The chapter sets out to query ancient scholars’ awareness of politeness phenomena as reflected in language and the metalinguistic tools they used to describe them. Particular attention is devoted to the terms charientismos and astimos, as well as to some specific acceptations of reticentia and expressions like grave or durum dictu.

Even if as a general rule ancient grammarians and commentators did not analyse the ordinary spoken language, since they mostly focused on poetry and the more exalted prose genres, it can be argued that all commentators of literary texts pay some considerable attention to ordinary language in interaction, and some attempt is made by them at identifying and labelling what they correctly see as speakers’ rhetorical strategies to reach a pragmatic goal while avoiding conflicts with an interlocutor or giving offence. These writers also make interesting deductions about the social and educational implications of the correct use of politeness etiquette and ritualization.

Despite the many studies devoted to aposiopesis in Latin poetry, a deeper insight into this rhetorical figure in Statius’ Thebaid is called for. This paper argues that Statius is the first to use such a figure of speech extensively in Latin epic and does so in his poem also marking programmatic loci, teasing out a tension between the epic and other literary genres, otherwise said between the Thebaid itself and the ones before it (see e.g. Theb. 4, 516; 8, 60; 7, 210; 12, 301; 380–5). By discussing some of the most relevant points, my paper highlights Statius’ programmatic use of aposiopesis: it shows the poet’s choice to avoid deviations to other poetic genres – such as tragedy or elegy – in his epic, in contexts where such contaminations would not be suitable. Moreover, the paper argues that aposiopesis is a relevant intertextual link between the Thebaid and Statius’ poetic background: we are dealing with silent challenges which further develop Statius’ meta-poetic discourse on generic interactions and literary memory.