Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-08T05:21:24.773Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Horace, Odes 4. 1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 February 2009

A. T. von S. Bradshaw
A. T. von S. Bradshaw
Affiliation:
Univeristy of Durham
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The introductory ode of Horace's fourth book has been given comparatively little critical attention, although it might have been expected to arouse exceptional interest, being the first-fruits of the lyricist's autumnal harvest. The neglect is due partly to the poem's deceptive simplicity but much more to the unease which it arouses in Horace's admirers: Venus does not seem the most fitting deity for the poet laureate to invoke, and moreover this is not so much an invocation as an appeal to be left alone; the young man who is the subject of Horace's eulogy was hardly a person of much eminence at the time of writing, though he became prominent later and is now prosopographically well endowed; above all, there is the disturbing picture of the elderly poet testily acknowledging an amorous urge and surrendering his dignity in pederastic dreams.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Classical Quarterly , Volume 20 , Issue 1 , May 1970 , pp. 142 - 153
Copyright
Copyright © The Classical Association 1970

Access options

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

References

page 142 note 1 Judged merely in terms of space allocated in the Prosopographia Imperii Romani Paullus Fabius Maximus rates higher than 93 per cent of those who held the consular office between 30 B.C. and A.D. 14, but almost all the evidence relates to his subsequent career.

page 142 note 2 The fullest treatment of this element and indeed of the poem as a whole is by Weinreich, Otto, ‘Religionswissenschaftliche und Literaturgeschichtliche Beiträge zu Horaz’, Zeitschr.für Kirchengeschichte, lxi (1942), 33–70Google Scholar—a valuable but understandably one-sided study.

page 142 note 3 It is improbable that the scripta referred to by Ovid in Ex P. 1.2. 135 were poetical compositions.

page 142 note 4 Horace, 413. I regret having to oppose Fraenkel's views here and elsewhere in this paper. He teaches and inspires even when he seems most mistaken, which is a measure of the great value of his book.

page 143 note 1 Op. cit. 365 and 350.

page 143 note 2 Brink, C. O., in Horace on Poetry, 179–83, takes a much milder view of the epistle than Fraenkel.Google Scholar

page 144 note 1 S. I. 2. 119, 1.3. 109, 1.4. 113, 1. 5.84, 2. 5. 80.

page 144 note 2 Ep. 1. 6. 38, 1. 18. 21, 2. 2. 56, A.P. 42, 320, 414.

page 144 note 3 Weinreich, , op. cit. 60.Google Scholar

page 144 note 4 Zielinski's, emendation deae for deo in 1. 16,Google Scholar recently defended by Nisbet, R. G. M. (Crit. Essays on Roman Literature: Elegy and Lyric, ed. Sullivan, J. P., 183),Google Scholar is not only superfluous: it destroys what was meant to be a joke.

page 145 note 1 Cinara does not appear in the Odes before Book 4 for those who can resist the temptation to identify her with Glycera (1. 19. 5, 1. 30. 3. 1. 33 2, 3. 19. 28).

page 146 note 1 He was one of the two provincia governors known to have been given this title in the time of Augustus. See Crook, J. A., Consilium Principis, 23–4.Google Scholar

page 147 note 1 Odes 2. 12. I have no doubt that the traditional identification of Licymnia with Terentia is correct. For a good discussion of the poem see Williams, G., ‘Poetry in the Moral Climate of Augustan Rome’, JRS lii (1962), 28–46, esp. 35–8.Google Scholar

page 147 note 2 Wili, W., Horaz, 155 remarks:Google Scholar ‘Die Ehre der Widmung des zweiten Buches wird gleichsam zwischen Pollio und Maecenas geteilt, ähnlich wie sie in B. IV der Lieder dem Paullus Maximus und Augustus zugleich zukommen sollte.’

page 147 note 3 Cf. Fraenkel, , op. cit. 425–6.Google Scholar

page 148 note 1 The great majority of the Augustan consuls (30 B.C.-A.D. 14) were married at some time in their lives, but unfortunately the biographical material is not sufficient to establish how many married before they took office. If Cassius Dio (56. 10. 3) is to be believed, there were at least two very remarkable examples of bachelor consuls—M. Papius and Q,. Poppaeus, coss. suff. A.D. 9.

page 148 note 2 I use the term in its usual rather loose sense. For a discussion of terms see Muth, R., ‘ “Hymenaios” und “Epithalamium” ‘ in Wiener Stud. lxvii (1954), 5–45.Google Scholar

page 149 note 1 Pavlovskis, Z., ‘Statius and the Late Latin Epithalamia’, Cl. Phil. lx (1965), 164–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar argues that the Medea has the last of the hymenaioi, which were superseded by the epithalamia (with Venus as the central figure). This seems to me to be drawing a more definite conclusion than the meagre evidence will allow.

page 149 note 2 Maximus does not appear to have been a poet like Stella, but he had Horace to sound the tibia for him.

page 149 note 3 From the marriage-song of a later Maximus: Ennodius, , Epithalamium dictum Maximi, 27. Cf. 17–18:Google Scholarcui sanguis census genius mens vota superstant / Musarum prima Julia supercilio.

page 149 note 4 Op. cit., 413–14.Google Scholar

page 149 note 5 Loc. cit., 39.Google Scholar

page 150 note 1 Cf. Dio Cassius, 58. 2.

page 150 note 2 Sen. Controv. 2. 4. 11. Syme observes: ‘It was Cassius who defined for all time the character and capacity of Paullus Fabius Maximus' (The Roman Revolution, 487Google Scholar). But Syme has special cause for despising Maximus—his Asianism (ibid. 375).

page 150 note 3 Op. cit. 412.Google Scholar

page 150 note 4 Loc. cit. 39.Google Scholar

page 150 note 5 An inscription found at a shrine of Venus Paphia in Cyprus:

page 151 note 1 De Horatianorum carminum inscriptionibus commentatiuncula, 4.Google Scholar

page 151 note 2 This has led a number of critics to believe that Horace is here making a genuine confession: e.g. W. Wili, Horaz, 355 and Wilkinson, L. P., Horace and His Lyric Poetry, 51–3.Google Scholar

page 152 note 1 Fraenkel is very illuminating on this point. For a tidying and partial modification of Fraenkel's scheme see Ludwig, W., ‘Die Anordnung des vierten Horazischen Odenbuches’, Mus. Hel. xviii (1961), 1–10.Google Scholar

page 152 note 2 It would be rash to offer a list of these, but 3. 12 can probably be safely cited as an example.

page 152 note 3 For a discussion of some of the metrical features see Rotsch, L., ‘Zur Form der drei Horaz-Oden im Asclepiadeus maior’, Gymn. lxiv (1957), 89–98.Google Scholar Horace seems to have made a point of including a wide range of metres in the fourth book as he had done in the first.

page 152 note 4 Orazio Lirico, p.Google Scholar

page 153 note 1 Cf. the Fescennine section of Cat. 61.119–43.