for the name is due to its convenient scansion. .DOOdGZURM
3. ex istis: almost exclusively (the one exception being 2, 28, 5) placed immediately before the penthemimeresis of the hexameter or the caesura of the pentameter; cf. 1, 76, 4; 9, 22, 15; Ciris 431; Ov. am. 3, 2, 35; epist. 11, 104; fast. 2, 386; 6, 215; Pont. 1, 3, 38; 4, 14, 6; Epiced. Drusi 244. Aucte: an Auctus appears in three other epigrams, and there is no reason to suppose that they do not all refer to the same person, viz. the Pomponius Auctus of 7, 51. As appears from the latter, Auctus was an admirer of Martial’s who apparently knew his poems by heart (cf. 7, 51, 6 Non lector meus hic, Urbice, sed liber est); in 7, 52, the poet thanks him for reading his poems to a certain Celer. In 12, 13, as here, Auctus is simply the addressee of the epigram, but it would seem likely that the mention of him in these two poems was Martial’s way of expressing his gratitude for Auctus’ unsolicited services to him. 4. arat1: Gaselee’s emendation of the amat of the MSS to arat should be accepted2 with reference to Martial’s predilection for ambiguous puns (see 9, 6 intro.). For aro in the sense of futuo and ager etc. as a paraphrase for cunnus or culus, cf. 1 is equally rare in Greek; no instances are given in Pape, s.v. (his reference to its The name occurring in Plaut. Pseud. is erroneous). There are two instances in P. M. Fraser & E. Matthews (eds.), A Lexicon of Greek Personal Names, vol. 1, Oxford 1987, s.v. 2 S. Gaselee, “Martial IX. 21”, CR 35 (1921), pp. 104 f. .DOOdGZURM
124
Plaut. Asin. 874 fundum alienum arat, incultum familiarem deserit; Truc. 149 f. Non arvos hic, sed pascuost ager: si arationes | habituru’s, qui arari solent, ad pueros ire meliust; Merc. 356 arare mavelim, quam sic amare; Anth. 712, 17 arentque sulcos molles arvo Venerio (see Adams, pp. 24 and 154). This also provides the epigram with the same kind of paradox as is found in 12, 16, 3 pedicas agellos and 10, 31, 6 hominem comes (see the introduction above).
22 Credis ob haec me, Pastor, opes fortasse rogare, propter quae vulgus crassaque turba rogat, ut Setina meos consumat glaeba ligones et sonet innumera compede Tuscus ager; ut Mauri Libycis centum stent dentibus orbes et crepet in nostris aurea lamna toris, nec labris nisi magna meis crystalla terantur et faciant nigras nostra Falerna nives; ut canusinatus nostro Syrus assere sudet et mea sit culto sella cliente frequens; aestuet ut nostro madidus conviva ministro, quem permutatum nec Ganymede velis; ut lutulenta linat Tyrias mihi mula lacernas et Massyla meum virga gubernet equum. Est nihil ex istis: superos et sidera testor. Ergo quid? Ut donem, Pastor, et aedificem.
5
10
15
Martial criticizes the greed of the people, the vulgus crassaque turba, who want riches for no other purpose than to be able to live in the lap of luxury. The refusal of extravagance is in line with Martial’s own Epicurean view of life, reflected in some of his poems to Iulius Martialis (1, 15; 5, 20; 10, 47; see 9, 97, 1 note), in which he extols convictus facilis, sine arte mensa; | nox non ebria, sed soluta curis; (10, 47, 8 f.). He does not despise wealth but prefers that which is non parta labore, sed relicta (ibid. 3) or, as here, given to him. In this poem, however, Martial states that he asks for money (as he does, for example, of Domitian in 6, 10), not to enable him to lead a quiet life, but to act as the model of the good patron, to be able both to build and to give; this should be considered in the light of 9, 46, in which Gellius spends all his fortune on expensive building while giving nothing to needy friends; see the introduction to that epigram. For greedy patrons, see 9, 2 intro. 1. Pastor: suggested by Giese (see Friedländer, ad loc.) as being identical with the Iunius Pastor, whom Pliny in his youth had defended in court contra potentissimos civitatis atque etiam Caesaris (sc. Domitiani) amicos (epist. 1, 18, 3). There is no other mention of him by Martial; cf. also Stein in RE 10, s.v. Iunius 117, 1074. 125
2. vulgus crassaque turba: naturally to be taken in malam partem, accentuated by crassus in the sense of stultus, rusticus, etc. (TLL, s.v. 1105, 46 ff.). Vulgus and turba are used together in this sense also in Cic. fam. 7, 1, 3 Extremus elephantorum dies fuit. In quo admiratio magna vulgi atque turbae; and Sen. dial. 10, 1, 1 turba … et inprudens vulgus. Shackleton Bailey prints the reading of populus for the vulgus of . E
J
3. Setina … glaeba: for Setian wine, see 9, 2, 5 note. ligones: The ligo, a mattock with a broad, inward-curving iron blade, served various purposes in ancient agriculture. The reference here is to its use in hilly regions, where it was used in place of the plough; cf. 4, 64, 32; 9, 57, 7; Iuv. 11, 89 erectum domito referens a monte ligonem.1 4. innumera … compede: according to Columella, the slaves employed in vineyards (vinitores) should be cleverer than those working in the fields. However, being smarter, they were also more unrestrained and inclined to escape, for which reason they mostly worked in fetters (Colum. 1, 9, 4 f.). As qualified workers, the vinitores easily got employment elsewhere, if they escaped; there were even professional “slave-catchers”, fugitivarii, who for a high price and under suspicious circumstances transferred the vinitores from one master to another; see D. Flach, Römische Agrargeschichte, Munich 1990, p. 170. Tuscus ager: the wine of Etruria was generally considered of poorer quality (Marquardt, p. 436), but Martial does not seem to have had anything against it. He mentions it again in 9, 57, 7 (without any hint as to its quality), and in 13, 118, he compares it to the wine of Tarraco, which, according to Pliny (nat. 14, 71), could compete with the very best Italian wines. In 1, 26, 5 ff., it is mentioned as inferior to an Opimian vintage, but as the year of Opimius’ consulship (121 BC) produced the best vintage ever, the reference is not necessarily negative. 5. Mauri Libycis ... dentibus orbes: luxurious table-leaves of citrus-wood on feet of ivory; cf. 2, 43, 9; 9, 59, 10; 10, 98, 6; 12, 66, 6; 14, 89; 14, 91, 2; Cic. Verr. II 4, 37; Lucan. 10, 144 f.; Stat. silv. 3, 3, 94; 4, 2, 38 f. (with Coleman); Apul. met. 2, 19. They are referred to as Mauri (Libyci 2, 43, 9; 14, 91, 2; Atlantica munera 14, 89, 1; Maurusiaci 12, 66, 6; Massyla robora Stat. silv. 3, 3, 94; robora Maurorum Stat. silv. 4, 2, 39) because Mauritania had a particularly large supply of citrus-trees, the most celebrated being those provided by Mt. Ancorarius in Mauretania Citerior, although they were already exhausted in Pliny’s day (nat. 13, 95). Table-leaves were made from an excrescence on the root, and fetched enormous prices (cf. 14, 89, 2). Cicero possessed a table for which he had paid 500,000 IIS, and nearly three times as much, 1,300,000 IIS, had been paid for a
1
For the ligo and its various types, see K. D. White, Agricultural Implements of the Roman World, Cambridge 1967, pp. 36 ff.
126
table belonging to the Cethegan family; see Plin. nat. 13, 91 ff.; Marquardt, p. 702; Blümner, Privataltertümer, pp. 124 ff. Ivory is commonly referred to as the tooth of the elephant; thus 2, 43, 9 Indis ... dentibus; 5, 37, 5 pecudis Indicae dentem; 7, 13, 2 antiqui dentis … ebur; 10, 98, 6 Indicos ... dentes; 13, 100 dentis Erythraei; 14, 3 Libyci ... dentis; 14, 91 lem. dentes eborei, although opinions varied as to whether it really was a tooth or a horn; cf. epigr. 19, 3 cornuta mole (sc. elephante); 1, 72, 4 Indico ... cornu; Plin. nat. 7, 7. 6. aurea lamna: the bed is covered with sheets of gold, probably on a wooden frame; such covering could be thin enough to be scraped off with the nail; cf. 8, 33, 5 f. derasa ... ungue ministri | brattea, de fulcro quam reor esse tuo. Seneca mentions beds of gold (aurei lecti) as an instance of superabundance in epist. 110, 12 and 17, 12, but it is uncertain whether this refers to beds covered with gold or to beds of solid gold as a mere exaggeration for literary effect. Golden beds are otherwise mentioned as elements of Eastern luxury; thus Plaut. Stich. 377; Cic. Tusc. 5, 61; Curt. 9, 7, 15; Suet. Iul. 49, 3; Flor. epit. 1, 40, 28. For beds with silver coverings, see Plin. nat. 33, 146; Suet. Cal. 32, 2; cf. Marquardt, p. 301; Blümner, Privataltertümer, p. 118. 7. labris … meis … terantur: “wear out with my lips”. For tero indicating constant use, cf. 8, 3, 4 teritur noster ubique liber; 11, 3, 4 a rigido teritur centurione liber. magna … crystalla: Martial often mentions crystal vessels, crystalla or crystallina (cf. 1, 53, 6; 3, 82, 25; 8, 77, 5; 9, 73, 5; 10, 14, 5; 10, 66, 5; 14, 111), but it is sometimes difficult to tell whether he is referring to genuine rock-crystal or to crystal glass; the latter would be the case at least in 9, 59, 13 (see note ad loc.) and 12, 74, 1, although it seems reasonable to assume that at least the “fictitious” references are to rock-crystal, the prices of crystal glass in Martial’s day having fallen, owing to mass production (Forbes, Studies 5, p. 171). Vessels of genuine rock-crystal were much sought after, especially those with no defects in the material, the so- called vasa acenteta (Plin. nat. 37, 28); cf. Apul. met. 12, 19 crustallum inpunctum. They were very fragile, which was also the reason for their costliness (Sen. benef. 7, 9, 3) Breaking such a vessel would have been a slave’s utmost fear; Seneca relates an episode which occurred when Augustus was dining in the house of Vedius Pollio (dial. 5, 40, 2): Fregerat unus ex servis eius crustallinum; rapi eum Vedius iussit ne vulgari quidem more periturum: murenis obici iubebatur, quas ingentis in piscina continebat (cf. 14, 111). They also serve as stock examples of unnecessary luxury in epist. 119, 3 and 123, 7; see also Marquardt, p. 743; Blümner, Privataltertümer, pp. 408 f. 8. faciant nigras … Falerna nives: because of its dark colour, Martial frequently refers to the Falernian as nigrum; thus 8, 55, 14; 77, 5; 11, 8, 7; 49, 7; cf. 2, 40, 6 fusca Falerna. The wine frequently appears in the works of the poets and particularly often in Martial, who mentions it twenty-six times, whereas the Caecubum
127
and Setinum are mentioned seven times each, the Sabinum but once (see Heraeus’ Index nominum). On the Falernian wine, see, above all, Plin. nat. 14, 62 f. It was grown on the Ager Falernus in Campania, the estate producing the finest wine being that of L. Cornelius Sulla Faustus (son of the dictator), situated six miles east of Sinuessa, north-east of Capua. However, Pliny reckoned the Falernian of his day a secondclass wine, culpa copiae potius quam bonitati studentium (but, as he himself acknowledges, it is a matter of taste which wine each man considers the best; nat. 14, 59). There were three varieties of Falernian, one dry (austerum), one sweet (dulce) and one light (tenue), whereas some discerned three vintages according to the place of growth, Caucinian growing on the tops of the hills, Faustian half-way up, and Falernian at the bottom. For the practice of straining the wine through a colander containing snow, see note on 9, 2, 5 dominae ... liquantur. 9. canusinatus ... Syrus: “a Syrian dressed in Canusian wool”; the adjective canusinatus is found only here and in Suet. Nero 30 canusinatis mulionibus. The carriers of the sedan (lecticarii), commonly Syrians (see note on 9, 2, 11), wore a livery, probably a paenula (cf. Sen. benef. 3, 28, 5), a heavy, water-repellent cloak for outdoor use. In Book 14, Martial has two distichs on Canusinae (14, 127 C. fuscae; 129 C. rufae), both probably referring to paenulae; see Leary ad locc.; Blümner, Privataltertümer, p. 448. Canusium in Apulia was famous for working and dyeing the high-quality Apulian wool, which was the best available (Plin. nat. 8, 190);1 cf. 8, 28, 1 ff.; Varro ling. 9, 39; Iuv. 6, 150 (with Courtney); Mau in RE 3, s.v. Canusium 1501; Marquardt, p. 459; Blümner, Privataltertümer, p. 237. assere: the pole used for carrying the sedan, here probably collective singular; cf. Iuv. 7, 131 longo ... assere with Courtney’s note. The poles were placed on the carriers’ shoulders, and the sedan was hung on them with plaited straps (cf. 2, 57, 6), short enough to keep the person travelling in the sedan above those who walked (Iuv. 1, 158 f. qui dedit ergo tribus patruis aconita, vehatur | pensilibus plumis atque illinc despiciat nos?); Blümner, Privataltertümer, p. 447. 10. culto sella cliente frequens: after the salutatio, at which the client was not allowed to enter before his patron unless properly dressed in the toga (hence culto; see 9, 49, intro.), he was expected to accompany his patron to the forum, clearing his way through the crowd; thus, clients are sometimes referred to as anteambulones (a word found only in Martial and Suet. Vesp. 2, 2); cf. 2, 18, 5; 2, 74; 3, 7, 2; 3, 46, 4 f.; 10, 74, 3. The patron was carried in a sedan, here a sella, in which the person carried sat upright; cf. 2, 57, 6; 3, 36, 4; 9, 100, 3; 10, 10, 7; Blümner, Privataltertümer, p. 445.
1
See also Mau in RE 3, s.v. Canusium 1501; Marquardt, p. 459; Blümner, Privataltertümer, p. 237.
128
11. conviva ministro: for dinner-guests lusting after the attending servants, see 9, 25 intro. (the same ending in 9, 25, 9). For vini ministri as concubines, see the Earinus cycle, intro. 12. Ganymede: for the comparison of young boys to Ganymede, a notable feature of the Earinus cycle, see 9, 11, 7 note. 13. lutulena linat … mihi mula lacernas: note the alliteration, underlining the contents; cf. Hofmann–Szantyr, p. 713. Tyrias … lacernas: the lacerna was an open cloak with fringes, thrown over the shoulders, hanging down over the loins and held together with a clasp on the chest or on the shoulder. It was probably brought to Rome from the Orient in the first century BC and was worn at first exclusively by soldiers; the lacerna was, however, soon adopted by civilians, which caused the conservative Augustus to forbid its use in the Forum (Suet. Aug. 40). It nevertheless gained in popularity, and, in Martial’s day, it appears to have been commonly worn over the toga as protection (cf. 8, 28, 22; 12, 26, 11); see Lange in RE 12, s.v. Lacerna 327 ff. Given its protective function, the lacerna was usually made of coarse material (cf. 1, 96, 4; 7, 86, 8; 8, 58), but there were also more fashionable designs made of less durable materials (6, 59, 5 f.), plain white (14, 135) or dyed with purple (14, 131), the former for use at spectacles, perhaps to match the toga made compulsory by Domitian (see Leary on 14, 135, 2). Disregarding the decree, some still appeared in scarlet (5, 23, 5 f.) or even black lacernae (4, 2, 2). Apart from these, there were natural-coloured lacernae (14, 1331), amethyst-coloured (2, 57, 2 f.), greenish-yellow (5, 23, 1 with Howell’s note) and lacernae interwoven with gold (Iuv. 10, 212), but the height of luxury were those dyed with Tyrian purple (see, apart from the instances above, 2, 29, 3; 2, 43, 7; 5, 8, 5 and 11; 10, 87, 10; 13, 87; 14, 133, 2). Such a cloak would change hands for 10,000 IIS (4, 61, 4 f.; 8, 10). To Seneca, such cloaks were mere objects of display, worn by those who would do nothing that might pass unnoticed (epist. 114, 21). On Tyrian purple, see note on 9, 62, 4. 14. Massyla … virga gubernet equum: alluding to Massylian outriders, employed by the rich when travelling, to make way for the company; they formed part of a showy display which also included precursors (the so-called cursores), and an often overburdened baggage train carrying costly services, sometimes statues and even mosaic floors.2 The outriders seem in general to have been Africans dressed in magnificent garments; cf. 10, 6, 7 picti tunica Nilotide Mauri; 10, 14, 2 Libys ... eques; 12, 24, 6. Seneca was naturally upset by this luxurious and ostentatious way of travelling (see epist. 87, 9; 123, 7). Like the Numidians and other neighbouring nations, the Massylians were skilled horsemen, who did not use reins or saddles when riding, but only riding1 The “natural colour” of the lacernae Baeticae mentioned in 14, 133 would be a reddish brown, owing to the colour of the fleece of the Baetic sheep (see Leary, ad loc.). 2 See Blümner, p. 466, Marquardt, pp. 147 f.
129
whips (cf. Lucan. 4, 682 f.).1 Massylus, like Libycus (cf. 9, 1, 6), could denote Africans in general (for example, Stat. Theb. 11, 27 Massyla per arva with Venini’s note), but in this case, it may well be taken in its proper sense. 15. superos et sidera testor: a solemn oath and a reminiscence of Vergil, who is the first Latin poet to let his characters swear by the gods and the stars or to take them as witnesses; thus Aen. 3, 599 f. (Achaemenides) per sidera testor, | per superos atque hoc caeli spirabile lumen; 4, 519 f. (Dido) testatur moritura deos et conscia fati | sidera; 6, 458 f. (Aeneas) per sidera iuro, | per superos et si qua fides tellure sub ima est; cf. 9, 429; 12, 197 ff.; then Lucan. 8, 728 ad superos obscuraque sidera fatur; cf. 9, 522; Stat. silv. 1, 4, 117 f. ardua testor | sidera teque, pater vatum Thymbraee; cf. Theb. 10, 360; 12, 393; Val. Fl. 7, 498 ff.
23 O cui virgineo flavescere contigit auro, dic, ubi Palladium sit tibi, Care, decus. “Aspicis en domini fulgentes marmore vultus? Venit ad has ultro nostra corona comas.” Albanae livere potest pia quercus olivae, cinxerit invictum quod prior illa caput.
5
Like 9, 24, this epigram is addressed to Carus, the winner at one of Domitian’s Alban games (in 94?), but the chief aim of both poems is really to flatter the emperor with the description of the miraculous behaviour of Carus’ prize, the golden olive-wreath, when faced with a bust of Domitian. Carus had the bust on display in his home, and Martial would presumably have seen it on a visit; on its head rested the golden olive-wreath, inviting an aetiological poem on its choice of resting-place: it has flown thither of its own accord, the olive of Minerva being drawn to the head of her protégé Domitian (cf. note on 9, 3, 10 res agit … tuas). Thus, the oak (as awarded the winner at the Capitoline contest) must envy the olive, since the latter has been the first to encircle the head of Domitian. The oakwreath, of course, represents Jupiter, just as eager as Minerva to mark his favour to Domitian; but, as Carus gained the victory at Alba, not yet having been victorious in the Capitoline games, he has given Minerva the advantage. With the olive representing Minerva, the alleged behaviour of the wreath is not immediately comparable to those instances in which, typically, animals are affected by the numen of the divine emperor (like the goose of 9, 31, for example); whereas the animals act directly under the influence of the emperor’s numen, the olive-wreath of Carus would have been placed on Domitian’s bust by Minerva herself or at least flown to the bust, not so much because it felt the divinity of the
1
See Schwabe in RE 14, s.v. Massyli 2166.
130
emperor as because her attributes, like the goddess herself, lovingly tend her ward.1 Domitian’s Alban games, the Quinquatria Minervae, are known primarily from Suet. Dom. 4, 4: the games, consisting of hunting spectacles, scenic performances and contests in oratory and poetry, were held annually in honour of Minerva at Domitian’s villa at Alba2 and were overseen by supervisors elected by lot from the members of a college of priests formed by Domitian. Dio Cassius (67, 1, 2) says that the games were held “almost every year” ( , suggesting that there may have been intermissions) at the , i.e. the Quinquatrus, the official feast in honour of Minerva celebrated between the 19th and the 23rd of March.3 Martial mentions or alludes to the Alban games in five epigrams, twice outside Book 9. The first reference is 4, 1, 5 f. Hic (sc. Domitianus) colat Albano Tritonida multus in auro | perque manus tantas plurima quercus eat, where “the Alban gold” certainly alludes to the golden olive-wreath; the epigram thus marks the terminus ante quem for the institution of the games, which accordingly must have occurred before the publication of Book 4 at the turn of the year 88–89. In 5, 1, 1, Martial mentions Alba as Palladia, probably with reference to the festival (but perhaps also to the Palladium brought by the Trojans to Alba Longa; see Howell ad loc.). Apart from the present poem and the following, there is also a mention of the wreath in 9, 35, 9. Statius, who had himself been victorious in the Alban games of March 90,4 mentions the games four times with regard to his victory (silv. 3, 5, 28 ff.; 4, 2, 63 ff.; 4, 5, 22 ff.; 5, 3, 227 ff.). Besides Suetonius and Dio, the sole reference to the Alban games later than Martial and Statius is Iuv. 4, 99 ff. mentioning the venationes; the games apparently came to an end with the assassination of their founder.5 NDW
{WRM
ÅM
HcSHjQ
3DQDTQDLD
1. O cui: cf. 4, 54, 1 f. (of the winner at the Capitoline games Collinus) O cui Tarpeias licuit contingere quercus | et meritas prima cingere fronde comas. The address with o cui appears for the first time in Verg. georg. 1, 12 f. (of Neptune) tuque o, cui ... frementem | fudit equum; then Ov. met. 7, 164; 15, 39; Sil. 13, 8; Stat. Theb. 6, 180. O qui in Catull. 24, 1; o quicumque in Verg. Aen. 8, 122.6
1 Weinreich (Studien, p. 137) considers the wreath as acting under the influence of Minerva: “Domitian, der Verehrer Minervas, hatte ja den alljährlichen Dichterwettstreit in seinem Albanum eingesetzt, und so huldigt nun der dem siegreichen Dichter verliehene Kranz ultro dem Stifter des Agons, der ein Liebling der Göttin ist”. Scott (p. 123) seems exclusively to consider the influence of the imperial numen (“the crown felt the divine power of the monarch”). 2 The building, which was probably designed by Rabirius, comprised a theatre as well as a circus (Jones, Domitian, p. 97). 3 Jones, Domitian, p. 100; cf. Hentschel in RE 24, s.v. Quinquatrus 1149 ff.; Mooney on Suet. Dom. 4, 4, p. 527. 4 See Coleman, pp. xvii f. The prize-winning poem was about Domitian’s actions against the Chatti in 89 and his campaign against the Dacians of the same year (the First Pannonian War); see Coleman on silv. 4, 2, 66–7. 5 So Friedländer, Sittengeschichte 2, p. 230. 6 O qui also in Verg. Aen. 1, 229; Hor. carm. 1, 26; 3, 26, 9; Ov. rem. 557; met. 8, 855; trist. 4, 4, 1; Val. Fl. 1, 194; 5, 235; Stat. Theb. 10, 762; o quicumque also in Ov. met. 4, 114; Manil. 3, 36; Val. Fl. 4, 674; Stat. Theb. 5, 20.
131
virgineo flavescere contigit auro: the golden olive-wreath; cf. 4, 1, 5 Albano ... auro; Stat. silv. 3, 5, 29 sancto ... Caesaris auro; 4, 2, 67 Palladio ... auro. The colour of gold is flavus (cf. 9, 61, 3), because of which things with golden ornamentation are said to flavescere; cf. Ov. met. 8, 701 stramina flavescunt aurataque tecta videntur with Bömer’s note; TLL, s.v. flavesco 887, 20 ff. Virgineus of things pertinent to Minerva appears, apart from this instance, only in Verg. Aen. 2, 168 virgineas ... vittas (of the Palladium) and Val. Fl. 5, 646 virgineas … Cecropis arces; OLD, s.v. 2 c. Later Claud. 8, 36 virgineum Tritona. For the ending contigit auro, cf. Ov. epist. 3, 59; met. 15, 416; 15, 497; Iuv. 5, 164. 2. Dic, ubi: at the beginning of the hexameter also 4, 66, 17; 7, 73, 5; Ov. met. 8, 861; Lucan. 9, 123. Palladium … decus: again, the olive-wreath; cf. Stat. silv. 4, 2, 67 (cited above); Ov. ars 1, 727 Palladiae … coronae (of the prize at the Olympic games); Palladius of the olive also Verg. georg. 2, 181; Moret. 113; Ov. met. 8, 275 (with Bömer); Stat. Theb. 5, 417; 6, 575; Sil. 1, 238; 3, 405. Cf. decus of laurel wreaths in Ov. trist. 3, 1, 46 aeternum ... decus; Pont. 2, 8, 25 decus indelebile; of the corona navalis Sen. benef. 3, 32, 4; decus of a diadem Ov. met. 9, 690; Sen. Herc. f. 252; Ag. 8; Thy. 701; Stat. Theb. 11, 161 (with Venini). Care: this Carus is otherwise unknown, nor is there anything to indicate in what event he took part. Friedländer’s identification of him with an alleged Carus of 7, 74, 7 and 9, 54, 5 cannot be accepted; in 7, 74, Carpo should be read (with ; see Heraeus’ apparatus); for 9, 54, 5, see note ad loc.
J
3. Aspicis en: cf. Ov. met. 13, 264; Pont. 4, 7, 3. domini: for Domitian as dominus, see note on 9, 20, 2 domini. fulgentes marmore vultus: fulgere of the lustre of marble statues, cf. 1, 70, 6 plurima qua (sc. sacro clivo) summi fulget imago ducis; 6, 13, 4 placido fulget vivus in ore decor; Octavia 795; TLL, s.v. fulgeo 1509, 72 ff. The ending is a reminiscence (appearing also in 8, 24, 5) of the famous prophecy of Anchises in Verg. Aen. 6, 847 f. excudent alii spirantia mollius aera | credo equidem, vivos ducent de marmore vultus. 5. Albanae … olivae: metonymy for the wreath, cf. 9, 35, 9; Verg. Aen. 5, 309 flava … caput nectentur oliva; Hor. carm. 1, 7, 7 decerptam fronti praeponere olivam; TLL, s.v. oliva 565, 55 ff. pia quercus: the oak-wreath awarded the winner in the Capitoline games; see note on 9, 3, 8.
132
livere: “to envy” (cf. TLL, s.v. 1544, 20 ff.), with the dative on the analogy of invideo, cf. Kühner-Stegmann 1, § 76, p. 310. Perhaps there is also a play on the basic meaning “to be dark blue”, alluding to the colour of an olive: the oak envies the olive and turns dark blue, imitating the colour of its fruits in the hope of getting the same advantages. 6. invictum … caput: for the epithet invictus, see note on 9, 1, 10 invicta ... manus.
24 Quis Palatinos imitatus imagine vultus Phidiacum Latio marmore vicit ebur? Haec mundi facies, haec sunt Iovis ora sereni: sic tonat ille deus, cum sine nube tonat. Non solam tribuit Pallas tibi, Care, coronam; effigiem domini, quam colis, illa dedit.
5
Continuing the theme of 9, 23, this epigram praises Carus’ bust of Domitian, on which he had placed the olive-wreath of Alba. Although made of simple Latin marble, in the eyes of Martial the bust surpasses the noble ivory of Phidias’ Olympic Zeus. From its radiant beauty and majestic serenity, it appears that this is not the image of a man, but that of the earthly Jupiter; indeed, it is such as cannot have been made by mortal hands: it must be the work of Domitian’s patron-goddess Minerva (cf. Stat. silv. 1, 1, 5 f., of the equestrian statue of Domitian, an te Palladiae talem, Germanice, nobis | effecere manus). Compare also 9, 64, on a bust of Hercules with the features of Domitian. 1. Palatinos imitatus ... vultus: of the twelve instances of the adjective Palatinus in Martial, three are directly applied to Domitian as the earthly Jupiter, making a parallel to Tarpeius of the heavenly (see note on 9, 86, 7). Six instances are obviously synonymous with “imperial”; thus 4, 45, 2 (of Parthenius); 8, 28, 22 (of a toga received from Parthenius); 8, 39, 1 and 13, 91, 1 (mensa, the imperial kitchen); 9, 79, 2; 11, 8, 5 (of the clothes presses of Nerva’s wife); three instances refer to gods, 5, 5, 1 (Minerva); 5, 19, 4 (Palatini dei; see Howell ad loc.); 8, 60, 1 (Palatinus colossus, of uncertain significance; see Friedländer ad loc.). It is noteworthy that prior to Martial Palatinus is used only in a neutral sense, referring to the Palatine without further connotation (Verg. Aen. 9, 9 P. Evander; Ov. met. 14, 622 P. gens; 15, 560 P. colles; fast. 6, 794 P. iugum; 5, 152 and Prop. 4, 6, 44 P. aves) or to the famous temple of Apollo situated on the hill (P. Apollo Hor. epist. 1, 3, 17; Prop. 4, 6, 11; P. arae Hor. carm. saec. 65; P. laurus Ov. fast. 4, 953; P. Phoebus Calp. ecl. 4, 159). The sense of “imperial” is thus introduced by Martial, as is the application of the word to Domitian; he is fol-
133
lowed in the former respect by Iuv. 6, 117 P. cubile, in the latter (or perhaps in both respects) by Stat. silv. 3, 4, 38 Palatino ... amori (sc. Domitian). Note the scansion /ÑJ?RGLMQ, which is the usual one in Martial; of twenty cases (comprising also Palatia etc.), fifteen are scanned /Ñ , UFCPC?Q MLJW DGTC ?PC QA?LLCB /Ò .1 The long scansion was introduced, for metrical convenience, by Silius (12, 516); see Citroni on 1, 70, 5. For imitor of sculpturing, cf. Hor. ars 33 (faber) mollis imitabitur aere capillos; Ov. Ib. 437 aere Perilleo veros imitere iuvencos; TLL, s.v. imitor 435, 10 ff. The ending imagine vultus also 6, 27, 3; 9, 74, 3; Ov. trist. 1, 7, 1; Pont. 2, 8, 21. 2. Phidiacum … ebur: Phidias’ great statue of Zeus in Olympia, made of ivory and gold on a wooden frame and further decorated with ebony, gems, etc.2 The works of Phidias were highly praised in antiquity; cf., for example, Cic. Brut. 228 Q. Hortensi admodum adulescentis ingenium ut Phidiae signum simul aspectum et probatum est; orat. 8 Phidiae simulacris quibus nihil in illo genere perfectius videmus. The statue of Zeus was the model of perfection: Plin. nat. 36, 18 Phidian clarissimum esse per omnes gentes, quae Iovis Olympii famam intellegunt, nemo dubitat; 34, 54. Martial has, in all, nine references to Phidias,3 although the statue at Olympia is mentioned only here. Latio marmore: as a material for sculpture, marble was inferior to ivory; cf. Sen. epist. 85, 40 Non ex ebore tantum Phidias sciebat facere simulacra; faciebat ex aere. Si marmor illi, si adhuc viliorem materiam obtulisses, fecisset quale ex illa fieri optimum posset; Plin. nat. 36, 15. There is no reason to doubt, though, that the marble used for the bust would have been the finest available in Italy; thus, as there is no mention of marble from Latium in antiquity, Latius should probably be taken in a wide sense (cf. 9, 64, 2 Latia via of the Appian way) as referring to the Etruscan marble of Luna (Carrara), quarried on a larger scale from the end of the republic and used for sculpture (for example, the Apollo di Belvedere) as well as for buildings (for example, the temple of Apollo on the Palatine); see Philipp in RE 2:3, s.v. Luna 1, 1804 f. But, in spite of the high esteem in which it was held, it naturally yielded to ivory as material for sculpture, and there is, of course, an effective contrast between Latium marmor and Phidiacum ebur; although the artist has used a decidedly inferior material, his work surpasses the splendour of Phidias’ Zeus, because the subject is Domitian. 3. mundi facies: “the face of heaven”, perhaps referring to the Sun, as in Lucr. 4, 134 mundi species ... serena; Sen. Oed. 250 sereni maximum mundi decus (with Töchterle). The comparison of Domitian both to the Sun and to Jupiter would then be of the same kind as in 9, 20, 6 (see note ad loc.). Mundi facies is otherwise used by Manilius as a kind of terminus technicus for “the aspect of the firma1
Long scansion: 1, 70, 5; 4, 5, 7; 4, 78, 7; 7, 28, 5; 8, 28, 22; 8, 39, 1; 9, 24, 1; 9, 42, 5; 9, 79, 2; 9, 86, 7; 9, 91, 3; 9, 101, 13; 11, 8, 5; 12, 21, 3; 13, 91, 1. Short scansion: 4, 45, 2; 5, 5, 1; 5, 19, 4; 8, 60, 1; 9, 39, 1. 2 Pausan. 5, 11; cf. Sieveking in RE 19, s.v. Pheidias 1921. 3 Thus, 3, 35, 1; 4, 39, 4; 6, 13, 1; 6, 73, 8; 7, 56, 3; 9, 44, 6;10, 87, 16; and 10, 89, 2.
134
ment”, “the face of heaven”; cf. Manil. 1, 33; 1, 111; 1, 811; 2, 923; 4, 267; also Sen. epist. 89, 1. Thus, while it is possible to take this and the following Iovis ... sereni as meaning “the aspect of the firmament and the sky on a clear day”, the connection with Iovis ora sereni is effective only if taken to refer also to the actual Sun and Jupiter himself. Cf. also patriae facies of Augustus in Ov. Pont. 2, 8, 20. Iovis ora sereni: cf. 5, 6, 9 (to Parthenius) Nosti tempora tu Iovis sereni (“you know the time when Caesar is cheerful”). Martial continues the metaphor of the sky, cf. the expressions sub Iove, “in the open”, “under the heavens” and Iuppiter = “weather” (for example, Hor. carm. 1, 1, 25 f. manet sub Iove frigido | venator; 1, 22, 19 f. malus ... Iuppiter; Ov. fast. 2, 138; Stat. Theb. 2, 404), on the analogy of which Iuppiter serenus would be “fair weather”.1 4. sine nube: cf. Ov. fast. 3, 369 ter tonuit sine nube deus, tria fulgura misit. Bömer, ad loc., points to Greek models, like Hom. Od. 20, 103 f. (sc. ) ;2 and 20, 113 f. .3 Thunder from a clear sky was regarded as an omen; cf. Serv. Aen. 7, 141 f. (hic pater omnipotens ter caelo clarus ab alto | intonuit) in serenitate, quod est augurii; nam in nubibus causa est; cf. also Verg. Aen. 8, 523 ff.; 9, 630. When Jupiter thundered from a clear sky, a caelum serenum, he was propitious; the bust of Domitian carries the features of a friendly Thunderer. D¸WdND
xEU±QWKVHQ ¢
=H¹M
PHJO
G
S DcJOHQWRM 2O¹PSRX _ ·\±THQ xN QHIyZQ
xEU±QWKVDM
S
R¸UDQR¿
VWHU±HQWRM
_
R¸Gy
SRTL
QyIRM
xVWd
5. Care: see note on 9, 23, 2. coronam: the olive-wreath awarded to the winner at the Alban games (see 9, 23 intro.). 6. domini: Domitian as dominus (see note on 9, 20, 2 domini). illa dedit: as shown by the opening questions, Minerva has not only given the bust to Carus, but sculptured it herself, being the patron deity of painters and sculptors.4 The situation is the same in 6, 13, 1 f. (on a statue of Julia) Quis te Phidiaco formatam, Iulia, caelo, | vel quis Palladiae non putet artis opus? Minerva is also mentioned, for the same reason as in the present epigram, at the beginning of Stat. silv. 1, 1 (on the equestrian statue of Domitian) Quae superinposito moles geminata colosso | stat Latium complexa forum? Caelone peractum | fluxit opus? Siculis an conformata caminis | effigies lassum Steropem Brontemque reliquit? | An te Palladiae talem, Germanice, nobis | effecere manus (silv. 1, 1, 16). 1
The expression has been treated at some length by Sauter, p. 62 f. It would ultimately go back to the ancient Indo-European concept of the supreme god as the brightness of heaven; see Wachsmuth in KP 5, s.v. Zeus 1516 ff. 2 “At once he (sc. Zeus) thundered from gleaming Olympus from on high from out the clouds.” 3 “How loudly you have thundered from the starry sky, yet nowhere is there any cloud.” Translations by A. T. Murray & G. E. Dimock, Loeb. 4 See, for example, Furtwängler in Roscher, s.v. Athene 681 f.
135
25 Dantem vina tuum quotiens aspeximus Hyllum, lumine nos, Afer, turbidiore notas. Quod, rogo, quod scelus est, mollem spectare ministrum? Aspicimus solem, sidera, templa, deos. Avertam vultus, tamquam mihi pocula Gorgon 5 porrigat atque oculos oraque nostra petat? Trux erat Alcides, et Hylan spectare licebat; ludere Mercurio cum Ganymede licet. Si non vis teneros spectet conviva ministros, Phineas invites, Afer, et Oedipodas. 10 The theme of tipsy guests looking eagerly at the host’s young and beautiful servants is found elsewhere in Martial; cf. 9, 22, 11, and in particular 10, 98, in which the poet expresses the same indignation at the host’s jealousy: should Martial rather look at his lamps and citrus-tables than at the minister Idaeo resolutior cinaedo? Moreover, the servants were not totally discouraging, as might be gathered from line 6 (see note below), and cf. 11, 23, 9 f. dabit nobis lasciva minister basia. On the sexual abuse of the ministri, see the Earinus cycle, intro. The present epigram is clearly influenced by AP 12, 175 (Strato): u+
]KORW¹SHL SUHFH
_
NDOR¼M
R¸
GR¹ORLM
WdM
J
U
xSg
QU
SHUdHUJD
SDLVgQ xM
wWDdURXM
{UZW
EOySHL
_
_
GDPQWLQRM
]ÇQWZQ
{UJD
P
WG
TKOXSUHSHjM
WdM
WHLUM
xVWdQ
_
²SRX
RfQ- G
{UZWHM _ R¸G| PyTDL 'LRIÍQ Q xTyO9M SLTL _ NNHj 7HLUHVdKQ xM S±WRQ zONH _ W´Q P|Q xS R¸G|Q cGHjQ W´Q G xSg PR¿QRQ cGHjQ
P
RcQRF±RXM
R¸N
WdM
G|
HcVgQ
7QWDORQ
) appears three times more in Martial, 1. Hyllum: the name Hyllus (Gr. always in an obscene context; thus of a lascivious boy in 2, 60 and 4, 7, and in 2, 51 of a depraved miser. r8OORM
2. lumine turbidiore notas: “you mark me with a yet gloomier glance”; for noto in the sense of “to look askance at”, see Forcellini, Lex., s.v. 8, 296. 3. Quod, rogo, quod: Martial often puts such affectionate questions, opened by a monosyllabic interrogative pronoun followed by parenthetical rogo, at the beginning of the verse; thus 2, 80, 2; 3, 76, 3; 5, 25, 7; 10, 41, 3; 10, 66, 1. The parenthetical rogo in questions is a distinctive feature of Martial’s language (eleven instances more,2 always with iambic shortening; cf. 9, praef., 6 puto); the usage is colloquial and first appears in Petronius, who uses it frequently (for example, 7, 1; 20, 1; 39, 1; see Hofmann, p. 130). There are no other instances from the poets of 1 “Either be not jealous with your friends about your slave boys, or do not provide girlish-looking cupbearers. For who is of adamant against love, or who succumbs not to wine, and who does not look curiously at pretty boys? This is the way of living men, but if you like, Diophon, go away to some place where there is no love and no drunkenness, and there induce Tiresias or Tantalus to drink with you, the one to see nothing and the other only to see” (W. R. Paton’s translation, Loeb). The first distich of this epigram would be the model also of 10, 98, 11 f. habere, Publi, | mores non potes hos et hos ministros. 2 3, 44, 9; 3, 52, 3; 3, 73, 3; 4, 84, 4; 5, 44, 1; 5, 82, 3; 6, 17, 2; 7, 86, 3; 10, 15, 2; 10, 21, 2; 13, 58, 2.
136
the parenthetical rogo in questions, except for Stat. silv. 4, 9, 42 ff. ollares, rogo, non licebat uvas, | Cumano patinas in orbe tortas | aut unam dare synthesin quid horres?, whereas the corresponding quaeso, which is not found in Martial, appears once each in Horace, Propertius and the Priapea, six times in Phaedrus and four times in Silius. Similarly, Martial has six instances of the paratactic rogo followed by either an imperative or subjunctive (cf. 9, 9, 3 monemus),1 which otherwise appears only in Ov. epist. 11, 127; trist. 3, 6, 22; compare the much commoner, paratactic quaeso, found twice each in Catullus, Vergil, Valerius Flaccus and Juvenal, six times each in Tibullus and Propertius, nine in Ovid, eleven in Silius and ten in Statius. Emphatic gemination like quod ... quod is originally colloquial, adopted into rhetoric and higher poetry as a means of significant ornamentation and emphasis; the latter is particularly obvious in cases in which the repeated words are separated by, as here, rogo, inquam (so 6, 64, 8), precor, etc. Compare 9, 84, 8 and see Hofmann–Szantyr, § 45 b, pp. 809 f. mollem: “girlish”, “dainty”; cf. 9, 11, 10; 9, 59, 3; Hor. epod. 11, 4 mollibus in pueris aut in puellis urere; mollis is often used of catamites in this sense; cf. 3, 73, 4; Catull. 25,1; TLL, s.v. 1379, 26 f. It may also signify compliance in love (TLL, s.v. 1377, 71 ff.), cf. Prop. 2, 22, 13 quaeris, Demophoon, cur sim tam mollis in omnis?; Ov. am. 2, 3, 5, which may strengthen Martial’s argumentation: the boy is even inviting. 4. templa, deos: deos is metonymy for statues of the gods, TLL, s.v. deus 889, 7 ff. For the prosody, cf. Ov. trist. 3, 1, 60. 5 f. Avertam ... petat: “Should I turn away, as if it were a Gorgon (and not the boy) who poured the wine for me and tried to catch my eye” (cf. Friedländer ad loc.); the one who looked upon the face of a Gorgon was immediately turned to stone. Against the reading of T petat, Shackleton Bailey has adopted the reading of tegam, altering the punctuation of the whole sentence thus: avertam vultus, tamquam mihi pocula Gorgon | porrigat, atque oculos oraque nostra tegam? Whereas both readings give acceptable meanings, petat seems nonetheless preferable, as it implies that it is not only Martial who looks at the boy, but also that the boy gives him inviting glances. The introduction of the Gorgon may perhaps be influenced by AP 6, 126 (Dioscorides), on the Cretan warrior Hyllus, who wore a picture of a Gorgon on his shield.2 J
E
1
Paratactic with imperative: 2, 14, 18; 2, 25, 2; 6, 20, 4; with subjunctive: 3, 95, 3; 6, 5, 2; 7, 95, 18. AP 6, 126, 1–4 (“Not idly did Hyllus the son of Polyttus, the stout Cretan warrior, blazon on his shield the Gorgon, that turns men to stone, and the three legs”; translation by W. R. Paton, Loeb). This Hyllus is otherwise unknown (see A. S. F. Gow & D. L. Page, The Greek Anthology, vol . 2, Cambridge 1965, p. 245). 2
QU
6PD W±G R¸Fg PWDLRQ xS VSdGL SDjM ¯
{THWR
_
*RUJ±QD
W
Q
OLTRHUJ´Q
¯PR¿
NDg
WULSO±D
3RO¹WWRX
JR¿QD
_
_
r8OORM
S´
.UWDM
TR¿URM
JUD\PHQRM
137
7. Trux … Alcides: Hercules is mentioned as trux also in Sen. Troad. 720 and Stat. Theb. 11, 46 f.; cf., for example, Ov. epist. 16, 267 ferus Alcides; Val. Fl. 6, 462 durus Tirynthius; Petron. 123, 1, 205 f. arduus Amphitryoniades; Sen. Herc. O. 495 Hercules horridus; see Carter, Epitheta, s.v. Hercules 42 ff. Hylan: the earliest transmitted accounts of the story of Hylas (originally a Cian hero) are those of the contemporaneous Theocrit. 13 and Apollon. 1, 1207 ff. (it is possible that Theocritus wrote his account with his eyes on that of Apollonius; see A. J. F. Gow, Theocritus. Edited with a Translation and Commentary, Cambridge 1950, vol. 2, pp. 231 f.). According to Apollonius, Hylas was the son of king Theiodamas, killed by Hercules, who fell in love with the young Hylas and brought him along on the journey of the Argonauts. When Hylas in Mysia was seeking for a spring to get water, the Naiads of the spring were struck by his beauty and pulled him into the water, where he disappeared. Hercules, suspecting that the Mysians had kidnapped Hylas, seized hostages and ordered them never to rest until Hylas was recovered (see Sittig in RE 9, s.v. Hylas 110 ff.). The comprehensive accounts in Latin poetry of Hylas are Prop. 1, 20 and Val. Fl. 3, 521 ff.; cf. Verg. ecl. 6, 43; georg. 3, 6; Ov. ars 2, 110; trist. 2, 406; Stat. Theb. 5, 443; silv. 1, 2, 199; 2, 1, 113; Iuv. 1, 164. There are seven mentions more of Hylas in Martial, mostly (like Ganymede) as the pattern of fair boys; thus 5, 48, 5; 6, 68, 8; 7, 15, 2; 7, 50, 8; 11, 43, 5. There is a humorous allusion to his abduction in 9, 65, 14, and he represents the Argonauts as epic stock-subject in 10, 4, 3. Three times the poet mentions a real boy by the name of Hylas; thus 3, 19; 8, 9; 11, 28 (with Kay on 11, 28, 2). 8. Ludere Mercurio cum Ganymede licet: cf. 7, 74, 3 sic tibi (sc. Mercurio) lascivi non desit copia furti, | sive cupis Paphien, seu Ganymede cales, but these are the only instances in Latin literature to present Mercury as smitten with love for Ganymede. Now the mentions of both Venus and Ganymede in 7, 74 are important, because Hermes was considered to have abducted Aphrodite from the party of Artemis; thus Hymn. Hom. Ven. 116 f. (Aphrodite to Anchises) Q¿Q Gy P
QUSD[H
FUXV±UUDSLM
$UJHLI±QWKM
_
xN
FRUR¿
$UWyPLGRM
FUXVKODNWRX
.1 Some one hundred verses further below in the same poem (202– 204), the abduction of Ganymede is mentioned:
NHODGHLQ M
¢
PKWdHWD
=H¼M
_
USDVHQ
µQ
GL
NDW
GÍPD THRjM xSLRLQRFRH¹RL ODVWRQ
{FH
IUyQDM
R¸Gy
WL
NOORM
eQ
WRL
P|Q
TDQWRLVL
[DQT´Q
PHWHdK
,2 and in lines 207 f., it is said:
¨GHL
_
²SS9
Rb
IdORQ
Xb´Q
_
*DQXPGHD
NDd
WH
'L´M
7UÍD G| SyQTRM
QUSDVH
TyVSLM
.3 The verb used of Hermes’ abduction of Aphrodite ( , “snatch up”) is elsewhere used of the abduction of people by a gale of wind;4 the uncompounded is used in the passage mentioning Ganymede’s abduction, where it is also explicitly said that he was snatched away by a . HOOD
QDUS]Z
US]Z
TyVSLM
HOOD
1 “And now the Slayer of Argus with the golden wand has caught me up from the dance of huntress Artemis, her with the golden arrows.” 2 “Verily wise Zeus carried off golden-haired Ganymedes because of his beauty, to be among the Deathless Ones and pour drink for the gods in the house of Zeus.” 3 “But grief that could not be soothed filled the heart of Tros; for he knew not whither the heaven-sent whirlwind had caught up his dear son” (translations by H. G. Evelyn-White, Loeb). 4 Roscher in Roscher, s.v. Hermes 2372.
138
Given Hermes’ function as god of the wind,1 it seems likely that he was considered, along with Jupiter himself, the eagle, Minos and Tantalos, as one of Ganymede’s abductors. Perhaps Martial mentions Ganymede together with Venus in 7, 74 because Mercury had been involved in the abduction of both. 9. teneros … ministros: “tender”, but also “amorous” (cf. 4, 14, 13) and “effeminate”; see OLD, s.v., and cf. mollem above. For the ending of the line, cf. 9, 22, 11. 10. Phineas … et Oedipodas: Phineus was a seer in the story of the Argonauts, and, like Oedipus, he was blind, not from birth, but as a result either of his being thus punished by the gods or because he had traded the sight of his eyes for a long life (see Ziegler in RE 20, s.v. Phineus 225 ff.). Such tragic figures would be quite safe guests at a banquet attended by beautiful young slaves; on the other hand, in the company of such guests, the banquet would be equally entertaining. The parallel to AP 12, 175 (quoted above), where Strato suggested that his host should invite Tiresias and Tantalus, is very close.
26 Audet facundo qui carmina mittere Nervae, pallida donabit glaucina, Cosme, tibi, Paestano violas et cana ligustra colono, Hyblaeis apibus Corsica mella dabit: sed tamen et parvae nonnulla est gratia Musae; appetitur posito vilis oliva lupo. Nec tibi sit mirum, modici quod conscia vatis iudicium metuit nostra Thalia tuum: ipse tuas etiam veritus Nero dicitur aures, lascivum iuvenis cum tibi lusit opus.
5
10
This poem was certainly originally intended to head a collection of poems (a libellus; cf. 9, 16 intro.) which Martial sent to Nerva. There are a number of poems throughout the Epigrams which have obviously served the same purpose before being incorporated into a published book; in Book 9, cf. nos. 58, 84, and 99.2 M. Cocceius Nerva, who was to succeed Domitian as emperor, is mentioned in six epigrams of Martial’s, the present one and 8, 70 being the only ones to appear before his accession to the throne and, as such, of greater interest; the references made to Nerva the emperor (11, 2, 5; 11, 4, 5; 11, 7, 5; 12, 5, 3) tend to be mere flattery. First and foremost a politician (praetor in 66, consul in 71 with Vespasian 1 Ibid. 2360 “Die Bedeutung, welche H. als Diener der Götter, namentlich des Zeus hatte, erklärt sich sehr einfach aus der das ganze Altertum, vor allem aber Homer und die übrigen Dichter beherrschenden Anschauung, dass der Wind das Werkzeug der Götter, namentlich des Zeus sei und von diesem gesendet werde”. 2 See White, Dedication, pp. 56 f.
139
and in 90 with Domitian), Nerva was renowned for his oratorical abilities, which were, however, restrained to some degree by his modesty (cf. 8, 70, 1 cited below). Pliny mentions an oratio pulcherrima of his in a letter to Trajan (epist. 10, 8, 1). Somewhat better attested than his eloquence is his poetry, although none of it has survived. Nerva was one of the literary circle formed by Nero in 59 and comprising, among others, Lucan and Petronius, perhaps also Silius Italicus.1 Martial states that he could have risen to considerable heights as a poet, had not his modestia stood in his way;2 cf. the characterisation of Nerva the poet in 8, 70: Quanta quies placidi, tantast facundia Nervae, | sed cohibet vires ingeniumque pudor | cum siccare sacram largo Permessida posset | ore, verecundam maluit esse sitim, | Pieriam tenui frontem redimire corona | contentus, famae nec dare vela suae. | Sed tamen hunc nostri scit temporis esse Tibullum, | carmina qui docti nota Neronis habet. As appears from the concluding line of this poem, Nero referred to Nerva as the Tibullus of his time, which may suggest that he, like Tibullus, wrote in the genre of tender elegy. What is quite obvious is that he wrote epigrams or erotic poems, for he is among the doctissimos gravissimos sanctissimos homines, whom Pliny produces in defence of his own versiculos severos parum (epist. 5, 3, 2 ff.).3 Lines 9-10 state that ipse Nero recited his poems to Nerva with the utmost respect for his judgement and express some esteem of the poetry of the otherwise despised emperor. Nero’s poetic ambitions, probably encouraged by his teachers, the Alexandrian Chaeremon and the younger Seneca,4 are well known from various authors; apparently, he was not completely devoid of talent (cf. 8, 70, 8 [quoted above], and Suet. Nero 52, 1).5 Like Nerva, Nero wrote in different genres; the present epigram refers to his opus lascivum, his epigrams, which are mentioned only here and perhaps also in Plin. nat. 37, 50, but he also wrote epic and hymns, perhaps also satire.6 Of his works, nothing has come down to us, except for thirteen lines from the Troica.
1
Nerva was in great repute with Nero, not only as a poet, but above all as a counsellor; he began his political career under Nero and also played a significant role in the suppression of Piso’s conspiracy. Their mutual interest in poetry may well have played an important part, at least initially, in Nerva’s popularity with the emperor (see Sullivan, Nero, pp. 31 ff.). 2 Modesty was obviously an inherited feature among the Nervae; cf. 5, 28, 3 f. Pietate fratres Curvios licet vincas, | quiete Nervas, comitate Rusones. 3 The list given by Pliny comprises such names as Cicero, Sulla, Hortensius, Julius Caesar, Augustus and Tiberius. The greatest poet in the circle of Nero, Lucan, also wrote obscene epigrams, as appears from 10, 64, 5 Non tamen erubuit (sc. Lucanus) lascivo dicere versu | “Si nec pedicor, Cotta, quid hic facio?” (= Lucan. frg. 10). 4 Sullivan, op. cit., pp. 28 f. 5 Itaque ad poeticam pronus carmina libenter ac sine labore composuit nec, ut quidam putant, aliena pro suis edidit. Venere in manus meas pugillares libellique cum quibusdam notissimis versibus ipsius chirographo scriptis, ut facile appareret non tralatos aut dictante aliquo exceptos, sed plane quasi a cogitante atque generante exaratos. Tacitus admits that Nero as a boy aliquando carminibus pangendis inesse sibi elementa doctrinae ostendebat (ann. 13, 3), but his judgement of the poetry of the emperor is far less complimentary (see ann. 14, 6). 6 His epic work is represented by the Troica, but he also had plans to write an enormous epic on the history of Rome (Dio Cass. 62, 29); his other works are less well attested (see B. H. Warmington, Suetonius, Nero, Bristol 1977, pp. 116 f.).
140
1. facundo carmina mittere Nervae: Ovid has the same doubts about sending one of his Letters from Pontus to Severus: Quis mel Aristaeo, quis Baccho vina Falerna, | Triptolemo fruges, poma det Alcinoo? | ... | Mittere ad hunc carmen frondes erat addere silvis (Pont. 4, 2, 9–13). For the expression “carry coals to Newcastle” in Latin, cf. also 7, 42, 6 Alcinoo nullum poma dedisse putas? (as in Ov. Pont. 4, 2, 10; Alcinous, king of Phaeacia, had famous orchards); 11, 42, 4 thyma Cecropiae Corsica ponis api (cf. line 4 below); Hor. sat. 1, 10, 34 in silvam non ligna feras insanius; Ov. am. 2, 10, 13 f. quid folia arboribus, quid pleno sidera caelo, | in freta collectas alta quid addis aquas?; cf. Otto, s.v. Alcinous, p. 12; s.v. silva 1, p. 323. 2. pallida … glaucina: glaucina (plur.), mentioned only here and in dig. 34, 2, 21, 1 (TLL, s.v. glaucina 2036, 40 ff.), was a salve made of the herb glaucium (Gr. ), the seeds and leaves of which were crushed and used for curing inflammations in the eyes; see Plin. nat. 27, 83, who refers to the salve made from it as dia glauciu (Gr. ). The health-giving juice of the glaucium is mentioned also in Colum. 10, 103 f., and Scrib. Larg. 22 proscribes the use of diaglaucium at an early stage of the inflammation. The word glaucina, intentionally or not, would perhaps remind the reader of the Greek “coals to Newcastle”, viz. , “owls to Athens”. JOD¹NLRQ
GL
JODXNdRX
JOD¿N HcM $TQDM
Cosme: the cosmetics of Cosmus were in Martial’s day the most famous beyond comparison, first appearing in Book 14 and still mentioned in Book 12. Apart from perfumes, oils and salves (cf. 3, 82, 26 Cosmianis ampullis; 11, 8, 9 Cosmi alabastra; 11, 15, 6 pingui … Cosmiano; 11, 49, 6 Cosmi … onyx; 12, 55, 7 libram [sc. of unguent]… Cosmiani; 12, 65, 4 Cosmi … libram; 14, 59, 2 delicias Cosmi) and aromatic herbs (11, 18, 9 Cosmi folium; 14, 146, 1 Cosmi folio), Cosmus also supplied pastilles against bad breath (such as Fescennina in 1, 87, devours to rid herself of the smell of hesterno vino); cf. also 3, 55, 1; 14, 110, 1; perhaps also 7, 41, 1 (“the quintessence of Cosmus’ perfumes”?). Kay on 11, 8, 9 (cf. Courtney on Iuv. 8, 86) suggested that Cosmus may actually have been a trade name (Gr. , “ornament” etc., although there were other Cosmi), and Bowie (on 12, 55, 7) that there were several generations of Cosmi in the trade, just as there may have been several gourmets called Apicius (Leary on 14, 59, 2). It has even been suggested that Martial’s many references to Cosmus were part of an advertising campaign and that Cosmus in some way paid Martial for making them, i.e. a case of ancient sponsorship (see A. P. Ball, CJ 2 [1906], pp. 168 f.). N±VPRM
3. Paestano … colono: Paestum in north-western Lucania, a colony since 273 BC, was famous for its floral splendour (cf. 6, 80, 6; Riemann in RE 22, s.v. Poseidonia 1233). Martial refers particularly to its beautiful roses, thus 4, 42, 10; 5, 37, 9; 9, 60, 1; 12, 31, 3; also Verg. georg. 4, 119; Prop. 4, 5, 61; Ov. met. 15, 708; Pont. 2, 4, 28; Anth. 646, 11 f. Of its violets and privets, there is no mention other than the present one.
141
cana ligustra: the image of pale (or white) beauty in 1, 115, 3; 8, 28, 11; thus first Verg. ecl. 2, 17 f. o formose puer, nimium ne crede colori: | alba ligustra cadunt, vaccinia nigra leguntur; then only Ov. met. 13, 789 (with Bömer’s note). 4. Hyblaeis apibus Corsica mella: the honey of Mt. Hybla in Sicily was counted among the very best, second only to that of Attica (see note on 9, 11, 3). On the other hand, the Corsican honey, like that of Sardinia, was among the worst (Porph. Hor. epist. 2, 3, 375 Corsicum et Sardum mel pessimi saporis est), and its acridity is well attested. According to Pliny, it was good for removing stains on the face (nat. 30, 28) and was also, on account of its acidity, the best honey for boiling gems to make them more colourful (nat. 37, 195); as food, it was obviously quite useless, and Ovid even refers to it as mel infame (am. 1, 12, 10). Various reasons were given for its acidity. Pliny (nat. 16, 71), like Theophrastus (hist. plant. 3, 15, 5), ascribes it to the box, while Vergil (ecl. 9, 30) considered the yewtree as causing the bitterness (cf. Colum. 9, 4, 3); see also Schuster in RE 15, s.v. mel 369. 5. parvae … Musae: “the genre of short poems”, cf. TLL, s.v. Musa 1692, 18 ff. But parvus may also express a sense of humbleness, more apparent in this case than in 7, 29, 6 and 8, 82, 2 (carmina parva) and 10, 1, 3 (carmine parvo), where the interpretation of parvus simply as “short” is perhaps more likely.1 This is also true of the parvum carmen in Hor. epist. 2, 1, 258 (see Brink, Hor. epist. II, ad loc.). 6. posito … lupo: “even though a bass is put on the table”. A fish highly esteemed in Greece as well as in Rome, Martial mentions the bass alongside the red mullet in 2, 37, 4; 2, 40, 4; 11, 49, 9. The most appreciated variety was the lupus lanatus (so-called from the whiteness of its flesh), which was at its best when caught in rivers (cf. 13, 89; Plin. nat. 9, 61), especially in the Tiber “between the two bridges” (Hor. sat. 2, 2, 31 ff.; Plin. nat. 9, 169; Macr. Sat. 3, 16, 11 ff.), but it was also bred in ponds (cf. 10, 30, 21 Piscina rhombum pascit et lupos vernas; see Wellmann in RE 3, s.v. Barsch 27 f.). The bass was most cunning and had certain ways of avoiding the fisherman’s net. Ovid tells how the fish, when surrounded by the net, used its tail to dig itself into the sand and lay thus concealed, until the net had passed (hal. 23 ff.; cf. Plin. nat. 32, 11). It was also rapacious, which earned it its Latin name (like its Greek name , derived from , “greedy”). When posito vilis … lupo was scanned, perhaps the listener would perceive the last part as ovilis … lupo, which in that case might be a playful hint at such lines as Ov. ars 2, 364 Plenum montano credis ovile lupo?; 3, 7 f. quid virus in angues | adicis, et rabidae tradis ovile lupae?; trist. 1, 6, 10 incustoditum captat ovile lupus. OEUD[
1
OEURM
Cf. TLL, s.v. parvus 556, 45 ff. (55).
142
vilis oliva: cf. 1, 103, 7; cf. Hor. sat. 2, 2, 44 ff. necdum omnis abacta pauperies epulis regum: nam vilibus ovis nigrisque est oleis hodie locus. Olives were served at almost every meal (see Blümner, Privataltertümer, p. 168). 7 f. modici … conscia vatis | nostra Thalia: “my Thalia, well aware of the fact that I am a minor poet”; modici conscia vatis would be an instance of the ab urbe condita construction with adjectives (cf. note on 9, 1, 3). Thalia was the Muse of comedy as well as of light verse and, as such, Martial’s confidante (cf. 9, 73, 9; 10, 20, 1 ff.). He often refers to his poetry as nostra (mea) Thalia (cf. 4, 8, 12; 8, 73, 3; 12, 94, 3, with the epithet lasciva in 7, 17, 4, cf. Stat. silv. 2, 1, 116; 5, 3, 98); cf. also 7, 46, 4 tua ... Thalia of the hopeless verses of Priscus, and see Höfer in Roscher, s.v. Thaleia 450 f. 9. dicitur aures: the same ending in Prop. 2, 20, 13. 10. lascivum: lascivia was the main feature of the epigram (cf. 1, praef. lascivam verborum veritatem, id est epigrammaton linguam), and consequently Martial often refers to his own works with the epithet lascivus; cf. 1, 4, 8; 3, 86, 1; 4, 14, 12; 5, 2, 5; 7, 14, 7; 7, 68, 3; TLL, s.v. lascivus 985, 73 ff. For Nero’s poetry, see the introduction above. lusit: here perhaps of recitation, like Ov. ars 3, 317 f. et modo marmoreis referant audita theatris, | et modo Niliacis carmina lusa modis; otherwise frequently of the composition of light verse; thus 9, 84, 3; TLL, s.v. 1781, 84 ff.
27 Cum depilatos, Chreste, coleos portes et vulturino mentulam parem collo et prostitutis levius caput culis, nec vivat ullus in tuo pilus crure, purgentque saevae cana labra volsellae: Curios, Camillos, Quintios, Numas, Ancos, et quidquid umquam legimus pilosorum loqueris sonasque grandibus minax verbis, et cum theatris saeculoque rixaris. Occurrit aliquis inter ista si draucus, iam paedagogo liberatus et cuius refibulavit turgidum faber penem: nutu vocatum ducis, et pudet fari Catoniana, Chreste, quod facis lingua.
5
10
Attacks on sham philosophers occur throughout Books 1 to 12, the targets being principally Stoics and Cynics, although Martial generally does not explicitly refer to them as philosophers or mention what doctrine they profess (except for 4, 53, 143
which is openly aimed at a Cynic). From his descriptions of their conduct and the attributes he gives them, it nonetheless becomes quite clear that they are men who are bald or have short haircuts (significant of Stoics as well as Cynics; cf. Kißel on Pers. 3, 54), appearing as stern moralizers, a principal Stoic feature, finding fault with the ways of the world and holding up the ancient Roman exempla virtutis as models for the unimpeachable life, neglecting their appearance, an essential mark of the Cynics, who took pride in an ascetic life of absolute poverty, “with the ragged cloak, staff and beggar’s wallet as their badge with a complete disregard of appearances …”1 (cf. 4, 53, 3 ff. and see note on 9, 47, 2). But when no one sees, the would-be Stoic indulges in vices well below human dignity, and under the worn-out cloak of the filthy Cynic are found the tokens of effeminate vanity. See 1, 24; 1, 96; 2, 36; 6, 56; 7, 58, 7; 9, 47; 12, 42. Philosophers who fail to live up to their doctrine are known already to Cicero; cf. Tusc. 2, 11 f. Quotus enim quisque philosophorum invenitur, qui sit ita moratus, ita animo ac vita constitutus, ut ratio postulat? Qui disciplinam suam non ostentationem scientiae, sed legem vitae putet? Qui obtemperet ipse sibi et decretis suis pareat? Videre licet alios tanta levitate et iactatione, ut iis fuerit non didicisse melius, alios pecuniae cupidos, gloriae non nullos, multos libidinum servos, ut cum eorum vita mirabiliter pugnet oratio. Later, they are a source of irritation to Seneca (epist. 108, 5 f.) and Quintilian (inst. 1, praef.; 12, 3, 122), but these instances are not directly comparable with those in Martial, as they rather deal with failure to adopt a given teaching; Martial’s characters are mere hypocrites, some of whom appear not to have received any education at all, only to have grown a beard, put on tattered clothes and gone out to complain about others. The principal attack on these would-be philosophers is, however, the opening of Juvenal’s Second Satire (1–35), in which he lets fly at those qui Curios simulant et Bacchanalia vivunt (2, 3). His targets are the same as Martial’s, as is the gist of his argumentation: Castigas turpia, cum sis | inter Socraticos notissima fossa cinaedos? | Hispida membra quidem et durae per bracchia saetae | promittunt atrocem animum, sed podice levi | caeduntur tumidae medico ridente mariscae (2, 9–13). Compare also the vetula of Hor. epod. 8, who keeps libelli Stoici among her satin pillows (8, 15 f.), yet is unable to keep her unchecked sexuality within bounds. It has been suggested that the invectives against philosophers in Quintilian and Martial may to some extent be directed against a “Stoic opposition” to Domitian, which for the opponents resulted in several exiles and death sentences and which would have made philosophers “fair game” for satirical scorn (cf. Courtney, p. 120). However, Austin (op. cit., p. xvi) denies this on the part of Quintilian, and there is in fact little to indicate that there ever was an opposition united by a common Stoic ideal (see Jones, Domitian, pp. 119 ff.). Moreover, Martial in his epigrams on philosophers adopts and elaborates a theme found in Greek epigram; thus the present epigram is clearly modelled on AP 11, 155 1
W. K. C. Guthrie, A History of Greek Philosophy, vol. 2, Cambridge 1969, p. 490; see further note on 9, 47, 2. 2 Quintilian’s hostility may have emanated from the feud between rhetoricians and philosophers concerning which educational method should be preferred (see R. G. Austin, Quintiliani Institutionis Oratoriae Liber XII, Oxford 1948, pp. xvii ff. and notes ad loc.).
144
(Lucilius):
2ÀWRM
¯
W M
UHW M
GPDM
EDU¹M
RÀWRM
¯
SQW9
_
SVLQ
xSLSOVVZQ RÀWRM ¯ LJRPFRM _ NDg SÇJZQD WUyIZQ wOZ Wd JU SUHS|M
1 (see Burnikel, Struktur, pp. 22 ff.). For the theme in later Greek authors, cf. Athenaeus 13, 563 d ff.; Lucian. symp. 34 f. See also Courtney’s introduction to Iuv. 2 and Richlin 138 f.
HcSHjQ
_
OO
wOZ
1. Chreste: Gr.
SRLÍQ
&U VWRM
{UJD
NDNRVWRPWZQ
, used also of a miser in 7, 55.
coleos: “testicles”; cf. Petron. 44, 14 si nos coleos haberemus, “if we were virile men”. The word was apparently less obscene than mentula; its tone is commented on even by Cicero (fam. 9, 22, 4) “Testes” verbum honestissimum in iudicio, alio loco non nimis. Et honesti “colei Lanuvini”, Cliternini non honesti, although the significance of this remark is uncertain. Martial uses it metonymically of libidinous men in 12, 83, 2; see Adams, pp. 66 f. portes: usually not of parts of the body, but in this case perhaps because Chrestus carries his depilated testicles as a kind of adornment; cf. TLL, s.v. porto 51, 54 ff. (cf. ibid. 50, 40 ff.). 3. caput … levius: “a head more hairless”; for levis in the sense of “bald”, cf. Iuv. 10, 199 leve caput; TLL, s.v. levis 2, 1222, 44 ff. Short hair was characteristic of Stoics and Cynics; cf. Pers. 3, 35 (with Kißel); Iuv. 2, 15. prostitutis … culis: male prostitutes and effeminates depilated the culus, just as a female prostitute or courtesan would depilate the cunnus (see Henderson, p. 220), cf. 2, 62 Quod pectus, quod crura tibi, quod bracchia vellis, | quod cincta est brevibus mentula tonsa pilis: | hoc praestas, Labiene, tuae (quis nescit?) amicae. | cui praestas, culum quod, Labiene, pilas?; 6, 56, 4; Iuv. 2, 12. 4. nec … ullus … pilus: to remove the hair from the legs was a sign of exaggerated vanity and detestable effeminacy; cf. 2, 62 quoted above; 5, 61, 6; 6, 56; 10, 65, 8; 12, 38, 4; compare the pun in 2, 36, 5 f. Male depilation was obviously practised in Rome already in the second century BC, as it is castigated, along with other signs of effeminacy, in a speech by Scipio Aemilianus (referred in Gell. 6, 12); see Richlin, pp. 92 f. 5. saevae … volsellae: “tweezers”, called saevae, because the treatment naturally hurt. The tearing out of the hairs was used alongside cutting and shaving, though such scrupulous care of the body was not regarded as quite becoming in a man (cf. 8, 47). According to Suetonius, the method was used by Julius Caesar, who was circa corporis curam morosior (Suet. Iul. 45, 2); cf. Sen. nat. 1, 17, 2; epist. 114, 21; Bömer, Privataltertümer, p. 269.
1 “This solid adamant of virtue, this rebuker of everyone, this fighter with the cold, with his long beard, has been caught.” “At what?” “It is not proper to say at what, but he was caught doing things that foul-mouthed people do.” (Translation by W. R. Paton, Loeb.)
145
cana labra: in a wider sense of the parts around the actual lips (and thus hypallage), cf. 10, 42, 6; TLL, s.v. 1. labrum 811, 27 ff. There may, however, also be an allusion to Martial’s idea, that those who practised oral sex attracted a sickly pallor (cf. 1, 77 and see 9, 95 intro.). 6. Curios, Camillos: generalizing plurals (“typisiert”, Hofmann-Szantyr § 28, p. 19), as the names serve as representatives of a certain character; cf., for example, Cic. Sest. 143; Sen. dial. 9, 7, 5; epist. 22, 11; Gell. 14, 1, 29; and instances from Martial below. The present is Martial’s longest continuous list of exempla virtutis, models of ancient Roman virtue.1 Although the prime model was naturally Cato (see below on line 14), the Curii are those most often used by Martial in such contexts; cf. 1, 24, 3; 6, 64, 2; 7, 58, 7; 7, 68, 4; 9, 28, 4; 11, 16, 6; 11, 104, 2. Behind the name stands M’. Curius Dentatus, consul 290, 284 (suffectus), 275 and 274, who ended the Samnite War and conquered, among other peoples, the Sabines. The Camilli (also 1, 24, 3 and 11, 5, 7) owe their fame to M. Furius Camillus, who captured Veii about 396, defeated the Gauls who invaded Rome in 387–6 and was considered parens patriae conditorque alter urbis (Liv. 5, 49, 7). For similar mentions of the Curii and Camilli, cf. Cic. Sest. 143; Cael. 39; Pis. 58; Hor. carm. 1, 12, 41 f.; epist. 1, 1, 64; Lucan. 1, 169 f.; 6, 787 f.; 7, 358; Sil. 13, 723 f.; Iuv. 2, 153 f.; see also Otto, s.v. Camillus, p. 68 and s.v. Curius, p. 102; Citroni and Howell on 1, 24, 3 respectively. Quintios: mentioned because of the achievements of T. Quinctius Capitolinus Barbatus, consul six times between 471 and 439, and L. Quinctius Cincinnatus (perhaps the former’s elder brother), who was consul suffectus in 460 and was summoned directly from the plough to the dictatorship in 458; cf. Cic. Cato 56; Hanslik in RE 24, s.v. Quinctius 24, 1012 ff., and Quinctius 27, 1020 ff. For the spelling Quint- for Quinct-, cf. Plin. paneg. 57, 5 Tantone Papiriis etiam et Quintiis moderatior Augustus et Caesar et pater patriae? Numas: Numa Pompilius, the second king of Rome, presented as a model of integrity and irreproachability also in 11, 5, 2; 11, 15, 10; 11, 104, 2; 12, 3, 8; perhaps also 10, 52, 2. Numa is mentioned only twice before the present instance (3, 62, 2 sub rege Numa condita vina; 6, 47, 3 Numae coniunx), and it is interesting to note that, in Books 10 and 11, Numa is mentioned in no less than eleven poems; apart from as an exemplum in the instances given above, also in expressions like plebs Numae (10, 10, 4; 10, 76, 4), Numae colles (10, 44, 3), denoting old age (10, 39, 2; 10, 97, 4), and as Egeria’s husband (10, 35, 14). In Book 12, the frequency again drops to two instances, apart from 12, 3, 8 (above) also 12, 62, 8 urbs Numae. It is thus quite obvious that the frequency of references to Numa in Books 10 and 11 is somehow connected with the emperor Nerva. Perhaps they reflect Mar1 For Martial’s use of such exempla, see A. Nordh, “Historical exempla in Martial”, Eranos 52 (1954), pp. 224-238. Nordh observes that the selection of names is very similar to that of Juvenal, Statius (in the Silvae), Pliny the Younger and Quintilian, indicating that “the uniform selection of types in these authors reflects the exempla and the favourite subjects for suasoriae in the rhetorical schools” (p. 225).
146
tial’s solution to the problem that the emperor would not have himself compared to divinities; Martial then introduces expressions like plebs Numae to compare Rome under Nerva with the reign of Numa, who to the Romans represented peace, piety and morality, whom Livy describes as consultissimus vir ... omnis divini atque humani iuris (1, 18, 1), whose mind would have been suopte ... ingenio temperatum ... virtutibus, ... instructumque non tam peregrinis artibus quam disciplina tetrica ac tristi veterum Sabinorum (ibid. 4), and who on his accession set out to build a new Rome: urbem novam, conditam vi et armis, iure eam legibusque ac moribus de integro condere parat (ibid. 19, 1). This would have been a flattering comparison, and presumably also one to which Nerva could consent. It would also have been quite in line with contemporary efforts to present the reign of Nerva as a new age of peace and freedom; a temple was erected to Libertas ab imp. Nerva Caesare Aug. restituta (CIL 6, 472), and the coins were inscribed with libertas, libertas publica, and Roma renascens (see Stein in RE 4, s.v. Cocceius 16, 153).1 There are, it is true, still a couple of epigrams in Book 10 of satirical content, in which Numa is used merely as the image of antiquity or old age, but, in Books 11 and 12, he appears only as an exemplum virtutis and in the phrase urbs Numae. These less reverent instances may perhaps be a remnant from the first edition of Book 10, which appeared Domitian was still emperor. Ancos: the only allusion in Martial to Ancus Marcius, the fourth king of Rome and grandson of Numa; cf. Cic. rep. 2, 33; Liv. 1, 32 ff.; Philipp in RE 14, s.v. Marcius 9, 1543. He is mentioned alongside his grandfather in Hor. epist. 1, 6, 27; cf. 4, 7, 15; Iuv. 5, 57. 7. pilosorum: a play on the similar sound of pilosorum and philosophorum, to whom Martial alludes here; the philosophers (and, we may add, the would-be philosophers) were hairy and wore long beards like their Greek models; cf. 2, 36, 5 f. Nunc sunt crura pilis et sunt tibi pectora saetis | horrida, sed mens est, Pannyche, volsa tibi; 6, 56; 9, 47 (with commentary); Iuv. 2, 11 f.; AP 11, 156. In this line, Shackleton Bailey prints usquam of for the umquam of . E
J
8. minax: “threatening” but also “severe”; cf. TLL, s.v. minax 995, 77. grandibus … verbis: “grandiose”, in malam partem; cf. 2, 69, 7 f. En rogat ad cenam Melior te, Classice, rectam. | Grandia verba ubi sunt? Si vir es, ecce, nega; 9, 32, 5; cf. TLL, s.v. grandis 2186, 37 ff. 9. theatris: Chrestus’ problem with the theatre would have been due to two genres, the mime and the pantomime. The mime was a burlesque farce, largely drawing on mythological subjects, but also involving a good many love and adultery scenes, which were also the chief reason for its popularity; it probably also took up many of the features of comedy, which it gradually superseded. The language of the mime was coarse and vulgar (cf. 8, praef. mimicam verborum licentiam), and 1
For the comparison of Hadrian with Numa, see R. Zoepfel, “Hadrian und Numa”, Chiron 8 (1978), pp. 391–427.
147
the character of the play often obscene, sometimes involving actresses performing in the nude; such immoral plays, enjoyed by men, women and children alike, were held out by Ovid to show that his Ars really was quite innocent (trist. 2, 497 ff.), and Martial claims that, if chaste matrons watch mimes, they ought to be able to read his epigrams without blushing (3, 86). However, the license of the mimes was to some degree excused by the nature of the feast of Flora, at which they were mainly performed (cf. Ov. fast. 5, 329 ff.). It was on one such occasion that Cato Uticensis had to leave the theatre, ne praesentia sua spectaculi consuetudinem impediret; the anecdote is related by Val. Max. 2, 10, 8 (cf. Sen. epist. 97, 8), and Martial alludes to it in 1, praef. (see Citroni ad loc.). On the mime in general, see R. C. Beacham, The Roman Theatre and its Audience, London 1991, pp. 129– 140; Friedländer, Sittengeschichte 2, pp. 113 ff. The pantomime, which enjoyed the same popularity as the mime, was likewise a source of moral degeneration. While the range of its themes was quite large, the commoner and also the most appreciated were love stories, often derived from mythology, such as Apollo and Daphne, Aphrodite and Ares, and the amorous adventures of Zeus. Like the mime, the pantomime often involved a substantial amount of obscenity, and the actors (the so-called histriones; there were no female actors in pantomime) developed an elasticity in their bodies, which enabled them to dance the parts of women in such a scabrous way that even real women, however voluptuous they might be, could “learn something” from them (cf. Iuv. 6, 63 f.). In spite of, or perhaps rather because of, the popularity of the pantomimes, Domitian forbade the histriones to appear on stage,1 while it was still permitted for them to perform in people’s homes. On the pantomime, see Beacham op. cit., pp. 140–153; O. Weinreich, Epigramm und Pantomimus, Heidelberg 1948. 10. draucus: the word, perhaps of Gallic origin (cf. TLL, s.v. draucus 2067, 47 ff.), may simply denote an athlete who performs in public (thus 7, 67, 5 and 14, 48), but in some cases, the emphasis lies not on their athletic abilities, but on the fact that they were considered to be of extraordinary sexual ability; thus 1, 96, 12 f. spectat (sc. Maternus) oculis devorantibus draucos | nec otiosis mentulas videt labris; 11, 72 Drauci Natta sui vocat pipinnam, | collatus cui Gallus est Priapus. This view was partly due to the alleged connection between bodily strength and sexual ability, but above all to the fact that the drauci wore a fibula on the penis to prevent them from having intercourse, which would diminish their strength.2 Once the fibula had been removed, they might be expected to be more sexually vigorous than usual.3 It should be noted that fibula in this context does not refer to the usual “safety-pin”, but to a ring, which was pulled through the prepuce and joined together at the ends by a craftsman (the faber of line 12), cf. Schol. Iuv. 6, 1 Suet. Dom. 7, 1; Plin. paneg. 46, 1. The pantomimi had previously been banished from Italy by Tiberius, restored by Caligula and banished again by Nero, during whose reign, though, they reappeared. Domitian’s prohibition was abolished by Nerva, but renewed by Trajan, who, however, removed it in 107 (see Mooney, p. 539). 2 Such fibulae were worn also by actors (cf. 7, 82; 14, 215; Iuv. 6, 73 with the note of the scholia: nam omnes pueri vocales fibulas in naturis habent, ne coeant) and by citharoedi and choraules (11, 75, 3; 14, 215; cf. Iuv. 6, 379 with the scholia cited below), as the voice was supposed to be maintained in good shape if one abstained from intercourse. 3 See Housman, Draucus (= Class. pap., pp. 1166 f.).
148
379 fibulam dicit circellos, quos tragoedi sive comoedi in penem habent, ut coitum non faciant, ne vocem perdant; on the operation necessary to apply the fibula, described by Cels. 7, 25, 2, see Jüthner in RE 9, s.v. Infibulatio 2543 ff. Rather strange is Martial’s mention in 11, 75, 1 of a fibula in the shape of a theca ahenea, a case of bronze, which obviously covered the penis and would hardly have been fastened by a faber, since it might fall off during exercise (cf. 7, 82). There is no other evidence of the fibula in the shape of a case, and so it is difficult to form any further idea of it, but cf. Kay on 11, 75, 1. 11. iam paedagogo liberatus: “just released from the paedagogus”, indicating that the draucus is a youngster. The paedagogus, often a Greek slave, was the permanent companion of the boy until he adopted the toga virilis around the age of seventeen (Marquardt, p. 111). 12. refibulavit: “freed from the fibula”, the only instance of this word, the opposite of which is infibulare. turgidum penem: not “swollen”, but “swelling” because of the long abstinence. 13. ducis: perhaps related to the expression scortum sim. ducere, attested mainly in Plautus; cf. TLL, s.v. duco 2143, 53 ff. fari: the only occurrence in Martial of this somewhat archaic word, certainly ironical with reference to the Catoniana lingua. 14. Catoniana … lingua: Cato, the stock example of Roman virtue,1 sums up the exempla virtutis above. He is often mentioned by Martial, sometimes with a certain amount of irony, as the model of severe morality (see Citroni, p. 11). The Cato family possessed two such exempla, Cato Censorius and his great-grandson Cato Uticensis, and it is sometimes difficult to say to which one Martial alludes. Some references are clearly to Cato Uticensis (thus 1 praef. [twice]; 1, 8, 1; 1, 78, 9; 5, 51, 5 [on his eloquence, see Howell ad loc.]; 6, 32, 5; 9, 28, 3; 11, 5, 14), while at least one certainly alludes to Cato Censorius (2, 89, 1 f. Quod nimio gaudes noctem producere vino, | ignosco: vitium, Gaure, Catonis habes; cf. Hor. carm. 3, 21, 11 f. narratur et prisci Catonis | saepe mero caluisse virtus). Cato Censorius is perhaps referred to also in 12, 3, 8, but, in some cases, no clear distinction can be made (10, 20, 21; 11, 2, 1; 11, 15, 1; 11, 39, 15). As, some lines above, Martial has Chrestus attacking the theatre, Cato Uticensis was probably chiefly in his mind in this case (cf. note on line 9 above), which also contains Martial’s only instance of the adjective Catonianus. Martial consistently expresses the utmost disgust at acts of oral sex; worse than fellatio was perhaps only cunnilinctio. For instances in the present book, cf. 63; 67, 5; 92, 11; perhaps also 95; see Sullivan, p. 189. 1
For example, Verg. Aen. 6, 841; Hor. carm. 2, 1, 24; Stat. silv. 2, 7, 68; Iuv. 2, 40; cf. Otto, s.v. Cato, p. 78.
149
28 Dulce decus scaenae, ludorum fama, Latinus ille ego sum, plausus deliciaeque tuae, qui spectatorem potui fecisse Catonem, solvere qui Curios Fabriciosque graves. Sed nihil a nostro sumpsit mea vita theatro, et sola tantum scaenicus arte feror: nec poteram gratus domino sine moribus esse; interius mentes inspicit ille deus. Vos me laurigeri parasitum dicite Phoebi, Roma sui famulum dum sciat esse Iovis.
5
10
An epigram on the mimic actor Latinus, employed at Domitian’s court, probably meant as an epitaph or, as suggested by Friedländer, written on the occasion of Latinus’ retirement from the stage and intended to form the legend on a picture of him. The potui in line 3 shows only that he is no longer active, and the fact that this is Martial’s last mention of Latinus (see below) suggests that the poem is not merely honorary, but sepulchral; cf. also the similarity to 10, 53, the epitaph of the charioteer Scorpus. For Martial’s sepulchral poetry, see S. Johnson, “The Obituary Epigrams of Martial”, CJ 49 (1953–54), pp. 264–272. The latter part of the poem is devoted to explaining how an actor in the genre of mime, characterized by obscenity and licence, may be employed at the court of Domitian, the restorer of morals (9, 5 intro.). The reason must be that Latinus’ employment could obviously be regarded as paradoxical and thus perhaps seem to malignant people to indicate that Domitian was not as serious about morals as he seemed; consequently, it forms a parallel to Statius’ eagerness to provide divine sanction for the castration of Earinus, which likewise was felt to need some explanation, having been performed under the auspices of an emperor who himself prohibited castration (silv. 3, 4, 65 ff.; see the Earinus cycle intro.). Martial therefore felt it necessary to point out that Latinus’ personal life was unpolluted by the licence of the stage; otherwise, he could not have been in favour with the emperor, who as a god had the power to look into people’s minds and see their true selves. The poem turns rather into an eulogy of Domitian, which culminates in the concluding lines, making a handsome contrast to each other; the people might well call Latinus a parasitus Phoebi, which is what he is as a professional, as long as Rome knows that, at heart, he is a servant of her Jove. Martial mentions Latinus five times more, only here and in 1, 4, 5 in connection with Domitian; the other instances (as also 1, 4, 5) mostly refer to what would have been Latinus’ preferred character, the derisor, which apparently he often played against another famous actor, Panniculus (see 2, 72, 1; 3, 86, 3; 5, 61, 11; 13, 2, 3). An idea of Latinus’ role at Domitian’s court is given by the only mention of him in Suetonius, where Latinus tells Domitian at dinner inter ceteras diei fabulas that he had accidentally passed the funeral pyre of the astrologer Ascletarion (whom the emperor had sentenced to death but had given a dignified funeral to frustrate his prophecy that his body was to be torn apart by dogs), that a sudden breeze had scattered the pyre and that he had seen that his body had been
150
devoured by dogs after all (Suet. Dom. 15, 3). Juvenal mentions Latinus twice, in 1, 36 and 6, 44; the latter instance simply refers to his acting, but the former appears in a context which has made some think that he actually acted as an informer, although Juvenal does not expressly state that he did; he simply mentions a magni delator amici | ... | ... quem Massa timet, quem munere palpat | Carus et a trepido Thymele summissa Latino (1, 33 ff., see Courtney ad loc. and cf. Mart. 1, 4, 5). This anonymous informer is said to have been feared and bribed by two other known informers, Baebius Massa and Mettius Carus (cf. Jones, Domitian, p. 181); it is true that the third person mentioned as smearing him is Latinus, but this does not necessarily imply that he too was an informer. However, the scholia ad loc. states that he was a nequissimus delator, a freedman of Nero, who had him put to death for having been involved in the adultery of Messalina. Unless there were two Latinuses, this is naturally quite impossible; if anything, the author seems to have confused Latinus with Paris, Nero with Domitian, and Messalina with Domitian (see below). Another note in the scholia (Schol. Iuv. 4, 53) says that the most influential informers at the court of Domitian were Armillatus, Demostenes et Latinus archimimus, but then adds sicut Marius Maximus scribit, which does not increase its credibility.1 On the whole, the only reasonable information on Latinus is that of Suetonius; but from Latinus acquainting Domitian at dinner with the gossip of the day, it is rather a long way to the nequissimus delator. Actors enjoying considerable imperial favour and exercising substantial influence are known also from the courts of earlier emperors, for example, the pantomimic Mnester (Suet. Cal. 55, 1) and the tragic actor Apelles (Dio Cass. 59, 5, 2) at the court of Caligula and the mimic actor Halityrus at Nero’s (Joseph. vit. 16; see Friedländer, Sittengeschichte 1, pp. 61 ff. and 2, pp. 141 f.). At the early court of Domitian, the pantomimic dancer Paris was a force to be counted with, until he was put to death by the emperor, according to Dio Cass. 67, 3, because he had been involved in an affair with Domitia (cf. Suet. Dom. 3, 1), whom Domitian would have divorced, but much of this is probably nothing more than antiDomitianic propaganda (see Jones, Domitian, pp. 34 ff.). Still, it is clear that Paris was not to be mentioned while Domitian was emperor, for the epitaph which Martial wrote for him was not published until Book 11 (11, 13, on which see Kay’s introductory note). 1. dulce decus: an echo of Hor, carm. 1, 1, 2 dulce decus meum (of Maecenas). The combination is otherwise unusual, the only other instances being Ciris 246 and Stat. silv. 3, 1, 161 (cf. TLL, s.v. decus 244, 70 f.). The epigraphic character of the poem is emphasized by the adjective dulcis, which is very frequently used of the dead in funerary inscriptions (see TLL, s.v. 2194, 43 ff.). fama: fama of the object of fame (TLL s. v. 217, 24 ff.), often used with decus; thus 8, 28, 2 fama decusque gregis; 10, 103, 4 decus et nomen famaque vestra. 1 Marius Maximus, who wrote a continuation of the Lives of Suetonius, from Nerva to Elagabalus, and was a source to the authors of the Historia Augusta, is characterised as an uncritical collector of material rather than a historian; see Miltner in RE 14, s.v. Marius 48, 1828 ff.
151
Fama in this sense is relatively common in Martial, slightly more often with reference to persons and animals (thus also 7, 27, 2; 9, 71, 1; 10, 103, 4; 11, 9, 1) than to things (8, 28, 2; 9, 43, 5; 9, 101, 2). Elsewhere, the word is used of a person only in Prop. 1, 15, 22 and Ov. am. 3, 9, 5. 2. ille ego sum: see note on 9, praef., 5. The phrase has an epigraphic ring to it. plausus: metonymy for the one receiving the applause, cf. 10, 53, 2, (of Scorpus) plausus, Roma, tui deliciaeque breves (cf. OLD, s.v. 2). 3. spectatorem … Catonem: Cato Uticensis was said to have left the theatre at the ludi Florales, in order that the licentious mimes would not be restrained by his presence (see note on 9, 27, 9). Latinus would have made him stay. 4. solvere: “make them soften”, cf. 14, 183 (Homeri Batrachomachia) Perlege Maeonio cantatas carmine ranas | et frontem nugis solvere disce meis and see OLD, s.v. 9. Curios Fabriciosque graves: on Martial’s use of exempla virtutis and on the Curii, see note on 9, 27, 6. C. Fabricius Luscinus, consul in 282 and 278, censor in 275, was a leading figure in the war against Pyrrhus, whom he defeated at Beneventum. Martial refers to him as a model of austerity and frugality in 7, 68, 4; 10, 73, 3; 11, 2, 2 (not himself, but his daughter, whom Martial assumes to have inherited her father’s morality; see Kay’s note); 11, 5, 8; 11, 16, 6 (Curio Fabricioque); cf. also Hor. carm. 1, 12, 40 and Otto, s.v. Fabricius, p. 129. Persons renowned for their auctoritas are often described as graves; cf. Lucan. 10, 152 Fabricios Curiosque graves; Stat. silv. 2, 7, 68 gravem … Catonem; see TLL, s.v. gravis 2278, 67 ff. and J. Hellegouarc’h, Le vocabulaire Latin des relations et des partis politiques sous la république, Paris 1972, pp. 287 ff. 5. Sed nihil ... theatro: a necessary reservation in an epigram in which the presence of Domitian is so clearly felt. Latinus’ defence of his personal morality (mea vita) against the immorality of his art (nostro theatro, cf. 9, 27, 9, note) is similar to Martial’s own defence of himself in 1, 4, 8 lasciva est nobis pagina, vita proba, which has its prototype in Catull. 16; cf. Ov. trist. 2, 353 f., and see commentaries by Citroni and Howell ad loc. For sumere in the sense “adopt a habit”, see OLD, s.v. 12. For the ending, cf. Prop. 2, 3, 23; 2, 20, 11; 2, 26a, 1; Ov. am. 2, 15, 21. 6. scaenicus: Latinus would be eager to emphasize that he is a scaenicus only by virtue of his ars; being a scaenicus also in private life was equal to being a hypocrite (see Forcellini, Lex., s.v. scenicus 5, 368). 7. moribus: used pregnantly in the sense of bonis moribus; cf. 9, 101, 21 mores populis dedit (sc. Domitianus); Verg. Aen. 6, 852 paci ... imponere morem (with Austin’s note); TLL, s.v. 1, 1525, 6 ff.
152
7 f. domino ... deus: perhaps an allusion to the formula dominus et deus (on which see note on 9, 66, 3). However, dominus is justified by Latinus’ relation to Domitian being that of a servant to his dominus (cf. famulus in line 10), and the two words are thus not synonymous, as is the case, for example, in 5, 5, 1 ff. Sexte, Palatinae cultor facunde Minervae, | ingenio frueris qui propiore dei — | nam tibi nascentes domini cognoscere curas | et secreta ducis pectora nosse licet. The presentation of Domitian as a god is discussed in the introduction, pp. 32 f. For the ending of line 8, cf. epigr. 17, 4; 5, 3, 6; 8, 62, 2; 13, 39, 2; 13, 74, 2; Ov. epist. 4, 12. 9. laurigeri parasitum … Phoebi: Latinus was a member of the guild of mimes called parasiti Apollinis. The only other literary mention of the parasiti Apollinis is Fest. p. 326, but there are twelve known inscriptions mentioning the guild, six involving pantomimi, two archimimi, one a mimus and three lacking specific reference to the professions of the parasiti in question; the absence of mention of any actors other than the mimi and pantomimi as members of the guild would indicate that it comprised no dramatic actors.1 The name of the parasiti Apollinis may derive from Delos, a centre of the cult of Apollo, which, with its pilgrimage and many festivals, made the city prosperous; the 2nd-century comedy-writer Crito called the very citizens of Delos “parasites of the god”: (frg. 3, 8, CAF 3, p. 354). Performing at these festivals were not only such artists as were organised in the worldwide guild of Dionysiac artists, but also “incidental” performers who were not admitted to that guild; these would be the , “parasites”, as they earned their livings from performances in honour of Apollo. These actors would correspond to the performers who became popular in Rome from the beginning of the second century BC, like the mimi at the Floralia (which became an annual festival in 173), and which probably named their guild after their equivalents on Delos; see E. J. Jory, “Associations of Actors in Rome”, Hermes 98 (1970), pp. 224-253 (the parasiti are discussed on pp. 237-242). Together with Ov. ars 3, 389, the present is the only instance in Latin of lauriger being used with direct reference to Apollo (see TLL, s.v. lauriger 1059, 32 ff.). Similarly, is applied to Apollo but once, in Anacreont. 12, 6 (Bruchmann, Epitheta, p. 22). D¸WR¼M SDUDVdWRXM
WR¿
THR¿
WR¼M
'KOdRXM
SDUVLWRL
$S±OOZQRM
GDIQKI±URM
GDIQKI±URLR )RdERX
10. sui … Iovis: for Domitian as the Jupiter of Rome, see the introduction, pp. 29 ff.
1
Contrary to what was previously assumed, cf. Ziehen in RE 18, s.v. Parasiti Apollinis 1376 f.
153
29 Saecula Nestoreae permensa, Philaeni, senectae, rapta es ad infernas tam cito Ditis aquas? Euboicae nondum numerabas longa Sibyllae tempora: maior erat mensibus illa tribus. Heu quae lingua silet! Non illam mille catastae vincebant, nec quae turba Sarapin amat, nec matutini cirrata caterva magistri, nec quae Strymonio de grege ripa sonat. Quae nunc Thessalico lunam deducere rhombo, quae sciet hos illos vendere lena toros? Sit tibi terra levis mollique tegaris harena, ne tua non possint eruere ossa canes.
5
10
An obituary epigram on the old procuress and practician of love magic, Philaenis, based throughout on ironical paradoxes of expressions and mythological commonplaces, such as would be found in a serious obituary or epitaph but which become patently absurd when applied to Philaenis. Thus, the opening reference to Nestor, the stock example of old age, is followed by an expression with an epigraphic ring (rapta tam cito), which would be used of those carried off by a premature death (but then, again, Philaenis had not yet reached the age of the Sibylla). The affectued exclamation in line 5 is such as might be found in the epitaph of a great orator; that this is not Martial’s reason for introducing it here is at once made apparent. The rhetorical questions of lines 9 and 10 are also such as may be found in a serious epitaph, if the dead had been in possession of such abilities as would be hard to replace; Martial surely does not mourn the loss of a witch and procuress. The epigram is closed by an “inside out” parody of the common funerary formula sit tibi terra levis: what Martial wishes is not that the earth may not lie heavily on Philaenis, but that she may be covered by a thin layer of earth, so that the dogs may easily dig out her bones. The theme is related to the “vetula-Skoptik”, represented in the present book, for example, by 9, 37, but the points of emphasis are not totally representative of that genre, the preferred subjects of which are the physical repulsiveness of older women, particularly courtesans, who deny their age and make up themselves to appear younger than they are (see 9, 37, intro.), and the scorn directed at them. Here, the scorn is not so much at the physical as at the psychological repulsiveness of an old, chattering and hypocritical procuress. The epigram shows some debt to Greek predecessors, especially for the concluding pun, which has its model in AP 11, 226 (Ammianus) ;1 cf. also 11, 72 (Bassus of Smyrna) , | , ' , | ' , | ,| (fK
VRL
NDW
J M
NR¹IK
N±QLM
RcNWU|
1yDUFH
NURWIRLVL
SUHVE¹WDWRM ULTPHjVTDL
1
.XWÇWDULM
IRM
GH¹WHURQ
SRO¹PXTRM
TUVDV
U[DPyQK
_
C+ SROL
³IUD VH KLGdZM x[HU¹VZVL N¹QHM
JUDjD
xOIRX
]ÇHL
NDg
SOyRQ
GL
OH¹VVRXVD
Q
1yVWZU
FHUg NDg
ODL¬
UWdSRM
R¸NyWL
J UDM
Rk
WH
“May the dust lie light on thee when under earth, wretched Nearchus, so that the dogs may easily drag thee out.”
154
,| note on line 12 below. Q¹PIK
ÈVWH PH GLVW]HLQ
,
P WL SySRQT
'
$dGKM
;1 and 7, 345 (anonymous); cf.
1. Saecula Nestoreae … senectae: “the generations of the aged Nestor”; Nestorea senecta would be abstractum pro concreto for Nestor senex (cf. Hofmann–Szantyr, p. 748). The expression would thus be equivalent to Eleg. in Maecen. 1, 139 Nestoris annosi ... saecula. For Nestorea ... senecta with the same placing (though of different significance), see also 13, 117, 1; Stat. silv. 1, 3, 110. Nestor was considered to have lived through three generations (approximately three hundred years), as stated already by Homer Il. 1, 250 f.: …|… ; cf. Cic. Cato 31; Hor. carm. 2, 9, 13 ter aevo functus (with Porph.); Ov. met. 12, 187 f. vixi | annos bis centum; nunc tertia vivitur aetas (see Bömer ad loc.); Hygin. fab. 10, 3 Nestor ... qui tria saecula vixisse dicitur beneficio Apollinis. In Greek as in Latin, he is used as the model of old age, see Otto, s.v. Nestor, p. 242; Schmidt in RE 17, s.v. Nestor 119. Martial uses him as such (often together with Priam) also in 2, 64, 3; 5, 58, 5; 6, 70, 12; 7, 96, 7; 8, 6, 9; 8, 64, 14; 10, 24, 11; 10, 67, 1; 11, 56, 13; 13, 117, 1. WØ
JHQHDg PHU±SZQ QTUÇSZQ _ xITdDT
G
GK
G¹R
P|Q
PHW
G| WULWWRLVLQ QDVVHQ
Philaeni: the name Philaenis is used by Martial only of the vilest possible women; three epigrams (2, 33; 4, 65; 12, 22) are aimed at a one-eyed courtesan, whom Martial finds utterly disgusting (perhaps this is the same Philaenis as in 9, 62 and 10, 22), while 7, 67; 7, 70; and 9, 40 refer to women addicted to what in Martial’s eyes were the worst kinds of sexual vice. 2. rapta … tam cito: cf. 1, 116, 3 Hoc tegitur cito rapta suis Antulla sepulchro; 11, 69, 11 Nec queror (sc. Lydia) infernas quamvis cito rapta sub umbras. Variants of this expression are very common in the funeral inscriptions of those carried off by a premature death (see Citroni on 1, 116, 3 with instances), thus making a paradoxical irony when used of someone who has filled the whole life-span of Nestor. infernas … Ditis aquas: with the same position also 1, 101, 10; Prop. 2, 34, 92; Ov. trist. 1, 5, 20. Apart from this instance and 1, 101, 10, Martial has the adjective infernus four times (1, 36, 5; 4, 16, 5; 11, 5, 13; 11, 69, 11, all of which define umbra), always immediately before the penthemimeresis, a position which is also prevalent in Vergil, Ovid, Lucan, etc.3 Note also, that infernus is a word 1 “Cytotaris with her grey temples, the garrulous old woman, who makes Nestor no longer the oldest of men, she who has looked on the light longer than a stag and has begun to reckon her second old age on her left hand, is alive and sharp-sighted and firm on her legs like a bride, so that I wonder if something has not befallen death”. Translations by. W. R. Paton, Loeb. For emphasis on old age, cf. also AP 11, 67; 11, 69. 2 “Two generations of mortal men had he ere now seen pass away … and he was king among the third”; cf. also Od. 3, 245. 3 See Citroni on 1, 36, 5. Note, however, that he is wrong in stating that infernus without exception stands immediately before the penthemimeresis; of the nine instances of the word in Ovid, eight occupy this position, whereas one, Met. 3, 504 tum quoque se, postquam est inferna sede receptus, stands before the bucolic diaeresis. Moreover, Verg. Aen. 12, 199 vimque deum infernam et duri sacraria Ditis displays essentially the same placing of the adjective, but Citroni disregards it as not standing directly before the
155
typical of dactylic verse,1 where it replaces inferus, which in some forms cannot be fitted into the verse. Martial mentions Dis twice more, in 11, 5, 13 infernis ... Ditis ab umbris; and in 12, 32, 6 nocte Ditis. Together with Tibullus (who has a similar ending of the pentameter in 3, 1, 28 Auferet extincto pallida Ditis aqua), he is alone in Latin literature in referring to the waters of the nether regions as Ditis aqua. 3 f. Euboicae … Sibyllae: the Sibyl of Cumae. She is called Euboica, since Cumae was founded from the cities of Chalcis and Cyme on Euboea. The adjective is applied to the Sibyl herself only here and in Stat. silv. 1, 2, 177 Euboicae carmen … Sibyllae and 4, 3, 24 Euboicae domum Sibyllae, but it is elsewhere used with reference to the region of Cumae (for example, Aen. 6, 2; 6, 42; Ov. met. 14, 155) or to the oracles of the Sibyl (Ov. fast. 6, 210, cf. Stat. silv. 5, 3, 182); see Rzach in RE 2:2, s.v. Sibyllen 2091 ff. A common feature of all the Sibyls of the ancient world is that they were proverbially old,2 and the great age of the Sibyl of Cumae is frequently emphasized; Vergil calls her longaeva sacerdos (Aen. 6, 321 and 628), Propertius speaks of the Cumaeae saecula vatis (2, 2, 16), Ovid calls her vivax (met. 14, 104; fast 4, 875), and Silius refers to her as vetus Sibylla (13, 411). In the story of Aeneas at Cumae (met. 14, 101-157), Ovid ascribes the age of 1,000 years to the Sibyl (14, 144 ff. nam iam mihi saecula septem | acta, tamen superest, numeros ut pulveris aequem, | ter centum messes, ter centum musta videre; see Bömer ad loc.). The Sibyl is used as the archetype of old age also in Prop. 2, 2, 16; 2, 24, 33 f.; Ov. fast. 3, 534 (see Bömer ad loc.); 4, 875; Pont. 2, 8, 41; Priap. 12, 1 ff.; Stat. silv. 1, 4, 125 ff. Petronius makes a joke of it in 48, 8: nam Sibyllam quidem Cumis ego ipse oculis meis vidi in ampulla pendere, et cum illi pueri dicerent: , respondebat illa: ; cf. Otto, s.v. Sibylla, p. 321. 6dEXOOD
Wd
TyOHLM
SRTDQHjQ
TyOZ
numerabas longa … tempora: normally, longa tempora would mean “long lifetime”, as in 14, 84 Ne toga barbatos faciat vel paenula libros, | haec abies chartis tempora longa dabit (cf. Ov. trist. 3, 3, 80; Iuv. 14, 157 f.; OLD, s.v. tempus1 5 c), but this is somewhat awkward when coupled with numerabas, suggesting something that may be counted (like 7, 14, 9 bis denos puerum numerantem perdidit annos). Perhaps this is an early instance of the use of tempora for anni, which otherwise is attested only in considerably later sources;3 there may be a parallel in the use of saecula in the sense of tempora in Ov. met. 4, 67 nulli per saecula longa notatum (with Bömer’s note), where also longus, as probably in the
penthemimeresis because of the elision. To the information given by Citroni, it may be added that 10 out of 11 occurrences of infernus in Propertius stand immediately before the penthemimeresis, as is also the case with all three instances in Tibullus. 1 Appearing for the first time in Varro and Cicero (only in his translation of Aratos); see Leo, “Superne, supernus”, ALL 10 (1898), pp. 436 f. 2 Rzach, op. cit., 2078 f. 3 For example, CE 186, 7 sic fortis centum nummerabat (sic) tempora vitae; see E. Löfstedt, “Zu den neuen Carmina Latina Epigraphica”, RhM 67 (1912), pp. 207-225 (particularly p. 216); cf. id., Philologischer Kommentar zur Peregrinatio Aetheriae, Uppsala 1911, p. 194 n. 2.
156
present case, tends towards the meaning numerosus; cf. Mart. 8, 8, 2 (of Ianus) renoves voltu saecula longa tuo; TLL, s.v. longus 1638, 26 ff. 4. maior erat etc.: a humorous hair-splitting; when talking of such enormous periods of time, three months more or less do not really make any difference. 5. heu quae: similar affected exclamations are to be found at the beginning also of 1, 12, 6; Verg. Aen. 3, 317; Ov. am. 2, 4, 6; met. 2, 447; trist. 3, 4b, 52. In the following references to Philaenis’ loquacity, one may sense a contrast with the pleasant eloquence of Nestor, cf. Cic. Cato 31 ut ait Homerus “ex eius lingua melle dulcior fluebat oratio”. catasta: a platform on which slaves were displayed in the market; see Mau in RE 3, s.v. catasta 1785 f. Martial must be thinking of the noise caused by the slave-dealers when offering their goods for sale, not, as suggested in TLL, s.v. catasta 597, 61 ff., of a turba vilium hominum, servorum, barbarorumve. 6. quae turba Sarapin amat: the worshippers of Sarapis, the Egyptian, Hellenistic and syncretistic god, whose cult was introduced into Italy in the second century BC. Ignored by Augustus and suppressed by Tiberius, it was not until the reign of Caligula that the first temple of Isis and Sarapis was built on the Campus Martius. The temple was burned down in the fire of 80, and Domitian, who, like his father and brother, encouraged the cult, had it restored (see Jones, Domitian, pp. 91 f.). The cult of Isis and Sarapis flourished particularly in the second and third centuries, supported by emperors like Trajan, Hadrian and Caracalla; the last mentioned built a splendid temple on the Quirinal (see Roeder in RE 2:1, s.v. Sarapis 2416 f.). The reference here is probably to flute-players or musicians of some kind; cf. Apuleius’ description of the procession at the festival of the dedication of a ship to Isis in met. 11, 9: Ibant et dicati magno Sarapi tibicines, qui per oblicum calamum, ad aurem porrectum dexteram, familiarem templi deique modulum frequentabant. The musicians in question probably played the bombyx flute or tibia obliqua. Flute-playing was a feature of Egyptian ceremonies in honour of Osiris, elements of which were inherited by the rites of Sarapis; musical activity in connection with Sarapis is recorded in an early-first-century BC inscription at Tanagra in Boeotia, mentioning the gathering of Sarapis worshippers for competitions in playing the trumpet, flute and lyre; see J. G. Griffiths, Apuleius of Madauros, The Isis Book (Metamorphoses, Book XI), Leiden 1975, pp. 188 f. Amat suggests a more intimate relationship to the deity than does colo (cf. 9, 42, 5). 7. matutini … magistri: for Martial’s complaints about the noise of the schools, which began early in the morning, see the introduction to 9, 68. Matutinus also of the client in 12, 68, 1; cf. TLL, s.v. matutinus 506, 67 ff. cirrata caterva: “curly-headed”; freeborn boys wore their hair long until the adoption of the toga virilis (see the Earinus cycle intro.). The adjective is not 157
normally used with direct reference to persons, cf. TLL, s.v. cirratus 1188, 53 ff., but cf. Pers. 1, 29 cirratorum centum, in which Kißel perceives a sense of affection, whereas in the present case, there is rather a notion of annoyance. The schoolboys are called capillati in 10, 62, 2. 8. Strymonio de grege: the river Strymon in Thracia, falling into the Aegean Sea just north of the peninsula of Chalcidice, was reputed to be the habitat of numerous cranes;1 from thence, they moved south to the Nile in winter (cf. Lucan. 5, 711 f.; 3, 199; Sen. Oed. 604). Vergil alludes to the screaming of the cranes in Aen. 10, 264 ff. tela manu iaciunt, quales sub nubibus atris | Strymoniae dant signa grues atque aethera tranant | cum sonitu; Servius comments: Haec autem comparatio non ad telorum pertinet iactum, sed ad Troianorum clamorem. Cf. also Verg. georg. 1, 120 Strymoniaeque grues (with Servius); Aen. 11, 580; Iuv. 13, 167. 9. quae nunc: the despairing questions recall Catull. 8, 16 ff. (at Lesbia’s “loss” of Catullus) Quis nunc te adibit? Cui videberis bella? | Quem nunc amabis? Cuius esse diceris? | Quem basiabis? Cui labella mordebis? Cf. Verg. Aen. 2, 69 f.; 9, 490 f.; Iuv. 3, 49 f.; 7, 54 f.; 12, 48 f. Thessalico lunam deducere rhombo: Thessaly was traditionally the home of witchcraft (see in particular Apul. met. 2, 1), perhaps as it was a centre of the cult of Hecate and is often mentioned in connection with magic herbs (for example, Plaut. Amph. 1043) and even more often with the rite of pulling down the moon, a characteristic feat of the Thessalian witches. The earliest extant mention of this rite is in Arist. nub. 749–55 6W
NDTyORLPL
Q¹NWZU
VWURJJ¹ORQ
_
ÆIHOVHLyQ
V
WQ
ÈVSHU 6W
JXQDjND
VHOQKQ
NWURSWRQ ²
WL
_
Hc
HlWD NWD
PKNyW
IDUPDNdG
G
_
D¸WQ
WKURdKQ
Hc
{FZQ
QDWyOORL
SULPHQRM
NDTHdU[DLP
_
6Z
VHOQK
Wd
4HWWDOQ
HcM
G WD
PKGDPR¿
_
ORIHjRQ
_
WR¿W
Q
R¸N
Q
;2 cf. Plato, Georgias 513 with note in E. R. Dodds, Plato, Georgias, Oxford 1959. The rite is frequently alluded to in Latin poetry, particularly because it was an important element of love magic; thus, for example, Verg. ecl. 8, 68 ff. ducite ab urbe domum, mea carmina, ducite Daphnin. | Carmina vel caelo possunt deducere lunam; Hor. ep. 5, 45; id. carm. 1, 27, 21 (with Nisbet and Hubbard ad loc); Prop. 1, 1, 19; 2, 28, 35; Tib. 1, 8, 21; Ov. epist. 6, 85; am. 2, 1, 23; met. 12, 263; Lucan. 6, 500. Lunam deducere is a magical terminus technicus; see S. Ingallina, Orazio e la magia, Palermo 1974, pp. 135 ff.; id., “I «giambi» opera prima di Orazio”, Latomus 39 (1980), p. 362. The question whether the witches were believed to be able to actually pull down the moon or only to cause an eclipse has been the subject of debate; D. E. SRGRdKQ WR¼M W±NRXM
1
Presumably in the lake of Tachino in the basin of Seres, which was passed by the river on its way to the sea; see Oberhummer in RE 2:4 s.v. Strymon 392; cf. also Gossen-Steiner in RE 11 s.v. Kranich 1573. 2 “Strepsiades: Suppose I hire some grand Thessalian witch to conjure down the Moon, and then I take it and clap it into some round helmet-box, and keep it fast there, like a looking glass. Socrates: But what’s the use of that? Strepsiades: The use, quotha: why, if the moon should never rise again, I’d never pay one farthing” (translation by B. Bickley Rogers, Loeb). Strepsiades wants to hide away the moon, so that his creditors will not know the beginning of each new month.
158
Hill has a good collection of literary instances,1 but his arguments in favour of the thesis that ancient references to the trick “always suggest the physical removal of the moon” are not altogether convincing; he does not mention, for example, AP 14, 140, 1 ff. ,2 where the verb (“to put out”, “quench”, etc.) suggests an eclipse, and he finds an argument for his opinion in Lactantius’ note on Stat. Theb. 1, 105 Talis erat lux illi, qualis est luna, cum laborat magica arte. Nam pagani magicis artibus credebant lunam posse mutari, unde Vergilius “carmina vel lunam caelo deducere possunt (sic)”, translating posse mutari as “could be moved”, whereas “could be changed” would presumably be a more correct translation. Certainly, neither Pliny (nat. 30, 6 f.) nor Ovid (medic. 41 f.) believed in their powers. The effect which the witches’ rites allegedly had on the moon could be neutralized by the clashing of cymbals, the noise of which annoyed Martial just as much as that of the matutini magistri; cf. 12, 57, 15; Tib. 1, 8, 21; Tac. ann. 1, 28; Theocrit. 2, 36. There have been various opinions also about the nature of the rhombus (Gr. ), a magical instrument used particularly in love magic (cf. Prop. 2, 28, 35 ff. deficiunt magico torti sub carmine rhombi, | et iacet exstincto laurus adusta foco; | et iam Luna negat totiens descendere caelo, | nigraque funestum concinit omen avis; 3, 6, 25; Ov. am. 1, 8, 7), but it would seem that it was similar to the , a magic wheel used for the same purpose; thus Theocrit. 2, 17 , .3 Gow ad loc. has a description of the though without connecting it with the rhombus; it had two holes, one on each side of the centre, and a thread was run through the one hole and back through the other, and its ends were tied together. The ends of the loop thus created were alternatively pulled and relaxed, thus making the wheel revolve. See A. M. Tupet, La magie dans la poésie latine. 1: Des origines à la fin du règne d’Auguste, Paris 1976, pp. 50 ff.; McKeown on Ov. am. 1, 7, 8. =H¿
4HVVDOLNDg
PNDU
SDd]RXVL
¢
PDUDdQHWDL
WRL
{UJD
³PPD
WG
6HOQKM
H»DGHQ
_
xN
RkD
PHU±SZQ
JXQDjNHM
fGRQ
_
D¸W±M
PDUDdQZ
±PERM
fXJ[
W¼ W QRQ xP´Q SRWg GÍPD W´Q QGUD
q,XJ[
zONH
fXJ[
10. hos illos … toros: Philaenis procured sexual favours (cf. OLD, s.v. torus 5 b) right and left without misgivings. The indefinite hic and ille are usually linked by a copula, but the same asyndeton as here is found in 12, 60, 11 Excipere hos illos (sc. amicos), et tota surgere cena; cf. TLL, s.v. hic 2736, 54 ff; A. Sonny, “Demonstrativa als Indefinita”, Glotta 6 (1915), pp. 61-70. 11. Sit tibi terra levis: a very frequent formula in funerary inscription; the dead man usually asks the person who passes by to wish that the earth may lie lightly on him; cf., for example, CE 1452 dic rogo qui transis: sit tibi terra levis; see R. Lattimore, Themes in Greek and Latin Epitaphs, Urbana, Illinois 1942, pp. 65 ff.; TLL, s.v. levis 1, 1203, 8 ff. Martial paraphrases the formula also in 5, 34, 9 f. (on Erotion) Mollia non rigidus caespes tegat ossa, nec illi, | terra, gravis fueris: non fuit illa tibi; 6, 52, 5 f. (on the barber Pantagathus) Sis licet, ut debes, tellus, pla1
D. E. Hill, “The Thessalian Trick”, RhM 116 (1973), pp. 211-238. “Blessed Zeus, are these deeds pleasing in thy sight that the Thessalian women do in play? The eye of the moon is blighted by mortals; I saw it myself”. Translation by W. R. Paton, Loeb. 3 “My magic wheel, draw to the house the man I love”; cf. Verg. ecl. 8, 68 f. quoted above. 2
159
cata levisque, | artificis levior non potes esse manu; 11, 14 Heredes, nolite brevem sepelire colonum: | nam terra est illi quantulacumque gravis; cf. also Tib. 2, 4, 50; Ov. ars 3, 740. mollique … harena: mollis in the sense of “soft”, “yielding to the touch”; cf. TLL, s.v. mollis 1372, 4 ff. The combination mollis harena occurs for the first time in Ov. am. 2, 11, 47 (cf. met. 2, 577; Ib. 422). 12. ne tua non possint etc.: normally a simple ne possint would be expected, but Martial turns it the other way round, on the pattern of AP 11, 226 (Ammianus); see the introduction above. For other humorous paraphrases of the formula, cf. AP 7, 204, 7 f. (Agathias Scholiasticus); 7, 583, 7 f. (by the same). To be left unburied and to be devoured by animals was to the Roman the utmost horror; as such, it was imposed as a severe punishment upon those convicted for perduellio, high treason; see Mommsen, Strafrecht, pp. 987 ff. This view is occasionally reflected in literature; thus, for example, Cic. Mil. 33; Catull. 108, 3 ff. non equidem dubito quin primum inimica bonorum | lingua exsecta avido sit data vulturio, | effossos oculos voret atro gutture corvus, | intestina canes, cetera membra lupi. For more instances involving dogs, who were considered to be keen on human flesh (cf. Phaedr. 1, 27, 3 effodiens ossa thesaurum canis), see TLL, s.v. canis 254, 18 ff.
30 Cappadocum saevis Antistius occidit oris Rusticus. O tristi crimine terra nocens! Rettulit ossa sinu cari Nigrina mariti et questa est longas non satis esse vias; cumque daret sanctam tumulis, quibus invidet, urnam, visa sibi est rapto bis viduata viro.
5
A sincere and touching epigram on the death of L. Antistius Rusticus and his loving wife Mummia Nigrina’s recovery of his ashes from Cappadocia. Once bereft of her husband, she carries his urn in her bosom, complaining that the way is not long enough before she, then twice bereft, must entrust his ashes to the tomb, which she envies. The moving picture of Nigrina reminds us in its sympathetic tone of Tacitus’ pitiful picture of the once illustrious Agrippina, defessa luctu et corpore aegro, boarding the ship for Rome with her children, carrying the urn with Germanicus’ ashes in the fold of her gown (Tac. ann. 2, 75). L. Antistius Rusticus and Mummia Nigrina are mentioned in only two epigrams of Martial in the whole of the transmitted literature, the other being 4, 75, praising Nigrina for her generosity in sharing her father’s wealth with her husband. Yet they are quite well known, thanks to two inscriptions. One (from Rome, CIL 6, 27881) is the epitaph of their slave-girl Tyche, who died at the age of twenty, set up by her husband and fellow-slave Celtiber: Dis Manibus | Tyche | vix 160
ann XX | Antisti Rustic | et Mummiae | Nigrinae | fec Celtiber | conservus | coniugi carissi | h(ic) s(ita) e(st) s(it) t(ibi) t(erra) l(evis) | d(ecessit) V I(dus) Mar(tias) i(mperatore) D(omitiano) XIII cos. From this inscription, dating from 87,1 we know that Nigrina’s nomen gentilicium was Mummia (see PIR2 M 714)..The other inscription concerns Antistius’ doings in Cappadocia and is thus of greater relevance to the present epigram.2 Found in Psidian Antioch, it proclaims the measures taken, apparently on his own authority without the intervention of Domitian,3 by Antistius, who served as legate of Galatia-Cappadocia in 91-93 or 94, against a famine following an unusually harsh winter. The rough dating of the inscription to 93 confirms that Antistius was in Cappadocia and would have died there in 93 or 94, shortly before the publication of Martial’s Book 9. It also gives Lucius as his praenomen and lists, in reverse order, every office he had held, including a suffect consulship, probably in the eighties, and a proconsulship of the province of Hispania ulterior Baetica, along with numerous military distinctions. His connection with Martial is perhaps explained by the fact that they were apparently compatriots (the inscription opens with L. Antistio [L.] f. | Gal. Rustico, where Gal. probably indicates that he was a Spaniard from the tribus Galeria4). As Mummia Nigrina, for obvious reasons, is not mentioned in the Cappadocian inscription, our knowledge of her depends entirely on Martial and on CIL 6, 27881. Her affection for and submission to her husband secured a place for her among the (comparatively few) virtuous women recognized by Martial, and she would probably have complied fully with Martial’s formula for equality given in 8, 12, 3 f. Inferior matrona suo sit, Prisce, marito: | non aliter fiunt femina virque pares. Other ideal wives mentioned by Martial are Claudia Rufina (11, 53; she was British by birth and is thus perhaps the same person as the Claudia Peregrina of 4, 13; see Kay on 11, 53, 1), Argentaria Polla, Lucan’s widow (7, 21 and 23; 10, 64; cf. Stat. silv. 2, 7), and Sulpicia, wife of Calenus (10, 35 and 38). Among historical exempla of female virtue are Porcia, the wife of Brutus (1, 42) and Caecina Paetus’ wife Arria Paeta (1, 13); see further Sullivan, Martial, pp. 191 f. 1. Cappadocum saevis … oris: saevis would refer both to the climate of Cappadocia being very rigorous in winter (cf. Forcellini, Onomast., s.v. Cappadocia 330) and to its savage inhabitants, elsewhere described as feroces Cappadoces (Lucan. 3, 243 f.), and their land as regno ... feroci Cappadocum (Manil. 4, 760 f.). 2. tristi crimine terra nocens: the land is made guilty of Antistius’ death (OLD, s.v. nocens 2), like of that of Camonius Rufus in 6, 85, 3 f. impia Cappadocum tellus (cf. Sil. 2, 29; Stat. Theb. 10, 850; TLL, s.v. impius 624, 41 ff.). Similarly, 1
Domitian began his thirteenth consulship that year but laid it down on the thirteenth of January, and thus was in fact not consul in March. M. McCrum & A. G. Woodhead, Select Documents of the Principates of the Flavian Emperors including the Year of the Revolution A.D. 68-96, Cambridge 1961, no. 464, pp. 139 f. 3 See B. Levick, “Domitian and the Provinces”, Latomus 41 (1982), pp. 50-73 (pp. 57 f.). 4 See S. E. Stout, “L. Antistius Rusticus”, CPh 21 (1926), p. 47. There is nothing to support Groag’s opinion in RE 16, s.v. Mummius 27, 534, that Mummia Nigrina was a rich patroness of Martial. 2
161
the fields of Pharsalus are called terra nocens in Lucan. 7, 768 and 869; cf. also Stat. Theb. 5, 592. 3. Rettulit ossa sinu: the bones of the cremated corpse were collected by the nearest relations and put in the sinus, a hanging fold of the dress used as a pocket, before they were put in the urn; Nigrina carries the urn containing the ashes of her beloved husband in this fold, as Agrippina did when she brought back the ashes of Germanicus from Antioch (Tac. ann. 2, 75 feralis reliquias sinu ferret); cf. Tib. 1, 3, 5 f.; Prop. 1, 17, 11 f.; Sen. dial. 12, 2, 5; Mau in RE 3, s.v. Bestattung 356 ff. 4. esse vias: this ending also in Tib. 1, 1, 26; 1, 9, 36; Prop. 3, 5, 10; Ov. epist. 17, 146; 18, 154; fast. 2, 8; Ib. 24. 5. sanctam … urnam: this is the only instance of this juncture, but cf. Stat. Theb. 7, 697 f. sanctum et venerabile ... funus; Cic. Phil. 9, 14 sepulcra sanctiora; Sen. Tro. 509 f. sanctas parentis conditi sedes. It is used more frequently of the spirits of the dead (thus 6, 18, 1; 7, 40, 3) and of deceased persons, for example, Verg. Aen. 11, 158; see OLD, s.v. sanctus 3 c. tumulis: when the plural is used of one single grave, it is usually in order to avoid elision; thus Prop. 4, 7, 53 f. si fallo, vipera nostris | sibilet in tumulis et super ossa cubet; Sil. 9, 133 fratris tumulis arma; Stat. Theb. 5, 679 tumulis etiamnum; silv. 3, 1, 24 mersum tumulis Eurysthea; 4, 4, 55 magni tumulis adcanto magistri; CIL 11, 911, 15 te pi[e] possessor, sive, colone, precor | ne patiare meis tumulis [i]ncrescere silvas. In the present case, there are no metrical reasons for the plural, nor can it be maintained that Martial preferred a dactyl (-is quibus) to a spondee (-o cui) before the bucolic diaeresis; of 188 instances of such diaeresis in Book 9, 86 are preceded by a dactyl, whereas 102 are preceded by a spondee. 6. rapto bis viduata viro: “twice deprived through the snatching away of her husband” (bis is used ), recalling Vergil’s words of Orpheus in georg. 4, 504 quo se rapta bis coniuge ferret? Probably Martial wants to draw a parallel with the story of Orpheus and Eurydice, in which Orpheus, having lost his wife for the second time, would have felt the same bitter grief as Nigrina. S´ NRLQR¿
162
31 Cum comes Arctois haereret Caesaris armis Velius, hanc Marti pro duce vovit avem; luna quater binos non tota peregerat orbes, debita poscebat iam sibi vota deus: ipse suas anser properavit laetus ad aras et cecidit sanctis hostia parva focis. Octo vides patulo pendere nomismata rostro alitis? Haec extis condita nuper erant: quae litat argento pro te, non sanguine, Caesar, victima, iam ferro non opus esse docet.
5
10
This epigram is concerned with a picture of a goose, which had been vowed and sacrificed to Mars by C. Velius Rufus (?; see below on line 2) for the safe return of Domitian from the campaign against the Sarmatians on the Danube, the Second Pannonian War (see the introduction, pp. 26 f.). Miraculously, hidden in the entrails of the bird were found eight silver coins, each of them obviously representing one month of the emperor’s absence in the war. In this way, the goose had showed, by silver instead of blood, that the offering was pleasing to Mars, but above all that there was no more need of bloodshed; Domitian appears as a Prince of Peace, a role which Martial ascribes to him also in 9, 70, 7 f. and 9, 101, 21, obviously inspired by the war in question, although it actually was not a success; see further note on 9, 70, 7 f. The image of the goose may perhaps have been placed next to a statue of Mars,1 since the opening lines are such as may be found on a votive tablet (cf. below on line 2), and since lines 7–8, which speak of the silver coins as “hanging from the goose’s open beak”, make little sense unless we take them as referring to something like a “mittelalterliches Spruchband”, emerging, in the picture, from the beak and showing the coins (so Weinreich, Studien, p. 133).2 The present epigram is of some importance for the dating of Domitian’s Second Pannonian War. From other epigrams of Martial, it appears that Domitian returned from this war in January 933 and, assuming that Velius made the vow at the departure of the emperor and performed it on his return, Domitian would have left for the Danube little less than eight months before, that is, in May 92 (line 3; cf. Gsell, pp. 225 ff.). The poem is also, as Friedländer observed (pp. 61 f.), among the earliest of Book 9, as the two concluding lines, stating that there is no longer any call for armed conflict, indicate that the vow was performed and the poem written immediately upon the return of the emperor, in January 93. 1
See F. Möller, “Die Gans auf Denkmälern des Mars”, Westdeutsche Zeitschrift für Geschichte und Kunst 5 (1886), pp. 321–331. Möller points to an image of a she-goat standing next to the statue of Vediovis, to whom that animal was sacrificed (cf. Gell. 5, 12, 12). As such an image, he also explains the goose standing next to the enthroned Mars on a bronze tablet found in Bonn (see note on line 2 below). 2 Schmook, p. 54, thinks that the goose was stuffed and placed on view in a temple, the coins being put in its mouth. 3 Probably on the 1st or the 2nd, if 8, 4 was written on the day of the votorum nuncupatio, January 3rd, when vows were offered for the emperor (see Friedländer, p. 60). Cf. also 7, 5–8 (Friedländer, p. 58); 8, 2; 8, 8; 8, 11; 8, 21 (Friedländer, pp. 59 f.).
163
That the goose did not resist being sacrificed was, of course, technically important to the offering; the resistance of the sacrificial animal was a sign that the offering was not pleasing to the gods, making litatio (see below on line 9) impossible.1 But the goose’s going to the altar even of its own accord and volunteering to be sacrificed are due to its perception of Domitian’s divine numen. The ability of animals to feel the sacra potestas of the emperor is frequently stressed by Martial, as their incapability of lying (epigr. 29, 8 mentiri non didicere ferae) furnishes an irrefutable proof of his divine power. Many instances are provided by the animals in the arena: in epigr. 17, an elephant kneels to Titus non iussus, nulloque docente magistro, but because nostrum sentit et ille deum; similarly, a hind hunted by Molossian hounds flees to the feet of Titus, where the hounds dare not follow; Martial exclaims Numen habet Caesar, sacra est haec, sacra potestas (epigr. 29, 7). The hares of the hare–lioncycle in Book 1 (poems 6; 14; 22; 48; 51; 60; 104; cf. 44; 45) may safely leap unharmed in and out of the mouth of Domitian’s lions because of the lions’ consciousness of their divine master (1, 104, 22 norunt cui serviant leones).2 Domitian’s sacred fish in Lacus Baianus has a similar awareness of the emperor (4, 30), as has the parrot of 14, 73, which by its own accord has learned to speak the words Caesar have. Cf. also poems 61 and 79 of the present book. The idea of the willing sacrificial animal goes back to the theme of animals voluntarily sacrificing themselves to gods (like the ox to Demeter in Aelian. nat. anim. 11, 4) and later to Hellenistic rulers.3 However, Weinreich points to a passage from Plutarch (Lucull. 24), indicating that the theme appeared in Roman tradition already during the republic (then in connection with military commanders).4 Plutarch tells how Lucullus, after crossing the Euphrates, ran across the sacred heifers of Artemis, which were grazing freely and could only with difficulty be caught and dragged to the sacrificial altar; but presently, “one of these heifers … came to a certain rock which is deemed sacred to the goddess, and stood upon it, and lowering its head without any compulsion from the usual rope, offered itself to Lucullus for sacrifice”.5 In Latin, the volunteering sacrificial animal perhaps appears in Tib. 2, 1, 15 and Petron. 133, 13 f., but, if so, its willingness is in these cases due to the influence of the god in question (Bacchus/Ceres and Priapus respectively). The first certain instance of the application of the theme to a Roman emperor would be AP 9, 352, 3 f. (Leonidas of Alexandria), on a sacrifice following Nero’s deliverance from the Pisonian conspiracy, stating that Rb
G
wNDW´Q
2¸UDQdRLR
'L±M
ERXSO JHM
wNR¹VLRQ
D¸FyQD
WD¹UZQ
_
§PD[DQ
EZPRjM
;6 otherwise, evidence is scarce before Martial. On the theme of
1
Wissowa, Religion, p. 351. See Citroni’s introduction to 1, 6. 3 See Weinreich, Studien, pp. 156 ff. 4 Weinreich, op. cit., pp. 137 ff. 5 Plut. Lucull. 24, 7; translation by Bernadotte Perrin, Loeb. 6 “A hundred axes made the willing necks of as many bulls bleed at the altars of Heavenly Zeus” (W. R. Paton’s translation, Loeb). However, Weinreich (p. 140) must be mistaken in assuming that refers to Nero, “da Leonidas IX 355, 3 die Poppäa anredet als , , ”. The epithet (used of Zeus also in AP 12, 230, 4 [Callimachus], and 16, 293, 3 [Anonymous]) would rather emphasize that the Zeus in question is “the heavenly”, and not Nero; cf. Martial’s use of different attributes (Ausonius pater [9, 7, 6], as opposed to pater deum [9, 3, 6], Palatinus Tonans, as opposed to Tarpeius Tonans [9, 86, 7], etc.) to distinguish Domitian from Jupiter. 2
2¸UQLRM
=H¹M
3RSSDdD
2¸UQLRM
164
'L´M
HÁQL
6HEDVWLM
animals and the emperor’s numen as a whole, see Weinreich, Studien, pp. 74 ff.; cf. Scott, pp. 119 ff. For its influence on plants, see note on 9, 61, 9 Auctorem … sentire videtur. ) was introduced into Latin poetry 1. Arctois: the adjective Arctous (Gr. by Seneca (for example, Oed. 606 Arctoas nives with Töchterle’s note; TLL, s.v. Arctous 472, 58 ff.). Martial has it six times, twice as a general reference to the North (epigr. 15, 4; 5, 68, 1), twice with reference to the Rhine (4, 11, 8; 10, 6, 2), and twice referring to the war against the Sarmatians (8, 65, 3 Arctoi … belli and the present occurrence). Note also that, of in all thirty-two occurrences of this adjective in Silver Latin dactylic verse, twenty-four stand, as here, immediately before the penthemimeresis.1 UNWØRM
haereret … Caesaris armis: haereret may be taken in the sense of adhaereret (cf. Ov. met. 8, 144 Cnosiacaeque haeret comes invidiosa carinae; Lucan. 3, 24 haereat illa tuis per bella per aequora signis; TLL, s.v. haereo 2496, 8 ff.), in which case armis must be taken as metonymy for exercitui (TLL, s.v. arma 600, 44 ff.). It would also be possible to understand haereret as occupatus esset (TLL, s.v. haereo 2499, 23 ff.); armis should then be taken abstractly as synonymous with bellis; cf. Ov. met. 4, 34 f. aut ducunt lanas aut stamina pollice versant | aut haerent telae famulasque laboribus urguent, see Bömer ad loc.; TLL, s.v. arma 599, 11. The ending Caesaris armis, found once in Ovid (am. 1, 2, 51), appears no less than ten times in Lucan. 2. Velius: most probably C. Velius Rufus, whose distinguished military career spanned all three Flavian emperors and was crowned with a procurate of Pannonia and Dalmatia between c. 90 and the beginning of 93, followed by a governorship of Raetia between 93–94 and 95–96.2 His military career is recorded in an inscription from Baalbek (ILS 9200), from which it appears that he was decorated in bello Marcomannorum Quadorum (both Suebic tribes) Sarmatum (viz. the branch of the Iazyges), adversus quos expeditionem fecit per regnum Decebali, regis Dacorum (lines 14 ff.); this might have been in 89 at the earliest, in the First Pannonian War,3 since the words per regnum Decebali imply that Domitian had come to terms with the Dacian king.4 Jones assumes that the expedition took place in 92, during the Second Pannonian War,5 but this is not important for the identi1
Lucan. 10 before the penthemimeresis, 2 at the beginning of the verse; Sil. 2 before the penthemimeresis; Stat. 7 before the penthemimeresis, 1 at the beginning of the verse; Mart. 4 before the penthemimeresis, 1 one preceding the diaeresis of the pentameter, 1 at the beginning of the verse; most divergent is Val. Fl., in having 1 instance before the penthemimeresis, 1 following the penthemimeresis, and 2 before the hephthemimeresis. 2 See K. Strobel, “Zur Rekonstruktion der Laufbahn des C. Velius Rufus”, ZPE 64 (1986), pp. 265–286. Friedländer (following Mommsen) identified Velius as Velius Paulus, governor of Pontus-Bithynia (see Dihle in RE 2:8, s.v. Velius Longus 628 f., where Longus is a mistake for Paulus, see Eck in RE Suppl. 14, 827 [to the article Velius 5]). There is no evidence that Velius Paulus participated in any of the Pannonian Wars. 3 So Strobel, op. cit., p. 277. 4 Jones, Domitian, pp. 150 ff. 5 Jones, op. cit., p. 152.
165
fication of the Velius of this epigram with Velius Rufus, who in any case was procurator of Pannonia at the time of the latter war. hanc Marti … avem: the formula suggests a dedicatory inscription, cf. 1, 31, 1 Hos tibi, Phoebe, vovet totos a vertice crines (sc. Encolpos) with Citroni’s note. This is the only literary evidence that geese were sacrificed to Mars, but there is a handful of different monuments and utensils from Roman Britain and Germany (see Möller, op. cit.), depicting Mars with a goose, presumably while the watchfulness of the bird was such as would be expected of the Roman soldier, above all, of those at the frontier, who had to live with the constant threat of barbaric tribes. The connection of the goose with Mars is certainly also due to the god of war being the vigilant guardian of soldiers and generals; before going to war, the commander would betake himself to the Sacrarium Martis and shake the ancilia and the lance of the god, while calling to Mars “Mars vigila” (Serv. Aen. 8, 3); see Roscher in Roscher, s.v. Mars 2422 f. pro duce vovit: similar prosody in 8, 4, 2 suspicit et solvit pro duce vota suo; Ov. epist. 10, 72. 3. Luna quater binos … peregerat orbes: the moon is frequently used by the poets to denote a series of months, according to the principle Luna dabit menses, peragit quod menstrua cursum (Manil. 3, 517). Such expressions are mostly of similar structure, luna being the subject of a verb (impleo, retego, compleo, etc.) governing orbem or orbes. The amount of time is denoted by a numeric adverb when the singular orbem is used (for example, Ov. met. 2, 344 luna quater iunctis inplerat cornibus orbem [with Bömer’s note]; 7, 531 Luna, quater plenum tenuata retexuit orbem; 11, 453; Lucan. 2, 577) or, with the plural orbes, either by a numeric adverb with a distributive (for example, Sil. 3, 67 bissenos Lunae nondum compleverat orbes; Stat. Theb. 1, 576 bis quinos plena cum fronte resumeret orbes; cf. silv. 5, 2, 12) or by a cardinal number (Ov. fast. 3, 517 sex ubi sustulerit, totidem demerserit orbes). The verb perago appears also in Val. Fl. 1, 283 f. septem Aurora vias totidemque peregerat umbras | luna polo. 4. debita ... iam sibi vota: Domitian has returned, and Mars has fulfilled his part of the vow. Poscebat, since the demand remains until the vow is performed. Note also the frequency of pentameters ending with vota deus sim. (4, 1, 4; 4, 73, 6; Tib. 3, 3, 10; Prop. 3, 3, 10; Ov. epist. 16, 282; Pont. 2, 8, 28; 4, 4, 30; Epiced. Drusi 22; 194). 5. ipse: in the sense of sua sponte; cf. Serv. georg. 1, 34. 6. cecidit sacris … focis: the focus was the portable seat of fire which stood at the altar to receive the offering of wine and incense that began the sacrifice (see Wissowa, Religion, pp. 351 f.). The juncture sacris … focis sim., in the pentameter always with the same position as here, is first found in Tibull. 1, 2, 83 f. Num feror incestus sedes adiisse deorum | sertaque de sanctis deripuisse focis? (also 1, 8, 69; 3, 10, 23), followed 166
by Ovid (fast. 3, 734; 4, 297; Pont. 2, 1, 32; cf. also fast. 3, 30 sacros … focos; Mart. 1, 21, 2 sacris … focis). The dative focis with cecidit indicates that the firepan is regarded as a kind of manifestation of the god, replacing the dative of expressions like Verg. Aen. 1, 334 multa tibi ante aras nostra cadet hostia dextra. Although cado focis is elsewhere unattested, the same idea may be observed in Sen. Thy. 1057 ff. ferro vulnera impresso dedi, | cecidi ad aras, caede votiva focos | placavi. hostia parva: cf. Tib. 1, 22 nunc agna exigui est hostia parva soli. , a very rare word in classical Latin, occurring once in 7. nomismata: Gr. Horace (epist. 2, 1, 234) and five times in Martial, where it usually signifies a coupon of some kind, probably in the shape of a coin; thus 1, 11, 1; 1, 26, 3; 8, 78, 9; in 12, 62, 11, the word signifies tokens bearing a text and a picture of different kinds of apophoreta, which should be exchanged for the gift itself (see Citroni on 1, 11, 1). In later Latin, the word mostly alludes to strange or rare coins, such as collector’s items or coins for ornamental use;1 there is something of this notion here — it is not just any coins that hang from the beak of the goose, but sacred coins, formed as an omen in the entrails of the bird. Q±PLVPD
8. nuper erat: the same ending in 8, 65, 2; 14, 128, 2; Ov. trist. 2, 1, 158. 9. litat: “give favourable omens”; of the sacrificial animal also in 10, 73, 6; cf. 8, 15, 2. Expressions of the victima litat kind are considered by Bömer to be Ovidian coinages (Ov. met. 15, 794 victima nulla litat, with Bömer’s note; also Plin. nat. 8, 183; 207), but cf. the phrase hostiae litationem inspexerunt in the Acts of the Arval brethren, which may have preserved an ancient usage (see Wissowa in RE 13, s.v. litatio 740 ff.). The word is more commonly used with the person offering, in the sense of “to sacrifice successfully”; thus 10, 92, 16; TLL, s.v. lito 1511, 4 ff.; cf. Serv. Aen. 4, 50 inter “litare” et “sacrificare” hoc interest, quod “sacrificare” veniam petere, “litare” propitiare et votum impetrare; 2, 119. The litatio was the conclusion of the sacrifice, when the entrails of the animals were inspected. If abnormalities or malformations were found, then the sacrifice remained sine litatione and had to be repeated usque ad litationem (see Wissowa in RE, loc. cit., and Religion, p. 253). 9 f. sanguine ... | ... ferro: note the resemblance to Sen. epist. 77, 9 on the suicide of Marcellinus: Non fuit illi (sc. Marcellino) opus ferro, non sanguine.
1
Cf. Dig. 7, 1, 28 pr. Pomponius libro quinto ad Sabinum. Nomismatum aureorum vel argenteorum veterum, quibus pro gemmis uti solent, usus fructus legari potest; 10, 4, 9, 4; 34, 2, 27, 4; Ser. med. 520.
167
32 Hanc volo, quae facilis, quae palliolata vagatur, hanc volo, quae puero iam dedit ante meo, hanc volo, quam redimit totam denarius alter, hanc volo, quae pariter sufficit una tribus. Poscentem nummos et grandia verba sonantem possideat crassae mentula Burdigalae.
5
This epigram presents a variation of a common theme in the tradition of erotic poetry, the poet’s preferences regarding his mistress (or lover).1 The theme is found several times in the Greek Anthology, it has been variously treated by, among others, Horace, Propertius and Ovid, and Martial varies it in a number of epigrams. In 1, 57, he advocates a “golden mean”: the girl should not be too easy to catch and not too repugnant (cf. AP 5, 42 [Rufinus]; 12, 200 [Strato]); 5, 83 treats a classical dilemma: Insequeris, fugio; fugis, insequor; haec mihi mens est: | velle tuum nolo, Dindyme, nolle volo (cf. Hor. sat 1, 2, 107 f.; Ov. am. 2, 19, 36; AP 12, 102, 5 f. [Callimachus]; 12, 203 [Strato]); in 11, 100, Martial proclaims that the girl should be neither too skinny nor too fat (cf. AP 5, 37 [Rufinus]). 4, 42 is a longer piece on the poet’s preferences in a boy; cf. 2, 36; 11, 60; 11, 102. The present epigram explicitly contradicts 1, 57 and 5, 83, as Martial proclaims that he wants a girl who is facilis, who is not vain, who will do anything you say for a couple of denarii and yet is able to satisfy three men at the same time. What he wishes for is thus an ordinary meretrix, as the counterpart of which he poses those poscentes nummos et grandia verba sonantes. Strange as it may seem, what Martial understands by the latter phrase is not luxurious concubines, but most surely married women of leisure from the upper social classes, as may be concluded from some verses in Horace’s sat. 1, 2, which, as shown by Prinz,2 more or less form a key to the understanding of the second part of this epigram. The lines in question are sat. 1, 2, 116 ff. Tument tibi cum inguina, num, si | ancilla aut verna est praesto puer, impetus in quem | continuo fiat. Malis tentigine rumpi? | Non ego; namque parabilem amo venerem facilemque. | Illam “post paulo” “sed pluris” “si exierit vir” | Gallis, hanc Philodemus ait sibi, quae neque magno | stet pretio neque cunctetur cum est iussa venire. The passage obviously goes back to a (now lost) epigram of Philodemus but shows so many similarities to the present epigram that Prinz is surely right in assuming that the epigram of Philodemus was the source of both Martial’s and Horace’s verses. Prinz also draws attention to a passage from Propertius containing the same similarities and probably also modelled on the same epigram of Philodemus, which thus seems to have been well known; cf. Prop. 2, 23, 12 ff. Ah pereant, si quos ianua clausa iuvat! | Contra, reiecto quae libera vadit amictu, | custodum et nullo saepta timore, placet. | Cui saepe immundo Sacra conteritur Via socco, | nec sinit esse moram, si quis adire velit; | differet haec numquam, nec poscet garrula, 1 The matter has been fully treated by K. Prinz in his paper “Zu Horaz Sat. I 2, 121 und Martial Epigr. IX 32”, WS 34 (1912), pp. 227-236. 2 Op. cit., pp. 232 ff.
168
quod te | astrictus ploret saepe dedisse pater, | nec dicet “timeo, propera iam surgere, quaeso: | infelix, hodie vir mihi rure venit.” | Et quas Euphrates et quas mihi misit Orontes, | me iuerint: nolim furta pudica tori. The same desire for love without demands as here can be observed in 3, 33, in which Martial sets out by saying that he most of all wants a free-born girl, but, on second thoughts, comes to the conclusion that what he really wants is a slave girl with the looks of a free-born (cf. AP 5, 18, 7 f. [Rufinus]). In the Greek Anthology, there are also a couple of epigrams making fun of Zeus for taking such pains to get at his mistresses, when one can get what one wants with such ease for two obols or a drachma; thus AP 5, 125 (Bassus) 2¸
ER¿M
G|
JyQRLWR
_
OORM
FÆ
PHOdTURXM
N¹NQRM
PyOOZ
H¹VHLQ
xS9±QLRM
_
WGH SDdJQLD W¬ G| .RUdQQ9 _ WR¼M °EROR¼M GÇVZ WR¼M G¹R
109 (Antipater) OOZM
'UDFP M
QWLOyJRXVDQ
(¸UÇSKQ
{FH
_
NDg
WQ
$WTdGD
VWUZPQQ
PWH
SDUyFRXVDQ
SRWH
IXODVVyVTZ
NR¸
IREKTHgM
FHLPÇQ _ QTUDNDM ¢ D PWKQ =H¿ IdOH ER¿M xJyQRX
FUXV±M
=KQg
_
SyWRPDL PKGyQD
PHPIyD
;1 5,
PW
FÆS±WH
2
1. Hanc volo, quae: Friedländer compares Auson. 26, 56, 1 Prete Hanc volo, quae non vult; illam, quae vult ego nolo (cf. 5, 83, 1); cf. also 1, 8, 6 Hunc volo, laudari qui sine morte potest; 10, 59, 6 Hunc volo, non fiat qui sine pane satur; 6, 60, 4. facilis: “easy to come to terms with”, as in 1, 57, 2 Nolo nimis facilem difficilemque nimis; 3, 69, 5 facilesque puellae; 12, 46, 1 Difficilis facilis, iucundus acerbus es idem; cf. TLL, s.v. facilis 62, 28 ff. This is the parabilem … venerem facilemque of Hor. sat. 1, 2, 119 quoted above. palliolata: a very rare adjective; apart from the present, there are only three instances, Suet. Claud. 2, 2; Act. lud. saec. Sept Sev. 5a, 59; and Hist. Aug. quatt. tyr. 15, 8; TLL s.v. palliolatus 132, 47 ff.; compare the adverb palliolatim in Plaut. Pseud. 1275; Caecil. com. 133; Fronto p. 150, 16 van den Hout. The pallium, the outer garment corresponding to the of the Greeks, was worn by men and women alike, by respectable matrons (11, 104, 7) as well as by concubines (Ov. am. 1, 4, 49; 3, 2, 25; ars 1, 153 with Hollis’ note; ars 1, 733 refers to a head-dress; see also McKeown on am. 1, 4, 41); cf. also Martial’s complaints of his fictitious wife in 11, 104, 7 fascia te tunicaeque obscuraque pallia celant. The adjective palliolatus is derived from the diminutive palliolum, the precise meaning of which is somewhat obscure; probably, the diminutive would convey a sense of “plain, simple”, etc., to distinguish the palliolum from the pallium of the matrons, which was usually purple-coloured; cf. 11, 27, 8, where the unstylish mistress of Flaccus asks for five untreated fleeces for a palliolum, and Prop. 2, 23, 13 reiecto quae libera vadit amictu (see above); see also Kreis & von Schaewen in RE 18 s. v. pallium 250, and Blümner, Privataltertümer, p. 235, the bPWLRQ
1 “I am never going to turn into gold, and let someone else become a bull or the melodious swan of the shore. Such tricks I leave to Zeus, and instead of becoming a bird I will give Corinna my two obols.” 2 “You can have the Attic Europa for a drachma with none to fear and no opposition on her part, and she has perfectly clean sheets and a fire in winter. It was quite superfluous for you, dear Zeus, to turn into a bull”; W. R. Paton’s translations, Loeb.
169
latter making a distinction between the pallium and the palliolum, though with no further explanation. 2. dedit: sc. se, like in 10, 81, 3 promisit pariter se Phyllis utrique daturam; cf. 7, 75, 2 (addressed to a deformis anus) vis dare (sc. te) nec dare vis (sc. pecuniam); TLL s.v. do 1697, 80 ff. With dedo, cf. Trabea com. 3 ff. De inproviso Chrysis ubi me aspexerit, | alacris obviam mihi veniet complexum exoptans meum, | mihi se dedet (TLL, s.v. dedo 267, 72 ff.). The ellipse suggests that se dare alicui was a common phrase of prostitutes and concubines. 3. redimit … denarius alter: a metaphor from the legal language, “to buy up (in order to acquire control)”, cf. OLD, s.v. redimo 2. One denarius (= ten asses) would be quite an ordinary price for a prostitute, and two denarii still not too expensive; see note on 9, 4, 1. Perhaps the denarius alter should not be taken too literally, since the point is to distinguish Martial’s girl from those who poscent nummos (line 5) for each additional service: “add another denarius, and she’ll do whatever you want”. 4. una tribus: una in the sense of sola. The number three is not chosen at random but is an echo of Prop. 1, 13, 29 f. nec mirum, cum sit Iove dignae proxima Ledae | et Ledae partu gratior, una tribus (with the same sense of una); Ov. Pont. 2, 8, 56; Nux 76. 5. grandia verba sonantem: grandia, i.e. tumida, superba (cf. note on 9, 27, 8); the lofty verb sono is aptly chosen to go with the adjective (cf. note on 9, praef. 7). The haughty words of arrogant ladies are spelled out by Hor. sat. 1, 2, 120: “post paulo” “sed pluris” “si exierit vir”. Cf. also Prop. 2, 23, 17 f. quoted above. 6. crassae: Heraeus in his apparatus explains crassus as pinguis, dives et luxuriosus, but Shackleton Bailey is surely right in rejecting this and pointing to 9, 22, 2 vulgus crassaque turba, i.e. crassae in the sense of stultae or rusticae (see note ad loc.). Burdigalae: metonymy for the inhabitants of Burdigala (now Bordeaux),1 corresponding to the Galli in Hor. sat. 1, 2, 221 (quoted above), which, in its turn, is dependent on Martial to be correctly understood (cf. Prinz, op. cit., pp. 233 ff.). It must be assumed that both Martial and Horace had a common source in Philodemus, but, judging only from Horace’s Galli, it would be impossible to say whether Philodemus wrote , i.e. the Gauls, or , the castrate priests of Cybele; in writing Burdigalae, Martial shows that his Greek model most certainly had . Porphyrio (Hor. sat. 1, 2, 120-121) explains the passage in Horace thus: Gallis autem has (such women mentioned in Hor. sat. 1, 2, 120, corresponding to the nummos poscentes etc. of Martial) ait aptiores esse, quia Filodamus *DOWDL
*OORL
*DOWDL
1
A collection of the instances mentioning Burdigala will be found in A. Holder, Alt-celtischer Sprachschatz, 1-3, Leipzig 1891-1913, s.v. Burdigala; cf. Ihm in RE 3, s.v. Burdigala 1061.
170
Epicurius, cuius sensum transtulit, relegat tales ad Gallos, qui magno adulteria mercantur vel propter divitias, vel quod incensioris libidinis sint. The incensior libido may perhaps point rather to eunuchs than to Gauls,1 but Prinz produces a couple of instances describing the Gauls in a way comparable to Porphyrio, in particular with reference to their wealth; thus Tac. ann. 3, 46, who describes the Aedui as quanto pecunia dites et voluptatibus opulentos tanto magis imbellis; the wealth of the Gauls is emphasized in Ioseph. Bell. Iud. 2, 364 ; and Poseidonius in Strabo 7, 2, 2 calls the Helvetii . Thus, Prinz assumes that the Gauls had become the model for rich provincials (cf. Manil. 4, 793 Gallia dives). But they were also regarded as notoriously credulous,2 and the crassa Burdigala would then probably be metonymy for “well-to-do country bumpkins”, who, when in the big city, want to show off by going only for that which is most thrilling and most expensive — the pampered wife of a well-to-do Roman. ·PHjM
SORXVLÇWHURL SROXFU¹VRXM
*DODWÍQ
P|Q
QGUDM
HcUKQDdRXM
Gy
33 Audieris in quo, Flacce, balneo plausum, Maronis illic esse mentulam scito. The contents of this epigram closely resemble an event that occurred at a bath in the Satyricon of Petronius (92, 8 f.), involving a young man who had lost his clothes: illum autem frequentia ingens circumvenit cum plausu et admiratione timidissima. Habebat enim inguinum pondus tam grande, ut ipsum hominem laciniam fascini crederes. O iuvenem laboriosum: puto illum pridie incipere, postero die finire. Itaque statim invenit auxilium; nescio quis enim, eques Romanus ut aiebant infamis, sua veste errantem circumdedit ac domum abduxit, credo, ut tam magna fortuna solus uteretur. Other epigrams making fun of an excessively large penis are 6, 36 (a big nose and a big penis; see Grewing’s introduction, ad loc.); 11, 51; 11, 72; Kay (on 11, 51) compares AP 11, 224 (Antipater); Iuv. 9, 92; Suet. Vesp. 23, 1; Hist. Aug. Comm. 10, 9. The theme is, of course, ultimately at home in poetry devoted to Priapus, the foremost attribute of whom is a very conspicuous penis; in the Priapea, compare, in particular, poems 1, 6, 8, 18, 30, and 36 (cf. W. H . Parker, Priapea: Poems for a Phallic God, London & Sydney 1988, p. 41). Given the exposure of naked bodies in the public baths, those who in fact came there to find a lover did not run the risk of “buying a pig in a poke”; the inpudici balneum Tigillini (3, 20, 15) is perhaps an instance of a bath known to be preferred by homosexuals; cf. also 1, 23 (with commentaries by Citroni and Howell). The nakedness could also lead to various embarrassing situations; in 12, 83, Fabianus goes about making fun of others’ haemorrhoids, until, on a visit to Nero’s baths, he discovers that he has them himself (cf. Iuv. 6, 374 ff.; 11, 156 ff.). 1 2
On the lewdness of eunuchs, see Hug in RE Suppl. 3, s.v. Eunuchen 454. Cf. 5, 1, 10 tumidus Galla credulitate fruar; Otto, s.v. Gallus, p. 152.
171
1. Flacce: there are twenty-two epigrams in Martial that mention a Flaccus (in Book 9 also nos. 55 and 901), and it is most likely that all of these refer to one and the same Flaccus, perhaps identical with the Calpurnius Flaccus, to whom Pliny addressed epist. 5, 2 (see note on 9, 90, 10, and, in particular, White, Aspects, pp. 113-118; cf. Howell on 1, 57, 1, and Kay on 11, 27, 1). Flaccus came from Patavium (1, 61, 3 f.; 1, 76, 2), and wrote poetry in his youth, which may explain his acquaintance with Martial; in 1, 76, Martial dissuades him from writing poetry and advises him to commit himself to rhetoric instead, since this is what brings in the money. Flaccus seems to have taken his advice, for there is no mention later on of his poetry. Instead, he devoted himself to a political career, for his stay on Cyprus was most likely as a proconsul, legate or quaestor (8, 45; 9, 90, 10, note). Consequently, he must have been of senatorial rank, which, along with their interest in poetry and their common origin from Patavium, would have recommended him to another of Martial’s close friends, L. Arruntius Stella (see note on 9, 55, 2). Like he was with Stella (see 9, 42 intro.), Martial appears to have been quite intimate with Flaccus, in spite of his (probable) senatorial rank; he is one of the persons mentioned most frequently in the Epigrams, being the recipient also of epigrams with obscene contents, which, when addressed to a senator, argue for close acquaintance. 2. Maronis: the same name appears in 4, 80 (the variant Maron); 11, 34; 11, 67 and 12, 90, of which this is the only instance with a sexual implication. The Greek variant of the name, , has been derived from ( ) , “to flash, sparkle, gleam” (see Pape, s.v. , which is perhaps what Martial alludes to here; Maro, then, would be a flashy, exhibitionistic dandy. There is also an erotic undertone in Homer’s description of the eyes of Aphrodite as (Il. 3, 397). 0UZQ
PDU PDdUZ
0UZQ
³PPDWD
PDUPDdURQWD
34 Iuppiter Idaei risit mendacia busti, dum videt Augusti Flavia templa poli, atque inter mensas largo iam nectare fusus, pocula cum Marti traderet ipse suo, respiciens Phoebum pariter Phoebique sororem, cum quibus Alcides et pius Arcas erat: “Gnosia vos” inquit “nobis monumenta dedistis: cernite, quam plus sit, Caesaris esse patrem.”
5
The last epigram on the templum gentis Flaviae (on which see 9, 1 intro.) is a somewhat absurd piece, in tone and function not unlike 9, 3 and 9, 36 (see 9, 3 1
Also 1, 57; 1, 59; 1, 61; 1, 76; 1, 98; 4, 42; 4, 49; 7, 82; 7, 87; 8, 45; 8, 55; 10, 48; 11, 27; 11, 80; 11, 95; 11, 98; 11, 100; 11, 101; 12, 74.
172
intro.). The framework is Homeric: the gods are assembled at the table of Jupiter, drinking nectar and looking down upon the earth (cf., for example, Hom. Il. 4, 1– 4). But here, Jupiter, fuddled with nectar, seeing the magnificent splendour of the newly built Flavian temple, the dynastic mausoleum and the resting-place of Vespasian, laughs scornfully at his own alleged grave in Crete and makes a bizarre joke to his assembled children: when one compares Jupiter’s humble grave on Mt. Ida with the Flavian temple in Rome, it is quite obvious how much better it is to be the father of Domitian than the father of Olympic gods. The last two lines of the poem are important. First, the reference to Caesaris pater clearly shows that Domitian intended the temple to be a dynastic mausoleum and that the ashes of Vespasian rested there. Secondly, Jupiter states that it is his present children, Mars, Apollo, Diana, Hercules, and Mercury, who have built the tomb on Crete. This feature, which naturally lacks any support in mythology,1 is obviously introduced by Martial to make an exact parallel between Jupiter and his children, on the one hand, and Vespasian and Domitian, on the other; the children of Jupiter had built the tomb on Crete, just as Domitian had built the templum gentis Flaviae as a resting-place for Vespasian. The group of Jupiter’s children here mentioned consists partly of deities elsewhere brought into connection with Domitian (Mars, Hercules, Apollo) and partly of those who had been compared or identified with earlier emperors, particularly with Augustus (i.e. Apollo and Mercury); Diana stands out as not having been previously included in such comparisons. But the choice of Mars, Apollo, Diana, Hercules and Mercury as corresponding to Domitian in this context is certainly not arbitrary; rather, each divinity is selected as being comparable to or identifiable with Domitian or as representing an aspect of the emperor. Thus, Mars represents the emperor as victorious commander, Apollo alludes to his literary interests and also implies a comparison to the Sun, Diana is presumably an image of his interest in and legislation on matters of morality, Hercules, as usual, is the prime model of the victorious hero, and finally, the comparison with Mercury is a transfer, on the model of Horace, of the Hellenistic bringing laws and culture to men, perhaps also representing an interest in trade and economic matters (see further the commentary below). It is notable that Minerva is left out of the group; in all likelihood, she is excluded here for reasons similar to those that account for her not being mentioned as indebted to Domitian in 9, 3, 10: it would not be proper to add Domitian’s protecting goddess to a band which had failed to equal the Flavian temple; again, the emperor’s relation to Minerva was no joking matter (cf. 9, 3 intro.). %DVLOH¼M
VZWU
1
The grave of Zeus was naturally exploited in the polemics of Christian authors. For instance, Lactantius (inst. 1, 11, 46 f.) quotes some lines of Euemeros (whom he refers to as “Ennius”) about the death of Zeus and his funeral, which would have been taken care of by the Curetes (cf. note on 9, 20, 8): aetate pessum acta in Creta vitam commutavit et ad deos abiit eumque Curetes filii sui curaverunt decoraveruntque eum. Lactantius is eager to pass this off as historical facts: hoc certe non poetae tradunt, sed antiquarum rerum scriptores. Quae adeo vera sunt, ut ea Sibyllinis versibus confirmentur, qui sunt tales: , ,| (= Oracula Sibyllina 8, 47 f.). GDdPRQDM
\¹FRXM
QHN¹ZQ
HfGZOD
NDP±QWZQ
ÎQ
.UWK
ND¹FKPD
WIRXM
G¹VPRURM
z[HL
173
1. Idaei … mendacia … busti: mendacia of the figments of poets and fables; cf., for example, Ov. am. 3, 6, 17 prodigiosa … veterum mendacia vatum; TLL, s.v. mendacium 700, 65 ff. The Cretans’ claim to possess the grave of Zeus gave rise, if nothing else, to the rumour of the Cretans being notorious liars, cf. Callimach. Iov. 8 f. “ ” .1 The reason for this claim is to be sought in the religion of the pre-Greek inhabitants of the island, a community of peasants with the “God of the year” as principal deity, personified in a child, born in spring and dying in autumn, symbolizing the growing power of nature, rising in spring, bearing fruit in summer, and wilting away in autumn. On the immigration into Crete of the Greek tribes from the north, this deity came to be identified with the main divinity of the immigrants, Zeus, and with this identification followed a mingling of the myths; Zeus, like the God of the year, came to be considered not only as having been born on the island, but also — all the more offensive in the eyes of later generations (save the Christians, who naturally benefited largely from it) — to have died there (see Ziegler in Roscher, s.v. Zeus 578 ff.). According to Varro (as stated by Solin. 11, 6) and Porphyrius (vita Pyth. 17), the tomb itself was shown on Mt. Ida, while others placed it at Cnossus or on Mt. Dicte (see Cook, Zeus 1, pp. 157 ff.). Of the nature of the tomb, the sources, for obvious reasons, are reticent. It was said, though, to have had an inscription, reading something like or .2 .U WHM
Hg
\H¿VWDL
NDg
J
U
WIRQ
Ï
QD
VHjR
_
.U WHM
xWHNWQDQWR
V¼
G
R¸
TQHM xVVg J
U DcHd
=$1 .52128
728 ',26 7$)26
2. Augusti Flavia templa poli: cf. 9, 3, 12 with note. Here, Martial has changed the epithet from Latius to Augustus, emphasizing the connection with the deified Flavians. 3. inter mensas: metonymically, “during dinner” (equivalent to, for example, Cic. ad Q. fr. 3, 1, 19 inter cenam); thus, first Verg. Aen. 1, 686 regalis inter mensas; then Hor. ars 374 (different meaning in sat. 2, 2, 4); Sil. 11, 243; Stat. silv. 4, 2, 17 vina inter mensasque; TLL, s.v. mensa 742, 12 ff. 4. Marti: Mars represents Domitian as victorious commander; compare in particular 6, 76, 1, the epitaph of the Praetorian prefect Cornelius Fuscus, who is referred to as sacri lateris custos Martisque togati, “guardian of a sacred life and of Mars clad in toga” (the Praetorian cohorts furnished the guards for the imperial palace; cf. Friedländer, ad loc.). Mars is mentioned in connection with Domitian’s Second Pannonian War in 7, 2, 1 f. (on Domitian’s cuirass) lorica ... Martis Getico tergore fida magis; 8, 65, 11 f. (on the temple of Fortuna Redux and the triumphal arch built on the emperor’s return) Haec est digna tuis, Germanice, porta triumphis; | hos aditus urbem Martis habere decet. Statius com1
“‘Cretans are always liars.’ Yea, a tomb, O Lord, for thee the Cretans builded; but thou didst not die, for thou art for ever” (translation by. A. W. Mair, Loeb). Note, however, that also the tombs of Apollo, Uranus and Dionysus were exhibited in antiquity (see F. Pfister, Der Reliquienkult im Altertum, Gießen 1909, pp. 385 ff.). 2 The former according to Euemeros (Ennius) in Lact. inst. 1, 11, 46, the latter according to the Schol. in Lucian. Iup. trag. 45; further instances in Pfister, op. cit., p. 386.
174
pares the equestrian statue of Domitian to Mars returning on his steed from Thrace (silv. 1, 1, 18 f. exhaustis Martem non altius armis | Bistonius portat sonipes), and Domitian reclining at dinner to Mars resting after his Thracians exploits (silv. 4, 2, 46 f. non aliter gelida Rhodopes in valle recumbit | dimissis Gradivus equis). With the same reference to Domitian as successful general, Mars also appears on Domitianic coins (see Scott, p. 93). Cf. also epigr. 6, where Mars appears as the military assistant of Titus. 5. Phoebum: The comparison with Apollo is presumably twofold, alluding partly to Domitian as connoisseur and patron of literature and a poet himself (cf. 5, 5, 7, with Howell’s note) and partly to Domitian as the Sun (see note on 9, 20, 6 Rhodos). The former notion is apparent in 5, 6, 18 f., where Martial expresses his certainty that Domitian will, without being pressed, want to read the book he sends him, because he, being the dominus novem sororum, knows good literature. The latter may be observed in Stat. silv. 1, 1, 103 f., stating that Rhodes would prefer the equestrian statue of Domitian to the colossus of Helios (Phoebus): tua sidereas imitantia flammas | lumina contempto mallet Rhodos aspera Phoebo (where, as in the present case, the identification with the Sun is suggested by the use of Phoebus, properly used of Apollo as sun-god [cf. OLD, s.v.; Wernicke in RE 2, s.v. Apollon 19 ff.]). There is another possible comparison of Domitian with Apollo in Mart. 5, 1, 3 f., presenting him as inspiring the responses of the oracle at Antium (where the emperor himself had a villa), an idea which may be based on a desire to compare Domitian to the Delphic Apollo.1 Compare also Stat. silv. 5, 1, 13 ff. temptamus dare iusta lyra, modo dexter Apollo | quique venit iuncto mihi semper Apolline Caesar | annuat, where Domitian and Apollo are invoked side by side, as are Apollo and Vespasian in Val. Fl. 1, 5 ff. In connection with Apollo, it should be noted that previously Nero and particularly Augustus had been compared to this god, the former because of his literary and dramatic ambitions2 and the latter for more complex reasons. His mother Atia claimed to have conceived him by Apollo while sleeping in his temple; likewise, his father Octavius maintained that he had seen the sun rise from the womb of his pregnant wife in a dream (Suet. Aug. 94, 4; Dio Cass. 45, 1, 2).3 Subsequently, Augustus unabashedly emphasized his connection with Apollo; in a kind of masquerade (referred to as ), he appeared dressed up as Apollo (Suet. Aug. 70, 1), and in his library, he had a statue on display showing himself habitu ac statu Apollinis (Schol. Hor. epist. 1, 3, 17). According to Servius (ecl. 4, 10), Augustus’ cult of Apollo had perhaps awakened a literary echo in Verg. ecl. 4, 10: quidam hoc loco “casta fave Lucina, tuus iam regnat GZGHNTHRM
1
Cf. Sauter, p. 89, n. 9. Sauter (p. 88) suggests that the mention of the Castalian well in 9, 18, 8 likewise implies a comparison with Apollo, which, however, seems both unnecessary and too far-fetched to be taken into consideration. 2 When he appeared on stage, Nero was hailed by the spectators in such terms as (“Glorious Caesar! Our Apollo, our Augustus, another Pythian!”; Dio Cass. 61, 20, 5) and was greeted as an Apollo on returning from Greece in 68 (ibid. 63, 20, 5). Calpurnius Siculus also referred to him as Palatinus Phoebus (ecl. 4, 159; see Riewald, pp. 278 f.). 3 Similar tales were told of Alexander the Great and Scipio Africanus (see Riewald, pp. 269 f.). ¯
$S±OOZQ
¯
$»JRXVWRM
HkM
ÅM
NDO´M
.DjVDU
¯
3¹TLRM
175
Apollo” Octaviam sororem Augusti significari adfirmant ipsumque Augustum Apollinem. Given Domitian’s striving towards Augustan standards in moral, religious and economic matters (cf. Jones, Domitian, pp. 13 and 99), it would probably have been natural for the poets to flatter him by attempting to set up a connection between Domitian and the god most revered by Augustus. Whether or not Domitian actually considered himself a second Augustus, the account in Suet. Dom. 15, 3, of Minerva appearing to Domitian before his assassination in a dream and warning him that she could not protect him any more, having been disarmed by Jupiter, is something in that line; for, in the same manner, on the eve of Philippi, she had appeared to Augustus’ physician Artorius, warning him that Augustus, however ill, should not remain in the camp during the battle; the future emperor left the camp and thus saved his life when it was captured by Brutus (Val. Max. 1, 7, 1).1 Phoebique sororem: a common antonomasia in Latin poetry, particularly promoted by Ovid and Seneca. Carter (Epitheta, s.v. Diana 31) records nine instances of Phoebi soror (Verg. 1, 329; Ov. met. 5, 330; 15, 550; Priap. 1, 3; Sen. Herc. fur. 136; 905; Oed. 44; Stat. Theb. 2, 237; 8, 271) and two of soror alone (Mart. 4, 45, 6; Sen. Herc. fur. 906), to which add Prop. 2, 15, 15; Ov. epist. 11, 45; rem. 200; and fast. 6, 111. Bruchmann (Epitheta, s.v. 44) produces only one Greek parallel, Eur. Hipp. 15 . The inclusion of Diana, it must be admitted, poses a problem, as a man would not be directly compared to a goddess and there is no apparent connection between Domitian and Diana, except in the imperial cult at Ephesus, which is not of relevance in this epigram.2 But unless Phoebum ... Phoebique sororem is to be considered as a kind of formula (echoing, for example, fast. 5, 699 abstulerant raptas Phoeben Phoebesque sororem), in which Phoebique sororem has no particular relevance, Diana, considering her function as goddess of chastity, may perhaps appear in this context as representing Domitian’s moral reforms. These would have pleased her in more than one way, obviously through the reinforcement of the Lex Iulia (see 9, 5 intro.), but certainly also through the edict against castration and the prohibition of the prostitution of children (see the introductions to 9, 5 and 9, 7).3 s$UWHPLM
)RdERX G GHOIQ s$UWHPLQ
1
Sauter (pp. 91 f.) considers Minerva’s saving of Augustus a reason why Domitian should choose her as his patron goddess, which is perhaps correct; if nothing else, it certainly was a reason for Domitian’s own dream, as told by Suetonius; cf. also note on 9, 3, 10 res agit … tuas. 2 Domitian was honoured particularly through the institution of the Ephesian Olympic games, which were probably held for the first time in the October of 89 and discontinued with Domitian’s assassination (see S. J. Friesen, Twice Neokoros. Ephesus, Asia and the Cult of the Flavian Imperial Family, Leiden 1993, pp. 137 ff.). The Ephesian mint produced a coin, showing the head of Domitian on the obverse and, on the reverse, an image of Olympian Zeus, a symbol which was previously unknown on Ephesian coinage. The sitting Zeus holds the sceptre in his left hand, and his outstretched right hand holds, not a Nike, but the temple statue of the Ephesian Artemis. This implies two innovations as regards Ephesian coinage: the coin “assimilated the emperor to Zeus, and it placed the emperor in a direct relationship to Ephesian Artemis” (ibid., p. 119). 3 Diana’s special connection with untouched children is apparent in the famous hymns of Catullus (34, 1 f. Dianae sumus in fide | puellae et pueri integri) and Horace (letting, however, the boys praise Apollo,
176
6. Alcides: the comparison of the monarch with Hercules as the victorious hero had Hellenistic roots and is frequently applied by Martial to Domitian (see 9, 64 intro. and cf. 9, 65 and 9, 101). pius Arcas: on Hellenistic–Augustan pattern, Mercury (called Arcas because of his birth on Mt. Cyllene in Arcadia) represents the emperor probably as a Hellenistic , identified with the Egyptian Hermes (Toth) who brought leges et litteras to men (cf. Cic. nat. deor. 3, 56) and who presumably also, as the Latin Mercury, was the god of trading and of welfare in general (see K. Scott, “Mercur-Augustus und Horaz C. I 2”, Hermes 63 [1928], pp. 15-33). Hellenistic rulers had long been identified with Hermes, and there is epigraphic evidence from the East that Augustus was too; this would have inspired Horace to identify Augustus with Mercury in carm. 1, 2, 41 ff. sive mutata iuvenem figura | ales in terris imitaris almae | filius Maiae patiens vocari | Caesaris ultor; see Nisbet & Hubbard on Hor. carm. 1, 2, 43, for a valuable discussion of Hellenistic models (for example, Alexander, Ptolemy III and Ptolemy V) and epigraphic evidence. There is also a bilingual inscription from Cos explicitly mentioning Augustus as Hermes (Scott, op. cit.): Imp. Caesari Divi f. Aug. | Mercurio scrutarei. | (“To the emperor Caesar Augustus Hermes, son of the god, by the sellers of small wares led by Diogenes, son of Polychares, loyal to Caesar”); the guild of would probably have set up the inscription to honour Augustus-Mercury, god of trading. As with Apollo above, it seems reasonable to assume that Martial would have been inspired by Augustan ideas and notably by Horace when he included Mercury in the present group of Jupiter’s children, as there is no further certain evidence of a comparison of Domitian with Mercury; the suggestion that two bronze statuettes of Mercury carry the features of Domitian is doubtful (see Scott, Imperial cult, p. 148). Mercury is referred to as pius probably because he accompanied the dead to Hades (cf. Hor. carm. 1, 10, 17 ff.), perhaps also because he was the rescuer of divine children (for example, Dionysus, Aesculapius and the Dioscuri) and brought them to safety, and because he was the follower of heroes under divine protection (Perseus, Hercules and Priam); see Drexler in Roscher, s.v. Hermes 2363 f. and 2373 ff. %DVLOH¼M
VZWU
$¸WRNUWRUL
.DdVDUL
3URVWDWR¿QWRM 'LRJyQRXM WR¿
4HR¿ _
_
XbÍL
6HEDVWÍL
3ROXFURXM
C(UP L
_
JUXWRSÍODL
_
ILORNDdVDURM
JUXWRSÍODL
7. Gnosia … monumenta: Gnosius, lit. “of Cnossus”, is frequently used, in the sense of Cretensis, of the whole of Crete; cf. 13, 106, 1 Gnosia Minoae genuit vindemia Cretae; Forcellini, Onomast., s.v. Gnosos 679. 8. Caesaris esse patrem: the pater referred to is, of course, Vespasian; for the prosody, cf. note on 9, 12, 8.
carm. 1, 21, 1 f. Dianam tenerae dicite virgines, | intonsum pueri dicite Cynthium); cf. also carm. saec. 70 ff. quindecim Diana preces virorum | curat et votis puerorum amicas | adplicat auris.
177
35 Artibus his semper cenam, Philomuse, mereris, plurima dum fingis, sed quasi vera refers. Scis, quid in Arsacia Pacorus deliberet aula, Rhenanam numeras Sarmaticamque manum, verba ducis Daci chartis mandata resignas, victricem laurum quam venit ante vides, scis, quotiens Phario madeat Iove fusca Syene, scis, quota de Libyco litore puppis eat, cuius Iuleae capiti nascantur olivae, destinet aetherius cui sua serta pater. Tolle tuas artes; hodie cenabis apud me hac lege, ut narres nil, Philomuse, novi.
5
10
Philomusus tries to get dinner invitations by always being able to give details of the latest news in matters of lesser or greater importance to the Roman public. He knows the current situation on the unsettled frontiers of the empire, where Parthians, Chatti, Sarmatians and Dacians pose a constant threat; he knows the quality of the African harvests, of vital importance to the corn supply of Rome herself; but he is also capable of more down-to-earth gossip, such as which lucky poet is going to win the golden olive-wreath at the Alban games and whom Jupiter is going to crown with the oak of the agon Capitolinus. There is only one snag in it: Philomusus is making it all up. So, when the wily Martial invites him, it is on one condition — that he will not tell any news. On the phenomenon of dinner-hunting, see 9, 14 intro. ; the name appears also in 3, 10; 7, 76; and 11, 63, 1. Philomuse: Gr. but there is nothing to connect the epigrams. Kay (on 11, 63, 1) points out that Philomusus was common as a slave name and as cognomen (of liberti). )LO±PRXVRM
mereris: not “deserve”, but “get together, receive (as one’s wage)”, cf. 10, 74, 4 centum merebor plumbeos die toto; TLL, s.v. mereo 802, 55 ff.; OLD, s.v. 1. 2. vera refers: the same ending in 9, 99, 2. 3. Pacorus:, successor, together with Vologaeses II, of Vologaeses I, king of the Parthians, who may have been Pacorus’ father (see Miller in RE 18, s.v. Pakoros 3, 2438). Domitian did not make contact with him in terms of regular warfare, but, as king, Pacorus played a prominent part in the Parthians’ support of the third false Nero, who appeared in the East about 88, when the main efforts of the Romans were directed against the Dacians. Pacorus was thus able to support the pretender at little or no risk, before unwillingly giving him up to Rome; cf. Suet. Nero 57, 2 and see Jones, Domitian, pp. 157 f. Arsacia … aula: “in the Parthian palace”; cf. note on 9, 11, 8. The adjective Arsacius ( ), derived from the founder of the Parthian kingdom Arsaces
$UVNLRM
178
( ), does not appear in Latin prior to the present instance (which is also the only occurrence in Martial); the TLL, s.v. Arsacius 674, 30, records three more instances, but from the fifth century (Claud. 8, 216; 18, 415; Sidon. carm. 2, 450). Note the parallel arrangement of aula and the qualifying adjective in 7, 99, 3 Carmina Parrhasia si nostra legentur in aula; 8, 36, 3 Pars quota Parrhasiae labor est Mareoticus aulae?; 12, 5, 3 Contigit Ausoniae procerum mitissimus aulae; 13, 4, 1 Serus ut aetheriae Germanicus imperet aulae.
$UVNKM
4. Rhenanam … manum: the Chatti, on whom see the introduction, pp. 23 ff. The adjective Rhenanus is ; cf., however, transrhenanus, which is found in Caesar and Pliny and which is particularly frequent in Tacitus, with nine instances in the Histories and one in the Annals. Caesar also has one instance of cisrhenanus (Gall. 6, 2, 3). SD[
OHJ±PHQRQ
Sarmaticamque: the Indo-European Sarmatians roamed, during the greater part of antiquity, over the region from Hungary to the lower Volga. As their western branch, the Iazyges and Roxolani, gradually moved westwards, they came to pose a real threat to Rome on the Danube (cf. Ovid’s references to these tribes and their crossing of the Danube in trist. 3, 10, 33 f.; 3, 12, 29 f.; Pont. 4, 7, 9 f.), and various steps were taken to control them. Vespasian put much effort into strengthening the defences on the Danube, a policy which was continued by Domitian right from the beginning of his reign.1 However, in 92, Domitian was forced into military conflict with the Sarmatians, when they joined the German Suebi in the Second Pannonian War; the campaign was far from successful for the Romans, as the Sarmatians managed to destroy an entire legion. There is also evidence of substantial concentrations of troops in Pannonia and Upper Moesia towards the end of Domitian’ reign, presumably as the Sarmatians had again teamed up with the Germans to confront Rome; see further the introduction, pp. 26 f. 5. ducis Daci: the Dacian king Decebalus, with whom the Romans made contact during Domitian’s First Dacian War, launched because of the Dacians’ crossing of the Danube under Decebalus’ predecessor Diurpaneus in the winter of 84–85 and their attack on the Romans in Moesia, in which the governor Oppius Sabinus was killed. Accompanied by his praetorian prefect Cornelius Fuscus, Domitian moved to the area, but the repulse of the Dacians was complicated by the appearance of the new king Decebalus, who, like his predecessor Burbista in the time of Sulla and Caesar, had apparently succeeded in uniting under one ruler the Dacians, who normally lived scattered through several principalities. However, Fuscus managed to force the Dacians back across the Danube, but then, in the first half of 86, decided to avenge Sabinus’ death by invading Dacia, with disastrous results. In the late summer, Domitian again left Rome for the Danube, but returned only a couple of months later, having strengthened the defences of Moesia with three additional legions; the real revenge for the destruction of Fuscus was not to come until the defeat of the Dacians at Tapae by Tettius Iulianus in late 88. 1
Jones, Domitian, pp. 135 ff.
179
Domitian came to terms with Decebalus at the beginning of the First Pannonian War in 89, and, after that, he was to cause him no more trouble (see Jones, Domitian, pp. 138 f., pp. 141 ff. and p. 150; Brandis in RE 4, s.v. Dacia 1960; ibid., s.v. Decebalus 2250; cf. 9, 101, 17 note). 6. victricem laurum: the message of victory (lauratae litterae or tabellae), which was sent by the commander to the emperor, was wrapped in a branch of laurel; cf. 7, 5, 3 f. Invidet hosti | Roma suo, veniat laurea multa licet (with Friedländer’s note); Ov. am. 1, 11, 25 f. non ego victrices lauro redimire tabellas | nec Veneris media ponere in aede morer. The messenger with such litterae was distinguished by carrying a laurel on the head of his spear; cf. 7, 6, 5 f. Publica victrices testantur gaudia chartae, | Martia laurigera cuspide pila virent; Plin. nat. 15, 133; Pers. 6, 43 f.; Sen. Ag. 410 hasta summo lauream ferro gerit (with Tarrant); Stat. Theb. 12, 520; silv. 5, 1, 92; Iuv. 10, 65; cf. Iuv. 4, 149 with the scholia; von Premerstein in RE 12, s.v. Lauratae litterae 1014. quam venit ante vides: ante postpositive to quam is found in only four instances, apart from the present also Lucr. 3, 973; 4, 884; Tib. 3, 13, 8; cf. TLL, s.v. ante quam 154, 54 ff. Compare the same position of quam and ante (although not in the same sense as here) in a number of Ovidian pentameters; thus fast. 1, 94 quam fuit ante domus; trist. 5, 12, 22 quam fuit ante minus; Pont. 2, 1, 4 quam fuit ante locus; 3, 1, 50 quam fuit ante dedit; 3, 1, 98 quam fuit ante minus. 7. Phario … Iove: Pharius used in a general sense of the whole of Egypt; cf. 3, 66, 1 Phariis … armis; 4, 11, 4 Phariae coniugis (= Cleopatrae); 5, 69, 1 Phario … Pothino; 6, 80, 3 Pharios … hortos; 7, 30, 3 de Pharia Memphiticus urbe; 10, 48, 1 Phariae … iuvencae (= Isidis); cf. Pharus metonymically for Egypt in 9, 40, 2; Forcellini, Onomast., s.v. Pharus 2, 469. For Iuppiter as metonymy for imber, cf. 7, 36, 1 Cum pluvias madidumque Iovem perferre negaret and Friedländer on epigr. 12, 1; cf. Cook, Zeus 2, pp. 1 ff., for Zeus the sky-god as god of the weather. fusca Syene: Syene, the modern Aswan, situated in the far south of Egypt, represents the southern extremity of the Empire (as in 1, 86, 6; see Citroni ad loc.), contrasted with the northern provinces mentioned above; cf. 5, 13, 7 f. Magnaque Niliacae servit tibi glaeba Syenes, | tondet et innumeros Gallica Parma greges (with Howell’s note). The epithet fusca is hypallage alluding to the colour of the skin of the inhabitants (cf. TLL, s.v. fuscus 1654, 7 ff.). There are no comparable parallels, but the similarity of expression may perhaps support Watt’s emendation of the corrupted line in Stat. silv. 4, 2, 27 mons Libys Iliacusque nitet, multa Syene (on different kinds of marble) to simul atra Syene (alluding in that case to the colour of the stone; see Coleman ad loc.). Note also that Syene etc. is always placed at the end of the verse (hexameter or hendecasyllabus); thus 1, 86, 7; 5, 13, 7; Ov. Pont. 1, 5, 79; Lucan. 2, 587; 8, 851; 10, 234; Val. Fl. 6, 74; 6, 703; Stat. Theb. 4, 745; silv. 2, 2, 86; 4, 2, 27; Iuv. 11, 124. The corn harvest of Egypt and Africa, like the weather on which its quality depended, was of vital interest to the city of Rome, as it was from there that the 180
annona civica, the corn supply of the city itself, came (cf. Plin. paneg. 30 f.). If the crops failed there, the result would be serious problems in Rome (see Marquardt, Staatsverwaltung 2, p. 233). 8. Libyco litore: Libycus in the sense of ÏDPÚAÑLSQ
UFGAF A?LLMR @C DGRRCB GLRM
B?ARWJGA TCPQC QCC LMRC
quota … puppis eat: quotus in the sense of “how many?” (“interdum ponitur pro quot”, Forcellini, Lex., s.v. 2, 68); cf. 14, 218, 1 Dic quotus et quanti cupias cenare; Hor. epist. 1, 5, 30 tu quotus esse velis rescribe. Note the resemblance to Ov. trist. 3, 12, 32 hospitaque in Ponti litore puppis erit. 9. Iuleae … olivae: the golden olive-wreath awarded the winner at Domitian’s Alban games; see 9, 23 intro. and note on 9, 23, 5 Albanae … olivae. It is called Iulea, as Domitian’s villa, at which the games were held, was situated in the Ager Albanus, the site of the ancient town of Alba Longa, founded by Iulus (Ascanius), son of Aeneas.1 The adjective (scanned ¹J×SQ) was coined by Propertius (4, 6, 17) and is subsequently used only by Ovid (fast. 4, 124; 5, 564; 6, 797; Pont. 1, 1, 46; 2, 5, 49), Lucan (1, 197; 9, 995) and Martial, with the same sense as here in 13, 109 (on Alban wine), in the sense of “imperial” in 9, 101, 15 (see note ad loc.). The ending echoes Verg. georg. 2, 85 nec pingues unam in faciem nascuntur olivae. 10. aetherius … pater: also 9, 36, 7; Stat. Theb. 11, 207; silv. 3, 1, 108 and 186; cf. Lucan. 5, 96 aetherius Tonans; Stat. Theb. 1, 704 aetherius parens; Achill. 2, 53 aetherius rector. Before the Silver Latin epoch, the epithet seems to have been restricted to things (although sometimes with a sense of divinity), for example, Cic. nat. deor. 1, 103 a. ignes (cf. Lucr. 2, 1098); 2, 42 locus; 2, 54 cursus; Catull. 66, 55 umbrae; Hor. carm. 1, 3, 29 domus; Ov. am. 2, 14, 41 aurae; ars 3, 550 sedes. Cf. also note on 9, 3, 3. sua serta: the wreath of oak-leaves which constituted the prize at the agon Capitolinus (see note on 9, 3, 8). Which poet was going to win the prize would reasonable only have been a subject of gossip before the games were held, and this poem would therefore have been written in 94, before the summer. 11. hodie cenabis apud me: an echo of Catull. 13, 1, like 11, 52, 1 Cenabis belle, Iuli Cerialis, apud me (see Kay, ad loc.). For the “future of invitation”, see and Nisbet & Hubbard on Hor. carm. 1, 20, 1 (comparing, for example, Plaut. Curc. 728 tu, miles, apud me cenabis; Hor. epist. 1, 7, 71 post nonam venies; Prop. 3, 23, 15 venies hodie).
1
According to Vergil, Ascanius, cui nunc cognomen Iulo additur, was called Ilus, dum res stetit Ilia (Aen. 1, 267 ff.). In the Aeneid, the frequencies of the two names are more or less equal, Ascanius appearing 41 times and Iulus 35 (see Austin on Aen. 1, 267; Serv. Aen. 1, 267; Rossbach in RE 2, s.v. Askanios 4, 1611 ff.).
181
36 Viderat Ausonium posito modo crine ministrum Phryx puer, alterius gaudia nota Iovis: “quod tuus, ecce, suo Caesar permisit ephebo, tu permitte tuo, maxime rector” ait; “iam mihi prima latet longis lanugo capillis, iam tua me ridet Iuno vocatque virum.” Cui pater aetherius “Puer o dulcissime,” dixit, “non ego, quod poscis, res negat ipsa tibi: Caesar habet noster similis tibi mille ministros tantaque sidereos vix capit aula mares; at tibi si dederit vultus coma tonsa viriles, quis mihi, qui nectar misceat, alter erit?”
5
10
The last epigram of the Earinus cycle is very different from the five preceding (nos. 11-13; 16-17). Whereas the first five poems form a two fold entity, a “name series” and an “offering series”, this epigram stands apart as neither celebrating the name Earinus nor the hair-offering. The five preceding epigrams are such as would have been written to comply with an imperial request or spontaneously in celebration of an important event within the palace. This is hardly the case with the present epigram; its humorous character, light-hearted approach to its theme and obvious choice of sexually allusive words (gaudia, ephebo, mares, nectar) rather indicates that Martial does not take the subject seriously any more. The poem was certainly not part of the libellus presented to Domitian and Earinus (see 9, 16 intro.), was but probably written to provide a humorous offset to the Earinus cycle when incorporated into Book 9. It may thus be seen as a result of Martial’s inability to be consistently serious in treating a matter in which he felt there was room for a joking twist. Such jokes might be made also on matters concerning (but naturally not at the expense of) Domitian himself (cf. 9, 3 and 9, 34) and must consequently have had Domitian’s consent, leading one to think of Martial as a kind of “court jester” (see the introduction, pp. 31 f.). The poem describes the reaction on Mt. Olympus to the hair-offering of Earinus (Ausonius minister), making a complete comparison of Domitian and Earinus to Jupiter and Ganymede; cf. notes on 9, 11, 7 and on line 12 below. Ganymede is growing up; the first signs of a beard are hidden under his long curls, and Juno smiles scornfully at him and calls him “a man”, adding to his frustration at being trapped in boyhood like the ministri in Sen. epist. 47, 7 and 95, 24 (see the Earinus cycle intro and note on line 5 below). Still, he cannot be allowed to cut his hair but must remain the eternal cupbearer and perform his office to the full; the notion of a grown-up Ganymede as lover of Jupiter is present also in 11, 43, 3. Earinus had none of the features of a man, yet he was allowed, by the grace of Domitian and to Ganymede’s envy, to be treated as one. But it is not Jupiter himself who opposes Ganymede’s wishes, it is the actual circumstances, the res ipsa: although Jupiter is the supreme god, his freedom of action is heavily obstructed by mythology; he cannot pick another cupbearer, no more than he can remarry or do anything else that would disturb the mythological tradition.
182
Domitian, on the other hand, is a living god with no mythology other than that which he creates himself through his actions; he can do what he pleases, and has the means to do it. This paradoxical situation is a good illustration of the artificiality and rigidity which many of Martial’s contemporaries probably felt was inherent in Graeco-Roman religion; the growing desire for religious confidence and a more personal relation to the gods was presumably a reason for people to choose a certain deity as their own patron god or goddess, as Domitian chose Minerva. A healing and helping god was naturally very suitable as a “private deity”, which may account for the growing popularity of Aesculapius during this period and for the rise of the Asklepieion at Pergamum, where the locks of Earinus were offered (see C. Habicht, Die Inschriften des Asklepieions, in E. Boehringer (ed.), Altertümer von Pergamon, 3:3 (Berlin 1969), pp 6 ff.). 1. Ausonium … ministrum: the usual designation for the slaves serving the wine was vini ministri (see Blümner, Privataltertümer, p. 396). For their task, often involving sexual services and appearance in women’s clothing, see the Earinus cycle intro. On the adjective Ausonius, see note on 9, 7, 6. posito … crine: see note on 9, 16, 2 posuit. For the ending crine ministrum, cf. Ov. fast. 6, 441 attonitae flebant demisso crine ministrae. 2. Phryx puer: Ganymede is called Phryx as the son of Tros, king and mythological founder of Troy; cf. 10, 20, 9 raptum … Phryga; 12, 15, 7 Phrygium … ministrum; Stat. Theb. 1, 548 Phrygius … venator. For the same epithet of other Trojans, cf. Ov. epist. 16, 203 (of Anchises); fast. 4, 274 (of Aeneas); Verg. Aen. 7, 363 (of Paris). alterius … Iovis: alter does not imply (as Garthwaite, Court Poets, p. 82, would have it) that Jupiter himself is “the second” Jupiter, inferior to Domitian; as the words Ausonium … ministrum in the preceding line have drawn attention to Earinus and Domitian (the earthly Jupiter), Jupiter himself is quite naturally “the other Jupiter” when introduced in line 2. It is true that alter may seemingly equate Domitian and Jupiter, just as the one of the two consuls is referred to as alter consul without any notion of inferiority (cf. TLL, s.v. alter 1731, 4 ff.). However, the words tuus … Caesar in line 3 and Caesar ... noster in line 9 still suggest Jupiter as the greater deity and Domitian as being under his protection. gaudia: the usual metonymy of the person who is the source of the joy (TLL, s.v. 1712, 73 ff.), but cf. also the frequent use of gaudia with reference to erotic pleasure (see note on 9, 41, 8 gaudia foeda). 3. tuus … Caesar: indicating Jupiter’s supremacy over and protection of Domitian, just as suo and tuo ephebo indicate the respective cupbearer’s standing in relation to his master. ephebo: often in the sense of puer amatus, concubinus; cf. TLL, s.v. ephebus 655, 73 ff. 183
4. maxime rector: of Jupiter also in Verg. Aen. 8, 572 f. divum ... maxime rector Iuppiter. 5. prima … lanugo: lanugo from lana, because of the similarity of the first beard to wool; it is usually qualified by prima; cf., for example, Verg. Aen. 10, 323; Stat. silv. 3, 4, 65; 5, 5, 20; Iuv. 13, 59. The first beard is among the features of the pitiable catamites in Sen. epist. 95, 24: Transeo puerorum infelicium greges quos post transacta convivia aliae cubiculi contumeliae expectant; transeo agmina exoletorum per nationes coloresque discripta ut eadem omnibus levitas sit, eadem primae mensura lanuginis, eadem species capillorum, ne quis cui rectior est coma crispulis misceatur. 6. me ridet Iuno vocatque virum: Juno is generally presented as envying Ganymede and disapproving of his relation to Jupiter; cf. 11, 43, 1 ff.; Verg. Aen. 1, 28; Ov. met. 10, 161 (with Bömer); fast. 6, 43; AP 9, 77 (Antipater of Thessalonica). The idea was to be made the theme of an amusing dialogue between Zeus and Hera by Lucian (dial. deor. 8), and Statius contrasts Juno’s disapproval of Ganymede with the love of both Domitian and Domitia for Earinus (silv. 3, 4, 14, ff.). The point here is therefore Juno’s malicious pleasure in seeing Ganymede growing up with no hope of ever being recognized as an adult; this will be her revenge on her husband’s cupbearer. 7. pater aetherius: see note on 9, 35, 10. 10. tantaque … aula: tantus has a concessive implication: “his palace, however big”; cf. Plaut. Bacc. 124 qui tantus natu deorum nescis nomina. sidereos ... mares: sidereus of radiant, almost divine beauty; cf. 10, 66, 7 sidereos ... ministros; OLD, s.v. sidereus 2. For mas of an object of homosexual affection, see note on 9, 7, 2. 12. qui nectar misceat: there is often a clearly felt sexual implication in the description of Ganymede as the one who blends and pours out the nectar for Jupiter, indicating that Jupiter’s main concern is not the potential loss of a cupbearer, but of a concubine; cf. AP 12, 68 (Meleager), in which the poet denies that he wants the fair Charidemus, because the boy looks at Zeus, “as if already serving the god with nectar” (12, 68, 2 ), and then asks in resignation what gain there is in having the king of heaven as a competitor for victory in love ( ); cf. also AP 12, 70, 1 f. ' , , ,| ,1 and see note on 9, 11, 5. In Lucian. dial. deor. 8, Hera’s principal complaint about Zeus and Ganymede is Zeus’s constant kissing of the cupbearer: “And you can’t take the cup from him, ÅM
GK
QyNWDU
WØ
THØ
RcQRFRÍQ
Wd Gy PRL W´Q xSRXUDQdZQ EDVLO D _ QWDTORQ QdNKM W M xQ {UZWL
ODEHjQ
0XnVNH
1
6WVRP
US]HLQ
xTyORL
QyNWDURM
xJÊ
NDg
=KQ´M
xQDQWdRQ
Hc
Vy
RcQRF±RQ
“I will stand up even against Zeus if he would snatch you from me, Myiscus, to pour out the nectar for him” (W. R. Paton’s translation, Loeb).
184
without kissing him first before all our eyes, and you find his kiss sweeter than the nectar, and so you keep on and on asking for a drink, even when you’re not thirsty” (dial. deor. 8, 2; translation by M. D. Macleod, Loeb). Martial extends the metaphor to anal intercourse in 11, 104, 17 ff. (Martial addresses his fictitious wife) Pedicare negas: dabat hoc Cornelia Graccho, | Iulia Pompeio, Porcia, Brute, tibi; | dulcia Dardanio nondum miscente ministro | pocula Iuno fuit pro Ganymede Iovi.
37 Cum sis ipsa domi mediaque ornere Subura, fiant absentes et tibi, Galla, comae, nec dentes aliter quam Serica nocte reponas, et iaceas centum condita pyxidibus, nec tecum facies tua dormiat, innuis illo, quod tibi prolatum est mane, supercilio, et te nulla movet cani reverentia cunni, quem potes inter avos iam numerare tuos. Promittis sescenta tamen; sed mentula surda est, et sit lusca licet, te tamen illa videt.
5
10
Attacks on elderly women (“vetula-Skoptik”) abound in Martial, deriding their toothlessness, baldness, withering bodies, stench, blindness or one-eyedness1 and their desperate attempts to conceal all this by means of wigs, false teeth and heavy make-up. Especially repulsive to Martial is their unchecked sexual urge (furor Venereus), manifesting itself in the sex-starved vetula who now is even willing to pay and also in the old hag who continuously outlives her husbands and looks for new ones. The present Galla is Martial’s foremost representative of the former category (which may be observed also in 10, 90; 11, 29; perhaps also in 2, 33; 2, 41; 7, 75), as the Vetustilla of 3, 93 is that of the latter (cf. 9, 10 intro.); cf. also 1, 19; 1, 72, 3–6; 2, 41, 11; 3, 32; 4, 20; 5, 43; 6, 12; 6, 93; 8, 33, 17; 12, 7; 12, 23; perhaps also 9, 62. The vetula was already a feature of Attic comedy, but the character was greatly promoted by Greek epigram; there is a number of epigrams in the Greek Anthology that largely scorn the same defects as does Martial. The aged prostitute and the vetula keen on getting married appear in two epigrams of Nicharcus (AP 11, 73 [below] and 71 [see 9, 10 intro.] respectively), 11, 417 (Anonymous). Toothlessness is mocked at in AP 11, 310 (Lucilius) and 11, 374, 3 f. (Macedonius the consul); baldness in 11, 68 (Lucilius);2 general corporal decay in AP 5, 21 (Rufinus); 5, 76 (Rufinus); 5, 204 (Meleager) and 5, 273 (Agathias Scholiasticus); 1
It may be noted that some of these features are mentioned also in the mockery of old men; cf. 2, 41, 10; 6, 57; 6, 74; 8, 57. 2 The epigrams of the Greek Anthology otherwise do not mock baldness, but grey or white hair; cf., for example, AP 11, 66, 3 (Antiphilus of Byzantium); 11, 67, 4 (Myrinus); 11, 69 (Lucilius); and 11, 72, 1 (Nicarchus).
185
and a heavy make-up to conceal it in AP 11, 66 (Antiphilus of Byzantium); 11, 310; 11, 374, 1 f.; and 11, 408 (Lucian). The epigrams of Martial stressing the furor Venereus should be compared also with Horace’s Epodes 8 and 12; thus 3, 39, the opening twelve lines of which were demonstrated by Grassman (see below) to have been written as an aemulatio of epod. 8, 1–10; as in epod. 8, their sexual eagerness effects nothing but impotence; cf. 6, 23 and 11, 29 (the contents of which also resemble epod. 12). The stench of the vetula in epod. 12, 4 ff. is an element not found in the Greek Anthology but continued by Martial. The silk gown in line 3 of the present epigram also has its counterpart in epod. 12, 21 and Galla’s forefathers perhaps in epod. 8, 11 ff., but cf. here in particular AP 11, 73 (Nicharcus), on the lusty old prostitute who, like Galla, is now prepared to pay for sex (see Burnikel, Struktur, pp. 111 ff.).1 See further Brecht, Spottepigramm, pp. 62 ff.; V. Grassmann, Die erotischen Epoden des Horaz, Munich 1966, pp. 18 ff., and his index, s.v. vetula–Skoptik; Richlin, pp. 109 ff. 1. Cum sis: a common opening (“although you are so and so, you still do so and so”) of satirical epigrams; cf. 2, 35; 3, 93; 4, 6; 6, 64; 6, 77; 13, 34. mediaque ornere Subura: a Roman lady would have a staff of ornatrices at her disposal, who made her toilet in the comfort of her own home;2 not so Galla, who nevertheless is at home while her toilet is taken care of by the wigmakers and cosmeticians of the Subura, the busy area south of the Viminal and west of the Esquiline. It housed shops (7, 31, 9 ff.; 10, 94, 5) and also private houses (like that of Stella; see 12, 2, 11 and cf. 9 42 intro.), but Martial mentions it primarily with reference to prostitution (2, 17, 1; 6, 66, 1; 11, 61, 3; 11, 78, 11; cf. Prop. 4, 7, 15; Pers. 5, 32; Priap. 40, 1), describing it as noisy (clamosa 12, 18, 2; cf. Iuv. 11, 51), humid and filthy (5, 22, 5); see Platner & Ashby, pp. 500 ff. 2. fiant absentes … comae: this being the only instance of the phrase comae fiunt (cf. TLL, s.v. coma 1749, 64 f.), it is impossible to decide whether it refers to the production of the wig or to a wig handed in for setting. Wigs were worn by men and women alike under the influence of fashion, but naturally also to conceal baldness; see Blümner, Privataltertümer, pp. 276 f. Martial mocks bald women also in 2, 33, 1; 3, 93, 2; 6, 12; 12, 7; 12, 23. For the ending, cf. 4, 45, 8.
1
*UDjD
NDO
xODXQRPyQK {FHLM
_
SdQHL
_
Wd
JU
H·UVHLM J
U
NDg
RlVTDM WHFQjWLQ
WUHjM
NDg
²W
¢Q
²WDQ
QyD
G|
OO
Sd9
WyVVDUDM
Q
W±WH
W±W
¨WHL
POORQ
xTHOV9M
_
_
_
Q¿Q
HcM
µ
[yVWDM
G
xTyOHL
TyOHLM NN
NWZ _ NROOWDL NQd]HL SDTLNH¹HWDL Q WL GLGØ WLM _ ODPEQHL Q P GØ
GR¿QDL
D¸WQ
WR¹WRX PLVT´Q
PLVT´Q
H¸HSdWDNWRQ
JdQHW
{FHL
QZ
W´
W
STRM
(“A handsome old woman (why deny it?) you know she was, when she was young; but then she asked for money while now she is ready to pay her mount. You will find her an artist, and when she has had something to drink then all the more you will have her submissive to whatever you want. For she drinks, if you consent, three or four pints, and then things are all topsy–turvy with her; she clings, she scratches, she plays the pathic; and if one gives her anything, she accepts, if not, the pleasure is her payment”; translation by W. R. Paton, Loeb). 2 See Forbes, Studies 3, p. 41.
186
Galla: see note on 9, 4, 1; cf. here in particular the Galla of 10, 75. 3. dentes: a grotesque picture: at the same time as Galla takes off her luxurious silk gown (see below), she also takes out her denture. Martial makes fun of the toothless and of those with false teeth (exclusively women, cf. note 1 above) in several epigrams (cf. 1, 19; 1, 72, 3 f.; 2, 41; 3, 93, 2; 5, 43; 12, 23) which “may seem neither particularly attractive nor particularly amusing to us” but which is “more understandable at a time when dentistry was still primitive” (Howell 1, 19 intro.). False teeth were made from bone and ivory (cf. 1, 72, 4), pitch and boxwood (2, 41, 7), and fastened with gold (Cic. leg. 2, 60); see Marquardt, p. 756; Blümner, Privataltertümer, p. 478. ) is real silk, so called from the inhabitants of conSerica: Serica (Gr. temporary China, the Seres (Gr. ; see H. Frisk, Griechisches Etymologisches Wörterbuch, Heidelberg 1960–70, s.v.), which was the only habitat of the silk worm (Bombyx mori) in antiquity. There was also an inferior but highly esteemed silk (such as the Assyrian and Coan; see below) produced by scraping the cocoons of wild Bombyx (or similar) species native to the Mediterranean world. Silk came into greater use in Rome from the beginning of the Empire and, being among the most expensive things brought forth by the earth (Plin. nat. 37, 204), silk clothes were much cherished by dainty women; in connection with concubines, the thin and transparent Coa vestis is mentioned particularly often; cf. Hor. sat. 1, 2, 101; Tib. 2, 3, 53; Prop. 1, 2, 2; Ov. ars 2, 298; Pers. 5, 135 (with Kißel’s note). Perhaps this corresponds to the bombycina in Martial (8, 68, 7; 11, 49, 5 with Kay; 14, 24, 1), who otherwise only mentions the Serica, such as was worn by Nerva’s empress (11, 8, 5) and which could be bought of top quality in the Vicus Tuscus (11, 28, 11 with Kay). The extravagance of the silk gowns naturally upset Seneca, cf. benef. 7, 9, 5 Video sericas vestes, si vestes vocandae sunt, in quibus nihil est, quo defendi aut corpus aut denique pudor possit, quibus sumptis parum liquido nudam se non esse iurabit; hae ingenti summa ab ignotis etiam ad commercium gentibus accersuntur, ut matronae nostrae ne adulteris quidem plus sui in cubiculo, quam in publico ostendant. See further Forbes, Studies 4, pp. 49 ff. VKULN±M
6 UHM
4 f. centum condita pyxidibus | nec tecum facies tua dormiat: Galla is so heavily made up that it appears that her face is not really with her in bed but is scattered throughout a number of toilet-boxes (pyxides). Greek and Roman women as a rule applied make-up that was heavy from the modern point of view; they powdered themselves preferably with white lead (which might melt away in sunshine, 2, 41, 12; cf. 1, 72, 5 f.; 7, 25, 2) but also with chalk (which could get washed away by rain, 2, 41, 11), bean–flour, earth of Chios or white crocodile droppings, used rouge, nail-paint and eye-paint (see below), and even applied a blue colour to accentuate the veins. This ars ornatrix also generated a literature that is now mostly lost but was probably once large on the production and use of perfumes and cosmetics. Hippocrates gives recipes for unguents, Galen mentions a work on cosmetics by Heraclides (about 250 BC), and Cleopatra VII is said to have written a book on beautification; in Latin, there is Ovid’s De medicamine faciei, but also 187
Apicius and Pliny give occasional recipes for perfumes and cosmetics; see further Blümner, Privataltertümer, pp. 437 f.; Forbes, Studies 3, pp. 38 ff. The awkward attempts of old hags to acquire a youthful appearance must, to attract notice under these circumstances, have led them to such heavy application of powder that their faces actually seemed like masks that could be taken off. There is a similar line of thought in AP 11, 310 (Lucilius): , , , , · | .1 For the phrase centum condita pyxidibus, cf. Hor. carm. 2, 14, 26 (Caecuba) centum servata clavibus.
+J±UDVDM
SORNPRXM
I¿NRM
PyOL
NKU±Q
°G±QWDM
W M
D¸W M
GDSQKM
³\LQ
Q
J±UDVDM
5 f. innuis … supercilio: Galla coquetishly raises the eyebrow which has been brought in the morning from its pyxis; the same phrase supercilia proferre also in Petron. 110, 2. Such patches came into use in Rome at the beginning of the first century. Otherwise, the eyebrows were lengthened particularly by using soot; cf. Ov. ars 3, 201; Petron. 126, 15; Iuv. 2, 93; Blümner, loc. cit.; Forbes, Studies 3, p. 40. 7 f. nulla ... cani reverentia cunni | quem potes inter avos iam numerare: “no reverence towards your white-haired cunt, which you may now count among your (venerable white-bearded) ancestors”. The parallel between Galla’s cunnus and her ancestors is made on the basis of the white hair which they have in common; but whereas the white hair in the case of the ancestors suggests that they are venerable on account of old age (cf. TLL, s.v. canus 297, 47 ff.), it would rather imply something like “faded with old age” in the case of Galla’s cunnus. Furthermore, the reference to Galla’s ancestors indicates that she was of a noble family and thus probably also rich; it recalls the mention of the ancestral masks in Hor. epod. 8, 11 ff. (the poet having just vented his scorn at the physical ugliness of the vetula) esto beata, funus atque imagines | ducant triumphales tuum. Here, as in Horace, her wealth and high birth cannot compensate for her general repulsiveness. Galla’s lack of reverence towards her white-haired cunnus probably implies that she had depilated it; cf. 10, 90, in which Martial expresses his indignation at this practice on the part of the exceedingly old Ligeia (10, 90, 1 f. Quid vellis vetulum, Ligeia, cunnum? | Quid busti cineres tui lacessis?). Depilation of the cunnus was otherwise considered quite appropriate in prostitutes and concubines (cf. note on 9, 27, 3 prostitutis … culis). For the ending of line 7, cf. Ov. fast. 5, 57. 9. sescenta: “innumerable pleasures” or “600,000 IIS”. In either case, sescenti indicates an indefinitely large number; it is similarly used in 6, 59, 2; 11, 65, 1 (with Kay); see E. Wölfflin, “Sescenti, mille, centum, trecenti als unbestimmte und runde Zahlen”, ALL 9, pp. 178 ff. Cf. the vain promises of the aged Phyllis in 11, 29, 5 and the use of trecenti in 9, 19, 1. 1
“You bought hair, rouge, honey, wax, and teeth. For the same outlay you might have bought a face” (translation by W. R. Paton, Loeb).
188
9 f. surda ... lusca: “but the dick cannot hear your promises and, one-eyed as it may be, it still sees you”; for impotence caused by the appearance and pushfulness of the lovesick vetula, cf. 6, 23; 11, 29; Hor. epod. 12, 8 f. The single eye of the penis is the orifice of the urethra; cf. 2, 33, in which the aged Philaenis is found to have the same features as a penis: Cur non basio te, Philaeni? Calva es. | Cur non basio te, Philaeni? Rufa es. | Cur non basio te, Philaeni? Lusca es. | Haec qui basiat, o Philaeni, fellat; cf. TLL, s.v. luscus 1866, 8 ff.
te tamen illa videt: the same structure of the second half of the pentameter ( tamen ille ) also in 4, 71, 6; 7, 25, 4; Tib. 1, 6, 66; Ov. am. 1, 5, 14; 1, 11, 16; ars 1, 666; 2, 186; fast. 2, 602; 6, 414; trist. 2, 1, 466; Pont. 2, 11, 14; 3, 4, 4.
38 Summa licet velox, Agathine, pericula ludas, non tamen efficies, ut tibi parma cadat. Nolentem sequitur, tenuisque reversa per auras vel pede vel tergo, crine vel ungue sedet; lubrica Corycio quamvis sint pulpita nimbo et rapiant celeres vela negata Noti, securos pueri neglecta perambulat artus, et nocet artifici ventus et unda nihil. Ut peccare velis, cum feceris omnia, falli non potes: arte opus est, ut tibi parma cadat.
5
10
The skill of Agathinus, the master juggler, is overwhelming. With swift limbs he hurls the shield up in the air and catches it on his foot, on his back, on his head and on his fingertips, although the stage is slippery from sprinkles of perfume and the wind blows hard; it seems as though he is trying to avoid the shield, which is seeking his body of its own accord. To keep the shield in constant motion is child’s play for Agathinus; to drop it would take practice. The present epigram would seem to be the result of Martial’s having watched one of his performances. The juggling with a shield appears only in this epigram, but cf. the pilarii juggling with balls, who arouse the same admiration as Agathinus. Quintilian refers to their tricks as miracula illa in scaenis and describes their skill in a way very similar to Martial’s account of Agathinus: ea quae emiserint ultro venire in manus credas et qua iubentur decurrere (inst. 10, 7, 11); cf. also Manilius’ description of a pilarius in 5, 168 ff. (on the dexterity of those born under the Twins) ille potens turba perfundere membra pilarum | per totumque vagas corpus disponere palmas, | ut teneat tantos orbes sibique ipse reludat | et velut edoctos iubeat volitare per ipsum. There are pictures of pilarii preserved on gravestones, and also occasional epitaphs, like that of the imperial freedman P. Aelius Secundus,
189
who was pilarius omnium eminentissimus (CIL 6, 8997); see Schneider in RE 20, s.v. pilarius 1320 ff. The poem is so full of Ovidian echoes as almost to seem like an Ovidian cento; see the commentary on lines 2, 3, 6, 7 and 8 below. 1. Summa … pericula ludas: “play with the utmost danger”, viz. of the shield falling on the ground (thus Friedländer ad loc.); the accusative is internal (cf. Kühner-Stegmann 1, § 71 c, p. 277). The expression has no exact parallels, but similar expressions are listed in the TLL, s.v. ludo 1780, 59 ff. . He was obviously a real person, perhaps, like the Agathine: Gr. mimic actor Latinus in 9, 28, a member of Domitian’s staff of entertainers (like the Aelius Secundus above, who would also have been engaged at the court).
$JDTjQRM
2. non tamen efficies: a direct borrowing from Ov. Pont. 2, 2, 24 non tamen efficies ut timeare mihi; cf. met. 13, 64. parma: a small shield, round or oval, used by the lightly armed velites as well as the cavalry and the Thracian gladiators (cf. note on 9, 68, 8 parmae). This is the only instance of its being used by a juggler, but cf. Iuv. 5, 153 ff., which mentions a monkey, dressed up in helmet and parma and armed with a spear, riding on a she–goat; see Lambertz in RE 18, s.v. Parma 1, 1539 ff.; cf. also 9, 20, 10. 3. Nolentem: Martial takes the rendering one step further than do Manilius and Quintilian (above); whereas these two authors describe the balls as following the pilarius of their own accord, the skill of Agathinus is so great that it seems as if his hands are actually trying to avoid the chasing shield. tenuisque reversa per auras: cf. Ov. ars 1, 43 haec tibi non tenues veniet delapsa per auras. The ending per auras is much favoured by Lucretius (14 instances), Vergil (17), Ovid (19), and Silius (31) but is found only five times in Statius and seven in Valerius Flaccus. Martial has it also in 1, 3, 11 and 1, 6, 1. 4. ungue: metonymy for “fingertip” (cf. Iuv. 10, 53). 5. lubrica Corycio … pulpita nimbo: the stage is slippery from having been sprinkled with sweet wine mixed with saffron (Plin. nat. 21, 34), which, because of its fragrance (considered equal to that of the rose), was used to freshen up the air in dining–rooms, baths and theatres. The epithet Corycius is used because the best saffron was that which thrived in the caves of Mt. Corycus in Cilicia (Plin. nat. 21, 31 ff.); cf. 3, 65, 2; Eleg. in Maecen. 1, 133; Ciris 317; Hor. sat. 2, 4, 68; Lucan. 9, 809; Stat. silv. 5, 1, 214; Iuv. 14, 267; see Orth in RE 2:3, s.v. Safron 1730; Ruge in RE 11, s.v. Korkyros 4, 1452; TLL suppl., s.v. Corcyrus 660, 47 ff. 6. celeres … Noti: this phrase also in Ov. fast. 5, 686 with the same position in the metre as here. For celer as an attribute of winds, cf., for example, Hor. carm. 1, 12, 10 and see TLL, s.v. celer 751, 24 ff. 190
vela negata: in the theatre, as in the amphitheatre, awnings could be stretched out over a system of poles and crossbeams to protect the spectators from the sun. They were naturally a welcome arrangement (at Pompeii they were mentioned even in the advertisements for gladiatorial games in the phrase vela erunt; cf., for example, CIL 4, 1177; 1180), but their use was made impossible by strong wind; cf. 11, 21, 6 Pompeiano vela negata Noto (with Kay’s note). In such cases, Martial recommends the use of sunshades (14, 28 with Leary) or a sun-hat; thus 14, 29 (Causea) In Pompeiano tecum spectabo theatro: | nam flatus populo vela negare solet;1 see also Fensterbusch in RE 2:5, s.v. Theatron 1414; Friedländer in Marquardt, Staatsverwaltung 3, pp. 533 f. For the prosody, cf. also Ov. epist. 2, 100 expectem pelago vela negata meo?; am. 2, 16, 22 dare non aequis vela ferenda Notis. 7. securos … neglecta perambulat artus: because of Agathinus’ skill, his limbs are securi (“sure, steady”), as he is free from the fear of dropping the shield, which moves about his limbs seemingly neglected by him. Securus is similarly used in 11, 11, 2 et mihi secura pocula trade manu (cf. Kay ad loc.). For perambulo as conveying a sense of steadiness and ease, see TLL, s.v. perambulo 1185, 61 f. There is an Ovidian echo also in this line; cf. Ov. epist. 9, 135 mens fugit admonitu, frigusque perambulat artus. 8. ventus et unda: the unda being the sprinklings of saffron of line 5. The juncture is Ovidian, appearing twice in his pentameters (am. 2, 16, 46; epist. 7, 44), both with the same position as here. 9. cum feceris omnia: “though you have done everything”, cf. 6, 93, 11 f. Cum bene se tutam per fraudes mille putavit, | omnia cum fecit, Thaida Thais olet (where the indicative should probably be ascribed to the “Verszwang”; cf. Hofmann–Szantyr, § 336, pp. 624 f.). 10. ut tibi parma cadat: Martial often ends an epigram by repeating one of the opening lines, sometimes with a slight variation; in Book 9, see poems 46, 55, 57, 77, 78 and 100. Similar methods of “embracing” a poem can be observed also in Greek epigram (for example, AP 11, 254; 11, 308; 11, 310 [Lucilius]; 11, 186 [Nicarchus]); see Friedländer on 2, 6, 17; Siedschlag, Form, pp. 123 f.; cf. Joepgen, pp. 101 f.
1 Leary, like most editors, prints Pontanus’ conjecture nam flatus, whereas Heraeus, followed by Housman, retained the reading of TE Mandatus, taking it as the name of a velarius amphitheatralis (see Leary on 14, 29, 2).
191
39 Prima Palatino lux est haec orta Tonanti, optasset Cybele qua peperisse Iovem; hac et sancta mei genita est Caesonia Rufi: plus debet matri nulla puella suae. Laetatur gemina votorum sorte maritus, contigit hunc illi quod bis amare diem.
5
A birthday poem to Rufus’ wife Caesonia, who was lucky enough to have been born on the same day as Domitian, the 24th of October. Accordingly, it is the latter that is important; no girl is so much in debt to her mother as Caesonia, because she was born on the same day as the emperor, and her husband Rufus counts himself lucky, as he has a twofold reason to love this day, as the birthday of his wife and that of Domitian. Thus, the epigram is more of an adulatory piece to the emperor in the guise of a birthday poem for Caesonia; cf. the poems to Carus (9, 23–24) and Latinus (9, 28), which are just as much eulogies of Domitian as of the persons they obviously celebrate. For Martial’s birthday poems, see 9, 52 intro. 1. Palatino … Tonanti: for Palatinus and its scansion in Martial, see note on 9, 24, 1. This is one of five instances in Martial of the scansion PÒ NCPF?NQ GLDJS CLACB @W .T fast. 5, 152 prima Palatinae signa dedistis aves). The epithet Tonans of Domitian as the earthly Jupiter is discussed in my note on 9, 86, 7. 2. Cybele … peperisse Iovem: the mention of Cybele, the mother of Jupiter, draws attention to Domitian’s mother Flavia Domitilla (who died before his accession and is otherwise not mentioned in the epigrams). The Phrygian Great Mother Cybele had since the 5th century BC been identified by the poets (for example, Soph. Phil 391; Aristoph. Av. 875; Eur. Ba. 126 ff.) with the Greek Rhea, wife of Kronos and mother of Zeus, presumably as both were mothers of gods; see Rapp in Roscher, s.v. Kybele 1638 ff., and cf. AP 6, 217 (Simonides) and 218 (Alcaeus), in which and are used alternately of the same goddess. The identification was continued by the Latin poets; cf., for example, Verg. Aen. 9, 83; Sil. 17, 36; Ov. fast. 4, 194 (on which see Bömer with further instances) .XEyOK
C5HdK
3. sancta: sanctitas morum was a prime virtue in a wife, of the wife of Apollinaris in 10, 30, 5 and cf. Phaedr. 3, 10, 30 Sanctam ... uxorem; Cic. Phil. 3, 16 sanctissimae feminae atque optimae of Augustus’ mother Atia; Plin. epist. 9, 28, 1 Plotinam sanctissimam feminam and paneg. 83, 5 Quid enim illa sanctius, quid antiquius of the empress Pompeia Plotina; OLD, s.v. sanctus 4. mei … Caesonia Rufi: as this Rufus is known only by his cognomen, his identity cannot be determined with certainty, but meus suggests that he was closely acquainted with Martial, and he seems also to have had some connection with the emperor. Now some of the Rufi mentioned by Martial may be ruled out at once as 192
possible objects of identification, viz. Camonius Rufus, who was dead (cf. 9, 74 and 76), Canius Rufus (who was married to Theophila; see Howell on 1, 61, 9) and the Rufus of 12, 52, 3, married to Sempronia; nor is there anything to argue for an identification with Safronius Rufus (4, 71; perhaps 11, 103; see Kay ad loc.) or the satirist Iulius Rufus (10, 99). Unless the present Rufus appears only in this epigram, the most likely candidate would be Instantius Rufus (7, 68; 8, 50; 8, 73; 12, 95; 12, 98); he was married, as appears from 7, 68, 2 and 12, 95, 4 ff., and the fact that Martial did not refrain from addressing a poem like the latter to him indicates that they knew each other quite well. Even though there is no tangible connection between Domitian and Instantius, from 12, 98 it appears that he was proconsul of Baetica and thus at least made a political career, even though it was probably not a distinguished one; see White, Aspects, pp. 89 ff. 4. nulla puella: common after the diaeresis of the pentameter. Martial has it seven times more,1 and cf. Tib. 3, 8, 24; Prop. 2, 26b, 26; Ov. m. 2, 10, 26; ars 1, 714; 2, 688; 3, 552. 5. gemina votorum sorte: “the twice happy outcome of his prayers”; the expression is unparalleled.
40 Tarpeias Diodorus ad coronas Romam cum peteret Pharo relicta, vovit pro reditu viri Philaenis, illam lingeret ut puella simplex, quam castae quoque diligunt Sabinae. Dispersa rate tristibus procellis mersus fluctibus obrutusque ponto ad votum Diodorus enatavit. O tardus nimis et piger maritus! Hoc in litore si puella votum fecisset mea, protinus redissem.
5
10
The poet Diodorus has left Egypt for Rome to participate in the Capitoline games (cf. note on 9, 3, 8), and his wife Philaenis, a simple–minded girl, makes a vow that she, upon his safe return, will perform fellatio on him. Diodorus is shipwrecked (without ever getting to Rome, as nothing is mentioned of the contest) and makes quite a silly figure as he swims ashore to his wife’s vow, which the shipwreck has brought to a premature fulfilment. Still, Martial makes fun of him for not returning fast enough: had his girl made such a vow, he would have turned around at once.
1
1, 76, 4; 2, 66, 6; 4, 71, 2 and 4; 7, 29, 4; 11, 64, 2; 14, 205, 2.
193
The aim of the epigram is presumably to poke fun at Greek “professional poets”, who travelled from festival to festival (of which there were over a hundred in the Greek world under the early Empire) to advertise their talents and hopefully gain prizes, viz. money in the minor festivals, in the major also crowns and honour (see Hardie, pp. 23 ff.). In the Capitoline games of the summer of 94, no less than fifty-two competitors participated in the event of improvising Greek hexameters, as appears from the epitaph of Q. Sulpicius Maximus (CIL 6, 33976), a young boy who himself took part in this event that year; many of these had certainly come from abroad. If this was an unusually large number (and its being mentioned in the inscription points in that direction; cf. Wissowa in Friedländer, Sittengeschichte 4, p. 276), it might perhaps have annoyed Martial, who, in spite of his apparent debt to Greek epigrammatists, would probably have joined Juvenal in his negative view of the Greeks as unfair and unwelcome competitors for the favour of rich patrons. In his third satire, Juvenal refers to the Greeks as a divitibus gens acceptissima nostris (3, 58), with whom one could not compete on equal terms, since they also were an adulandi gens prudentissima (3, 86; cf. also 3, 92 and 104; see Courtney on Iuv. 3, p. 153). This negative view was shared also by men like Pliny, otherwise pro-Greek, and by Tacitus (see A. N. Sherwin-White, Racial Prejudice in Imperial Rome, Cambridge 1967, pp. 71 ff.). It does not seem unlikely that also Martial would have felt provoked by the Greek master flatterers, especially by those working in his own field of poetry. The dig in 9, 11, 14, at Greek poets quibus est nihil negatum may be a sign in this direction, as is also perhaps Martial’s reference to the effects of the fancy versus echoici as Graecula echo (see Friedländer ad loc.); cf. also 10, 76. Perhaps the present epigram is a manifestation of an urge to ridicule the Graeculi flooding the Capitoline games of 94. Shipwreck and death at sea were common themes in Greek epigram; compare in particular AP 7, 366 (Antistius) on Greek athletes who had perished while travelling between games: , , , ,| , ,– – ;1 cf. also AP 7, 665 (Leonidas of Tarentum); 7, 500 (Asclepiades); 7, 738 (Theoridas); 9, 85 (Philip); and see G. Williams, Change and Decline, Berkeley etc. 1978, p. 194.
$ÇRX SURFRDg Vy
ODjOD\ S±VRQ
.DUSDTdK
OJRM
_
NDg
C(OOGL
V|
S±URM
WR¼M
6LNHO´M
SQWZQ
_
0HQyVWUDWH
ÉOHVHQ
NUyVVRQDM
xQ
NDg Vy
S±QW-
0yQDQGUH
'LRQ¹VLH
IH¿
TORI±UZQ
1 f. Tarpeias … ad coronas | Romam cum peteret: “when Diodorus set out for Rome for the Capitoline games”; the construction with ad, “to participate in”, is slightly brachylogical and may be labelled as concretum pro abstracto; cf., for example, Prop. 3, 14, 9 nunc ligat ad caestum gaudentia bracchia loris; TLL, s.v. ad 536, 5 ff. The oak-wreath is metonymy for Domitian’s Agon Capitolinus, on which see note on 9, 3, 8.
1 “To thee, Menestratus, the mouth of the Aous was fatal; to thee, Menander, the tempest of the Carpathian Sea; and thou, Dionysius, didst perish at sea in the Sicilian Strait. Alas, what grief to Hellas! the best of all her winners in the games gone” (W. R. Paton’s translation, Loeb).
194
Diodorus: obviously fictitious, as Martial’s epigrams always salva infimarum quoque personarum reverentia ludant (1, praef.); see the principles for real and fictitious characters in Martial formulated by Kay on 11, 7, 1, and cf. 5, 15, 2; 9, 95b; 10, 33, 9 f. Rather surprisingly, Diodorus is considered to have been a real person by Frobben (in his index of names in Friedländer), Heraeus and Shackleton Bailey, and even by W. Schmid & O. Stählin, Geschichte der griechischen Litteratur, vol. 2:1, 6th ed., Munich 1920, p. 326. 2. Pharo: metonymy for Egypt; see note on 9, 35, 7 Phario … Iove. Even though a reference particularly to Alexandria (cf. the indices of names in Friedländer, Heraeus and Shackleton Bailey) may be likely, it cannot be confirmed by Pharus alone (cf. 7, 30, 3 de Pharia Memphiticus urbe fututor, where Pharia urbs is Memphis). 3. Philaenis: on this name in Martial, see note on 9, 29, 1. 4. illam … quam: this kind of periphrastic circumscription (a noun or pronoun followed by a relative clause) for mentula is common in Latin; cf. 3, 68, 7 f. nominat illam, | quam recipit sexto mense superba Venus; 11, 15, 8 f. nec per circuitus loquatur illam, | ex qua nascimur, omnium parentem (with Kay); cf. pars, quam etc. (for example, Ov. ars 2, 707; Petron. 129, 1; Priap. 37, 8 f.; 48, 1 f.; Adams, p. 45. puella simplex: “the simple–minded girl”; the vow of Diodorus’ wife does not consist of laboured artefacts or of ritual slaughter, but simply and plainly of fellatio. 5. castae … Sabinae: the Sabines were of proverbial moral sternness and their women equally virtuous and chaste; thus, in 1, 62, 1, the chaste Laevina is said not to yield to the antiquis … Sabinis (cf. Citroni ad loc.); cf. 11, 15, 1 f. Sunt chartae mihi, quas Catonis uxor | et quas horribiles legant Sabinae; Ov. am. 2, 4, 15 rigidas ... Sabinas; 3, 8, 61 tetricas ... Sabinas. The epithet horribiles in 11, 15, 2 agrees with Ovid’s description of the Sabine women as immundae (am. 1, 8, 39), indicating that their rigidity also made their appearance suffer; Kay ad loc. fittingly remarks that their morality derived from the fact that casta est quam nemo rogavit (Ov. am. 1, 8, 43); see also Otto, s.v. Sabina, p. 304. 7. mersus fluctibus obrutusque ponto: “dipped in the waves and overwhelmed by the ocean”; mersus and obrutus often appear side by side; cf. Ov. trist. 5, 11, 13 (with Luck’s note); Liv. 6, 17, 2; Sen. nat. 4, 2, 6; Sil. 4, 79 f.; Tac. ann. 1, 64, cf. TLL, s.v. mergo 832, 20 ff. and s.v. obruo 153, 3 ff. For obrutus ponto, cf. also Sen. Tro. 1031 and Sil. 9, 541. 8. ad votum enatavit: an amusing ambiguity; ad votum can mean either “ Diodorus escaped according to (his wife’s) wish” (cf. Quint. decl. 332, 1; Ps. Quint. decl. 1, 5; ibid. 3, 9; Sen. epist. 15, 3; Tac. dial. 41, 1; Porph. Hor. epist. 1, 11,
195
17) or “ Diodorus escaped to the vow (= to claim the vow)”; for enatare ad aliquod, cf. TLL, s.v. enato 554, 45 f.
41 Pontice, quod numquam futuis, sed paelice laeva uteris et Veneri servit amica manus, hoc nihil esse putas? Scelus est, mihi crede, sed ingens, quantum vix animo concipis ipse tuo. Nempe semel futuit, generaret Horatius ut tres, 5 Mars semel, ut geminos Ilia casta daret: omnia perdiderat, si masturbatus uterque mandasset manibus gaudia foeda suis. Ipsam crede tibi naturam dicere rerum: “istud quod digitis, Pontice, perdis, homo est.” 10 This epigram is aimed at a certain Ponticus, who is in the habit of masturbating without ever having sexual intercourse, and he is bitterly reproached by Martial, who delivers a virtual hellfire sermon, using parodic, quasi-philosophical arguments which are very remote from his own view of the matter, as it emerges elsewhere (see below). This moralizing outburst and Martial’s hypocritical argumentation in particular would be hard to explain unless Ponticus is taken to be a would-be moral philosopher, like the Chrestus of 9, 27 and the Pannychus of 9, 47, preaching sexual abstinence but masturbating when no one sees. Lines 3–10 could then be seen as a mocking pastiche of the kind of lectures Ponticus himself gives to those who listen to him in the streets. The would-be philosopher is thus, as it were, paid back in his own coin: applying an excessively moralizing and quasi-philosophical diction (notably in lines 3 f. and 9 f.), Martial holds up masturbation as the most dreadful crime, implying the wastage of a human being, and quite possibly more than one: it took Horatius only one act of intercourse to beget the three Horatii and it took Mars only one such act to beget Romulus and Remus. Note the parodic inclusion of historical exempla, a feature very popular with moral philosophers (see 9, 27 intro.), and the ridiculous use of futuit with the father of the Horatii and Mars as subjects. On top of it all, in support of his fabricated argumentation, Martial produces Nature itself, the Stoics’ measure of good and bad. But the arguments produced by the poet are presumably not meant to recall the doctrines of any particular school; philosophers do not seem to have had any problem with masturbation, and some even approved of it (thus Zeno the Stoic; cf. Sext. Empir. pyrrhon. hypot. 3, 206) or practised it themselves (thus the Cynic Diogenes; see Plut. de stoic. repugn. 21). Rather, such words as scelus est, sed ingens and the plea to Nature itself are simply meant to give the outburst a philosophical air. Martial himself quite obviously did not consider every sexual activity not aimed at child birth as unjustifiable; he even did what he could to secure the ius trium liberorum for himself without actually having to produce a single child (2,
196
91; 2, 92). The point that the semen is actually a human being and is not to be wasted by masturbation is naturally also inconsistent with his general view on masturbation; elsewhere, he thinks it acceptable as a last resort (as such, he practised it himself; cf. 2, 43, 14; 11, 73, 4), even though it should be avoided if one has the means (hence his advice in 12, 95, 5 ff. to Instantius Rufus not to read Musaeus’ pathicissimi libelli without the company of his wife, ne talassionem | indicas manibus libidinosis | et fias sine femina maritus).1 This is essentially in line with the prevalent view of masturbation in antiquity, which generally did not condemn it if practised for want of something better, although there were naturally those who chose to reject it, as there were those who advocated it (particularly Cynic philosophers); see W. A. Krenkel, “Masturbation in der Antike”, WZRostock 28 (1979), pp. 159–178; Henderson, p. 221. 1. Pontice: for Martial’s use of this name, see note on 9, 19, 2. paelice laeva: “your left hand as mistress”; the left hand is associated with masturbation also in 11, 73, 3 f. Cum frustra iacui longa prurigine tentus, | succurrit pro te saepe sinistra mihi and with heterosexual stimulation in, for example, Lucil. fragm. 308 Krenkel (quoted below); ars 2, 706; Anth. 742, 84 (for Ov. am. 2, 15, 11, see Booth’s commentary). In all likelihood, this association emanates from the idea of the left hand as “unclean” (cf. Adams, p. 209), not necessarily in a moral sense but rather in a physical one. Kay (on 11, 73, 4) denies the notion of uncleanness, because “there is no reason why heterosexual acts should be stigmatised in this way, and there is little evidence that Romans considered masturbation a bad practise”. He suggests that the left hand was originally associated only with masturbation “because its movements were easier to conceal than those of the right when the man was clothed”2 and that the association was then transferred to other erotic contexts. However, the use of the left hand in masturbation was not an entirely Roman phenomenon but is found also in Greek art (see Krenkel, op. cit., p. 161); furthermore, the fact that the left hand is already associated with heterosexual stimulation by Lucilius, whereas there appears to be no connection with masturbation in Latin literature prior to Martial, would contradict Kay’s suggestion that the sexual connotation linked to the left hand emanates from masturbation. The explanation of the left hand as “unclean” would therefore be the more likely. Cf. also J. Rosenbaum, Geschichte der Lustseuche im Altertume, 8th ed., Berlin 1921, p. 343, n. 7. 2. amica manus: cf. Priap. 33, 5 f. turpe quidem factu, sed ne tentigine rumpar, | falce mihi posita fiet amica manus; Friedländer suggests that both derive from Lucil. fragm. 308 Krenkel at laeva lacrimas muttoni absterget amica (which can 1 Martial’s denunciation of the stimulation of boys’ genitals by men (11, 22; cf. 11, 46, 3) is based on the view that “the anus belongs to men, the penis to women” (see Kay’s introduction to 11, 22) and thus has no relevance here, nor has his defence of masturbation as part of the sexual act against the objections of his fictitious wife (11, 104, 13 f.). 2 As a similar thought, Kay produces the idea of the left hand as given to theft, apparently because its movements were less noticeable; cf. 12, 28, 3; Plaut. Pers. 226 furtifica laeva; Catull. 12, 1; Plin. nat. 24, 103; 33, 13; Ov. met. 13, 111 natae ... ad furta sinistrae is irrelevant here (see Bömer, ad loc.).
197
be understood both as J?CTÑ ?KGAÑ ?LB ?Q J?CTÑ ?KGAÒ 3FC Q?KC CLBGLE GQ DMSLB GL .T CNGQR RPGQR
3 f. Scelus est etc.: this sentence is a typical example of the threatening grandia verba in which the would-be philosophers excelled (see 9, 27, 8). mihi crede: Martial and Ovid offer far more instances of the colloquial, interposed mihi crede (or crede mihi) than any other Latin poet; Martial has 18 occurrences, Ovid 40. Next comes Propertius with seven, and then there are but a few to be found in Lucilius, Tibullus, Horace, Calpurnius, the Priapea, Silius and Statius. Statistical analysis, based on comedy and the works of Lucilius and Petronius, has shown that crede mihi, which is the commoner formula in the Latin poets, as opposed to mihi crede, was also the one preferably used in the spoken language (see Citroni on 1, 3, 4). sed: a colloquial and emphasizing use (= et quidem), found from Plautus onward, but more frequent in Silver and Late Latin. It is common in Martial (sometimes intensified by an et), for example, 1, 43, 9; 1, 117, 7; 2, 6, 6; 5, 44, 9; 6, 68, 1; 7, 2, 8; 10, 87, 14; 12, 18, 22; cf. Hofmann–Szantyr, § 260 b, p. 487, and see Citroni on 1, 43, 9 with further instances. The ending sed ingens also in Ov. met. 11, 15; Stat. Theb. 9, 103; silv. 3, 3, 44. 5 f. Horatius ... Mars: to parody the would-be philosophers’ manner of speaking, Martial introduces two historical/mythological exempla from Rome’s distant past, who would have given the history of Rome a different turn had they been incorrigible masturbators. The lines are clearly influenced by Ov. am. 2, 14, 9–18, in which Ovid reminds Corinna, who has just terminated a pregnancy, that history would have looked different had Thetis, Ilia and Venus (the mothers of Achilles, Romulus and Remus, and Aeneas respectively) resorted to abortion. But in a context such as the present, the device naturally becomes completely absurd. To lend further weight to his fake argumentation and to emphasize that each time Ponticus masturbates, he wastes not only one human life but possibly two or three, Martial chooses fathers of triplets and twins as exempla. Horatius is the father of the Horatian triplets, who, in the days of Tullus Hostilius, saved Rome from Alban domination by defeating in single combat the Alban triplets matched against them. Two of the Horatii fell, whereas the third, by a cunning move, killed the lot. The father’s role in the legend is limited to forgiving his surviving son for killing also his own sister, who was engaged to one of the Alban brothers and upset her brother by showing more grief for the death of her betrothed than for that of her brothers (see Münzer in RE 8, s.v. Horatius 2, 2322). Mars is naturally mentioned as the father of Romulus and Remus (see below). 6. Ilia casta: Ilia is the original Latin name of the mother of Romulus and Remus, found in the legend that made her the daughter of Aeneas (so Naevius and Ennius, according to Serv. Aen. 1, 273; 6, 778) and stressing her Trojan ancestry. Owing to the chronological difficulties posed by this idea, the legend was remod198
elled during the 2nd century BC, using additional myths that introduced the Alban kings and made her the daughter of Numitor. The name Ilia now seemed inappropriate and, instead, she was given the name of the Greek god mother , together with her nomen gentilicium as daughter of an Alban king, Silvia. However, the poets of the classical period, following Ennius, retained to a large extent the name Ilia and emphasized her Trojan ancestry, for example, Hor. carm. 3, 3, 32 Troica … sacerdos. The epithet casta is probably due to the fact that Ilia or Silvia had been made a Vestal virgin, an arrangement which the later legend ascribes to her uncle Amulius, vainly trying to prevent her from getting any offspring to succeed her father, Amulius’ brother Numitor, who had inherited the throne; see Rosenberg in RE 2:1, s.v. Rea Silvia 341 ff. C5yD
7. omnia perdiderat: Mars and Horatius would have ruined the future of Rome, had they exclusively masturbated. Omnia perdere is a common phrase, capable of meaning both “to lose everything” and “to destroy everything”; cf. Cic. Att. 2, 21, 1; Catull. 29, 24; Liv. praef. 12; Ov. met. 13, 527 with Bömer’s note. masturbatus: the verb masturbor (like its derivations masturbator and masturbio; see TLL, s.v. respectively) is found only in Martial (this instance and 11, 104, 13), except for one instance in Charisius and one in the Glossaria Latina; see TLL, s.v. masturbor 434, 14 ff. The etymology of the word is much disputed. Ernout–Meillet (s.v., p. 389) suggest that it is a distortion of the Greek verb (“to prostitute”), but the most plausible suggestion is that it consists of KÒL- (of manus) and stupro, where the -n- has dropped out with lengthening of the preceding -a- ( > mÑ and the second element has been remodelled on the analogy of turbo; see Walde–Hofmann, s.v. masturbor 48; Adams, pp. 209 ff. (with conclusive refutation of the theory proposed by J. P. Hallet, “Masturbator, Mascarpio”, Glotta 54 [1976], pp. 292 ff.). These phonetic changes indicate that the word was not a neologism in Martial’s day, but it is surprising that the word is not found prior to Martial; the fact that it is entirely absent in literature as well as in Pompeian graffiti, combined with the fact that both examples in Martial appear in a historical/mythological context, supports Adams’ suggestion that masturbor was not even a vulgarism, but “an obsolescent verb which Martial resuscitated”. PDVWURSH¹Z
8. mandasset etc.: “put their shameful delight in their hands”. There are no other instances of mandare gaudium, but cf. Sen. Med. 150 f. questus ... secreto abditos | manda dolori; Sil. 7, 655 f. totam pectoris iram | mandat atrox hastae; TLL, s.v. 1 mando 263, 19 ff. gaudia foeda: a singular juncture, but cf. Lucr. 4, 1158 and Ov. met. 10, 319 foedo … amori. Gaudia is commonly used in an erotic sense, cf. 11, 27, 5; Petron. 132, 15, 5 nam quis concubitus, Veneris quis gaudia nescit?; Prop. 1, 4, 14; Ov. am. 3, 7, 63; ars 2, 459; 3, 88; 3, 805. See Adams, pp. 197 f.; TLL, s.v. gaudium 1712, 33 ff.; and cf. 9, 36, 2 with note.
199
9. Ipsam ... naturam ... rerum: a particularly Stoic-sounding line; the Stoics declared that Nature was the perfect being and deemed things good or bad in so far as they agreed with Nature (see, for example, A. A. Long, Hellenistic Philosophy. Stoics, Epicureans, Sceptics, London 1974, pp. 179 ff.). In his philosophical writings, Seneca uses similar expressions to lend emphasis to his thought; thus dial. 6, 17, 6 Dicit omnibus nobis natura; epist. 91, 18 Hoc puta rerum naturam dicere; 110, 20 Haec nobis Attalus dixit, natura omnibus dixit; cf. Ps. Quint. decl. 4, 10 finge tibi velut ipsam proclamare naturam. For the prosody, cf. 3, 3, 3 Ipsam crede deam verbis tibi dicere nostris. 10. homo est: Martial crowns his annihilation of Ponticus by claiming that the semen which he wastes by masturbation is a human being. What he has in mind here is probably the doctrine formulated by Democritus and known as pangenesis, according to which the seed (Democritus discerned a paternal and a [practically identical] maternal seed, the conglomeration of which resulted in a foetus) consisted of small particles of atoms drawn from every part of the body, so that it contained all the elements of the grown individual. While different from the view proposed by Aristotle (according to whom, the semen of the male provided movement and form, and the menstrual fluid of the female the matter), this doctrine was embraced by Lucretius (see 4, 1209–1232) as well by Seneca (cf., for example, nat. 3, 29, 3 in semine omnis futuri hominis ratio comprehensa est et legem barbae canorumque nondum natus infans habet); see J. Blayney, “Theories of conception in the ancient Roman world”, in B. Rawson (ed.), The Family in Ancient Rome. New Perspectives, Ithaca, New York 1986, pp. 230–236. For the ending, see note on 9, 53, 2.
42 Campis dives Apollo sic Myrinis, sic semper senibus fruare cycnis, doctae sic tibi serviant sorores, nec Delphis tua mentiatur ulli, sic Palatia te colant amentque: bis senos cito te rogante fasces det Stellae bonus adnuatque Caesar. Felix tunc ego debitorque voti casurum tibi rusticas ad aras ducam cornibus aureis iuvencum. Nata est hostia, Phoebe; quid moraris?
5
10
Martial prays Apollo that Domitian, at Apollo’s request, may not delay in granting the consulship to L. Arruntius Stella, Martial’s patron and close friend, presumably as Stella’s year of office as praetor has recently come to an end (see below). For some reason, Martial’s petition had no effect; Stella had to wait until 101–102 for the consulship (see below). 200
Mentioned in eighteen poems, Stella is one of the individuals to receive most attention in the Epigrams; his wife Violentilla occurs in another three.1 Only Flaccus, the mutual friend of Stella and Martial (see notes on 9, 33, 1 and 9, 55, 2), and Domitian are mentioned more frequently. Stella was of patrician origin (Stat. silv. 1, 2, 71 patriciis maioribus ortum2), born in the neighbourhood of Padua (Apona tellus 1, 61, 3) and destined to have a successful career in Roman administration; yet Martial is almost completely reticent about it. The sole explicit mention of an office is his reference to Stella as consul meus in 12, 2, 10, an office which he would have entered in 101 or 102 (cf. Friedländer, p. 66; according to CIL 6, 1492, Stella was consul on the 19th of October, so the consulship would have been suffect); thus, the present poem had no effect on Domitian, unless that of 101–102 was Stella’s second consulship, which seems improbable, as an earlier consulship would hardly have passed unnoticed by Martial. Stella was probably praetor in 93, because 8, 78 mentions him as the arranger of games held in celebration of Domitian’s return from the Second Pannonian War in early 93 (cf. the introduction, pp. 26 f.; PIR2 A 1151; White, Aspects, p. 109), although Martial makes no mention of his title. Some additional information on Stella’s cursus may be gathered from the famous epithalamium (silv. 1, 2), which Statius composed on the occasion of Stella’s wedding to Violentilla in 89–90.3 In lines 176 f., Statius presents him as a quindecimvir sacris faciundis, and lines 178 ff. probably envisage the praetorship, which would make Stella quaestorius at the time of the wedding, although the interpretation of these lines in uncertain; see White, Aspects, pp. 107 ff., for a discussion. A consulship ante diem is foretold in 174 ff. In spite of Stella’s senatorial standing and patrician origin, the great majority of Martial’s epigrams in which he appears are rather unpretentious, sometimes humorous (cf. 9, 55) or even somewhat daring in approach, arguing for considerable intimacy between the senator and the poet; perhaps this close friendship originated from the fact that Stella himself (like Flaccus; see note on 9, 33, 1) was an amateur poet (cf. 1, 7; 1, 61, 4; 4, 6; 6, 21, 1; 7, 14, 5; Stat. silv. 1, 2, 195 ff.). This fact certainly accounts for Martial’s choice of Apollo, god of poetry, to make the request to Domitian. On Stella, see further PIR2, loc. cit.; White, Aspects, pp. 105 ff.; Friends, pp. 267 ff. The epigram is threefold. First, there is a wish that Apollo, having fulfilled Martial’s prayer, may always take pleasure in his cult at Gryneion, the swans, the Muses, and the Delphian oracle (1–5); it is followed by an expression of the actual prayer (6–7) and by Martial’s promise to make a sacrifice, should Apollo grant his prayer (8–11). For the promise of a sacrifice on the hearing of a prayer, cf. AP 6, 157 (Theodoridas); 6, 191 (Cornelius Longus); 6, 240 (Philippus); 6, 300 (Leonidas); Schmoock, p. 57. 1
Stella also in 1, 7; 44; 61; 4, 6; 5, 11; 12; 59; 6, 21; 47; 7, 14; 36; 8, 78; 9, 55; 89; 10, 48; 11, 52; 12, 2; Violentilla in 6, 86; 7, 15; 50. 2 If Stella’s equestrian namesake, who supervised the Neronian games of 55 (Tac. ann. 13, 22), was his father or grandfather, Statius’ reference may be to Stella’s maternal ancestry (see PIR2 A 1150 and 1151; White, Aspects, pp. 105 f.). 3 Statius also dedicated his first book of Silvae to Stella but may not have been among his close acquaintances; see White, Friends, pp. 267 ff. For Martial’s celebration of the wedding (6, 21) and its relation to Statius’ epithalamium, see Henriksén, Martial und Statius, pp. 91 ff.
201
1. Campis dives… Myrinis: to be taken as being governed by fruare in the following line, and dives probably as hypallage for campis divitibus, “so may you delight in the rich fields of Myrina”. The reference is to the cult of Apollo at Gryneion (a town in southern Aeolis, some 7 km from the town of Myrina), where there was an ancient oracle, a marble temple and a sacred grove (cf. Verg. ecl. 6, 72 with Servius; Aen. 4, 345; Orph. hymn. 34, 4; Strab. 13, 3, 5; Philostr. vita Apoll. 4, 14; Pausan. 1, 21, 7; Aristid. or. 51, 7 Behr); see Kroll–Bürchner in RE 7, s.v. Gryneion 1900 f., and Ruge in RE Suppl. 6, s.v. Myrina 615 ff; Jessen in RE 7, s.v. Gryneios 1901 f. Apart from Vergil and the present instance, there appears to be no other reference to Gryneion in Latin literature, and Martial would seem to be alluding to it here in direct dependence on Vergil (cf. the reference to the Acidalian well in 9, 12, 3), though it is impossible to decide whether it is of any particular significance in this context. The adjective Myrinus (not found elsewhere) is modelled without a suffix directly on the name Myrina, a common practice in poetry; cf., for example, Verg. Aen. 7, 710 Amiterna cohors (where Amiterna is a direct adjectivization of Amiternum) and see W. Schulze, Zur Geschichte lateinischer Eigennamen, 2nd ed., Berlin etc. 1966, pp. 535 ff. sic: wishes with sic-clauses are common in the poets from Catullus (17, 5) onwards, expressing “a wish which is made conditional on the granting of a request” (OLD, s.v. sic 8 d), commonly, as here, on the fulfilment of a prayer (“may you ever delight in the Myrinian fields ... should Caesar soon grant the consulship to Stella”). This condition is, however, not always expressed in a clause grammatically corresponding to the sic-clause (for example, an ut- or si-clause), but in an imperative or subjunctive clause; see Blase in G. Landgraf, Historische Grammatik der lateinischen Sprache, vol. 3:1, Leipzig 1903, pp. 133 f.; cf., for example, Hor. carm. 1, 3, 1 ff. (with Kiessling & Heinze); Tib. 2, 5, 121 f. sic tibi sint intonsi, Phoebe, capilli, | sic tua perpetuo sit tibi casta soror. The construction is frequent in Martial in petitions to men as well as in prayers to the gods; thus again to Apollo in 4, 45, 5 ff.; to Vulcan in 5, 7, 7 f.; to Mercury in 7, 74, 3 ff.; to a nymph in 9, 58, 3 ff.; to Venus in 9, 90, 7 ff.; to the river Rhine in 10, 7, 3 ff.; and to Saturn in 12, 62, 15 f.1 2. senibus … cycnis: cf. 5, 37, 1 (of Erotion) Puella senibus dulcior mihi cycnis; Stat. Theb. 5, 341 f. mitior … senibus cycnis et pectine Phoebi | vox media de puppe venit. The swan is already in Homer and Hesiod considered sacred to Apollo (Hyperboreus), presumably as the whooper swan, like the god, came from the north, from whence it migrated southward in winter. The song of the dying swan, however, is not mentioned earlier than Aeschyl. Ag. 1444, but thereafter becomes a commonplace. In Plat. Phaed. 85, Socrates ascribes the singing to the swan’s prophetic ability (being the bird of Apollo): “because they (sc. the swans) have foreknowledge of the blessings in the other 1
For petitions to men, cf. 5, 6; 7, 28; 72; 99 ; 9, 90, 1 and 7; 10, 61, 5 f.; 12, 49, 5 ff.
202
world they sing and rejoice on that day (i.e. the day of their death) more than ever before” ;1 cf. Cic. Tusc. 1, 73. The song of the dying swan is mentioned by Martial also in 13, 77; cf. Ov. met. 14, 430; Sen. Ag. 678; Phaedr. 301; Stat. silv. 2, 4, 10 (with van Dam’s note); see further R. Liver, “Der singende Schwan”, MH 39 (1982), pp. 148 ff.; Otto, s.v. cycnus 2 and 3, pp. 104 f.; TLL, s.v. cycnus 1585, 31 ff. Pliny, who had apparently made some experiments on the matter, concluded that the song of the dying swan was a misconception (nat. 10, 63), which naturally is essentially correct. The breathing of the dying swan, like that of most other animals, tends to become violently uncontrolled just before the moment of death; as the air passes the vocal cords, they produce cries, even though the swan itself is no longer in control of either breathing or cry.2 3. doctae … sorores: this juncture also in 1, 70, 15; Tib. 3, 4, 45; Ov. met. 5, 255 (with Bömer’s note); fast. 6, 811 (cf. 4, 191 with Bömer’s note); trist. 2, 13; Manil. 2, 49; Stat. Theb. 9, 317; see TLL, s.v. doceo 1757, 2 ff.; Nisbet & Hubbard on Hor. carm. 1, 1, 29. The epithet (in the sense of “learned, gifted, talented”) was first applied to the Muses in Latin by Catullus (65, 2 doctis … virginibus); in the same sense, it is commonly used as an epithet of poets (frequently so by Martial of Catullus, see Citroni on 1, 61, 1); cf. also the interjection sophos ( ) as a “bravo” to reciting poets (for example, in 1, 3, 7). VRIÍM
5. Palatia: the lavish temple of marble and gold on the Palatine was by far the most celebrated shrine of Apollo in Rome and among the most magnificent structures erected by Augustus. Vowed in 36 BC, it was dedicated on the 9th of October 28; cf. Hor. carm. 1, 31 and Prop. 2, 31 written on the occasion; further references in Hor. epist. 1, 3, 17; Prop. 4, 1a, 3; Ov. ars 3, 119; 3, 389; Calpurn. 4, 159; Lucan. 3, 103. The temple was probably restored by Domitian (see note on 9, 3, 11 Phoebum; Platner & Ashby, pp. 16 ff.). Note that Palatia may also contain an allusion to the emperor and the imperial family, cf. 7, 28, 5 (to the lawyer Fuscus) sic fora mirentur, sic te Palatia laudent (where Lindsay and Shackleton Bailey print Palatia with a capital P, Friedländer and Heraeus palatia). For the scansion /ÑJ?RG? see note on 9, 24, 1. amentque: cf. note on 9, 29, 6. 6. bis senos … fasces: the twelve fasces to which the consuls were entitled; Statius uses the same paraphrase in connection with Stella in silv. 1, 2, 174 ff. The phrase was coined by Ovid (Pont. 4, 9, 4 bis senos fascis; the paraphrase bis seni for the metrically impossible duodecim appears after Verg. ecl. 1, 43; cf. also Bömer on Ov. met. 2, 497) and is used by Martial also in 7, 63, 9 and 8, 66, 3; cf. Sil. 8, 484 and compare also seni fasces of the six fasces of the praetor in Mart. 11, 98, 15.
1 2
Harold North Fowler’s translation, Loeb. I am grateful to David Stenström, BA, for advising me on this matter.
203
7. bonus: “good-tempered”; cf. 4, 8, 9 bonus aetherio laxatur nectare Caesar; contrasted with iratus in Stat. Theb. 7, 161 f. an nobis pater iratusque bonusque | fulmen habes?; TLL, s.v. bonus 2087, 128 ff. adnuatque: like det, to be taken with fasces and Stellae; cf., for example, Stat. silv. 4, 1, 46 f. longamque tibi rex, magne, iuventam | annuit; TLL, s.v. adnuo 791, 73 ff. 8. debitorque voti: when a prayer had been granted and the thing prayed for was no longer in votis but in manibus (Serv. Aen. 10, 280), the person who had made the vow became compos voti but was now also indebted to the god until the vow was paid. Voti debitor (found only here and in Servius; see below) appears here as a synonym of the commoner voti reus, a metaphor from legal language to emphasize the seriousness of the debt; cf. Verg. Aen. 5, 237 constituam (sc. taurum) ante aras voti reus (with Servius’ note: voti reus voti debitor: unde vota solventes dicimus absolutos. Inde est “damnabis tu quoque votis”, quasi reos facies); Petron. frg. 27 vers. 12; Stat. Theb. 6, 198; Macr. Sat. 2, 3, 6. For damnare votis, cf. Serv. Verg. 4, 699 cuiuscumque debiti, id est reatus damnatio finem facit. “Damnare” autem est damno adficere, id est debito liberare. Ideo et cum vota suscipimus, rei voti dicimur, donec consequamur beneficium et donec condemnemur, id est promissa solvamus, ut “damnabis tu quoque votis”; Verg. ecl. 5, 80 (with Servius); Liv. 7, 28, 4; 10, 37, 16; Germ. 348; Hygin. astr. 2, 24, 1; cf. condemnare votis (CLE 4, 4); see further Latte, p. 46. 9. rusticas ad aras: a singular juncture; Martial would be thinking of an altar of turf (Verg. Aen. 12, 118 f. aras gramineas; Ov. met. 7, 240 with Bömer’s note; 15, 573 f. viridique e caespite factas | placat odoratis herbosas ignibus aras; Sil. 4, 701; 15, 434), probably to be raised at his country estate at Nomentum. In ancient times, the turf altar was the normal form of an altar (cf. Serv. Aen. 12, 119 Romani … moris fuerat caespitem arae superimponere et ita sacrificare). Later, such altars were used in private sacrifices and are often mentioned with emphasis on humbleness and simplicity; thus in 12, 60, 3; cf. Hor. carm. 1, 19, 13 (with Nisbet & Hubbard); 3, 8, 4; Ov. trist. 5, 5, 9; see Latte, p. 386; Reisch in RE 2, s.v. Ara 338 f. 10. cornibus aureis iuvencum: the practice of gilding the horns of cattle destined for sacrifice was an ancient one, mentioned already in the Iliad (10, 294; cf. Od. 3, 385; 3, 426; 3, 437) and indispensable in the lavish Roman state sacrifices (see Latte, pp. 385 f.). Mentions of the practice are mostly in official and mythological contexts (see Bömer on Ov. met. 7, 162 for a collection of instances, to which add Plin. nat. 33, 39); here, it makes a glaring contrast to the humble rustic altar in the preceding line. Sacrifices of iuvenci are often mentioned by the poets; cf. 14, 4, 1; Verg. georg. 2, 537; 3, 23; 4, 283; Aen. 3, 247; 3, 369; 5, 101; 5, 329; 6, 38 grege de intacto septem mactare iuvencos (sacrifice to Apollo; see Norden, ad loc.); 8, 719; 9, 627 (with gilded horns) statuam ante aras aurata fronte iuvencum; Ov. met. 204
10, 272; 15, 129; fast. 1, 83; 3, 375 f.; Lucan. 4, 132; Sil. 4, 796; 11, 251; 12, 445; Val. Fl. 2, 331; Stat. Theb. 4, 409; 8, 594; Ach. 1, 417; Iuv. 6, 48 (with gilded horns); see Latte, p. 381; Keller in RE 2:3, s.v. Stier 2516. For the prosody, cf. 10, 7, 6 (of the horns of the river Rhine). 11. Nata est hostia: nata stresses the age of the victim; the bull-calf has already been born (viz. at Martial’s Nomentan farm, where the sacrifice will take place; see note on line 9 above). It is growing to be a iuvencus (the second of the ages of cattle; cf. Varro rust. 2, 5, 6) and Apollo must not wait too long, lest the steer grow into a bull. The age of the sacrificial animal was of importance; cf. Serv. Aen. 3, 21 in victimis etiam aetas est consideranda; Latte, p. 381; Krause in RE Suppl. 5, s.v. Hostia 246 ff. The MSS all agree in the transmission of nata, which is printed by Schneidewin, Friedländer, Gilbert, Lindsay and Heraeus; yet it has seemed unsatisfactory to many editors and provoked emendations, like Heinsius’ rather vapid vota and recently the lecta of Shackleton Bailey, based, I imagine, on Verg. Aen. 4, 57 mactant lectas de more bidentis (with Serv.: moris enim fuerat ut ad sacrificia eligerentur oves, quibus nihil deesset) and Aen. 6, 39 lectas ex more bidentis (Serv. “de more” [sic] antiquo scilicet, quem praetermisit quasi tunc omnibus notum, id est ne habeant caudam aculeatam, ne linguam nigram, ne aurem fissam: quod docet aliud esse intactum, aliud lectum); cf. Krause, op. cit., p. 242. This obviously provides a good sense, but not necessarily a better one than does nata.
43 Hic qui dura sedens porrecto saxa leone mitigat, exiguo magnus in aere deus, quaeque tulit, spectat resupino sidera vultu, cuius laeva calet robore, dextra mero: non est fama recens nec nostri gloria caeli; nobile Lysippi munus opusque vides. Hoc habuit numen Pellaei mensa tyranni, qui cito perdomito victor in orbe iacet; hunc puer ad Libycas iuraverat Hannibal aras; iusserat hic Sullam ponere regna trucem. Offensus variae tumidis terroribus aulae privatos gaudet nunc habitare lares, utque fuit quondam placidi conviva Molorchi, sic voluit docti Vindicis esse deus.
5
10
Novius Vindex was an amateur poet and collector of works of art, who had acquired a statuette by Lysippus of the sitting Hercules with a quite fantastic history. The statuette was celebrated by Martial in the present epigram and the following, and by Statius in silv. 4, 6 (on the latter, see, apart from Coleman’s commentary, 205
also H. Canick-Lindemaier, “Ein Mahl vor Hercules. Ein Versuch zu Statius, Silve IV 6: Hercules Epitrapezios”, AU 14:3 [1971], pp. 43– 65). Novius Vindex was probably not one of the close acquaintances of either Martial or Statius, as he is not mentioned prior to or later than the poems in question; there is no reason to identify him with the Novii of 1, 86 and 7, 72, 7 (see Howell on 1, 86, 1), and even though Martial may have known of him already in 88 (if the Vestinus of 4, 73 is to be identified with his namesake and friend of Vindex mentioned in silv. 4, 6, 94), he did not consider him important enough to be approached as a possible patron. He was presumably not a senator or, if he was, he had probably retired; for in the cases of the seven senators mentioned by Statius in the Silvae, the poet never neglects to specify the senatorial post most recently held (the one exception being the retired Rutilius Gallicus); there is no such information to be found on Vindex. The only actual facts known of him are that he wrote poetry (see note on line 14 below; Stat. silv. 4, 6, 30) and collected works of art (silv. 4, 6, 20 ff.); cf. Coleman, p. 173, and see PIR2 N 194. There is no explicit information on the reason why Martial and Statius should celebrate a work of art belonging to a man whom they addressed on no other occasion. Statius, who otherwise usually gives the circumstances of each poem in the preface of the respective book of Silvae, is reticent about silv. 4, 6; however, in the poem itself, he says that he had been invited to dinner by Vindex and shown numerous works of fine art by Myron, Praxiteles, Phidias, Polyclitus and Apelles (silv. 4, 6, 25 ff.). But, on the table, there was the statuette of Hercules, of which Statius became particularly fond (multo mea cepit amore pectora, silv. 4, 6, 33 f.). But why did he celebrate this particular statuette in 109 hexameters, and why did Martial compose two epigrams on the same work of art? A comparison of silv. 4, 6 with the present poem reveals obvious similarities. First, there is the ecphrasis: Hercules sits on the lion skin, which has been stretched out on a stone (line 1; silv. 4, 6, 57 f.), holding the club in one hand and a cup in the other (4; silv. 4, 6, 56 f.); the statuette is attributed to Lysippus (6; silv. 4, 6, 37; 108 f.). Then, there is the list of its previous possessors: Alexander (7 Pellaeus tyrannus; silv. 4, 6, 59–74 Pellaeus regnator), Hannibal (9; silv. 4, 6, 75–84) and Sulla (10; silv. 4, 6, 85–88); the quiet of Vindex’ home is now a welcome resting-place for the statuette, weary of the life in the great houses (9, 43, 11–12; silv. 4, 6, 88–98). Both poets use the antithesis “a great god in small shape” (9, 43, 2; silv. 4, 6, 35 f.), and both liken the statuette of Vindex to Hercules when staying with Molorchus (13 f.; silv. 4, 6, 51), a subordinate mythological character whose inclusion would be by no means obvious . These major similarities, which essentially appear in the same order in both poems, suggest that neither Martial nor Statius wrote spontaneously, but on some kind of given directive. The most obvious and also the most attractive explanation would be that Vindex had recently acquired the statuette and, excited about its history, gave a dinner to celebrate his new acquisition. Martial and Statius (probably like several other poets or would-be poets as well) would have been among the guests; quite obviously, neither would have failed to bestow some verses on the “object of honour”, which would also be Vindex’ reason for inviting
206
them.1 It may well be, as suggested by White (Friends, pp. 286 f.), that the host proposed the statuette “as the theme for their after–dinner improvisations”; see also Henriksén, Martial und Statius, pp. 108 ff.; White, loc. cit.; Heuvel, pp. 315 ff.; Vessey in ANRW 32, 5, pp. 2794 ff. In the preface of Silvae 4, Statius mentions the statuette of Vindex as Hercules Epitrapezios (cf. the titulus of silv. 4, 6 Hercules Epitrapezios Novi Vindicis; cf. Coleman, pp. xxviii ff.). In modern times, a whole genre of statues of the seated Hercules has come to be designated as epitrapezios, owing to their similarity to Vindex’ statuette, although the term epitrapezios (Gr. ) in antiquity was probably only applicable to statuettes meant to be placed on a table (see Coleman, p. 174). The basic features, from which several copies show individual deviations, are as follows: the hero sits on a rock, on which he has stretched out the lion skin; his left leg is put forward, his right foot rests by the rock, the leg being bent at a sharp angle; his arms are stretched forward, the left hand holding the club, the upper end of which rests on the ground; the right hand holds the cup, a cantharos; his head is raised to the right, his eyes gazing at the sky.2 These features correspond to what the poets tell us about Vindex’ Hercules, which they assure us was sculpted by the hand of Lysippus himself. This was perhaps the case, even though a copy would seem more likely (Coleman, loc. cit.). The possibility of its being the original, however, cannot be ruled out, as Floren wishes (op. cit., p. 51), on the basis of the signature reading and not , since the Greek genitive is not found in the MSS (see further note on 9, 44, 6 Lysippum). Epigrams describing works of art are common in Greek epigram and occupy a large section of AP 16 (epigrams 32–334, nos. 90–99; 101–104; and 124 being on pictures of Hercules). xSLWUDSy]LRM
/XVdSSRX
/¹VLSSRM
xSRdHL
1. dura … saxa: the statuette pictures Hercules sitting on the lion skin, which is stretched out on a rock; cf. Stat. silv. 4, 6, 57 f. aspera sedis | sustinet et cultum Nemeaeo tegmine saxum. porrecto … leone | mitigat: “softens with the stretched-out lion skin”. Leo is metonymy for lion skin, cf., for example, Val. Fl. 1, 263; TLL, s.v. leo 1169, 41 ff.; mitigo in the sense of “make soft” (= “make more comfortable to sit on”); ibid., s.v. mitigo 1148, 4 ff. 2. exiguo magnus in aere deus: the majesty of Hercules as a god is contrasted with the smallness of the statuette (antithesis); Statius expresses the same idea with emphasis on Hercules’ divinity in silv. 4, 6, 35 f. finisque inclusa per artos | maiestas! Deus ille, deus! The same kind of antithesis is found also in Greek 1
Van Dam has suggested that the dinner was given on January 26; see the introduction, pp. 12 f. See J. Floren, “Zu Lysipps Statuen des sitzenden Herakles”, Boreas 4 (1981), pp. 47–60 (here pp. 48 f.); F. de Visscher (“Héraklès Epitrapezios”, AC 30 [1961], pp. 67–129) reproduces a number of pictures of statues of the epitrapezios; mainly focusing on the then recently discovered colossus of Hercules at Alba Fucens, he tends to overstress the connection between the colossus and the statuette of Vindex (see Floren, pp. 50 f.; see also E. Berger, Antike Kunstwerke aus der Sammlung Ludwig, vol. 2, Terrakotten und Bronzen, Basle 1982, pp. 306 ff.).
2
207
epigram; cf., for example, AP 9, 776 (Diodorus); 16, 120 (Archelaos); see also Coleman on Stat. silv. 4, 6, 35–6. The antonyms exiguus and magnus on both sides of the diaeresis of the pentameter are found also in Ov. fast. 6, 22 ause per exiguos magna referre modos, and the words frequently appear as contrasts; Seneca is especially fond of the juncture (for example, dial. 5, 34, 2; 10, 1, 3; 12, 10, 5; epist. 43, 3; 53, 11 At mehercules magni artificis est clusisse totum in exiguo; 58, 34; 76, 28). The statuette was made of bronze; cf. Stat. silv. 4, 6, 47 ff. 3. quaeque tulit … sidera: Hercules carried the firmament while Atlas fetched for him the golden apples of the Hesperides, the acquiring of which was one of the Twelve Labours (see note on 9, 101, 4 aurea poma). spectat resupino sidera vultu: the skyward gaze is one of the basic features of the epitrapezios (see the introduction above). Although this is the one instance in Martial, sidera vultu sim. is a common verse-ending in hexameters; cf. Ov. met. 1, 731; Sil. 6, 101; 9, 168; 15, 84; Stat. Theb. 9, 453; 11, 700; Val. Fl. 6, 622. 4. calet: the verb indicates a tension in the seated Hercules, suggesting a firm grip of the club and the cup; one senses the force of the club and the ardour of the wine running through his limbs. The statue seems to be alive; this is Vergil’s spirantia aera (Aen. 6, 847). laeva … robore, dextra mero: this is the usual disposition of the club and the cup (see the introduction above). Statius makes no distinction: tenet haec marcentia fratris | pocula, at haec clavae meminit manus (silv. 4, 6, 56 f.). 5. non est fama etc.: cf. 14, 93, 1 (on antique cups) Non est ista recens nec nostri gloria caeli. fama: fama of the object of fame; cf. TLL, s.v. 217, 24 ff. Fama in this sense is relatively common in Martial, slightly more often with reference to beings (thus 7, 27, 2; 9, 28, 1 [see note ad loc.]; 9, 71, 1; 10, 103, 4) than to things, the latter being the case also in 8, 28, 2 (toga) and 9, 101, 2 (the Appian Way). nostri gloria caeli: gloria is used in a way similar to fama above, of the thing which lends glory. For gloria of artefacts, cf. 10, 89, 1 Iuno labor, Polyclite, tuus et gloria felix; Ov. Pont. 4, 1, 29; TLL, s.v. gloria 2080, 65 ff. Caelum is here primarily the chisel, and nostri caeli would be “of Roman manufacture”, but it may also refer to the sky, i.e. “made under the Roman sky”; cf. Leary on 14, 93, 1. 6. nobile … munus opusque: the synonyms munus and opus appear together elsewhere, though with different meanings; cf., for example, Ov. ars. 1, 69 of public buildings; met. 7, 436 of the deeds of Theseus; similarly in Pont. 4, 1, 36.
208
Nobile opus is a common juncture, cf. 6, 73, 2 and 8, 6, 8 (both with the same meaning as here); epigr. 6b, 2; 9, 93, 6; Prop. 2, 31, 12 (cf. Mart. 14, 3, 2); Ov. trist. 1, 10, 30; Sil. 2, 612; Stat. silv. 1, 2, 250 f. Nobile munus, however, is not, and here the adjective would presumably have been chosen because of opus. Lysippi: the Greek sculptor, active during the reign of Alexander the Great, of whom he made several portraits (Plin. nat. 34, 63; cf. Cic. fam. 5, 12, 7; Hor. epist. 2, 1, 140; Val. Max. 8, 11, 2). He was counted among the finest sculptors of antiquity (cf., for example, Cic. de. orat. 3, 26; Prop. 3, 9, 9; Quint. inst. 12, 10, 9) and worked mostly in bronze; famous is his “Apoxyomenos”, a copy of which is preserved in the Vatican. Heracles was, apart from Zeus, his favourite subject among the gods, and his statues of the hero comprised the colossal Hercules of the acropolis in Tarentum, which depicted him sitting on a basket, on which he, as in this case, has stretched out the lion skin. A couple of epigrams in the Planudean anthology, 4, 103 (= AP 16, 103 Geminus) and 4, 104 (= AP 16, 104, Philippus), are about another statuette by Lysippus of a sitting Hercules, showing the god without his club and lion skin, of which he had been deprived by Eros (see Lippold in RE 14, s.v. Lysippos 6, 48 ff.). 7. Pellaei … tyranni: cf. Stat. silv. 4, 6, 59 f. Pellaeus habebat | regnator laetis numen venerabile mensis. The reference is to Alexander the Great, called Pellaeus from his home town of Pella, the capital of Macedonia from about 400 BC (Oberhummer in RE 19, s.v. Pella 3, 341 ff.). The adjective Pellaeus (Gr. ) appears already in Plautus (Asin. 333 and 397 Pellaeus mercator), but it is mostly used with reference, in one way or another, to Alexander; thus Verg. georg. 4, 287; Ov. met. 12, 254; see Forcellini, Onomast., s.v. Pella 447. It frequently occurs in Silver Latin, particularly in Lucan (thirteen occurrences, some of which refer to Alexandria and Ptolemaic Egypt; see Forcellini, loc. cit., c and d); also Sil. 11, 381; 13, 765; 17, 429 f.; Val. Fl. 1, 365; Iuv. 10, 168. Martial has it also in 13, 85, 2 (with reference to the Alexandrines); Statius also in silv. 1, 1, 86 (with direct reference to Alexander). 3HOODjRM
8. qui cito perdomito etc.: “who rests a victor in the empire he swiftly subdued”, “swiftly” because it took him a little more than ten years to conquer his truly vast empire. Alexander’s corpse was moved from the scene of his death in Babylon to Memphis and thence to Alexandria (Curt. 10, 10, 20), where it was buried in a mausoleum, resting embalmed in honey in a glass coffin. It was one of the principal tourist attractions of Alexandria; cf. Stat. silv. 3, 4, 117 f.; Suet. Aug. 18, 1; Friedländer, Sittengeschichte 1, p. 455. The TLL (s.v. orbis 917, 1 ff.) knows but one instance of orbis being used of the empire of Alexander (Sen. suas. 1, 5 orbis illum suus non capit) whereas it is commonly used of the Roman empire. 9. hunc puer… iuraverat Hannibal: when still a boy, Hannibal took an oath of vengeance on Rome (see Liv. 35, 19, 3 f.); the scene is depicted on a shield in Sil. 2, 426 ff. parte alia supplex infernis Hannibal aris | arcanum Stygia libat cum vate cruorem | et primo bella Aeneadum iurabat ab aevo; cf. Flor. epit. 1, 22, 2. 209
Statius also records that the statuette had belonged to Hannibal and that he poured libations to it (silv. 4, 6, 76 ff.). Iurare with the bare accusative is a common construction; see TLL, s.v. iuro 675, 46 ff. Servius Aen. 12, 197 calls it et ornatior elocutio et crebra apud maiores, quam si velis addere praepositionem, ut dicas “iuro per maria, per terras”. A Grecism, it found its way into Latin during the first century BC (see Norden on Aen. 6, 324). ad Libycas … aras: see note on 9, 6, 1. 10. Sullam … trucem: a singular epithet, but cf. 11, 5, 9 Sulla cruentus; Stat. silv. 4, 6, 107 saevi … Sullae; the cruelty of Sulla (particularly in the Civil War) was almost proverbial (cf. Sall. Catil. 21, 4 Victoria Sullana and see Fröhlich in RE 4, s.v. Cornelius 392, 1548 ff.). His eastern campaigns gave much opportunity for acquiring Greek and Hellenistic art, for example, he plundered the temple of Zeus Eleutherios and stole a Hippocentaur by Zeuxis. His connection with Hercules consists in his offering a tenth of his property to the god, cf. Plut. Sull. 35, 1 and see Coleman on Stat. silv. 4, 6, 85–8 (Statius’ account of Sulla’s possession of the statuette). Martial makes an almost Statian move in having Hercules command Sulla to lay down his power. Statius’ Silvae, unlike the epigrams of Martial, abound with divine interventions in contemporary human life; cf., for example, the epithalamium of Stella and Violentilla (silv. 1, 2) and the poem on Earinus (silv. 3, 4). It is perhaps more than a mere coincidence that a Statian feature otherwise foreign to Martial appears in a poem on a theme common to both poets. See also 9, 44 intro. 11. offensus variae tumidis terroribus aulae: double hypallage for variis tumidae terroribus aulae, “displeased with the numerous (and varied) terrors of the haughty life in great houses”; cf. Hofmann–Szantyr, § 93, pp. 159 f. The idea that the house of Vindex will lend Hercules a welcome life of peace and quiet, as opposed to his turbulent life with his previous masters, appears in Stat. silv. 4, 6, 89 ff., which in thought is very similar to the present line: Nunc quoque, si mores humanaque pectora curae | nosse deis, non aula quidem, Tirynthie, nec te | regius ambit honos, sed casta ignaraque culpae | mens domini, cui prisca fides coeptaeque perenne | foedus amicitiae ... nec bella vides pugnasque feroces, | sed chelyn. 12. habitare: the transitive use of habitare appears more often with deities than with humans beings; cf., for example, 10, 28, 3 (of Ianus) pervius exiguos habitabas ante penates; compare TLL, s.v. habito 2479, 47 ff. with 2478, 63 ff. 13. placidi … Molorchi: Martial follows the legend as related by Apollodorus (2, 74 f.), according to whom Hercules came to Cleonae on his way to Nemea, and was received as a guest by the day-labourer Molorchus (cf. 4, 64, 30). According to Callimachus (to whom the character largely owes its fame; cf. Aitia frg. 103; 108; 142; 193; 250 Scm.; Probus on Verg. georg. 3, 19), Molorchus was a 210
goatherd with only one goat, which he would sacrifice to Hercules as a god if he returned from Nemea victorious, otherwise to his manes; see Pley in RE 16, s.v. Molorchos 13 f.; cf. note on 9, 101, 6 terga leonis. Molorchus, the host of Hercules, is introduced here as a flattering parallel to Vindex, at whose table the god is now a permanent conviva. He appears also in Statius’ account (silv. 4, 6, 51 ff., quoted in the note on 9, 44 3), with the epithet parcus; cf. Stat. silv. 3, 1, 29 pauper M.; Theb. 4, 160 Cleonaeus M. 14. voluit docti Vindicis esse deus: Martial’s only hint that Vindex was a poet (for doctus as an epithet of poets, see the note on 9, 42, 3). Statius is more explicit, saying that art was Vindex’ pastime quotiens chelyn exuit (silv. 4, 6, 30) and that Vindex will hymn the deeds of Hercules (ibid. 99 ff.); in the preface to silv. 4, Statius also speaks of the honour, quem de me et de ipsis studiis meretur (sc. Vindex). The ending esse deus etc. is found also in 2, 91, 2; cf. Tib. 1, 8, 72; Prop. 2, 29a, 12; Epiced. Drusi 130; especially common in Ovid, who has no less than 16 instances.1
44 Alciden modo Vindicis rogabam, esset cuius opus laborque felix. Risit, nam solet hoc, levique nutu “Graece numquid” ait “poeta nescis? Inscripta est basis indicatque nomen.” Lysippum lego, Phidiae putavi.
5
The sequel to 9, 43 is an epigram completely different from its predecessor. Logically, it precedes no. 43 in time, telling how Martial first sees Vindex’ statuette of Hercules and asks for the artist, and its relation to its predecessor is comparable to that of 9, 36 (see intro. ad loc.) to the Earinus cycle and 9, 34 to the series of epigrams on the Flavian temple; again, Martial cannot bear a thoroughly serious treatment of the matter but has to give it a humorous turn. This is Martial the jester and, as such, he may well have appeared at the presumed dinner at Vindex’ house (see 9, 43 intro.), improvising an ex tempore piece as a counterpart to the more elevated poem which he bestowed on the statuette at first. It is notable that Martial in this epigram turns to the statuette itself and asks for the artist and that the statue itself smiles and gives him a hint. A speaking statue was, of course, fantastic enough (cf. 11, 102, 8 portentum est, quotiens coepit imago loqui with Kay’s note) and would really be a feature foreign to Martial’s style. It could be avoided by accepting the reading of or Shackleton Bailey’s emendation (see below), but there is no reason to do so; the view that the J
1
am. 3, 3, 46; 3, 12, 38; epist. 2, 126; 7, 132; rem. 784; fast. 2, 398; 3, 112; 3, 874; 6, 366; trist. 1, 1, 32; 1, 3, 40; 5, 3, 18; 5, 11, 26; Pont. 2, 1, 48; 3, 4, 80; 3, 5, 54.
211
statuette really is the subject of risit and ait in lines 3 f. has substantial grammatical and manuscript support and, furthermore, in a jocular epigram such as the present, the speaking statuette rather adds to the humour. However, as Statius was also present at the dinner and composed a poem on the statuette, one cannot help wondering if Martial’s conversation with the statuette was meant, in one way or another, to be a paraphrase of the style of Statius (cf. note on 9, 43, 10). In a recent paper (“Martial 9.44 and Statius”, CPh 92 [1997], pp. 269–272), A. Kershaw has suggested that the poem as a whole was written (or improvised, one may add) in response to Silvae 4, 6. The points made by Kershaw are as follows: (1) The air of informality characterizing the opening of silv. 4, 6 is the same as pervades Mart. 9, 44 (“if Statius is on such familiar terms with Vindex, then Martial is equally intimate with the statue!”). (2) The talking statue of Martial hints perhaps at Statius’ description of Vindex’ collection of art (silv. 4, 6, 20 ff. mille ibi tunc species aerisque eborisque vetusti | atque l oc ut uras mentito corpore ceras | edidici). (3) Statius’ flattering remark about Vindex’ profound knowledge of art (silv. 4, 6, 22 ff. quis namque oculis certaverit usquam | Vindicis, artificum veteres agnoscere ductus | et non inscriptis auctorem reddere signis?) is “patently alluded to” in Martial’s presentation of himself as incapable of identifying an artist, even if the work of art is inscribed with his name. This all seems very attractive, putting 9, 44 and silv. 4, 6 in a relation similar to that between Martial’s and Statius’ respective poems in celebration of the wedding of Stella and Violentilla (Mart. 6, 21 and Stat. silv. 1, 2). There, Martial uses the intervention of Venus, a significant feature of silv. 1, 2, to travesty the long epithalamium of his fellow poet (see Henriksén, Martial und Statius, pp. 91 ff.; cf. also Grewing’s introduction to 6, 21). 9, 43–44 is one of those pairs of epigrams in which the former treats the subject on a serious basis, while the latter adopts a humorous approach of some sort; cf. nos. 52–53 and 54–55 in the present book. The relation between these epigrams is not such that the latter needs the former for its mere understanding, but the effect is very much increased when the epigrams are read as placed in the book; cf. the introduction, p. 20. 1. Alciden … Vindicis: this is the reading of the –group, which was accepted by Lindsay and Heraeus; others have preferred that of the –group Alciden … Vindicem (so Schneidewin and Friedländer), meaning that Martial asks Vindex. A third variant is found in the editio Romana of 1473 (cf. Heraeus–Borovskij, p. vii), which has Alcides … Vindicem (printed by Gilbert, advocated by Housman [see below] followed by Shackleton Bailey). Now there is nothing to suggest that the reading of is not correct, while the fact that the proleptic accusative is rarely found in Silver Latin argues against that of (see Hofmann–Szantyr, § 252 d, p. 471). Furthermore, as observed by Kershaw (op. cit., p. 269), Martial uses the double accusative with rogo only in the sense of “ask for”, never “ask about”. Consequently, the reading of should be kept in the text. E
J
E
J
E
212
2. opus laborque: coupled also in epigr. 1, 7 f.; 8, 36, 2 f. For labor as metonymy for works of art cf. 4, 39, 5; 8, 50, 1; 10, 89, 1 Iuno labor, Polyclite, tuus et gloria felix; Ov. Pont. 4, 1, 29; TLL, s.v. 2. labor 794, 31 ff. felix: of things pleasant to look at; cf. 10, 89, 1 cited above and see note on 9, 17, 6 felix facies. 3. risit, nam solet hoc: on this line, Housman bases his rejection of the reading Alciden … Vindicis of the –group. Housman says: “If the statuette had a fixed smile on its face (which, by the way, solet is incapable of meaning), it could not have smiled in answer to Martial’s question, non risit uerum ridebat; it must therefore have been Vindex who smiled and was wont to smile …”.1 I fail to see why this has to be the case; nam introduces the reason for the smile, which is not that Martial has asked a silly question but that he solet hoc, which may well allude to a fixed smile on the statuette’s face. Even though no smile is clearly discernible on the face of the hero in any of the pictures of Hercules Epitrapezios reproduced by de Visscher (see 9, 43 intro.), there may be some support for this in Statius’ description of the statuette in silv. 4, 6, 51 ff. Statius says that the statue presented Hercules qualem parci domus admirata Molorchi | aut Aleae lucis vidit Tegeaea sacerdos; | qualis et Oetaeis emissus in astra favillis | nectar adhuc torva laetus Iunone bibebat: | sic mitis vultus, veluti de pectore gaudens, | hortatur mensas. This may well imply a smile on the statuette’s face. Note that Martial in 6, 82, 7 f. uses almost the same words to describe his own reaction to the somewhat ludicrous, yet flattering question, is he not “the” Martial?: Subrisi modice, levique nutu | me quem dixerat esse non negavi. E
4. Graece … poeta nescis: Heraeus (and Borovskij) reintroduce the comma, removed by Lindsay, after poeta, making it vocative. Housman (loc. cit.) argues that it should be removed again, and, obviously, poeta taken as predicative attribute gives a stronger emphasis to the word and a better meaning: “Do you, a poet, not know Greek?” Those who did not know Greek were rustici (cf. 14, 58, 1), and such ignorance was especially embarrassing in the case of a poet. and the -group. Rejected by all modern 6. Lysippum: the reading of both the editors and replaced by (as printed in the editio Aldina of 1501), Housman (followed by Shackleton Bailey) argued that Lysippum should be kept,2 in the sense of “the name of Lysippus”, and produced some instances from Ovid in which a name is obviously used by itself in the sense of “the name of …”. The best parallel to the present instance is fast. 5, 567 f. spectat et Augusto praetextum nomine templum, | et visum lecto Caesare maius opus, where the ablative absolute realized as an independent utterance would be lego Caesarem. The inscription would have involved the words Caesar fecit, just as the inscription of Vindex’ statuette would very likely have read (or ); the of the Aldina would perhaps rather suggest that the statuette was a E
J
/XVdSSRX
/¹VLSSRM
xSRdHL
xSRdKVHQ
/XVdSSRX
1 2
Housman, Heraeus, p. 202 (= Class. pap., p. 1103). Housman, Corrections, pp. 246 f. (= Class. pap., pp. 724 f.).
213
copy (see Floren, p. 51). Other instances produced by Housman are fast. 513 f. “da nunc bibat ordine” dixit | “Iuppiter.” Audito palluit ille Iove; met. 10, 401 f. “… vivunt genetrixque paterque.” | Myrrha patre audito suspiria duxit; see Bömer ad loc. To these, Heraeus, while maintaining that Lysippum should be rejected, adds Mart. 5, 54 Extemporalis factus est meus rhetor: | Calpurnium non scripsit, et salutavit (see his apparatus, ad loc.). Consequently, there seems to be no reason to reject the reading Lysippum of the MSS, and the line should be translated thus: “I read the name of Lysippus; I thought it was by Phidias”. Phidiae putavi: to Martial, Phidias represents the height of Greek art and, as such, receives more attention in the Epigrams than any other Greek artist, being mentioned nine times.1 This would indicate that the line is complimentary (cf. 6, 13, 1 f. on the wonderful statue of Julia by an anonymous artist: Quis te Phidiaco formatam, Iulia, caelo [sc. non putet]) and suggests a paraphrase like: “I thought it was a work by Phidias, that is, a work by the very best (like everything else in your collection). And I see I am not mistaken; it is a work by Lysippus, who, while not as prominent as Phidias, is reckoned among the greatest.” While this may perhaps seem to be exaggerated flattery (Sullivan [Martial, p. 124] referred to it as a “hyperbolic compliment”), it would not appear so to a man who, according to Statius (silv. 4, 6, 25 ff.), in fact possessed works not only by Phidias, but also by Myron, Praxiteles, Polyclitus and Apelles. Although Martial would not actually have thought that the statuette was an original by Phidias (neither the size nor the subject argues in favour of Phidias, although the great master was known to have worked not only in ivory and gold but also in bronze; see Plin. nat. 34, 54; Sen. epist. 85, 40 [quoted on 9, 24, 2]; Lippold in RE 19, s.v. Pheidias 1934 f.), by presenting himself as ignorant, he would also have emphasized Vindex’ superiority as a connoisseur of art. It has been suggested that the line implies that Martial considered Vindex’ statuette a forgery; see R. M. Henry, “On Martial IX. 44.”, Hermathena 71 (1948), pp. 93–94. However, Henry’s line of argument cannot be maintained, as it is based primarily on being written in Greek and Phidiae in Roman characters.2 But whether Martial rendered the name in Roman or in Greek characters need not be of any importance to the theory of a possible forgery. Important, on the other hand, is the implication of such a theory. If Martial had decided that the statuette was a forgery even before he had had a close look at it, he would have displayed a considerable mistrust of Vindex’ knowledge of art, turning him into a rather naive, second-rate collector (of the kind he attacks, for example, in 4, 39). This not only fits ill with the praise for profound knowledge of art heaped upon /XVdSSRX
1
The second place is held by Mentor (see 9, 59, 16 note), appearing six times, then Polyclitus four, Myron three, and Praxiteles and Scopas once each. Lysippus is only mentioned here and in 9, 43. 2 Henry poses the question, why only the name of Lysippus is in Greek and not the name of Phidias (but if that had been the case, it would have been easily explained by the fact that the Greek genitive )HLGdRX cannot be fitted into the verse) and suggests that Martial at once took the statuette for a forgery and expected to read Phidiae in Latin on the base; to his surprise, he read /XVdSSRX in Greek. Henry concludes: “The forger had at least not given himself away, and betrayed the Roman atelier in which the piece had been made by claiming it as the work of the great master and in his ignorance of forgetfulness putting the name in Latin”.
214
Vindex by Statius in silv. 4, 6, but there is also no apparent reason for Martial’s wanting to degrade Vindex in such a way, unless he actually was under the impression that Vindex was a great hypocrite. If that had been the case, however, he would probably not have written 9, 43 in the first place.
45 Miles Hyperboreos modo, Marcelline, triones et Getici tuleras sidera pigra poli: ecce Promethei rupes et fabula montis quam prope sunt oculis nunc adeunda tuis! Videris inmensis cum conclamata querellis saxa senis, dices “Durior ipse fuit.” Et licet haec addas: “Potuit qui talia ferre, humanum merito finxerat ille genus.”
5
The epigram is addressed to Marcellinus, a soldier and a friend of Martial’s, who had been fighting on the Danube and was now going to the Caucasus; he had thus come to know the northern extremities of the empire and now he was going to the legendary and forbidding regions of the far east. It can easily be imagined that this was not the appointment of his dreams (see note on line 4 below); perhaps he had hoped for something less arduous after his service on the Danube. The poem may therefore be considered as a piece of encouragement or, perhaps, of consolation, showing that there is always someone worse off and that even the hardest fate can be endured. Here, the one worse off is Prometheus, who was chained to a rock in the region to which Marcellinus is going. Although subjected to extreme and, as it seemed, never-ending pain, he endured, harder than the rocks from which his screams reverberated, and was eventually released through the intervention of Hercules. Thus, he set an example to all men subjected to adverse fate, showing them that even extreme pain can be endured and that, in the words of Horace, non, si male nunc, et olim | sic erit (carm. 2, 10, 17 f.). Furthermore, as mankind is always afflicted by hardships, Prometheus, the master of suffering, was worthy to be its maker. 1–2. Hyperboreos … triones … | … Getici … poli: the lines closely resemble 6, 58, 1 f. Cernere Parrhasios dum te iuvat, Aule, triones | comminus et Getici sidera ferre poli. The use of the uncompounded triones (sc. the Great and the Little Bear; see Forcellini, Lex., s.v. trio 2, p. 182) with an adjective (cf. 6, 58, 1 quoted above; 7, 80, 1 Odrysios ... triones; Verg. Aen. 1, 744 and 3, 516 geminos ... Triones) is likely to be connected with such cases of tmesis of Septemtriones as Verg. georg. 3, 381 talis (sc. gens) Hyperboreo Septem subiecta trioni (cf. Ov. met. 2, 528) and with triones used without attribute (for example, Ov. met. 2, 171); see Grewing on 6, 58, 1. Its significance here is further defined by Getici … sidera … poli; the Getae (Gr. ) were the northern branch of the Thracian peoples, and the *yWDL
215
Dacians in their turn the north–western group of the Getae, so the reference here (as in 6, 58) is probably to Dacia; cf. Weiss in RE 7, s.v. Getae 1330 ff. The adjective Hyperboreus (Gr. ) was first used in prose by Cicero (nat. deor. 3, 75, 12 tertius [sc. Apollo] Iove tertio natus et Latona, quem ex Hyperboreis Delphos ferunt advenisse) and in poetry by Catullus (115, 6), but never became very popular either with prose-writers or poets; among the latter, Martial occupies a place apart, using the adjective five times (also 4, 3, 5 referring to the Chatti and the Dacians; 7, 6, 1 and 8, 78, 3 to the Sarmatians; 9, 101, 20 to the Chatti; see note ad loc.), compared with three each in Vergil and Statius and one each in Catullus, Horace, Ovid, Lucan, Valerius Flaccus and Juvenal. For locations given with similar reference to northern constellations, cf., for example, Ov. trist. 3, 4b, 47 f. Proxima sideribus tellus Erymanthidos Ursae | me tenet and see Luck, ad loc. C8SHUE±UHLRM
Marcellinus: a dear friend of Martial’s, the recipient of two more epigrams (3, 6; 6, 25) and mentioned in a third (7, 80). As appears from the first two, Martial was also a close friend of his father’s. By the time 6, 25 was written, he was participating in Domitian’s First Pannonian War (as appears from 6, 25, 2 horrida Parrhasio quem [sc. Marcellinum] tegit ursa iugo),1 which had ended when Martial wrote 7, 80 (see 7, 80, 1 f.). The first two lines of the present poem may also allude to this war, but, if one is willing to take modo more literally, it is possible that they indicate the participation of Marcellinus also in the Second Pannonian War of 92 (on which see the introduction, pp. 26 f.). Since little is known of Domitian’s doings in the far north-eastern part of the empire, nothing can be said with certainty about Marcellinus’ doings in the Caucasus. There is no direct evidence of a campaign by Domitian in that area, but, as it was of strategic importance, it attracted the emperor’s attention. Vespasian had built fortifications on the land of the Iberi, who by then formed a client-kingdom, controlling the Darial Pass. It is probable that Domitian managed to turn Albania, the region east of Iberia towards the Caspian Sea, into a client-kingdom as well, thereby gaining control of the important Derbend Pass (see further Jones, Domitian, p. 156; A. B. Bosworth, “Arrian and the Alani”, HS Ph 81 (1977), pp. 226 f.). This he would already have achieved by 84, so Marcellinus’ task was probably nothing more than control of the frontier, but cf. PIR2 M 183. 2. tuleras sidera pigra: sidus ferre, “endure the climate”, cf. Plin. paneg. 15, diversam aquarum caelique temperiem ut patrios fontes patriumque sidus ferre consuesti. Perhaps the construction is meant to parallel potuit qui talia ferre in line 7. Piger is the stock epithet for coldness; cf. Rhet. Her. 4, 43, frigus pigrum dicimus, quia pigros efficit; OLD, s.v. piger 1 c. 3. Promethei rupes: the Prometheae of the -group (printed by Scriverius) stands against the Promethei of , which is retained by the editors. Shackleton Bailey, however, accepts the reading of and compares it with Prop. 1, 12, 10 Prometheis E
J
E
1
Jones, Domitian, pp. 150 f.; on Domitian and the Dacians, see note on 9, 35, 5 ducis Daci.
216
… iugis. Still, Promethei may very well be retained in the text, as it provides a good hendiadys with the following fabula (“the legendary cliffs of the Promethean mountains”).1 Prometheus was punished for having brought men fire by being chained fast to the Caucasus; every day, an eagle devoured his liver, which then grew again, only to be devoured again the next day. The eagle was killed by Hercules, who also liberated Prometheus (see Bapp in Roscher, s.v. Prometheus 3041 ff.). According to Arrian Peripl. Pont. Euxin. 11, 5, a peak in the Caucasus called was shown as the mountain to which Prometheus was chained (cf. Friedländer, Sittengeschichte 1, p. 451). Propertius (2, 1, 69) is the first to speak of the Caucasus as rupes Promethei; cf. Mart. epigr. 7, 1; 11, 84, 9. 6WU±ELORM
fabula montis: fabula is metonymy for “the things told in the fable” (see TLL, s.v. fabula 28, 1 ff.). In this case, it logically means “the places mentioned in the story of Prometheus”. Presumably it does not allude to all the stories told of the region (which could include, for example, the story of Medea); if that were the case, we should expect the plural, as in 10, 5, 17 and Sen. nat. 3, 29, 7. The singular rather indicates that a specific story or at least a circle of stories is meant, as in Auson. 14, 28 f. Prete tota … Minoia fabula Cretae ... tenui sub imagine vibrat. 4. prope … oculis … adeunda tuis: a concise, and unparalleled, expression for “go and see at close quarters”, oculis tuis serving as a substitute for videnda. In spite of the marvellous things Marcellinus will see in the Caucasus, the gerundive indicates that he is not going there of his own free will but is compelled to do so. To have been on the Danube and be going to the Caucasus was something like falling out of the frying–pan into the fire, as the Caucasus was proverbially horrid (Verg. Aen. 4, 366 f.; Hor. carm. 1, 22, 6 f.; epod. 1, 12; Sen. Med. 43; Thy. 1048) and housed wild beasts (Sen. Herc. f. 1208 f.), especially tigers (Sil. 4, 331; 5, 148; 15, 81). Note also that adeundus, when appearing in the pentameter, always has the same placing as here.2 5. conclamata: conclamo here means “call out to” (= inclamo). To judge from the TLL, s.v. conclamo 71, 15 ff., this sense of the word is rare and not found earlier than Sen. Oed. 974 f. victor deos | conclamat omnis (cf. epist. 52,13 ); most instances are found in considerably later sources. 1 It may be noted, though, that an examination of the use of the genitive Promethei and the adjective Prometheus in dactylic verse (based on all occurrences of the genitive of the noun and all cases of the adjective in Enn., Lucil., Lucr., Catull., Verg., App. Verg., Hor., Prop., Tib., Ov., Albinov., Pers., Gaetul., Calp. Buc. Eins., Priap., Manil., Lucan., Sil., Val. Fl., Mart., Stat., Iuv.) argues for the reading Prometheae. The adjective always appears either before the diaeresis of the pentameter (10, 39, 4; 14, 80, 2; Ov. am. 2, 16, 40) or, in hexameters, before the penthemimeresis (the present case; Stat. Theb. 8, 305; Val. Fl. 7, 356) or in the second half of the fourth and the whole of the fifth foot (Mart. 11, 84, 9; Stat. Theb. 11, 468). The one exception to this is Prop. 3, 6, 7 o prima infelix fingenti terra Prometheo, where the final o is elided because of the ille beginning the following line. The genitive is otherwise exclusively used in verse–endings, where its final ei is always diphtongized (Verg. ecl. 6, 42 Caucasiasque refert volucris furtumque Promethei; Prop. 2, 1, 69; Val. Fl. 5, 154). 2 1, 70, 12; 7, 93, 2; Tib. 1, 6, 22; 3, 5, 2; Ov. epist. 18, 8; fast. 4, 470; 4, 496; 5, 374; 6, 412; 6, 450; trist. 1, 4, 18; 1, 8, 38; 3, 1, 70; 3, 10, 76; Pont. 1, 8, 12; Ib. 478.
217
6. durior ipse fuit: sc. saxis, because Prometheus managed to endure the pains when chained to the mountain. A trisyllabic comparative followed by ipse is fairly common after the diaeresis of the pentameter, cf. 1, 114, 4 dignior ipse legi. It is favoured by Ovid; thus am. 1, 6, 62 durior ipse tuis (sc. foribus); epist. 4, 166; 19, 188; Pont. 1, 3, 92; cf. also Ib. 22; Eleg. in Maecen. 1, 30; Priap. 68, 16. A monosyllabic word followed by a disyllabic comparative and ipse is less frequent; cf. 8, 18, 2; Ov. ars. 2, 218. 8. humanum … finxerat …genus: Prometheus was said to have created man out of clay, cf. 10, 39, 4 ficta Prometheo diceris (sc. Lesbia) esse luto; 14, 182, 1; Hor. carm. 1, 16, 13 (with Porph.); Phaedr. 14, 16, 3; Hyg. astr. 2, 15, 1; fab. 142, 1; see Bapp, op. cit., 3044 ff.
46 Gellius aedificat semper: modo limina ponit, nunc foribus claves aptat emitque seras, nunc has, nunc illas reficit mutatque fenestras; dum tantum aedificet, quidlibet ille facit, oranti nummos ut dicere possit amico unum illud verbum Gellius “Aedifico.”
5
The grandeur of Roman private houses is a commonplace in literature. It is admired in Statius’ poems on the villa of Manilius Vopiscus at Tibur (silv. 1, 3) and on that of Pollius Felix at Surrentum (silv. 2, 2); cf. the letters of Pliny on his villas at Laurentum (2, 17 with Sherwin-White’s introduction) and at Tifernum Tiberinum (5, 6); it is displayed as an example of unnecessary extravagance; thus already by Cato (for example, orat. 185), and by Horace (for example, carm. 2, 18, 17 f., on which see the introduction by Nisbet & Hubbard) and, as such, it is attacked by satirists. An expressive example of this is Iuv. 14, 86–95,1 on a certain Cretonius who “out-builded” himself by erecting houses more splendid than the temples of the gods, thus consuming the greater part of his fortune; what was left, his son ran through in the same manner, following the example of his father. Martial’s epigram on Gellius is a variation on the theme; it not only makes fun of the morbid passion to build, but also emphasizes on one of the themes frequently used by Martial, viz. the greed of the rich and their unwillingness to share with those of small means, neatly summarised in 11, 68, 1 Parva rogas magnos; sed non dant haec quoque magni; cf. 9, 2 intro. It is clear that it is not because of his constant building activities that Gellius cannot assist his begging friend but because he realizes that, as long as he builds, he has a valid excuse and therefore he does not dare to stop building. Of course, his greed entices him into a vicious 1
On this passage, see R. E. Colton, “Juvenal 14 and Martial 9.46 on the Building Craze”, CB 41 (1964), pp. 26–27. In spite of its title, the paper has little of value concerning Martial.
218
circle, and, in the end, he will meet with the same fate as did Juvenal’s Cretonius. In 9, 22, Martial repudiates the character of Gellius and paves the way for this epigram by stating that he himself wants riches to be able to build and to give. Note also that Martial emphasizes Gellius’ fear of his begging friend in having him build only doors and repair windows, by no means the most luxurious details in a Roman house, but those which kept people out. Thus, Gellius builds himself in, metaphorically as well as literally. 1. Gellius: Martial uses the name only here and in 9, 80, where Gellius is the very opposite of the man in this epigram, a poor man who marries an rich old hag. Previously, Martial had used only the feminine form Gellia in various satirical epigrams; thus 1, 33; 3, 55; 4, 20; 5, 17; 5, 29; 6, 90; 8, 81. limina ponit: the phrase is found only here and in Prop. 2, 6, 37 f. quos igitur tibi custodes, quae limina ponam, | quae numquam supra pes inimicus eat?, which alludes to the threshold. It may, however, also allude to the lintel (limen superum; cf. Plin. nat. 36, 96 [limen] quod foribus inponebat) or perhaps to both. The threshold, limen inferum was in the majority of cases made of stone, as was usually the case also with the lintel (see Blümner, Privataltertümer, p. 17). 2. foribus claves aptat: the TLL lists this passage s.v. apto 323, 81 ff., in the sense of “to fit into” and compares it with, for example, 9, 68, 6 and 9, 93, 5. This suggests a kind of slight metonymy with regard to claves, which logically would allude not only to the key, but also to the actual lock; cf. Hor. carm. 2, 14, 26 servata centum clavibus. Note also Tib. 1, 6, 34 frustra clavis inest foribus and 2, 4, 31 hinc clavim ianua sensit, perhaps suggesting that the connection between key and door was more important than the connection between key and lock. Clavis is only mentioned together with the actual lock, claustrum, in two instances, both in connection with Egypt or North Africa and alluding to a kind of lock common in these areas (see Apul. met. 4, 10 and Germ. 196 f.; Marquardt, p. 227; on Roman keys and locks, ibid., pp. 226 ff.; Blümner Privataltertümer, pp. 25 ff.). seras: it was not uncommon for the front door of the house to have several types of locking devices attached to it. Gellius combines his lock with a bar, of which there were several different kinds, usually made of solid wood (Blümner Privataltertümer, pp. 22 ff.). 3. nunc has, nunc illas: a very common pattern at the beginning of the hexameter, occurring already in Lucretius, who also has the most frequent recurrence of this formula viz. nunc huc nunc illuc (2, 131, cf. Ov. epist. 10, 19; met. 4, 622; Manil. 2, 904; 3, 167; 3, 268; Sil. 7, 574). Variants are nunc hinc nunc illinc (Lucr. 2, 214; 6, 199); … hic … illic (Lucr. 2, 575); … hunc … illum (Lucan. 3, 276); … hi … illi (Verg. Aen. 10, 355); … his … illis (Manil. 1, 191; Stat. Theb. 11, 478); … hos … illos (Verg. Aen. 5, 441; Sil. 5, 150).
219
4. dum tantum: in the sense of dummodo, as noted by Friedländer. The juncture is extremely rare: the TLL, s.v. dum 2224, 14 f. knows no other instance than the present, but note the occasional use of tantum in the sense of modo (see Hofmann– Szantyr, § 330, IV a, p. 616). Here, it is probably used for the sake of metrical convenience. 6. unum ... “Aedifico”: see note on 9, 38, 10.
47 Democritos, Zenonas inexplicitosque Platonas quidquid et hirsutis squalet imaginibus, sic quasi Pythagorae loqueris successor et heres. Praependet sane nec tibi barba minor: sed quod et hircosis serum est et turpe pilosis, in molli rigidam clune libenter habes. Tu, qui sectarum causas et pondera nosti, dic mihi, percidi, Pannyche, dogma quod est?
5
Pannychus is one of the false philosophers, recurring characters in Martial, who wears a long beard and preaches a rigid morality and yet practises sodomy himself. This poem is particularly close — in content and tone — to the beginning of Juvenal’s Second Satire (see the introduction to 9, 27). Its point is also very similar to that of Mart. 2, 89: Quod nimio gaudes noctem producere vino, | ignosco: vitium, Gaure, Catonis habes. | Carmina quod scribis Musis et Apolline nullo, | laudari debes: hoc Ciceronis habes: | quod vomis, Antoni: quod luxuriaris, Apici. | Quod fellas, vitium dic mihi cuius habes? 1. Democritos etc.: for generalizing plurals, see note on 9, 27, 6 Curios, Camillos; cf. here in particular Sen. dial. 9, 7, 5 Vix tibi esset facultas dilectus felicioris, si inter Platonas et Xenophontas et illum Socratici fetus proventum bonos quaereres. inexplicitosque Platonas: “the obscure thoughts of pseudo-Platos”. The adjective inexplicitus is found only here and in Stat. Theb. 2, 511 dictis … inexplicitis, “obscure words”. In his commentary, Friedländer took it as “ungelesene” to make it fit with his theory that the following line referred to pictures in bookrolls; he was followed by the TLL, s.v. 1329, 43 ff. (suggesting that the adjective is equal to non evolutos [= “unread”] and that Platonas means libros Platonis) and by the OLD, s.v. inexplicitus 1. However, in the Sittengeschichte (see below), Friedländer rightly does not maintain this theory; not only would the generalizing
220
plural Platonas be unparalleled in the sense of “the books of Plato”,1 but there is no reason to take inexplicitus as meaning non evolutus (as does the TLL, loc. cit., with reference to explico in the sense of “to unroll” a bookroll, i.e. “to read” [ibid., s.v. explico 1727, 69 ff.]); the adjective should in this case be derived from explico in the sense of “to understand, interpret” (ibid., s.v. explico 1735, 3 ff.), used of philosophical ideas, for example, in Cic. phil. frg. 5, 29 magna … animi contentio adhibenda est in explicando Aristotele, si legas. 2. quidquid ... hirsutis squalet imaginibus: “whatever appears unkempt in shaggy images”, an unparalleled expression, which, however, may be compared grammatically to Sen. Herc. f. 366 f. tum vastis ager | squalebit arvis. The reference is to the busts of philosophers, with which those who wanted to appear as such were wont to fill their homes; cf. Iuv. 2, 4–7 indocti primum, quamquam plena omnia gypso | Chrysippi invenias; nam perfectissimus horum, | si quis Aristotelen similem vel Pittacon emit | et iubet archetypos pluteum servare Cleanthas (with Courtney); Friedländer, Sittengeschichte 3, 42 f.; cf. Iuv. 8, 17 squalentis ... avos; OLD, s.v. squaleo 2 b. hirsutis: the long beard (cf. line 4 below) was typical of ancient philosophers, especially of Stoics and Cynics (see Mau in RE 3, s.v. Bart 32; Kißel on Pers. 4, 1). Also, they are often charged with having a dishevelled appearance, which was true particularly of the Cynics (see the introductions to 9, 27 and 9, 57). 3. Pythagorae … successor et heres: cf. Ov. met. 3, 589 accipe, quas (sc. opes) habeo, studii successor et heres with Bömer’s note.2 For heres in this sense, cf. TLL, s.v. 2655, 4 ff.; for successor, see OLD, s.v. c, to which Cels. 3, 9, 3, Sen. nat. 7, 32, 2, and Gell. 13, 5, pr. may be added. 5. hircosis serum: serum, the reading of T , was met with scepticism already by Friedländer, who suggested that hircosis turpe (found in C) was the original reading. Serum is printed by Gilbert, Lindsay and Heraeus, but Shackleton Bailey breaks with this tradition, regarding serum as nonsense because it would lack a connection with hircosis similar to turpe pilosis. Instead, he prints carum, a conjecture of his own, in defence of which he writes: “Pannychus would have to pay for his pleasure, like the unattractive ladies in 9. 37. 9 and elsewhere; cf. also 14. 215”.3 Serum, however, may perhaps be advocated by determining the sense of hircosus. Derived from hircus, “he–goat”, it is found but six times in the surviving literature, of which three are in Martial (also 10, 98, 10; 12, 59, 5); also Plaut. Merc. 575; Pers. 3, 77; Gell. 12, 2, 11. The OLD, s.v. defines the adjective as E
1 When an author’s name is used as metonymy for his writings, it normally takes the singular, cf., for example, 14, 190 (Titus Livius in membranis) Pellibus exiguis artatur Livius ingens, | quem mea non totum bibliotheca capit. 2 Bömer points out that successor rarely occurs in poetry, but perhaps fast. 5, 77 (where Bömer prints successit, whereas the Teubner edition of Alton, Wormell & Courtney [Leipzig 1978] has successor) should be added to his list of instances from Ovid. 3 Shackleton Bailey, Corrections, p. 284.
221
referring exclusively to the smell of a goat (i.e. “smelling like a goat”), which is the obvious meaning in Pers. 3, 77 gente hircosa centurionum; Gell. 12, 2, 11 (contrasted with unguentatus), and Mart. 10, 98, 10 (hircosi … subulci). In 12, 59, 4 f. te pilosus | hircoso premit osculo colonus, the sense of “bristly” (alluding to the beard of the goat, cf. 14, 141) should be added; the colonus is pilosus, and his kiss is like that of a goat, stinking and prickly (on the unpleasantness of kissing bearded persons, cf. 10, 42, 5; 11, 39, 4). This would be transferable also to Plaut. Merc. 575 senex hircosus tu osculere mulierem?; if, as suggested by this latter instance, the adjective was especially appropriate to old men, it is quite possible that serum is correct, and the explanation of Gilbert (as printed in his apparatus) would be quite close to the truth: “paedicari velle Pannycho dicitur et serum esse et turpe, sero ut adulto et iam hircoso, quem nemo iam vult, turpe ut piloso, qui veri (non effeminati) viri speciem affectat”; Heraeus in his apparatus also compares Plin. epist. 3, 1, 12 (senibus) industria sera turpis ambitio est. Given these notions, hircosus is especially luckily used of a philosopher, who both smells as a consequence of his neglecting himself and, like the goat, wears a beard; cf. AP 11, 430 (Lucian) (c
W´
WUyIHLQ
SÇJZQD
SHULSRLHjQ _ NDg WUJRM H¸SÇJZQ Dl\ ²ORM xVWg 3OWZQ
GRNHjM
VRIdDQ
pilosis: Martial jokingly uses this adjective instead of philosophi also in 9, 27, 7. 6. molli … clune: clunis, lit. “buttock”, is used as an euphemism for culus (see Adams, pp. 115 f.). Whereas the present instance is quite clear, it is often difficult to judge whether it alludes to the culus or the actual buttock(s); cf. 11, 100, 3; Iuv. 2, 21. Mollis perhaps implies that Pannychus depilated his culus; cf. 9, 27, 3 prostitutis … culis with note. rigidam: sc. mentulam. Rigidus is commonly used of the erect penis, cf. 6, 49, 2; 11, 16, 5; Catull. 56, 7; Priap. 4, 1; 45, 1; Adams, p. 103. 7. causas et pondera: obviously “nature (character) and line of argument and claim of belief”; for causa in this sense, cf., for example, Cic. fat. 33 non eadem sit illorum causa et Stoicorum; TLL, s.v. caussa 687, 14 ff. But there is probably also a pun here on the sense of ponera as “scrotum” (cf. Catull. 63, 5; Forcellini, Lex., s.v. pondus 2, 728), and one cannot help wondering whether causas, carelessly pronounced, could not be made to sound like caudas (in the sense of “penises”; cf. OLD, s.v. 2). The juncture is singular. 8. dic mihi: a common verse–opening, first found in Verg. ecl. 3, 1, then in Hor. ars 141; Prop. 2, 32, 55; 3, 6, 1; 4, 3, 23; surprisingly few instances in Ovid (epist. 2, 27; fast. 3, 170) but a favourite of Martial’s, who has no less than 12 instances (also 1, 20, 1; 3, 11, 4; 3, 30, 2; 5, 55, 1; 5, 58, 2; 8, 3, 12; 9, 82, 6; 12, 92, 4; 13, 14, 2; 14, 179, 1; 14, 215, 1); also Iuv. 6, 393; 8, 56. 1
“ If you think that to grow a beard is to acquire wisdom, a goat with a fine beard is at once a complete Plato” (transl. by W. R. Paton, Loeb).
222
percidi: percido is attested in the sense of pedico in several passages in Martial’s epigrams, cf. 4, 48, 1 and 4; 6, 39, 14; 7, 62, 1 and 2; 12, 35, 2. It is used in the same way twice in the Priapea (13, 1; 15, 6), and there is also some epigraphic evidence for this use (see Adams, pp. 146 f.). Pannyche: a humorous name, derived from Gr. SQ and Q¹[, “he who does something the whole night”. 3QQXFRM is attested in Greek inscriptions, whereas the feminine form 3DQQXFdM occurs as the name of concubines and also as the title of comedies (see Pape, s.v.). While there is epigraphic evidence of the Latin transcription of the name,1 Martial offers the only surviving literary instances, using the name also in 2, 36 (of a character identical with the present); 6, 39, 9; 6, 67; 12, 72. Cf., however, Petron. 25, 2 (Pannychis) and Sidon. epist. 5, 13; 7, 9, 18 (Pannychius, a real person).
1
See Forcellini, Onomast., s.v. Pannychus.
223
Revised edition of dissertation for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Latin presented at Uppsala University in 1998. Printed with the aid of a grant from the Swedish Council for Research in the Humanities and Social Sciences (HSFR)
ABSTRACT Henriksén, C., 1999. Martial, Book IX. A Commentary. Vol. 2. Acta. Univ. Ups., Studia Latina Upsaliensia 24:2. 209 pp. Uppsala. ISBN 91-554-4294-3. This dissertation consists of a commentary on Book 9 of the Epigrams of M. Valerius Martialis (ca. 40–104 AD). The book, with its 105 epigrams one of the longer in Martial’s production, was published in late 94 or early 95 and presents the reader with Martial’s characteristic variety of subjects drawn from contemporary Roman society and everyday life. Notable is that Book 9 contains a markedly higher frequency of poems focusing on the emperor Domitian than any other of Martial’s books. The tendency towards a greater attention to Domitian is obvious already in Book 8 (published in early 94) and is likely to have been continued also in the last book published under his reign, the now lost first edition of Book 10 (published in 95). In Book 9, this tendency is also reflected in the increase of references to Domitian simply as Iuppiter or as Tonans, of the application to the emperor of epithets originally belonging to divinities, and of comparisons of Domitian with gods, particularly with Jupiter, the Sun, and Hercules. The book as a whole is set within an imperial framework, marked at the beginning by poems 1, 3, 5 and 7, and by poem 101 at the end. The present commentary consists of an introduction discussing the date, general characteristics, structure and themes of Book 9 (with special regard to matters concerning the emperor), followed by a detailed commentary on each of the 105 poems, placing them in their social, historical and literary context. Key-words: Martial, epigram, Domitian, Silver Latin, panegyric, Statius, Ovid, Greek Anthology. C. Henriksén, Department of Classical Philology, Uppsala University, Box 527, SE-751 20 Uppsala, Sweden.
© Christer Henriksén 1999 ISSN 0562-2859 ISBN 91-554-4292-7 (vols. 24:1–24:2) ISBN 91-554-4293-5 (vol. 24:1) ISBN 91-554-4294-3 (vol. 24:2) Printed in Sweden by Textgruppen i Uppsala AB 1999 Distributor: Uppsala University Library, Box 510, SE-751 20 Uppsala, Sweden
Preface and Acknowledgements The manuscript of this volume was essentially in a finished state a year ago, and originally intended to be published as one book together with volume 1. However, as the commentary was nearing completion, it became apparent that it would have to be divided into two volumes and the printing of the second postponed, until the necessary funds could be raised. Now, almost a year later, I am happy to extend my thanks to the Swedish Council for Research in the Humanities and Social Sciences for providing the funds needed. Since the appearance of the first volume of this commentary, my attention has been claimed by other projects, and I regret that I have had little opportunity to consider those works on Martial in general and on Book 9 in particular which have appeared shortly before and since the printing of volume 1. Still, the delay in the publication of volume 2 has enabled me to incorporate much of the friendly criticism offered by Mr. Peter Howell, of Royal Holloway College, University of London. The commentary has benefited greatly from his perspicacious remarks, and I would like to convey to him my sincere thanks. In preparing the present volume for publication, I have enjoyed the generous support of Professor Hans Helander to which I have grown accustomed. My debt to him I acknowledge with pleasure. Otherwise, what I have said in the preface to volume 1 applies also to the present.
Uppsala, 31 August 1999
C.H.
Contents
Text and Commentary: Poems 48–103 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Indices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195 Addenda et corrigenda to volume 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 209
Text and Commentary Poems 48–103
48 Heredem cum me partis tibi, Garrice, quartae per tua iurares sacra caputque tuum, credidimus, – quis enim damnet sua vota libenter? – et spem muneribus fovimus usque datis. Inter quae rari Laurentem ponderis aprum misimus: Aetola de Calydone putes. At tu continuo populumque patresque vocasti, ructat adhuc aprum callida Roma meum: ipse ego, – quis credat? – conviva nec ultimus haesi, sed nec costa data est caudave missa mihi. De quadrante tuo quid sperem, Garrice? Nulla de nostro nobis uncia venit apro.
5
10
A certain Garricus, presumably a wealthy elder, has promised to bequeath to the speaker a quarter of his fortune. The latter, acting like a second-rate captator, does his best to add to the old man’s goodwill by presenting him with various gifts, among which is a huge Laurentine boar. Garricus instantly gives a dinnerparty, inviting everybody but the heir in spe, who realizes that his efforts have been in vain. The wisdom gained from such experiences is summarized in 12, 73: Heredem tibi me, Catulle, dicis. | Non credam, nisi legero, Catulle. For the phenomenon of captatio, see 9, 8 intro. 1. Heredem … partis … quartae: i.e. heres ex quadrante, heir of a fourth part (or three-twelfths; see below on line 11) of his fortune; cf. Hor. sat. 2, 5, 100; Manigk in RE 8, s.v. Hereditarium ius 639. The passage does not, like Plin. epist. 5, 1, 9 f., allude to the fourth part guaranteed to the heredes scripti by the lex Falcidia of 40 BC (on which, see Kaser, Privatrecht 1, p. 630; Sherwin-White on Plin. loc. cit.). Garrice: the name appears also in 11, 105. In both instances, the more common name Car(r)ius appears in some of the MSS,1 but, as Garricus is attested in inscriptions, it should no doubt be kept (see Heraeus’ apparatus, ad loc). In the present case, Martial may have chosen the name because of its similarity to garrio; thus, it would imply something like “he who is full of nonsense”. 2. per tua iurares sacra etc.: Garricus swears a solemn oath by his family rites (sacra, cf. 3, 6, 2; 12, 62, 6 & 14; OLD, s.v. sacrum 3 d) and by his head. Oaths are commonly sworn by someone’s head, since the head was sacred; cf. Athen. 2, 72 Kaibel .2 The first instances in Latin literature are in Vergil, for example, Aen. 9, 300; cf. Pease on Aen. 4, 357 and cf. also Ov. epist. 3, 107; trist. 5, 4, 45; Pont. 3, ²WL
G
bHU´Q
xQ±PL]RQ
WQ
NHIDOQ
G ORQ
xN
WR¿
NDg
NDW
D¸W M
°PQ¹HLQ
1 In the present case, DE has Garrice but Carr- is found in a lemma in D; J has Gallice with Garr- in a lemma; cf. Kay on 11, 105, 1. 2 “That people regarded the head as sacred is clear from the fact that they swore by it” (Gulicks’s translation, Loeb).
11
3, 68; Sil. 10, 437 f.; Iuv. 6, 16 f. with Courtney’s note. Oaths sworn by anyone’s family rites seem to be elsewhere unattested; cf., however, the oath sworn by the penates in Cic. ac. 2, 65 iurarem per Iovem deosque penates me et ardere studio veri reperiendi et ea sentire quae dicerem. 3. damnet … vota: “for who would renounce one’s wishes?” (cf., for example, OLD, s.v. damno 3 c); perhaps there is also a play on the legal term damnas voti; cf. note on 9, 42, 8. 5. rari Laurentum ponderis aprum: the boar of Laurentum was one of the best, in spite of Horace’s statement that it was malus, because it fed on grass and reeds (sat. 2, 4, 42). Martial mentions it again in 10, 45, 4. Cf. also note on 9, 14, 3 Aprum. Boars may weigh as much as 300 pounds (cf. Kay on 11, 69, 9); ancient authors usually refer to large specimens simply as ingentes (14, 31, 2; Cic. Verr. II 5, 7), ingentis magnitudinis (Val. Max. 1, 7 ext., 4) or primae magnitudinis (Petron. 40, 3). 6. Aetola de Calydone: Martial compares the boar to that which ravaged the region around the city of Calydon in Aetolia. Let loose by Artemis, who had been left empty-handed at a sacrifice made by king Oeneus of Calydon, it was killed by his son Meleager; see Ov. met. 8, 273–546, with Bömer, pp. 94 ff. Martial mentions the boar also in 1, 104, 6 f.; 11, 18, 18; 11, 69, 10. 7. populumque patresque: “everyone from high to low” (van Dam on Stat. silv. 2, 5, 25; cf. senatus populusque and see OLD, s.v. populus 2 b). This is the only instance of this phrase within the hexameter; it is commonly found at its end, as in 7, 5, 1 and 8, 49, 7; thus already in Lucil. fragm. 1253 Krenkel; then Verg. Aen. 4, 682; 9, 192; Ov. met. 15, 486; Sil. 10, 634; 11, 496; Stat. silv. 1, 4, 15; 2, 5, 25; Val. Fl. 8, 281. 8. callida Roma: partitive attribute, “the shrewd part of Rome”, because those invited to dine on the boar would be such as Garricus wanted to encourage as legacy-hunters, senators as well as ordinary people;1 just as before he had encouraged the narrator with the quadrans (which cost him nothing), he now uses the boar which he got for nothing. They are all likely to become future fellows in misfortune, and, though they naturally considered themselves callidi (a fitting epithet of the legacy-hunter, cf. Petron. 125, 3 callidus captator), the adjective is certainly used here ironically, as they in the end will surely find themselves left with nothing, least of all a mention in Garricus’ will. The MSS all have callida, which was printed by the editors up to and including Heraeus, while Dousa’s emendation pallida2 was advocated by Lieben3 and 1
As appears not least from Martial’s numerous epigrams on the subject, legacy-hunting was widespread in Rome and was not practised only by the people of the lower classes; cf. Tac. ann. 13, 52 quoted in the introduction to 9, 8. 2 Those indulging in exaggerated gluttony could become pale from bad digestion; cf. 1, 77, 3; TLL, s.v. pallidus 130, 51 ff.
12
printed in Borovskij’s editio correctior of Heraeus and by Shackleton Bailey. However, Lieben’s argumentation in favour of pallida seems to be founded on a misinterpretation of the situation; he writes: “Was soll dieses callida bedeuten? Etwa: ‘schlau’, weil es (sc. Rome) sich in den Handel der beiden nicht eingemischt hat und aus ihm Vorteil zieht? Dazu ist callida ein viel zu starker Ausdruck: es lag ja nicht in der Absicht von populusque patresque, einen solches Vorteil zu erlangen”. This is, of course, correct, but Lieben takes no account of the possibility that those invited may be captatores themselves, nor does Nisbet when proposing marcida with reference to Prud. psych. 316 (of Luxuria) pervigilem ructabat marcida cenam.1 9. nec: = ne … quidem. This use of nec, which is not recorded with certainty earlier than Cicero, can be observed also in Catull., Hor., Prop., Ov., Lucan., and Pers. (see Hofmann–Szantyr, § 241, B b, pp. 449 f.). haesi: in the sense of particeps fui; cf. Liv. 5, 2, 10 ne in turba quidem haerere plebeium quemquam; Stat. silv. 3, 3, 64 ff.; TLL, s.v. haereo 2496, 31 ff. 10. sed: roughly “and what’s more”; cf. 7, 71, 3 f. nec dispensator nec vilicus ulcere turpi | nec rigidus fossor, sed nec arator eget; 10, 19, 2; see OLD, s.v. sed 9 b. costa … caudave: probably the scantiest part of the boar that Martial could think of. Ribs occur as a joint of meat also in 10, 45, 3, (where rodere suggests its meagreness); the only other mention of ribs as a dish is in Varr. rust. 2, 4, 11. The boar’s tail is never mentioned as edible. 11 f. quadrante … | … uncia: Martial makes a play here on the division of the inheritance (the as) into twelfths, unciae, which were distributed to the heirs (see Manigk, loc. cit.). When the speaker does not even get the uncia of his own boar, what can he hope for in the case of the quadrans of the inheritance?
3 1
E. Lieben, “Zu Martial”, Philologische Wochenschrift 50 (1930), p. 458. R. G. M. Nisbet, “A new Teubner of Martial”, CR 52 (1992), pp. 50–51.
13
49 Haec est illa meis multum cantata libellis, quam meus edidicit lector amatque togam. Partheniana fuit quondam, memorabile vatis munus: in hac ibam conspiciendus eques, dum nova, dum nitida fulgebat splendida lana, dumque erat auctoris nomine digna sui: nunc anus et tremulo vix accipienda tribuli, quam possis niveam dicere iure tuo. Quid non longa dies, quid non consumitis anni? Haec toga iam non est Partheniana, mea est.
5
10
This lofty poem is the second and last in Martial on the toga given to the poet by Domitian’s a cubiculo (i.e. chamberlain, cf. Rostowzew in RE 4, s.v. a Cubiculo) Parthenius, the first being 8, 28, written a year or so earlier, apparently upon its bestowal. Consequently, multum cantata libellis is hyperbole, unless Martial wrote other epigrams on the toga as well, which for one reason or another were not published in his books. The first epigram stresses the bright splendour of the toga, which is said to shine whiter than lilies, privets, the ivory of Tibur, the Spartan swan, etc. (8, 28, 11 ff.), but still, it is not whiter than Parthenius himself. The present epigram offers the same play on the name of Parthenius (see below on line 3 Partheniana), but now the toga is so worn out as no longer to be Partheniana; instead, it is now fully Martial’s. The toga was made of white wool, and so it easily became dirty. But as it was prescribed for the clients at the salutatio (see Friedländer, Sittengeschichte 1, pp. 226 f.), it was important to keep it clean, and therefore constant washings were called for, which in their turn entailed that it quickly became threadbare (though a toga which had been washed three or four times was considered as good as new; see 10, 11, 6). The dilemma of the required whiteness of the toga and the easiness with which it got soiled is a recurring theme in Martial (for example, 1, 103, 5; 3, 36, 9; 7, 33, 1; 9, 100, 5; Friedländer, loc. cit.; Blümner, Privataltertümer, p. 214). Note the high-flown, somewhat sentimental style of the poem, manifest in the contrast between past (lines 5 and 6) and present (line 7), and the reflection on the omnivorous time (line 9), reminiscent of Ovid. 1. Haec est illa meis: a common opening of the hexameter; cf. 7, 21, 1; 7, 69, 1; 9, 76, 1; Enn. frg. var. 19; Ov. epist. 15, 193; fast. 6, 713; Lucan. 7, 254. meis multum cantata libellis: compare Dirae 26 multum nostris cantata libellis. “pure, undefiled” (or perhaps “virgin-white”), 3. Partheniana: of Gr. a word-play alluding to its giver, (Ti. Claudius?) Parthenius; a similar play is found in 8, 28, 15 f. Sed licet haec primis nivibus sint aemula dona (sc. the toga), | non sunt Parthenio candidiora suo; cf. also line 6 below. Parthenius was a SDUTyQLRM
14
freedman of Nero and Domitian’s a cubiculo and, like most chamberlains, he exercised a considerable influence on his master and on his approachability (see Weaver, p. 7; Jones, Domitian, pp. 61 ff.). As such, he was an important channel for Martial’s access to the palace, as Flavius Abascantus, Domitian’s ab epistulis, was for Statius; 1 see, for example, 5, 6, in which the poet asks Parthenius, who knows tempora Iovis sereni, to give his book to Domitian. Martial had made a careful approach to Parthenius already in 88 or 89, with a petition to Apollo to make good Parthenius’ vow for his son Burrus (4, 45), and he kept addressing him also after the assassination of Domitian, in which Parthenius played some part, if not as a murderer himself, at least as organiser of the crime (see Jones, op. cit., pp. 193 ff.). He may also have been involved in the nomination of Nerva, and Martial’s mention of Parthenius in 11, 1, only a few months after the assassination, is likely to be seen as a political act to show his support for the new regime (see Kay, pp. 52 f.). Parthenius also during the reign of Nerva remained an important intermediary for Martial’s contact with the emperor; in the same way as he had asked him to give his writings to Domitian, Martial in 12, 11 asks him to present them to Nerva.2 vatis: some other passages state that Parthenius wrote poetry himself; thus 5, 6, 1; 11, 1, 6; 12, 11, 1 ff., cf. 8, 28, 1. 4. conspiciendus eques: Martial alludes to his equestrian rank for the first time in 3, 95, 9 f., where, in connection with the rewards bestowed upon him by Caesar uterque (i.e. Titus and Domitian), he speaks of himself as tribune. This would have been a tribunatus semestris, an honorary title practically without duties, but bringing in its train, like all tribunates, the knighthood (see Mommsen, Staatsrecht 2, pp. 367 f.). Martial mentions his rank also in 5, 13, 2 and 12, 29, 2, but it is not clear to which of the emperors he owed it; Howell (on 5, 13, 2) suggests that it may have been given by Titus. The same ending appears in Tib. 1, 2, 72 and Ov. trist. 2, 114. Note that the only dactylic poets to use the adjective conspiciendus (apart from Martial, who has only this instance) are Tibullus, Ovid and Valerius Flaccus, of whom the lastmentioned has one instance (the only one found in a hexameter), Tibullus three and Ovid 14; in Tibullus and Ovid, the word appears only in the pentameter, always with the same placing as here, immediately following the diaeresis. 6. auctoris nomine digna: cf. above on line 3. 7. anus et ... vix accipienda: “old and hardly acceptable to”; for Martial’s frequent application of anus to things as a feminine adjective in the sense of “aged”, cf. 1, 39, 2; 1, 105, 4; 6, 27, 8; 11, 46, 6; 12, 2, 4; 14, 127, 2 (see Howell on 1, 39, 2). 1
It is noteworthy that Martial never mentions Abascantus, and Statius never Parthenius (cf. Sullivan, Nero, p. 194). 2 The carmina mentioned in 12, 11, 6 would have been a book of selected epigrams from Books 10 and 11 (cf. 12, 4; Sullivan, Martial, pp. 50 f.), and not Book 12, as Nerva was forced to hand Parthenius over to the revengeful Praetorians before its publication (see Kay, p. 53).
15
The gerundive vix accipienda expresses the same sense as would an adjective ending with -bilis; cf. 9, 65, 1 and see P. Aalto, Untersuchungen über das lateinische Gerundium und Gerundivum, Helsinki 1949, p. 99. tremulo ... tribuli: “a pauper trembling (from the cold)”, who otherwise would gladly accept a toga because of its high price. Tribulis is literally “of the same tribus” but is used also in the sense of vir humilis (cf. OLD, s.v. b “one registered by his tribe, i.e. not capite census and therefore a landless man”); cf. tribus in the sense of “the masses” (8, 15, 4; OLD, s.v. tribus 2 b), as distinguished from those with equestrian or senatorial rank. Martial has tribulis in this sense also at 9, 57, 8; the only other instance is Hor. epist. 1, 13, 15 ut cum pilleolo soleas conviva tribulis (with Porph.). 8. niveam dicere iure tuo: again a play on words, niveus here meaning “cold as snow”, as a consequence of the toga’s being so threadbare as not to keep its wearer warm any more; Friedländer (on 4, 34, 2) compares 3, 38, 9 and 12, 36, 2; cf. also 2, 46, 7 f. Tu spectas hiemem succincti lentus amici | – Pro scelus! – et lateris frigora trita times (“the threadbare garment of your companion”). For iure tuo at the end of the pentameter, see also 14, 142, 2. 9. longa dies: “long time”, cf., for example, Verg. Aen. 5, 783 with Servius; for the juncture longa dies, cf. 11, 69, 7 (where dies, however, rather means “life”) and see TLL, s.v. dies 1053, 69 ff. consumitis anni: as regards the metaphor (“the tooth of time” in Shakespeare), cf. Ovid’s famous lines in met. 15, 234 ff. tempus edax rerum, tuque, invidiosa vetustas, | omnia destruitis vitiataque dentibus aevi | paulatim lenta consumitis omnia morte! (with Bömer), and the, equally famous, section in Pont. 4, 10, 5–8; also Hor. carm. 3, 6, 45 damnosa quid non inminuit dies? For the prosody, cf. Ov. Ib. 145 Sive ego, quod nolim, longis consumptus ab annis; Manil. 4, 1 Quid tam sollicitis vitam consumimus annis. 10. non est Partheniana, mea est: the pun is based on the ambiguity of Partheniana, meaning “of Parthenius” as well as “pure” (see above on line 3). Because the toga is not shining white any more, it would no longer suit Parthenius, only Martial.
16
50 Ingenium mihi, Gaure, probas sic esse pusillum, carmina quod faciam, quae brevitate placent. Confiteor. Sed tu bis senis grandia libris qui scribis Priami proelia, magnus homo es? Nos facimus Bruti puerum, nos Langona vivum: tu magnus luteum, Gaure, Giganta facis.
5
Recusatio, the renouncing of mythological and heroic themes in favour of more down-to-earth subjects treated on a smaller scale, goes back to Callimachus of Alexandria (Aetia 1, 17 ff.).1 It was introduced by Parthenius of Nicaea to Rome, where it was adopted by the poetae novi; cf., for example, Catull. 14; 22; 36, and his welcoming of the Zmyrna of his friend Cinna (95). Vergil echoes Callimachus in ecl. 6, 3, and Horace takes his ideas as an excuse for declining to hymn Agrippa’s military achievements (carm. 1, 6), on the same grounds handing over to Maecenas the task of honouring Augustus’ conquests in verse (carm. 2, 12; see the introductions by Nisbet & Hubbard to these poems); see also carm. 4, 15 and Horace’s manifesto in sat. 2, 1, 1 ff., which served as a model for Pers. 1 (cf. also 5, 1 ff.) and Iuv. 1; see Rudd, pp. 124 ff. Propertius declares that he has not the ability to write epic, but, if that were his gift, he would not sing of mythological themes, but of the deeds of Caesar (2, 1, 17 ff.). Traces of this conception are to be found also in Ovid (am. 1, 1 ff.), and even Statius could consider the mythological themes of epic rather trite, referring to Troy’s fall, the straying of Odysseus and the journey of the Argonauts as trita vatibus orbita (silv. 2, 7, 48 ff.; wisely, he omits mention of the Theban cycle and of Achilles). Martial, like Juvenal later on, adopts a more aggressive attitude towards “higher poetry”, not that which deals with historical themes (Martial praises the works of Lucan as well as those of Silius2), but that which extends over an intolerable number of books, crowded with mythology and obscure allusions. His principal argument is not that he is unable to write in the loftier genre; he does not ask the reader to overlook any inability on his part but straightforwardly attacks those who write in the genre of mythological epic as well as tragedy. In more than one epigram, he lists the subjects which he find most detestable: the stories of Tereus, Polyphemus (4, 49), Daedalus and Icarus (4, 49; 10, 4), Medea (5, 53; 10, 35) and Colchian witches in general (10, 4), Niobe, Andromache, Deucalion, Phaethon (5, 53), and, what appears to be his favourite target, Thyestes (4, 49; 5, 53; 10, 4; 10, 35). The subject of Troy he speaks of only in the present epigram (while it occurs in similar contexts elsewhere, for example, Prop. 2, 1, 14), and that of the giants and the Gigantomachy, alluded to in line 6, is otherwise mentioned only in 11, 52, 1 On the phenomenon, see W. Wimmel, “Kallimachos in Rom”, Hermes Einzelschriften 16, Wiesbaden 1960, mainly dealing with the Augustan poets. 2 For Martial’s relation to Silius Italicus, see H. Szelest, “Martial und Silius Italicus”, Aus der altertumswissenschaftlichen Arbeit Volkspolens, hrgb. von J. Irmscher und K. Kumaniecki, Berlin 1959, pp. 73–80, and pp. 78 ff. in particular. On Martial’s relation to mythology, see also F. Corsaro, “Il mondo del mito negli Epigrammaton libri di Marziale“, SicGymn 26 (1973), pp. 171–205; H. Szelest, “Die Mythologie bei Martial“, Eos 62 (1974), pp. 297–310.
17
17, a line slightly criticizing the poet’s friend Iulius Cerealis, who wrote a Gigantomachy. The mythological motives were all too artificial and divorced from reality and also indicated a certain snobbery on the part of the writer as well as the reader (cf. 4, 49, 9 f. “Illa [sc. epic] tamen laudant omnes, mirantur, adorant.” | Confiteor: laudant illa, sed ista (sc. epigram) legunt). Instead, Martial advises his reader to read that of which possit dicere vita “Meum est” (10, 4, 8). Cf. also 10, 21; 14, 1, 11 f., and see also Courtney’s introduction to Iuv. 1, 1 and J. W. H. Atkins, Literary Criticism in Antiquity; A Sketch of its Development, vol. 2, Graeco-Roman, London 1952, pp. 300 ff. The reason for this hostile attitude is partly the fact that the popularity of the mythological epic increased greatly during the Silver Age. Martial and Juvenal lived at a time when nearly everybody seems to have composed tragedy and mythological epic and recited it on every street corner and when one ran the risk of having to listen to a Gigantomachy if one invited a friend to dinner (11, 52, 16 f.; see Iuv. 1, 1 ff.). But it is quite possible, even very probable, that there also were personal reasons for Martial’s spitefulness. It has long been held that Martial was not on friendly terms with Statius, the foremost representative of the Silver Latin mythological epic, although the evidence brought forward for such an enmity is by no means conclusive (see Henriksén, Martial und Statius, pp. 81 f.). However, there are some indications that, at least in 94, there was some kind of quarrel between the two poets, as Martial also in 9, 81 defends himself against a “certain poet” (quidam poeta), who finds fault with him because his poems are less elaborate. Both 9, 81 and particularly the present poem are very personal in tone, rancorously defensive, and aimed at a specific person, not at mythological epic in general. It is therefore reasonable to assume that Gaurus and the quidam poeta of 9, 81 are one and the same person. Although there is no clue to the identity of Martial’s slanderer in 9, 81, it is nonetheless clear that his criticism of Martial is such as would have been brought up by a representative of “higher poetry”. In the case of the present epigram, it appears that Martial did in fact provide a hint by choosing the name Gaurus; in his commentary on line 3, Friedländer suggested that this particular name was selected because there is a mountain ridge called Gaurus in Campania, the home district of Statius (cf. also Friedländer, Sittengeschichte 2, pp. 247 f.), and that accordingly the epic poet was the particular target of this epigram. The theory of a quarrel in 94 is further supported by the fact that Statius in the preface of Silvae 4 (published in 95) defends himself against his own slanderers, qui reprehenderunt, ut audio, quod hoc stili genus (sc. lighter poetry) edidissem; a couple of lines below, he says: quisquis ex meis invitus aliquid legit, statim se profiteatur adversum. Ita quare consilio eius accedam? In summam, nempe ego sum qui traducor: taceat et gaudeat. It is quite likely that this criticism came partly from Martial (cf. D. W. T. C. Vessey, Statius and the Thebaid, Cambridge 1973, p. 40; Coleman, p. 59). The reason for the bitter feeling which surfaces in the passages mentioned is certainly to be sought in the competition for literary patronage. This was of vital importance both to Martial and to Statius, who, unlike Seneca, Lucan, Silius and Valerius Flaccus, did not belong to the senatorial class and had no substantial family fortune on which to fall back. But the Silver Age lacked a Maecenas, and
18
the generous climate enjoyed by the Augustan poets had changed (cf. 8, 55, 5; 1, 107), preparing the ground for fierce competition for the favour of those patrons who could still be found. As long as Statius worked on the Thebaid (which was published in 91 or 92), he may have competed with Martial for the favour of the emperor and perhaps of certain wealthy patrons. But as, towards the end of the eighties, he began to write occasional poems, the competition would have hardened drastically. Not only did Statius enter a field which Martial no doubt considered his own, but he also addressed patrons whom Martial had been courting for several years. This competition may account for the rancorous attitude of the present poem and 9, 81 and of Statius’ defence of his Silvae in the preface to Book 4, which were all written about the same time. See further Henriksén, Martial und Statius, pp. 111 ff. Note Martial’s contrasting of great and small throughout the epigram. Having been charged with having an ingenium pusillum, he likens his poetry to small works of art, whereas Gaurus, who wants to be considered a magnus homo, produces a luteus Gigas. Martial uses the same contrast elsewhere; cf., for example, 1, 9; 3, 62, 7 f. 1. Gaure: as suggested by Friedländer, Martial probably chose this name as a guarded allusion to Statius (see the introduction above). If Martial wanted to attack Statius, according to his principles (see note on 9, 40, 1 Diodorus), he could naturally not do so openly and would probably not want to; it was a tradition not to mention a rival or enemy by name, lest he should be remembered by posterity (see Sullivan, Martial, p. 125). Martial uses the name Gaurus also in 2, 89; 4, 67; 5, 82; and 8, 27, none of which have anything in common with the present poem; the Gaurus of 2, 89 is said, it is true, to write poems Musis et Apolline nullo, but since that is not the main theme of the poem, it is not enough to connect that Gaurus with the present one. probas: the word is perhaps best taken in a conative sense = probare studes, “you try to demonstrate” (see Kühner-Stegmann 1, § 31, 8, pp. 120 f.). pusillum: the word is rarely found in poetry in general (Catull. 37, 16; 54, 1; Hor. sat. 1, 4, 17; 5, 69; Ov. rem. 730; Priap. 14, 6; Iuv. 10, 121; 14, 29; 15, 70) but is rather frequent in Martial, who has 11 instances (also 1, 9, 2; 3, 42, 3; 3, 47, 4; 3, 62, 8; 4, 43, 9; 5, 82, 4; 7, 55, 6; 10, 98, 9; 12 praef.; 14, 10, 1). Its tone is colloquial, and it is used with regard to intellectual capacities also in Sen. benef. 2, 27, 1; Hor. sat. 1, 4, 17 f. animus pusillus (see Citroni and Howell respectively on 1, 9, 2). 2. brevitate: one of the chief aims of the epigrammatist was placere brevitate, as opposed to the long works of the epic poets; cf., for example, 8, 29; AP 9, 342 (Parmenion); 9, 369 (Cyrillus) (see Howell [Commentary on Book 1], pp. 8 f.; Atkins, loc. cit.). Martial thought brevity essential in composing books as well as epigrams (4, 29, 7 f.), but it is worth noting that he himself was subject to contemporary criticism for making his epigrams too long, as appears from the poems 19
written to rebut such charges (1, 110; 2, 77; 3, 83; 6, 65; 10, 59; see H. Szelest, “Ut faciam breviora mones epigrammata, Corde… Eine Martial-Studie”, Philologus 124 [1980], pp. 99–108). 3. bis senis … libris: Friedländer’s suggestion that the specific mention of twelve books alludes to Statius’ Thebaid is not conclusive, as twelve books is the “ideal length” of an epic work. The fact that Vergil’s Aeneid, the prime model of epic works in Latin, is divided into twelve books (half of the twenty-four books each of the Iliad and the Odyssey corresponding to the letters of the Greek alphabet) has certainly played a part. 3 f. grandia ... Priami proelia: grandia is, of course, ironical. On Martial’s criticism of the mythological subject-matter of epic, see the introduction above. Apart from the Ilias Latina and Book 2 of Vergil’s Aeneis, the Trojan war was treated in Latin by Lucan (Iliacon), Petronius (Troiae Halosis) and the emperor Nero (Troica; cf. 9, 26 intro. and see Sullivan, Nero, pp. 88 ff.), none of which has been preserved, except for a handful of lines from the works of Lucan and Nero. magnus homo es: cf. 2, 32, 2 and see note on 9, 53, 2. 5 f. Bruti puerum … Giganta: Martial adopts a metaphor from sculptural art, likening his own poetry to art on the smaller scale, and introducing a giant in the next line as a symbol of mythological epic. Bruti puerum: the words allude to a statuette of a boy, famous as having been a favourite with Brutus the Tyrannicide. It was quite small and is mentioned in this capacity by Martial also in 2, 77, 4, in a context similar to the present. There is also a distich on a clay copy of it in the Apophoreta (14, 171 fictile; see Leary, ad loc.). Pliny (nat. 34, 82) ascribes the statuette to the sculptor Strongylion, active towards the end of the 5th and at the beginning of the 4th century BC. He was probably an Athenian, as two of his works were put up on the Acropolis (a “wooden horse” [in the temple of Artemis Brauronia] and a bull), and as he also furnished the cult statue of Artemis Soteira for Megara, Athens’ ally. Together with Cephisodotus and Olympiosthenes, he sculpted a group of Muses placed on Mt. Helicon and is also known to have made a sculpture of an Amazon, which was in the possession of Nero, presumably a statuette, as the emperor used to have it carried in his suite (see Lippold in RE 2:4, s.v. Strongylion 372 ff.). %UR¹WRX
SDLGdRQ
Langona: the allusion here is obscure, since there is no unquestionable mention of a statue called Langon anywhere; the word langon itself is equally unattested in Latin, and the sole passage which could offer an explanation involves textual problems. In nat. 34, 79, Pliny gives a list of famous sculptors and their works: Lycius … fecit … puerum sufflantem languidos ignes et Argonautas … Leochares aquilam … Autolycum pancratii victorem … Iovemque … item Apollinem diadematum, Lyciscum mangonem, puerum subdolae ac fucatae vernilita20
tis, Lycius et ipse puerum suffitorem. This is the text printed in the Teubner edition by Iahn & Mayhoff (Leipzig 1897), which follows the reading of the B-manuscript, the 10th century Bamberg MS which is an authority for the later books of Pliny. However, all other MSS offer Luciscus langonem (or Lyciscus lag-; see the apparatus by Iahn & Mayhoff) for Lyciscum mangonem; the adoption of this reading, along with a slight alteration of the punctuation, would give Lyciscus (sc. fecit) Langonem, puerum subdolae ac fucatae vernilitatis, which (as recognized by Iahn & Mayhoff) would fit in well with the present line. Friedländer found it less likely that the passage from Pliny is of any relevance here, rejecting earlier attempts to recognize in Langon the name of the Bruti puer, as the latter statuette is known to have been made by Strongylion, not by a Lyciscus (cf. Lippold in RE 13, s.v. Lykiskos 7, 2296). Heraeus joined him in this view, but he also demonstrated that the significance of langon is “layabout”, the word being a transcription of Gr. ; cf. Etymologicum magnum 554, 14 1 and see W. Heraeus, “Varia”, RhM 54 (1899), pp. 309 f. Now Pliny’s description of the statuette as puer subdolae ac in the above sense,2 fucatae vernilitatis does not seem inappropriate of a and it is tempting to adopt the reading of the inferior MSS and translate the passage from Pliny thus: “Lyciscus made Langon, a boy of deceitful and deceiving impudence”. Moreover, the subdola ac fucata vernilitas would be fittingly applied to Martial’s epigrams and, hence, the Langon would be an appropriate representative of his writing. This would also imply that Martial in the present line mentions two works of art, the “Boy of Brutus” and the Langon of Lyciscus. ODJJÇQ
ODJJÇQ
¯ H¸TyZM ODQTQZQ WR¿ JÍQRM NDg I±ERX
ODJJÇQ
6. Giganta: the giant is introduced here as a representative of the cumbrous epic. Martial’s friend Iulius Cerealis wrote a Gigantomachy (see the introduction above), and the young Ovid also had plans to write such a work; cf. Ov. am. 2, 1, 11 ff. (with Booth’s note); Waser in RE Suppl. 3, s.v. Giganten, 658. The Gigas luteus is strangely reminiscent of the statues with feet of clay in Daniel 14, 6.
“ODJJÇQ: one who immediately hides away from struggle and things causing fear.” Cf. W. Klein, “Studien zur griechischen Künstlergeschichte”, Archaeologisch–Epigraphische Mittheilungen aus Oesterreich 7 (1883), pp. 60–84; see p. 73 for the Langon. 1 2
21
51 Quod semper superos invito fratre rogasti, hoc, Lucane, tibi contigit, ante mori. Invidet ille tibi; Stygias nam Tullus ad umbras optabat, quamvis sit minor, ire prior. Tu colis Elysios nemorisque habitator amoeni esse tuo primum nunc sine fratre cupis; et si iam nitidis alternus venit ab astris, pro Polluce mones Castora ne redeat.
5
An epigram on the death of Cn. Domitius Lucanus, elder brother of Cn. Domitius Tullus, adoptive sons of Domitius Afer the orator.1 They were enormously rich and had notable political influence; from a plebeian family they became patricians by 74, suffect consuls around 79 (Tullus perhaps for a second time about 98), and, later on, proconsuls of Africa,2 and Martial did his best to draw their attention to his poetry, approaching them with pieces flattering their mutual affection and inseparability. That they exercised literary patronage is clear from 3, 20, where Martial’s fellow Spaniard Canius Rufus, poet and historian, is described as being in receipt of their support. It is, however, difficult to say whether Martial was as successful as Rufus; perhaps the fact that he no longer addresses Tullus after the present epigram is an indication that he was not or that his favour rested with Lucanus. Anyhow, the Domitii were not likely to be easily captured by the flattery of a poet; on the contrary, they were rather shrewd gentlemen, who did not refrain from manipulating the will of Lucanus’ father-in-law for their own profit and, in the case of Tullus, from encouraging legacy-hunters only to leave them completely empty-handed.3 See further PIR2 D 167 and D 152 respectively; White, Aspects, pp. 87 ff.; and the introductions to 1, 36 by Citroni and Howell. The main theme in Martial’s poems mentioning the Domitii is their brotherly pietas, which is the subject also of 1, 36 and 5, 28, 3 (in the latter, he talks of them as the fratres Curvii, their full names being Cn. Domitius Afer Titus Marcellus Curvius Lucanus and Cn. Domitius Afer Titius Marcellus Curvius Tullus). 1, 36 is of special interest; in that epigram, Martial says that, if Lucanus and Tullus were given the fate of Castor and Pollux, there would be a noble argument between them, as both would wish to be the first to die for his brother, so as to be able, not to share life and death with the survivor but to say to him: “Live on your own time and live on mine too”. When, some eight years later, Lucanus died, Martial followed up 1, 36 with the present poem (which is the only source mentioning his death) as a natural sequel to the former. It is a poem not of compassion and consolation, but of encouragement. Now, Lucanus has drawn the winning ticket and died before his envious brother. But Lucanus is not treated as dead; he 1
Lucanus and Tullus were really the sons of Sex. Curvius, who was accused by Domitius Afer and condemned. Domitius then adopted them in 41 or 42 (18 years before his death [Plin. epist. 8, 18, 5], which occurred in 59 [Tac. ann. 14, 19]). 2 See Syme, Tacitus, p. 4, n. 2; p. 69, n. 6. 3 When Tullus died in 106–7, he left his entire fortune to his niece Domitia Lucilla; cf. the introduction to 9, 8 and see Howell’s introduction to 1, 36.
22
is “mythologized”, having become the counterpart of Castor, the one of the Dioscuri who was mortal (being the son of Tyndareus; cf. note on 9, 103, 2 alio ... cycno). He dwells in the underworld and is now for the first time fully content with being without his brother. And should he encounter Castor himself, stepping down from heaven to change places with Pollux, he will exhort him not to return, but to remain in the underworld, unselfishly granting his brother the privilege of constantly being in heaven. The idea is the same as in 1, 36, 6; the will to sacrifice oneself for the other is greater with the Domitii than with the Dioscuri. Martial’s emphasis on their mutual affection was not chosen at random; it was certainly what the Domitii most wanted to hear. They apparently were anxious to appear together; cf. the inscription from a road on their estate at Bomarzo, reading iter privatum duorum Domitiorum (CIL 11, 3042), and the stamps on the tiles from their factory (ILS 8651–8651a). But even though Martial seems to have pulled the right strings, he was probably not very successful in his flattery, at least not after Lucanus’ death. As mentioned above, there are no subsequent epigrams addressed to Tullus alone, in the same manner as Martial had addressed only Lucanus in the humorous anecdote of 8, 75;1 perhaps Martial found Lucanus easier to get round than Tullus, which may be the reason why the death of the former put an end to his poetic advances. 3. Stygias … umbras: so ; undas O, It. vg., see Heraeus’ apparatus. The juncture Stygia unda is the commoner,2 hence the MSS often disagree as to which of the variants should be read. Of the six instances of Stygiae undae/umbrae in Martial, two have been transmitted only with umbrae (1, 101, 5 and 1, 114, 5), one with undae (6, 58, 3), and the rest (apart from the present also 11, 84, 1 and 12, 90, 3) with both variants. The confusion also extends to expressions like infernas … sub umbras (11, 69, 11; cf. Heraeus’ apparatus and Kay, ad loc.). In the present case, undas was printed by the editors up to Lindsay, who introduced umbras in the text. The word has been kept by Heraeus and Shackleton Bailey, although there are no means of judging between the two readings in Martial, except perhaps for the fact that there are two transmissions of umbrae without variants and only one with undae. Heraeus in his apparatus compares the unanimously transmitted 1, 36, 5 infernas … ad umbras (to which add 4, 16, 5), which, however, is not a direct parallel, since infernus does not have the notion of water, as Stygius has; moreover, the expression infernae umbrae has, as mentioned above, also been transmitted with the variant undae in 11, 69, 11. Better support is to be found in Ov. met. 1, 139 Stygiisque … umbris; Sil. 5, 597 Stygiave sub umbra; 9, 45 Stygia … umbra; 13, 784 Stygia … in umbra; Stat. Theb. 11, 85 Stygiis … in umbris; silv. 3, 5, 37 Stygias … ad umbras; Ach. 1, 630 Stygiasque EJ
1 Groag (PIR2 D 152) is doubtful whether the Lucanus of 8, 75 is Domitius Lucanus, but his doubts have not met with undivided approval either from White (op. cit., p. 88) or from Howell; in the index nominum of Heraeus as well as of Shackleton Bailey, the Lucanus of 8, 75 is listed as identical with Domitius Lucanus. 2 Cf. Verg. Aen. 3, 215; 6, 385; 7, 773; 12, 91; Aetna 79; Hor. carm. 2, 20, 8; Prop. 2, 34, 53; 3, 18, 9; Ov. epist. 16, 211; ars 2, 41; met. 2, 101; 3, 272; 10, 697; 11, 500; trist. 1, 2, 65; 5, 9, 19; Pont. 2, 3, 43; Lucan. 6, 749; Sil. 2, 706; 15, 43.
23
… ad umbras, all unanimously transmitted. It is noteworthy that all the instances, with the exception of Ovid, are to be found in Silver Latin. 5. Elysios: sc. campos. Elysii elliptical also in Lucan. 6, 699, Stat. Theb. 4, 482; perhaps also in Serv. georg. 1, 39 “sequi curet Proserpina matrem” ad admirationem Elysiorum posuit. Heraeus in his apparatus also produces a number of instances of the elliptical Elysii from the CLE. nemorisque habitator amoeni: the grove, like the brook and the grotto, is one of the features of the locus amoenus; see Curtius, pp. 199 ff.; Bömer on Ov. fast. 2, 315; Nisbet & Hubbard on Hor. carm. 2, 3, pp. 52 f., with further references. For the probable source of this expression, see Verg. Aen. 6, 673 ff. (Anchises is speaking) nulli certa domus; lucis habitamus opacis, | riparumque toros et prata recentia rivis | incolimus; for groves in Elysium in general, cf. Verg. Aen. 6, 639; Ov. am. 2, 6, 49; Sen. Herc. f. 744; Tro. 158. Nemoris habitator is a singular juncture. 7. nitidis … astris: astra should perhaps be taken as referring to the actual stars (viz. the constellation of Gemini; see Ov. fast. 5, 693–720 with Bömer) rather than to the heavens as the abode of the gods. The juncture nitida astra is to be found only in Martial (also 8, 36, 7) and Statius (silv. 1, 2, 147; 2, 1, 94). alternus: predicative, with the force of an adverb, “in his turn”. The adjective is frequently used in connection with the Dioscuri in the role referred to here; cf. 10, 51, 2; Verg. Aen. 6, 121; Ciris 397; Ov. fast. 5, 719; Sil. 9, 295; 13, 805; cf. TLL, s.v. 1754, 70 ff. 8. pro Polluce mones Castora: Friedländer punctuates pro Polluce, mones …, which makes no great difference to the meaning, since it is still Castor who comes from the heavens to relieve Pollux. The present punctuation, preferred by Schneidewin, Gilbert, Lindsay, Heraeus and Shackleton Bailey, implies that Lucanus is an example for Castor, thereby exhorting him not to return to heaven, but to let Pollux take over also his share of days on Olympus. Thus, the love of Lucanus for Tullus is even greater than that of Castor for Pollux.
24
52 Si credis mihi, Quinte, quod mereris, natales, Ovidi, tuas Aprilis ut nostras amo Martias Kalendas. Felix utraque lux diesque nobis signandi melioribus lapillis! Hic vitam tribuit, sed hic amicum. Plus dant, Quinte, mihi tuae Kalendae.
5
This epigram, like its humorous sequel 9, 53, is written to Martial’s close friend Quintus Ovidius on his birthday, the 1st of April. In its humble plainness, it is perhaps the most sincere declaration of friendship among the poems to Ovidius (see note on lines 1 f. below), although the idea of the birthday of a friend or patron as equally or even more sacred than one’s own appears to have been something of a commonplace; it is expressed, for reasons similar to Martial’s, by Horace on the birthday of Maecenas (carm. 4, 11, 17 f. iure sollemnis mihi sanctiorque | paene natali proprio) and later by Pliny (epist. 6, 30, 1) and Censorinus (3, 5 f.); cf. also Marcus Aurelius’ letter on Fronto’s birthday (Fronto p. 43, 10 ff. van den Hout 1954), and see K. Argetsinger, “Birthday Rituals: Friends and Patrons in Roman Poetry and Cult”, ClAnt 11 (1992), pp. 175–193 (pp. 176–179 particularly). For other birthday poems in Martial, cf. 3, 6; 4, 1; 9, 39; 12, 60; see also the poems on Argentaria Polla’s celebration of the birthday of her late husband Lucan (7, 21–23). On the birthday in antiquity, see W. Schmidt, Geburtstag im Altertum, Gießen 1908. All the information supplied by Martial himself indicates that he was really born on the first of March. In 12, 60, 1 f., he explicitly says so: Martis alumne dies, roseam quo lampada primum | magnaque siderei vidimus ora dei; elsewhere, he mentions that day as his natales Kalendae (10, 24, 1) or as meae Kalendae (10, 92, 10); the Kalends of March was also the day when Martial expected (the fictitious) Sextilianus to present him with a toga (10, 29, 3). However, the fact that a couple of other birthdays are mentioned by Martial as being on the Kalends—besides that of Q. Ovidius also that of the lawyer Restitutus (10, 87, 1 f.)—made H. Lucas suspect that it was customary to celebrate a person’s birthday not on the birthday itself, but on the Kalends of the month in which one was born (H. Lucas, “Martial’s Kalendae nataliciae”, CQ 32 [1938], pp. 5–6). As Lucas acknowledges, the evidence only of the present epigram and 10, 87 is not enough to support such a thesis, as it may still be a matter of coincidence. But Lucas finds support for his theory in 8, 64, in which a certain Clytus wants as many opportunities as possible to demand presents: Ut poscas, Clyte, munus exigasque, | uno nasceris octiens in anno | et solas, puto, tresve quattuorve | non natalicias habes Kalendas (8, 64, 1–4). The fact that Martial here mentions the Kalends proves, according to Lucas, that birthdays were celebrated on that day;1 the reason would be the religious and commercial significance of the Kalends, which was sacred to 1
There seems to be nothing to support Lucas’ statement that “This was either on the first of the month in which the birthday fell or else on the first of the month following”.
25
Juno, the guardian of birth, and on which there was greater license in spending money; for the latter reason, the celebration of one’s birthday on the Kalends might result in greater heaps of presents. The first objection to this theory is self-evident, as it seems rather absurd that the birthday–celebrations of the whole of Rome would have been limited to twelve days only; if that were the case, those with even a limited circle of acquaintances would surely know some persons whose birthdays fell in the same month and had to be celebrated on the same day. Moreover, Martial, on whose evidence Lucas bases his thesis, mentions the birthday of Marcellinus’ father as falling on the 18th of May, the day on which it was apparently also celebrated: Lux tibi post Idus numeratur tertia Maias, | Marcelline, tuis bis celebranda sacris (3, 6, 1 f.). A further and perhaps more important counter-argument against Lucas’ thesis is provided by inscriptions recording a person’s donation of funds for the celebration of his or her birthday (even after his or her death): from these inscriptions, it is apparent that the donor wanted the celebrations to take place on the actual birthday, cf., for example, CIL 10, 5849 … iussit XII K. Octobr. die natalis sui … sportulas item populo fieri; 10, 4736; 10, 5654. Other literary sources also argue against Lucas’ theory, for example, Hor. carm. 4, 11, 14–20, in which Maecenas is said to reckon his years from the Idus ... | qui dies mensem Veneris marinae | findit Aprilem, and Ov. ars 1, 405 ff., where the poet advises against making an approach on days when one is expected to bring a present: Sive dies suberit natalis, sive Kalendae, | quas Venerem Marti continuasse iuvat, … differ opus. Here, the birthday in contrasted with the Kalends of April (on which women apparently received presents; see Hollis, ad loc.). Similar to this instance is Prop. 4, 5, 35 f., where slaves, in order that their mistress may receive presents, are told to put it into the lover’s head that it will soon be the Kalends of April or that the mistress has her birthday on the Ides of May. To sum up, the evidence of Roman birthday celebrations indicates that these took place on the actual birthday, and the fact that Martial’s and Ovidius’ birthdays, as well as that of Restitutus, were on the Kalends should be considered a coincidence; in the case of Ovidius, such a coincidence might perhaps have acted as a stimulus to Martial to stress the Kalends in the present epigram. 8, 64, it is true, calls for an explanation. In this case, it would seem to be most natural to accept that of Lucas: Clytus chose to celebrate his fictitious birthdays on the Kalends, as this, he hoped, would result in his getting more presents. But this was a device solely of Clytus, and is not to be regarded as common practice; for the trick of faking a birthday to get presents, cf., for example, Ov. ars 1, 430; Schmidt, op. cit., p. 29. 1. Si credis mihi: a modest variant of the more straightforward (and commoner) crede mihi (cf. note on 9, 41, 3), usually with the addition of quid sim., as in Ov. trist. 3, 4, 3 usibus edocto si quicquam credis amico; 5, 4, 23; Pont. 1, 5, 9 (1, 6, 19); Iuv. 10, 67; Sen. epist. 64, 2; 96, 2; 119, 9; Plin. epist. 7, 17, 7; 10, 26, 2 (but crede mihi only 7, 31, 7); Fronto p. 128, 12; p. 167, 17 van den Hout 1954. 1 f. Quinte … | … Ovidi: a very dear friend of Martial, who is the only source of our knowledge of Ovidius. Appearing in another eight epigrams ranging from 26
Book 13 to Book 10, he was the poet’s neighbour at Nomentum, where apparently he grew wine, cf. 1, 105 and 13, 119. 9, 98 is a humorous piece on a miserable vintage. Martial much admired the decision of Ovidius to accompany his patron Caesonius Maximus, who had been exiled by Nero in 65, to Sicily (see 7, 44 and 45). 7, 93 is a poem addressed to the city of Narnia in Umbria, reproaching it for keeping Ovidius away from Nomentum (and Martial) all too often. Ovidius may have had some special connection with the town; perhaps it was his home-town, as it was Nerva’s. In 10, 44, Martial advises the ageing Ovidius against going on a journey with a friend to Britain. Thereafter, nothing more is heard of him. For a similar spreading of a name over the two opening lines, cf. 7, 97, 1 f. Nosti si bene Caesium, libelle, | montanae decus Umbriae Sabinum. 3. nostras … Martias Kalendas: see the introduction above. 5. melioribus lapillis: the well-known habit of marking a happy day with a white mark was, according to Plin. nat. 7, 131, derived from the Thracian custom of putting stones of different colours, corresponding to the experience of each day, into an urn. As regards the Romans, however, it was probably originally nothing more than a way of marking the calendar (see Nisbet & Hubbard on Hor. carm. 1, 36, 10). The day was marked with chalk (Hor. carm. 1, 36, 10) or a small white stone (Catull. 68, 148; Mart. 12, 34, 5; Plin. epist. 6, 11, 3), even with a pearl (Mart. 10, 38, 4; Stat. silv. 4, 6, 18) or a gem (Mart. 8, 45, 2; 11, 36, 1); cf. Otto, s.v. calculus, pp. 64 f. The expression melior lapillus is found only here and in Pers. 2, 1, from which Martial has apparently taken it over (cf. Kißel, ad loc.). 6. hic … hic: for the usual hic … ille. This repetition of the same pronoun with explicit reference to two different things is of colloquial origin and appears already in Plautus. It was introduced into higher poetry by Vergil (ecl. 4, 56), under whose influence it was adopted also by Tacitus (see Hofmann–Szantyr, § 105 a, Zus. , p. 181). In Martial, cf. also 11, 81: Cum sene communem vexat spado Dindymus Aeglen, | … | viribus hic, operi non est hic utilis annis | … | Supplex illa rogat pro se miserisque duobus, | hunc iuvenem facias, hunc, Cytherea, virum. E
27
53 Natali tibi, Quinte, tuo dare parva volebam munera; tu prohibes: inperiosus homo es. Parendum est monitis, fiat quod uterque volemus et quod utrumque iuvat: tu mihi, Quinte, dato. Martial wanted to give Q. Ovidius some presents on his birthday, the Kalends of April (see 9, 52), but Ovidius, in a fit of modesty, would not accept them. Ovidius had probably expected to be pressed, but instead Martial takes the opportunity of pulling his friend’s leg: he has to obey Ovidius’ wish, and thus it is better that Ovidius should give presents to Martial, for the poet enjoys getting them just as much as his friend enjoys giving them. Herein lies a small lesson in friendship: it is unjust of Ovidius to prevent Martial from giving him presents, for to a friend it is worth just as much to be able to give as to receive. The epigram is placed immediately after 9, 52, the warm–hearted poem on Ovidius’ birthday, and although it may be read by itself, it loses much of its effect if detached from its context. Such coupled epigrams are common in Martial, and often, one must imagine that something has occurred between the composition of the two epigrams (commonly some kind of reaction to the former), causing Martial to write a second epigram in reply to the reaction; see the introduction, vol. 1, p. 20. On birthday presents in Rome, see Schmidt, Geburtstag, p. 29 (where, apparently, he is wrong about Pers. 1, 16; see Kißel, ad loc.). In 10, 87, 8 ff., Martial has a list of exclusive birthday presents which would become the lawyer Restitutus, such as Tyrian mantles, evening dresses, genuine sardonyxes, embossed work by Phidias, hares, kids and fish. Mantles occur again in this context in 7, 86, 7 ff., together with Spanish silver and a toga. 2. inperiosus homo es: Martial is fond of this structure in the second hemiepes of the pentameter; cf. in particular 1, 73, 4 ingeniosus homo es; 1, 107, 2 desidiosus homo es; 5, 82, 4 Gaure: pusillus homo es; 10, 88, 2 officiosus homo es; 12, 64, 2 Cinna, gulosus homo es; cf. also 1, 9, 2; 1, 67, 2; 2, 32, 2; 4, 83, 4; 5, 61, 8; 9, 41, 10; 9, 50, 4; and 9, 63, 2. 4. tu mihi, Quinte, dato: for the structure, cf. 2, 61, 6; 3, 60, 2; 13, 126, 2; and 14, 25, 2.
28
54 Si mihi Picena turdus palleret oliva, tenderet aut nostras silva Sabina plagas, aut crescente levis traheretur harundine praeda pinguis et inplicitas virga teneret aves: cara daret sollemne tibi cognatio munus, nec frater nobis nec prior esset avus. Nunc sturnos inopes fringuillarumque querellas audit et arguto passere vernat ager; inde salutatus picae respondet arator, hinc prope summa rapax miluus astra volat. Mittimus ergo tibi parvae munuscula chortis: qualia si recipis, saepe propinquus eris.
5
10
The Caristia or cara cognatio (see below on line 5) was a family celebration falling on the 22nd of February, on the day after the Feralia, the feast in memory of the dead. On this day, which was not an official festival day but a feria privata (Fest. p. 242), the members of each family got together for a feast, for which everyone brought a certain amount of food and drink. As indicated by the present epigram, it was customary also to send food for this feast to friends. Cf. also Ov. fast. 2, 617–638 (with Bömer’s note on 617); Val. Max. 2, 1, 8; Wissova in RE 3, s.v. Caristia. In this epigram, Martial regrets that he cannot provide the unnamed addressee (who is probably the same as in the following poem, viz. Flaccus; see note on line 5 below) with a munus solemne, i.e. a thrush, which obviously would be a suitable gift on the Caristia (cf. 9, 55, 1). But Martial has no means of breeding thrushes, nor are there any wildfowl for him to catch, as his farm is not in the Sabine woodland, but at Nomentum, where there are no edible birds at all, except for those of the poultry yard. Thus, he will be giving a chicken. Note the chiastic structure of the epigram: Martial begins by talking of bred birds, and then turns to wild fowl; when in line 7 he gets on to the conditions at Nomentum, he first mentions wild birds and then ends by talking of bred birds, those of his poultry yard. 1. Picena … oliva: the olives of Picenum were, along with those of Sidicini, the best in Italy; cf. Plin. nat. 15, 16. Martial mentions them often; thus in 1, 43, 8; 4, 46, 12; 4, 88, 7; 5, 78, 20; 7, 53, 5; 11, 52, 11 (with Kay’s note); and 13, 36, 1. turdus: in Rome as in Greece, the thrush was reckoned to be one of the most delicious birds; Martial considered the thrust a mattea prima (13, 92) and mentions it also in 2, 40, 3; 3, 47, 10; 3, 58, 26; 3, 77, 1; 4, 66, 6; 6, 11, 3; 6, 75, 1; 7, 20, 6; 9, 55, 1 and 8; 11, 21, 5; and 13, 51. Besides being caught in the wild (see below), there were also special turdaria for their breeding. These could be found in Rome as well as in the countryside, especially in the Sabine land, which by its nature was particularly suitable for thrushes and where the bird was found in large numbers (Varro rust. 3, 4, 2). It was also wise to locate breeding in the same area 29
as birds were caught, as thrushes often died during transport in small cages (Colum. 8, 10, 1), so presumably Martial, in mentioning the bred thrush and, in the following line, the catching of birds in the Sabine woods, wants to contrast his own farm at Nomentum with one in the Sabine land (see further Keller, Tierwelt 2, pp. 76 ff.; Ihm in RE 5, s.v. Drossel 1721 ff.). Thrushes were normally bred on a mixture of figs and spelt, but it appears that olives were their preferred food, which perhaps also made the meat paler and more delicate; cf. Calp. ecl. 3, 48 non sic destricta macrescit turdus oliva; Auson. 25, 16, 1 f. Prete (perhaps in dependence on this epigram) Qualis Picenae populator turdus olivae | clunes opimat cereas; Athen. 2, 68 Kaibel . · ' .1 The Byzantine Geoponica (14, 24, 6) mentions olives as food for thrushes. Difference in taste due to variation in food was presumed, for example, in boars (see note on 9, 14, 3 Aprum). 6XUDNR¹VLRL
W
M
NdFODM
NLFODM
OyJRXVLQ
(SdFDUPRM
WM
W
G|
xODLRILORIJRXM
NLFODM
palleret: Friedländer assumed that this refers to the colour of the meat turning paler when the bird was fed on olives, which would seem to be correct with reference to the quotation from Ausonius above. 2. tenderet … silva Sabina … plagas: thrushes, like other birds and prey, could be caught by using nets (cf. 2, 40, 3; 3, 58, 26; 11, 21, 5) fastened to trees (or to poles, see Blümner, Privataltertümer, pp. 517 ff.; 526); cf. Ov. ars 1, 47 Aucupibus noti frutices; met. 11, 73 (laqueos) quos callidus abdidit auceps (with Bömer). On the frequency of thrushes in the Sabine land, cf. note on line 2 above. 3 f. crescente … harundine … | pinguis … virga: another way of catching birds was by using reeds, harundines aucupatoriae (cf. TLL, s.v. harundo 2543, 37 ff.), at the end of which was fastened a rod (viscum) smeared with birdlime prepared from mistletoe, here referred to as “the sticky rod”. Two or more reeds could be joined to increase the range of the device, hence crescente; cf. also 14, 216; Sil. 7, 677; Val. Fl. 6, 261 ff. The bird got stuck on the limed rod and could thus be pulled in by the bird–catcher (as suggested by traho); see K. Linder, Beiträge zu Vogelfang und Falknerei im Altertum, Berlin 1973, pp. 19 ff. levis … praeda: also of the nymph Pholoe hunted by Pan in Stat. silv. 2, 3, 20. 5. cara: cara , Care T. The reading of T was preferred by earlier editors, and Friedländer identified the Carus thus obtained with the winner in the Alban games of 9, 23, although there is nothing to argue for an identification between the two (cf. note on 9, 23, 2 Carus). Lindsay introduced cara into the text, which is obviously correct, as the Caristia is elsewhere referred to as cara cognatio (cf. Pol. Silv. fast. Febr. 22; Tert. idol. 10; Menol. Colot. Febr. [CIL 12, p. 280]; Vall. EJ
1
“Syracusans call thrushes kichelae. Thus Epicharmus: ‘kichelae, too, which like to eat the olives’”. Translation by Gulick, Loeb.
30
Febr. [CIL, loc. cit]; CIL 6, 10234, 13; TLL, s.v. cognatio 1478, 50 ff.). This leaves the epigram without an explicit addressee, but it seems safe to assume that the poem is addressed to the same person as in 9, 55, viz. Martial’s friend and patron Flaccus (see note on 9, 33, 1).1 Obviously, the two epigrams form a couple of the kind “serious epigram followed by humorous epigram on the same theme and with the same addressee”, which can be observed elsewhere in Martial (see 9, 53 intro.). Hence, the addressee is likely to have been the same person. 7. sturnos inopes: “useless starlings”. Even though the bird is mentioned as edible (its meat, however, being difficult to digest, see Anthim. 26), the Romans do not seem to have cared for it as food; it was prescribed, though, for certain diseases (Philum. med. 2 p. 126, 8; Galen. 6, 435 K; see Steier in RE 2:3, s.v. Star 2150 f.). It is also possible that there is a notion of “serving no good purpose, inexpedient” (for inops in this sense of things in nature, cf. TLL, s.v. 1755, 38 ff.), because starlings in great numbers devastated the fields of corn and were a real plague to farmers (cf. AP 7, 172 [Antipater of Sidon]; 9, 373 [Anonymous]). See also F. Capponi, Ornithologia Latina, Genoa 1979, pp. 473 ff. (for the differfringuillarumque querellas: fringuillarum ; fringillorum ent forms, cf. Capponi, op. cit., p. 234; TLL, s.v. 1340, 21 ff.). The reading of was introduced by Heraeus, who observed that the feminine form was preferred by the authors (TLL, loc. cit.). The word is onomatopoetic (cf. fringultio, “to twitter”) and probably refers to the chaffinch, which is seldom mentioned in literature (see Capponi, op. cit., pp. 234 ff.; H. Gossen in RE Suppl. 8, s.v. Finken 12, 170; TLL, loc. cit.). Querellae also of the croaking of the pica in 1, 53, 10. E
DJ
E
8. arguto passere etc.: as observed by Siedschlag, Ovidisches, p. 160, the line is presumably an adoption of Ov. trist. 3, 12, 8 indocilique loquax gutture vernat avis. Like the starlings, sparrows in great numbers were a threat to the cornfields, but, according to Anthim. 30, their meat was good and healthy to eat; cf. also Athen. 2, 68 Kaibel. Mentioning them in this context, Martial (like the Romans in general, perhaps, as there is no mention of the sparrow as food) would hardly have shared this opinion (see Steier in RE 2:3, s.v. Sperling 1631 f.; Capponi, op. cit., pp. 384 ff.). The epithet argutus is not elsewhere applied to the sparrow, the song of which is characterised by Catull. 3, 10 by the verb pipiare and by Suet. frg. 161 p. 254, 1 by the verb titiare; cf. TLL, s.v. passer 606, 32 ff. 9. salutatus picae respondet arator: the word pica was used by the Romans of the magpie as well as of the jay, and it is often impossible to judge which bird is meant. Both, again, are quite useless birds (cf. Martial’s disappointment at being served a pica in 3, 60, 8), having the unpleasant call (1, 53, 10; Ov. met. 5, 678 rauca garrulitas) in common, but also the ability to imitate human speech (ibid. 299), which was much admired. Capponi (op. cit., p. 416) suggests, though, that 1
This suggestion was made by White, Dedication, p. 41, n. 4, although he also held open the possibility of the addressee being the Ovidius of 9, 53 and, in fact, was doubtful about both.
31
the picae mentioned in Petronius and Martial (see below) are magpies, while those appearing in Ovid (also met. 5, 299) are jays. The pica seems to have been trained mostly to make salutations; cf. 7, 87, 6; 14, 76; Petron. 29, 1. The phenomenon was apparently common enough for Martial to talk jokingly of the pica here as being able to salute by nature, without any training. Cf. also Plin. nat. 10, 118; Pers. pr. 9 (and see Kißel’s note); Stat. silv. 2, 4, 19; Keller, Tierwelt 2, pp. 112 f. Note also that the participle salutatus, like the supine, always has this position in the hexameter.1 10. prope summa etc.: the line summarises two distinctive features of the kite, which was proverbially greedy as well as an excellent flier; cf. Ov. am. 2, 6, 33 f.; met. 2, 715 ff.; Pers. 4, 26; Plin. nat. 10, 28; Otto, s.v. milvus 1 and 4, pp. 222 f. It was not hunted for food other than as a remedy for certain diseases (its liver was considered effective against epilepsy [Plin. nat. 30, 92], ophthalmic diseases [ibid. 29, 125] and wryneck [ibid. 30, 110]), nor was its call a pleasure; Suet. loc. cit. refers to it as lupire vel lugere. See also Capponi, op. cit., pp. 338 ff.; Steier in RE 2:3, s.v. Sperber 1619 ff. The juncture summa astra is found only in Martial (only this occurrence) and Statius (Theb. 10, 782; 12, 128; silv. 3, 4, 49). miluus astra volat: milvus ad astra ; milvus in astra . Milvus was originally trisyllabic (for example, Plaut. Aul. 316) and retains this scansion in the Augustan poets (for example, Hor. epod. 16, 32; epist. 1, 16, 51; always trisyllabic in Ovid, except for hal. 95, at the verse-ending; cf. Bömer on met. 2, 716; see TLL, s.v. 985, 44 ff.). The first instance in which the word is unquestionably disyllabic is Iuv. 9, 55; in late Latin, it reigns supreme (TLL, loc. cit.). The trisyllabic scansion being prevalent in classical Latin, the prepositions ad and in have been regarded as inserted by later interpolators, to whom the trisyllabic scansion was unfamiliar; this is the case in Pers. 4, 26 dives arat Curibus quantum non miluus errat, where later MSS offer the variant milvus oberrat (see Kißel, ad loc.). The reading KGJQ U?Q DGPQR advocated in the present instance by A. Palmer (“Notes on Martial”, Hermathena 21 [1895], p. 167), and printed by Heraeus and Shackleton Bailey (referring to Housman, “Versus Ovidi de piscibus et feris”, CQ 1 [1907], pp. 275–278 [= Class. pap., pp. 698–701]). However, it has not been universally accepted (see Kißel, loc. cit., and TLL, loc. cit.), and Martial, like Juvenal, could presumably also have written milvus. In such a case, prope would be an adverb and should be taken closely with hinc: “at a close range from here, the kite extends its flight up to the highest stars”; cf. Ov. epist. 18, 50 Icarium quamvis hinc prope litus abest! If the reading milvus is accepted, we have also to judge between in astra and ad astra. A prosodical investigation of the word astra in the same metrical position as here2 shows that, in all instances involving a verb of motion, astra is in the majority of cases (12 instances) preceded by in, whereas ad appears in three inDJ
1
E
Cf. 1, 70, 1; 2, 18, 3 & 4; 5, 66, 1; Verg. Aen. 9, 288; Ov. fast. 4, 539; trist. 1, 3, 34; 3, 7, 1; Pont. 2, 7, 1; Stat. Theb. 4, 815; 7, 708; 12, 401; Achill. 1, 57; Iuv. 1, 116. Based on all occurrences of the word in Bucolica Einsidlensia, Calpurnius Siculus, Catullus, Gaetulicus, Martial, Ovid, Albinovanus Pedo, Persius, the Priapea, Propertius, and Tibullus.
2
32
stances (there is also one instance with sub).1 For want of other means of judging between in and ad, in astra would be the safer reading here. 11. parvae munuscula chortis: Martial is referring to the poultry yard at his Nomentan farm, and the munuscula would be chickens. Thus, his statement in 7, 31 that there were none at the farm should not be taken seriously, nor should his constant complaints of its shortcomings in general (cf. 9, 18 intro.). Note that Martial uses the form chors no less than six times, and always in the sense of “poultry yard” (also 3, 58, 12; 7, 31, 1; 7, 54, 7; 11, 52, 14; 13, 54, 2); the form cohors he has only once, in the sense of “cohort” (10, 48, 2). The contracted form is almost exclusively restricted to the sense of “poultry yard” (or “farmyard” etc.), but it is extremely rare; see TLL, s.v. cohors 1549, 79 ff. When Martial uses parvus and munusculum in the same context, the adjective always, except here, accentuates the diminutive; see 5, 84, 7 munuscula parva; 7, 49, 1 parva suburbani munuscula ... horti; 7, 80, 5 parva tui munuscula ... amici . 12. saepe propinquus eris: “you shall often be my relative”, i.e., “you will often receive a present from me on the cara cognatio” (cf. Friedländer, ad loc.). For the prosody, cf. Prop. 4, 1a, 14; Ov. trist. 3, 7, 24; 4, 4, 24; Pont. 2, 2, 104.
55 Luce propinquorum, qua plurima mittitur ales, dum Stellae turdos, dum tibi, Flacce, paro, succurrit nobis ingens onerosaque turba, in qua se primum quisque meumque putat. Demeruisse duos votum est; offendere plures vix tutum; multis mittere dona grave est. Qua possum sola veniam ratione merebor: nec Stellae turdos nec tibi, Flacce, dabo.
5
The contents of this epigram are virtually the same as in the preceding poem (which is presumably also addressed to Flaccus; cf. note on 9, 54, 5 cara), giving the reason for Flaccus not getting any thrushes on the Caristia, although the reason here is quite different from that given in 9, 54: amidst Martial’s enthusiastic preparations for sending thrushes to his patrons and close friends Stella and Flaccus, he comes to think of the huge and troublesome crowd of other patrons, each and every one of whom believes himself to be Martial’s chief benefactor and most appreciated supporter. Now, if Martial were to send thrushes only to Stella and Flaccus, the others would take offence; sending thrushes to them all is out of the question. Thus, his only way out of the difficulty is to send thrushes to no one. 1
in: Prop. 3, 18, 34; Mart. epigr. 1, 6; 16b, 2; 19, 2; 22, 6; 1, 3, 8; Ov. epist. 16, 72; fast. 2, 478; 3, 186; 3, 414; 3, 808; Pont. 2, 9, 62. ad: Mart. 11, 69, 6; Ov. fast. 3, 374; 4, 328. sub: Mart. 4, 75, 6. There are only three instances in which astra is not preceded by a preposition, and none of these involves a verb of motion (see Prop. 2, 32, 50; Epiced. Drusi. 256; Mart. 14, 124, 2).
33
Martial here refrains from mentioning the chicken which serves as a substitute for the thrushes in 9, 54, 11, but it is doubtful whether this could be made into an argument that 9, 54 is not addressed to Flaccus (see note on 9, 54, 5); the epigrams are too closely related in space and subject and, in a humorous and neatly arranged piece such as this, the poet must allow himself a certain amount of artistic freedom to make it work. The epigram is just a joking excuse to Flaccus for not giving him thrushes, and the addressee, being as close to the poet as Flaccus was, would certainly take the epigram for what it was. For similarly coupled epigrams in Martial, see the introductions to 9, 44 and 53. 1. Luce propinquorum: i.e. the Caristia, see 9, 54 intro. 1 f. plurima … ales | … turdos: birds, and apparently thrushes in particular (see note on 9, 54, 1 turdus), seem to have been customary gifts in the Caristia; cf. 9, 54 intro. 2. Stellae ... Flacce: Stella and Flaccus were two of Martial’s closest friends, and apparently, they were also acquainted with each other. Both came from Patavium, had the senatorial rank in common and both had some poetic interests and ambitions, though not above the amateur level; in public life, both made political careers. They are mentioned side by side also in 1, 61, 4 (as poets from “the land of Aponus”) and 10, 48, 5, in a dinner invitation. For Flaccus, see further note on 9, 33, 1; on Stella, 9, 42 intro. 3. ingens onerosaque turba: the crowd of tiresome patrons, whom Martial cultivates out of necessity and not because he wants to. For the prosody, cf. 12, 28, 19; Verg. Aen. 6, 325; 11, 34; 11, 372; Lucan. 4, 748; Stat. silv. 5, 1, 235. 4. primum ... meumque: “the chief and my (particular) friend” (cf. TLL, s.v. meus 919, 31 f.). Shackleton Bailey, in his Loeb edition, takes this as a hendiadys, translating “my prime favourite” and adding “Lit. first and mine” in a note. However, the word order rather suggests the former translation, which also was preferred by Ker in his Loeb. 6. grave est: the same verse-ending is found in 9, 68, 10; Ov. am. 2, 4, 6; trist. 4, 8, 4. 8. nec … dabo: for the device of ending an epigram with a line similar to a line at the beginning, see note on 9, 38, 10. Pentameters of the same structure as the present are to be found in 3, 77, 2 and 4; 4, 83, 4.
34
56 Spendophoros Libycas domini petit armiger urbis: quae puero dones tela, Cupido, para, illa quibus iuvenes figis mollesque puellas: sit tamen in tenera levis et hasta manu. Loricam clipeumque tibi galeamque remitto; 5 tutus ut invadat proelia, nudus eat: non iaculo, non ense fuit laesusve sagitta, casside dum liber Parthenopaeus erat. Quisquis ab hoc fuerit fixus, morietur amore. O felix, si quem tam bona fata manent! 10 Dum puer es, redeas, dum vultu lubricus, et te non Libye faciat, sed tua Roma virum. Spendophoros, a young and beautiful slave, is following his master, presumably an officer, to Africa as an armiger. But the service for which Spendophoros is truly fitted is not that of conventional warfare; the arrows of Cupid are more apt for him, and the less armour he wears, the better equipped he will be for the battle ahead. Martial thus depicts Spendophoros as a “soldier of love”, even as a new Cupid: whoever gets hit by his arrows will die of love. This is a variation of the metaphor of love as a militia amoris, appearing already in Roman comedy but largely developed by the Latin elegists; cf. particularly Ov. am. 1, 9, 1 Militat omnis amans, et habet sua castra Cupido; ars 2, 233; also Tib. 1, 10, 53 ff. (cf. Prop. 2, 5, 21 ff.); Hor. carm. 3, 26; see R. O. A. M. Lyne, The Latin Love Poets, Oxford 1980, pp. 71 ff. But whereas the amator militans of the elegists does battle to win the favour of a mistress, Spendophoros will inspire love for his own person by means of his arrows and naked beauty, thus forcing others to fight about himself. In lines 7 ff., Martial compares Spendophoros to Parthenopaeus, the young Arcadian hero at Thebes, giving a hint that his beauty when naked would probably have given him more success than did the armour he wore when he was slain. This concept of Parthenopaeus as a is in all likelihood derived from Statius’ picture of the young hero as given in the Thebaid; there is an obvious, homoerotic notion about the young hero in Statius’ epic,1 which has apparently inspired Martial also with regard to Spendophoros’ equipment: Statius’ Parthenopaeus fought with divine arrows, viz. those of Artemis, the protectress of his mother Atalante (Stat. Theb. 9, 726 ff.), but also, and more important, with a spear (ibid. 708), which would account for the hasta mentioned in line 4. Statius is the only source who mentions Parthenopaeus with the hasta and the arrows of Artemis, and it seems probable that he has influenced Martial in this respect. But it is also possible that in the present case, the levis hasta of Spendophoros should be understood as referring to his mentula (Adams, pp. 19 f.; TLL, s.v. hasta 2552, SDjM
NDO±M
1
See S. W. Schetter, Untersuchungen zur epischen Kunst des Statius, Wiesbaden 1960, pp. 44 ff. Note also that in silv. 2, 6, 42 f., Statius compares the puer delicatus of Flavius Ursus to Parthenopaeus.
35
77 ff.; ibid., s.v. levis 1222, 43 ff.). In such a case, armiger would also be sexually allusive; see note below. As published in Book 9, this poem would probably have left most readers without a hint as to its addressee: obviously, it was written to flatter not Spendophoros, but his unnamed master. Even though the recipient himself would naturally have recognized himself as the addressee of a poem such as the present, it would still have failed to live up to the expectations of most of Martial’s patrons, viz. to be honoured by an explicit mention in his poetry. White argues that poems lacking an obvious addressee must therefore have been presented to their actual recipients prior to publication, either by extempore performance, by public recitation or by circulation in libelli; other instances are 2, 85; 4, 19; 5, 42; 6, 52; 8, 46; 9, 103; 11, 91; and 12, 67 (see White, Dedication, pp. 40 ff.). , “to pour a libation” and , thus presumably 1. Spendophoros: of Gr. “the carrier of libations”. Martial uses it of a beautiful youth also in 10, 83, 7, but there are no other instances in Latin literature. The Greek version of the name ( ) appears in AP app. 2, 306, 1. VSyQGZ
IyUZ
6SHQG±IRURM
Libycas ... urbis: see note on 9, 6, 1 Libycis. domini … armiger: the office of armiger, in the sense of squire, was, of course, of no relevance in classical Roman circumstances. In Suet. Aug. 49, 1, the word apparently relates to the emperor’s bodyguard of Calagurritans, and when Cicero in dom. 13 refers to a certain Sergius as armiger Catilinae, stipator tui corporis, signifer seditionis, etc., this is obviously rather an expression of contempt than a relation of fact. However, Roman soldiers may take slaves with them on campaign, and as was Spendophoros no doubt the slave of a master here unnamed, Martial may simply refer to him by an old-fashioned term, suitable because of the nature of his master’s mission; see D. J. Breeze & B. Dobson, Roman Officers and Frontiers, Stuttgart 1993, p. 583. But armiger is surely also chosen for the double entendre— compare the phrase inguinis arma gero of Priapus in 6, 73, 6 (where arma is used as a metaphor for the penis; see Grewing, ad loc.); cf. also 11, 78, 6. For the sexual symbolism of weapons, see Adams, pp. 19 f. (suggesting that it was “instantly recognisable in ancient society”). 2. tela: the arrows, standard equipment of Cupid, are topical; cf., for example, Tib. 2, 5, 107; 2, 6, 15; Ov. epist. 20, 232; am. 2, 9b, 34; ars 1, 261; rem. 612; met. 1, 468; 5, 366; 10, 311; and trist. 4, 10, 65 and see Bömer on Ov. met. 10, 311. For the prosody of the line, cf. 14, 21, 2. 4. tenera … manu: this juncture is commonly used in the same position in the pentameter as here, cf. 3, 19, 4; 14, 54, 2; 14, 177, 2; Tib. 2, 3, 10; 3, 9, 8; 3, 12; 2; Prop. 3, 3, 34; 3, 7, 48; Ov. am. 1, 13, 18; epist. 15, 216; fast. 4, 120; 4, 774; Pont. 4, 12, 24.
36
4. levis … hasta: Martial has Spendophoros carrying a spear, obviously to make him resemble Parthenopaeus, but possibly also as a sexual allusion (see the introduction above). 5. loricam clipeumque tibi galeamque remitto: in his Loeb, Shackleton Bailey translates “I don’t ask you for breastplate ...”, paraphrasing remitto as a te non postulo in the apparatus of his Teubner edition. This seems preferable to Ker’s “Cuirass and shield and helm I leave to thee”. For the prosody, cf. Verg. Aen. 10, 553; also Ov. epist. 13, 147; met. 12, 130; Sil. 4, 432; Stat. Theb. 9, 560. 7. non iaculo, non ense: Sil. 5, 429 nunc iaculis, nunc ense, modo inter milia consul. The line is also reminiscent of Ovid’s description of the peaceful conditions during the Golden Age in met. 1, 99 f. non galeae, non ensis erat: sine militis usu | mollia securae peragebant otia gentes. fuit laesus: = est laesus. The passive perfect may be felt to be not strong enough to convey the notion of the past, the participle being close to an adjective; for this reason, the normal sum may be replaced by fui to accentuate the past tense. While it appeared in archaic Latin, the classical language generally repudiated this accentuation (though it was used even by Caesar, civ. 3, 101, 4) but allowed it in passages set in the past tense, where the passive perfect with sum was felt to need emphasis; this would be the case here, even though metrical convenience probably played a part; cf. also 1, 43 1 f. The use of fui for sum where there is no need of emphasis is very rare and remains so throughout antiquity (as opposed to fuerat for erat); see further H. Blase in G. Landgraf, Historische Grammatik der lateinischen Sprache, 3:1, Syntax des einfachen Satzes, Leipzig 1903, pp. 173 ff. 8. Parthenopaeus: the Arcadian hero, one of the Seven against Thebes, renowned for his youth and beauty (Statius refers to him as puer, for example, Theb. 9, 877); see Lewy in Roscher, s.v. Parthenopaios 1651 ff. He is mentioned by Martial also in 6, 77, 2 as the model of strong youth (cf. 10, 4, 3). In 11, 86, it is the name of a fictitious glutton. The point here is that Parthenopaeus met his doom while wearing his protective armour, getting killed by a piece of battlement coping thrown by Periclymenus (Eur. Phoen. 1153 ff.) or slain by Dryas, grandson of Orion, in an assault on the Arcadians (thus Stat. Theb. 9, 841 ff.; for other versions, see M. Dewar, Statius, Thebaid IX, Oxford 1991, ad loc.). Had he been naked, he would have been able to capture everyone by his mere beauty and thus would have been quite safe. 9. ab hoc: sc. a Spendophoro, using the arrows in the same way as Cupid. fuerit fixus: the passive future perfect with fuero, originally a vulgar parallel form (used also by Cicero), is preferred by the poets to that with ero as being
37
metrically more convenient. There seems to be no consistent difference in sense between the two forms (see Landgraf, op. cit., pp. 188 f.). 10. bona fata manent: Ov. fast. 4, 156 bona fama manet. 11 f. puer … | … virum: Martial wishes that Spendophoros may grant the last of his boyhood not to Africa, but to Rome. There is not only a physical contrast here, but also a sexual: as long as Spendophoros is a puer, he is morally permissible as a passive homosexual partner; having entered puberty and become a vir and thus a part of the heterosexual world, this is no longer the case (see Kay on 11, 22, 6 virum). Other instances of this contrast in Martial are 11, 31, 8; 8, 46; and 11, 78, 12.
57 Nil est tritius Hedyli lacernis: non ansae veterum Corinthiorum, nec crus compede lubricum decenni, nec ruptae recutita colla mulae, nec quae Flaminiam secant salebrae, nec qui litoribus nitent lapilli, nec Tusca ligo vinea politus, nec pallens toga mortui tribulis, nec pigri rota quassa mulionis, nec rasum cavea latus visontis, nec dens iam senior ferocis apri. Res una est tamen – ipse non negabit –, culus tritior Hedyli lacernis.
5
10
Yet another epigram on an ostensible moralist who is really a pathic. Here, it is not explicitly stated that the target, a certain Hedylus, is a would-be philosopher, but this is quite obvious from his ragged appearance, represented by his threadbare cloak, the hallmark especially of Cynic philosophers. The requirement for raggedness could lead to a kind of paradoxical vanity, which already Socrates saw and rebuked in Antisthenes, who was anxious to wear his cloak so that the rents could be clearly seen (Diog. Laert. 2, 36; cf. note on 9, 47, 2 hirsutis). In the same manner, Hedylus would boast about and show off his worn-out cloak, and Martial joins in the game, asserting that indeed nothing is as worn as the cloak of this stern philosopher, only to pull him completely to pieces in the concluding lines, for there is one thing more worn than his cloak: his anus. For Martial’s attacks on moralizers who turn out to be pathics, see 9, 27 intro. and cf. 9, 41 and 47. The hypocritical neglect of appearance forms the target of his wit also in 1, 24; 2, 36; 4, 53, 3 f.; 6, 56; 7, 58, 7; 12, 42, 1; and 14, 81; in Greek epigram, cf. AP 11, 139; 154; 156; 157; 410; and 430.
38
Repetition of subordinate clauses with anaphora of the conjunction is relatively common in Martial; cf., for example, 1, 39; 1, 41; 2, 11; 2, 53; 2, 57; 3, 62; 3, 63; 3, 93; and 9, 97. This device, practically completely absent in Greek epigram, can be observed in Catullus (for nec, compare in particular Catull. 43, 1–4); see Siedschlag, Form, pp. 41 f.; cf. Howell’s introduction to 1, 39. 1. tritius … lacernis: for the lacerna, see note on 9, 22, 13 Tyrias … lacernas. In 1, 96, 4, one of Hedylus’ kindred spirits is referred to as amator ille tristium lacernarum. (of , “sweety”), is Hedyli: the name, formed on the diminutive used of a passive homosexual also in 1, 46 and 4, 52. Although the name is a perfectly normal one in Greek (see Pape, s.v. ), there are no other instances of it in Latin. However, it seems to have had sexual undertones, and Martial would not have chosen it at random; cf., with reference to women, Hedylium of an amica in Plaut. Pseud. 188 (cf. AP 5, 133) and Hedyle in Petron. 113, 3 (see Howell’s introduction to 1, 46). G¹ORM
G¹M
C+G¹ORM
2. ansae veterum Corinthiorum: “the handles of old vessels of Corinthian bronze”. The formula of this highly praised bronze seems never to have been known to the Romans, nor do the Greeks seem to have been agreed on its precise content. It was thought to be a mixture of bronze, gold and silver accidentally created when Corinth was captured and burnt in 146 BC (Plin. nat. 34, 6 ff.; Plut. Delph. orac. 2, the latter also offering another myth of its invention, ascribing it to a bronze–worker who mixed gold with bronze in order to hide it), but presumably, the Corinthian bronze was a bronze with a particularly high content of tin (see Emanuele, Aes Corinthum). The Corinthian bronze was eagerly collected, among others, by Augustus (Suet. Aug. 70, 2); cf. also Sen. dial. 9, 9, 6; 10, 12, 2; Plin. epist. 3, 1, 9; 3, 6, 4; Trimalchio boasted about his being the only genuine collection of Corinthian ware (“Corinthian” inasmuch as it was made by the smith Corinthus, Petron. 50, 2). Martial mentions the bronze also in 9, 59, 11 (see note ad loc.); 14, 43; 14, 172; 14, 177. 3. crus compede lubricum decenni: Martial would be thinking of the shin of a slave, kept in shackles for many years; cf. note on 9, 22, 4 innumera … compede; Tib. 1, 7, 42; 2, 6, 36; Ov. am. 2, 2, 47; Pont. 1, 6, 31. 4. ruptae … mulae: “the abraded [i.e. by the yoke or sim.] neck of a worn-out mule”. The mule was considered the animal most suitable for heavy work of different kinds; above all, it was used as a draught and pack animal (see Toynbee, Animals, pp. 185 ff.). Martial, like other poets, prefers the feminine form mula to the masculine mulus (of which there is only one instance in the Epigrams, 5, 22, 7, whereas there are eight instances of mula, 1, 79, 3; 3, 62, 6; 8, 61, 9; 9, 22, 13; 11, 79, 4; 14, 162, 1; 14, 197 lem.).
39
5. Flaminiam: sc. viam. The Flaminian Way, built in 220 BC by C. Flaminius, was one of the three most important roads from Rome northwards (Cic. Phil. 12, 22). It was busy (Tac. hist. 2, 64, 1; cf. Iuv. 1, 61; Claudian carm. min. 40, 8 refers to it as pulverulenta) and also an important high way for armies (Tac. hist. 3, 79, 1; 82, 2; ann. 3, 9, 1) but was kept in good condition and restored by, among others, Augustus (Suet. Aug. 30, 1). Its shortcomings, presumably not to be taken too seriously, are mentioned only here. Like the other roads leading from Rome, the via Flaminia was lined with sepulchral monuments (cf. 6, 28, 5; 11, 13, 1); see further Weiss in RE 6, s.v. Flaminia via, 2493 ff. 6. qui litoribus nitent lapilli: cf. in particular 8, 64, 5 f. Sit vultus tibi levior licebit | tritis litoris aridi lapillis; the pebbles of the beach are in this case nothing more than small stones (cf. Prop. 1, 2, 13; Ov. am. 2, 11, 13) abraded by the waves and not, as in 10, 38, 5, pearls (cf. note on 9, 2, 9 Erythraeis … lapillis). 7. Tusca ligo vinea politus: in hilly regions, the ligo (“mattock”) was used instead of the plough (and not to prune the vines themselves); see note on 9, 22, 3 ligones; thus, vinea here means “vineyard”. For Etrurian wine, see note on 9, 22, 4 Tuscus ager. 8. toga mortui tribulis: for the funeral, the dead person was dressed up in the toga (see Blümner, Privataltertümer, p. 484). In the case of the poor, the toga would often be threadbare, as a consequence of constant washings to keep it clean for the morning salutations, at which it was required. Because of its high price, the poor would also be unable to replace it when worn out (cf. the introduction to 9, 49); indeed, according to Juvenal, there were even some who never put on the toga at all, except on the bier (Iuv. 3, 171). For tribulis in the sense of vir humilis, cf. note on 9, 49, 7 tremulo ... tribuli. 9. mulionis: there were different kinds of muliones, those who hired out draught animals and carriages and who were for hire themselves, as well as those who were slaves (Blümner, Privataltertümer, p. 465). Of the muliones in general, Martial did not have any high opinion; cf. 10, 76, 9, in which the poet complains that even a mule-driver was better off than the likes of himself. Seneca (epist. 47, 15) reckoned that the task of the slave muleteers was among the dirtier kinds of work (without taking any moral view of it). 10. visontis: the maned bison, found wild in Germania (Plin. nat. 8, 38), is mentioned by Martial in epigr. 22, 10 and 1, 104, 8 as occurring at spectacles; presumably, the one mentioned here was also destined for the arena, its side having been rubbed against the cage during the long transport from Germania (see Toynbee, Animals, p. 148). 11. dens … senior ferocis apri: the tusks are the boar’s only weapon, but a dreadful one; cf. 11, 69, 9 (with Kay); 13, 94; TLL, s.v. aper 209, 47 ff. The boar being ferocious (ferox as an epithet of the boar only here and in Ov. met. 4, 723; cf., for example, trux aper Ov. met. 10, 715; torvus a. Prop. 2, 3, 6), and the one 40
mentioned here being an old one, its tusks would have been worn down not only by chewing, but also in many a battle. 12. ipse non negabit: cf. 4, 43, 10, where the phrase occurs in the same place of the hendecasyllabus and in a similar context. Here, I follow the punctuation of Shackleton Bailey. 13. culus tritior etc.: for the idea of the anus of a passive homosexual being worn by intercourse, cf. 2, 51, 2. Martial often ends an epigram by repeating one of the opening lines, sometimes, as here, with a slight variation (see note on 9, 38, 10).
58 Nympha sacri regina lacus, cui grata Sabinus et mansura pio munere templa dedit, sic montana tuos semper colat Umbria fontes, nec tua Baianas Sassina malit aquas: excipe sollicitos placide, mea dona, libellos; 5 tu fueris Musis Pegasis unda meis. “Nympharum templis quisquis sua carmina donat, quid fieri libris debeat, ipse monet.” C. Caesius Sabinus, a friend of Martial’s, has built a temple to the nymph of a lake in his home town of Sassina in Umbria, and Martial offers some libelli of his to the nymph, making a prayer that she will accept his offering. The prayer, which occupies lines 1–6, is quite sincere and worded in the usual style with sic-clauses followed by an imperative (the actual wish) and a vow on the poet’s part if the prayer is heeded; the same structure can be observed in 9, 42, for example. In lines 7–8, there follows, rather abruptly as an , the answer of the nymph; it is a snubbing and cruel one in glaring contrast to the preceding lines: the man who offers his books to a temple of the nymphs has himself shown what ought to be done with them (see below on lines 7 f.). In fact, the character of this concluding distich is such that it might form an epigram of its own. As pointed out by Barwick (“Zur Kompositionstechnik und Erklärung Martials”, Philologus 87 (1932), p. 64), its relation to the rest of the poem is exactly paralleled by that of 1, 4 to 1, 5; in 1, 4, Martial asks Domitian to read his epigrams (illa fronte) qua Thymelen spectas derisoremque Latinum (1, 4, 5), while 1, 5 gives Domitian’s reply (even alluding to the same idea that bad poems deserve to be drenched in water): Do tibi naumachiam, tu das epigrammata nobis: | vis, puto, cum libro, Marce, natare tuo. In the case of the present epigram there is nothing in the MSS to support the separation of the concluding distich. But it is worth noting that there is no manuscript support either for Scriverius’ obviously correct and universally accepted separation of 9, 95 and 95 b. Barwick even refers to the two sections as 9, 58 and 9, 58 b. SURVG±NKWRQ
41
The poem (or the first six lines) would have been written to head the libelli presented to Caesius Sabinus, just as 9, 26 introduced a collection of poems presented to Nerva (see 9, 26 intro.). 1. sacri … lacus: the lake is sacred because of the presence of the nymph; cf. 4, 57, 7 f. and Verg. ecl. 1, 51 f. fortasse senex, hic inter flumina nota | et fontis sacros frigus captabis opacum (compare Servius, ad loc.: fontes sacros quia omnibus aquis nymphae sunt praesidentes). Sabinus: C. Caesius Sabinus, of Sassina in Umbria (thus the fellow townsman of the centurion Aulus Pudens of 1, 31 etc.; cf. 7, 97), appears with certainty in two more epigrams, 7, 97 (giving his nomen gentilicium; his praenomen is recorded in inscriptions; cf. below) and 9, 60, and possibly also in 11, 8 and 17 (see Kay on 11, 8, 14, though the Sabini appearing in these instances were regarded as fictitious by Groag in RE 3, s.v. Sabinus 29, 1316); the occurrence of a Sabinus in 4, 37, 3 is uncertain, as Sabinus in this case is the reading only of , while the MSS offer Sabellus (which is printed by Shackleton Bailey). If the Sabinus of 11, 8 and 17 is to be identified as Caesius Sabinus, then the erotic allusions of these epigrams would argue for some intimacy between him and the poet, but the same allusions may also suggest that the name is in fact fictitious, as the use of the name Sabinus, which has a ring of moral sternness to it (cf. note on 9, 40, 5), would be quite humorous in such a context. Caesius Sabinus’ building activities at Sassina are recorded in five fragmentary inscriptions (CIL 11, 6489–6493; 6499), four of which concern dedications to Jupiter, Apollo, Minerva and the Dei publici respectively. J
E
2. pio munere templa dedit: the gift of a temple is naturally pium; the juncture also in Sil. 17, 32 pia munera and Val. Fl. 2, 330 f. insuetis et iam pia munera templis | reddit. The ending templa dedit also 6, 10, 2. 3. sic: see note on 9, 42, 1 sic. montana … Umbria: cf. 7, 97, 2, mentioning Caesius Sabinus as montanae decus Umbriae; Umbria is intersected by the Apennines. 4. Baianas … aquas: probably a reference to the sulphurous hot springs at Baiae, which are often mentioned for their healing powers; cf. Plin. nat. 31, 5. Martial mentions or alludes to them also in 1, 62, 4; 3, 20, 19; 4, 57, 6; 6, 42, 7; 6, 43, 1 f.; 10, 14, 3; cf. Hülsen in RE 2, s.v. Baiae 2774 f. (however, the reference in Ov. met. 15, 713 is not altogether certain; see Bömer, ad loc.). Sassina: Martial elsewhere mentions Sabinus’ home town of Sassina (for the spelling Sarsina found in Plautus and Servius, see Philipp in RE 2:2, s.v. Sarsina 51) in northern Umbria because of its famous cheese: 1, 43, 7 (with Howell); 3, 58, 35. It was also renowned for its milk; cf. Plin. nat. 11, 241; Sil. 8, 461 f.
42
5. sollicitos: “anxious” (about their reception), cf., for example, Ov. trist. 5, 2, 1 f. Ecquid ubi e Ponto nova venit epistula, palles, | et tibi sollicita solvitur illa manu?; Forcellini, Lex., s.v. sollicitus 3, 555. 6. fueris: future perfect in the main clause to denote that the result is sure to occur; see Kühner-Stegmann, § 37, 2, pp. 147 f.; Hofmann–Szantyr, § 180 a, p. 323. ) on Mt. Helicon, which, Pegasis unda: the spring Hippocrene (Gr. according to Hellenistic tradition, sprang from the hoof mark of Pegasus (Nicand. heter. 4 quoted by Anton. Lib. met. 9, 2; Ov. met. 5, 257; fast. 3, 456; Pont. 4, 8, 80; AP 9, 225 [Honestus]; see Sittig in RE 8, s.v. Hippokrene 1854 ff.); Martial’s description of it as Pegasis unda is a direct borrowing from Ov. trist. 3, 7, 15. The spring was sacred to the Muses and a source of poetical inspiration (for example, AP 9, 230 [Honestus]). Hesiod’s story of how he was inspired at Mt. Helicon (Hesiod. theog. 5 ff.) was later improved by his drinking from the spring, a subject which became something of a topos; cf. AP 7, 55, 5 f. (Alkaios); 9, 64 (Asclepiades or Archias); 11, 24 (Antipater). Mt. Helicon is associated with poetical inspiration also in Callimachus, Ennius, Vergil (ecl. 6, 64 f.) and Propertius (3, 3, 1 ff.); see Sittig, op. cit., 1853 f. C,SSRNUQK
7 f. Nympharum templis … | … ipse monet: viz. that they deserve to be thrown into the water. Friedländer understood the lines as the reply of Caesius Sabinus but was contradicted by Barwick (loc. cit.), who took it as the reply of the nymph, to whom the preceding prayer is addressed; compare 1, 4, containing a petition to the emperor, which is followed, as here, by a snubbing reply (1, 5 quoted above), quite obviously from the emperor himself. The idea that bad poems deserve to be drenched in water occurs also in 1, 5; 3, 100; 5, 53; 14, 196. It has been traced to an anecdote about Plato in Diog. Laert. 3, 5, and is relatively widespread in Latin literature; often, as in 5, 53, 4, it is mentioned together with the burning-up of the poems; see Nisbet & Hubbard on Hor. carm. 1, 16, 3. Perhaps there was some magical rite of purification behind it; Citroni (on 1, 5, 2) refers to A. Ronconi “«Malum carmen» e «malus poeta»”, Filologia e linguistica, Rome 1968, pp. 141 f.
43
59 In Saeptis Mamurra diu multumque vagatus, hic ubi Roma suas aurea vexat opes, inspexit molles pueros oculisque comedit, non hos, quos primae prostituere casae, sed quos arcanae servant tabulata catastae et quos non populus nec mea turba videt. Inde satur mensas et opertos exuit orbes expositumque alte pingue poposcit ebur, et testudineum mensus quater hexaclinon ingemuit citro non satis esse suo. Consuluit nares, an olerent aera Corinthon, culpavit statuas et, Polyclite, tuas, et turbata brevi questus crystallina vitro murrina signavit seposuitque decem expendit veteres calathos et si qua fuerunt pocula Mentorea nobilitata manu, et viridis picto gemmas numeravit in auro, quidquid et a nivea grandius aure sonat. Sardonychas veros mensa quaesivit in omni et pretium magnis fecit iaspidibus. Undecima lassus cum iam discederet hora, asse duos calices emit et ipse tulit.
5
10
15
20
A vivid description of how Mamurra spends a whole day at the Saepta, the distinguished market-place of contemporary Rome, looking at the most beautiful slaveboys, exclusive furniture, expensive utensils and luxury jewellery. But his intention was never to buy anything, only to make it look as if he intended to, eager to disguise his true poverty with a veil of alleged wealth. He satisfies his lusts by devouring with his eyes such slave-boys as are not displayed to the mob but are reserved for more wealthy customers; once back among the crowd, he scrutinizes all the most expensive wares, but, in order not to have to buy anything, he finds fault with every object: the dinner sofa is too small for his enormous citrus-table, the bronzes are not real Corinthian, there are too few gems inlaid in the golden cup. He even has complains about genuine statues of the Greek masters and varies his trickery by having put aside ten vessels of murrine ware, which, of course, he will never come back for. Having spent the day in this manner, he sneaks away at closing-time, having bought nothing but two cups of the cheapest kind. The woes of the poor man who cannot buy the whole of Saepta are neatly summarized by Martial in 10, 80, in which a certain Eros goes about vainly sighing for much the same wares as Mamurra—murrine vessels, slave boys, a citrus table—and weeps at his inability to buy them all. Martial adds a moral at the end: Quam multi faciunt, quod Eros, sed lumine sicco! | Pars maior lacrimas ridet et intus habet.
44
1. Saeptis: the Saepta Iulia, usually referred to simply as Saepta. The structure was a rectangular porticus, completed by Agrippa in 23 BC on the location of the ovile, the voting precinct of the comitia centuriata, on the Campus Martius. As popular elections were rarely held from the time of Tiberius onward the Saepta was used for other purposes; already under Augustus, as later under Caligula and Claudius, it was the scene of gladiatorial combats, and naumachiae were given there. The building was damaged in the fire of 80 but was quickly restored by Domitian and became, to judge from the references to it in Martial and Statius, a distinguished market-place (10, 80), a popular place for strolling (Stat. silv. 4, 6, 2), apparently the place to be seen (2, 57) and consequently also a hunting-ground for dinner-hunters (cf. 9, 14 intro.); see further L. Richardson, A New Topographical Dictionary of Ancient Rome, Baltimore 1992, pp. 340 f.; Platner & Ashby, pp. 460 ff.; Rosenberg in RE 2:1, s.v. Saepta 1724 ff. Mamurra: Martial applies this name to unpleasant persons here and in 10, 4, 11, drawing, of course, on the Mamurra of Catullus (Catull. 29; 41; 43; 57; nicknamed in 94, 105, 114, 115). A native of Formiae in southern Latium, Mamurra had served under Pompey in the war against Mithridates and thereafter as praefectus fabrum under Caesar in Spain, services during which he accumulated substantial wealth, which he treated as wastefully as he had his patrimony. His behaviour upset people (cf. Cic. Att. 7, 7, 6), not least Catullus, who also seems to have had private reasons for not liking Mamurra (cf. Catull. 29; 41; 43; see Fordyce’s introduction to Catull. 29). Although Martial’s debt to Catullus is apparent in this case, the connection between his Mamurra and the actual person is limited to the sharing of the name and of the low morals; already Horace (sat. 1, 5, 37) had used the name as a generic plural for persons of the same kind as Mamurra (see also R. Paukstadt, De Martiale Catulli imitatore, diss. Halle 1886, p. 8). 2. Roma … aurea: the line is an obvious echo of Ov. ars 3, 113 f. Simplicitas rudis ante fuit: nunc aurea Roma est, | et domiti magnas possidet orbis opes, which is the first instance of the juncture aurea Roma; after this, it does not occur until considerably later: Iuvenc. 2, praef. 2; Hist. Aug. Pesc. 12, 6; Auson. 21, 1, 1 Prete. Whereas the meaning in Ovid is “Rome adorned with gold”, Martial has here metonymically transferred the expression to wealthy Romans, giving the phrase a partitive notion, “the wealthy part of Rome”. vexat opes: “waste their wealth”. The unparalleled phrase suggests a frenetic activity at the market-place. Friedländer compared it to flagellat opes found in 2, 30, 4 and 5, 13, 6, meaning that the money is kept in constant motion (“whip up”; OLD, s.v. 3), but perhaps a comparison with Sall. Catil. 20, 12 omnibus modis pecuniam trahunt vexant is more natural, where the meaning is, using a metaphor from warfare, “devastate their fortune”. 3 ff. molles pueros … nec mea turba videt: molles (often used of effeminates; cf. 9, 11, 10 molle), oculis comedit (cf. 1, 96, 12 oculis devorantibus; the expression is colloquial; see Howell, ad loc.) and prostituere (apparently not used elsewhere 45
with reference to the mere displaying of slaves, but, of course, frequent in the sense of “to prostitute”) add a sexual notion to the passage. Young and beautiful slave-boys could be very expensive; the sum of 100,000 IIS is mentioned both in 1, 58, 1 (see Howell ad loc.) and in 11, 70, 1. However, these prices would not be fetched by the boys in the front booths, the primae casae, as the more valuable slaves, to judge from this passage, were displayed on a platform (catasta) in a hidden back room (cf. Blümner, Privataltertümer, p. 279), open only to those likely to be able to pay for them (hence servant; OLD, s.v. 8), and not to the mob or the likes of Martial. For the ending of line 6, cf. Ov. trist. 1, 5, 34. 7. inde satur: corresponds to comedit in line 3. For inde depending on an adverb (substantive, adjective), see TLL, s.v. 1116, 33 ff. opertos … orbes: in the shops as well as in homes, expensive table-leaves, like those of citrus-wood (see note on 9, 22, 5), were often covered with a protective cloth, a mantele (cf. 12, 28, 12; 14, 139); cf. Blümner, Privataltertümer, p. 125. 8. pingue … ebur: exclusive table-leaves were usually put on an ivory leg (note on 9, 22, 5), and it seems likely that Martial is referring to such a leg here, put away on the top shelves to keep it out of reach of the customers. To preserve it from decay, ivory was smeared with old olive-oil, hence pingue; see Plin. nat. 15, 32; Blümner, Technologie 2, p. 374, n. 1. , 9. testudineum … hexaclinon: a dinner sofa for six (from Greek “with six couches”) inlaid with tortoiseshell. It is of a kind called stibadia (Gr. , dim. of “bed [of straw]”, cf. 14, 87), a semi–circular sofa, which, because of its shape, was also referred to as sigma (10, 48, 6). Apparently Greek in origin, it came into use in the Principate and replaced the three lecti tricliniares previously used. Hexaclinon is a in Latin, but there are instances of and in Greek (see Blümner, Privataltertümer, p. 119). Tortoiseshell was a popular decoration on couches (already mentioned by Varro ling. 9, 47), cf. 12, 66, 5; 14, 87; Blümner, op. cit., p. 117. Note that the verse is a spondiacus; when such verses occur in Martial (Friedländer, p. 40, gives 13 instances), the poet generally follows the rule that the fourth foot should be filled out with a dactyl and the fifth and sixth with a quadrisyllabic word; cf. Crusius, pp. 52 f. w[NOLQRM
VWLEGLRQ
VWLEM
SD[
w[NOLQRQ
wSWNOLQRQ
9 f. mensus quater … | ingemuit: to make it look like as if he really wants to buy the luxury couch, Mamurra measures it time and time again to see if there is any way to make it fit his huge (imaginary) table of citrus-wood (cf. note on line 7 opertos … orbes above). Of course, he finds that there is not; otherwise, he would have to buy the couch, for which he had no money. The costly table-leaves of citrus-wood were usually small, made from a single piece of wood and resting on
46
a single leg (Blümner, op. cit., pp. 124 f.), so Mamurra’s exaggeration is almost ridiculous. As regards ingemesco with the accusativus cum infinitivo, see Kühner-Stegmann, 1 § 126 b, p. 691; TLL, s.v. 1516, 79 ff. 11. Consuluit nares, an olerent aera Corinthon: the idea that Corinthian bronze (on which see note on 9, 57, 2) could be recognized by its distinctive smell seems to have had a proverbial ring in Martial’s day, even though there is no evidence for such a smell. An attempt at an explanation was made by Emanuele, Aes Corinthum, p. 354, suggesting that “the patina itself, produced by the chlorides in Corinthian water, had a distinct odor”. But Emanuele also acknowledges that here Martial might want to satirize the idea of a possible “olfactory authentication”, and indeed it seems more likely that Martial really ridicules Mamurra by having him putting into practice something that was probably nothing more than a popular saying. A hint of a solution of the problem is given by Petronius in the famous passage in which Trimalchio, while boasting that he is the only one to possess genuine Corinthian bronzes (which is true, inasmuch as his bronzes are made by a smith named Corinthus), still declares that he prefers glass vessels: ignoscetis mihi quod dixero: ego malo mihi vitrea, certe non olunt (Petron. 50, 7). This obviously refers to the same idea as the present line, but it is important to keep in mind that Trimalchio does not claim to be able to identify real Corinthian bronze by its smell but simply states that he prefers glass to his fake Corinthian bronze, since glass does not smell; see J. Linderski, “Aes olet: Petronius 50.7 and Martial 9.59.11”, HSPh 94 (1992), pp. 349–353. Obviously, his fake bronze smelled, the reason for which would have been the practice of greasing bronze as a protection against rust (Linderski, op. cit., p. 351). Corinthian bronze, on the other hand, does not seem to have been inclined to rust (Cic. Tusc. 4, 32), presumably because it had a high content of tin (Emanuele, Aes Corinthum, p. 352), and therefore did not need to be greased to the same extent as bronze of poorer quality. Consequently, genuine Corinthian bronze would actually not have smelled as much as such bronzes. It would seem that the idea of the smell of Corinthian bronze belonged to the sphere of popular sayings (perhaps something like “to be able to scent gold out”) and lacked support in reality. Petronius makes a joke about it by introducing Trimalchio’s paradoxical, smelly, Corinthian bronze, possibly in his case because they were really not from Corinth but only made by the smith Corinthus, and Martial makes a fool of Mamurra putting a proverb into practice. 12. Polyclite: Mamurra, in his zeal to find fault with every object so as not to have to buy it, shows his lack of culture in complaining about the statues that really are by the great masters as if they were nothing but copies. Martial mentions Polyclitus (the sculptor of the famous Doryphoros and of the Diadumenos) in two more epigrams (8, 50, 2; 10, 89), making him, together with Myron, the third most often mentioned Greek artist in the poet’s works (see note on 9, 44, 6 Phidiae putavi).
47
13. turbata … crystallina vitro: the line obviously refers to vessels of crystal glass, but its exact meaning has been variously understood, for example, as referring to an impure section in the crystal resembling ordinary glass, to crystal mixed up with small pieces of glass to cheat the customer or, as Friedländer suggested, to crystal with an piece of ordinary glass inset so as to look like a contamination; cf. Blümner, Privataltertümer, p. 408, n. 18. However, turbata should be interpreted, I think, not as an attribute but as the predicative part of an accusativus cum infinitivo pronouncement governed by questus. Martial’s aim being to poke fun of Mamurra, there was probably no fault in the crystal at all (just as there cannot have been any fault in the work of Polyclitus); Roman glass-workers were quite capable of producing perfect crystal, but Mamurra, having started to examine the vessel, has to find at least some tiny fault in it, lest it should seem that it is his limited purse and not the low quality of the vessel that keeps him from buying it. Thus, the line is more effective if there was in fact no fault in the crystal than if there really was. On Roman crystal cups, which were made both of rock-crystal and of glass imitating crystal, see note on 9, 22, 7 magna ... crystalla. 14. murrina: murrines, vessels of a kind of glass originally produced as a substitute for precious stones, were just as sought after as crystal (they are mentioned together in 3, 82, 25; Plin. nat. 33, 5; 35, 158, 36, 1; Iuv. 6, 155 f. grandia tolluntur crystallina, maxima rursus | murrina; Hist. Aug. Aur. 17, 4; murrine alone in Mart. 3, 26, 2; 10, 80, 1; 11, 70, 8; 13, 110, 1; 14, 113). The ware displayed a variety of colours, and it has been plausibly suggested that it was made of fluorspar. Pliny has an account of it in nat. 37, 18–22, stating that it was imported from the Parthian kingdom and first came to Rome after Pompey’s victory over Mithridates in the late sixties BC. It soon became popular and fetched enormous prices (owing to its fragility: Plin. nat. 33, 5); Nero, for instance, had paid 1,000,000 IIS for one single bowl. See Kay on 11, 70, 8 with further references. signavit seposuitque: Mamurra fastened a seal on the vessels as a token of purchase, a custom which is rarely attested, but cf. Ulp. dig. 18, 6, 1 si dolium signatum sit ab emptore, Trebatius ait traditum id videri; perhaps also Sen. benef. 3, 15, 2 refers to this practice: utinam nulla stipulatio emptorem venditori obligaret nec pacta conventaque inpressis signis custodirentur, fides potius illa servaret et aecum colens animus! , apparently first introduced into Latin by 15. veteres calathos: Gr. Vergil, who uses the word in the original Greek sense of “basket” (ecl. 2, 46; Aen. 7,806), but also in the sense of “drinking-vessel”,1 the latter sense being unattested in Greek; cf. A. E. A. Saalfeld, Tensaurus Italograecus, Vienna 1884, s.v. Martial mentions the calathus twice more (8, 16, 6; 14, 107), both instances referring to wine cups. As indicated by 8, 6, 16 Priami calathis and by the present instance, the word carried a notion of great age. NODTRM
1
For wine, ecl. 5, 71; for milk, georg. 3, 402; these vessels were probably either wicker-covered or shaped like tapered baskets (see R. Coleman, Vergil, Eclogues, Cambridge 1977, p. 168).
48
16. Mentorea … manu: at Rome, the Greek chaser Mentor (first half of the 4th century BC?) was considered the prime master of his art. Pliny speaks of him as maxime laudatus (nat. 33, 154) and relates that the orator Lucius Crassus possessed a pair of goblets chased by his hand, for which he had paid 100,000 IIS (nat. 33, 147). Despite his origin, Mentor is not mentioned anywhere in the extant Greek texts, except in Lucian (see Lippold in RE 15, s.v. 10, 965 ff.). Mentor is one of the Greek artists who frequently appear in Martial (six instances, also 3, 40, 1; 4, 39, 5; 8, 50, 2; 11, 11, 5; 14, 93, 2, all referring to bowls, plates or cups); only Phidias is mentioned more often (cf. note on 9, 44, 6 Phidiae putavi). He seems to have worked mostly in silver, and his works were very rare and equally sought after, which naturally resulted in there being not only copies, but also forgeries. 17. viridis picto … gemmas … in auro: Mamurra counted the emeralds inlaid in a chased golden cup, pretending to check whether there were enough for him to consider a purchase. Gold was used for luxury cups (if only as a gilding), a luxury which was sometimes increased by the addition of precious stones to the cup to produce socalled pocula gemmata (Plin. nat. 33, 5; 37, 17). Apparently, emeralds (virides gemmae, also 11, 28, 10; Iuv. 6, 458; cf. Val. Fl. 6, 699 f.) were used in particular; cf. 14, 109 (108 Leary) (Calices gemmati) Gemmatum Scythicis ut luceat ignibus aurum, | aspice. Quot digitos exuit iste calix! mentioning Scythian emeralds, which were considered the best (cf. Plin. nat. 37, 65; Friedländer on 4, 28, 4; Leary on 14, 108, le.); cf. also Iuv. 5, 39 ff. and see Blümner, Privataltertümer, p. 408. Pictus here must mean “chased” (so Ker in his Loeb), a usage of the word which seems to be unattested elsewhere. The juncture pictum aurum appears in Lucan. 2, 357 and Val. Fl. 3, 11, but both these refer to gold embroidery; it is noteworthy, though, that in both instances, the words occupy the same metrical position as in the present line; cf. also Ov. met. 3, 556 and Stat. Theb. 6, 208. 18. a nivea grandius aure sonat: large pearls, like precious stones, were popular as decorations in earrings (cf., for example, Ov. medic. 21 f.; Sen. benef. 7, 9, 4; Plin. nat. 9, 114). The type of earring known as crotalia (Plin. nat. 9, 114; Petron. 67, 9; Blümner, Privataltertümer, p. 263) was decorated with several, loosely hanging pearls, the rattling of which accounts for its name, cf. Gr. , “to make a rattle”. Grandius may allude either to the rattle being louder the bigger the pearls, or perhaps to the pearls themselves, in the sense of “large” or “distinguished”. Niveus is a standard epithet of female beauty (see Bömer on Ov. met. 3, 423), but the present may perhaps also be interpreted as a case of hypallage (the ear itself, and not the pearls, is said to be as white as snow). NURWyZ
19. Sardonychas veros: genuine sardonyx rings. To be considered a sardonyx, the stone had to have three (or more) layers, black, white and red; varieties with only two layers were considered ordinary onyxes (see Plin. nat. 37, 85 ff.). The sardonyx, which was found in India (as opposed to the onyx, which was imported 49
from Arabia), was a popular stone for rings and is often mentioned as such, especially by Martial (cf. 2, 29, 2; 4, 61, 6 [with the epithet verus]; 5, 11, 1; 11, 37, 2), and also by Persius (1, 16) and Juvenal (6, 382; 13, 139; cf. also Plin. nat. 37, 4); it is also mentioned without further specification in 4, 28, 4 (with the epithet Indus); 10, 87, 14 (verus); 11, 27, 10; Iuv. 7, 144; see Schramm in RE 18, s.v. Onyx 535 ff. The semiprecious stone was obviously very valuable, and forgeries (which were very hard to tell from the genuine stone) were made by putting together separate pieces of stones of different colours (Plin. nat. 37, 197), hence Martial’s stress on the stones as veri in 4, 61, 6 and 10, 87, 14. In the present instance, the MSS offer vero ( , printed by Gilbert [but see his apparatus], Lindsay and Heraeus) and viro ( ), which was rightfully emended to veros in the editio Aldina. Apart from the support of the parallels in Books 4 and 10, veros obviously provides a far better sense than vero: Mamurra is looking for real sardonyxes and no forgeries; of course, he does not find any, lest he should be forced to buy them; thus, the pattern from the preceding lines is repeated. E
J
20. magnis … iaspidibus: according to Pliny (nat. 37, 115 ff.), jasper (an opaque variety of quartz) appears in a multitude of varieties, like the green Indian (similar to emerald), the Cypriot greyish-green, the Persian sky-blue, the Phrygian purple, etc., the best one being that which has a shade of purple. The yellowish variety is mentioned by Pliny only in passing as similes myxis (“like the sebesten plum”), although this is the kind most often mentioned by the Latin poets, presumably because of the fact that the first mention of this variety in Latin appears in Verg. Aen. 4, 261 f., referring to a sword inlaid with yellowish jasper: stellatus iaspide fulva | ensis (cf. Serv. ad loc.; Gell. 2, 26, 11); then Lucan. 10, 122 and Stat. Theb. 7, 659. Of old, jasper was used for various decorative purposes; apart from the quotation from Vergil above, cf. Stat. Theb. 4, 270 (the quiver of Parthenopaeus adorned with amber and jasper); 7, 658 f. (a fibula with jasper); cups inlaid with jasper are mentioned by Lucan. 10, 122 and Iuv. 5, 42. Martial’s only other mention of jasper refers to the rings of his friend Stella (5, 11, 1 f. with Howell), and it seems likely that this is the reference also of the present line, like that of the preceding one. 21. undecima … hora: perhaps “at closing-time”. The eleventh hour fell in the last quarter of the day, which was called suprema and lasted from the ninth hour to sundown on the twelfth (Blümner Privataltertümer, pp. 373 f.). Even though there seems to be no evidence for the eleventh hour as the common closing-time of shops, there is a parallel in the stipulated time for court proceedings, which were not allowed to begin earlier than the first hour or to end later than the eleventh (see Mommsen, Strafrecht, pp. 364 f., and cf. Cic. Cluent. 27 puer, cum hora undecima in publico valens visus esset, ante noctem mortuus; Fronto p. 34, 25 f. van den Hout 1954 ego quom sine te sum, causidicos in undecimam horam audio).
50
22. asse duos calices emit: having spent the whole day at the Saepta, Mamurra left without having bought anything but two calices, which he carried himself, since he had not even got slaves to carry them for him. The calix was the commonest type of drinking-vessel (Blümner, Privataltertümer, p. 405) and so could be had in very cheap variants; cf. 12, 74; Iuv. 11, 145 plebeios calices et paucis assibus emptos; Leary on 14, 94, le.
60 Seu tu Paestanis genita es seu Tiburis arvis, seu rubuit tellus Tuscula flore tuo, seu Praenestino te vilica legit in horto, seu modo Campani gloria ruris eras: pulchrior ut nostro videare corona Sabino, de Nomentano te putet esse meo.
5
A neat epigram to accompany Martial’s gift to his friend Caesius Sabinus of a wreath (probably) of roses and violets, the two flowers commonly used for wreaths; cf. Plin. nat. 21, 14 paucissima nostri genera coronamentorum inter hortensia novere, ac paene violas rosasque tantum; cf. Ov. met. 12, 410, with Bömer; Stat. silv. 1, 2, 22. The flowers are, however, not such as Martial has grown himself on his Nomentan farm, but such as had been imported into the city from the famous flower gardens of Italy. Now, as several famous Romans had villas in the areas renowned for their floral splendour, Martial here makes a contrast between these and his own (allegedly) poor farm at Nomentum: the flowers in his wreath may be from Paestum, Tibur, Tusculum, Praeneste or Campania, but if Sabinus thinks that the wreath is made of Nomentan flowers, it will seem all the more beautiful to him. Like Nomentum, Tibur, Tusculum and Praeneste are all country towns, situated in hilly regions at a convenient distance from Rome, Tibur to the east, Praeneste to the south-east and Tusculum to the south of the city. Because of their great natural beauty, pleasant climate and nearness to Rome, the towns were enjoyed as summer resorts by rich Romans, who built large villas in these regions; perhaps the best-known are the villa of Cicero at Tusculum (which, however, could also pride itself on those of Sulla, Varro, Pompey, Hortensius, Brutus and others; see McCracken in RE 2:7, s.v. Tusculum 1484 ff.) and that of the emperor Hadrian at Tibur (where also Statius’ friend Manilius Vopiscus had a villa, silv. 1, 3). Alongside with Lanuvium and Tibur, Praeneste was the favourite secessus of Augustus (Suet. Aug. 72, 2); cf. also Iuv. 14, 88. As the foremost resorts of wealthy Romans, Tibur, Tusculum and Praeneste are often mentioned together. In 10, 30, 5 ff., Martial states that Apollinaris prefers Formiae to all other places: non ille … dulce Tibur …, | nec Tusculanos … secessus, | Praeneste nec sic … miratur; Pliny said that he preferred his Tuscan villa to Tusculanis Tiburtinis Praenestinisque (epist. 5, 6, 45); cf. Stat. silv. 4, 4, 15 ff.; Sen. benef. 4, 12, 3. The same popularity was enjoyed by Campania, where, 51
among others, Cicero, Pliny the Younger and Statius’ friend Pollius (silv. 3, 1) had villas; see in general Van Buren in RE 2:8, s.v. Villa 2150 ff. Paestum is the one place lacking literary evidence for villas, but its mention in this epigram is guaranteed by the fame of its roses; on the other hand, Tibur, while notable for its villas, seems not to have had any specific reputation as a floral town. The wreath was a popular gift as a sign of mutual friendship; see K. Baus, Der Kranz in Antike und Christentum, Bonn 1940, pp. 34 f., and cf. 7, 89, an epigram accompanying a wreath of roses to Apollinaris. Epigrams accompanying a gift of some kind (other than those of the Xenia and Apophoreta) belong to a genre popular especially with the poets of the Garland of Philip, perhaps to be regarded as a secularised variant of the religious votive epigram. In Martial, cf., apart from the present and 7, 89, also 1, 111 (a book and incense to Regulus); 5, 59 (earthenware to Stella); 7, 49 (eggs and apples to Severus); see Howell’s introduction to 1, 111 with further references. 1. Paestanis: the flowers of Paestum, in north-western Lucania, were famous, above all, the roses (see note on 9, 26, 3 Paestano … colono). 2. rubuit tellus Tuscula flore tuo: the only flower mentioned by Pliny in connection with Tusculum is the violet (nat. 21, 27), which was ranked third after the rose and the lily. When Martial speaks of Tusculum as rubens flore, it seems that he has in mind the kind of violet which antiquity in fact designated as red but which today cannot be identified; cf. Ov. met. 4, 268 f. est in parte rubor violaeque simillimus ora | flos tegit with Bömer’s note. Among the varieties of the violet, Pliny mentions a purple (nat. 21, 27): Violis … plura genera, purpureae, luteae, albae (see also Cels. med. 5, 11, 1); cf. Pind. Ol. 6, 55 . The alliterative juncture tellus Tuscula is to be found also in Tib. 1, 7, 57. 3. Praenestino … in horto: the roses of Praeneste, together with those of Campania, were in the highest repute among the Romans and flowered longer than any other rose (see Plin. nat. 21, 16 ff.). Note the diaeresis after the third foot, an incision which is generally avoided in hexameters, so as not to split the verse into two equivalent halves (this forms the basis of the so-called Stellungsregel von Marx); in the exceptional cases in which such a diaeresis can be observed, it is motivated by particularly strong connections between words or by points of emphasis (Crusius § 55), but I fail to see any such motivation in this line. vilica: the bailiff’s wife, like the bailiff himself, is a significant character in Martial’s pastoral idylls, more so than in any other poet; the vilicus or the vilica appear in 13 epigrams,1 which may be compared with one instance each of vilicus (vilica) in Catullus and Ovid, four each in Horace and Juvenal; absent in Vergil.
1
Vilica also in 1, 55, 11; 3, 58, 20; 4, 66, 11; and 12, 18, 21; vilicus in 1, 49, 25; 3, 58, 31; 3, 68, 9; 7, 31, 9; 7, 71, 3; 10, 30, 28; 10, 92, 5; and 12, 18, 25. Cf. also 2, 11, 9; 6, 39, 19; 10, 48, 7; and 11, 39, 5.
52
4. Campani gloria ruris eras: cf. note on the preceding line Praenestino … in horto. Campania had an abundance of roses (copia rosae Plin. nat. 13, 26) which flowered early, just as those of Praeneste flowered late (ibid. 20); in spring, when the fields had had their rest, the Campanian fields brought forth a rose with a scent sweeter even than that of the garden rose (ibid. 18, 111). Campania was also the only place in Italy to grow the “hundred-petalled” rose (the centifolia, ibid. 21, 17). For the ending gloria ruris eras, cf. 6, 80, 6 tantaque Paestani gloria ruris erat; the source of the expression appears to be Verg. georg. 1, 168. For this use of gloria, cf. note on 9, 43, 5 nostri gloria caeli. 5. nostro … Sabino: Martial’s Umbrian friend, C. Caesius Sabinus (see note on 9, 58, 1 Sabinus). 6. Nomentano … meo: Sabinus will appreciate the flowers more if he thinks that they come from Martial’s own country estate at Nomentum (on which see the introduction to 9, 18), all the more so, as Sabinus, who would not have been spared Martial’s constant complaints about its shortcomings, would probably not expect anything like that to come out of that estate. On Nomentum and Martial’s (humorous) complaints about it, see the introduction to 9, 18.
putet esse (with variants) is common in putet esse: the combination the second hemiepes of the pentameter; cf. 3, 5, 12; 8, 47, 2; 8, 78, 4; 11, 55, 8; and 12, 21, 2. It first appears in Propertius (2, 29a, 12; 4, 1a, 38; 4, 5, 40); five instances in Ovid (ars 2, 296; 3, 610; rem. 784; fast. 3, 658; Pont. 2, 3, 12).
53
61 In Tartesiacis domus est notissima terris, qua dives placidum Corduba Baetin amat, vellera nativo pallent ubi flava metallo et linit Hesperium brattea viva pecus. Aedibus in mediis totos amplexa penates stat platanus densis Caesariana comis, hospitis invicti posuit quam dextera felix, coepit et ex illa crescere virga manu. Auctorem dominumque nemus sentire videtur: sic viret et ramis sidera celsa petit. Saepe sub hac madidi luserunt arbore Fauni, terruit et tacitam fistula sera domum; dumque fugit solos nocturnum Pana per agros, saepe sub hac latuit rustica fronde Dryas. Atque oluere lares comissatore Lyaeo, crevit et effuso laetior umbra mero; hesternisque rubens deiecta est herba coronis, atque suas potuit dicere nemo rosas. O dilecta deis, o magni Caesaris arbor, ne metuas ferrum sacrilegosque focos. Perpetuos sperare licet tibi frondis honores: non Pompeianae te posuere manus.
5
10
15
20
A poem on a plane-tree planted by Julius Caesar in a house at Corduba, presumably during the Civil War; the tree would thus have been about 140 years old when celebrated by Martial (see note on line 2 dives … Corduba below). In a pastoral tone, the poem focuses on the fact that the plane was planted by Caesar and stresses the divinity of the latter, and the tree’s connection with and awareness of the divus Iulius. Martial elsewhere shows neither approval nor disapproval when speaking of Julius Caesar.1 But, in this poem, the tone is thoroughly laudatory. The hand of Caesar is hospitis invicti dextera felix (line 7), Caesar himself is magnus (line 19), and the tree is aware of his divinity, all features which, while applicable to Caesar as commander, are equally at home in the terminology of the imperial cult. In the concluding line, Martial even explicitly and unreservedly takes Caesar’s part against Pompey, a position which was not a matter of course. The position of the senatorial and Stoic opposition was for almost a century in favour of what Lucan called the causa victa: Caesar was still considered an absolute ruler who had subverted the free Republic, the defender of which was Pompey; this approach was not to change until the reign of Trajan (cf. Syme, Tacitus, pp. 430 ff.). For instance, when Statius in silv. 1, 1, 22 ff. draws a parallel between Domitian and 1
Julius Caesar appears very rarely in the Epigrams, usually being mentioned in a general way; thus 6, 32, 5 sit Cato, dum vivit, sane vel Caesare maior; elsewhere with reference to the Civil War, cf. 9, 70, 3; 11, 5, 11 te (sc. Nerva) privato cum Caesare Magnus amabit (“there would be no cause for civil strife in the reign of Nerva”).
54
Julius Caesar, apropos of the former’s equestrian statue, which overlooked the Forum and the templum divi Iulii, his picture of the latter is not uncritical: Hinc obvia limina pandit | qui fessus bellis adsertae munere prolis | primus iter nostris ostendit in aethera divis; | discit et e vultu quantum tu mitior armis, | qui nec in externos facilis saevire furores | das Chattis Dacisque fidem: te signa ferente | et minor in leges iret gener et Cato castris. As noted by Hardie (p. 191), the emphasis on Domitian’s clemency even to foreign enemies is a “suggested comparison with Caesar’s anger even against domestic enemies”, but there is also some criticism of Pompey and Cato in his statement that they would not have broken the law and gone to war had Domitian been in Caesar’s place. Statius’ guarded judgement of Caesar and Pompey would have been in line with the contemporary view, but this is actually irrelevant to Martial’s picture of Caesar, as given in the present poem. What is important, though, is the thought expressed by Statius in silv. 1, 1, 24: primus iter nostris ostendit in aethera divis. Caesar was the first of the Roman divi, which is the only thing important here. Regardless of his deeds as a living man, he is ineluctably the first divus, and the plane-tree which he planted will continue to grow forever, a symbol of the eternal succession of divine Roman emperors. Caesar the dictator or the politician is of no immediate relevance; the tree is conscious only of Caesar the god. The plane-tree was very much appreciated both in Greece and in Rome because of its large leaves providing plenty of shade; certain specimens were regarded as marvels, like the Lycian plane with a hollow trunk, 81 feet wide, inside which the consular Licinius Mucianus gave a banquet with no less than eighteen guests. Famous planes in literature include the one at Aulis, where the Achaeans made a sacrifice before leaving for Troy (Hom. Il. 2, 307), the plane in Lydia loved by Xerxes (Herodot. 7, 31; famous not least for its role in Handel’s aria “Ombra mai fu”), and the plane at Ilissus outside Athens, beneath which Socrates discussed the immortality of the soul with Phaedrus (Plat. Phaedr. 229 b); see further the list given in Plin. nat. 12, 9 ff. (which, however, does not mention Caesar’s plane at Corduba). According to the tradition, the plane was first brought to Italy by Dionysius, tyrant of Syracuse, who used it as a decoration in his palace at Rhegium (c. 390 BC, Plin. nat. 12, 6 ff.), and thence it spread north, being found in central Italy by the end of the Republic. The plane was an indispensable feature of any wealthy Roman’s garden; cf. 3, 58, 3 (of the villa of Bassus at Baiae); 12, 50, 1; Hor. carm. 2, 15, 4; there were planes in the Tusculan villa of L. Crassus (Cic. de orat. 1, 28), and Seneca grew them at his villa at Nomentum (epist. 12, 2); see also Pliny’s description of his villa in Tifernum Tiberinum (epist. 5, 6, 20 ff.; 27, 32, 36) and R. Meiggs, Trees and Timber in the Ancient World, Oxford 1982, pp. 276 f. In the same manner, the plane was a standing element of the locus amoenus and the pastoral idyll, cf., for example, Theocrit. 18, 44; 22, 41; 25, 20; Catull. 64, 290; Verg. georg. 4, 146; Hor. carm. 2, 11, 13; Calp. ecl. 4, 2; Petron. 131, 8. It provided welcome shade to weary shepherds and is associated with them and with Pan himself; cf. particularly AP 6, 35 (Leonidas); 6, 96 (Erycius); 6, 106 (Zonas); 6, 170 (Thyillus); 7, 174 (Erycias): 7, 196 (Meleager); 9, 374 (Anonymous); for epigrams in the Greek Anthology focusing on planes, see AP 9, 220 (Thallus); 9, 231 (Antipater); 9, 247 (Philippus, see below); 9, 627 (Marianus); 9, 669 (Marianus).
55
A poem about a tree in a Roman garden naturally suggests the inclusion of a reference to the pastoral idyll: hence the section on the Fauns, Pan, the Dryad, and the out-of-doors carousel in lines 11–18. There is a parallel arrangement in Stat. silv. 2, 3, the birthday poem to Atedius Melior on a plane-tree in his garden, which bent towards a pool and then grew upwards again. The poem opens in a manner which reminds us of lines 5 f. of the present poem (silv. 2, 3, 1 f. Stat, quae perspicuas nitidi Melioris opacet | arbor aquas complexa lacus) and then proceeds to give the reason for the tree’s conspicuous nature. Pan once hunted a nymph, who escaped by plunging into the pool; deprived of his prey, Pan planted a young plane beside the pool, commanding the tree to spread its sheltering leaves above it (silv. 2, 3, 8–61). Statius’ poem being a kind of aition, the pastoralmythological section is the point of emphasis, but the poem still shows roughly the same arrangement as the present one: there is an introduction describing the tree (silv. 2, 3, 1–7; Mart. 9, 61, 1–10), a pastoral-mythological passage (silv. 2, 3, 8–61; Mart. 9, 61, 11–18), and a conclusion (silv. 2, 3, 62–77, containing congratulations and good wishes for Melior; Mart. 9, 61, 19–22); it may well be that Martial used it as a model for the present poem. For the pastoral-mythological motif in and Ovidian influences (fast. 1, 391 ff., the ass of Silenus; the pursuit of nymphs in the Metamorphoses) on silv. 2, 3, see van Dam, pp. 283 f. and 286; see also his note on silv. 2, 2, 100–6. 1. Tartesiacis … terris: so-called from the ancient city of Tartessus in southern Spain on the mouth of the river Baetis (now the Guadalquivir). Founded probably by the Etruscans about 1100 BC because of the abundant silver and copper in the region, it was an important commercial town until its destruction by the Carthaginians around 500 BC (see Schulten in RE 2:4, s.v. 2446 ff.). domus est notissima: for all its fame in ancient times, it is not possible to determine which house is meant here. The pastoral setting of lines 11 ff. have been taken as suggesting a villa outside the city itself, and one such villa, the so-called palace of “Mogueit el Rumi” (where today a symbolic plane-tree grows), has been tentatively identified as the location of Caesar’s plane–tree. There is, however, no substantial evidence to support this theory (Knapp, Roman Córdoba, Berkeley etc. 1983, p. 66), and furthermore, a villa outside the town would probably not be referred to as a domus. For the prosody, cf. Ov. met. 2, 591; 4, 287. 2. dives … Corduba: i.e. in Corduba on the river Baetis, the capital of the province of Baetica in southern Spain, founded probably by M. Claudius Marcellus as a Roman colony (Knapp, op. cit., p. 11) in a region attractive on account of the mineral riches of the Sierra Morena (above all, copper; Hübner in RE 4, s.v. Corduba 1223; for gold, see below) and the fertile land south of the river. It played a significant role in the Civil War between Caesar and the Pompeians, at the beginning of which it was held for Pompey by his legate M. Terentius Varro (the famous writer). Caesar himself, however, visited the town on only two occasions, on one of which he must have planted the plane. The first occasion was a stay of a couple of days in the late spring of 49; Caesar had summoned all the magistrates 56
and chief men of the surrounding communities to Corduba, which had been evacuated by Varro when Caesar began to move towards the town. The assembled magistrates gave Caesar their support, and Corduba remained pro-Caesarian, although, after an interval of unrest, it fell into the hands of Sex. Pompeius, son of Pompey the Great. Pompeius fled the town at the news of Caesar’s major victory at Munda in 45,1 and Caesar then quickly suppressed the remaining pro-Pompeian elements in Corduba by sending his troops into the town, which was partially destroyed and the Pompeians slaughtered. Caesar remained in Corduba for a while, and perhaps this is the more likely occasion for the planting of the plane. For details concerning the Civil War in Baetica, see Knapp, op. cit., pp. 20 ff. Baetin: the only instance of this accusative with -n. 3. vellera nativo pallent … flava metallo: Baetica was famous for its production of wool (12, 64, 5), of which there was a white variety suitable for the toga (8, 28, 5 f.), a black (1, 96, 5), and, in the region around Corduba, a reddish (5, 37, 7; 12, 63, 3 ff.) used particularly for mantles; Colum. 7, 2, 4; cf. Plin. nat. 8, 191; Blümner, Privataltertümer, p. 240. Martial implies that the mineral deposits of the region coloured the wool (cf. Iuv. 12, 40 ff. [vestes] quarum generosi graminis ipsum | infecit natura pecus, sed et egregius fons | viribus occultis et Baeticus adiuvat aer), and it seems that, in using the epithet flavus (cf. note on 9, 23, 1 virgineo flavescere contigit auro), he has particularly gold in mind. Corduba is not usually connected with this metal, but Sil. 3, 401 speaks of its aurifera terra, and Spain was otherwise rich in gold; Strabo 3, 2, 8 also states that “Turdetania (somewhat east of Baetica) and the territory adjoining it” was very rich in gold, silver, copper and iron and that the gold was not only mined but also washed from the rivers, which carried goldbearing sand; cf. also Blümner in RE 7, s.v. Gold 1564. The phrase reminds us of Vergil’s description in ecl. 4, 42 of how wool will automatically take purple colour during the Golden Age; see Coleman, ad loc. 4. linit … brattea viva: lino here means “to gild” (cf. cf. 4, 39, 7; 8, 33, 11; Suet. Nero 31, 2; TLL, s.v. 1456, 83 ff.), brattea “a thin covering” (cf. bratteatus = auratus, TLL, s.v. 2167, 18) and vivus “natural” as opposed to artificial; cf. 12, 63 tinctis gregibus colore vivo of the sheep grazing in the fields of Corduba (Forcellini, Lex., s.v. vivus 377, 5). Hesperium … pecus: the expression makes one think of the cattle of Geryon, whose abode was in later tradition sometimes placed near Tartessus, see note on 9, 101, 10 (where Geryon’s cattle are referred to as Hesperias ... boves).
1
It may be noted here that the Caesarians, while cutting down trees for their camp at Munda, came upon a palm-tree, which Caesar spared as foreboding his victory. A branch shot forth on the palm, growing continuously and overshadowing the mother tree within a few days; and many doves, the birds of Venus, nested in it, although they normally shunned the stiff foliage of the palm (Suet. Aug. 94, 11); see W. Deonna, “La légende d’Octave-Auguste. Dieu, sauveur et maître du monde”, RHR 83 (1921), pp. 192 ff.
57
5 f. Aedibus in mediis totos amplexa penates | stat platanus: obviously inspired by Verg. Aen. 2, 512 ff. aedibus in mediis nudoque sub aetheris axe | ingens ara fuit iuxtaque veterrima laurus | incumbens arae atque umbra complexa penatis; cf. also Sil. 13, 277 f. Aedibus in mediis consurgens ilice multa | extruitur rogus, hospitium commune peremptis. There was a tree in the atrium also at Manilius Vopiscus’ villa at Tibur, cf. Stat. silv. 1, 3, 59 mediis servata penatibus arbor (with Vollmer’s note). Cf. also the opening lines of Stat. silv. 3, 2 Stat, quae perspicuas nitidi Melioris opacet | arbor aquas complexa lacus. 6. densis … comis: the plane has large leaves and provides plenty of shade; according to Pliny, this was the reason why it was brought to Italy: quis non iure miretur arborem umbrae gratia tantum ex alieno petitam orbe? (nat. 12, 6). Compare also Cic. carm. frg. 23, 10 platano umbrifera; Verg. georg. 4, 146 ministrantem platanum potantibus umbras; Nux 17 platanis ... praebentibus umbram; Petron. 131, 8, 1 nobilis aestivas platanus diffuderat umbras; Fronto p. 29, 18 f. van den Hout 1954 platanus umbrosa. 7. hospitis invicti: the reference here would obviously be to Caesar’s military achievements, but in a poem such as this, one must also consider the formulary usage of invictus with regard mainly to divinity, which Martial elsewhere applies to Domitian; see note on 9, 1, 10 invicta … manus. dextera felix: like invictus, felix may simply mean “victorious in battle”, but, like invictus, and for the same reasons, it should be taken one step further to the sense of faustus, bene ominatus, sacer (TLL, s.v. 439, 2 ff.). Cf. Ov. am. 3, 13, 34, referring to the hand of Halaesus, mythological founder of Falerii, as felix manus. As the plane, still a virga, in the following line is said to begin to grow ex illa manu, there may also be a notion of felix in the sense of “fertile” or “productive”, adding to the tree’s perception of Caesar’s divinity. 9. Auctorem … sentire videtur: for the influence of the numen of the divine monarch on sacrificial animals and animals in the arena, see 9, 31 intro. The same was applicable also to plants; the whole of nature is aware of his numen. It was at home in the Hellenistic tradition; cf., for example, AP 9, 307 (Philippus), presenting the emperor, as it were, as the creative force of nature: a laurel grew on an altar of the emperor; Daphne, says Philippus, who refused Apollo, now desires “Zeus, the son of Aeneas”, since “not even stone can refuse to bear offspring to Caesar”. In like manner, the plane at Corduba is inspired by Caesar’s divinity, making it flourish and strive to reach the heavens with its crown. Compare also Quint. inst. 6, 3, 77, relating how Augustus, when the Tarraconians told him that a palm had grown forth from his altar, jokingly answered: apparet ... quam saepe accendatis; Suetonius tells that a withered oak on Capri revived at the coming of Augustus (Aug. 92, 2); see Weinreich, Studien, p. 79, n. 11; Sauter, pp. 169 f. Sentire videtur three times at the end of the hexameter in Lucretius (2, 989; 3, 607; 3, 1053).
58
nemus: this is the only instance of the word with reference to one single tree (see Forcellini, Lex., s.v. 255, 6), and it has therefore been subjected to interpolations (suum in , see Heraeus’ apparatus). But perhaps nemus is meant to emphasize the sanctity of the tree; cf. nemus in the sense of “sacred grove” (cf. OLD, s.v. 2). J
10. sidera celsa: in its consciousness of Caesar, the plane reaches towards the stars, the abode of divus Iulius himself (see note on 9, 101, 22 astra suis, caelo sidera). The juncture sidera celsa appears first in Stat. Theb. 7, 4 (also 8, 61), which may have influenced Martial here. 11–14.: this is the order of these lines offered by the MSS and kept by all editors except Friedländer, who adopted Munro’s suggestion 13–14–11–12. The -group gives the lines in the order 11–14–13–12. However, at the time of Friedländer’s edition, the important L manuscript of the -group had not yet emerged from obscurity (see the introduction, vol. 1, p. 35), nor did he use the f MS of the same group. The -group has therefore gained substantial in support, and Friedländer’s argumentation need no longer be taken into consideration. E
J
E
E
11. madidi … Fauni: in poetry, the plural Fauni as a category of rustic demons (as opposed to the singular Faunus) is probably to be regarded as having been influenced by the plurality of similar Greek demons (for example, and ), although there may have been a native Roman concept of a multitude of Fauni; see Otto in RE 6, s.v. Faunus 2060. They are a common feature of the countryside and frequently appear either by themselves (8, 49, 4; 10, 92, 3; Verg. ecl. 6, 27; Hor. ars 244; Priap. 36, 5; Sil. 5, 626; Stat. Theb. 4, 696; silv. 1, 3, 99; 2, 3, 7) or coupled with other rustic deities, such as the almost identical Satyrs (Lucr. 4, 580; Hor. epist. 1, 19, 4; Ov. met. 6, 392), with the Nymphs (Lucr. 4, 580; Verg. georg. 1, 10; Aen. 8, 314; Stat. Theb. 2, 521; 6, 95; Ach. 1, 240), sometimes with the addition also of rivers (Ov. Ib. 81 f.; Val. Fl. 1, 105 f.); often, all or some of these are combined. The Fauns usually carry epithets such as agrestum praesentia numina (Verg. georg. 1, 10), ruricolae (Ov. met. 6, 392), Apenninicolae (Sil. 5, 626), capripedes (Lucr. 4, 580), cornipedes (Stat. Theb. 4, 696) and faciles (Stat. silv. 2, 3, 7). Madidus appears only here as an epithet of the Fauns, but Martial also in 8, 49, 4 hints at their addiction to wine (cf., for example, Hor. epist. 1, 19, 4; cf. carm. 3, 18, 6 of Faunus himself), which is a clear sign of their identification with the Satyrs, companions of Bacchus. The section on the rustic deities is neatly kept together by saepe sub at the beginning of this line and line 14. The same opening of the line is found in Verg. georg. 3, 416; Ov. epist. 4, 97; ars 2, 315; met. 4, 626; 8, 746 saepe sub hac dryades festas duxere choreas; fast. 6, 554. 3QHM
6WXURL
or pan-pipe (TLL, s.v. fistula 829, 12. terruit … fistula sera domum: the 70 ff.). Syrinx was a nymph loved by Pan, who transformed herself into a reed in V¿ULJ[
59
order to escape him; from the reed, Pan made the pan-pipe, hence its connection with rustic demigods and shepherds; cf. Ov. met. 1, 689 ff. with Bömer; Eitrem in RE 2:4, s.v. Syrinx 1777 f. Terruit refers to the feeling of the inhabitants of the house when they become aware of the presence of the numina, suggesting that the nightly lusus of the drunken Fauns was rather noisy and perhaps also that the tones of the syrinx are not languorous ones but rather such as earned the instrument epithets such as arguta (Sidon. ecl. 7, 24) and garrula (Tib. 2, 5, 30). Visits by rustic deities and other demigods mostly occur at night; cf. nocturnum Pana below and van Dam on Stat. silv. 2, 2, 100–6. 13 f. solos nocturnum Pana per agros | … Dryas: Pan’s love of nymphs was always unhappy, and those he chased were transformed into trees or plants, like Syrinx and Pitys; he had the reluctant Echo torn to pieces by mad shepherds. None of these, it is true, were Dryads, but the Dryads were closely connected with Pan as inhabitants of trees giving shade to shepherds during the heat of the summer; in this respect, the plane-tree, with its large leaves, played a significant role and was considered (like the oak, the willow, the elm and, above all, the pine) sacred to the god; see Roscher in Roscher, s.v. Pan 1393 ff., and cf. the epigrams from the Greek Anthology mentioned in the introduction above. For nocturnus Pan, see also Stat. Theb. 3, 480; Val. Fl. 6, 538. For the juncture soli agri, cf. Verg. georg. 3, 249; Ov. ars. 2, 473; Sil. 6, 57 f. 14. saepe sub hac: in distichs, saepe at the beginning of a pentameter is commonly repeated at the beginning of the following hexameter or pentameter or both. There seems to be no other instance in which saepe is repeated at the beginning of the pentameter three lines below to enclose a section. On the iteration of saepe, see also Bömer on Ov. met. 2, 813. ), an epithet of Dionysus as “loosener”, is 15. comissatore Lyaeo: Lyaeus ( not recorded earlier than Hellenistic times; it was adopted by the Latin writers (already Enn. [trag. 121]; Verg. Aen. 4, 58; Ov. am. 3, 15, 17; met. 4, 11 etc.) and, like the god himself, also serves as metonymy for “wine” (for example, Hor. epod. 9, 38; carm. 1, 7, 22 with Nisbet & Hubbard; Ov. am. 2, 11, 49; ars 3, 645; 3, 765; fast. 5, 521). The present instance should probably be taken both as metonymy (as suggested by oluere) and as indicating that Bacchus himself was present at the revel of the Fauns; the reference to Bacchus proper is suggested by the fact that comissator (a word virtually absent in poetry but found three times in Martial, also 4, 5, 3 and 5, 16, 9) is not elsewhere applied to the wine itself (see TLL, s.v. 1790, 7). /XDjRM
16. crevit … umbra mero: according to Plin. nat. 12, 8, plane-trees were fertilized with wine, as this was considered most beneficial to the roots; Pliny ascribes this to the high esteem in which the plane was held, and it seems questionable whether he really believed in wine as fertilizer, as he adds: docuimusque etiam arbores vina potare! The idea was obviously well known, cf. Ov. rem. 141 ff.
60
quam platanus vino gaudet ... tam Venus otia amat; AP 9, 247 (Philippus), on a plane uprooted by the wind, which was revived by pouring wine on it. Umbra is metonymy for the foliage, cf. OLD, s.v. 3 b. 17 f. deiecta ... rosas: difficult lines; the reading of the -group and of L and f in the -group is delecta, while deiecta is found in the remaining MSS of the group, P and Q. There is consequently substantial support in the MSS for delecta, but this does not make much sense, and attempts at emendations have been made, like Gilbert’s distincta (retracted by himself) or Shackleton Bailey’s depicta (Corrections, p. 284). If, however, deiecta is accepted,1 we may translate: “the grass, reddening from yesterday’s wreaths, has been pressed down, and no one could say that the roses (sc. of the wreaths, cf. 9, 60 intro.) were his”; cf. TLL, s.v. deicio 397, 26 ff. (paraphrasing deiecta as “deflexa”). Friedländer’s explanation of deiecta, “Von den Rosenkränzen, welche die Begleiter des Bacchus dort gelassen hatten, war das Gras niedergebogen und zugleich geröthet”, was opposed by Friedrich (G. Friedrich, “Zu Martial”, Philologus 68 [1909], pp. 111 f.), who suggested that the grass would have been pressed down by the master of the house and his guests having a drinking-bout beneath the plane and took line 18 as implying that the merry band would have returned the day after, without anyone being able to tell which of the scattered wreaths he had worn the night before; for he holds it to be too ridiculous that “Bacchus und seine Begleiter am nächsten Tag wiederkommen und sich nach ihren Kränzen umsehen sollen”. This explanation, while pointing in the right direction, still needs some modification. First, it is obvious that the revel is held by Bacchus and the Fauns, and herba deiecta would refer to the grass having been pressed down by this merry band. It would therefore be Bacchus and the Fauns who have left their wreaths scattered about beneath the plane. But the lines clearly depict the scene of the revel on the day after, and thus reasonably as found by the actual inhabitants of the house when they woke up in the morning; the sight of the pressed-down grass and the scattered wreaths, which no one among them could claim as his own, and the memory of the sound of the flute at night, would probably make them suspect what had really been going on the night before. J
E
E
19. magni Caesaris: like invictus and felix above, the epithet magnus is capable of bearing both a profane and a sacred sense; in the former sense, it was the honorary title of Pompey and was applied to Caesar by Catullus (11, 10 Caesaris … monumenta magni), to Augustus by Vergil (georg. 4, 560), Horace (carm. 1, 12, 50), Propertius (2, 1, 26; 2, 7, 5; 2, 31, 2) and Ovid (fast. 4, 124; 4, 859; trist. 1, 2, 3; 2, 230; 4, 1, 54; Pont. 1, 8, 24). But magnus was naturally also used by the poets as an epithet of gods; of Jupiter (cf., for example, 12, 90, 4; Plaut. Aul. 776; Verg. Aen. 3, 104; 9, 82 f.; Hor. carm. 1, 10, 5; Ov. am. 1, 10, 8; epist. 14, 95; ars 2, 540; met. 2, 677 f. [with Bömer; for the Greek models, see Bruchmann, Epitheta, pp. 133 f.]), of Mars (Ov. trist. 2, 295 [cf. Bruchmann, Epitheta, p. 40]) and as the official epithet of Hercu1
As it has been by all editors from Schneidewin to Heraeus; Shackleton Bailey prints †delecta†.
61
les (see note on 9, 64, 1 Herculis ... Caesar). When used by Martial and Statius of Domitian, of his magnae manus etc., it is mostly to be taken as expressing the emperor’s sanctity, apart perhaps from such instances as allude to the emperor as the great commander (for example, Stat. silv. 3, 1, 62 magnus dux; see Sauter, pp. 96 ff.). 20. ne metuas … focos: cf. Nux 177 ff. Si merui videorque nocens, imponite flammae | nostraque fumosis urite membra focis: | si merui videorque nocens, excidite ferro … Caesar’s plane need not fear iron and fire; it is as though the elements could sense the divinity behind the tree, in the same manner as the tree itself is conscious of the divine Caesar. The thought is similar to 9, 1: invicta quidquid condidit manus, caeli est. The fires would be sacrilegi, as burning the tree of divus Iulius. Martial has the adjective only four times, (apart from the present also 4, 30, 12; 9, 61, 20; 9, 70, 2), all of which are applied to actions against the state (9, 70, 2, Catilina’s sacrilegum nefas) or, more specifically, against the divine emperor or objects related to him; thus, the hook catching Domitian’s sacri pisces in 4, 30 is called sacrilegus, as well as the furores of Saturninus’ revolt (see note on 9, 84, 1 sacrilegos … furores). 21. Perpetuos … frondis honores: the plane will grow eternally, a symbol of the divine successors of Caesar. Cf. Apollo’s words to Daphne in Ov. met. 1, 565 tu quoque perpetuos semper gere frondis honores (with Bömer). 22. Pompeianae … manus: the tree was planted by the hand of a victor and a god, not by that of the mortal over whom he gained the victory.
62 Tinctis murice vestibus quod omni et nocte utitur et die Philaenis, non est ambitiosa nec superba: delectatur odore, non colore. Philaenis wears purple clothes day and night; it is not because she is particularly fond of the colour but apparently because she likes the smell of urine, a side effect of the dyeing process which seems to have remained in the final product (see below on line 4). The reason, as suggested by Shackleton Bailey in his Loeb, is very likely that it hides her own smell; she is presumably incontinent. Although it is not explicitly said that Philaenis is an elderly women, it is reasonable to assume that she was; Martial uses the name only of such women as he would have found particularly repulsive, explicitly of a vetula in 2, 33 (see note on 9, 29, 1 Philaeni). For the vetula-scoptic in Martial, see 9, 37 intro.
62
2. et nocte ... et die: the words substitute the Ovidian formula nocte dieque which is common in dactylic verse; thus 10, 58, 11; 11, 56, 6; Ov. met. 2, 343; 4, 260; 12, 46; Pont. 3, 1, 40; then Silius (three instances), Valerius Flaccus (two), Statius (six) and Juvenal (three). 3. ambitiosa nec superba: purple clothes were otherwise a sign of extravagant luxury; they were the fashion among wealthy Roman ladies already in the 3rd century BC, and Julius Caesar, followed by Augustus, Tiberius and Nero, tried to restrict their use among the people (Suet. Iul. 43, 1). There are no indications of such restrictions during the reign of the Flavians, although purple clothes were still in vogue; Martial mentions such prices as 10,000 IIS for a Tyrian cloak coloris optimi (8, 10); cf. Schneider in RE 23, s.v. purpura 2006; Friedländer, Sittengeschichte 2, pp. 315 f. 4. odore: the smell of purple-dyed garments is mentioned also in 1, 49, 32 olidae ... vestes murice; 2, 16, 3 (torus) Sidone tinctus olenti; 4, 4, 6, comparing the smell of Bassa to a bis murice vellus inquinatum. The dyeing industry itself was a smelly business, owing to the method of extracting the dye from the molluscs: these were opened (or crushed) and the innards were left in salt for three days, after which the fleshy parts and impurities were removed from the liquid. This was obviously a malodorous process; Strabo, for example, says that Tyre was an unpleasant city to live in because of the number of dye-works (Forbes, Studies 4, pp. 117 f.). Lilja explains the smell of purple on the basis of this method of preparation (S. Lilja, The treatment of odours in the poetry of antiquity, Commentationes Humanarum Litterarum 49, Helsinki 1972, p. 136; cf. p. 166). But nowhere in the ancient writers is there any mention that the odour attached to the dye itself. Important in this context is a passage from Pliny on the use of purple in the robes of state (nat. 9, 127): Tyri praecipuus hic (sc. murex) Asiae, Meninge Africae et Gaetulo litore oceani, in Laconica Europae. Fasces u securesque Romanae viam faciunt, idemque pro maiestate pueritiae est, distinguit ab equite curiam, dis advocatur placandis omnemque vestem inluminat, in triumphali miscetur auro. Quapropter excusata et purpurae sit insania. Sed unde concliis pretia, quis virus grave in fuco, color austerus in glauco et irascenti similis mari? Apparently, Pliny makes a distinction between purpura and conchylia, the former presumably signifying “true purple”, which apparently did not smell, and the latter “conchylian dye”, which was odorous; cf. E. de Saint–Denis in the Budé edition of Pliny (Livre IX, Paris 1955); see also his note ibid., p. 138. Pliny’s distinction between purpura and conchylia is also apparent elsewhere, for example, in nat. 5, 76; 8, 197; and 9, 130. In 9, 138 he gives the reason for the odour of the conchylian dye: In concylia veste … ius temperatur aqua et pro indiviso humani potus excremento. The smell would thus be due to the true purple having been diluted with water and urine (see Blümner, Technologie 1, p. 236). Martial’s mention of smelly Sidonian purple in 2, 16, 3 and of the odorous cloth bis murice vellus inquinatum in 4, 4, 6 may perhaps be explained as referring to fabric dyed with “Tyrian conchylian purple”, which was done by a doubledyeing process: first, conchylian dye was used, followed by the usual method of 63
producing Tyrian purple, by soaking the cloth twice in two, different, “true” purple dyes (Blümner, op. cit., pp. 237; 234). Pliny remarks that the method would have arisen from the dyers’ having second thoughts about the conchylian, dying the cloth a second time to get rid of undesirable effects (Paenitentia hoc primo debet invenisse, artifice mutante quod damnabat, nat. 9, 140). Among the undesirable effects would certainly have been the smell of the conchylian dye, which, however, may have been present also in the final product.
63 Ad cenam invitant omnes te, Phoebe, cinaedi. Mentula quem pascit, non, puto, purus homo est. Phoebus gets invited to dinner by depraved persons because he is known to perform sexual services in return. He is thus a kind of male prostitute, a category of men for whom antiquity on the whole showed disapproval (as of sex between grown-up men; see Sullivan, Martial, pp. 188 f.). Similar to Phoebus is the Telesinus of 6, 50: Cum coleret puros pauper Telesinus amicos, | errabat gelida sordidus in togula: | obscenos ex quo coepit curare cinaedos, | argentum, mensas, praedia solus emit. | Vis fieri dives, Bithynice? Conscius esto: | nil tibi vel minimum basia pura dabunt. 1. Phoebe: the name appears in ten other epigrams, two making cutting comments on his looks (2, 35; 3, 89), two poking fun at a bald man with artificial hair (6, 57; 12, 45), four referring to a creditor (2, 44; 6, 20; 9, 92; 9, 102) and two aimed, as here, at homosexuals (1, 58; 3, 73). Howell (on 1, 58, 2) remarks that the name would suggest good looks, which, in a case like this, would perhaps imply effeminacy. 2. Mentula quem pascit: Phoebus is metaphorically “fed by the dick” inasmuch as he makes a living out of it, but also in a more literal way if he performed fellatio (which is certainly implied here, see note on purus below) or agreed to pedicatio; the culus (like the cunnus) is elsewhere depicted as “eating” or “feeding on” the mentula; cf. 9, 80, 2 with note; 12, 75, 3 Pastas glande natis habet Secundus; and see Adams, p. 138. However, quem may perhaps also be taken to refer both to Phoebus and one of the cinaedi of the preceding line, if one assumes that the latter acted as passive homosexual and Phoebus took the active part (Adams, p. 141, reckons only with this possibility). In such a case, Phoebus would still make a living out of his penis, but the cinaedus, taking the passive part, would also pascere mentulam. Such an interpretation gives us the opportunity of taking the line as anticipating an objection from Phoebus to Martial’s designation of his friends as cinaedi: “But they are not catamites”, to which Martial ambiguously replies: “I do not consider him who is fed by the dick to be innocent”.
64
purus: the word means, of course, “morally innocent”, but when referring to concrete sexual acts, it often appears to have a more literal meaning. The general idea seems to be that the semen was pollutant; Martial often uses (im)purus with reference to fellatio; cf. 14, 70 (69 Leary) (Priapus siligineus) Si vis esse satur, nostrum potes esse Priapum: | ipsa licet rodas inguina, purus eris; 2, 61, 8; 3, 75, 5; 6, 66, 5; 9, 67, 7; and see Adams, p. 199; also of the cunnus in 3, 87, 2. Perhaps the same idea is reflected in CIL 4, 1391 Veneria Maximo mentla exmuccavt per vindemia tota et relinque(t) putr. ventre mucei os plenu … It should be noted, though, that in 11, 61, 14 purus is used also in connection with cunnilinctio, so perhaps the impurity would be the result of oral sex rather than of the semen specifically. See also 9, 67, 7 with note.
64 Herculis in magni voltus descendere Caesar dignatus Latiae dat nova templa viae, qua, Triviae nemorosa petit dum regna, viator octavum domina marmor ab urbe legit. Ante colebatur votis et sanguine largo, 5 maiorem Alciden nunc minor ipse colit. Hunc magnas rogat alter opes, rogat alter honores; illi securus vota minora facit. Domitian had built a temple to Hercules on the Via Appia, about midway to his estate at Alba, and in the temple, there stood a statue of the god bearing the features of the emperor. The temple, which is mentioned also in 9, 3, 11, is not mentioned in Martial’s previous books and would therefore have been finished in 94. It does not appear anywhere else in the extant literature and, the archaeological evidence being equally scarce, no conclusions can be drawn as to the features of the temple itself; the remains of a building on the same location, previously identified with the temple and commonly called “tempio di Ercole”, date in fact from the late Republic (see L. Quilici, Via Appia da Porta Capena ai Colli Albani, Rome 1989, p. 55). The comparison of rulers with Hercules, the prime model of the victorious hero, first appeared in the Hellenistic world, where it was as favoured by the rulers themselves as it was later by their Roman counterparts; Alexander the Great, for example, used to wear a lion skin and carry a club (Athen. 12, 53 Kaibel f.; see Sauter, pp. 78 ff.). In Rome, this habit was imitated by Caligula and Nero; Augustus, being more cautious, was content with the mere comparison; cf. Verg. Aen. 6, 801; Hor. carm. 3, 14, 1 ff. The height was reached by Commodus, who dressed as Hercules, called himself Hercules Romanus and even tried himself to imitate hero by performing cruel deeds in the amphitheatre. Well known is the bust presenting Commodus in a lion skin, the club resting on his shoulder (see further Riewald, pp. 283 ff.). ÈVSHU ¯ C+UDNO M
65
By letting the statue in the temple on the Appian Way be given his own features, Domitian perhaps made way for such extravagances as those of Commodus, but literary comparisons of Domitian and Hercules are comparatively few. Martial had made some attempts in that direction in 5, 65, depicting the deeds of Hercules as inferior to the spectacles given by Domitian in the arena and foretelling that the emperor, like Hercules, will be given heaven as a reward for them. It is not until Book 9, however, that the true comparisons appear, probably in response to Domitian’s statue of Hercules, which would have indicated that the emperor thought the comparison appropriate. 9, 65 is coupled with the present poem and is devoted entirely to the statue, but the thoroughly realized comparison appears in 9, 101, a grandiose piece weighing the deeds of Hercules against those of Domitian, which are naturally found to be superior. The hero is also among the children of Jupiter in 9, 34, who may be interpreted as representatives of the emperor (see 9, 34 intro.). Perhaps there were further comparisons in the first edition of Book 10, of which only the second edition has survived; it was issued in the reign of Trajan and was consequently cleared of all references to Domitian (cf. Sullivan, Martial, pp. 44 ff.). See also 9, 101 intro. In the Silvae of Statius, there are no elaborate comparisons between Domitian and Hercules. A couple of lines in Book 4, however, compare the hero to the emperor; thus 4, 2, 50 f., in which Domitian hosting a banquet is likened to the relaxed Hercules resting after having accomplished his Labours, and 4, 3, 155 ff., which draws a parallel between the northward journeys of the emperor and those of Hercules and Bacchus (cf. Sauter, p. 84). Although these instances are insignificant as compared with those of Martial, it may be noted that they appear in poems written in 94–95 (see Coleman, p. xx), and may thus perhaps have been inspired by the statue of Hercules with the features of Domitian. 1. Herculis ... Caesar: the order of precedence is set at once: it is Domitian who deigns to lend his features to Hercules, not vice versa. The present line offers Martial’s only instance of Hercules with the epithet magnus, which in the official Roman cult was restricted to Hercules Magnus Custos but is relatively common in Latin poetry (see Carter, Epitheta, p. 43). In Greek poetry, the epithet is rare (see Bömer on Ov. met. 9, 135). In using the epithet here, Martial emphasizes Domitian’s greatness: Hercules is magnus, and yet he is the minor when compared to Domitian (line 6). PyJDM
2. Latiae … viae: sc. Via Appia, presumably called Latia as being the principal road to Rome from the south (cf. Friedländer, ad loc.); apparently for the same reason, it is called Ausonia via in 9, 101, 2. In the same manner, the city of Rome itself is referred to as both Latia and Ausonia urbs (see note on 9, 17, 4). The juncture Latia via is unparalleled. 3. Triviae nemorosa … regna: south of the Alban lake, near the town of Aricia (cf. 13, 19, 1) and east of the Appian Way, is the Lacus Nemorensis or Speculum Dianae (now Lago di Nemi; see map in RE 1, 1310), on the shore of which lay the famous temple of Diana Nemorensis, to whom the lake and the nearby grove, nemus Dianae, were sacred. The priest of the temple bore the title of rex Ne66
morensis (cf. Stat. silv. 3, 1, 55; Suet. Cal. 35, 3),1 and the area could thus, as here, be referred to as a regnum (cf. Ov. ars 1, 260; fast. 3, 271 with Bömer). The feast of Diana Nemorensis fell on the 13th of August (Stat. silv. 3, 1, 60 Hecateidas … idus), when women with torches walked in procession to Aricia (Prop. 2, 32, 10; Ov. fast. 3, 267 ff.; Stat. 3, 1, 56). While Diana is often mentioned as Trivia by the poets (see Carter, Epitheta, p. 31), this is particularly the case with Diana Nemorensis (cf. 5, 1, 2; 6, 47, 3; Verg. Aen. 7, 516; 774; 778; Prop. 2, 32, 10; Sil. 8, 362; Stat. 3, 1, 56), although this seems somewhat incongruent with the archaeological evidence (for example, votive offerings), which rather suggests that Diana Nemorensis was a goddess of women and childbirth. Nemorosa regna also in Sil. 3, 666 of the oracle of Ammon in Libya. 4. octavum … marmor: the eighth milestone, slightly more than 10 km from Rome, corresponding to the sixth milestone from Domitian’s Alban villa (9, 101, 12). Together with 7, 31, 10 rus marmore tertio notatum, this is the only instance of marmor used in this sense; cf. TLL, s.v. 410, 76 f. domina … urbe: also 3, 1, 5; 12, 21, 9. The expression emanates from the Augustan concept of Rome as the head of the world, the predestined rulers of which are the Romans themselves (rerum dominos Verg. Aen. 1, 282). This particular juncture is Ovidian (am. 2, 14, 16, rem. 291; Pont. 4, 5, 7, cf. met. 15, 444–447; also Calp. ecl. 4, 161), but Ovid has presumably drawn on Hor. carm. 4, 14, 44 domina Roma (found in Martial in 1, 3, 3; 10, 103, 9); see further Bömer on Ov. met. 15, 447. 5. sanguine largo: the same ending in Verg. Aen. 12, 721. 6. maiorem … minor ipse colit: in the same manner as Hercules, himself magnus (cf. line 1 above), used to be worshipped with votive offerings and sacrificial animals, now he himself worships Domitian. Minor should be taken predicatively: “now he, himself the lesser, worships the greater”; cf. 9, 101, 11. For the prosody, cf. 11, 50, 4. 7. Hunc ... rogat alter opes … alter honores: hunc must point to Domitian, whom one man asks for great wealth and another for honours, which are precisely what the emperor can give. Rogat means simply “ask”. There is nothing to indicate that people prayed—in the religious sense—to the emperors, dead or living, in the same way as they prayed to an Olympic god (see G. W. Bowersock, “Greek intellectuals and the imperial cult” in W. den Boer [ed.], Le culte des souverains dans l'empire Romain, Geneva 1973, p. 180). 1
Anyone who succeeded in breaking a branch on a certain tree in the grove and, using the branch as a weapon, defeated the sitting rex in single combat would become rex Nemorensis. This was the practice also during the empire, but, because of the danger involved, it particularly attracted runaway slaves, who could find refuge in this office (see Wissowa, Religion, p. 199).
67
8. illi securus vota minora facit: “to him (sc. Hercules), a man perfunctorily (for this sense of securus, see OLD s.v. 4) makes lesser vows”; the possibility of obtaining what you want from Hercules is so remote (unlike the possibility of getting it from the emperor) that people are not very bothered about it; certainly, more than one man had learned not to expect great things from such prayers. The lack of confidence in traditional deities is apparent also in 9, 36 (see the introduction to that epigram); they are, rather, legendary figures with small ability to act, whereas Domitian is a concrete “god” and able to perform concrete actions.
65 Alcide, Latio nunc agnoscende Tonanti, postquam pulchra dei Caesaris ora geris, si tibi tunc isti vultus habitusque fuissent, cesserunt manibus cum fera monstra tuis: Argolico famulum non te servire tyranno vidissent gentes saevaque regna pati, sed tu iussisses Eurysthea; nec tibi fallax portasset Nessi perfida dona Lichas, Oetaei sine lege rogi securus adisses astra patris summi, quae tibi poena dedit; Lydia nec dominae traxisses pensa superbae, nec Styga vidisses Tartareumque canem. Nunc tibi Iuno favet, nunc te tua diligit Hebe; nunc te si videat nympha, remittet Hylan.
5
10
This poem is attached to the preceding in the manner observed earlier in this book (cf. 9, 44 and 55 and see the introduction, vol. 1, p. 20), being more light-hearted and treating more freely of the new statue of Hercules bearing the features of Domitian (see 9, 64 intro.). Here, Martial turns directly to Hercules, praising him as lucky in his newly won likeness to Domitian: had such a divinely beautiful face been his in his lifetime, he would not have attracted the anger of Juno, nor would he have had to perform the Labours that it brought in its train and to suffer the fire of Oeta to gain immortality; he would safely have gained his place among the gods, which he had now earned through his suffering. Thus, the poem is really a prophecy of what lies in store for the Roman Hercules: Domitian will be taken up among the gods, welcomed by all, without labours and without pain. There is a similar, while not equally realized comparison in 5, 65: the Labours of Hercules are compared to the games given by Domitian in the arena, the concluding lines foreseeing the emperor’s reception among the gods on his death: Pro meritis caelum tantis, Auguste, dederunt | Alcidae cito di, sed tibi sero dabunt (5, 65, 15–16). For the comparison between Hercules and Domitian, see further 9, 101 intro.
68
1. Latio … agnoscende Tonanti: “whom Jupiter now can acknowledge as his own”; for this sense of the gerundive, see note on 9, 49, 7 anus et ... vix accipienda. As a Greek national hero, Heracles was naturally the son of the Greek Zeus rather than of the specifically Roman Iuppiter Capitolinus (here mentioned as Latius Tonans, as in Lucan. 8, 219 [foedera] per Latium iurata Tonantem). But now, when a genuinely Roman Hercules has appeared in the shape of Domitian, Jupiter can freely acknowledge him as his son. 2. pulchra … ora: Domitian was in fact said to have been good-looking; cf. Suet. Dom. 18, 1 Statura fuit procera, vultu modesto ruborisque pleno, grandibus oculis, verum acie hebetiore; praeterea pulcher ac decens, maxime in iuventa, et quidem toto corpore exceptis pedibus, quorum digitos restrictiores habebat. The ending ora geris also 10, 28, 6 Et fora tot numeras, Iane, quot ora geris. dei Caesaris: the only instance mentioning Domitian as “Caesar the god”; see the introduction, vol. 1, p. 33. 3. isti vultus habitusque: “this face and this bearing”, but here perhaps rather “this face and this outfit”, alluding to the face of Domitian combined with the usual attributes of Hercules, which surely would have been present in the statue; the same distinction is made in Verg. Aen. 1, 315 virginis os habitumque gerens. For the phrase, cf. Hor. sat. 2, 4, 92 voltum habitumque hominis (at the beginning of the line); Calp. ecl. 7, 76 f. (alluding to Nero) tibi si propius venerandum cernere numen | fors dedit et praesens vultumque habitumque notasti; also Stat. Theb. 2, 230; 4, 546; 6, 263, all immediately following the penthemimeresis. Similar expressions with the same metrical position are Verg. georg. 1, 52 cultusque habitusque (cf. Sil. 15, 171); Manil. 1, 342 cursumque habitumque; Stat. Theb. 7, 222 mentemque habitumque; 10, 678 gressumque habitumque; silv. 2, 6, 104 moresque habitusque. 5. Argolico … tyranno: sc. Eurystheus of Argos, referred to as Argolicus tyrannus also in Lucan. 9, 367, in the service of whom Hercules performed the Twelve Labours. According to the tradition of the Iliad (19, 103 ff.), Heracles’ service under Eurystheus was the result of Hera’s cunning; bitter about Zeus having got Alcmene pregnant with Heracles, she made her husband promise that any descendant of Perseus who was born on a certain day should rule Mycenae. As the goddess of birth, Hera delayed the delivery of Alcmene and accelerated the birth of Eurystheus (cf. Sen. Herc. f. 830 Natus Eurystheus properante partu). Although there are alternative traditions (for example, Eur. Herc. 15 ff.), the Homeric story has exerted the greater influence, and in Latin poetry, Juno is generally given the blame for the Labours of Hercules; cf. Verg. Aen. 8, 288 ff.; Ov. epist. 9, 5 ff.; 9, 45; met. 9, 15 (cf. Bömer on met. 9, 273 ff., pp. 360 ff.); Stat. silv. 3, 1, 22; see Preller–Robert 2:2, pp. 615 ff.
69
6. saevaque regna: because of the Labours he imposed upon Hercules, the poets presented Eurystheus as the hero’s brutal enemy and supplied him with epithets such as Stheneleius hostis (Ov. epist. 9, 25); Eurysthea durum (Verg. georg. 3, 4); see Bömer on Ov. met. 9, 203. 7. iussisses: with ellipsis of an infinitive like tua regna pati (so Friedländer) or servire; cf. TLL, s.v. iubeo 582, 58 ff. 7 f. fallax … Nessi perfida dona Lichas: the fatal garment, smeared with the blood of Nessus the centaur. It was given to Hercules by his herald Lichas on behalf of Deianeira, the hero’s wife, whom Nessus was trying to abduct when he was shot by Hercules with an arrow steeped in the poison of the Hydra. As the hero fell in love with Iole, daughter of Eurytus of Oechalia (see below on line 11), Deianeira, believing that the centaur’s blood would work as a love-potion (as she had been told by the dying Nessus), prepared the garment to regain her husband. But the blood of the centaur was infected with the poison, and the garment stuck to the body of Hercules, who then sought his death in the fire on Mt. Oeta; see Kroll in RE 13, s.v. Lichas 260 f.; Escher, ibid. 4, s.v. Deïaneira 2378 ff.; Eitrem, ibid. 9, s.v. Iole 1, 1847 f.; Bömer on Ov. met. 9, 211 ff., pp. 310 ff. Lichas was not really fallax, because he did not know of the powers of the garment (cf., for example, Ov. met. 9, 155 ignaroque Lichae, quid tradat), even though he appeared treacherous to Hercules himself (for example, Ov. met. 9, 213 f.), who threw his herald against a rock in the ocean when he became aware of the effect of the garment (see Bömer on Ov. met. 9, 211 ff., pp. 341 ff.). 9. Oetaei sine lege rogi: “without the necessity of (= having to be burnt in) the fire at Oeta”, cf. TLL, s.v. lex 1250, 61 ff.; the fire at Oeta, whence Hercules was taken up among the gods, was a condition for his divinization, as it purified him of his mortal human elements (Preller–Robert, op. cit., pp. 597 ff.). The expression QÚL× JÕE× appears in Prop. 3, 13, 50 but is a favourite especially with Ovid (epist. 15, 73; ars 3, 133; met. 1, 90; 1, 477; 2, 204; 11, 489); then Sil. 16, 202 and, with the same placing as here (favoured by Ovid’s famous words of the Golden Age in met. 1, 90 sponte sua sine lege fidem rectumque colebat), Val. Fl. 6, 445; Stat. Theb. 6, 768, silv. 3, 3, 49. 10. astra ... poena dedit: on poena = “your suffering”, i.e. the Labours, cf. 5, 65, 1 f. Astra polumque dedit ... | Alcidae Nemees terror et Arcas aper; 5, 65, 15; 9, 101, 22; 14, 124, 2 magno qui (sc. Domitian) dedit astra patri. Heracles was promised immortality because of his Labours by Athena and Hermes (Diod. 4, 10) or by the oracle at Delphi (Apollod. 2, 73); cf. Gruppe in RE Suppl. 3, s.v. Herakles 1020; cf. Stat. silv. 3, 1, 25 f. virtute parata | astra; Sen. Ag. 813 f.; Herc. O. 31 f. The apotheosis of Hercules is frequently considered as a migration in astra; cf., for example, Ov. met. 9, 271 f.; fast. 2, 478; 3, 186; Sen. Herc. f. 437; Herc. O. 1433; 1942 f.; 1972; 1977 f.; Val. Fl. 4, 35 f.; Stat. Theb. 11, 46 f.; silv. 3, 1, 25 f.; 4, 6, 53. There is, naturally, no question of catasterism (cf. note on 9, 101,
70
22), but of astra as metonymy for the dwelling of the gods, see TLL, s.v. astrum 972, 75 ff. patris summi: see note on 9, 1, 5 summi … patris. 11. Lydia … dominae … pensa superbae: without the knowledge of Deianeira, Heracles had asked king Eurytus of Oechalia for the hand of his daughter Iole and been denied. In revenge, he killed Eurytus’ son Iphitus. Because of this crime, Zeus sentenced him to pay a sum of money to Eurytus and, in order to earn this sum, he was sold as a slave to Omphale, queen of Lydia, and remained in her service for a year, performing various deeds. The theme of the hero serving under a woman was much favoured in literature and art. Old Attic comedy seized upon its comic potential, comparing Pericles and Aspasia to Heracles and Omphale, and the theme was further developed by Hellenistic writers. In Latin poetry, Hercules’ servitude with Omphale is generally presented as a servitium amoris, and the hero as wearing women’s clothes and spinning, the queen as wearing the lion skin and wielding the club; cf. Prop. 3, 11, 17 ff.; 4, 9, 45 ff.; Ov. epist. 9, 55 ff.; ars 2, 217 f.; fast. 2, 303 ff.; Sen. Herc. f. 465 ff.; Herc. O. 371 ff.; Stat. Theb. 10, 646 ff.; Ach. 1, 260 ff.; see Preller– Robert, op. cit., pp. 567 f.; Herzog-Hauser in RE 18, s.v. Omphale 389 ff. 12. Styga … Tartareumque canem: for Hercules’ fetching of Cerberus from Hades, see note on 9, 101, 8 cum cane. Tartareus canis of Cerberus also in 5, 34, 4. As noted by Siedschlag, Ovidisches, p. 159, this pentameter may haven been inspired by Ov. ars 3, 322 Tartareosque lacus tergeminumque canem. 13. Nunc Iuno … nunc Hebe: nunc, i.e. “after your deification”; cf. Oct. 210 f. deus Alcides possidet Heben | nec Iunonis iam timet iras. On his ascension into the heavens, Heracles was reconciled to Hera and married to Hebe, goddess of youth and, according to the Homeric tradition (for example, Hom. Od. 11, 603 f.), her daughter with Zeus. Later tradition considered her the daughter of Hera alone (for example, Ov. met. 9, 400; see Bömer, ad loc.) and the marriage a sign of the reconciliation (Preller–Robert, op. cit., p. 601). 14. nunc te si videat nympha: should the nymph who pulled down fair Hylas into her spring set eyes on the new Hercules, she would let go of the boy as a sign of favour; there is a similar mythological twist in the concluding distich of 9, 103. For the story of Hylas, see note on 9, 25, 7 Hylan. The previous line, which is a statement of “mythological fact”, paves the way, as it were, for the concluding witticism, which brings together myth and reality. The repetition of nunc, here in the sense of “now, when you have got the features of Domitian”, makes the previous line lose something of its colour to this line and vice versa: the fact stated in line 13 lends a notion of actual possibility to line 14, while the latter, with its notion of contemporaneousness, seemingly suggests that also the love of Juno and Hebe is in fact due to Hercules’ new likeness to Domitian. 71
66 Uxor cum tibi sit formosa, pudica, puella, quo tibi natorum iura, Fabulle, trium? Quod petis a nostro supplex dominoque deoque, tu dabis ipse tibi, si potes arrigere. A certain Fabullus has made a petition to the emperor for the ius trium liberorum, although he has a young and beautiful wife; Martial concludes that he is impotent: Fabullus would not need to molest our Sire and God, if only he could get it up. Impotence is a recurring theme of the scoptic epigrams, sometimes in connection with old age (3, 75; 11, 46; see Kay on the latter; cf. AP 11, 29 [Automedon]; 11, 30 [Philodemus]), but more often as a theme in its own right (cf. 2, 45, 3, 73; 12, 86). The problem of childlessness due to impotence occurs also in 10, 91, while 3, 70 deals with “partial” (or perhaps “psychological”) impotence. Those affected by impotence often turned to unnatural ways of expressing their sexuality; thus 6, 26; 11, 25 (with Kay). 1. Uxor cum tibi sit: this exact opening is found also in 12, 97, an epigram on Bassus, who practises sodomy, in spite of his having a lovely wife. Cum sit tibi (“although you have …”) is commonly used by Martial at the beginning of satiric epigrams (cf. 1, 111, 1; 4, 34, 1; 4, 78, 1; 7, 18, 1; cf. Ov. met. 9, 549), as is cum sis (see note on 9, 37, 1). 2. natorum iura … trium: those of marriageable age who did not live in a respectable marriage were caelibes and therefore also incapaces, i.e. unable to be appointed heir in a person’s will; but as also widowers and widows, although they may have had children, were considered caelibes, the lex Iulia of Augustus prescribed that, if they had at least three children, they should not be regarded as incapaces; this was the ius trium liberorum. The right could also be bestowed by the senate and later by the emperor as an honour to persons unmarried or childless; thus, it had been conferred upon Martial by both Titus and Domitian (see note on 9, 97, 5 f.). Caelibes could not be appointed heirs at all, while those who were married but childless were allowed to inherit only half the amount bequeathed (see Kaser, Privatrecht 1, pp. 273 f.). Fabulle: Martial apparently had a friend of this name (cf. 5, 35, 8; 6, 72, 3; 12, 20, 1; 12, 22, 2), to whom the dinner-complaints of 3, 12 and 11, 35 were perhaps also directed, depending on whether the poet was close enough to Fabullus for the latter not to be offended by such poems (cf. Kay on 11, 35, 4 Fabulle). The present Fabullus is certainly not Martial’s friend and is surely, like those in 4, 87 and 12, 85 (equally uncomplimentary poems), fictitious. 3. dominoque deoque: the lofty tone of the line makes a sharp contrast with the straightforwardness of what follows. The juncture dominus et deus appears in Martial for the first time in 5, 8, 1, and then there are only a couple of instances in the following books (7, 34, 8 and 8, 2, 6, apart from the present). In 10, 72, 3, 72
addressed to Trajan, who, like Nerva, rejected all such titles, the poet contrasts him with Domitian: dicturus dominum deumque non sum. Domitian’s use of the title dominus et deus must now be considered with greater caution than it has previously received. The evidence of the ancient historians is limited to a note by Suetonius and one by Dio, presumably drawing on the former. Suetonius states that Domitian, cum procuratorum suorum nomine formalem dictaret epistulam, sic coepit: “dominus et deus noster hoc fieri iubet” (Dom. 13, 2; perhaps Martial is drawing on this same fact in 5, 8, 1 Edictum domini deique nostri). Thenceforward, it became the custom not to address the emperor otherwise, neither in writing nor in speech. Dio agrees that the titles were used both in speech and in documents and improves the story by stating that Domitian “took vast pride in being called ‘master’ and ‘god’” (67, 4, 7). Later writers, such as Aurelius Victor, Eutropius and Orosius, state that Domitian in fact adopted the title and that this was linked to a deterioration in his character; Orosius even adds that the emperor not only demanded to be referred to as dominus and deus in speech and writing, but also to be worshipped as one: Qui (sc. Domitianus) per annos quindecim ad hoc paulatim per omnes scelerum gradus crevit, ut confirmatissimam toto orbe Christi Ecclesiam, datis ubique crudelissimae persecutionis edictis, convellere auderet. Is in tantam superbiam prolapsus fuit, ut dominum sese ac deum vocari, scribi, colique iusserit (hist. 7, 10, 2). But these are authors whose works must be studied with great caution. The use of dominus et deus by Martial and others who thought it important to win the emperor’s favour1 is no proof that Domitian claimed it as a title and ordered everybody to use it. If that had been the case, it is remarkable that such antiDomitianic writers as Tacitus, Pliny, and Juvenal did not seize upon what would have seemed a most detestable feature of the emperor’s character. Furthermore, the juncture is never used by Statius; on the contrary, he states that Domitian would not have himself called dominus (silv. 1, 6, 83 f.). I quote here the conclusion of Jones: “He (sc. Domitian) obviously knew that he was not a God, and, whilst he did not ask or demand to be addressed as one, he did not actively discourage the few flatterers who did” (Domitian, p. 109; cf. also Scott, pp. 102 ff., which, however, should be read with more caution). Cf. also the introduction, vol. 1, pp. 28 f.
1
For example, the jurist Juventius Celsus, who had to convince the emperor that he had not been part of a conspiracy against him (which in fact he had, Dio 67, 13, 3 f.).
73
67 Lascivam tota possedi nocte puellam, cuius nequitias vincere nemo potest. Fessus mille modis illud puerile poposci: ante preces totas primaque verba dedit. Inprobius quiddam ridensque rubensque rogavi: pollicitast nulla luxuriosa mora. Sed mihi pura fuit; tibi non erit, Aeschyle, si vis accipere hoc munus condicione mala.
5
The narrator has spent a night with a girl who did anything he wanted; after a while, he even dared to ask for anal intercourse and fellatio. The girl agreed to both, but to the latter only on condition that he performed the same service in return. Martial himself obviously found oral sex generally repulsive, and, accordingly, he has the narrator decline; but Aeschylus, a character elsewhere presented as dedicated to oral sex, would probably not have. 1. Lascivam … puellam: lascivus is a frequent epithet of girls in poetry, often, but not always (cf. Verg. ecl. 3, 64; Hor. carm. 4, 11, 23), in malam partem, Ov. epist. 9, 65; ars 1, 523; Iuv. 6, Ox32. 2. nemo vincere potest: nemo ; nulla . Although both words give an acceptable meaning, Housman advocated nemo as being better established in the MSS and as giving a better sense, taking vincere as “exhaust” (with reference to Sall. Cat. 20, 12 summa lubidine divitias suas vincere nequeunt): “nemo amator quicquam nequitiae rogare potest, quod puellae praestare nolit” (Housman, Corrections, p. 247 = Class. pap., p. 725). DJ
E
3. mille modis: for this juncture to denote an infinitely large number, see also Hor. carm. 3, 7, 12; Ov. am. 2, 8, 1; ars 1, 756; 3, 787; met. 5, 596 ; Ibis 187; Lucan. 3, 689; Stat. Theb. 9, 28; cf. Hofmann–Szantyr, § 113 a, p. 211. Modus here, as in 12, 65, 2, refers to sexual schemata (cf. Tib. 2, 6, 52); common in Ovid, am. 2, 8, 28; 3, 7, 64 (with Brandt’s note); 3, 14, 24; ars 2, 680; 3, 787. The ablative is thus causal. illud puerile: anal intercourse. 4. ante preces totas: “before I had finished my prayers”. The construction falls somewhere between the ab urbe condita construction with omission of the participle (for example, factas) and the ab urbe condita construction with adjectives. The former, treated by Heick on pp. 67 f., is not a fully apt description, as totas conveys too much of the sense not to be vital to the construction; no instances involving a similar adjective are presented by Heick. Nor does the a. u. c. construction with adjectives completely make the point, since one could omit totas and still have a perfectly intelligible construction (which then would pass as an a.
74
u. c. construction with omission of the participle). Obviously, there is both brachylogical and colloquial influence on the construction. Ker wanted to alter totas to totum, as he felt ante … prima verba to be a contradiction of ante preces totas (A. Ker, “Some explanations and emendations of Martial”, CQ 44 [1950], p. 13). He was rightly contradicted by Hudson-Williams (A. Hudson-Williams, “Some other explanations of Martial”, CQ 46 [1952], p. 27), whose analysis of the line—“the first phrase, ante preces totas, gives the general picture, the second, primaque uerba, is limitative and more precise”— seems more apposite. 5. Inprobius quiddam: fellatio. Martial considered oral intercourse the vilest of sexual acts (see note on 9, 27, 14). For inprobus in connection with oral intercourse, cf. 2, 61, 2; 3, 82, 31. 6. pollicitast: there is a clear difference between dedit in line 4 and pollicitast: in this case, the girl did not meet the speaker’s demands at once, but only promised she would, and on special terms at that (the condicio of line 8). luxuriosa: “wanton”, cf. 7, 91, 4. The frequency of the word, which is otherwise rarely found in poetry (four instances in Ovid, one each in Lucan and Juvenal), is comparatively high in Martial, being found on seven occasions.1 7. Sed mihi pura fuit etc.: several scholars have tried to explain the two concluding lines,2 which Friedländer described as “völlig unklar”. The most satisfactory explanation is, however, that provided by Housman (loc. cit.), who suggested that the speaker gave up the demand for fellatio, as he would not agree to the girl’s terms (see note on the following line). Thus, he did not “pollute” the girl’s mouth, and so she is pura (for this use of the word, see note on 9, 63, 2) as far as the speaker is concerned, but she will not be if Aeschylus accepts on the same terms. Note the similarity between these words and the second hemiepes of Ov. fast. 5, 326: cura repellendi sed mihi nulla fuit. Aeschyle: see note on 9, 4, 3, where the name is used, as here, in connection with fellatio. 8. condicione mala: the significance of the girl’s terms has been as much disputed as that of the preceding line. Housman (loc. cit.) took it as implying that the girl would perform fellatio only if her lover performed cunnilinctio, which surely would have been a reason for Martial’s speaker to decline on account of the poet’s disgust at oral sex. Prinz (op. cit., p. 116) suggests that the condition was payment, and he is followed by Killeen, who takes condicione mala as meaning magno pretio (comparing 9, 4, which, however, seems of little relevance to the sense of condicio here). Now, if the girl demanded money she would be a prosti1
Also 1, 87, 2; 9, 82, 4; 11, 8, 4; 13, 82, 2; 14, 110, 2. M. Schuster, “Ad Martialis Epigr. IX 67”, RhM 77 (1928), p. 432; K. Prinz, “De Martialis Epigr. IX 67”, WS 48 (1930), pp. 113–116; J. F. Killeen, “Ad Martialis Epigr. IX 67”, Glotta 45 (1967), pp. 233–234. 2
75
tute and, if she was a prostitute, it would have been obvious from the very beginning that she expected to be paid. In any case, her demanding money would not be particularly shocking, nor is such an interpretation congruent with Martial’s generally complacent view of prostitutes (see Sullivan, Martial, p. 168). However, since the essence of the two concluding lines is obviously “I declined on those conditions, but you won’t, Aeschylus”, there must be some negative implication aimed at Aeschylus. To be charged with paying money (even large sums) to prostitutes was not a great insult, while to be called a cunnilingus certainly was; thus Housman’s interpretation is preferable.
68 Quid tibi nobiscum est, ludi scelerate magister, invisum pueris virginibusque caput? Nondum cristati rupere silentia galli: murmure iam saevo verberibusque sonas. Tam grave percussis incudibus aera resultant, causidicum medio cum faber aptat equo; mitior in magno clamor furit amphitheatro, vincenti parmae cum sua turba favet. Vicini somnum non tota nocte rogamus: nam vigilare leve est, pervigilare grave est. Discipulos dimitte tuos. Vis, garrule, quantum accipis ut clames, accipere ut taceas?
5
10
Martial’s views of the Roman schoolmasters are pervaded by two facts: their habit of always shouting and their beginning their lessons already at sunrise, which kept the poet from sleeping; apparently, some teacher used to give lessons close to Martial’s house on the Quirinal. These facts obviously caused the poet enough irritation never to mention a schoolmaster without alluding to both or at least one of these facts, hence the clamosus magister in 5, 84, 2; the tumidus rauca voce magister of 8, 3, 15; the matutinus magister in 9, 29, 7; his exhortation to the schoolmaster at last to let his pupils enjoy their summer holidays in 10, 62, and Martial’s reason for staying in the countryside, as expressed in 12, 57, 4 f.: negant vitam | ludi magistri mane, nocte pistores. The poet adds to this unsympathetic picture of the schoolmaster by depicting him as bitter, stern, threatening and odious to his pupils; but Martial’s view of the schoolmaster as being utterly wicked was probably rather a result of his own annoyance than a reflection of the general opinion (see further Friedländer, Sittengeschichte 1, pp. 176 ff.). 1. Quid tibi nobiscum est: also at the beginning of 2, 22, 1 (mihi vobiscum); cf. Ov. am. 1, 7, 27; trist. 2, 1. ludi … magister: the teacher at the Roman elementary school, the ludus litterarius or litterarum. For want of appropriate premises, the lessons often took 76
place in pergulae towards the street (or even in the street itself), marked off only by a curtain, which did nothing to keep the noise inside (see Blümner, Privataltertümer, pp. 314 ff.). 2. invisum … caput: also Verg. Aen. 9, 496; Ov. Ib. 50. pueris virginibusque: this phrase, modelled on Hor. carm. 3, 1, 4 virginibus puerisque canto, first appears in Ov. fast. 5, 50; trist. 2, 370 (probably the model of Mart. 3, 69, 8); cf. also Ov. fast. 1, 628. The Roman elementary school was mixed (cf. 8, 3, 15 f.; Blümner, op. cit., pp. 317 f.). 3. Nondum cristati ... galli: cf. 14, 223 (Adipata) Surgite: iam vendit pueris ientacula pistor | cristataeque sonant undique lucis aves. The adjective cristatus is first applied to the cock by Ovid, in a passage which may have influenced the present line (met. 11, 597 ff.): non vigil ales ibi cristati cantibus oris | evocat Auroram, nec voce silentia rumpunt | sollicitive canes canibusve sagacior anser; also fast. 1, 455 f. nocte deae Nocti cristatus caeditur ales, | quod tepidum vigili provocet ore diem. The teaching frequently began in the early morning, cf. Ov. am. 1, 13, 17 f. tu (sc. Aurora) pueros somno fraudas tradisque magistris, | ut subeant tenerae verbera saeva manus; Iuv. 7, 222 f.; Blümner, op. cit., pp. 318 and 379 f. 4. murmure … saevo: this juncture also Val. Fl. 5, 121; Stat. Ach. 2, 120. verberibusque: corporal punishment of boys and girls alike was a distinctive element in the Roman school throughout antiquity and is mentioned by Plautus as well as Ausonius. A notorious example is the plagosus Orbilius in Hor. epist. 2, 1, 70; see further Blümner, op. cit., p. 319. sonas: thus . Editors have generally adopted the reading of T tonas, but sonas may be advocated by taking the line as a humorous allusion to Vergil’s scene from the Underworld in Aen. 6, 557 f. hinc exaudiri gemitus et saeva sonare | verbera, tum stridor ferri tractaeque catenae. E
6. causidicum etc.: the reading of and ( erroneously has medico for medio), printed by the editors from Friedländer onwards in preference to that of T causidico medium … equum, which, while possible, is illogical. The line alludes to an equestrian statue of a lawyer, likely meant to be placed in his own home (cf. Iuv. 7, 125 f.), since equestrian statues in public places were limited to the imperial family and to equestrian members of the State administration and high-ranking officers of the equestrian order (see J. Bergemann, Römische Reiterstatuen, Mainz am Rhein 1990, p. 14). In Martial’s day, knights could not, by performing mere civil service, qualify themselves for the higher offices open only to members of their order (which was possible from the reign of Hadrian onward; see Mommsen, Staatsrecht 3, pp. 560 ff.), and Martial therefore cannot have had in mind a knight, who by his work as a lawyer had gained access to a praefecture, for example; more likely, he is mocking at lawyer who, while of E
J
E
77
equestrian rank, was not entitled to an equestrian statue, but, by putting one up, displayed what Martial probably considered some degree of hubris. 7. magno … amphitheatro: Martial is, of course, thinking of the Flavian amphitheatre, which had a capacity of about 50,000 spectators (Platner & Ashby, p. 10). 8. parmae: metonymy for the “Thracian” gladiator, armed with the small, round shield called parma (see Lambertz in RE 18, s.v. parma 1543 f.; cf. note on 9, 38, 2 parma). These gladiators were generally matched against the scutarii (armed with the oblong scutum), who, according to Martial, mostly came out on top; cf. 14, 213 (Parma) Haec, quae saepe solet vinci, quae vincere raro, | parma tibi, scutum pumilionis erit. Consequently, the shouts of approval of the parmularii, the supporters of the Thracians, were all the louder when they did win. Even if the smaller shield gave the Thracians a disadvantage, Martial’s picture of them may be influenced by the fact that Domitian favoured the scutarii and that it was in Martial’s interest to do likewise (cf. Suet. Dom. 10, 1). Titus (Suet. Tit. 8, 2), as earlier Caligula (Suet. Cal. 54, 55), had favoured the Thracians; see also Friedländer, Sittengeschichte 2, pp. 75 f. turba favet: the same ending in Ov. fast. 2, 654. 10. pervigilare grave est: at night, Martial was kept awake by the noise from the bakeries (see 12, 57, 5 quoted above), and surely also by the traffic, which was only allowed in at night; cf. Iuv. 3, 236 ff. (with Courtney) and see Blümner, op. cit., p. 434 f. 11 f. quantum | accipis ut clames: which at any rate would not have been much. The teacher was dependent for his subsistence on the monthly merces, which the parents paid him for the education, but only for eight months, the period from July to October inclusive being free. The merces of the teachers at elementary schools was very low: according to Hor. sat. 1, 6, 75, they were paid 8 asses monthly for each pupil, and Ovid calls them turba fere censu fraudata (fast. 3, 829 with Bömer); cf. Friedländer, Sittengeschichte 1, pp. 178 f. Thus, they were often compelled to earn money on the side, for example, by drawing up wills (see Marquardt, pp. 92 ff.; Blümner, op. cit., pp. 315 f.).
69 Cum futuis, Polycharme, soles in fine cacare. Cum pedicaris, quid, Polycharme, facis? This short (and particularly rude) epigram is presented as a riddle, in which the answer to line 2 lies in the statement of line 1. The picture of the pedicator being defiled during the act by the pedicatus (apparently as the pedicatio was considered to give the latter loose bowels?) is found in Attic comedy (Henderson, pp. 78
193 f.) but is not too common in Latin. It can, however, be observed already in Lucilius (fragm. 1205 Krenkel), but after that, in literary sources, not until the Silver Age, which offers a handful of instances: Priap. 68, 8; 69, 9; Mart. 11, 88; 13, 26; Iuv. 9, 43 f.; see Adams, p. 171 f.; Richlin, p. 169. 1. Polycharme: also 8, 37 and 12, 56, neither of which has any sexual implications but deals with eagerness for money and presents. The name occurs in Greek in the form (see Pape, s.v.), i.e. “the source of much joy”, which forms the basis for Martial’s ironical use of the name here. The name , “the one who takes much delight in battle”, has presumably nothing to do with Martial’s Polycharmus. 3ROXFUPKM
3RO¹FDUPRM
in fine: “when you have an orgasm”; cf. Iuv. 7, 240 f. non est leve tot puerorum | observare manus oculosque in fine trementis and Adams, p. 143, n. 1. cacare: Martial has this verb seven times in all (also 1, 37, 2; 1, 92, 11; 3, 44, 11; 3, 89, 2; 11, 98, 22; 12, 61, 10; the much rarer word cacaturo appears in 11, 77, 2, see Kay ad loc.), considerably more frequently than any other writer; Catullus has it three times (whereof two are the cacata charta of Volusius), the Priapea, Phaedrus and Horace once each. The appearance of the word in the language of a freedman in Petronius (71, 8), and Seneca’s use of the compound concaco (apocol. 4, 3), suggest that it may not have had the same offensiveness as the sexual obscenities; see Adams, pp. 231 ff. 2. quid … facis?: the answer to this question may be gathered from the previous line. The pedicator’s running the risk of the pedicatus passing a motion during the pedicatio (see the introduction above) generated the expression mentulam caco, where caco carries the meaning of polluo cacando. Adams (loc. cit.) suggests that mentulam caco may have been a slang expression for pedicor, which, if applied to the present epigram, may turn it into a tautological play with words: “quid facis cum pedicaris? Mentulam cacas (= pedicaris)”.
79
70 Dixerat “o mores! o tempora!” Tullius olim, sacrilegum strueret cum Catilina nefas, cum gener atque socer diris concurreret armis maestaque civili caede maderet humus. Cur nunc “o mores!”, cur nunc “o tempora!” dicis? Quod tibi non placeat, Caeciliane, quid est? Nulla ducum feritas, nulla est insania ferri; pace frui certa laetitiaque licet. Non nostri faciunt, tibi quod tua tempora sordent, sed faciunt mores, Caeciliane, tui.
5
10
This epigram is aimed at a certain Caecilianus, who lets fly at contemporary society, using Cicero’s famous O tempora! O mores! Martial considered this an abuse and, to show this, he compares the times of Cicero with his own, separating them by a repeated paraphrase of Cicero’s exclamation in line 5. Cicero had good reason to complain, since he lived in a time when snares were set for the very state, when father-in-law and son-in-law fought each other in battle and the Roman soil was soaked with the blood of Roman soldiers in internecine war; Caecilianus, on the other hand, has no reason to be discontent, living, as he is, in peace in the reign of a propitious ruler. There is, then, no fault to be found with contemporary morals, but there is with those of Caecilianus. The epigram is classified with those in which a rebuker of other men’s morals is found himself to be morally depraved, but, in this case, the scene is changed from moral philosophy to oratory. Presumably, Caecilianus is an orator who, in his eagerness to imitate Cicero, even takes over words and phrases not applicable to the times of Domitian; in attacking fictitious public viciousness, intrigues and a nefas that does not exist, Caecilianus himself is the one guilty of nefarious behaviour and the one who should be rebuked; he thus parallels the moral philosophers who themselves are the worst practicians of the vices they attack (see the introduction to 9, 27). Martial’s description of the late Republic strongly reminds us of Ovid’s Age of Iron. In fact, Martial’s wording seems meant to recall the description of Ovid; according to the Metamorphoses, the Iron Age was subject to omne nefas (met. 1, 129); it was an age of war and blood (ibid., 142 f.); there is even the reference to hostilities between father-in-law and son-in-law (non socer a genero sc. tutus, ibid., 145). Consequently, the reign of Domitian with nulla ducum feritas and nulla insania ferri (see below on line 7) would be the new Golden Age, although this is not explicitly stated; note also that, in describing the new age, Martial begins by telling what it is not; in the same way, Ovid’s description of the Golden Age is crowded with negations (see Bömer’s introduction to Ov. met. 1, 89–112, pp. 48 f.). Although there was a tradition in Rome, after Vergil’s fourth Eclogue, of presenting the emperor as the founder of a new Golden Age (Sauter, pp. 19 ff.), there are few references to Domitian’s reign as an aetas aurea in Martial: 5, 19, 1 ff. and 8, 55, 1 ff. may point in that direction, and 9, 71 apparently depicts Domitian as the Prince of Peace, albeit in a veiled and enigmatic way. Explicit
80
references are, however, to be found in Statius; thus silv. 1, 6, 39 ff. (see Sauter, pp. 21 ff.). 1. o mores! o tempora!: Martial’s reference to the first speech against Catiline (Cat. 1, 2) shows the fame enjoyed by the speech in antiquity. But it was not the first, nor was it the only one in which Cicero exclaimed O tempora! O mores! He had done so in Verr. II 4, 56; and afterwards in dom. 137 and Deiot. 31. The phrase is cited also in Sen. suas. 6, 3, and Quintilian mentions it as an instance of affected exclamation (inst. 9, 2, 26). Tullius: Martial frequently mentions Cicero as the prime model of Roman rhetoric and prose (as Vergil is that of poetry).1 2. sacrilegum … Catilina nefas: cf. 5, 69, 4 hoc admisisset nec Catilina nefas. Because of his attempted overthrow of the state during the consulship of Cicero, Catiline became the model of sinful traitors, a fact of which there is ample literary evidence; cf., for example, Verg. Aen. 8, 668 locating him in Tartarus; Iuv. 2, 27; 8, 231; 10, 288 (with Courtney); 14, 41. 3. gener atque socer: Caesar and Pompey, often referred to in this way after Catull. 29, 24 socer generque, perdidistis omnia; cf. Verg. catal. 6, 6; Verg. Aen. 6, 830; the innuendo in Ov. met. 1, 145 (with Bömer); Lucan. 1, 289; 4, 802; 10, 417. diris … armis: this juncture also in Prop. 2, 9b, 49, where it is used about the war between Eteocles and Polynices, thus with reference to internecine slaughter, as here. 4. maestaque civili caede maderet humus: obviously an imitation of Ov. fast. 1, 312 sparsaque caelesti rore madebit humus (as observed by Siedschlag, Ovidisches, p. 159) and, of course, also reminiscent of met. 1, 149 f. virgo caede madentis | ultima caelestum terras Astraea reliquit. 6. Caeciliane: thus T , M(a)eciliane . In five of the 15 epigrams containing the name Caecilianus, there are alternative readings. The same variant as here is found in 1, 73, 2, where T, again, offers Meciliane for the C(a)eciliane of and , and in 4, 15, 2, in which has meciciliane, which is obviously wrong for M(a)eciliane. It has been argued that Maeciliane, being the more uncommon name and thus the lectio difficilior, may well be the correct reading in these instances and that Caeciliane, a very common name, was the result of interpolation. In the case of 1, 73, Postgate made an attempt to add to the evidence in support of Maeciliane, suggesting that it might be an adjectivization of Maecilia, which Catullus would have used as a pseudonym (via Aemilia, second wife of Pompey) for Mucia, third J
E
E
J
J
1
Cf. 3, 38, 3; 4, 16, 5; 5, 51, 5; 5, 56, 5; 5, 69; 7, 63, 6; 11, 48, 2; 14, 188. However, he was not a divinely gifted poet (2, 89, 4).
81
wife of Pompey (Catull. 113); see J. P. Postgate, “On some passages of Catullus and Martial”, CPh 3 (1908), pp. 260 ff. Catull. 113 and Mart. 1, 73, it is true, resemble each other in content: a woman (Maecilia in Catullus and the wife of Caecilianus in Martial) who used to have no or few lovers now has a multitude; but recent commentators on Catullus deny any connection with Mucia (see the commentaries by Fordyce and Quinn). Moreover, if the connection with Catullus is doubtful already in 1, 73, Postgate’s attempt to defend Maeciliane on the same grounds in the present epigram is all the more so. There is better support to be had in the MSS on the grounds of the lectio difficilior and facilior; also, here, as in 1, 73, the reading Maeciliane is that of the MS with the fewest interpolations (T). Nonetheless, all the editors have printed Caeciliane, with the exception of Schneidewin (in his first edition) and Shackleton Bailey; for want of conclusive proof in either direction, there is no means of making a definitive judgement, and therefore a fortasse recte should be added, with Heraeus and Citroni, to Maecilianus. See further Citroni’s introductions to 1, 65, p. 213 and, 1, 73, p. 236. 7. ducum feritas: Martial is perhaps thinking primarily of the Sullan proscriptions and the second triumvirate, whose cruelty was notorious; cf. note on 9, 43, 10. Note the position of feritas immediately before the penthemimeresis and of ferri at the verse-ending, by which Martial perhaps means to indicate an etymological connection between the two nouns;1 see F. Grewing, “Etymologie und etymologische Wortspiele in den Epigrammen Martials”, in F. Grewing (ed.), Toto notus in orbe. Perspektiven der Martial-Interpretation, Stuttgart 1998, p. 335. 7 f. nulla … insania ferri; | pace … certa: after Domitian’s return in early 93 from the Second Pannonian War, Rome had enjoyed a time of peace, even though this was not the pax certa that Martial wanted. Domitian seems to have had plans for and had perhaps also begun a third war in the north; however, the present lines show that, at the time this epigram was written, and in all likelihood by the publication of Book 9, a third campaign on the Danube could not yet have begun; see further the introduction, vol. 1, pp. 26 f. Martial’s notion of Domitian’s reign as a Golden Age and his efforts to present the emperor as a Prince of Peace (an ), on the basis of a Hellenistic tradition adopted by the Romans and applied by Vergil to Augustus and by Calpurnius Siculus to Nero etc. (cf. Sauter, pp. 17 f.), are almost exclusively connected with the ending of the Second Pannonian War, presumably rather as a result of wishful thinking than of fact; cf. 7, 80, 1 f.; 8, 15. So, whereas these epigrams may be considered as having sprung from the poet’s premature desire to celebrate his emperor as a bringer of peace, the emphasis on peace in the present poem is better established in reality; when it was written, there had in fact been a couple of years of peace since the emperor’s return from the north; the same goes (cUKQRSRL±M
1
Martial would be wrong to assume a common etymology in this case; see Ernout–Meillet, s.v. ferus and ferrum respectively.
82
for 9, 31, 9 f. and 101, 21. Before the Second Pannonian War, Martial had produced a celebration of peace only in 14, 34, written after the war against the Chatti in the early eighties, in which, as in the present case, he talks of a pax certa, although the peace then was as fragile as the one mentioned here (see the introduction, vol. 1, pp. 23 ff.). For the ending insania ferri, cf. Verg. Aen. 7, 461 insania belli. Perhaps Martial chose ferri here to emphasize the idea of the late Republic as an aetas ferrea, widening the expression from “the insanity of war” to “the insanity of the Iron Age”.
71 Massyli leo fama iugi pecorisque maritus lanigeri mirum qua coiere fide. Ipse licet videas, cavea stabulantur in una et pariter socias carpit uterque dapes: nec fetu nemorum gaudent nec mitibus herbis, concordem satiat sed rudis agna famem. Quid meruit terror Nemees, quid portitor Helles, ut niteant celsi lucida signa poli? Sidera si possent pecudesque feraeque mereri, hic aries astris, hic leo dignus erat.
5
10
A miracle from the animal world: a lion and a ram, kept in the same enclosure, live harmoniously together; they even eat together, and the same food at that: a baby lamb eases their hunger. This would be enough to earn them the honour of becoming constellations, which (less deservingly) befell the beasts of mythology. The concord of the lion and the ram is, of course, reminiscent of the transformation of nature in the Golden Age in Verg. ecl. 22 nec magnos metuent armenta leones; cf. Hor. epod. 16, 33 nec ravos timeant armenta leones; compare also orac. Sibyll. 3, 791 f. | (“the lion, devourer of flesh, will eat chaff by the manger like the ox”); Isaiah 11, 6 (“the calf and the young lion will grow up together”).1 But the epigram also raises a number of questions: which are the lion and the ram, why are they kept in the same enclosure, and how did it come about that they live in such harmony? The first scene that comes to mind is the stables of the amphitheatre; lions would naturally be found there, and possibly also a ram, judging from a passage from Columella: at 7, 2, 4 he speaks of miri coloris silvestres ac feri arietes, which were brought from Africa to the munerarii, the givers of public shows, in Spain. Northern Africa was generally rich in sheep, and it is likely that an African ram is meant also in this epigram; presumably an African wild sheep, Ovis tragelaphus, ArG in Arabic, which even today lives in the Atlas Mountains VDUNRE±URM
WH
OyZQ
IJHWDL
FXURQ
SDU
IWQ9
ÅM
ER¿M
1
Also in the fable of “the lion’s share” (Phaedr. 1, 5), there is cooperation between a lion and some of its natural enemies (viz. a cow, a she-goat and a lamb).
83
(see Keller, Tierwelt 1, p. 317). Being natural enemies (cf. Verg. Aen. 9, 339; Sil. 2, 684 ff.; Stat. Theb. 2, 675 f. leo … Massylas depastus oves), it seems possible that such rams were matched against lions in the Roman arena; and it would certainly be a marvel to see two beasts wont to fight each other fiercely now feeding together in the same enclosure. There can be little doubt that Martial wanted this miraculous behaviour to be due to the divine influence of the emperor; this is the reason for practically all animal miracles appearing in Martial; cf. the fish in 4, 30, the goose in 9, 31, the parrot in 14, 73, and from the arena, for example, the elephant in epigr. 17, the hind in epigr. 29 and the hare–lion cycle of Book 1 (see 9, 31 intro.). The lion and the ram would thus behave in this manner because they norunt cui serviant (1, 104, 22). In this particular case, Martial may have wished to attribute the peaceful intercourse of natural enemies to the influence of Domitian as a Prince of Peace, a role which he attempts to ascribe to the emperor elsewhere in this book (see 9, 70, 7 f. with note; 9, 31 intro.; 9, 101, 21). Perhaps it would then be possible to take the interpretation into the field of allegory: the ram, adopting to the lion’s habits and feeding on its own kin may be taken as representating the subdued nations conforming to the habits of the conqueror, and the lion as representing Domitian himself, showing his clemency towards the conquered by letting him share his meal. Domitian’s indulgence towards foreign enemies is emphasized by Statius in silv. 1, 1, 25 ff., in which he has him set an example to Julius Caesar himself: discit (sc. Caesar) et e vultu quantum tu (sc. Domitian) mitior armis, | qui nec in externos facilis saevire furores | das Cattis Dacisque fidem. The animals’ behaviour makes them deserve a catasterism even more than did the beasts of mythology. The same subject can be observed in the (perhaps fragmentary) epigr. 18 (16), and in a couple of epigrams in the Greek Anthology; thus AP 9, 224 (Krinagoras) and 6, 221 (Leonidas of Tarentum), cf. Weinreich, Studien, pp. 111 f. 1. Massyli leo fama iugi: Massylus, like Libycus, is in Silver Latin poetry generally equivalent to Africanus; see note on 9, 22, 14 and cf. 2, 75 quanta (sc. feritas leonis) nec in Libycis debuit esse iugis. It is, however, noteworthy that Massylus is used particularly often in connection with lions, by Martial also in 8, 53, and especially by Statius; thus Theb. 2, 675 ff.; 5, 330 ff.; 8, 124 f.; 11, 27 ff.; silv. 2, 5, 8. Note also the other similarities to Statius in lines 4 and 9 of this epigram. fama: for fama in the sense of “pride”, see note on 9, 28, 1. pecorisque maritus: usually of the billy-goat as the husband of the flock (see 7, 95, 13; 14, 141; 211). The idea occurs quite often in Greek texts as well as in Latin, for example, Verg. ecl. 7, 7; georg. 3, 125; Hor. carm. 1, 17, 7; see the commentary by Nisbet & Hubbard on the latter. 2. lanigeri: “a typical Lucretian compound” (thus Bailey on Lucr. 2, 318; also 2, 661; 5, 866; 6, 1245), although it appears already in Acc. praetext. 20 and Enn. sat. 66. This highly poetic word is quite common in classical poetry, though this is the only instance in Martial. Manilius very frequently uses it of the constellation 84
Aries (see A. De Boeuffle, Les noms latins d’astres et de constellations, Paris 1977, p. 154). 4. socias … dapes: this juncture also Stat. silv. 1, 6, 48, of the emperor’s banquet. 5. mitibus herbis: also at the end of 9, 17, 1 (with different sense; mitis here is merely “sweet”). 7. terror Nemees: also in 5, 65, 2 of the lion which roamed the area of Nemea in the Peloponnesus. Its killing, which provided him with the lion skin, was traditionally the first of Hercules’ Twelve Labours (see note on 9, 101, 6 terga leonis). After its killing, Zeus, to honour his son, placed it as a constellation in the heavens (cf. 4, 57, 5). Martial elsewhere applies it in comparisons with imperial shows; thus epigr. 6b; 28, 3; 5, 65. portitor Helles: the ram with the golden fleece, so-called also in Colum. 10, 155; Lucan. 4, 57. It carried Helle and her brother Phrixus, fleeing from their stepmother Ino, through the air, but Helle fell off into the Hellespont, which thus acquired its name. Phrixus was brought to Colchis, where he sacrificed the ram to Zeus. In reward for its deed, the ram was made a constellation; see Ov. fast. 3, 849 ff.; Preller–Robert 2:1, pp. 41 ff.; Bömer on Ov. fast. 3, 852. Martial usually mentions the ram alongside Phrixus; thus in 6, 3, 6; 8, 28, 20; 14, 211; with Phrixus and Helle 8, 50, 9 ff.; as a constellation 10, 51, 1. 8. lucida signa poli: also Tib. 1, 4, 20. 9. pecudesque feraeque: a purely Statian expression, found twice in the Thebaid, 4, 141 and 10, 141, both at the verse-ending. 10. dignus erat: cf. note on 9, 2, 14 haec erat, haec.
72 Liber, Amyclaea frontem vittate corona, qui quatis Ausonia verbera Graia manu, clusa mihi texto cum prandia vimine mittas, cur comitata dapes nulla lagona venit? Atqui digna tuo si nomine munera ferres, scis, puto, debuerint quae mihi dona dari.
5
Liber, a young charioteer and a friend of Martial, has sent the poet a basket of food, but without wine, offering a brilliant opportunity for a play with words: surely, Liber knows what he should have sent (viz. wine), if he wanted to send a gift worthy of his name.
85
The epigram is based on the play on the name Liber, which was also a byname of Bacchus and a metonymy for wine; for such play on names in Martial, cf. 1, 41, 14 ff.; 3, 34; 3, 78; 4, 9; 6, 17; 9, 95; 12, 39; see Joepgen, pp. 57 ff. 1. Liber: this young acquaintance of Martial’s appears also in the erotically allusive 8, 77. He was probably a slave, since charioteers were usually freedmen or slaves (see Friedländer, Sittengeschichte 2, pp. 25 ff.). Furthermore, the name Liber itself is rare as a cognomen among the free (Kajanto, Cognomina, p. 280, records 17 instances from CIL, one being a freedman). Amyclaea … corona: Amyclae in Laconia, often considered the birthplace of Castor and Pollux,1 is used here, probably as a reminiscence of Verg. georg. 3, 89 f. Amyclaei domitus Pollucis habenis | Cyllarus, to lead the thoughts to horseracing. The reference was previously considered to be to boxing (see, for example, Friedländer’s commentary), but, as noted by Housman, this fits ill with the action described as quatere verbera in the following line, which clearly alludes to a whip (see Housman, Corrections, p. 248 [= Class. pap., pp. 725 f.]; cf. OLD, s.v. verber 1 b and compare, with Housman, Culex 219 et flammas et saeva quatit mihi verbera [sc. Tisiphone]); the wreath was the ordinary prize at the races (see Friedländer, Sittengeschichte, loc. cit.). Housman’s concluding statement, however, needs revision; obviously unaware of the above passage from Vergil, Housman wrote “Amyclaea has nothing to do with Pollux, but means Castorea”. But there is no means of determining, nor any reason to try to determine, which of the Dioscuri is meant here; for, although Castor is the one usually connected with horses, Pollux also is occasionally mentioned as a horseman; cf. the above quotation from the Georgics (to which Servius made the same objection as did Housman to the present line) and see Furtwängler in Roscher, s.v. Dioskuren 1156, and Mynors on Verg. georg. 3, 89–91, p. 195. As Shackleton Bailey points out, the Dioscuri are generally , presiding over games (Shackleton Bailey, Corrections, p. 285). THRg
xQDJÇQLRL
2. Graia verbera: Martial’s mention of a “Greek whip” made Shackleton Bailey (loc. cit.) suspect that Liber had “evidently won a race at a Greek festival”. 3. clusa … texto … prandia vimine: a basket of wickerwork, always mentioned by Martial in connection with food, cf. 3, 58, 39 f. dona matrum vimine offerunt texto | grandes proborum virgines colonorum. The other instances in Martial all refer to gifts of food at the Saturnalia, an occasion when such gifts were exchanged more often than usual, cf. 2, 85, 1; 4, 88, 7; 7, 53, 5. For presents of food not given at the Saturnalia, cf. 5, 29; 6, 75; 7, 78. , the wine flagon which was put before the guests at the 4. lagona: Gr. table and also used as a sign outside the wine-merchant’s shop (7, 61, 5; see MarOJXQRM
1 Jessen in RE 1, s.v. Amyklaios 2, 1999. Cf. also 14, 161, 1; Ciris 489 (and R. O. A. M. Lyne, Ciris. A Poem Attributed to Vergil, Cambridge 1978, ad loc.); Ov. epist. 8, 71; Stat. Theb. 6, 329; 7, 413; silv. 4, 8, 29; Val. Fl. 1, 426.
86
quardt, pp. 629 f.). The vessel is mentioned extraordinarily frequently in Martial (16 occurrences), compared with three in Horace, two in Persius and five in Juvenal. 5. digna tuo … nomine munera: viz. a jar of wine. 5 f. ferres ... debuerint: ferres instead of tulisses; such an unreal imperfect subjunctive expressing past time was originally an archaic phenomenon,1 but was still quite common in Cicero; cf., for example, Brut. 238 huius si vita … non omnem commendationem ingeni everteret, maius nomen in patronis fuisset.2 In this case, as in Juvenal (for example, 4, 85, see Courtney, ad loc.), the phenomenon should be considered an archaism; Hofmann–Szantyr, § 185 III, pp. 332 f.; § 361 a, p. 662. The unreal perfect subjunctive debuerint likewise expresses past tense because of the modality of the word (haec dona dari debuissent being equal to haec dona dari debuerunt, the latter keeping its tense when made dependent on scis).
73 Dentibus antiquas solitus producere pelles et mordere luto putre vetusque solum, Praenestina tenes decepti regna patroni, in quibus indignor si tibi cella fuit; rumpis et ardenti madidus crystalla Falerno, et pruris domini cum Ganymede tui. At me litterulas stulti docuere parentes: quid cum grammaticis rhetoribusque mihi? Frange leves calamos et scinde, Thalia, libellos, si dare sutori calceus ista potest.
5
10
A shoemaker has inherited the estate of his dead patron and turned from being a poor cobbler into a wealthy landlord. The fact that such riches may befall by mere chance (and quite undeservedly) a simple, uneducated shoemaker stirs Martial’s envy: when such a character, without doing anything in return, becomes one of the very richest, what is the use of a proper literary education, which scarcely leads to any income at all? The scanty pecuniary rewards enjoyed by men of letters almost forms a topos in Martial. The chief reason for this is the lack of substantial, non-imperial patronage in Martial’s day, the more obvious to the poet, as his ideal in this respect was the literary patronage of Augustan times. Martial was of the opinion that a life of comfort and leisure, free from financial cares, was the proper breeding1
For example, Cato in Quint. inst. 9, 2, 21 cedo, si vos in eo loco essetis, quid aliud fecissetis?; more instances in Kühner-Stegmann 2, § 215 c 1, p. 399 Further instances in O. Jahn & W. Kroll, Cicero, Brutus, sechste Auflage überarbeitet von B. Kytzler, Berlin 1962, ad loc. 2
87
ground for great poetry. What he really needed was a Maecenas: sint Maecenates, non deerunt, Flacce, Marones (8, 55, 5; cf. 11, 3). Such a person he eventually found in Terentius Priscus (12, 3), but, when in his dullest mood, in spite of the patrons he had, Martial considered his own age as marked by ungenerousness and the emperor as the only person to whom it was worth turning.1 In such times, one would be better off not only in court (an occupation which Martial always declined; see Howell’s introduction to 1, 17), but even as a lyre-singer, a pipeplayer, an auctioneer, an architect, or a mule-driver (all, of course, quite unthinkable professions) than as a man of letters (cf. 1, 76; 3, 4, 7 f.; 5, 56; 10, 76). Thus, epigrams such as the present should be considered as occasional outbursts of indignation at times which did not always know how to pay proper rewards to true talent. Juvenal devoted his seventh Satire to the theme of the unprofitability of poetical or any other learned activity; for him, as for Martial, the emperor was the only hope, in Juvenal’s case Hadrian; see Courtney’s introduction to Iuv. sat. 7 and his survey of the subject on p. 350 in particular. 1. Dentibus etc.: in addition to tools, cobblers also used their teeth when mending shoes, a usage which would appear all the more disgusting if the shoes were old and muddy (line 2). The shoemaker of this epigram was apparently not one of the more exclusive and is thus presumably not to be identified, as does Sullivan,2 with the shoemaker of Bononia, who had become wealthy enough to give games of his own (3, 16; 59; 99). In imperial times, as it became fashionable to wear shoes dyed with purple, embroidered and adorned with precious stones, it was obviously possible for a shoemaker to make a fortune out of his trade;3 but the one mentioned here was a common cobbler, a fact which also adds to the point. 3. Praenestina: for Praeneste as a resort, see the introduction to 9, 60. decepti regna: thus , defuncti rura and ; the reading of and was printed by Gilbert and Lindsay, whereas Schneidewin, Friedländer and Shackleton Bailey have combined decepti from and rura from . Among modern editors, Heraeus (following Gruterus’ edition of 1602), Izaac, Giarratano and Dolç keep the reading of unaltered. Although the choice in cases like the present is “extremely uncertain”,4 some arguments can be put forward for the reading of . To begin with decepti/defuncti: here, the lectio difficilior of needs little justification, having now been generally acknowledged as being correct. Opinions differ, however, regarding its sense. Heraeus (in his apparatus) wrote “Decepti crimen tecte notat” without further specification, which nonetheless seems, in spite of Shackleton Bailey’s objection,5 E
D
J
E
D
J
DJ
E
E
E
1
Sullivan, Martial, pp. 116 ff. Ibid., p. 169. 3 Forbes, Studies 5, p. 59. 4 Lindsay, Ancient Editions, pp. 23 ff.; some editors have in the apparatus expressed diffidence at the reading printed in the text; thus Friedländer (“defuncti rura vielleicht richtig”) and Gilbert (“regna … sane elegantius est”). 5 Shackleton Bailey, More Corrections, p. 141. He suggests that deceptus means “‘Cheated’ of his due, i.e., his expectation of life”, comparing Cic. fam. 5, 16, 4 as well as epigraphic evidence (CIL 3, 14644 and 2
88
to be the correct interpretation. It was elaborated by Parroni,1 who suggested that the shoemaker acted as a captator (on which see the introduction to 9, 8). This may, however, be somewhat doubtful, as it seems questionable whether a poor shoemaker (assuming this to be the implication of the opening lines) would have the means to successfully act as a legacy-hunter; cf. the annual 6,000 IIS given by the captator in 9, 8. Martial also explicitly states that the deceased was the shoemaker’s patron; nowhere in the epigrams on legacy-hunting is there a hint that the captator is the client of his victim. Anyhow, the important thing is that the shoemaker had been appointed heir and that Martial intimates that he had achieved this by deceitful means (the crimen of Heraeus). In defence of regna, Heraeus produced 12, 31, 8 has Marcella domos parvaque regna dedit; 57, 19 Petilianis … in regnis; Verg. ecl. 1, 69. The list may be augmented with Cic. Att. 14, 16, 1 haec Puteolana et Cumana regna; de orat. 1, 41 nisi hic in tuo regno essemus (sc. in Cicero’s villa at Tusculum); cf. Forcellini, Lex., s.v. 145. Furthermore, from the mention of the cella (“slave’s chamber”) in the following line, it appears that Martial has particularly the house in mind; in that context, regna is more appropriate, since it would be a slight lapse to say rura, in quibus cella fuit. In addition, the combination of regna and cella produces an antithesis that suits the context very well; it has also been suggested that regna carries a notion of the succession being unmerited, contrasting it with the poverty of the shoemaker.2 Consequently, it seems warranted to adopt the reading of altogether. E
5. rumpis … crystalla: the price of crystal was advanced by its fragility (Sen. benef. 7, 9, 3 crystallina, quorum accendit fragilitas pretium); see note on 9, 22, 7 magna ... crystalla. ardenti … Falerno: 14, 113, 1; Hor. carm. 2, 11, 19; Iuv. 4, 139. Wine was preferably mixed with hot water, calda (Blümner, Privataltertümer, p. 401); the shoemaker shows his ignorace by adding water hot enough the break the fragile crystal. The ending crystalla Falerno also in 8, 77, 5. 6. Ganymede: his deceased patron’s delicatus; fair boys are often referred to by the name of the cupbearer of Jupiter; see the introduction to 9, 11. 7. litterulas: not, as in OLD, s.v. 2, “one’s ABC”, but literary education and activity.3 stulti … parentes: this phrase has been variously understood, but, in all likelihood, it should not be taken as being derogatory of Martial’s parents: stulti does not refer to their intellectual capacities but has rather an implication of ironic 12, 18). But, just as he holds that Heraeus’ interpretation reads in too much, this explanation seems too faint and does not make much sense in this context. 1 P. Parroni, “Gli stulti parentes di Marziale e il prezzo di una vocazione (nota a mart. [sic] 9, 73)”, in Studi di poesia latina in onore di Antonio Traglia, vol. 2, pp. 833–839, Rome 1979. 2 Ibid., p. 838. 3 Ibid., p. 836, n. 14.
89
compassion for their naiveté in letting him study with the grammaticus and the rhetor: “my poor foolish parents (viz. who put me in school to learn what they thought to be something honourable but which, in these times, is worth nothing)”; thus G. Hirst, “Note on Martial 9. 73. 7”, Classical Weekly 19 (1925), p. 66 (cf. Parroni, op. cit., pp. 835 f.). As noted by Hirst, the line is clearly inspired by Verg. Aen. 1, 392; cf. also Ov. trist. 2, 343. The question whether or not we know the names of Martial’s parents has been much debated, but as this has little relevance here and as the present mention of them is clearly not crucial to the epigram (as it has sometimes been taken to be), it may be sufficient to present here a brief account of the opinions expressed on this issue. Calderinus, in his edition of 1482, identified them with the Fronto and Flaccilla, whom Martial refers to as pater and genetrix and to whom is entrusted the soul of Erotion in 5, 34. This was the prevalent opinion until Farnaby, in his 1625 edition, suggested that Fronto and Flaccilla were Martial’s slaves and the parents of Erotion, and ever since the arguments have run in favour of now the one and now the other opinion; see here J. Mantke, “Do we know Martial’s parents? (Mart. V 34)”, Eos 57, 1967–1968, pp. 234–244, for a summary. Mantke himself came to the conclusion that Fronto and Flaccilla were in fact the parents of Erotion, and his arguments were strongly vindicated by A. A. Bell.1 Most recently, in his commentary on Book 5, Howell took sides with the opinion that they are in fact the parents of Martial. 8. quid cum etc.: “what use was it for me to attend the lessons of the grammaticus and of the rhetor?” The grammaticus and the rhetor represent the two stages following the elementary school (the ludus), the former teaching Latin and Greek literature (mainly poetry) and the latter rhetoric. It is doubtful whether this line can tell us anything of the social status of Martial’s parents, as it cannot at once be accepted that the poet really attended the lessons of both; perhaps, Martial uses them here as representatives of the non-lucrative literary education, as he does elsewhere (5, 56, 3); furthermore, the grammatici occasionally gave rudimentary teaching in rhetoric as well.2 It seems very likely, though, that the poet would have attended both, even if there was no rhetor in Bilbilis; Sullivan supposes that the nearest was to be found in Caesaraugusta or Tarraco.3 But this need by no means imply that Martial’s parents were rich; even though it is difficult to get an idea of the costs involved in giving one’s son a proper education,4 the monthly sum required to keep him in the school of the grammaticus was presumably not excessively large, nor was that charged by the rhetor; see, for example, S. F. Bonner, Education in ancient Rome, Berkeley & Los Angeles 1977, pp. 150 ff.
1
A. A. Bell, “Martial’s daughter?”, CW 78 (1984), pp. 21–24. Blümner, Privataltertümer, p. 331. 3 Sullivan, Martial, p. 2. 4 There is scarcely any contemporary evidence at all of the charges; much later, the edict of Diocletian set the sum to be charged by the grammaticus per pupil and month at 200 denarii (Blümner, op. cit., p. 324, n. 9); in the case of the rhetor, the sum was set at 250 denarii (ibid., p. 334, n. 6). But there were other factors involved. In Martial’s day, a famous teacher could charge considerably more than one with no reputation; in the larger cities, the competition also helped to keep the prices down (see further Blümner, op. cit., pp. 324 f. and 334). 2
90
9. Frange leves calamos etc.: Calp. ecl. 4, 23 (Corydon has dissuaded his brother Amyntas from writing poetry) frange, puer, calamos (here in the sense of “pipes”) et inanes desere Musas; Iuv. 7, 27 frange miser calamum vigilataque proelia dele. Perhaps there was a common, now lost, source for the expression. Levis is a common epithet of the reed, cf. Verg. georg. 2, 358; Moret. 61; also in different functions, of arrows in Ov. met. 7, 778; Sil. 17, 88, and of a pipe in Verg. ecl. 5, 2. In this case, it should be taken as alluding not only to the constitution of the reed, but also to the poetry written with it, i.e. “light”; the same double meaning is found in Phaedr. 4, 2, 1 f. Ioculare tibi videtur, et sane levi, | dum nihil habemus maius, calamo ludimus. Thalia: cf. note on 9, 26, 7 f.
74 Effigiem tantum pueri pictura Camoni servat, et infantis parva figura manet. Florentes nulla signavit imagine voltus, dum timet ora pius muta videre pater. Camonius Rufus, a native of Bononia (modern Bologna),1 was Martial’s dear friend and admirer, who knew whole epigrams by heart. Perhaps, Martial had made his acquaintance during his stay at Forum Cornelii in 87; it has been suggested that the Rufus of some epigrams in Book 3 is to be identified as Camonius (Sullivan, Martial, p. 31). Some time before the year 90, he had gone on some mission to Cappadocia, where he died at an age probably slightly less than twentyfive years (see note on 9, 76, 3). His ashes were brought back to his father in Bononia, and Martial wrote a poem in commemoration of his death (6, 85, on which see Grewing’s commentary). The present epigram paves the way for 9, 76, for the correct understanding of which it is essential. But nothing can be said with certainty about Martial’s reasons for taking up the theme of Camonius’ death again in Book 9, about five years after it had occurred. The most likely explanation seems to be that Martial for some reason had made contact with Camonius’ father, perhaps on a journey to Bononia, and, visiting him in his home, had seen the picture of Camonius as a baby. The fact that the father did not keep any other picture of his prematurely dead son touched the poet, who presented the father with 9, 76 to be put beneath Camonius’ picture. The character of 9, 74 suggests that it was not presented to the father; instead, it may have been written as a prologue to 9, 76 when the poem was incorporated into Book 9. 1. pueri pictura: cf. 9, 76, 9. 1
The family probably hailed from the region, as is indicated by the occurrence of the gentile name Camonius in some inscriptions in CIL 11 (5813; 5847; 6081; 6252).
91
2. infantis parva figura manet: Ov. fast. 6, 278 immensi parva figura poli. 3. Florentes nulla signavit imagine voltus: “the father did not have his son’s youthful looks portrayed in any image”; this use of signo is apparently unparalleled (see Forcellini, Lex., s.v. 2, 7, 503), but may perhaps derive from signum in the sense of “a figure in a painting” (OLD, s.v. 12 c). Very similar in expression, though not in meaning, are 6, 27, 3 est tibi (sc. nata), quae patria signatur imagine voltus; and 13, 30, 1 Caseus Etruscae signatus imagine lunae (with the clear sense of “stamped”). This is also the only instance of the juncture florentes voltus; cf., however, 3, 6, 3 florentes … genas of the cheeks of Marcellinus at the time of the depositio barbae. For the ending imagine vultus, see note on 9, 24, 1. 4. dum timet ora … muta videre: timet is perhaps best taken pregnantly and the line translated as “while his father yet only feared to see his lips silent”. Shackleton Bailey (More Corrections, p. 141) took dum in a causal sense and suggested that “when Camonius as a young man left … his father chose not to have a portrait painted, as most fathers would have done, because he was afraid that the sight of the silent face would distress rather than console him”. This, however, is an odd explanation, as most people, as Shackleton Bailey admits, would find a comfort in having with them the picture of an absent son. Shackleton Bailey rightly denies that the father had a presentiment of his son’s death; but if Camonius’ father felt that such an image would distress him, would this not be the same thing as if he felt the son’s journey to be ill-omened? Grewing takes muta to mean “lacking the faculty of speech”, and concludes that the father thought it appropriate to keep a picture only of the infans, i.e. of the child that had not yet learnt to speak, since a picture, being unable to speak, would correspond to the real nature of an “infant” but not to that of a young man.1 The same opening in Tib. 1, 8, 36; Ov. met. 2, 717; Priap. 3, 8. pius ... pater: the affection between father and son in this case seems to have been notable; cf. 6, 85, 7, but the father is naturally pius also through his recollection of and grief for his dead son.
1
F. Grewing, “Etymologie und etymologische Wortspiele in den Epigrammen Martials”, in F. Grewing (ed.), Toto notus in orbe. Perspektiven der Martial-Interpretation, Stuttgart 1998, p. 347.
92
75 Non silice duro structilive caemento, nec latere cocto, quo Samiramis longam Babylona cinxit, Tucca balneum fecit: sed strage nemorum pineaque conpage, ut navigare Tucca balneo possit. Idem beatas lautus extruit thermas de marmore omni, quod Carystos invenit, quod Phrygia Synnas, Afra quod Nomas misit, et quod virenti fonte lavit Eurotas. Sed ligna desunt: subice balneum thermis.
5
10
A certain Tucca has built himself a wooden balneum (a mere bath) at home, so that he can afford to build lavish marble thermae (baths with sporting facilities1) for the public as a kind of show-piece. Nonetheless, when the thermae were finished, he had no longer the means to provide for their heating. But Martial gives him a piece of advice: why not put the balneum to use in the furnace of the thermae? Considering the heating system, building a balneum out of wood is, of course, absurd and certainly makes Tucca penny-wise and pound-foolish. Likewise, it is an absurd improbability that a private individual would build thermae, at least at Rome—these were almost exclusively owned by the city or the state; see Yegül, op. cit., pp. 43 ff. 1. silice … duro: silex is frequently used as the model of hard rock, often with the epithet durus; cf. Verg. Aen. 6, 471; catal. 9, 46; Ov. met. 2, 706; 9, 304; Stat. silv. 4, 3, 1; Vitruv. 2, 7, 1. The name was applied to different stones showing this quality, but, in the present case, the reference is likely to basalt; cf. Vitruv. 1, 5, 8 and 2, 8, 4 f., speaking of silex (= basalt) as a material very apt for use in walls. structili ... caemento: “building concrete”, this juncture only here. Like basalt, Vitruvius (1, 5, 8) recommends its use in walls. 2 f. latere cocto, quo Samiramis … | Babylona cinxit: obviously modelled on Ovid’s lines from the tale of Pyramus and Thisbe: contiguas tenuere domos, ubi dicitur altam | coctilibus muris cinxisse Semiramis urbem (met. 4, 57 f.). Semiramis’ Babylonian walls were already in Ovid’s time a poetical topos (Prop. 3, 11, 21 f. and see Bömer on met. 4, 58, p. 37 f. with an extensive list of later instances). The standard picture of Semiramis as one of antiquity’s greatest builders is present already in Diodorus Siculus, who offers the earliest extant account of her, drawing on an account by Ktesias from the early 4th century BC. She is also credited with the founding of Babylon, a story which was very tenacious, although rejected already in the early third century BC by Berossus in his 1
For the distinction between balnea and thermae, see F. Yegül, Baths and Bathing in Classical Antiquity, Cambridge Mass. & London 1992, p. 43.
93
Babylonian history ( ; see Joseph. Ap. 1, 142); thus Vitruvius still speaks of Semiramis as being the builder of the walls of Babylon as a historical fact (8, 3, 8; brickwork in walls: ibid. 1, 5, 8); see W. Eilers, Semiramis, Vienna 1971, pp. 12 ff.; Lenschau in RE Suppl. 7, s.v. Semiramis 1210. In the extant Latin texts, there are more instances of the spelling Samiramis (always with substantial manuscript support) than of Semiramis,1 which is strange, as Greek only displays the spelling . Now the historical model for the mythical Semiramis was Sammuramat (wife of the Assyrian king Samsiadad V, 824–810 BC; see G. Pattinato, Semiramis, Zürich and Munich 1988, pp. 30 ff.), but this fact cannot have been any better known to the Romans than it was to the Greeks, from whom they had the story. But the initial sa- is found in the Near East in names of other mythical figures drawn from the legendary Semiramis, like the Armenian Samiran, Samira, etc. (see Eilers, op. cit., pp. 54 ff.). Perhaps this is the source of the initial sa- appearing in Latin, although it cannot be determined when and in what way it found its way into Latin. longus here obviously in the sense of “vast”, cf. TLL, s.v. 1635, 11, which, however does not offer any good parallels. Perhaps the adjective should be taken predicatively (“in all its length”). %DEXOZQLDN
6HPdUDPLM
3. Tucca: this rare cognomen, of Etruscan origin (cf. Howell on 1, 18; Kay on 11, 70, 1), appears in Martial quite often and almost exclusively in satirical and scoptic pieces; thus 1, 18; 6, 65; 7, 77; 11, 70, 12, 41; and 12, 94. 7, 41 is addressed to a Sempronius Tucca. 4. strage nemorum: strage nemorum suggests a virtual havoc of forests for the timber for Tuccas’s bath. Cf. Mercury’s words to Hannibal in Sil. 3, 204 ff. te maxima bella, | te strages nemorum, te moto turbida caelo | tempestas caedesque virum magnaeque ruinae | Idaei generis lacrimosaque fata secuntur. pinea ... conpage: compages, meaning either “joint” or “framework”, in the poets from Vergil onwards often refers to the structure of a ship; see TLL, s.v. 1998, 53 ff. and 1999, 36 ff. By building his bath of wood, and especially of pine, Tucca invites Martial to remark that he may well use it as a boat; pine was the material par excellence for ships; cf. Catull. 64, 10; Verg. ecl. 4, 38 f.; Hor. epod. 16, 57; Ov. met. 2, 185 (on which see Bömer with further instances). 6. beatas lautus extruit thermas: “extravagant he built sumptuous baths”, rather in malam partem, cf. Iuv. 1, 67 f. signator falsi, qui se lautum atque beatum | exiguis tabulis et gemma fecerit uda. 7 f. List of marbles: marble came to be used to a greater extent in baths during the 1st century AD, not only because of its beauty, but because of its resistance to 1
Semiramis is first found in Cicero (one instance, prov. 9), then Mela (1), Vell. Pat. (1), Hygin. (4), Prop. (1), Ov. (3), and Plin. (3, Books 19–33), whereas Samiramis first appears in Val. Max. (9, 3[ext], 4), then Curt. (3), Front. (1), Vitruv. (1), Ampel. (2), Plin. (6, Books 6–8), and Hist. Aug. trig. tyr. (1).
94
damp and heat; cf. I. Nielsen, Thermae et balneae, 1, Aarhus 1990, p. 42. An instance of such lavish constructions is provided by the sumptuously decorated baths of Claudius Etruscus, celebrated by Statius (silv. 1, 5) as well as by Martial (6, 42).1 Etruscus’ bath contained Numidian, Synnadic, Tyrian and Sidonian marbles with Laconian for incrustation (Stat. silv. 1, 5, 34 ff.; cf. Mart. 6, 42, 11 ff.). But Statius elaborates his description by enumerating also those varieties which it did not contain, thus forming an entire catalogue of marbles, which is something of a Statian specialty (see van Dam, p. 247). Three of the four marbles present in Tucca’s baths are to be found also in those of Etruscus, the exception being the Carystan, which Statius explicitly says was not the be found in the latter. But it is noteworthy that all four are mentioned by both poets in very similar diction; thus (marmor) quod Carystos invenit corresponds to (non huc admissa) undosa Carystos (silv. 1, 5, 34); quod Phrygia Synnas ... misit to purpura, sola cavo Phrygiae quam Synnados antro (ipse cruentavit ... Attis, silv. 1, 5, 37 f.); Afra quod Nomas misit to sola nitet flavis Nomadum decisa metallis (sc. purpura, silv. 1, 5, 36); quod virenti fonte lavit Eurotas to vix locus Eurotae, viridis cum regula longo | Synnada distinctu variat (silv. 1, 5, 40 f.). These similarities in diction may indicate that Martial, when describing the baths of Tucca, had Statius’ list of marbles in mind; especially the use of the river Eurotas to represent Laconian marble, a device common only to the poems in question, may point in that direction. Statius has furthermore an extensive catalogue of marbles in silv. 2, 2, 83–95, on the Surrentine villa of Pollius Felix (see van Dam, pp. 246 ff.). 7. quod Carystos invenit: Carystos is used metonymically for the inhabitants, and the construction thus parallels Synnas misit in the following line. There is no need for the emendations suggested by Heinsius (Carystides venae, see the apparatus of Shackleton Bailey) and Watt (Carystos evexit, W. S. Watt, “Notes on Martial”, AC 63 [1994], pp. 275–277). In Carystos ( ) in southern Euboia at the foot of Mt. Oche was quarried a white marble with greenish veins, reminiscent of the sea. The marble, which is known now as “cipollino”, was preferably used in luxury buildings, first by Mamurra (notorious through the verse of Catullus; cf. note on 9, 59, 1), who in his lavish home on Mons Caelius had columns of solid Carystan marble (Plin. nat. 36, 48). It is mentioned often; cf. Tib. 3, 3, 14; Lucan. 5, 232 (Stat. Theb. 7, 370); Sen. Tro. 836; Stat. silv. 1, 2, 149 f.; 1, 5, 34; 2, 2, 93; 4, 2, 28; Plin. epist. 5, 6, 36; Hist. Aug. Gord. 32, 1; see R. Gnoli, Marmora Romana, Rome 1971, pp. 154– 156; von Geisau in RE 10, s.v. Karystos 1, 2257. .UXVWRM
8. Synnas: the Romans generally referred to the marble of Docimeion ( ) in Phrygia by the name of the nearby city of Synnas (more common in the plural Synnada); Strab. 12, 8, 14; see Ruge in RE 5, s.v. Dokimeion 1273. The costly marble, now called “pavonazetto”, is white and red (Hor. carm. 3, 1, 41 ff.; Stat. silv. 1, 5, 37 f.; Plin. nat. 35, 3). Martial mentions it as used in the baths 'RNdPHLRQ
1
For the interrelation of these poems, see Henriksén, Martial und Statius, pp. 94 ff.
95
of Claudius Etruscus in 6, 42, 13; cf. also Tib. 3, 3, 13; and Ov. epist. 15, 142. See Gnoli, op. cit., pp. 142–144. ) for the Latin NuNomas: Martial uses exclusively the Greek Nomas ( mida (also 8, 53, 8 and 12, 29, 6), presumably because of the metrical convenience of the shorter form. This is true also of Propertius (one instance) and Silius (17 instances), while Numida is the only form used by Horace, Ovid, Manilius, Lucan and Juvenal. The only poets to use both forms are Vergil (three instances of Nomas, one of Numida) and Statius (two instances of Nomas, both with reference to marble, three of Numida). Numidian marble (“giallo antico”), yellow with red (or white) veins, was quarried above all in Simitthu and Hippo; Martial mentions it also in 6, 42, 13 (the baths of Etruscus), 8, 53, 8; cf. also Hor. carm. 2, 18, 4 f.; see Gnoli, op. cit., pp. 139–141; Windberg in RE 17, s.v. Numidia 1368. 1RPM
9. Eurotas: the largest river of Laconia, close to which, in Croceae (on the road from Sparta to Gytheion), was quarried the green, Laconian marble (“porfido verde di Grecia o serpentino”), used especially in luxury buildings like temples and baths (Pausan. 3, 21, 4); see Gnoli, op. cit., pp. 115–118; Pieske in RE 11, s.v. Krokeai 1942 f. Martial mentions it again in connection with the baths of Etruscus (6, 42, 11); cf. Tib. 3, 3, 14; Stat. silv. 1, 2, 148; 1, 5, 40; 2, 2, 90 f. Its green colour is often alluded to, in this case by the mention of the source of the Eurotas as virens fons. 10. subice balneum thermis: Martial suggests that Tucca should use his balneum to heat his thermae. Roman baths were heated by hot air circulating in cavities under the floor and in the walls (so-called balineae pensiles); the floor of these cavities was made in such a way that it sloped down towards the furnace, which facilitated the heating process (cf. Vitruv. 5, 10, 1 ff.; Mau in RE 2, s.v. Bäder 2748).
76 Haec sunt illa mei quae cernitis ora Camoni, haec pueri facies primaque forma fuit. Creverat hic vultus bis denis fortior annis, gaudebatque suas pingere barba genas, et libata semel summos modo purpura cultros sparserat: invidit de tribus una soror et festinatis incidit stamina pensis, absentemque patri rettulit urna rogum. Sed ne sola tamen puerum pictura loquatur, haec erit in chartis maior imago meis.
96
5
10
This epigram forms a pair with 9, 74, which acts as an introduction to the present. It was probably presented to the father of Camonius Rufus of Bononia, who had died in Cappadocia shortly before the year 90 (see the introduction to 9, 74), and was meant to be placed beneath the picture which the father kept of his son and which presented him as a boy. The epigram is written in the manner of a sepulchral inscription: it opens by giving the name of the deceased, who is subsequently described as having been a promising young man in the flower of his youth when envious Fate cut off his lifethread; the only lines falling outside this setting are line 2 and the concluding distich, in which Martial states that he has written the epigram in order that there should be not only a picture showing Camonius the boy, but also a maior imago of Camonius in his poem. By this, Martial meant primarily that his poem will give an image of Camonius as a young man, as contrasted with the picture of Camonius the boy. But there is also the notion suggested by Ov. trist. 1, 7, 1–14, the unnamed addressee of which carries Ovid’s picture set in a golden ring; the poet is touched by his friend’s piety but remarks that carmina maior imago | sunt mea (trist. 1, 7, 11 f.), here, the sense is obviously that Ovid’s works give a “better” or “more true” image of the poet than does the portrait on the ring (not, as Luck, ad loc., puts it, a greater image “im Gegensatz zu der kleinen Gemme”). A very similar thought is appended to Albrecht Dürer’s picture of Erasmus: . WQ
NUHdWWZ
W
VXJJUPPDWD Gd[HL
1. Haec sunt illa: see note on 9, 49, 1. mei: Camonius had been a good friend of Martial’s; see the introduction to 9, 74. 3. bis denis … annis: the fact that this line mentions 20 years has caused some confusion as to the meaning of 6, 85, 8, speaking of Camonius as having seen Alphei praemia quinta, i.e. five olympiadas. Martial elsewhere uses an Olympiad, on the Ovidian pattern, as synonymous with lustrum (cf. A. Scotland, “Zu Martial”, Philologus 29 [1870], pp. 185 f.), a period of five years, and certainly so in this passage also.1 A possible explanation was offered by Friedrich: “Genau auf den Tag ist Camonius Rufus schwerlich bei seinem Tode 20 Jahre alt gewesen. War er ein wenig älter, so ist viderat Alphei praemia quinta modo in Ordnung: er hatte die fünfte Olympiade eben erblickt, war eben in sie eingetreten” (G. Friedrich, “Zu Martial”, Hermes 43 [1908], p. 625). Still, it seems more attractive to agree with Shackleton Bailey (in his Loeb edition, ad loc.), suggesting that “the wording ... rather favours understanding ‘twenty years after the portrait was painted’”; I quote here Grewing on 6, 85, 8: “wenn also Camonius nicht gerade in einem olympischen Jahr geboren worden war, wurde er älter als 20, doch wenig älter als 25 Jahre”.
The fact that the E-group has quanta for quinta in 6, 85, 8 has been taken as a possible indication that Martial in fact wrote quarta here (see Friedländer, ad loc.); however, this possibility has not been advocated by any editor except Gruter (see Grewing on 6, 85, 8).
1
97
4. pingere barba genas: pingere ; cingere . Both readings are possible, but pingere would be preferable with reference to Camonius’ beard as “purple” in the following line. For the ending, cf. Priap. 3, 4. J
E
5. libata semel ... purpura: cf. 3, 6, 4 libat florentes haec (sc. dies) tibi prima genas (of the anniversary of the depositio barbae of Marcellinus). For libo of offerings of hair, cf. Ov. fast. 3, 562; Stat. Theb. 2, 255; OLD, s.v. 1 c. Purpura suggests that Camonius’ beard was red in colour; in like manner, the red hair of Nisus is mentioned as purpureus in Ciris 281 and Ov. met. 8, 94. 6. de tribus una soror: sc. Atropos, who cuts off the thread of life. The formula de tribus una is mainly used of the Parcae (thus in 4, 54, 10; Prop. 2, 13, 44; Ov. Ib. 240; Epiced. Drusi 243) but appears also in other contexts, for example, Ov. met. 10, 314 (with Bömer) of one of the Furies; cf. Ov. met. 10, 664; fast. 6, 288; trist. 2, 1, 246; Priap. 12, 9 (perhaps making a joke on the formula). 7. et … pensis: note the spondaic rhythm, underlining the contents. For pensa, see note on 9, 17, 2. 8. absentemque … rogum: “the urn brought back to his father (the remains of) the faraway pyre”; there is a tendency here to the metonymical use of rogus = cinis, but it is restrained by the adjective, which cannot be applied to cinis. For absens of things in the sense of “physically elsewhere”, see TLL, s.v. absum 215, 33 f.; OLD, s.v. absens 3. 9. puerum pictura: 9, 74, 1. 10. maior imago: see the introduction above.
77 Quod optimum sit disputat convivium facunda Prisci pagina, et multa dulci, multa sublimi refert, sed cuncta docto pectore. Quod optimum sit quaeritis convivium? In quo choraules non erit.
5
Priscus has written a learned and lofty poem on the best kind of dinner-party, presumably concluding it to be the kind at which the dinner is accompanied by philosophical conversation after the manner of the famous literary Symposia of Plato, Xenophon and others (later instances by, for example, Athenaeus and Plutarch; a parody of the genre is Lucian’s ; see, for example, Gärtner in KP, s.v. Symposion-Literatur); cf. Macr. Sat. 7, 1, 1 ff. But Martial 6XPS±VLRQ
98
/DSdTDL
holds that there is no need for profound erudition to reckon which is the best dinner-party: it is simply that at which there is no pipe-player. This epigram is written in an unusual metre, the iambic epode (iambic trimeter alternating with iambic dimeter acatalectic; see Crusius, § 154, and Howell’s introduction to 1, 49, p. 213), used by Horace in the first ten of his Epodes. Martial uses this metre only in three other epigrams, 1, 49; 3, 14; and 11, 59. 1, 49 stands out from the others by its length (42 verses, the second longest in Martial) and subject-matter, the praise of the comforts of country life, which, like the metre, is drawn from Horace. The remaining two, like the present, are short, joking pieces; common to this epigram and 11, 59 is the question quaeritis in the last line but one. It seems likely, too, that Martial has chosen the iambic metre for this epigram and for 11, 59 to fit certain words that had to be included; in the present case, it accommodates optimum and convivium, in 11, 59 dactyliothecam. In this case, perhaps the subject-matter can be combined with the unusual choice of metre to provide a clue to the circumstances under which the epigram was conceived: one can imagine a dinner-party at which the conversation drifts on to Priscus’ poem; perhaps the poet himself was present and had recited it. Martial, either on his own initiative or having been asked to do so, improvises a poem of his own on the same subject as Priscus, choosing the odd metre to fit the necessary words optimum and convivium and perhaps also to show off his technique. Quaeritis in line 5 may indicate that there are several persons present, as it would at a party (see below); perhaps, then, the same is applicable also to 11, 59, which shares the same metre and structure. For poetical improvisations at dinner-parties, see 9, 89 intro. 2. Prisci: Friedländer suggests that Martial’s benefactor Terentius Priscus is meant here, the first certain mention of whom is in 8, 45, a poem on his return to Rome from Sicily. Later, the poet presented him with Book 12 and addressed (or mentioned) him in some other epigrams of that book, notably 12, 3, in which Martial praises him as his Maecenas; cf. 12, 1; 3; 14; 62; 92. In this context, it is interesting to note that the same Terentius Priscus may be the man to whom Plutarch dedicated his De Oraculorum Defectu (mor. 409 ff.);1 “Quod optimum sit convivium” sounds a Plutarchian title. Apart from the obviously fictitious Prisci in Martial (1, 112, 2; 2, 41, 10; 9, 10, 1), there has been some dispute as to whether the rest are to be identified as Terentius Priscus or not. Immisch was rather liberal in this respect, taking 6, 18; 7, 46; and 8, 12, and also the present epigram as referring to Terentius, but was wrong, apparently due to a misinterpretation of pater optime in 12, 62, 7, in seeing a son of his in the Priscus of 12, 1 and 12, 14 and even in the Priscus to whom Book 12 is dedicated (O. Immisch, “Zu Martial”, Hermes 46 [1911], pp. 501 ff.). However, several of these Prisci may be identified with Terentius Priscus, thus 6, 18; 7, 46; 8, 12; and 10, 3. The opinions of the editors have varied in this respect, as there is no means of making a certain judgement. But the present Priscus has the poetical activity in common with the one of 7, 46 and, if the one is to be iden1
See P. Howell, “Martial’s Return to Spain”, in F. Grewing (ed.), Toto notus in orbe. Perspektiven der Martial-Interpretation, Stuttgart 1998, pp. 173–186 (here p. 175).
99
tified with Terentius, it is reasonable to do so also in the case of the other. There is nothing to contradict the identification of the present Priscus with Terentius; perhaps, then, he should be recognized also in 7, 46, provided that Martial was closely acquainted with him, as is required by the tone of that epigram. 3 f. dulci … sublimi ... docto pectore: the ability to sing dulciter (well-sounding) as well as sublimiter (in an elevated style) was as important to a poet as it was to be able to present himself as doctus (a stock epithet of poets; see note on 9, 42, 3). Compare here Quintilian’s characterization of the poetry of the young Domitian (inst. 10, 1, 91): Quid tamen his ipsis eius operibus in quae donato imperio iuvenis secesserat sublimius, doctius, omnibus denique numeris praestantius? and Pliny’s account of the poetical abilities of Sentius Augurinus (epist. 4, 27, 1): Multa tenuiter multa sublimiter, multa venuste multa tenere, multa dulciter multa cum bile. Sublimi pectore also in 9, praef., 1 (cf. note ad loc.); docto pectore also in 1, 25, 2; Ov. trist. 3, 1, 63 f. 5. quaeritis: it has been suggested that Martial, when posing a question in the plural, has a real audience in mind; thus also in 4, 65, 2; 8, 12, 2; 11, 59, 3; see W. Burnikel, “Zur Bedeutung der Mündlichkeit in Martials Epigrammbüchern I– XII” in Vogt–Spira (ed.), Strukturen der Mündlichkeit in der römischen Literatur, Tübingen 1990, p. 230, n. 38. Whereas there is in most cases nothing to indicate that this is in fact the case (rather the opposite is indicated by 8, 12, 2, where Martial uses quaeritis when addressing Priscus), it may be applicable to this epigram, assuming that Martial improvised it at a dinner-party. 6. the first line of the poem repeated almost identically at the end; see note on 9, 38, 10. ) playing the tibia ( ). The 7. choraules: the one who led the chorus ( term choraules is not found in either Greek or Latin before the time of Nero. LSJ gives but two literary instances, AP 11, 11, 1 (Lucilius) and Plut. Ant. 24. More instances are to be found in Latin, beginning with Pliny the Elder and Petronius and continuing through Servius, all in all, 16 instances, of which a quarter is to be found in Martial (also 5, 56, 9; 6, 39, 19; 11, 75, 3). In suggesting that the best dinner-party would be that at which there was no choraules, Martial may be making a humorous reference to the probable philosophical contents of Priscus’ treaties; for Plato himself would not allow the among the instruments in his State, because it could produce too many tones and play in all (Plat. Rep. 3, 399 d; see G. Comotti, Music in Greek and Roman Culture, translated by R. V. Munson, Baltimore and London 1989, p. 70). But perhaps there is also a trace here of Martial’s contempt of the choraules himself as a representative of a profession which he enviously disdained.1 All Martial’s mentions of the choraules are derogatory in one way or another, the reason for which may perhaps be gathered from 5, 56, 9: it is a matter of pure and simple FRU±M
D¸O±M
D¸O±M
UPRQdDL
1
To the sound of the tibia Martial apparently had no objection (cf. 5, 78, 29 f.).
100
envy at the high esteem in which they were held and the large sums paid to them (see Comotti, op. cit., p. 69) vis-à-vis the bare outcome of his own profession; cf. the introduction to 9, 73 and see Howell on 5, 56, 9.
78 Funera post septem nupsit tibi Galla virorum, Picentine: sequi vult, puto, Galla viros. This epigram closely resembles 9, 15, which hints at Chloe’s having poisoned seven husbands. The two pieces open in the same way, by stating that seven husbands are dead and buried. The following line, in both cases the last, contains the pun of the epigrams, in 9, 15 the innuendo that Chloe has put her seven husbands to death. The same hint is present here; Martial obviously means that Galla has been the cause of the deaths of her seven previous husbands. But now, by marrying Picentinus, who is obviously a poisoner himself, she is sure to meet with the same fate as her previous husbands. There is a similar situation in 8, 43: Effert uxores Fabius, Chrestilla maritos, | funereamque toris quassat uterque facem. | Victores committe, Venus: quos iste manebit | exitus, una duos ut Libitina ferat. For the device of ending an epigram with a line similar to the beginning, see note on 9, 38, 10; in the AP, most of the instances of this technique appear in twoline poems (see Siedschlag, Form, p. 124). 1. Galla: see note on 9, 4, 1. 2. Picentine: the only instance of this name in Martial. Kajanto records 16 instances, both male and female, of the cognomen but seems to be in some doubt as to whether in some cases it derives from Picenum or from the town of Picentia in southern Campania (Kajanto, Cognomina, p. 185). In this case, it is impossible to decide whether there are any specific implications in the name; cf., however, Martial’s use of the name Picens (lit. “of Picenum”) in 8, 57 and 62, both of satirical content. puto, Galla viros: this exact ending of the pentameter also in 4, 58, 2 and 7, 58, 10.
101
79 Oderat ante ducum famulos turbamque priorem et Palatinum Roma supercilium: at nunc tantus amor cunctis, Auguste, tuorum est, ut sit cuique suae cura secunda domus. Tam placidae mentes, tanta est reverentia nostri, tam pacata quies, tantus in ore pudor. Nemo suos (haec est aulae natura potentis), sed domini mores Caesarianus habet.
5
Early in the Principate, there are instances of members of the familia Caesaris (imperial freedmen residing at court and holding various offices), who through their ready access to the emperor had gained a considerable influence and substantial fortunes. Together with their often arrogant manners and coarse behaviour, this grated on the genuine Roman knights and senators, who quite naturally thought it humiliating that former slaves should be placed on the very verge of supreme power. The first instances appear in the reigns of weak and less apt emperors, who were more likely to come under the influence of cunning freedmen; “the degree of control exercised over his ‘famuli’ was one of the criteria for distinguishing an emperor’s worth in the eyes of his class-conscious contemporaries” (Weaver, pp. 9 f.). Under Caligula, there was Callistus, who managed to keep his position under Claudius by being part of the conspiracy against his predecessor. The reign of Claudius had men like Pallas and Narcissus, and under Nero, there were Helius and Polycleitus (see Friedländer, Sittengeschichte 1, pp. 40 ff.). Under Vespasian and Titus, no freedmen seem to have become as influential as under the last of the Julio-Claudians, nor are there any such striking instances in the reign of Domitian. But they still held important positions at court; obvious to anyone who tried to approach the emperor was the influence of the a cubiculo (“chamberlain”), who controlled access to his master. The importance of being on good terms with him appears from Martial’s poems to Domitian’s a cubiculo Parthenius (see note on 9, 49, 3); he also addressed the a libellis (secretary dealing with petitions) Entellus (8, 68) and the triclinarius (the man in charge of the arrangements of the dining-room) Euphemus (4, 8). There is a vague indication that Domitian used his freedmen also as “political agents” (Jones, Domitian, pp. 62 f.). In Agr. 40, 2, Tacitus refers to a rumour that Domitian had sent a freedman ex secretioribus ministeriis to Britain to persuade Agricola give up his command by promising him Syria. This was, however, probably not the case, and even Tacitus himself doubts the story (see Ogilvie & Richmond, Cornelii Taciti De vita Agricolae, Oxford 1967, ad loc.). An emperor who used his freedmen as emissaries, as did Claudius (below) and Nero (Tac. ann. 14, 39, 1), would have been dangerously close to making himself ridiculous; Dio Cassius tells how Narcissus, when sent by Claudius to replace Plautinus as commander of an army in Britain, was heckled by the soldiers shouting io Saturnalia, referring to the festival when slave and master changed places (60, 19, 3). But Domitian, like his predecessors, would probably have been under the influence of his freedmen to a certain extent; cf. Tac. Agr. 41, 4 ... satis constat Domitiani
102
quoque auris verberatas, dum optimus quisque libertorum amore et fide, pessimi malignitate et livore pronum deterioribus principem extimulabant. While noting the dependence of previous emperors on their liberti, Pliny in his Panegyricus (in a section not unlike the present poem) emphasized that this was not the case with Trajan (paneg. 88, 1 f.): Plerique principes, cum essent civium domini, libertorum erant servi: horum consiliis horum nutu regebantur; per hos audiebant per hos loquebantur, per hos praeturae etiam et sacerdotia et consulatus, immo ab his petebantur. Tu libertis tuis summum quidem honorem, sed tamquam libertis habes abundeque sufficere his credis, si probi et frugi existimentur. In the present epigram, Martial emphasizes that Domitian’s familia has none of the abhorrent features of those of previous emperors. This, however, is not due to their own character, but to that of Domitian, for “such is the nature of a powerful court”. Compare Philostratus’ vita Apoll. 5, 36, where the sage Apollonius gives Vespasian some advice: , , , .1 In Philostratus, the point is that the freedmen should realize how small they are by comparing themselves with the emperor, but, in this epigram, the idea finds a more subtle expression: the freedmen have in fact taken on the mores of their master, obviously under his mere influence and without any effort on their own part. Domitian’s charisma (or perhaps, his numen) pervades and affects everybody around him, be it animals in the arena (see 9, 31 intro.) or the servants of his household. It seems like a more guarded variant of the same idea when Statius says gaudent turmaeque tribusque | purpureique patres, lucemque a consule ducit | omnis honos (silv. 4, 1, 25 ff.; see Coleman, ad loc., for the punctuation of this passage). SHOHXTyUZQ
GdGZVLQ ²V-
WH
NDg
GR¹OZQ
R½M
UF
VRL
QyOZPHQ WUXIQ WRVR¹W- WDSHLQ±WHURQ D¸WR¼M xTdVDQWHM IURQHjQ
PHd]RQRM
GHVS±WRX
HcVdQ
1. turbamque priorem: “the familiae of old”. 2. Palatinum … supercilium: “the imperial haughtiness”; cf. 1, 4, 2 (the eyebrow of Domitian as a symbol of his moral sternness). The eyebrow was used in the same way by the Greeks (see LSJ, s.v. , and cf. the verb , “to be supercilious”). For Palatinus, see note on 9, 24, 1. °IU¿M
°IU¹RPDL
3 f. at nunc etc.: “but now the members of your household are so dearly beloved, that everybody cares less for his own house than for them”. Nunc tantus with the same placing as here also in Verg. Aen. 2, 10; 6, 133; Hor. sat. 2, 1, 10; Ov. Pont. 2, 4, 21; Lucan. 1, 21. Auguste tuorum (without est) is an Ovidian ending; cf. met. 1, 204; trist. 2, 1, 509. 5 f. placidae mentes … reverentia nostri … | … pacata quies … in ore pudor: the servants and freedmen of Domitian are distinguished by their kindly minds, their respect for the Roman citizens, their peaceable gentleness and their radiation 1 “Let us put an end to pride and luxury on the part of the freedmen and slaves whom your high position assigns to you, by accustoming them to think all the more humbly of themselves, because their master is so powerful” (translated by F. C. Conybeare, Loeb).
103
of modesty, qualities which are combined elsewhere; cf. 8, 70, 1 f.; Ov. fast. 5, 23; Pont. 4, 9, 91 f.; Stat. Ach. 1, 312; Iuv. 2, 110. In the concluding distich, the members of the familia are said to have learned these virtues from their master, but Martial elsewhere only speaks explicitly of Domitian’s placiditas (5, 6, 10; 5, 23, 3; 6, 10, 6). Quies and pudor would be evident qualities of a good emperor, but the latter, further defined by in ore, is probably a hint at Domitian’s natural flush; see Suet. Dom. 18, 1 (quoted in the note on 9, 65, 2 pulchra … ora); according to Tacitus, this rubor was very handy for Domitian as a means of hiding the blush of shame (Agr. 45, 2; cf. hist. 4, 40, 1; Plin. paneg. 48, 4). Martial is probably alluding to this flush also in 5, 2, 7, when he states that his poems are such as Domitian may read to Minerva ore non rubenti. His reverentia would not be for humbler folk, but rather for the gods and, as is said of Trajan in 11, 51, 1, a reverentia recti et aequi. For reverentia nostri, cf. Stat. Theb. 11, 467. Ore pudor 6, 58, 6; a favourite ending of Ovid’s, as in ars 2, 556; trist. 2, 130; 4, 3, 70; Pont. 4, 9, 92. 7. aulae … potentis: according to the TLL, s.v. 1457, 44 ff., aula is here = “rule”. But the presence of Domitian is so strongly felt in this phrase, that aula can almost be taken as metonymy for the emperor. 8. Caesarianus: this is the earliest instance of the substantival Caesarianus used of an imperial servant. However, there is not enough evidence to support the assumption that it was in fact the general term for these servants in Martial’s day (so Seeck in RE 3, s.v. Caesariani 1295 f.), even if this was to be the case later on. However, the adjectival Caesarianus is particularly frequent in Martial (five instances; the only text having more is the anonymous Bellum Africum [9]) who also uses it more freely than his predecessors so as to take on the sense of “imperial”; it refers to Domitian also in 8, 1, 4, but to Julius Caesar in 9, 61, 6 and to Augustus in 10, 73, 4 and is rather synonymous with “monarchist” in the pun of 11, 5. Previously, it had been used exclusively with reference to Julius Caesar and Augustus by their contemporaries, but also by authors of the Principate when speaking of the Civil War (see OLD, s.v. 1), but never before Martial with reference to the reigning emperor. The sense of “imperial” does not appear again until Hist. Aug. Sept. Sev. 6, 9; cf. Ulp. dig. 48, 13, 8, 1.
80 Duxerat esuriens locupletem pauper anumque: uxorem pascit Gellius et futuit. To escape starvation, Gellius has married a wealthy old woman. But such a way out of poverty was not an ideal one, as it unavoidably placed the man in an inferior position and entailed such obligations as Martial hardly thought preferable to being poor (see 9, 10 intro.).
104
2. pascit: on the surface, this seems to mean that Gellius, who thought it worth while to endure having sex with the old woman if only she supported him, not only had to have sex with her, but to support her as well. But this is, of course, absurd, since Gellius would have no means of supporting her. Instead, the epigram is based on a play on the sense of pascit, undoubtedly used here, as in 9, 63, 2, as a sexual metaphor. In his Loeb edition, Shackleton Bailey took it as referring to the wife’s performing fellatio (i.e. as synonymous with irrumat); however, as the irrumans, and not the irrumatus, is generally the target of Martial’s wit, this would leave the first hemiepes of the pentameter aimed at the wife, whereas one would expect the whole line to be aimed at Gellius. I would therefore suggest that pascit is used here in the obvious sense of “provide for” but with the implicit metaphor of the cunnus feeding on the mentula, thus paving the way for futuit. Et would in this context be taken epexegetically (“to be precise”, see OLD, s.v. 11), and the line may be paraphrased thus: “But Gellius provides for his wife, I can assure you; to be more precise, he fucks her” (see also TLL, s.v. pasco 598, 7 ff.). Gellius: see note on 9, 46, 1.
81 Lector et auditor nostros probat, Aule, libellos, sed quidam exactos esse poeta negat. Non nimium curo: nam cenae fercula nostrae malim convivis quam placuisse cocis. A “certain poet” has criticized Martial’s books for being “insufficiently elaborate”, but Martial does not care. His audience likes them, and that is quite enough for him: he would rather please the listeners and readers than other writers. The conclusion is brilliantly formulated as a kind of allegory with a proverbial touch: Martial likens his libelli to the dishes at a meal, representing the whole of his production: the poet hopes that the various dishes of his dinner will please the guests rather than the cooks. This kind of witticism, common in Martial, is derived from contemporary rhetoric and is dealt with by Cicero and Quintilian (see Cic. de orat. 2, 261 f.; Quint. inst. 6, 3, 68 f.; 8, 6, 54). In the present book, cf. 9, 88, 4 and see K. Barwick, “Martial und die zeitgenössische Rhetorik”, Berichte über die Verhandlungen der Sächsischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Leipzig, Philologisch–historische Klasse 104:1, Berlin 1959, p. 43. The idea of poems as a kind of food (viz. to the mind etc.) appears elsewhere in antiquity; cf. AP 9, 43, 1 f. (Parmenion of Macedonia) .1 Later, the idea of poems as courses at a dinner was used by Agathias Scholiasticus of Myrina (6th century AD) in the preface to his “collection of new epigrams”, preserved in the Greek Anthology (AP 4, 3). The same idea appears to form the basis of the designation of Roman R¸G|
GRXOH¹VZ 0RXVyZQ QTHD
1
WUDSy]DLM
_
ERVN±PHQRM
“ I, who feed on the flowers of the Muses, shall never be the slave of the table.”
105
satire as satura, which was believed by the Romans to be derived from a feminine form of satur with ellipse of a noun; see Ernout-Meillet, s.v. satur, and cf. Diomed. gramm. I 485, 36 f. (late 4th century) ... satyra a lance quae referta variis multisque primitiis in sacro apud priscos dis inferebatur et a copia ac saturitate rei satura vocabatur (which, while probably correct, is in fact Diomedes’ second preferred explanation of the word, see Gratwick in E. J. Kenney & W. V. Clausen [eds.], The Cambridge History of Classical Literature, vol. 2, Cambridge 1982, p. 161). Compare also expressions like pabulum animi; see TLL, s.v. pabulum 9, 29 ff. Like 9, 50, the present poem adopts a personally defensive attitude towards a specific slanderer of Martial’s poetry, and the charges brought against him are very much of the same kind: in 9, 50 an epic poet accuses Martial of being of less capacity because of the shortness of his poems and here a poet attacks Martial’s libelli as being “insufficiently elaborate”. This is criticism which is likely to have been brought up by a representative of “higher poetry” and, given this, I think it possible that the poet Gaurus who attacks Martial in 9, 50 is the same person as is referred to as quidam poeta here; if the identification of this Gaurus as Statius is correct, Statius would consequently be the poet alluded to also in the present case. This, then, would indicate that, at least in 94, Martial and Statius were not on friendly terms with each other, an assumption which also finds some support in the preface of Statius’ fourth book of Silvae. See further 9, 50 intro. 1. Lector et auditor: this is one of the two instances in which Martial mentions his “listener”, the other being 12, praef. (si quid est enim, quod in libellis meis placeat, dictavit auditor; see Howell on 1, 1, 4). The “reader” appears much more frequently, and Martial often addresses him directly in the vocative (8 instances); this latter feature, otherwise uncommon in Latin literature, he shares with Ovid, who addresses the lector particularly often in the poems written in exile. This phenomenon, as regards Ovid’s exile poetry, may be explained by the fact that Ovid had no audience to address at Tomi, but for Martial’s part it is a sign that he, even though he gave recitations before an audience, did not consider these to be the principal means of communicating his works; see Howell and Citroni respectively on 1, 1, 4 and cf. note on 9, 83, 4. Aule: presumably Martial’s friend the centurion Aulus Pudens, who is addressed or mentioned in 16 epigrams. Those which do not mention his cognomen but only an Aulus cannot all with absolute certainty be taken as referring to Pudens, but in all likelihood they do;1 see M. Citroni, “La carriera del centurione A. Pudens e il rango sociale dei primipilari. Interpretazione di Marziale V 48 e VI 58, 7–10”, Maia 34 (1982), pp. 247–257. Obviously, Pudens had a certain interest in poetry, especially Martial’s, as the poet addresses him on such matters also in 4, 29 and 7, 11; cf. also 8, 63, a joke on Pudens’ interest in poetry and boys. On the address by praenomen, a sign of
1
1, 31; 4, 13; 4, 29; 5, 48; 6, 58; 7, 11; 7, 97; 13, 69 all mention his cognomen, while an Aulus appears in 5, 28; 6, 54; 6, 78; 7, 14; 8, 63; 11, 38; 12, 51
106
familiarity which is commonly used by Martial but rare in other authors, see Howell’s note on 1, 5, 2 Marce. 2. exactos: “perfect, elaborate”; the word does not appear in this sense prior to the Augustan poets. C. O. Brink, who has made a thorough study of its use with regard mainly to these poets, argues that it was taken over from the vocabulary of the stonemasons (“to finish off” an artefact, see Brink, Hor. epist. II, pp. 121 f. and 421 ff.), to “replace and strengthen the somewhat superannuated Ciceronian perfectus”. Of the purely adjectival exactus in this sense, Brink identifies only three instances in the classical poets, apart from the present also Prop. 3, 9, 10 and Hor. epist. 2, 1, 74. If finite forms and participles are taken into account, Horace’s famous carm. 3, 30, 1 exegi monumentum aere perennius and similar instances may be added (see Brink, loc. cit.). In Martial, there is yet another instance of the adjective which may qualify here, 4, 86, 4 Nil exactius eruditiusque est (sc. Apollinari). It is true that this does not strictly allude to a poem, a book or a work of art, but to Apollinaris’ judgement of such things; rather than taking it as “exact”, as does Ker, it may perhaps be translated, with an extended field of application, as “refined”. The two mentioned above are the only occurrences of the adjective exactus in Martial. Perfectus he uses once, in the same sense (5, 63, 3). Finite forms of exigo appear twice (4, 82 4 and 5, 80, 3), both with reference to Martial’s poems, but both in the sense of “examine”. There seem to be no other instances of any form of exigo or the adjective exactus in this sense in other Silver Latin poets (Lucan, Silius, Statius and Valerius Flaccus). For the ending esse poeta negat, cf. Ov. Pont. 1, 5, 66. 3. Non nimium curo: an echo of Catull. 93, 1 Nil nimium studeo Caesar tibi velle placere.
82 Dixerat astrologus periturum te cito, Munna, nec, puto, mentitus dixerat ille tibi. Nam tu dum metuis, ne quid post fata relinquas, hausisti patrias luxuriosus opes, bisque tuum deciens non toto tabuit anno: dic mihi, non hoc est, Munna, perire cito?
5
A certain Munna, good for 2,000,000 IIS, has consulted an astrologer about his future and got the answer “peribis cito”. Taking this to mean that his death was imminent, he started to use up his fortune, eager not to miss the enjoyment of a single as. When, at last, he did not die but became bankrupt, he thought that the astrologer had lied to him. But Martial realizes that he had not, for “peribis cito” can be understood in two ways, either as “you will die soon” or as “you will
107
quickly become ruined”, which is precisely what has happened. Thus, the prophecy has come true. The play on words with the same sound but of different meanings ( ) is frequently used by Martial; for such play on verbs, cf., for example, 1, 79; 2, 67; 3, 75 and 10, 16 and see Joepgen, pp. 106 ff. QWDQNODVLM
1. dixerat astrologus: in Martial’s day, astrology was nothing new, but since the Hellenistic period, it had gained in respectability and acquired a more scientific character through the advances of astronomy and the fame of brilliant scientists and mathematicians such as Aristarchus of Samos and Hipparchus. The latter himself believed in astrological calculations, as did later the great Ptolemy. At Rome, the predictions of the astrologers were considered most reliable and their services were requested by citizens as well as by emperors, for example, by Augustus, Tiberius (who had his own court astrologer), Claudius, Nero and Vespasian. However, in times of unrest, the emperor could find reason to restrict the public’s access to their divination, lest rebellious elements should be encouraged by prophecies in their own favour. This was the reason why astrologers on several occasions, beginning in the Republic, were expelled from Rome and Italy; this had occurred on eight, possibly eleven occasions before the accession of Domitian (see F. H. Cramer, “Expulsion of astrologers from ancient Rome”, C&M 12 [1951], pp. 9–50).. Domitian, who was himself convinced of the ability of the astrologers, took such measures at least once, in the mid-nineties, perhaps in connection with his efforts to suppress the “Stoic opposition” (cf. 9, 27 intro.), and probably also in the late eighties following the conspiracy of Saturninus.1 At any rate, they would probably have been around in 94, as indicated by the present epigram (unless, of course, Martial wanted to further blacken Munna’s character by having him consult an astrologer after they had been banished). It may, however, be noteworthy that Martial mentions astrologers only twice, the other instance being 2, 7, 4 (published in 86–87). If Jerome’s chronology is correct, both mentions preceded Domitian’s expulsions by a year or so. While this may be a mere coincidence, it may perhaps also be an indication that the expulsions of astrologers followed an increased activity on their part. The same opening of the line occurs in Iuv. 6, 554. Munna: Martial is the only literary source of this name, which appears also in 10, 36 and 10, 60, both satirical. Forcellini (Onomast., s.v. Munnus), who suspects the name to be of Spanish origin, records two epigraphic instances of the form Munnus (CIL 2, 688; 9, 2080) and one of Munna as a female name (CIL 2, 238). 2. mentitus: in poetry, the perfect participle of mentior with present sense is comparatively frequent. Bömer (on. Ov. met. 9, 340) gives in all six instances from the Metamorphoses (apart from 9, 340 also 3, 214; 5, 360; 6, 648; 8, 251), cf. am. 1
The chronology of these edicts cannot be firmly established; the only source giving any dates at all for the expulsions of astrologers is Jerome’s Latin translation of the Chronicon of Eusebius, placing them in 89/90 and 95/96; see Sherwin-White, p. 764; Jones, Domitian, pp. 119 ff.
108
2, 19, 11; Iuv. 6, 123. This comparatively high frequency in poetry is probably to be explained by the fact that the present participle KÕLRÚÕLQ cannot be fitted into dactylic verse. In prose, this usage of mentitus is rare and not found earlier than Livy (24, 5, 11 f. postremo cum omnibus intolerandis patientiae humanae cruciatibus laceraretur, victum malis se simulans avertit ab consciis in insontes indicium, Thrasonem esse auctorem consilii mentitus, nec nisi tam potenti duce confisos rem tantam ausuros fuisse); see Kühner-Stegmann 1, § 136 b , p 759. E
3. ne quid post fata relinquas: viz. while Munna was afraid that he would not manage to use up his wealth himself. Thus, Munna may be said to have paid heed to the precepts of Horace in carm. 2, 14, in which is found the most famous expression of distaste at leaving one’s property to an heir: absumet heres Caecuba dignior | servata centum clavibus et mero | tinguet pavimentum superbo, | pontificum potiore cenis (lines 25 ff.; see Nisbet & Hubbard ad loc. with further literature on the subject). The expression post fata (also 5, 10, 12; 11, 33, 1; 11, 67, 1) is poetical and was frequently used by the poets after Verg. Aen. 4, 20.1 Bömer (on Ov. met. 13, 180) notes its use in prose “seit Val. Max. 3, 2, ext. 4; 4, 7” (to which add 5, 3, 2b) but states that it is mainly restricted to poetry. And indeed, the prose occurrences are easily counted; apart from those given by Bömer, there seem to be only two more instances from classical prose, Quint. inst. 12, 11, 7 and decl. 377, 8, and one from later, Serv. Aen. 10, 905. 4. hausisti … opes: evidently the only classical instance of opes as the object with haurio; cf., however, Tac. ann. 16, 18 plerique sua haurientium; TLL, s.v. haurio 2569, 15 ff. 5. bisque tuum deciens: viz. centum milia, “your 2 million sestertii”. Decie(n)s is used as a neuter substantive particularly in connection with money, cf. OLD, s.v. 2 b. tabuit: “melted away”; this metaphorical use of tabesco with reference to assets is unparalleled (see OLD, s.v. 1 b) and provides a notion of a natural and unstoppable course; Munna’s money melted away like snow in sunshine. 6. dic mihi: see note on 9, 47, 8. perire: pereo appears in the sense of “go bankrupt” already in Plautus, for example, Rud. 978 nam si istuc ius sit quod memoras, piscatores perierint; cf. Cic. prov. 12 qui se ... subsidiis patrimoni aut amicorum liberalitate sustentant, hos perire patiemur?; TLL, s.v. 1333, 6 ff.
1
Thus Prop. 4, 11, 63; Ov. am. 1, 15, 39; 3, 15, 20; met. 13, 180; Lucan. 7, 471; 8, 749; 9, 243; 9, 274; Sil. 4, 635; 6, 561; 6, 575; 15, 184; Stat. Theb. 1, 35; silv. 5, 3, 37.
109
83 Inter tanta tuae miracula, Caesar, harenae, quae vincit veterum munera clara ducum, multum oculi, sed plus aures debere fatentur se tibi, quod spectant qui recitare solent. Seemingly a celebration of Domitian’s games in the amphitheatre, which Martial freely admits surpass anything seen before. They attract the attention of the whole of Rome and no one would want to miss them; during the show, the streets are virtually deserted. So far, the epigram appears to be an adulatory piece. But in the latter distich, Martial reveals his true cause for gratitude to the emperor, lending a concessive notion to the former: Domitian’s games are marvellous to behold, it is true, but their true merit is that they keep everybody off the streets, and thus also the reciting poets, with whom contemporary Rome abounded and whom Martial obviously found intolerable. The present epigram is probably to be regarded as a humorous counterweight to the elevated poems written in celebration of the games given on Domitian’s return from the Second Pannonian War (see below). It thus has the same function as 9, 3; 9, 34; and 9, 36, all light-hearted pieces likely to have been written to balance the more serious poems celebrating Domitian as the great builder and as the earthly Jupiter (see the respective introductions to these poems). Again, Martial must have been perfectly confident about the emperor’s reaction; it was, after all, possible to pull the emperor’s leg, at least for the poets who had proved to be loyal to him. See also 9, 3 intro. 2. quae vincit veterum ducum ... munera: the words ducum munera suggest that the reference is to games given in celebration of a triumph, and the miracula of the amphitheatre mentioned in the preceding line would therefore probably refer to those seen at the games given in connection with Domitian’s return from the Second Pannonian War in early 93. Four poems in Book 8 give lofty celebrations of these games, in which a multitude of tigresses was displayed (8, 26), compared by Martial to the wealthy suite of Bacchus (8, 26, 5 f. vincit Erythraeos tua, Caesar, harena triumphos | et victoris opes divitiasque dei), further self-torture à la Mucius Scaevola (who showed his indifference to physical pain by holding his right hand in fire; cf. 8, 30, 1 f. Qui nunc Caesareae lusus spectatur harenae, | temporibus Bruti gloria summa fuit) and a huge lion likened to that which roamed Nemea (8, 55) and which also re-introduced the ancient event of pugilism (8, 80, 1 ff. Sanctorum nobis miracula reddis avorum | ... cum veteres Latiae ritus renovantur harenae | et pugnat virtus simpliciore manu).1 For further mentions of the marvellous spectacles given by Domitian, see the hare–lion cycle in Book 1; 4, 35; 5, 65; Stat. silv. 1, 6 (the account of the games given by Domitian on the
1
As a giver of games, Domitian was also otherwise innovative: in the circus, he added cavalry and infantry battles, staged venationes and gladiatorial combats by the light of lamps in the amphitheatre, and encircled a basin near the Tiber with seats for the purpose of giving an almost full-scale, naval battle; see Suet. Dom. 4, 1–2 (with Mooney’s commentary); Dio 67, 8, 2 ff.; Jones, Domitian, p. 105.
110
Kalends of December with its rain of sweets, luxurious meals, female and dwarf fighters, etc.). In spite of the unsatisfactory outcome of the Second Pannonian War (see the introduction, vol. 1, pp. 26 f.), it was celebrated with games also in the Circus (8, 11). 8, 78 mentions such games arranged by Stella (probably as praetor; see 9, 42 intro.). 4. quod spectant etc.: “since they, who are wont to recite, now watch instead”. Poetical recitations, which had been customary in Rome since the late Republic (see Friedländer, Sittengeschichte 2, pp. 223 ff.), were a constant source of annoyance to Martial and his fellow satirists (cf. Hor. sat. 1, 4, 23; 1, 4, 73; Pers. 1; Iuv. 1, 3 f.; 3, 9; 7, 40), although Persius and Juvenal probably (see Courtney on Iuv. 1, 3) and Martial certainly gave recitations themselves (as did virtually all the great poets; see Mayor on Iuv. 3, 9) and were aware of their importance. To the authors, recitations provided a means of presenting themselves to the public and testing the effects of their poems before publishing; to the public, they offered an opportunity to see established poets and rising talents in the flesh and listen to their latest productions recited in the way in which they were meant to be. A recitation by a famous poet was a true happening, and the attention was great. Juvenal tells of a recitation by Statius of the Thebaid: when the poet had fixed a day, the people rushed to hear him; he captured their hearts with the sweetness of his verse, and the crowd listened passionately, stamping the benches to pieces in excited acclamation (7, 82 ff.). On the other hand, for the less famous, reciting could be a thankless task; in the well-known letter to Sosius Senecio (epist. 1, 13), Pliny complains of the bad manners of people who, when invited to listen to a reciting poet, turn up only reluctantly and leave before the recitation is over. However, in Martial’s day, there was also a multitude of would-be poets, who, with no ability to write verses and even less to recite them, hunted the public and their friends with their poems. Their different categories are the targets of quite a number of epigrams in Martial. The untalented reciters appear in 1, 63; 2, 88; 4, 41; 6, 41; and 8, 20; it is these poets from whom Martial is glad to be spared during Domitian’s shows. He was troubled also by another group, namely those who recited Martial’s poems as if they were their own (such as Fidentinus in 1, 29 [on which see Howell] and 1, 38; also 1, 52; 1, 66). There were also those who in the same way recited poems that they had bought (2, 20). A third category which met with Martial’s disapproval was those who invited people to dinner only to get a chance to recite their new poems (cf. 3, 45; 3, 50); the poet parodies the theme in 11, 52, a dinner invitation to Iulius Cerialis with a promise that he will recite nothing—Martial generally shows great detachment from his own recitations (cf. 14, 137). Finally, the poet complains about reciting patrons, to whom their clients have no choice but to listen, because of their state of dependence; thus 10, 10, 9; 12, 40, 1. See also the introduction to 9, 89.
111
84 Cum tua sacrilegos contra, Norbane, furores staret pro domino Caesare sancta fides, haec ego Pieria ludebam tutus in umbra, ille tuae cultor notus amicitiae. Me tibi Vindelicis Raetus narrabat in oris, nescia nec nostri nominis Arctos erat: o quotiens veterem non infitiatus amicum dixisti “Meus est iste poeta, meus!” Omne tibi nostrum quod bis trieteride iuncta ante dabat lector, nunc dabit auctor opus.
5
10
A poem to accompany Martial’s gift of Books 4–8 to Norbanus, on his return from serving a six-year office in the northern provinces. It is important as being one of the very few literary contributions to our knowledge of the knight Norbanus and also plays a part in the dating of Book 9. For epigrams accompanying gifts of poems, see 9, 26 intro. 1 ff. Cum ... umbra: the opening lines are clearly influenced by Verg. georg. 4, 559 ff. Haec super arvorum cultu pecorumque canebam | et super arboribus, Caesar dum magnus ad altum | fulminat Euphraten bello victorque volentis | per populos dat iura viamque adfectat Olympo (referring to Augustus’ eastern campaigns; see Mynors, ad loc.), and also by the opening of Verg. ecl. 1 (see below on line 3). sacrilegos … furores: presumably the revolt of Saturninus in early 89 (see note on Norbane), called sacrilegus (contrasted with sancta in the following line; cf. Phaedr. 4, 11, 3; Stat. Theb. 10, 65, ff.) as being directed against the emperor. Cf. 9, 61, 20 with note. Norbane: because of the confused testimonia of the sources, there has been much debate and many misunderstandings regarding the identity of this Norbanus. It now seems established that he was the equestrian procurator of Raetia, who aided the commander of Lower Germany, A. Bucius Lappius Maximus, in suppressing the revolt of Saturninus, which broke out in late 88–early 89.1 Exactly when Norbanus arrived in Raetia is not known, but he had been there for six years (line 9 bis trieteride iuncta) when this poem was written (probably after the publication of Book 8 in early 94). His having got there already in 87 is perhaps unlikely, since that would date this poem in 93, in which case it would probably (although by no means necessarily) have appeared in Book 8; still, the safest assumption is that Norbanus would have been in Raetia from 88.
1 See G. Winkler, “Norbanus, ein bisher unbekannter Prokurator von Raetien”, Akten des VI. Internationalen Kongresses für Griechische und Lateinische Epigraphik, Munich 1973, pp. 495–498; PIR2 N 162; Jones, Domitian, p. 144. Domitian left Rome with the Pretorian guard for the scene of the revolt on 12 January 89 (Southern, p. 101).
112
After the suppression of Saturninus’ revolt, Lappius Maximus was promoted to be procurator of Syria. Thus, a promotion also of Norbanus is likely. Winkler, while suggesting the procuratorship of Belgica as well as of the Germanic provinces, advocates the prefecture of Egypt (Winkler, op. cit., p. 497). This suggestion was rejected by Petersen (PIR2, loc. cit.) and the fact that Martial in this poem makes no mention of a southern office probably indicates that there was none to mention. On the contrary, Arctos in line 6 puts a clear emphasis on the north, indicating that Norbanus was promoted to be procurator probably of one of the northern provinces mentioned above. Norbanus probably remained in office in the north until 94, when he returned to Rome and was presented with Martial’s gift of books. The reason for his return was obviously his further promotion to praetorian prefect, an office he held, according to Dio Cassius (67, 15, 2), at the time of Domitian’s assassination (see Winkler, op. cit., p. 498; Jones, op. cit., pp. 149 and 194). In spite of Martial’s reference to himself as vetus amicus and a cultor notus of Norbanus’ friendship in lines 4 and 7, Norbanus is not mentioned in any other of his epigrams. Norbana, perhaps a relative of his, is mentioned in 7, 74, 7. 2. domino Caesare: see note on 9, 20, 2 domini. sancta fides: Sauter (p. 111) suggested that the adjective here would not have the same value as when applied directly to the emperor and that it would be synonymous with pius. Sancta fides is the commoner juncture (also 10, 44, 8; Catull. 76, 3; Verg. Aen. 7, 365; Phaedr. 4, 14, 5; Sil. 13, 749), pia fides being found but twice (Ov. trist. 5, 14, 20; Pont. 3, 2, 98), and it is consequently not necessary to assume that Martial would have chosen the adjective here because the fides in question is a loyalty directed to the emperor. On the other hand, such considerations cannot be refuted: a loyalty to Domitian may be called sancta on the same grounds as a rebellion against him is sacrilegus (cf. above); it may also be noted that Martial in 8, 15, 7 defines the people’s pietas towards Domitian as a pietas sancta, a juncture which is not found elsewhere. 3. haec ego Pieria ludebam tutus in umbra: viz. all the poems which Norbanus during his absence would have known only from second-hand sources (lines 9– 10). As he presumably had been in Raetia from 88, the poems in question would be those published as Books 4 (published in December 88) to 8 inclusive. Book 3, which was published in the autumn of 87, he would have known before his departure. The immediate source of inspiration here is the famous opening of Vergil’s ecl. 1, lines 4 ff. nos patriam fugimus; tu, Tityre, lentus in umbra formosam resonare doces Amaryllida silvas. By alluding to these Vergilian lines, Martial here emphasizes the antithesis “dangerous life abroad” and “bucolic peaceful existence”. For the phrase and the prosody, cf. Prop. 2, 34, 85 haec quoque perfecto ludebat Iasone Varro. Pieria ... in umbra is “in my poetical recess”; cf. Stat. silv. 5, 2, 104 tacita studiorum occultus in umbra; OLD, s.v. umbra 5. The juncture Pieria … umbra only here and in Iuv. 7, 8. 113
Pierides ( ) was since Ps. Hesiod. scut. 206 a common epithet of the Muses as daughters of Pieros and Antiope; their birthplace was Pieria in Macedonia, ranking second only to Mt. Helicon as home of the Muses; see HerzogHauser in RE Suppl. 8, s.v. Pierides 495 f. On the motif of the Pierides as Macedonian Muses competing with the Greek, see Bömer’s introduction to Ov. met. 5, 294–678 (the struggle between the Pierides and the Muses). The combination in umbra appears in the hexameter exclusively at the verseending (48 instances from Vergil to Juvenal). The ending tutus in also Verg. Aen. 8, 323; Lucan. 6, 65; 10, 55; Iuv. 4, 93. 3LHUdGHM
4. cultor notus amicitiae: cf. 4, 67, 2 cana notus amicitia. 5. Vindelicis … in oris: strictly speaking, the Vindelici inhabited the eastern part of Raetia; here, the adjective Vindelicus designates the whole of the province, of which Norbanus was equestrian procurator at the time of Saturninus’ revolt. The claim to empire-wide fame in this and the following line resembles 11, 3, 3 ff., where Martial similarly boasts that he is read in faraway lands: meus in Geticis ad Martia signa pruinis | a rigido teritur centurione liber, | dicitur et nostros cantare Britannia versus; often, he states that he is toto notus in orbe (thus 1, 1, 2; cf. 5, 13, 2; 6, 64, 25; 7, 17, 10; 8, 61, 3). This is actually a poetical topos, appearing as early as Alcman (7th century BC; see Howell on 1, 2, 2 f.) and represented in Latin poetry, for example, by Hor. carm. 2, 20, 14, but the comparatively high frequency in Martial may primarily be due, as Citroni suggested, to the influence of the many instances in Ovid (see Citroni on 1, 2, 2 with instances). That this is a topos and not necessarily in accordance with the truth would be in line with Martial’s obvious excitement in 7, 88 at being read in Vienna in Gallia Narbonensis, a town neither particularly exotic nor very far from Rome. 7. o quotiens: also 11, 16, 5 and 14, 119, 2. After Verg. ecl. 3, 72 very common at the beginning of the hexameter, especially in Ovid (epist. 16, 187; met. 3, 375; 10, 661; 14, 643; Pont. 1, 9, 21 & 23; 4, 1, 9 & 11). non infitiatus amicum: an echo of Ov. Pont. 1, 7, 27 Nec tuus est genitor nos infitiatus amicos. 8. “Meus est iste poeta, meus”: Norbanus’ words when he heard Martial’s poems read in the faraway land. The verse-ending shows yet another Ovidian echo; cf. am. 2, 1, 10 (quo … ab indice doctus) conposuit casus iste poeta meos? For emphatic gemination, see note on 9, 25, 3 Quod, rogo, quod and for iste coupled with meus, see note on 9 praef. iste. 9. bis trieteride iuncta: “during two successive periods of three years”. The Greek can mean either a triennial festival (with ellipse of ) or a period of three years (with ellipse of ). The word first appears in Latin in Cicero (nat. deor. 3, 58), mentioning a Theban festival known as trieterides (see Pease, ad loc.). This is the only instance from prose; all the others (10 in all) are WULHWKUdM
xRUW
SHUdRGRM
114
found in Silver Latin poetry, where the notion of festival is the predominant one; thus Sil. 4, 776; Stat. Theb. 4, 729; 7, 93; 9, 480; Ach. 1, 595. Trieteris in the sense of “three years” is found once in Statius, silv. 2, 6, 72, a rather lofty circumlocution for the age of Flavius Ursus’ deceased favourite; hence van Dam’s conclusion (p. 433), that Statius only uses trieteris in a solemn context. The same is true of Martial, who never uses the word in the sense of “festival”, but, with the exception of the present poem, only in circumlocutions for age, once of a living boy (6, 38, 1, the son of Regulus), and twice of the deceased (7, 96, 3 of the delicatus of Bassus, and 10, 53, 3 of the charioteer Scorpus). 10. lector: in his Loeb, Shackleton Bailey took this to refer either to “a friend, who bought and read the books and then sent them on to Norbanus”, or to “‘your reader’ (lector, ), a slave in Rome with whom he had left instructions to send him M.’s works as they appeared”. He prefers the former explanation and adduces 9, 99, 7 (vilis eras ... si nunc te mitteret emptor) and 7, 80 (3 f. hunc Marcellino poteris, Faustine, libellum | mittere; Marcellinus was stationed in Dacia) in support. However, neither explanation seems very convincing; why, for instance, should Martial write lector here but emptor in 9, 99 if the circumstances are identical? Perhaps what he means is that previously, Norbanus had only known the books from a brother in arms who had read them aloud to him, having taken his Martial with him into the field, like the imaginary rigidus centurio of 11, 3, 4, who thumbs his book in the Getic frosts. QDJQÇVWKM
85 Languidior noster si quando est Paulus, Atili, non se, convivas abstinet ille suos. Tu languore quidem subito fictoque laboras, sed mea porrexit sportula, Paule, pedes. Paulus is simulating sickness in order to avoid giving a dinner and the speaker, who was to be among the guests, is left empty-handed. Annoyed at this humiliating treatment and knowing that Paulus is simulating, he bitterly remarks that, whereas poor Paulus may be suffering from a sudden illness, the speaker himself is worse off: his sportula is actually dead. The structure of the epigram is essentially such as can be observed in several of Martial’s scoptic pieces: it falls into two parts, the first more or less objectively describing the circumstances, while the poet uses the second, subjective part to make his point. There is also a change of address: in the former part, the “victim” appears in the third person, while in the second, he is spoken to directly; the same structure can be observed, for example, in 1, 33; 2, 16; 2, 44; 4, 81; 7, 67. But there is yet another device in this epigram, which makes it singular: the appearance of Atilius in the first part. Such an arrangement, in which the first part presents the “victim” in the third person while yet another person, the formal addressee of the poem, is directly addressed, is found only in this epigram and in 5, 115
38; see further K. Barwick, “Zur Kompositionstechnik und Erklärung Martials”, Philologus 87 (1932), pp. 71 f. 1. Languidior: “a bit unwell”; cf. TLL, s.v. languidus 924, 71 ff. Paulus: there are quite a few Pauluses in Martial, most of whom are fictitious; as real can be taken only the (otherwise unknown) man behind the generalizing plural Pauli as exempla of humour in 5, 28, 6, and possibly also the barrister in 7, 72, 1. Amongst the remainder, five allude to greedy patrons; thus 5, 22; 8, 33; 10, 10; and 12, 69. In these cases, as in the present, the name may have been chosen because of its meaning “small”; cf. Howell on 5, 22, 2. Atili: the name occurs only here in Martial; Friedländer suggested that he was identical with the Atilius Crescens (“a man of letters but not an advocate”, Sherwin-White on Plin. epist. 2, 14, 2), who appears in three letters of Pliny (1, 9, 8; 2, 14, 2; 6, 8, 1 ff.). 4. sportula: originally, the patron was expected to invite his clients to dinner once in a while. But with the increased number of clients to each patron, this custom became unpractical; instead, the clients were furnished with a small basket (a sportula) of food to be carried away. Around the middle of the first century AD, the food was replaced by a small amount of money, commonly 100 quadrantes,1 but the gift was still referred to as a sportula; thus, when mentioned by Martial, it generally refers to this dole of money. Around the year 87, Domitian revived the so-called publicae cenae, public dinners given to the people (or some of them) by the emperor, a magistrate or even a private person; they had been abolished by Nero for economical reasons and replaced by sportulae (see Suet. Dom. 7, 1 with Mooney’s note). Apparently, Domitian’s decree also referred to the sportulae of private patrons, for in 3, 7; 3, 30; and 3, 60, 9, Martial implies that the dole of money is no longer given to the clients, having been replaced by food. But this arrangement was unpopular both with the patron and the client and soon ceased to be practised: already in Book 4, the speaker has lost money by not attending a patron (4, 26), and the majority of the following instances refer to the money dole.2 See also Courtney on Iuv. 1, 95; Hug in RE 2:3, s.v. Sportula 1884 ff. However, in the present instance, sportula does not seem to refer to the money dole but rather, as suggested by Friedländer in his commentary, to mean “fare”, referring to the actual dinner. Compare 7, 86, 9 (similar in content to this epigram), in which sportula refers to the nataliciae dapes of Sextus (7, 86, 1). porrexit … pedes: obviously “is actually dead”, contrasted with Paulus’ fictitious languor in the preceding line. The expression, which has a touch of slang about it, is presumably a humorous distortion of the phrase manum porrigo (see 1
Cf. 1, 59, 1; 3, 7, 1; 4, 68, 1; 6, 88, 4; 8, 42, 3; 10, 70, 13; 10, 75, 1; Iuv. 1, 120 f. 4, 68; 6, 88, 4; 8, 42; 9, 100; 10, 27, 3; 10, 70, 13; 10, 75, 11. In 8, 49, 10, the sportula is contrasted to a recta (sc. cena), and may perhaps refer to a dole of food; for 7, 86, 9, see below.
2
116
OLD, s.v. porrigo 5), recalling the image of a dead animal with its legs in the air; compare also porrectus in the sense of “laid prostrate in death” (OLD, s.v. porrigo 2) and cf. Catull. 67, 6 postquam’s porrecto facta marita sene (with Kroll’s note).
86 Festinata sui gemeret quod fata Severi Silius, Ausonio non semel ore potens, cum grege Pierio maestus Phoeboque querebar. “Ipse meum flevi” dixit Apollo “Linon”: respexitque suam quae stabat proxima fratri Calliopen et ait: “Tu quoque vulnus habes. Aspice Tarpeium Palatinumque Tonantem: ausa nefas Lachesis laesit utrumque Iovem. Numina cum videas duris obnoxia fatis, invidia possis exonerare deos.”
5
10
A poem of consolation on the death of Severus, younger son of Silius Italicus, the epic poet. Apparently, Martial met Silius and was taken up among his clients in 88,1 from which year dates the first epigram mentioning him (4, 14, in which Martial asks Silius to take some time to read his poems). Then follow six epigrams equally spread through the following books; only Books 5 and 10 lack a poem to Silius, whereas Book 11 has two.2 The subject-matter of these comparatively few but continuous epigrams is rather restricted, extending only to praise of Silius’ own Punica and sound literary judgement, his activity as poet and orator, and occasionally also, as here, to events within his family; thus, 8, 66 commemorates the consulship of his eldest son and also expresses a wish for a consulship for Severus, so that three consulships would eventually befall his family. In this epigram, Severus has died. Silius mourns, and Martial sadly complains to Apollo and the Muses, manifesting his affection for the family. The words of consolation are then spoken by Apollo, the god of poetry. In line 5 appears Calliope, the Muse of epic poetry, who, together with Apollo, forms a parallel to the epic poet Silius, quite generally and in this case particularly because each had lost a son.3 A proper epicedion, like the Epicedion Drusi and the consolations of Statius (silv. 2, 1; 2, 5; 3, 3; 5, 1; 5, 3; 5, 5), would call for the poem to have several subdivisions, viz. introduction, laudatio, lamentatio, descriptio morbi and, finally, consolatio; see J. Esteve-Forriol, Die Trauer- und Trostgedichte in der römischen Literatur untersucht nach ihrer Topik und ihrem Motivschatz, diss. Munich 1962, 1 On Martial’s relation to Silius, see H. Szelest, “Martial und Silius Italicus”, in J. Irmscher and K. Kumaniecki (eds.), Aus der altertumswissenschaftlichen Arbeit Volkspolens, Berlin 1959, pp. 73–80. 2 Apart from the present and 4, 14, the poems are 6, 64, 10; 7, 63; 8, 66; 11, 48; and 11, 50. 3 There is no reason to assume that the connection of their children, Linus and Orpheus, with musical or poetical activity implies any poetical ambitions on Severus’ part; the comparison is primarily between Silius and the divinities, not between Severus and their sons (cf. Schmoock, p. 74).
117
p. 113; cf. pp. 118 f. On considering the format of Martial’s epigrams, it is easily realized that none of his mourning poems meet these criteria. Most of Martial’s production in this field consists of poems (serious or scoptic) in the form of funerary inscriptions (like 9, 29), although some can be said to correspond to certain parts of the epicedion. Thus 5, 37 is to some extent a laudatio of Erotion, in the same manner as the present poem would correspond to the consolatio. For the consolatory topos that even the gods are subject to the austerity of Fate and that the divinity of the parents is of no help to their children, cf. in particular Ov. am. 3, 9, 21 ff., which alludes both to Linus and Orpheus and may have influenced Martial here;1 AP 7, 8, 7 f.; 7, 616. The theme is as old as Homer; cf. Il. 18, 117 f.; 21, 109; see Curtius, pp. 90 ff. Compare also Hor. carm. 1, 28, 7 ff. with Nisbet & Hubbard, ad loc. 1. Severi: Silius or Catius Severus, younger son of Silius Italicus, who, judging from this epigram, died in 94. His premature death, the circumstances of which are unknown, is mentioned also by Pliny in a letter on the death of Silius (epist. 3, 7, 2). Whereas this is the only certain mention of Silius (Catius) Severus in Martial, there are a couple of others which may well be references to the same man (and were taken to be so by Friedländer [on 2, 6, 3] and Howell [on 5, 11, 2]); thus in 5, 11, 2; 5, 80, 2 and 12; 6, 8, 6; 7, 34, 1; 7, 38, 1; 7, 49, 2; 7, 79, 4; 8, 61, 8. The Severus in 2, 6, 3 may be fictitious (although Friedländer, loc. cit., identified him as Silius’ son). 2. Ausonio … ore: “the Latin tongue”; for this usage of os, cf. Ov. trist. 3, 14, 47 Threicio Scythicoque fere circumsonor ore; TLL, s.v. 1. 1082, 49 ff. For Ausonius, see note on 9, 7, 6. non semel: besides his poetical activity, which occupied his old age, Silius had in his younger days been politically active, which involved appearing as an orator; his career was crowned with the consulship in 68. In 7, 63, 5 f., Martial compares him to Cicero and Vergil, both of whom Silius admired greatly. Obviously, he had also bought an estate in Campania, which had belonged to Cicero and which contained Vergil’s tomb; see 11, 48 with Kay’s note and Klotz in RE 2:3, s.v. Silius 79 f. The expression non semel ore potens is singular; the poetical litotes non semel, like semel in general, appears to be used only of time (OLD, s.v.), which is probably not the case here. However, the adverb bis, equivalent to non semel in the sense of “twice”, is capable of the meaning here required, viz. “in twofold manner” (like, for example, Sil. 1, 322 hydro imbutas, bis noxia tela, sagittas). Thus, Martial would have set out from bis in this sense, circumscribing it with a phrase which quite obviously corresponds to bis in the sense of “twice” and apparently also to bis in the sense of “in twofold manner”.
1
In Ovid, however, the theme does not form part of the consolatio but of the lamentatio (see Esteve– Forriol, p. 137, § 28).
118
ore potens: this juncture only here. Potens = “capable”, cf. Hor. ars 289 f. nec virtute … clarisve potentius armis | quam lingua Latium; TLL, s.v. potens 278, 60 ff. 3. cum grege Pierio ... querebar: the grex Pierius is the Muses; see note on 9, 84, 3. The expression is found only in Martial (also 12, 11, 4). As regards queror with cum expressing the person to whom the complaint is made, see OLD, s.v. 1 c. 4. Linon: the mythological figure of Linus was variously considered in antiquity and had various stories attached to him, but the present mention is brought about by his being the prematurely dead son of Apollo. There are several myths involving this theme. According to the Argive version (Pausan. 1, 43, 7), Psamathe, daughter of king Crotopus, had conceived Linus by Apollo. Fearing the wrath of her father when he learned about the child, she exposed Linus in the forest, where he was torn apart by the king’s dogs. This version was promoted in Martial’s day by its being related by Statius in Theb. 1, 562 ff. A Central Greek version (Pausan. 9, 29, 6 ff.) made Linus the son of Amphimarus and Urania. He was the greatest singer yet known and was killed by Apollo because he considered himself equal to the god. To this Linus were brought sacrifices once a year in a grove on Mt. Helicon, just before the sacrifice to the Muses, with whom he seems to have become closely associated. According to yet another myth, Linus, here a brother of Orpheus, taught Hercules to play the lyre and was killed by the hero for having struck him (Apollod. 2, 63). There were also alternative genealogies, making him the son of Apollo by Urania or even by Calliope; see Greve in Roscher, s.v. Linos 2054 ff. When Linus appears in Latin poetry, it is generally in one of two functions, either as an inspired singer (in which case the details of his death are of less interest; Verg. ecl. 4, 56; 6, 67; Prop. 2, 13, 8) or as the prematurely deceased son of Apollo. In the latter case, as in the present poem (see note on the following line), Orpheus usually appears in the same context; thus Ov. Ib. 480 ff. (drawing on the Argive version and mentioning both Crotopus and the dogs); am. 3, 9, 21 ff. (on the death of Tibullus); Stat. silv. 5, 5, 54 ff. (the poem on the death of his adopted son). 5. quae stabat proxima fratri: Apollo is the child of Jupiter by Latona, and Calliope by Mnemosyne. The line clearly echoes Ov. met. 8, 367 arboris insiluit, quae stabat proxima, ramis; 12, 14 platanum, coeptis quae stabat proxima sacris. 6. Calliopen: Calliope, the Muse of epic poetry, was the mother of Orpheus. Apollo is sometimes considered his father (for example, by Ov. met. 10, 167), but as indicated by Apollo’s words tu quoque vulnus habet, Martial follows the oldest tradition, according to which Orpheus was the son of Oeagrus and Calliope. Orpheus died by being torn apart by Maenads or ecstatic women, and various reasons have been given for this violent death. In Aeschylus (where the myth first appears), it is Dionysus’ punishment for Orpheus’ neglecting him in favour of Apollo ever since the journey to Hades; the great Latin poets of the Augustan age, 119
who certainly influenced Martial, drew on a Hellenistic tradition, according to which Orpheus was torn apart by jealous women, who felt that Orpheus, in his great love for the deceased Eurydice, neglected every other woman; cf. Verg. georg. 4, 516 ff. and Ov. met. 11, 1 ff. (with additional nuances) and see Ziegler in RE 18 s.v Orpheus 1283 ff.; Bömer on Ov. met. 11, 1–66, pp. 237 ff. Tu quoque vulnus habes: this exact wording at the beginning of the hexameter in Ov. met. 13, 497. The ending vulnus habet (habent) is also a favourite of Ovid’s; thus epist. 4, 20; ars 1, 166; Pont. 1, 7, 50; Ib. 344. 7 f. Tarpeium Palatinumque Tonantem … utrumque Iovem: Jupiter and Domitian, side by side as the heavenly and earthly thunderer. For the epithet Tarpeius, see note on 9, 1, 5; for Palatinus, see note on 9, 24, 1. Among Jupiter’s numerous children, several were mortal and thus had no chance of outliving their father. But Friedländer suggests one in particular, the Lycian king Sarpedon, son of Zeus by Europa and Priam’s ally, slain in the Trojan war by Patroclus. In Hom. Il. 16, 459 ff., Zeus is said to have shed bloody raindrops on the earth, honouring his , whom he knew was to be killed shortly. Also here, the inability even of the gods to succour their mortal children is put forward in Glaucus’ prayer to Apollo upon Sarpedon’s death: ' 6DUSKGÊQ 'L´M Xb±M· ¯ G' R¸ RÀ SDLG´M P¹QHL.1 Although Friedländer does not offer anything in support of this suggestion, it is likely to be correct; practically all occurrences of Sarpedon in Latin literature (which are rather few) refer to his death and to his being the son of Jupiter, occasionally linked with the fact that also the children of gods must yield to Fate; thus, in direct connection with Homer, Cic. div. 2, 25; cf. in particular Vergil’s majestic words from the mouth of Jupiter in Aen. 10, 467–72: Stat sua cuique dies, breve et inreparabile tempus | omnibus est vitae; sed famam extendere factis, | hoc virtutis opus. Troiae sub moenibus altis | tot gnati cecidere deum, quin occidit una | Sarpedon, mea progenies; etiam sua Turnum | fata vocant metasque dati pervenit ad aevi; also Aen. 1, 100 (with Servius); Ov. met. 13, 255; several mentions in Hygin. fab. From Suet. Dom. 3, 1, it appears that Domitian was the father of at least one son by Domitia, born in his second consulate, i.e. in 73; the boy died young, probably before 83, and seems to have been deified (see Mooney on Suet. Dom. 3, 1, p. 518; cf. Stat. silv. 1, 1, 97; Sil. 3, 629). Martial mentions him once, half a decade later, as sending the snow which falls on Domitian in 4, 3.2 SDjGD
IdORQ
QU
ÉULVWRM
1
³OZOH
G
_
“The bravest man has perished, Sarpedon, the son of Zeus; and he succoured not his own son.” There is yet another epigram in Martial referring to a child of Domitian’s; in 6, 3 (published in 90), the poet bids a child to be born, a vera deum subdoles, to whom Domitian in time may pass over the eternal reins of Rome and whose thread of life will be spun by the divine Julia, the daughter of Titus. As would be expected, the poem has been taken as indicating that Domitia was pregnant again; but as henceforth nothing is said of such a child, she must either have had a miscarriage or the child must have died in infancy. In that case, however, Martial, as has been recognized, would certainly not have included the poem for publication in Book 6; if the book had already been published or the poem was otherwise known to Domitian at the death of the child, Martial would have had to write a consolatio, which he apparently did not. The reasonable conclusion must therefore be that no child was born, that there was not even a pregnancy in 90, and that 6, 3 expresses nothing more than Martial’s (and reasonably also the emperor’s) hope of a heir; cf. Scott, 2
120
The thunder was traditionally ascribed to the rumbling of Zeus’ car, and thus it is quite natural for him to appear as tonans. But with Augustus’ dedication of the temple to Iuppiter Tonans on the Capitol in 26 BC,1 the participle begins to be used by the poets as a true epithet of the god (see Weinstock in RE 2:6, s.v. Tonans 1708 f.). According to Dio Cassius 54, 4, the name was a translation of the Greek =H¼M EURQWÇQ, but, apart from his own text, there is now only epigraphic evidence of this epithet (LSJ, s.v.); in the Greek version of the Monumentum Ancyranum, Iuppiter Tonans is rendered as EURQWVLRM =H¹M (18, 21). In Homer, this aspect of Zeus is often expressed by the epithet ·\LEUHPyWKM (“high-thundering”); thus, for example, Il. 1, 354. In Aristotle’s De mundo 401a, 17 and in Orph. Hymn. 15, 9 appears the epithet EURQWDjRM, and there are also some instances of =H¼M NHUD¹Q(H)LRM (“wielding the thunder”) and NHUDXQRERO±M (“hurling the thunder”, see LSJ, s.v.). Overall, however, there are not nearly as many instances of Zeus the Thunderer in Greek as there came to be in Latin, where it became the standard epithet of the god. In Ovid, the epithetical character is unmistakable (cf. epist. 9, 7; met. 1, 170; 2, 466; 11, 198; fast. 2, 69; 4, 585; 6, 33; 6, 349), and Ovid is also the first to use Tonans simply in the sense of Iuppiter (cf. Bömer on met. 1, 170, p. 78); it was fully adopted by the Silver Latin epic poets (10 instances in Lucan, 22 in Silius, 25 in Statius’ Theb., 6 in silv., 4 in Ach.; 6 in Valerius Flaccus), and Martial uses it often: 5, 55, 1; 5, 72, 1; 7, 60, 2; 8, 39, 5; 9, 3, 9; 9, 11, 7; 9, 91, 5; 10, 20, 9; 10, 35, 19; 10, 92, 6; 11, 43, 3; 11, 94, 7; 12, 15, 6 (further examples below).2 A singular instance is 7, 60, 1 f. Tarpeiae venerande rector aulae, | quem salvo duce credimus Tonantem; here, it is apparent that “the Thunderer” has become the epithet of Jupiter as the supreme god, so that Tonans is practically capable of meaning “omnipotent”. As Tonans came to be synonymous with Iuppiter, it acquired epithets of its own; instances from Martial are summus T. (6, 13, 7 & 6, 83, 5) and Capitolinus T. (10, 51, 13, cf. Ov. fast. 2, 69). Combined with Tarpeius, it first appears in Ov. Pont. 2, 2, 42, but then not until Sil. 4, 548 and 17, 654; Martial has it yet once more (13, 74, 1). As the earthly Jupiter, Domitian is also referred to by Martial as Tonans, usually with an additional epithet like noster (6, 10, 9; 7, 56, 4), Latius (9, 65, 1) or, as here and in 9, 39, 1, Palatinus. Notable is 7, 99, 1, which mentions simply a Tonans, but where the reference to Domitian is clear from the context.3 Latius T. and Palatinus T. are apparently formed by analogy with epithets of Jupiter as Tonans; the former would thus correspond to aetherius T. (Lucan. 5, 96) and the latter to Tarpeius and Capitolinus T. Both are inventions of Martial’s own and appear only in Book 9. The present instance most effectively creates an image of Domitian as “the other Jupiter”, the Palatine Thunderer residing on the Palatine hill next to the Capitoline on the Capitol; see further the introduction, vol. 1, pp. 29 ff. p. 75; Garthwaite, Court Poets, p. 32; id. Censorship, pp. 16–17; Jones, Domitian, p. 37. The opinion that Domitia in fact expected a child is held by Friedländer (commentary on 6, 3) and Sauter, p. 120. 1 The temple was built because Augustus had narrowly escaped being struck by lightning during his Cantabrian campaign (see Platner & Ashby, pp. 305 f.). 2 5, 16, 5 falcifer Tonans is Saturn; cf. Howell, ad loc. 3 There are other instances in which Domitian is referred to simply as Jupiter; see Sauter, pp. 59 ff.
121
9–10. These lines were previously taken as Martial’s words to Silius, but that is illogical, since it is Martial, and not Silius, who is complaining to Apollo. Gilbert corrected this by putting the words in the mouth of Apollo; see W. Gilbert, Ad Martialem quaestiones criticae, Programm des kgl. Gymnasiums zu Dresden– Neustadt 1883, p. 12. 9. obnoxia fatis: a similar ending appears in Lucan. 9, 336. 10. invidia … deos: invidia was a common reaction to what were considered unjust actions of the gods, especially regarding a person’s death. The motif occurs also in 1, 12, 9 f.; 7, 47, 7; 12, 14, 8; cf. Epiced. Drusi 189 f.; Stat. silv. 1, 4, 5 f.; 3, 5, 41 f.; 5, 5, 77 f.; and see Citroni on 1, 12, 9 f.; I. Odelstierna, Invidia, invidiosus and invidiam facere, Uppsala Universitets Årsskrift 10, 1949, pp. 19 ff.
87 Septem post calices Opimiani denso cum iaceam triente blaesus, affers nescio quas mihi tabellas et dicis “Modo liberum esse iussi Nastam (servolus est mihi paternus): signa.” Cras melius, Luperce, fiet: nunc signat meus anulus lagonam.
5
Lupercus asks the drunken Martial to sign a document which he says concerns the manumission of one of Lupercus’ slaves. But Martial is clear-headed enough to suspect mischief and asks Lupercus to return the next day, finishing off the epigram with a play on the sense of signo: tonight, he signs no documents, only wine-vessels (see note on line 7 below). Lupercus’ procedure clearly shows that something is the matter with the content of the document. Now if it really concerns the manumission of a slave,1 the document would presumably be a manumissio testamento, manumission according to a will, which had to be attested by seven witnesses (see Kaser, Privatrecht 1, p. 568; Kübler in RE 2:5, s.v. Testament 989). Lupercus’ words in lines 4 f. liberum esse iussi Nastam also indicate a manumissio testamento, in which the manumission was declared in the form of a command (see below on line 4). However, if this is the kind of document that Lupercus puts forth, it is doubtful whether it would have any legal value: for the seven witnesses had to be expressly summoned for this purpose and, furthermore, had to sign the will at the same time (see Kübler, op. cit. 998 f.). 1
Friedländer suggested that Lupercus hands Martial a document with a content different from what he says, a document such as he could only hope for Martial to sign when drunk. But if Lupercus really wanted to mislead Martial regarding the content, he could easily have chosen a less suspicious reason to ask for his signature than the manumission of a slave.
122
Still, it seems that the purpose of Lupercus’ obviously rather desperate trick is to add another slave to his will, presumably for the sake of sordid gain, for, after Augustus, there were restrictions on the number of slaves one was allowed to set free. These restrictions were due to the fact that slaves who, according to their master’s will, were to be set free at his death (so called statuliberi) could be compelled to pay a sum of money from their peculium to compensate for the loss inflicted on the estate. As a consequence of the greed of the masters, this increased the number of manumissions and the mass of liberti grew drastically. Augustus wanted to prevent them from becoming too marked an element in Roman society and passed two laws restricting manumission, the Lex Fufia Caninia of 2 BC, and the Lex Aelia Sentia of 4 AD (Kaser, Privatrecht 1, pp. 99; 255). Lupercus is presumably gathering witnesses among the drunks at a revel in an attempt to circumvent these regulations. Perhaps the use in line 5 of the diminutive servolus is provoked by his wanting the manumission of Nasta, though exceeding the limitations, to appear as a small matter, the thought being something like “one poor old slave more or less”. Falsification of wills is mentioned also at Iuv. 1, 67 (see Courtney, ad loc.); 8, 142 ff.; cf. Sall. Catil. 16, 2. 1. Opimiani: the vintage of 121 BC, the year of the consulate of L. Opimius, was excellent enough to become almost proverbial. It is referred to by Cicero as an old vintage, of which there was apparently some left in his day.1 Some seventy-five years later, Velleius Paterculus (2, 7, 5) denied that there was any of it left, because of the time which had elapsed since Opimius’ consulship. Pliny, on the other hand, attests the existence of Opimian wine in his day, even though it was no longer drinkable because of the bitterness following the long maturing; it was used in small amounts as a seasoning for other wines (nat. 14, 55). Hence it follows that the many references in Martial to Opimian wine do not refer to the genuine product but have the function of an antonomasia for a wine of the highest quality (cf. Citroni on 1, 26, 7).2 Trimalchio’s wine, the label of which claimed it to be Falernum Opimianum annorum centum (Petron. 34, 6; cf. 34, 7), is thus no more than a joke in the same style as his true Corinthian bronze (see note on 9, 59, 11). 2. denso … triente: densus here in the sense of “frequent, numerous”; cf. 6, 86, 1 and TLL, s.v. 547, 45 ff. The singular is poetical; cf. OLD, s.v. 3. Wine was poured with a ladle holding one cyathus (one-twelfth of a sextarius or 0.045 l) and referred to by the same word. The amounts commonly poured were called, after the division of an as, a triens (four cyathi, 1.8 dl), a quincunx (five), a hemina (six), a septunx (seven) and a bes (eight); smaller or greater amounts were seldom used (but cf. 9, 93, 2). For these measures, there were vessels of the same amount (see Blümner, Privataltertümer, p. 403). The triens is the one most often 1
Cic. Brut. 287 Ut si quis Falerno vino delectetur, sed eo nec ita novo ut proximis consulibus natum velit, nec rursus ita vetere ut Opimium aut Anicium consulem quaerat — “atqui hae notae sunt optumae”: credo; sed nimia vetustas nec habet eam, quam quaerimus, suavitatem nec est iam sane tolerabilis. 2 Cf. 1, 26, 7; 2, 40, 5; 3, 26, 3; 3, 82, 24; 10, 49, 2; 13, 113.
123
mentioned (cf. Prop. 3, 10, 29; Pers. 3, 100), especially so by Martial,1 whose mentions of the triens are generally taken to refer to the vessel (cf. Citroni on 1, 106, 8), even though the notion of amount may still be present; cf. Kay on 11, 6, 9. cum iaceam ... blaesus: cf. Iuv. 15, 47 f. facilis victoria de madidis et | blaesis atque mero titubantibus. 4. liberum esse iussi: in the will, the manumission was declared in the form of a command, like Stichum servum meum liberum esse iubeo (Gaius inst. 2, 267; cf. 2, 276; Kaser, Privatrecht 1, p. 101); this would be the formula to which Lupercus’ words allude. Another allusion to the same formula appears in Plin. epist. 4, 10, 1; cf. also Petron. 54, 5 (which, however, does not refer to a will). 5. Nastam: the name, formed on the Greek QVWKM (“inhabitant”), appears on only one other occasion in Latin literature, Petron. 53, 5 (likewise of a slave), but Nasta also occurs in inscriptions, both as a slave’s name (CIL 10, 4636 l. 12) and as a cognomen (ibid. 926); cf. Forcellini, Onomast., s.v. 313. 6. signa: see the introduction above. Luperce: this name, a common cognomen (see Kajanto, Cognomina, p. 318), appears in eight other epigrams (1, 117; 3, 75; 4, 28; 6, 6; 6, 51; 7, 83; 11, 40; 12, 47) of various satirical contents; it has been suggested that a couple are real persons (the Luperci of 1, 117 and 6, 6), but this is most uncertain (see Howell and Citroni respectively on 1, 117; Kay on 11, 40). In the present case, perhaps Martial chose the name because its first part is lupus (cf. OLD, s.v. and note on 9, 2, 1 Lupe). 7. nunc signat meus anulus lagonam: at present, Martial only uses his ring to sign the wine-vessel (thus ensuring it for himself); the indication that he is not going to drink any more is surely another hint to Lupercus. The practice of signing the wine-vessel is attested by Pliny nat. 33, 26 Denique v<el> plurima opum scelera anulis fiunt. Quae fuit illa vita priscorum, qualis innocentia, in qua nihil signabatur! Nunc cibi quoque ac potus anulo vindicantur a rapina; cf. also Iuv. 14, 132; Tac. ann. 2, 2. For lagona, see note on 9, 72, 4.
1
Eleven instances; also 1, 106, 8; 4, 82, 5; 6, 86, 1; 8, 51, 24; 9, 90, 5 (metonymy); 10, 13, 5; 10, 49, 1; 11, 6, 9; 11, 39, 13; and 14, 103, 1.
124
88 Cum me captares, mittebas munera nobis: postquam cepisti, das mihi, Rufe, nihil. Ut captum teneas, capto quoque munera mitte, de cavea fugiat ne male pastus aper. Of the epigrams in Martial referring to legacy-hunting, this is the only one written from the perspective of the victim: while Rufus the captator (see the introduction to 9, 8) was trying to snare the speaker, he kept sending him gifts; now that he has succeeded, he no longer bothers with presents. The moral of the poem is that Rufus must keep sending presents, otherwise the goodwill will fade away, like anything which is left without support. The theme recurs in connection with loveaffairs: once the girl is caught (the “terminus technicus” for which is the same verb capto), love, like the fire to which it is often likened, has to be supported. This is neatly summarised by Ovid when he presents the theme of the second book of his Ars: Arte mea capta est, arte tenenda mea est (ars 2, 12, which has certainly lent its air to line 3 of the present poem). That money and gifts were considered crucial for the maintenance of love appears, for example, from Ov. rem. 749: Non habet, unde suum paupertas pascat amorem. The same was true of captatores and their victims; the captatio itself comprised gifts of money and presents, which had to be kept coming if the victim was not to cool down; this was also the reason why people encouraged legacy-hunters (cf. 4, 56; 5, 39; 8, 27; 9, 8; 9, 48). This common idea is here expressed as a kind of allegory in proverbial manner: if a boar is ill fed, you always run the risk of its escaping from the cage (see 9, 81 intro.). Note the progress of time through the epigram, emphasized by the change of tenses and verb forms in lines 1 to 3 inclusive (captares–cepisti–captum). 2. postquam cepisti: i.e. after Rufus had made his victim promise to insert him in his will; cf. 9, 48, 1 f. Rufe: Rufus here is either fictitious or a pseudonym; for other Rufuses in Martial, see note on 9, 39, 3 mei … Caesonia Rufi.
125
89 Lege nimis dura convivam scribere versus cogis, Stella. Licet scribere nempe malos. Martial’s friend Stella (see 9, 42 intro.) is giving a dinner-party and bids Martial to improvise a poem but sets up a condition which Martial finds, in one way or another, unacceptable. Presumably, Stella meant to tease the poet and deliberately presented him with a theme to which he knew Martial would not consent; there may be a similar situation in 11, 42, in which Martial complains about a certain Caecilianus giving him mortua lemmata while demanding of him vivida epigrammata. As a consequence, instead of an extempore piece on the suggested theme, Stella gets the present epigram, rounded off by a humorously sullen remark, making a play on the possible senses of malus, which is further underlined by the ironical nempe: “it is, I suppose, permitted to write bad/abusive verses”. Exactly the same play on malus with reference to poetry appears in Hor. sat. 2, 1, 80 ff. (conversation between Horace and the jurist C. Trebatius Testa, who advises the former to beware of the penalties which may be inflicted upon writers of lampoons): “Sed tamen ut monitus caveas, ne forte negoti | incutiat tibi quid sanctarum inscitia legum: | si mala condiderit in quem quis carmina, ius est | iudiciumque”. “Esto, siquis mala; sed bona siquis | iudice condiderit laudatus Caesare? Siquis | opprobriis dignum latraverit, integer ipse?” | “Solventur risu tabulae, tu missus abibis”. The second and concluding sentence was taken by Gilbert as the reply of Stella to Martial’s complaints and put within quotation marks, giving the sense of “you may, of course, write bad verse”. Gilbert was followed in this respect by Lindsay (making the first sentence a question), Heraeus and Shackleton Bailey. However, putting the concluding witticism in the mouth of Stella spoils something of its pun, as the sense of “abusive” for malus would not only be more appropriate to but also more effective in a remark from Martial on Stella’s harsh terms than in Stella’s reply to the complaints of Martial. Poetical recitations were a common feature of Roman supper parties and revels; it could be that the host himself recited his own poetry, often to his guests’ dismay (like the reciting host Ligurinus in 3, 44; 3, 45; and 3, 50; cf. 5, 78, 25; Plut. quaest. conv. 1, 4, 3), or that a lector (either a household slave or professional reciter) read from contemporary poetry or the classics (Iuv. 11, 179 ff.; see Blümner, Privataltertümer, p. 410). It does not seem that the guests themselves generally recited the works of others,1 even though this apparently also occurred, at least in the case of the works of a poet close to the person reciting — such would probably be the implication of 4, 82, in which Martial commends his third and fourth books to Venuleius (probably L. Venuleius Montanus Apronianus, consul in 92, see Friedländer, ad loc.), and asks him to read them nec post primum … summumve trientem, | sed sua cum medius proelia Bacchus amat (4, 82, 5 f.); given the circumstances, it seems less likely that Martial meant him to 1
Thus Kißel on Pers. 1, 30 (p. 154). Kißel assumes that this was the case at least with the upper classes of Roman society, but it seems to be contradicted by Mart. 4, 82 (see below).
126
read them silently; cf. also 2, 1, 9; 2, 6, 8; 4, 82, 5 f.; 5, 16, 9; 7, 97, 11; 10, 19, 19 ff. Poetical improvisations were originally a Greek practice, which, while admired as intellectual entertainment by men like Cicero, were not practised in their own right by the Romans of the Republic, but rather considered as belonging to the field of rhetorical exercises.1 But with the Silver Age and the growing influence of rhetoric on poetry, the Latin authors became interested in extempore composition.2 This is quite obvious from the prefaces to Statius’ Silvae, in which the poet frequently emphasizes the high speed with which the poems were written; in the preface to silv. 1, he states that they arose from a subito calore et quadam festinandi voluptate and that none of the poems in the book were written in more than two days, some even in one single day. In the case of Martial, Friedländer, in the preface to his edition (p. 20), remarked that the poet’s ability to write on a great variety of subjects and in many different moods, combined with an extraordinary ability of versification, would have highly recommended him for improvisation and that a large number of poems without doubt arose extempore.3 This was very likely the case, but explicit references to extempore composition in Martial are rare; thus, the present epigram, in which Stella at a dinner party has given him a theme on which to improvise, is singular, even though 11, 42 (see above) probably also refers to improvisation (see Kay, ad loc.). The evidence of poetical improvisations at revels is likewise rather scarce. Apart from this epigram, there is a line in the preface to Stat. silv. 1 stating that the poem on the baths of Claudius Etruscus (silv. 1, 5, with its 65 hexameters the shortest of the book) was written intra moram cenae. This would perhaps argue against White’s assumption that, “insofar as Romans annexed literary activity to their carouses, it was probably expressed in epigrammatic form” (White, Dedication, pp. 42 f.). Although epigram was very apt for this kind of composition, when asked to improvise at a dinner party, established poets probably kept as close to their chosen genre as possible.
1
See G. Williams, Change and Decline, Berkeley etc. 1978, p. 195. Ibid., p. 267; Friedländer, Sittengeschichte 2, p. 198. 3 Friedländer finds further arguments in what he calls Martial’s carelessness and sometimes even incorrectness of expression, which he explains by the assumption that the poet did not always have the time to elaborate his poems carefully. Friedländer also considers Martial’s inclination to repeat himself a consequence of his finding it more comfortable to use existing phrases than to invent new ones when improvising. 2
127
90 Sic in gramine florido reclinis, qua gemmantibus hinc et inde rivis curva calculus excitatur unda, exclusis procul omnibus molestis, pertundas glaciem triente nigro, frontem sutilibus ruber coronis; sic uni tibi sit puer cinaedus et castissima pruriat puella: infamem nimio calore Cypron observes, moneo precorque, Flacce, messes area cum teret crepantis et fervens iuba saeviet leonis. At tu, diva Paphi, remitte, nostris inlaesum iuvenem remitte votis: sic Martis tibi serviant Kalendae et cum ture meroque victimaque libetur tibi candidas ad aras secta plurima quadra de placenta.
5
10
15
A poem written perhaps on Flaccus’ departure for Cyprus to enter upon the duties probably of the praetorian proconsul of the province. The first two-thirds of the poem contain a warning to Flaccus to beware of the infamous heat at the height of the summer; it is formulated as a wish for Flaccus to once again be able to abide the summer heat in the only tolerable way, should he heed Martial’s words: to enjoy, free of cares, a cool draught of wine in a shady locus amoenus and the undivided faith of his favourite boy and girl. The pastoral scene echoes Horace’s description of the good life in the famous poem of exhortation to Q. Dellius (carm. 2, 3 Aequam memento; see below); compare also Statius’ advice to Vitorius Marcellus to take an unofficial leave from his duties to escape the summer heat: sed tu, dum nimio possessa Hyperione flagrat | torva Cleonaei iuba sideris, exue curis | pectus et assiduo temet furare labori (silv. 4, 4, 27 ff.). The last third of the poem is a similarly framed prayer to the Paphian Venus to return Flaccus safe and sound to Rome. Here, Martial wishes that the Kalendae Martiae may pay homage to the goddess and says that she will receive festive sacrifices if his prayer be granted. Now the inclusion of the Paphian Venus is quite obvious, but the mention of the Kalends of March calls for explanation, since at Rome, this day was the Matronalia, sacred to Juno and not associated with Venus. But because of the complete absence of further references to the Kalends of March as a Roman celebration of Venus, it is not possible to arrive at an explanation supported by literary evidence. However, guided by the fact that gifts were given by husbands to their wives on the Matronalia and, as an extension of this practice, obviously also by young men to their fiancées, Marquardt suggested that there was in fact an element of a “feast of love” in the festival and that this would account for the offerings to Venus mentioned here (see below). But it remains perplexing that this is not attested by any Roman author. Perhaps Mar-
128
tial is here referring to a purely Cypriot practice which would be appropriate to the Paphian Venus just mentioned. The absence of any mention by Latin authors of such a practice would be easier to understand than would their reticence about a Roman celebration of Venus on the Matronalia. 1. Sic: see note on 9, 42, 1. in gramine ... reclinis: obviously an echo of Hor. carm. 2, 3, 6 f. te in remoto gramine ... | ... reclinatum, on which Nisbet & Hubbard remark: “grass is particularly prized in Mediterranean countries (cf. Mart. 3, 65, 4), and hence appears as a conventional resting-place in the amoenus locus; it presupposes the shade and stream of the rest of the picture”. Cf. also Porphyrio’s comment, ad loc: In remoto gramine, hoc est in secessu nemoris. Reclinatum autem, id est resupinum recumbentem, ut solent, qui securiores et soluto animo hoc faciunt. For the grass and the river as distinctive features of the pastoral setting, cf. also Lucr. 5, 1392; Verg. ecl. 5, 46 f.; georg. 4, 19; Ov. am. 2, 16, 9 f.; rem. 177 f. 2. gemmantibus ... rivis: gemmans is a Lucretian coinage (Lucr. 2, 319 herbae gemmantes rore recenti; 5, 461), appearing also in Culex 70; Ov. met. 3, 264 f. gemmantia … sceptra; Manil. 4, 656 gemmantia litora; 5, 256; Sil. 4, 350 gemmanti gurgite; Stat. silv. 1, 5, 12, f. (of the baths of Etruscus) nitidis … gemmantia saxis | balnea; Martial has it three times, also in 12, 66, 5 and 13, 70 1. The only prosaists to use the adjective are Columella (4, 24, 16; 7, 6, 6; 8, 11, 8; 10, 258) and Pliny (nat. 10, 43; 17, 106; 17, 188; 36, 56). The juncture gemmantes rivi, which alludes to the water glittering as though with jewels as the sunlight is shining on it, is found only here; compare, however, the instance from Sil. 4, 350 quoted above. 3. curva ... unda: also Aetna 95 and Stat. Theb. 2, 381; cf. Ov. fast. 3, 520 curvis ... aquis. The adjective curvus makes the waves appear more carefree, as it were, than would curvatus (cf. Verg. georg. 4, 361; Sil. 1, 472; cf. 15, 155): they are in themselves curvae, not curvatae through external influence. 4. exclusis ... molestis: freedom from care is naturally as essential to the pastoral idyll as to the good life in general; cf. Catull. 31, 7 o quid solutis est beatius curis; Hor. carm. 1, 22, 10 f. meam canto Lalagen et ultra | terminum curis vagor expeditis. In 10, 47, 9 (to Iulius Martialis), Martial mentions a nox non ebria, sed soluta curis among the features of the Good Life (see 9, 22 intro.); cf. also 3, 20, 14. 5. pertundas glaciem triente nigro: wine was cooled by being poured through a colander containing snow (see note on 9, 2, 5 dominae ... liquantur). The triens