UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI
______, 20 _____
I,______, hereby submit this as part of the requirements for the degree of:
______in: ______It is entitled: ______
Approved by: ______'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
A dissertation submitted to the
Division of Research and Advanced Studies of the University of Cincinnati in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
DOCTORATE OF PHILOSOPHY (Ph.D.) Greek and Latin Philology
in the Department of Classics of the College of Arts and Sciences
2002
by
Peter J. Anderson
BA (Honours) University of Ottawa (Canada), 1995 MA University of Ottawa (Canada), 1997
Committee Chair: Dr. William A. Johnson In this dissertation I situate and analyze expressions of renown in nugatory poetry of the Flavian period – Statius, Martial, and Pliny –within the context of Roman elite attitudes toward memoria and the literary tradition of the poet's own success and renown. I assess the extent to which elite concern for commemoration affect literary expressions of the poet's own renown. I begin in Chapter One "Memoria" with a series of illustrative examples in support of the base assertion that concern for memoria is symptomatic of Roman elite culture. I suggest – through brief analyses of Cicero's post-consular and post reditum speeches, Tacitus' de vita Julii Agricolae, the so-called damnatio memoriae and the Senatus Consultum de Pisone Patre, and two quasi-case studies on the importance of memoria for writers under the early empire – that the major motivation which seems to underpin this need to commemorate is the desire to ensure individual posterity and/or to assure a corporate family influence. In Chapter Two "Terms of Praise" I focus on those words used by poets in the Flavian period to describe their own excellence and success as poets. Five key terms dominate this discussion: fama, laus, nomen, honor(-os), and gloria. In Chapters Three (Statius), Four (Martial), and Five (Pliny) I undertake focused analysis of the expressions of and attitudes towards their own success and renown. Statius, a professional poet, serves in many respects as a counter example to Martial and Pliny, most of all because Statius shows no interest in the Silvae as vehicles for his own memoria or renown. He looks instead to his epic poetry in that regard. Martial, the jaded raconteur of elite attitudes and habits, provides an informative perspective on the criteria for a poet's success, and on the consequences of success for memoria and renown. With Pliny I describe the motivations and assumptions underlying the production of literature – especially nugatory poetry – among his group of elite friends, relating these to similar aspects of literary culture in Martial.
for Lisann my best and most perfect joy Acknowledgments
It has been said, I'm unsure by whom, that gratitude expressed is in reality hope for more of the same. At the end of the dissertation process this statement is in many ways utterly false. And yet, it is also so very true. After five years in the Department of Classics at the University of Cincinnati, among many friends and colleagues, I have a very long list of people I could thank, and for a very long list of things. But in the interest of space, I shall be brief. To Harry Gotoff, who answered my early inquiries into the graduate program here with his usual good grace, who supported my early forays into Cicero, and who expected excellence – yet dealt patiently with my work nevertheless – thank you. To Holt Parker, who has influenced my approaches to ancient culture and literature, and who gave me a bottle of wine for limericks – proving once and for all the value of nugae – thank you. To Kathryn Gutzwiller and Ann Michelini, who supported and encouraged my development as a research student in uncountable ways, thank you. I also feel a great debt of gratitude to the Department and the trustees of the Semple fund for supporting my work in practical ways, to Jean Wellington, Mike Braunlin, and David Ball for making research in the Burnam Library such an enjoyable and low-frustration task, to the faculty as a group for working hard to create an atmosphere which balances the needs of creating high quality researchers and teachers with the needs of being human. Special thanks must go to John Wallrodt for years of technical advice.
If I were to begin to thank William Johnson for the many ways in which I have been privileged to have worked with him and become a friend I should not be able to stop easily. I must simply say a heartfelt, "Thank you".
There are of course, several people made conspicuous by their absence from this list, my parents Peter and Rosemary Anderson, my wife Lisann's parents Jack and Do Gurney, my suavissimi liberi Christopher and Megan, and many close friends both here and elsewhere. To all of these I am profoundly indebted.
Joy comes in many forms, and most of all in the faces of those you love and who love you. As for Lisann, my best and most perfect joy ... I hope to repay my deep, deep thanks to you over many lifetimes and in many places. 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
INTRODUCTION ...... 4
CHAPTER ONE: MEMORIA ...... 10
1.1 Memoria...... 12
1.2 Controlling Memoria...... 15 1.2.1 Cicero and Memoria: Construing the Past for the Future...... 16 1.2.2 Tacitus' Agricola: Remembering virtus ...... 24
1.3 Memoria Controlled ...... 31 1.3.1 Sanctions against Memory...... 32 1.3.2.1 Assumptions and Terminology ...... 35 1.3.2.2 Intent and Teleology...... 38 1.3.3 Sanctions and Memoria: the SCPP...... 41 1.3.4 Sanctions and Literature: Cremutius Cordus ...... 58
1.4 Remembering Rufus...... 61
CHAPTER TWO: TERMS OF PRAISE...... 73 2.1.1 Existimatio, Fama...... 74 2.1.2 Laus, nomen, honos ...... 79 2.1.3 Gloria...... 84
2.2 Gloria in Elite Society...... 90 2.2.1 Cicero: gloria and virtus ...... 91 2.2.4 Seneca: gloria and Philosophy...... 95 2.2.4 Gloria in Augustan Minor Poetry ...... 97 2.2.5 Tacitus' Dialogus: The Concerns of the Elite ...... 104
CHAPTER THREE: STATIUS ...... 109
3.1 Background...... 109 3.1.1 In the Poet's Image...... 118
3.2 The Poets ...... 121 3.2.1 Stella and the end (?) of poetry ...... 121 3.2.2 Laudatio Lucani: Silvae 2.7 ...... 127 3.2.2.1 Incongruity and Praise ...... 130 3.2.2.2 Praising Lucan...... 133 3.2.3 The Elder and the Younger Papinii ...... 136 3.2.3.1 Statius' Renown ...... 137
- 1 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
CHAPTER FOUR: MARTIAL...... 139
4.1 Background...... 139 4.1.1 Vital Statistics and Vital Speculations...... 140 4.1.2 Chronology of the Books ...... 146
4.2 A Poet's Renown ...... 148 4.2.1 Failure ...... 149 4.2.2 Being Successful ...... 155 4.2.3 Martial's success...... 159 4.2.3.1 Books 1-3 ...... 162 4.2.3.2 Books 4 – 9...... 163 4.2.3.3 Books 10 – 12...... 170 4.2.4 Readership and Success ...... 172
4.3 Conclusions: The Rewards of Success...... 180
CHAPTER FIVE: PLINY ...... 183
5.1 Background...... 184 5.1.1 Publication of letters...... 185 5.1.2 Studia ...... 186 5.1.2.1 Studium/Studia...... 187 5.1.2.2 Studia in Pliny ...... 189 5.1.2.3 Abstracting Studia ...... 195 5.1.2.4 The otium and negotium of studia ...... 199 5.1.3 Memoria and Motivations...... 203
5.2 Success in poetry...... 209 5.2.1 Praising Poets ...... 210 5.2.2 Praising Pliny ...... 212
5.3 Literary gloria in Pliny's Epistulae and the magnus vir...... 212 5.3.1 All for gloria, and gloria for all? ...... 213 5.3.2 Pliny's Literary Success and gloria ...... 221 5.3.3 Private lusus ...... 223 5.3.4 Ep. 9.25 and gloria ...... 225 5.3.4.1 Pliny's political gloria...... 227 5.3.4.2 Epistula 9.25...... 229
CONCLUSIONS...... 235
- 2 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
BIBLIOGRAPHY...... 248
Ancient Authors...... 248
Modern Scholarship and Commentaries on Ancient Authors...... 250
APPENDIX A: TERMS OF PRAISE ...... 263 A.1 Terms of Praise in Statius ...... 263 A.2 Terms of Praise in Martial ...... 269 A.3 Terms of Praise in Pliny ...... 280
INDEX OF PASSAGES DISCUSSED ...... 292
- 3 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
Introduction
"'If I should die,' I said to myself, 'I have left no immortal work behind me – nothing to make my friends proud of my memory – but I have loved the principle of beauty in all things, and if I had the time, I would have made myself remembered'" Keats to Fanny Brawne (1820)
John Keats, whether he knew it or not, was dying of consumption when he wrote this letter to his beloved Fanny Brawne in 1820. In certain respects, this famous quotation would not seem out of place in a letter written by a member of the Roman elite. Pliny, for example, laments the death of his young friend Julius Avitus who died at sea returning from his quaestorship (Pl. Ep. 5.21) on similar grounds. Quite apart from the loss to family and friends, and to the state, Pliny remarks on the ill-fortune of his untimely death for literature because Avitus did not have the opportunity to publish his writings; they died with him, leaving nothing for posterity to enjoy (quae nunc omnia cum ipso sine fructu posteritatis abierunt, 5.21.5). Keats' remarks we understand more easily, perhaps, as those of a mercurial, very young man facing a terrible death more or less alone. For Pliny's part, the feeling of loss for a talented young friend as full of potential as Avitus is understandable. But why did Pliny feel such a deep sadness because Avitus had not passed on his writings to posterity?
The drive to be esteemed in life and remembered after death was a sine qua non among the Roman elite of any period. Monuments and statues with tituli, inscriptions, funerary markers, funerary traditions that preserve the images and deeds of illustrious men (and women) – all signified to the community the prominence of an individual and the family. Excellence in public
- 4 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
life, particularly in military or political arenas, was the essential means through which individuals and their families achieved and maintained such social prominence. Within this general culture of commemoration, literature of certain genres (epic, tragedy, history, even lyric) became a fundamental tool in the preservation of the memoria of an elite individual – as subject
– and of his deeds (e.g. Fulvius Nobilior in Ennius Annales, and Caesar in Ovid's
Metamorphoses). Nugatory poetry (epigram and other forms of playful verse, i.e. vers de société1), as also other forms of verse, was used to commemorate elite Roman individuals as subjects; this seems true of Greek epigram also.2 For example, Cicero – perhaps tongue in cheek
– thanks Atticus in 1.16.15 for epigrammata about his consulship since no one else will write other poetry about him. And certain elegies of Tibullus and Propertius were composed with the commemoration of a particular elite individual in mind.
At the same time, however, there was a separate and distinct tradition of the poet commemorating his own success and renown as a poet. This tradition is the broader subject of my dissertation. In particular, I seek to examine how the interests and attitudes of the Roman elite toward memoria (i.e. commemoration) – discussed above briefly and at length in Chapters
One and Two – may have affected the tradition of the poet commemorating his own success as
1 A rather anachronistic term, yet ultimately descriptive of much Latin epigram; cf. The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Literary Terms (1990) where vers de société is defined as "the French term ('society verse') for a kind of light verse that deals with the frivolous concerns of the upper-class social life, usually in a harmlessly playful vein of satire and with technical elegance."
2 In the Imperial period examples of praise epigrams remain in, for example, Crinagoras (e.g. AP 16.40). K. Gutzwiller notes (pers.comm.) that the examples of the commemoration of elite individuals that may also be found in the new Posidippos text show this practice existed already in the Ptolemaic period.
- 5 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
poet. I chose to focus my investigation on the nugatory poetry of the Flavian period – when there seems to have been a strong revival of elite interest in composing literature – because of the richness of evidence. From this period we have texts of nugatory poetry (or in Pliny's case letters which reveal his attitudes towards his nugatory poetry) from three different authors: Statius,
Martial, and Pliny. Until the Flavian period, members of the Roman elite did not traditionally strive for commemoration as poets of light verse. These three authors offer the opportunity to observe whether two different types of elite poet (Martial as lower status elite and Pliny as higher status elite) employ significantly different terms to describe and commemorate their own success as poets. A fundamental premise of the dissertation is that an elite poet would exploit the tradition of the poet's own renown and success from within the specifically Roman elite culture of memoria.
In this dissertation, then, I situate and analyze expressions of renown in nugatory poetry of the Flavian period – Statius, Martial, and Pliny – both within the socio-cultural context of specifically Roman elite attitudes toward memoria (commemoration) and within the literary tradition of the poet's own success and renown. In particular, I assess the extent to which elite
Roman concern for commemoration, and the conditions on which it is predicated, affect literary expressions of the poet's own renown, especially post mortem. The dissertation falls into three parts: 1) an attempt to situate memoria (commemoration) in Roman elite culture and examine its significance, 2) a detailed survey of terms of renown commonly used by Statius, Martial, and
Pliny, with a special focus on gloria, and 3) the analysis of these poets' attitudes towards and
- 6 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
expressions of the success and renown of poets in general, and of themselves as poets in particular.
The analysis of the literary sources, however, requires specific socio-cultural grounding, as I have already indicated. And so, I begin in Chapter One "Memoria" with a series of illustrative examples in support of the base assertion that concern for memoria is symptomatic of
Roman elite culture. I suggest – through brief analyses of Cicero's post-consular and post reditum speeches, Tacitus' de vita Julii Agricolae, the so-called damnatio memoriae and the
Senatus Consultum de Pisone Patre, and finally two quasi-case studies on the importance of memoria for writers under the early empire – that the major motivation which seems to underpin this need to commemorate is the desire to ensure individual posterity and/or to assure a corporate family influence. These examples are chosen as representative of elite Roman thought about why and how one goes about controlling memoria, in what spheres the desire and methods for controlling memoria play out, and how great the significance of commemoration is for the elite individual and family.
In Chapter Two "Terms of Praise" I focus on those words used by poets in the Flavian period to describe their own excellence and success as poets. Five key terms dominate this discussion: fama, laus, nomen, honor(-os), and gloria. I attempt to provide a concise semantic description of these important terms and others, especially in relation to each other and their antonyms, as a necessary background for my analysis of the poetic texts in Chapters Three, Four, and Five. My immediate concern is to map out any conceptual boundaries for the application of
- 7 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
these terms in general. At the end of Chapter Two I focus on the term gloria, arguing for its importance as signifier of social and political standing for the elite individual. The word encapsulates the zero-sum competition that lies at the root of elite interaction in every period of
Roman history. In particular, I draw attention to the development of the term's application in the philosophical texts of Cicero and Seneca, and to the use of the term gloria in the light verse of the Augustan period, as it was applied by the poet to himself. In conclusion to this chapter, and as an introduction to the next three, I employ the first debate of the Dialogus de Oratoribus (that between Aper and Maternus) in order to situate the concerns of memoria, gloria, and renown as poets among the elite within the context of literary society of the Flavian period.
In Chapters Three (Statius), Four (Martial), and Five (Pliny) I undertake focused analysis of the expressions of and attitudes towards their own success and renown in the nugatory poets of the Flavian period. Statius, a professional poet, serves in many respects as a counter example to Martial and Pliny, most of all because Statius shows no interest in the Silvae as vehicles for his own memoria or renown. He looks instead, as we shall see, to his epic poetry in that regard.
In addition, I suggest that Statius' Silvae allow us a glimpse at three types of poets to be found in literary society of the Flavian period. I examine these singly from the perspective of renown: the elite dilettante (L. Arruntius Stella, St. Silv. 1.2), the "serious" elite poet (M. Annaeus Lucanus,
St. Silv. 2.7), and the professional poet (P. Papinius Statius the Elder – Statius' father, St. Silv.
5.3). Martial, the jaded raconteur of elite attitudes and habits, provides an informative perspective on the criteria for a poet's success, and on the consequences of success for memoria and renown. With Pliny, in his turn, I describe the motivations and assumptions underlying the
- 8 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
production of literature among his group of elite friends, relating these to similar aspects of literary culture in Martial especially. Of particular interest are the ideas of studia, otium, and negotium, and their interaction or juxtaposition in the elite culture Pliny describes. For Pliny the key motivation for the production of literature is the drive to be respected in life and remembered in death. This goal traditionally was realized through the public life of the magnus vir and its fruit, gloria, and not through the private life of the poet. Tibullus, Propertius, and Ovid, certainly, had all played with attaching gloria to their own success as poets; but as we shall see, in these examples gloria functions as a metaphor for success adopted most often from the military sphere, and used most often of the poet within a series of military images or in a clearly parodic manner. Pliny, however – who of all the poets examined in this dissertation has the strongest claim on gloria in the traditional sense – works towards a compromise position, and explicitly attempts to integrate his public (political) life as a magnus vir with his private (literary) life as a poet through gloria. I return in the Conclusions to Tacitus' Dialogus as an interpretative tool for the findings of the earlier chapters.
- 9 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
Chapter One: Memoria
The concern for proper, monumental, and enduring commemoration is symptomatic of Roman elite culture. The "epigraphic habit" has received considerable scholarly attention from this perspective,3 and monuments have always been central to the study of Roman culture. But commemoration as enacted through the elite pursuit of literary studies, particularly poetry, has been less adequately studied. In this project I undertake a detailed and targeted investigation of how elite interest in composing literature, especially poetry in the minor genres, and commemoration interlock. To pursue this question properly, however, the analysis of the literary sources requires specific socio-cultural grounding. And so I have chosen as the focus of the investigation elite culture under the early empire, and more precisely for the literary applications, the Flavian period. I begin in this chapter with a series of illustrative examples in support of the base assertion that concern for commemoration is symptomatic of Roman elite culture. In particular, I suggest that the major motivation that seems to underpin this need to commemorate is the desire to ensure individual posterity and to assure a corporate family influence.
In section 1.2 "Controlling Memoria", I suggest that a drive to control memoria arises from these basic anxieties, for in a society such as Rome in any period, it is not whether, but how one is remembered that counts. I expand on the observation concerning elite use of literature for commemoration in sections 1.2.1-2 using, as background, Cicero's consular and post reditum
3 See for example MacMullen (1982), Corbier (1987), Eck (1987); and, especially in regard to commemoration of the dead, Meyer (1990).
- 10 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
writings and, as foreground, Tacitus' Agricola – only two possible sources among a great many.
The choice of Tacitus in a study ultimately concerned with the Flavian period is obvious; no less so the choice of his Agricola for the study of commemoration. But Cicero’s writings, separated though they are in time and by social upheaval, provide an equally valuable perspective (since his anxiety over commemoration betrays its importance for elite society in general), as well as a specific point of reference from which we may track shifts or continuity in elite notions about commemoration. His value as a model to emulate or reject in the post-Augustan period cannot be overstated. But my focus on these particular works has other motivations as well. As groundwork for my study into how members of the elite commemorated themselves in their own literary works as writers and poets (and not simply as actors in the political arena), I deliberately emphasize how Cicero's consular and post reditum writings and Tacitus' Agricola represent a dynamic and ongoing attempt on the part of an individual to control memoria in the elite arena through literature. In section 1.3 "Controlled Memoria", I examine the so-called damnatio memoriae from this perspective of control (section 1.3.1), questioning in section 1.3.2 earlier assumptions about the purpose of these sanctions by re-evaluating the factual evidence. I apply this set of observations to the recently uncovered Senatus Consultum de Pisone Patre in section
1.3.3. I argue that the sanctions applied to Calpurnius Piso and his family were not intended to destroy or to eradicate memoria but to control how and for what the individual would be remembered in the public arena by diverting public attention from gloria to scelus. These sanctions against memory (i.e. both the damnatio memoriae in general and the specific example of the SCPP) are inarguably an attack on the commemoration of elite individuals and will serve as another specific and socio-historically grounded example of the culture of commemoration.
- 11 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
Section 1.3.4, an assessment of the significance of sanctions against memoria for composers of literature (in the broadest sense) and literary achievement, discusses the prosecution of the historian Cremutius Cordus. In the concluding remarks to this initial chapter, section 1.4
“Remembering Rufus”, I discuss how the drive to control memoria manifests itself also in the strategy Pliny adopts to portray and commemorate his intimate L. Verginius Rufus, and finally in the strategy which Verginius adopts to commemorate himself in a poem, his self-epitaph.
These few examples are chosen as representative of elite Roman thought about why and how one goes about controlling memoria, in what spheres the desire and methods for doing this play out, and how great the significance of commemoration is for the elite individual and family.
To explain with a metaphor: in this chapter I am tracking specific ripples (the topics and related issues of these investigations) on a much larger pond (elite culture and literature in general) in order to try to understand the importance of water (memoria) for the pond. It is inevitable that some ripples intersect at certain points, and others at other points; but I am more concerned to track the paths of ripples singularly, not their confluences. First, however, I need to describe in general terms the nature of that water.
1.1 Memoria
Memoria has a fairly precise set of core meanings:4 1) the physical seat of remembering; the remembering of a past event, a dead person, etc. (a subjective use); 2) an objective meaning
4 Following in less detail the basic plan of O. Prinz's TLL article (8.665-680). It is clear that the boundaries of these "core meanings" are extremely fluid. Fortunately I am not so much concerned with
- 12 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
very close, and often linked expressly, to oral-historical tradition; 3) and a metonymic roughly equivalent to spatium temporis or even aetas. The subjective "remembering" (1) and the objective "memoria=tradition" (2) are of most interest here for the notion that a place in this tradition may be created, or secured, for an individual. Ideally, memoria becomes an immortal existence for a dead person in the active recollection of his descendants (posteri) and of the wider public (posteritas); the public existence in reality depends either on an active public remembering by those with an interest in perpetuating the memoria of the person (e.g. in the pompa funebris, or the laudatio, or some other kind of public act) or on symbols which prompt memoria in those without such a stake (e.g. buildings, monuments, historical writing).5 On the individual level, memoria often seems to be construed as a sort of living remembrance of a person, closely associated with nomen, gloria, and especially posteritas.6 It has a social significance for the individual (and for his family) after death. For this reason we read that the memoria of a person can be mistreated publicly,7 or that care was taken by the family or
the precise limits and range of these meanings as with their significance in connection with controlling memory through literature, and the viability of memoria as a commodity to be controlled in public life.
5 For a discussion of the implications of private vs. public memoria for Geschichtsschreibung see Timpe (1996) 277-299, esp. 285-287. Timpe rightly distinguishes publica memoria from privata as a collective remembrance of virtus and res gestae.
6 Cf. Cic. Inv. 2.4 nomine et memoria digni sunt scriptores; CIL IX 5439 honorem statuae in patris sui nominis memoriamque transmisit; Liv. 28.43.5 in memoriam ac posteritatem. Many more examples may be found in the TLL 8.671-673, 676-679.
7 Tac. Ann. 6.2 atroces sententiae dicebantur, in effigies quoque memoriam eius [sc. Livia]; cf. SCPP 68- 70 numen quoq(ue) divi Aug(usti) violatum esse ab eo arbitrari senatum omni honore, qui aut memoriae eius aut imaginibus, quae antequam in deorum numerum referre{n}tur, ei r[. . . .]tae erant, habeba{n}tur, detracto.
- 13 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
concerned party for a person's memoria.8 This fascinating pseudo-existence for the individual through memoria is the ideological basis for sanctions against memory, “memoria damnata”.9
Posteritas in this context fits tightly within the same semantic frame as memoria: one exists in the minds of posteritas through memoria.10
From this perspective, the potential of memoria as the source of ‘immortality’ for individuals is plain to see. There are numerous passages in all periods in which memoria is sempiterna, immortalis, and the like; e.g. Immortalis humanorum operum custos memoria, qua magnis viris vita perpetua est (Sen. Suas. 6.5).11 Remembrance is not necessarily passive; if we consider the importance of the maiores and the mos maiorum for Roman elite culture, such a remembrance can be productive, too, brought forward as a model to imitate or avoid: Testantur et mortuos nostros imperatores, quorum vivit immortalis memoria et gloria, Scipiones, Brutos,
Horatios, Cassios, Metellos, et hunc praesentem Cn. Pompeium, ... (Cic. Balb. 40.1-3). In this way an outstanding individual may become part of cultural memory (the mos maiorum), influencing current debates in speeches or adduced for effect in literary works as an exemplum, beyond simply becoming part of the historical record. Given the prevailing ethos of the elite,
8 Cf. Cic. Red. Sen. 15; Tac. Ann. 4.38 Tiberius addressing the Senate; cf. below on Nicomachus Flavianus.
9 See below section 1.3.3 on the SCPP, and n. 62.
10 In the following pages, posteritas is understood as roughly equivalent to memoria in that it represents the vehicle in which memoria resides, i.e. future peoples. Likewise posteri, except that here the 'future peoples' are specifically descendants.
11 See TLL 8.672.1-40 for examples.
- 14 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
whose record and authority such exempla perpetuated both within the group and in society at large, it was the actions in war or politics which dominated, and it should come as no surprise that memoria is very often linked with res gestae.12 Such models were perpetuated through litterae. Thus litterae become an important witness – and battleground – for the elite’s effort to negotiate the promotion and control of not only certain models of behavior but also the memoria of particular individuals. That memoria also signifies an oral or written tradition of recorded events and people is surely proof enough of the organic connection of these two concepts, memoria and litterae. So Livy: litterae ..., una custodia fidelis memoriae rerum gestarum (6.1.2).
Still, Livy's assertion (one hardly unique, see Sen. Suas. 6.5 above) needs to be tempered somewhat by the observation that while literature, especially "historical" writing, functions as a safe-keeper of memoria (custodia fidelis memoriae), memoria is effected by a great deal more, including oral tradition and material culture. Non solum memoriae testimonio, sed etiam annalium, said Cicero (Cic. prov. 21).13
1.2 Controlling Memoria
It was never enough simply to be remembered. It was important to be remembered well for one's achievements and contribution to the res publica, to be esteemed even in death. And so, it was necessary to control memory by emphasizing precisely those elements of an individual's life that would be recognized as worthy of aestimatio. The family in particular had a great stake
12 See TLL 8.676.72-677.5.
13 Cf. Cic. Leg. 1.1.1-2.
- 15 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
in how an ancestor was remembered, for their collective tradition played a fundamental role in the family's survival and influence. The larger context of the funeral was the occasion for remembrances of precisely this sort, in both the pompa funebris and the laudatio. Here the family celebrated and publicized their history and influence.14 Before turning to Tacitus'
Agricola for an example of the family's attempt to control the memoria of a deceased member, let us turn first to Cicero. It would be extremely misleading to assert that Cicero's concern for memoria did not include some thought for his family.15 But I concentrate here on the individual's attempt to manipulate the public (and his peers) in order to construe for himself a lasting and, equally important, positive memoria.
1.2.1 Cicero and Memoria: Construing the Past for the Future
In the famous letter to L. Lucceius on how to write history (Fam. 5.12), Cicero complains about the falsification and exaggeration of family records (specifically laudationes) and monuments;16 and yet at the same time he encourages Lucceius to exaggerate and stretch the
14 For fuller recent treatments of the socio-political impact of the pompa funebris see Bodel (1999b), Flower (1996), Wesch-Klein (1993); see also the discussion of the sanctions against Piso Pater below.
15 The prominence of his brother Quintus in the post reditum speeches immediately belies this, for example. For Cicero's concern for posterity, and its importance for descendants, cf. De Off. 2.44-45.
16 Cf. Cic. Brut. 61-2, for which see n. 18. Later, in the De Legibus, Cicero remarks in a similar context that while inaccuracy is generally to be avoided, poetry treats of events differently, even to the point of elaborating fables, because "the object of the historian is truth in all its relations, that of the poet amusement": [Qvintvs] Intellego te, frater, alias in historia leges obseruandas putare, alias in poemate. [Marcvs] Quippe cum in illa ad ueritatem, Quinte,
- 16 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
truth.17 The reasons for the alteration of family records, of course, are plain to see: a desire to
'improve' the memoria of the deceased, and thus augment the influence of his family.18 Cicero’s writings, separated though they are in time from the Flavian period, provide a valuable background perspective on elite concern for commemoration. For this section of the dissertation,
Cicero will be representative of earlier traditions of thinking about memoria inherited by early
Imperial writers. As already noted, Cicero's example serves to emphasize the elite individual's response to the need to control his own memoria.
After his consulship down to the time of his return in 57 BC (and indeed thereafter – the letter to Lucceius discussed above is dated to 55 BC) Cicero weaves through many of his writings a thread of self-justification for his actions before exile as an attempt to interpret favorably the political and personal disaster of his exile.19 I shall suggest below that this "version" represents not only Cicero's attempt to salvage his reputation and influence while alive, but also to control his memoria for posterity, to direct – through literature – how he is remembered. Cicero faced
17 Cic. Fam. 5.12.3 Itaque te plane etiam atque etiam rogo, ut et ornes ea vehementius etiam, quam fortasse sentis, et in eo leges historiae negligas gratiamque illam, de qua suavissime quodam in prooemio scripsisti, a qua te flecti non magis potuisse demonstras quam Herculem Xenophontium illum a Voluptate, eam, si me tibi vehementius commendabit, ne aspernere amorique nostro plusculum etiam, quam concedet veritas, largiare.
18 Cic. Brut. 61-2 et hercules eae quidem exstant: ipsae enim familiae sua quasi ornamenta ac monumenta servabant et ad usum, si quis eiusdem generis occidisset, et ad memoriam laudum domesticarum et ad illustrandam nobilitatem suam. quamquam his laudationibus historia rerum nostrarum est facta mendosior. multa enim scripta sunt in eis quae facta non sunt: falsi triumphi, plures consulatus, genera etiam falsa et ad plebem transitiones, cum homines humiliores in alienum eiusdem nominis infunderentur genus.
19 The fundamental work is now Nicholson (1992).
- 17 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
serious challenges in restoring his previous prominence after his return from exile, even in maintaining political viability at the onset of the triumviral period, challenges which he never properly overcame. There is a visible attempt to place the best possible light on earlier decisions and alliances – in particular on the events of his consulship – and hyperbolic (perhaps even mendacious) explanations for his departure after Clodius' attacks. In fact, the sheer volume of writing devoted solely to this expediency which has been lost (details below), tallied with the constant references in surviving post-consular speeches, is a testament not simply to Cicero's obsession with his reputation but also to the importance of memoria (and posteritas) in political life at Rome.20 It is certainly not the case that memoria was the single motivation for these self- justificatory statements; but memoria would become the means by which Cicero could preserve his dignitas, honor, auctoritas for posterity.
Cicero began the drive to secure his version of events with a collection of his consular
21 speeches, which were compiled as such by at least June 60 BC. He clearly states his purpose in doing so through comparison of his motivation with that of Demosthenes in publishing the
Phillipics, ut semnovterov" ti" et politikwvtero" videretur (Cic. Att. 2.1.3). The consulship, especially the defeat of Catilina and the political fall-out from his execution, become the focus of
20 See Cic. Fam. 5.12.1 neque solum commemoratio posteritatis ac spes quaedam immortalitatis rapit sed etiam illa cupiditas ut vel auctoritate testimoni tui vel indicio benevolentiae vel suavitate ingeni vivi perfruamur. Cicero's obsession was not out-of-keeping with others of his class and rank (see Sullivan [1941] and Allen [1954]). As far as writings are concerned, we know of two poems in six books, a commentarius in Greek by Cicero (and perhaps also a Latin version), a monograph by Atticus, and a speech before the senate.
21 Cf. Cic. Att. 2.1.3 for the list of speeches.
- 18 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
what seems a frenzy of writing and revision through the late 60s and 50s BC. In 61 BC Cicero
22 reports to Atticus that Archias, who appears to have begun a poem in 62 BC, has at least not
23 continued to write, and that Thyillus will not. The year 61 BC also saw the publication of de consulatu suo,24 a speech given by Cicero in senatu as a response to Pompey's public snubs and
Crassus' praise.25 A commentarius26 in Greek seems to have circulated widely in the east after 60
27 BC, and may even have been as well regarded by others as by the author, Cicero, himself. In any event he also considered a Latin translation.28 Atticus, too, wrote a prose account in Greek of his friend's consulship.29 Cicero still desired a poetic instantiation of his glory, and had set to
22 Cic. Arch. 28 Nam quas res nos in consulatu nostro vobiscum simul pro salute huius
23 Cic. Att. 1.16.15 Epigrammatis tuis, quae in Amaltheo posuisti, contenti erimus, praesertim cum et Thyillus nos reliquerit et Archias nihil de me scripserit. In light of Arch. 28 (see note above), I wonder if the poem was ever actually begun.
24 See Crawford (1984) 102-4. She postulates a fairly certain publication ("on the whole it seems likely that the oration was published", [1992] 104) based in part on Cic. Or. 210 Adhibenda est igitur numerosa oratio, si aut laudandum est aliquid orantius, ut nos in accusationis secundo de Siciliae laude diximus ut in senatu de consulato meo, aut exponenda narratio, quae plus dignitatis desiderat quam doloris, ut in quarto accusationis de Hennensi Cerere, de Segestana Diana, de Syracusarum situ diximus.
25 See Cic. Att. 1.14.
26 Commentarius can be used of almost any set of notes or writing (see OLD s.v. and TLL), including notes for a speech (cf. Quint. Inst. 3.8.67), but it is better understood here as in Cic. Brut. 262.1-3 (where the distinction between the two types is clearly made): Tum Brutus: orationes quidem eius mihi vehementer probantur. compluris autem legi; atque etiam commentarios quosdam scripsit rerum suarum.
27 As well as a copy to Atticus (which Cicero invited him to make widely available to Greek readers: tu, si tibi placuerit liber, curabis ut et Athenis sit et in ceteris oppidis Graeciae [Cic. Att. 2.1.2]), one had already been given to Posidonius (Cic. Att. 2.1.1) from whom its circulation appears to have increased among Greek readers. This commentarius was a major source for Plutarch.
28 Cic. Att. 1.19.10 Latinum si perfecero, ad te mittam.
29 Cic. Att. 2.1.1.
- 19 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
30 work on it at least as early as March 60 BC, probably finishing it by the end of the year. This poem was never well received, perhaps because it was too baroque;31 Cicero was forced to
32 33 defend it several times. De temporibus meis, finished at least in draft between 56 BC and the
34 end of 54 BC (i.e. after his return), fared somewhat better, even in the hands of Caesar in
Britain.35 Cicero may have harbored doubts about its reception, but his anxiety in this regard may actually have been more to do with subject matter than style.36 Again, after his return from exile further attempts were made to have a prose version of his consulship produced by another. Much attention has focused on Cicero's request of Lucceius to write on his consular successes (Cic.
37 Fam. 5.12) in 55 BC, and rightly so, although Cicero's motivations for writing to L. Lucceius are complicated. Certainly, the letter goes beyond a simple request to write a favorable history of
30 Ewbanks (1933) 11, taking Cic. Att. 1.19 and 2.3 in conjunction.
31 Ps.Sall. In Cic. 2.3 describes Cicero admitted to the council of the gods (Cicero se dicit in concilio deorum immortalium fuissse, inde missum huic urbi civibusque custodem. cf. 4.7); cf. Q fr. 9.4 and 11.1, Juv. 10.122. Many point to the Bobbio scholiast (165 Stangl) for the ultimate judgment: "de consulatu suo scripsit poetico metro, quae mihi videntur opera minus digna talis viri nomine".
32 Cf. Cic. In Pis. 29.72 ff, Phil. 2.8.20, De Off. 1.22.77.
33 Not extant. Perhaps written in hexameters in three books describng the events of his consulship; cf. Cic. Fam. 1.19.23.
34 Cic. Fam. 1.9.23, to Lentulus 54. Lentulus left for Cilicia in 56. Quintus Cicero saw it apparently in 55 (cf. Cic. Q fr. 2.7.1). Cicero was still tinkering in autumn 54, cf. also Cic. Q fr. 3.1.11, Att. 4.8a.3.
35 See Cic. Q fr. 2.15.5.
36 Cic. Q fr. 2.15.5 Sed heus tu! celari videor a te. Quomodonam, mi frater, de nostris versibus Caesar? Nam primum librum slegisse scripsit ad me ante et prima sic ut neget se ne Graeca quidem meliora legisse; reliqua ad quendam locum rJaqumovtera; hoc enim utitur verbo. Dic mihi verum, num aut res eum aut carakth;r non delectat? Nihil est quod vereare; ego enim ne pilo quidem minus me amabo. Hac de re filalhqw'" et, ut tu soles scribere, fraterne.
37 Cf. also Cic. Att. 4.6.3, 4.9.2, 4.11.2.
- 20 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
Cicero's consulship, and borders on literary polemic for one style of historical writing. It seems fairly clear, in any case, that besides the immediate benefit for his reputation at that time (the more dominant concern in the letter),38 Cicero also had his eye on the preservation of his deeds for posterity.39 And of course, Cicero wished Lucceius to write a slightly more gripping account than he might have otherwise, given his stylistic affinities.40 Lucceius never met Cicero's request.
That Cicero used self-justification as a therapy for his damaged reputation has been the subject of close study.41 But in the speeches post reditum ad Quirites and in Senatu, and in the
De domo sua, Cicero is concerned not only with the current state of his reputation but also his reputation after death. While it would be inappropriate to maintain that renown after death is
38 Cic. Fam. 5.12.1 [rapit] illa cupiditas ut vel auctoritate testimoni tui vel indicio benevolentiae vel suavitate ingeni vivi perfruamur. Cf. also 5.12.7 Atque hoc praestantius mihi fuerit et ad laetitiam animi et ad memoriae dignitatem si in tua scripta pervenero quam si in ceterorum ..; and esp. 5.12.9 illa nos cupiditas incendit de qua initio scripsi, festinationis, quod alacres animo sumus ut et ceteri viventibus nobis ex libris tuis nos cognoscant et nosmet ipsi vivi gloriola nostra perfruamur.
39 Cic. Fam. 5.12.1 neque enim me solum commemoratio posteritatis ac spes quaedam immortalitatis rapit...; 5.12.6 neque autem ego sum ita demens ut me sempiternae gloriae per eum commendari velim qui non ipse quoque in me commendando propriam ingeni gloriam consequatur.
40 Cic. Fam. 5.12.3 itaque te plane etiam atque etiam rogo ut et ornes ea vehementius etiam quam fortasse sentis et in eo leges historiae neglegas gratiamque illam de qua suavissime quodam in prohoemio scripsisti, a qua te flecti non magis potuisse demonstras quam Herculem Xenophontium illum a Voluptate, eam, si me tibi vehementius commendabit, ne aspernere amorique nostro plusculum etiam quam concedet veritas largiare.
41 Nicholson (1992) 23 "But the speeches are not devoid of serious political purposes. The exigence behind them is deeper that the simple polite acknowledgment of favors and statements of appreciation. Were this all that mattered, Cicero could simply have thanked his friends privately—which he did, both in person and in letters. But he also felt compelled to make a formal, public statement of thanksgiving incorporating important political aims. The underlying motive behind the two orations PR is Cicero's need to redeem his reputation after the disgrace of exile, to restore his dignitas and to reassert his former auctoritas as a leading consular statesman."
- 21 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
Cicero's primary concern in these speeches, nevertheless, the notions of memoria and posteritas do play an important role, especially – significant to my mind – in the speech to the senate.42 In contrast to a general recognition of the enduring nature of his recollection of the people's kindnesses in the speech ad Quirites,43 Cicero seems at pains in the speech before the Senate to link his memoria first with that of the Senate in general, and second with that of the consul
Lentulus specifically. The first words of the speech (Si, patres conscripti, pro vestris immortalibus in me fratremque meum liberosque nostros meritis parum vobis cumulate gratias egero, quaeso obtestorque ne meae naturae potius quam magnitudini vestrorum beneficiorum id tribuendum putetis, Cic. Red.Sen. 1) evoke future memory, in a general sense perhaps, through immortalis; the hyperbaton certainly draws attention to immortalitas, and likewise to Cicero, his brother, and his children. At 3, a transition from the expressions of gratia with which the speech begins to a recognition of the senate's constant support during his exile, Cicero far more explicitly links his memoria with that of the senate as a whole. Here Cicero claims to have achieved immortalitas through the undying memoria of the senate's beneficia toward him:
Itaque, patres conscripti, quod ne optandum quidem est homini, immortalitatem quandam per vos esse adepti videmur. Quod enim tempus erit umquam cum vestrorum in nos beneficiorum memoria ac fama moriatur? (Cic. Red.Sen. 3). At 27 Cicero goes even further, claiming that the
42 Mack (1937) pointed out long ago the different emphases in the speeches cum senatu and ad Quirites. In general see Mack (1937) 3-17; for "die Reden nach der Rückkehr" see 18-48. But Mack did not comment on the fact that Cicero's emphasis on memoria is far more clearly focused in the speech in Senatu than it is in that ad Quirites.
43 Cic. Red.Pop. 24 Quapropter memoriam vestri benefici colam benivolentia sempiterna,
- 22 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
memory of the day of his recall will be eternal (ad sempiterni memoriam temporis), preserving the victory his restoration represents.44 Cicero links his memoria to the consul of that year also.
In 8 P. Lentulus, a primary force behind Cicero's recall, is named parens ac deus nostrae vitae fortunae memoriae nominis (Cic. Red.Sen. 8), an appellation repeated nearly verbatim in the speech ad Quirites.45 The phrase is marvelously pregnant, and seems otherwise unparalleled.
Following 4-7, which equate Cicero's safety with that of the res publica,46 Cicero may even be attempting a play on the title parens patriae, a title he himself received in 63.47 The genitives underscore the significance of Lentulus' actions: Cicero is 'reborn' into the life of good fortune
(vitae fortunae) and is restored to prominence (memoriae nominis). Cicero is at pains to control the memory of events in ways that reflect positively his policies and actions. Memoria, the recollection of these res gestae, is something that can be championed in the public arena.
44 Cf. Cic. Red.Sen. 27 denique illo die, quem P. Lentulus mihi fratrique meo liberisque nostris natalem constituit, non modo ad nostram verum etiam ad sempiterni memoriam temporis, quo die nos comitiis centuriatis, quae maxime maiores comitia iusta dici haberique voluerunt, arcessivit in patriam, ut eaedem centuriae quae me consulem fecerant consulatum meum comprobarent–eo die quis civis fuit qui fas esse putaret, quacumque aut aetate aut valetudine esset, non se de salute mea sententiam ferre?
45 Cic. Red.Pop. 11 P. Lentulus consul, parens, deus, salus nostrae vitae, fortunae, memoriae, nominis.
46 Cf. esp. Cic. Red.Sen. 4 Nam consules modesti legumque metuentes impediebantur lege, non ea quae de me, sed ea quae de ipsis lata erat, quam meus inimicus promulgavit ut, si revixissent ii qui haec paene delerunt, tum ego redirem; quo facto utrumque confessus est, et se illorum vitam desiderare, et magno in periculo rem publicam futuram si, cum hostes atque interfectores rei publicae revixissent, ego non revertissem. Idemque illo ipso tamen anno, cum ego cessissem, princeps autem civitatis non legum praesidio sed parietum vitam suam tueretur, res publica sine consulibus esset, neque solum parentibus perpetuis verum etiam tutoribus annuis esset orbata, sententias dicere prohiberemini, caput meae proscriptionis recitaretur, numquam dubitastis meam salutem cum communi salute coniungere.
47 See TLL 10.360.17ff for variations on parens patriae.
- 23 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
1.2.2 Tacitus' Agricola: Remembering virtus
For the culture of commemoration in the Imperial period and the attempt by a family to control a deceased member's memoria Tacitus' Agricola holds the position of prominence.
Indeed, the championing of memoria and res gestae is exclusively and explicitly undertaken in
Tacitus' De Vita Iulii Agricolae from the first words:
Clarorum virorum facta moresque posteris tradere, antiquitus usitatum, ne nostris quidem temporibus quamquam incuriosa suorum aetas omisit, quotiens magna aliqua ac nobilis virtus vicit ac supergressa est vitium parvis magnisque civitatibus commune, ignorantiam recti et invidiam. sed apud priores ut agere digna memoratu pronum magisque in aperto erat, ita celeberrimus quisque ingenio ad prodendam virtutis memoriam sine gratia aut ambitione bonae tantum conscientiae pretio ducebatur. ac plerique suam ipsi vitam narrare fiduciam potius morum quam adrogantiam arbitrati sunt, nec id Rutilio et Scauro citra fidem aut obtrectationi fuit: adeo virtutes isdem temporibus optime aestimantur, quibus facillime gignuntur. at nunc narraturo mihi vitam defuncti hominis venia opus fuit, quam non petissem incusaturus: tam saeva et infesta virtutibus tempora. (Tac. Agr. 1)
The observation that Tacitus deliberately echoes the opening of Cato's Origines dates back at least to Wijkström.48 Ogilvie is likely correct to suggest that this nod to Cato's Origines seems to
48 Wijkström (1937) 159-168. Ogilvie (1967) 126 ad loc. "Similarly the introduction of the Dialogus recalls the introduction of Plato's Symposium, and Annals 1.1,1 'urbem Romam a principio reges habuere' is modelled on the opening of Sallust's Catiline (6,1). The first words of the Germania (G. omnis...) may be compared with Caesar, B.G. 1.1,1 Gallia omnis and stamp the work as a piece of ethnographical writing. This conceit ... makes it certain that Tacitus is recalling Cato directly and not second hand through Cicero..."
- 24 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
be an acknowledgment of "his [Tacitus'] agreement with Cato's belief that success in life is to be won by personal achievement (virtus) rather than by circumstances, birth or position".49 But it seems equally important to recognize the common effort to commemorate the individuals as contributors to the prominence of the Roman state (through their virtutes and res gestae). The whole of the Agricola seems focused on the person of Agricola and the specifically individual virtutes which lie behind his res gestae; Cato, while he may have deliberately avoided attaching names to events in his historical writings,50 was ready enough to point out his own contribution to the state, and (although the contexts are lost) apparently condones the praise of glorious men in other social contexts such as the convivium.51
There is much less doubt as to the genre of the Agricola than perhaps there once was: it is a biography.52 Ogilvie cogently argued that the elements of the Agricola which had led earlier
49 Ogilvie (1967) 126. Cf. Nep. Cato 3.3. Horsfall (1989) 56-7 raises some possible motivations for not naming individuals.
50 For the background and arguments see Astin (1978) 211-239, esp. 231-6.
51 For his own contribution, note for example that Cato seems not have have shied away from including at least two of his own speeches in the Origines: the Rhodian speech in Book 5 and that against Galba in Book 7. See Astin (1978), esp. 234; Cf. Cic. Rep. 2.2. Astin goes on to assert that the aim of self-display will not answer all of our questions regarding the form or method of the Origines (234). For Cato's apparent approval of the praise of men at convivia, Cf. HRR 12, fr. 118 (=Cic. Tusc. 4.2.3): Gravissimus auctor in originibus dixit Cato, morem apud maiores hunc epularum fuisse, ut deinceps qui accubarent canerent ad tibiam clarorum virorum laudes atque virtutes.
52 For a clear discussion of scholarship on this question to 1966 see Ogilvie (1967) 11-20. The question has now moved more or less from strict definitions of genre (but not entirely; cf. Petersmann [1991] [= ANRW II.33.3 1785-1806], and the perceptive summary of Ogilvie [1991] [= ANRW II.33.3 1714-1740] 1715-16) towards the issue of purpose.
- 25 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
scholars to argue against considering it biography are in fact secondary to its form.53 The lessons and motivations behind the Agricola suggest its function. Ogilvie writes, "...it is difficult to escape the feeling that there is an ulterior purpose or occasion behind its publication."54 I am ready to admit a multiplicity of purposes for this interesting work.55 But one of them is clearly the preservation of Agricola's deeds (narrare vitam, Tac. Agr. 1.4) in a version complimentary to the dead man (Hic interim liber honori Agricolae soceri mei destinatus, professione pietatis aut laudatus erit aut excusatus, Tac. Agr. 3.3), that is, the desire to control public memoria about
Agricola – or more precisely how and for what he would be remembered.
That commemoration is the function of the Agricola and the purpose to which it was aimed is explicitly stated in the final section of the work. This elegant passage56 seems to encapsulate an aristocratic view of renown after death. The importance of the passage to what follows merits a full citation:
Si quis piorum manibus locus, si, ut sapientibus placet, non cum corpore extinguuntur magnae animae, placide quiescas, nosque domum tuam ab infirmo desiderio et muliebris lamentis ad contemplationem virtutm tuarum voces, quas neque lugeri neque plangi fas est. [2] admiratione te potius et immortalibus laudibus et, si natura suppeditet, similitudine colamus: is verus honos, ea coniuctissimi cuiusque pietas. [3] id filiae
53 Ogilvie (1967) 19.
54 Ogilvie (1991 = ANRW II 33.3.1714-1740) 1716.
55 For summaries of recent approaches, see Ogilvie (1991 = ANRW II 33.3.1714-1740); Turner (1997).
56 For the lyrical qualities of this final section, see Austin (1939) 116-117.
- 26 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
quoque uxorique praeceperim, sic patris, sic mariti memoriam venerari, ut omnia facta dictaque eius secum revolvant, formamque ac figuram animi magis quam corporis complectantur, non quia intercedendum putem imaginibus quae marmorae aut aere finguntur, sed, ut vultus hominum, ita simulacra vultus imbecilla ac mortalia sunt, forma mentis aeterna, quam tenere et exprimere non per alienam materiam et artem, sed tuis ipse moribus possis. [4] quidquid ex Agricola amavimus, quidquid mirati sumus, manet mansurumque est in animis hominum in aeternitate temporum, fama rerum; nam multos veterum velut inglorios et ignobilis oblivio obruit: Agricola posteritati narratus et traditus superstes erit. (Tac. Agr. 46)
A second person address in which Agricola calls his domus57 away from grief to the consideration of his virtutes brings to mind the importance for the aristocrat of family traditions of excellence (witnessed in the pompa funebris, laudatio, and imagines for example) and the emulation of ancestral greats,58 as well as exempla virtutum in general.59 The phrase admiratione
57 Tac. Agr. 46.1 nosque domum tuam ab infirmo desiderio et muliebris lamentis ad contemplationem virtutum tuarum voces, quas neque lugeri neque plangi fas est. et has been inserted by some editors between nosque and domum tuam (since Tacitus was not strictly part of Agricola's domus). –que et, although Ogilvie cites Agr. 18.5.4, seems a more common combination in sequences of three or more in the Agricola at least (cf. Agr. 5.3.1, 17.3.3, 33.1.2, 41.2.3). And, Ogilvie points out, Tacitus seems to be speaking for the domus in 45 (Ogilvie [1967] 312 ad loc.).
58 See Flower (1996) passim. The tradition was brilliantly manipulated by Cicero against Clodia (Cic. Cael. 33-34).
59 Cf. Val. Max. 8.14.praef., and esp. Val. Max. 8.15.praef. Candidis autem animis uoluptatem praebuerint in conspicuo posita quae cuique magnifica merito contigerint, quia aeque praemiorum uirtutis atque operum contemplatio iucunda est, ipsa natura nobis alacritatem sumministrante, cum honorem industrie appeti et exsolui grate uidemus.
- 27 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
... similtudine colamus60 has important resonances with the language of amicitia (and memoria) as well as well-worn associations with ancestor emulation;61 the familial concern for emulation is reinforced in the text by is verus honos ... pietas, which recalls the final words of the proem hic interim liber honori Agricolae soceri mei destinatus, professione pietatis aut laudatus erit aut excusatus (Tac. Agr. 3). Familial concerns are also apparent in Tacitus' exhortation to Agricola's widow and daughter, his own wife, to worship Agricola's memory (memoriam venerari, Tac.
Agr. 46.3).62 Thus the family is placed in prominent position in the final sections of the Agricola, just as they are in other contexts central to the preservation of individual's memoria (the laudatio and pompa funebris).
60 Tac. Agr. 46.2 admiratione te potius et laudibus et, si natura suppeditet, similtudine colamus: is verus honos, ea coniunctissimi cuiusque pietas. The correction similtudine colamus from the MS reading militum decoramus is well argued by Ogilvie (1967) 314 ad loc.
61 amicitia and memoria cf. Cic. Red.Pop. 27 memoriam vestri benefici colam benevolentia sempiterna; de Fin. 2.102.1 (in a similar context) quaero autem quid sit, quod, cum dissolutione, id est morte, sensus omnis extinguatur, et cum reliqui nihil sit omnino, quod pertineat ad nos, tam accurate tamque diligenter caveat et sanciat ut Amynomachus et Timocrates, heredes sui, de Hermarchi sententia dent quod satis sit ad diem agendum natalem suum quotannis mense Gamelione itemque omnibus mensibus vicesimo die lunae dent ad eorum epulas, qui una secum philosophati sint, ut et sui et Metrodori memoria colatur; cf. also Suet. Nero 57.2.3.
62 Apparently a new coinage; see TLL 8.678.70 and 58-70 for similar later usages. For statements in kind cf. Sen. ad Marc. 1.3ff (Marcia's service to the memory of Cremutius Cordus). Two exempla are produced by Seneca, Livia and Octavia. Livia is the model of proper grief, who seeks to maintain the memory of Drusus (Non desiit denique Drusi sui celebrare nomen, ubique illum sibi privatim publiceque repraesentare, libentissime de illo loqui, de illo audire: cum memoria illius vixit; quam nemo potest retinere et frequentare, qui illam tristem sibi reddidit. Sen. Ad Marc. 3.2). The opposite reaction is presented in 2.4 where Octavia's inordinate grief acts against the symbols of memory: as well as refusing to have an imago of Marcellus, or hear him spoken of, Octavia also ignored Marcellus' honors in poetry (Tenebris et solitudini familiarissima, ne ad fratrem quidem respiciens, carmina celebrandae Marcelli memoriae composita aliosque studiorum honores reiecit et aures suas adversus omne solacium clusit, Sen. ad Marc. 2.4). For similar thoughts see Sen. Ad Polyb. 18.7-8.
- 28 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
In the proem, after its assessment of monographs on individuals during earlier periods,
Tacitus remarks on the perils of biographical writing under Domitian. One of the motivations ascribed by Tacitus to the destruction of books and monuments, the destruction of the vox populi
Romani,63 has great significance for our understanding of sanctions against memory (discussed in more detail in Section Two). The vox populi Romani may have been destroyed, but (as Tacitus remarks at the end of Agr. 2) memoria was not: memoriam quoque ipsam cum voce perdidissemus, si tam in nostra potestate esset oblivisci quam tacere (Tac. Agr. 2.3).64 In
63 Tac. Agr. 2.1-2 Legimus, cum Aruleno Rustico Paetus Thraesa, Herrenio Senecioni Priscus Helvidius laudati essent, capitale fuisse, neque in ipsos modo auctores, sed in libros quoque eorum saevitum, delegato triumviris ministerio ut monumenta clarissimorum ingeniorum in comitio ac foro urerentur. Scilicet illo igne vocem populi Romani et libertatem senatus et conscientiam generis humani absoleri arbitrantur ...
64 The vox populi is often adduced by writers as a signal of consent and support, or of discord (Cic. De Leg. Agr. 2.4.7-10 Itaque me non extrema diribitio suffragiorum, sed primi illi vestri concursus, neque singulae voces praeconum, sed una vox universi populi Romani consulem declaravit; Pro Flac. 103.4-8 Sed quid ea commemoro quae tum cum agebantur uno consensu omnium, una voce populi Romani, uno orbis terrae testimonio in caelum laudibus efferebantur, nunc vereor ne non modo non prosint verum etiam aliquid obsint?; Liv. Ab Urbe 39.49.9.1-10.4 aegre summouentes obuios intrare portam, qui adducebant Philopoemenem, potuerunt. aeque conferta turba iter reliquum clauserat; et cum pars maxima exclusa a spectaculo esset, theatrum repente, quod propinquum uiae erat, compleuerunt, et, ut eo adduceretur in conspectum populi, una uoce omnes exposcebant; Tac. Hist. 3.67.10 XV kalendas Ianuarias audita defectione legionis cohortiumque, quae se Narniae dediderant, pullo amictu Palatio degreditur, maesta circum familia; ferebatur lecticula parvulus filius velut in funebrem pompam: voces populi blandae et intempestivae, miles minaci silentio.). For divided vox populi as sign of discord/disruption, cf. Tac. Hist. 1.40.1-8 Agebatur huc illuc Galba vario turbae fluctuantis impulsu, completis undique basilicis ac templis, lugubri prospectu. neque populi aut plebis ulla vox, sed attoniti vultus et conversae ad omnia aures; non tumultus, non quies, quale magni metus et magnae irae silentium est. Othoni tamen armari plebem nuntiabatur; ire praecipitis et occupare pericula iubet. The context here brings an interesting parallel to mind which connects vox with libertas, namely the statement of the Thessalians against Philip recorded by Livy; in the absence of the Romans (the guarantors of their libertas), the Thessalians vox (the symbol of their libertas) is ignored by Philip: Itaque ergo in tantum metum omnes Thessalos coniectos, ut non in civitatibus suis, non in communibus gentis conciliis quisquam hiscere audeat. Procul enim abesse libertatis auctores Romanos: lateri adhaerere gravem dominum, prhibentem uti beneficiis populi Romani. Quid autem, si vox libera non sit, liberum esse? (Liv. Ab Urbe 39.25.11)
- 29 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
essence, this survival of memoria is what lies behind Tacitus' assessment of biography in the proem. And, in essence, this survival of memoria is what Tacitus claims also for Agricola, not only in recording his life for posterity (Agricola posteritati narratus et traditus superstes erit,
Tac. Agr. 46.4), not only by giving his own vox to Agricola's memory (non tamen pigebit vel incondita ac rudi voce memoriam prioris servitutis ac testimonium praesentium bonorum composuisse, Tac. Agr. 3.3), but perhaps also in giving Agricola a vox through his writing, one with which Agricola draws attention to his virtutes and impels his family to emulation (nosque domum tuam ab informo desiderio et muliebris lamentis ad contemplationem virtutum tuarum voces, Tac. Agr. 46.1).65
We see then, in these two representative examples, how elite Romans conceived of memoria, and especially how they went about attempting to control memoria. Although in the one case the individual attempts to control his own memoria while still alive and, in the other, an individual attempts to control the now instantiated memoria of a dead family member, both represent the same essential process. In Cicero we saw that the interests of the individual in respect to the preservation of a positive memoria could precipitate a dynamic and ongoing campaign to assert in the public sphere a version of events and an interpretation of motives which accentuate the positive and play down (or veil) the negative. As much as an individual's concern for the control of memoria underpinned the discussion of the Ciceronian material, the
65 Tacitus's famous comment on the purpose of history shows strong influences from this thought, except for its focus on the family: Exequi sententias haud institui nisi insignis per honestum aut notabili dedecore, quod praecipuum munus annalium reor ne virtutes sileantur utque pravis dictis factisque ex posteritate et infamia metus sit (Tac. Ann. 3.65.1-4).
- 30 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
concern of the family for the memoria of a deceased member was fundamental to my analysis of
Tacitus' Agricola. In the Agricola we saw the relevance for the family of the deceased's memoria, and the importance of the family in controlling and perpetuating that memoria. In the analysis of these examples I have isolated the individual from the family for emphasis. It should be clearly understood, however, that while memoria as a concept may be so dissected and discussed, the full complexity of this organic and living part of Roman elite culture cannot be fully appreciated in this way. The reality is much less tidy. Setting aside for now, then, discussion of ways in which memoria was conceived and strategies for controlling memoria (a positive control), let us turn to a re-evaluation of a rather untidy manifestation of memoria, the so-called damnatio memoriae, from the perspective of control adopted above (but now negative). I shall argue that these "sanctions against memory" were not intended to destroy or to eradicate memoria but to control how and for what the individual was remembered in the public arena by diverting public attention from gloria to scelus.
1.3 Memoria Controlled
In section 1.3 I examine the so-called damnatio memoriae from the perspective of control
(section 1.3.1), questioning in section 1.3.2 earlier assumptions about the purpose of these sanctions by re-evaluating the factual evidence. I apply this set of observations to the recently uncovered Senatus Consultum de Pisone Patre in section 1.3.3. I argue that the sanctions applied to Calpurnius Piso and his family were not intended to destroy or to eradicate memoria but to control how and for what the individual would be remembered in the public arena by diverting
- 31 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
public attention from gloria to scelus. These sanctions against memory (i.e. both the damnatio memoriae in general and the specific example of the SCPP) are inarguably an attack on the commemoration of elite individuals and will serve as another specific and socio-historically grounded example of the culture of commemoration. Section 1.3.4, an assessment of the significance of sanctions against memoria of literary achievement, discusses the prosecution of
Cremutius Cordus.
1.3.1 Sanctions against Memory
The following discussion of the so-called damnatio memoriae needs to be prefaced by a short comment about terminology, the sources of information, and their interpretation. As most recent writers on the subject have pointed out,66 what modern scholarship knows as damnatio memoriae is simply the observed set of traditional punishments that were applied against an individual on a case-by-case basis. A variety of terms and periphrases are used by the ancient sources in narrating and listing the post mortem punishments that affect the memoria of a criminal. I should note first of all, however, that no technical term is found in extant sources before the jurists to describe these punishments as a group,67 and even these later legal texts are consistent in using memoria damnata, not damnatio memoriae.68 Of the literary and historical sources, only Suetonius uses a phrase remotely similar to that of the jurists in the context of
66 Cf. e.g. Vittinghoff (1936) 12; Varner (1993) 1-2; Flower (1998) 156, (2000) 58; Hedrick (2000) xii.
67 See below and esp. Vittinghoff (1936) 64-74 for ancient terminology.
68 See Zedler (1885) 1-27 passim and Vittinghoff (1936) 64-74 (a more coherent treatment of the juristic sources).
- 32 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
sanctions against the remembering of a dead individual – memoria abolenda – first of Gaius (and the other Caesars) and then of Domitian.69 Livy, Velleius Paterculus, and Tacitus do not use the term, although they narrate events which scholars associate with damnatio memoriae.
Sanctions against memory as they are traditionally understood were enacted against
Gaius and Domitian; but Suetonius uses the phrase memoria abolenda in each case.70 It seems clear on consideration of the passages (see n. 69), that the phrase is not used of the punishments as a whole, but simply identifies one of the punishments carried out against the two graves domini. Livy uses the phrase at 7.13.4 in a similar sense of "put out of mind" with a similar
69 Suet. Cal. 60, Dom. 23. The description of the Senate's angry attack on the symbols of Domitian's power after his death is striking, but not surprising, in its resemblance to some (but by no means all) of the traditional punishments inflicted (Contra [sc. the armies] senatus adeo laetatus est, ut repleta certatim curia non temperaret, quin mortuum contumeliosissimo atque acerbissimo adclamationum genere laceraret, scalas etiam inferri clipeosque et imagines eius coram detrahi et ibidem solo affligi iuberet, novissime eradendos ubique titulos abolendamque omnem memoriam decerneret, Suet. Dom. 23.1). The phrase memoriam abolendam cannot here be any sort of technical term describing a group of sanctions against memory, as is memoria damnata later, since it appears rather to be one of the punishments inflicted, closely linked to eradendos titulos. Nor does it describe a consequence of these earlier actions. Looking back in time on the reaction to Caligula's death, a similar juxtaposition of memoria abolenda and the destruction of physical symbols of power occurs (et senatus in asserenda libertate adeo consensuit, ut consules primo in curiam, quia Iulia vocabatur, sed in Capitolium convocarent, quidam vero sententiae loco abolendam Caesarum memoriam ac diruenda templa censuerint, Suet. Cal. 60). There too, memoriam abolendam is presented as concommittant with the destruction of the temples, rather than as a consequence. Presumably also "the other Caesars" (Caesarum) would include even the great Julius Caesar and Augustus. Since, however, their memoriae were manifestly guaranteed by large areas of Rome herself, it is difficult (even given the intensity of the Senate's dissatisfaction at this time) to construe this as "destroy/eradicate [their] memory".
70 Varner (1993) 14-76 Gaius, 216-294 Domitian. For questions raised over the extent of the sanctions against Domitian see Pailler&Sablayrolles (1994) 16-17 where they suggest only 44% of total inscriptions suffered erasure of name, and only 18.5% total in Rome and Italy.
- 33 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
notion of replacing the memory, in this case memory of disgraceful conduct.71 Livy 8.11.1
(concerning the devotio)72 and 9.36.1 (referring to the humiliating defeat at the Caudine Forks)73 should be construed likewise. Elsewhere Livy uses memoria with abolescere of an event or thing
"forgotten". At 3.55.6 he describes the sacrosanctity of the tribunes as something that prope iam memoria aboleverat,74 until its restoration under the Valerian-Horatian rogation. Tacitus uses memoriam abolere with a defining genitive once in the same sense of "put out of mind".75
Suetonius uses the phrase memoria abolita at de Grammaticis et Rhetoribus 24.2 of M. Valerius
Probus Berytius who, frustrated at his lack of advancement, gave himself over to the study of
71 Livy 7.13.3.2-7.13.5 is [sc. Tullius] praecedens militum agmen ad tribunal pergit mirantique Sulpicio non turbam magis quam turbae principem Tullium, imperiis oboedientissimum militem, 'si licet, dictator' inquit, 'condemnatum se uniuersus exercitus a te ignauiae ratus et prope ignominiae causa destitutum sine armis orauit me ut suam causam apud te agerem. equidem, sicubi loco cessum, si terga data hosti, si signa foede amissa obici nobis possent, tamen hoc a te impetrari aequum censerem ut nos uirtute culpam nostram corrigere et abolere flagitii memoriam noua gloria patereris.
72 Livy 8.11.1. haec, etsi omnis diuini humanique moris memoria aboleuit noua peregrinaque omnia priscis ac patriis praeferendo, haud ab re duxi uerbis quoque ipsis, ut tradita nuncupataque sunt, referre.
73 Livy 9.36.1 silua erat Ciminia magis tum inuia atque horrenda quam nuper fuere Germanici saltus, nulli ad eam diem ne mercatorum quidem adita. eam intrare haud fere quisquam praeter ducem ipsum audebat; aliis omnibus cladis Caudinae nondum memoria aboleuerat.
74 Livy 3.55.6.2-3.55.7 et cum plebem hinc prouocatione, hinc tribunicio auxilio satis firmassent, ipsis quoque tribunis, ut sacrosancti uiderentur, cuius rei prope iam memoria aboleuerat, relatis quibusdam ex magno interuallo caerimoniis renouarunt, et cum religione inuiolatos eos, tum lege etiam fecerunt, sanciendo ut qui tribunis plebis aedilibus iudicibus decemuiris nocuisset, eius caput Ioui sacrum esset, familia ad aedem Cereris Liberi Liberaeque uenum iret.
75 Tac. Hist. 1.84.11-13 paucorum culpa fuit, duorum poena erit: ceteri abolete memoriam foedissimae noctis. Cf. Tac. Ann. 1.3.25-28 bellum ea tempestate nullum nisi adversus Germanos super erat, abolendae magis infamiae ob amissum cum Quintilio Varo exercitum quam cupidine proferendi imperii aut dignum ob praemium; Tac. Ann. 1.78.7-8 ita proximae seditionis male consulta, quibus sedecim stipendiorum finem expresserant, abolita in posterum.
- 34 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
writings while in provincia, writings remembered there but forgotten at Rome.76 Consequently, I suggest that Suetonius' use of the phrase for Domitian is of a similar meaning, as it must be with
Caligula (who could "destroy the memory" of the Caesars, Julius, Augustus, Tiberius?). This is simply a periphrasis for "forget" or "put out of mind". To be sure, behind the phrase lies a conscious decision "to put out of mind", an intention felt more strongly in the instances cited above which hint that memoria might be “replaced”. Obviously, the concepts of "destroying" memory, "forgetting" (both deliberate and incidental), and "replacing" memory are not at all distinct enough to make a sure argument. On the other hand, I think it would be likewise imprudent to claim that the phrase memoria abolenda77 is used by Suetonius in these two instances to refer to "the destruction of memory" or the even later damnatio memoriae. It seems at least as valid to interpret these two passages as showing the Senate's willingness to manipulate and replace the memory these emperors were building for themselves. By destroying the emperors' symbols of power, the Senate constructs a new memoria designed to replace the one these very symbols instantiated.
1.3.2.1 Assumptions and Terminology
The terminology in use in modern scholarship, and the lack of terminology in the early sources (i.e. before the jurists) lies at the root of our difficulty in understanding the phenomenon of damnatio memoriae as a whole. It may very well be that the terminology traditionally
76 Suet. De Rhet. 24.2: legerat in provincia quosdam veteres libellos apud grammatistam, durante adhuc ibi antiquorum memoria necdum omnino abolita sicut Romae.
77 Even the grammatical construction is revealing: contrast the gerundival form of this phrase with the past participle of memoria damnata. Cf. n. 75 Tac. Ann. 1.3.25-28.
- 35 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
employed has pre-determined the focus of the debate. Damnatio memoriae, although invented by the jurists for reference to a specific legal phenomenon, was long ago extrapolated by scholars onto earlier, seemingly similar, cases. As a result, the terminology has created false categories and expectations, and the scholarship on the subject is still reacting to the discrepancies between the evidence and the construct. Early scholarly works on damnatio memoriae were as concerned with examining the legal basis and implications of memoria damnata as they were the types of punishments. Vittinghoff, for example, attempted to limit damnatio memoriae as a juristic terminus technicus referring to a punishment applied to the dead reus criminis perduellionis, and created abolitio memoriae to refer to punishments for maiestas.78 To abolitio memoriae ("der
Vernichtung von Bild und Namen, im Grab- und Trauerverbot, teilweise auch in der
Verfluchung des Geburtstages oder der festlichen Feier des Todestages ..., zumal in der Bild- und
Namensstrafe") Vittinghoff connects supplementary punishments (Zuzustrafen) contingent on the social rank of the individual ("abhängig von der sozialen und politischen Stellung des
Verbrechers").79
The basis for this distinction between damnatio and abolitio is difficult to ascertain, depending a great deal on Vittinghoff's larger purpose in this work, the juxtaposition of sources separated in time and intent, and his understanding of perduellio and maiestas. I do not have the
78 For damnatio memoriae as t.t. see Vittinghoff (1936) 66 "Es muß zunächst festgestellt werden, daß die memoria damnata (damnatio memoriae ist ausschließlich moderne Prägung) ein rein juristicher terminus technicus ist, der siebenmahl begegnet." Cf. also 70-72, esp. 70 "die m.d. [memoria damnata] gehört allein in den Zusammenhang des crimen perduellionis." For distinction of abolitio memoriae see 12-13.
79 Vittinghoff (1936) 12-13.
- 36 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
space to deal with these points in detail; but a note on Vittinghoff's larger project in connection with perduellio and maiestas is in order. The first half of the work (1-74) seems designed to isolate perduellio as described in the late juristic texts (where it is the worst type of maiestas) from similar types of crimes found in the historical sources, often associated with maiestas.
Furthermore, perduellio is in the jurists associated with the death of the accused prior to the beginning of the proceedings (64-74), and on this point too Vittinghoff tries to draw a fine distinction between these individuals and those accused of maiestas, who often "died" mid-trial.
In the legal texts, only a trial on perduellio would continue past the death of the accused.
Because memoria damnata is a term applied only in the jurists, and there only to those convicted of perduellio, Vittinghoff created a new term (abolitio memoriae) for the set of punishments in evidence in the historical sources.
There are several problems with this set of arguments, not least of which is that the jurists do not to my knowledge offer a consistent description of the punishments which comprise memoria damnata. Second, the distinction between perduellio and maiestas can only be argued, on the basis of the juristic sources, to be valid for that time period and not earlier. For the same reason, the importance of the status of the individual, living or dead, is reduced, and even further lessened by the fact that punishments meted out to those accused of crimen maiestatis were often post mortem in any case. If we reconsider Vittinghoff's argument from the point of view of the punishments inflicted (assuming that memoria damnata and abolitio memoriae share the same basic sanctions against memory), the distinctions disappear altogether.
- 37 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
1.3.2.2 Intent and Teleology
As for the sources and interpretation of evidence, reliance on anecdotal evidence (our only other evidence connected with sanctions against memory beyond the Senatus Consultum de
Pisone Patri – SCPP – and the physical evidence of erasures and image vandalism and reworking, which may be the result of a number of motivations80), immediately raises a rather serious question. Do we have only "failed" examples of these sanctions? In other words, did others suffer similar fates more completely, so that their existence is truly obliterated from the historical record?
There are several ways to deal with this question of evidence. We might suggest that the evidence we have is by chance, and that there may be many more cases that have simply disappeared from the record. Here basic assumptions come into play. Flower, for example, although she does suggest that shaming the memory was also part of the intent,81 seems quite
80 See Varner (1993) and Matheson (2000) on the reworking of portraits. Varner (1993) 7 suggests that damage or destruction of these images "approximate attacks on the emperor's actual physical being". See further discussion below on the destruction of Piso's statues. While he places this destruction – and a similar sort of regularized vandalism which preserves the identity of the portrait while marring its features – in the context of damnationes, I call attention to the statement of Vittinghoff (1936) 14 "Die Niederreißung der imagines principis ist der Anfang der Revolte gegen den Princeps und wird immer so gedeutet." The passages Vittinghoff cites are revealing since, in all the examples the destruction of images happen before an official act of damnatio occurred: Dio 63.25.1 Rufus' troops destroy images of Nero; Tac. Hist. 1.41, 1.55 Galba's images are torn down or stoned to show favor to Otho; Dio 65.10.3, Tac. Hist. 3.13, 3.31 Vitellius' images are destroyed by troops changing allegiance to Vespasian. Note that only for Nero – by virtue of the fact he was declared hostis (Suet. Nero 49.2 se hostem a senatu iudicatum et quaeri ut puniatur more maiorum) – can we be certain that there was a damnatio, but even then it was after his death and burial. Varner supposes damnationes for other emperors on the basis of the destruction and damage of images (the circularity of this argument is astonishing) or pure conjecture; see for example Varner (1993) 205-215.
81 Flower (1998) 158.
- 38 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
prepared to admit that there are individuals against whom such sanctions were applied, knowledge of whom was lost because (as she asserts) the purpose of such sanctions was to erase the individual from the record.82 She writes, "The easiest and most obvious way to attack an inscription which honored or mentioned the targeted individual would be to destroy it. Obviously this is also the hardest for us to detect."83 This basic assumption of intent can lead to rather serious distortions of the evidence, if not checked. One example: John Bodel, in an otherwise carefully argued paper, attributes a motivation for the SCPP of AD 20 (for details see below) on the part of the Senate which is evident neither in the text of the SCPP itself, nor in Tacitus' version of the events (cf. esp. Tac. Ann. 3.17):
"First, despite the expressed aim of the senators condemning Piso to eradicate all memory of him and his misdeeds, the clause of their decree mandating its publication in major cities and at military headquarters throughout the empire 'so that the order of the whole affair could be handed down to the memory of future generations and they would know what the Senate had decided about ... the crimes of the elder Cn. Piso,' fundamentally undermines its ostensible purpose." (my italics). 84
82 Flower (1998) 155 referring to the SCPP "I will argue that the decree attests a traditional form of damnatio memoriae whose aim was to remove an erring citizen while enabling both the family of the traitor and the larger community to continue as if the offender had never existed." [my underline] See also Flower (2000) 59 "We should also keep in mind that a truly successful damnatio memoriae would indeed have completely removed an individual from the historical and material record. We will never know how often this actually happened." Flower (1996) seems to stress the dishonor of the sanctions more strongly (cf. e.g. 29 "The imagines appear at the centre of the penalties designed to dishonour the memory of Piso.")
83 Flower (2000) 60. Linderski (1987) uncovered an "erased", but manifestly not completely, person.
84 Bodel (1999a) 44. The text translated (with omission of Germanicus) is SCPP 165-72 et quo facilius totius actae rei ordo posterorum memoriae tradi posset atque hi scire
- 39 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
There simply is no indication whatever of any such motivation on the part of the Senate. The text of the inscription at 165-72 is in fact quite plain in asserting the two motivations for and the ostensible purpose of the SC: to record the Senate's sententiae concerning Germanicus' moderatio and Piso's scelus, and "to preserve the whole affair for the memory of those to come"
(totius actae rei ordo posterorum memoriae tradi posset).85
It is here that I suggest the evidence for sanctions against memory might be profitably re- evaluated as attempts on the part of the state to control the memoria of a deceased enemy. To this end, the individual's negative qualities and actions are "immortalized" in the cultural record
(memoria) in a number of ways (for which see below). The memoria is not "destroyed", but deliberately and publicly construed for posterity in a negative light. This approach alleviates somewhat a recurring problem in the scholarship on the subject, namely, the paradoxical need on the one hand to destroy memory of an individual, and on the other hand to preserve the memoria as a deterrent example for future wrong-doers.86
85 Compare the formulation memoriae tradi to the end of Tac. Agr. 46.5: Agricola posteritati narratus et traditus superstes erit. Cf. TLL 8.677.60-678.4. See also Potter (1999) on "motivation clauses" in epigraphic material; Potter draws attention to the ideology of Imperial virtues outlined in the SCPP contrasted with Piso's own actions.
86 Hedrick (2000) attempts in large part to examine the paradoxes associated with sanctions against memory, adopting a complicated approach based on the paradoxical significance of erasure: "The damnatio memoriae should be understood as dissimulatory, a masquerade. It works to produce significant [sic] silences and erasures. The key is to recognize that the silences and erasures are themselves signs. To be sure, they are signs that pretend to be the opposite, the negation of representation – just as damnatio memoriae purports to be the destruction of memory and not its dishonoring. To notice silence and erasures, however, is to treat them as representations: what is recognized is always a sign, and a sign is never merely itself, but always something that stands for something else." (2000, 117). Hedrick, although he recognizes the dishonoring aspect of sanctions against memory, nevertheless maintains the primacy of
- 40 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
It should be increasingly clear that there is a problem in reconciling the evidence with the general scholarly assumptions about the purpose and effect of sanctions against memory. Our interests lie in the possible repercussions for memory of the sanctions; the working hypothesis is that these sanctions (with the possible exception of pecuniary damages) are directed at the public memory of the individual. The case of Piso Pater arguably offers the best overall evidence for the application of sanctions against memory, and has the extra merit of being relevant in time and circumstance to the study of the elite in Flavian Rome. In the following pages I examine in detail the implications of these sanctions for the memoria of an individual and a family, challenging certain standard assumptions that lie behind the interpretation of evidence. I will be most interested in showing how the sanctions cannot be intended to erase Piso's memoria in the short term, but rather seem intended to dishonor the individual and control how he is commemorated in the public arena.
1.3.3 Sanctions and Memoria: the SCPP
The Senatus Consultum de Pisone Patri has received a great deal of scholarly attention since its discovery in 1991. Not only do analytical texts exist in German and English editions,
the destruction of memory, often seeming to contradict himself at several points (e.g. 2000, 93: "the damnatio memoriae was intended to eradicate memory."). Clearly, Hedrick has attempted to understand the very difficult issue of how memory can or cannot be destroyed; the difficulties arise in his arguments because Hedrick perpetuates the notion that the initial intent of sanctions against memory is to destroy/eradicate memory (see Hedrick [2000] xii "So there is a tension implicit in damnatio memoriae, between its apparent purpose, which is to destroy memory, and the effects of its implementation, which work in a backhanded way to confirm memory."). Much of the paradox and tension would be negated if we were to alter Hedrick's statement to read: 'the apparent purpose of sanctions against memory is to dishonor an individual in memoria; their implementation sometimes works to facilitate the exclusion of the individual from memoria altogether.'
- 41 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
but the comprehensive commentary of Eck, Caballos, and Fernandez (1996) has now joined almost ten years of intense scholarly activity. The sanctions themselves have been the subject of two excellent discussions, Flower (1998) and in particular Bodel (1999a), which focuses on implications of the sanctions for public image at Rome. My debt to these articles will be obvious in what follows. Nevertheless, the sanctions, all of which have earlier or contemporary parallels, will bear discussion concerning how they might have affected the memoria of the individual (in the sense of the perpetuation of public image after death); working from the assumptions argued above, these sanctions are not intended to eradicate memoria but to control how and for what the individual is remembered in the public arena by diverting public attention from gloria to scelus.
The suggestion that the SCPP was intended to eradicate memory of Piso has been dismissed above. Indeed, the purpose of the SC was quite the opposite; the emphasis in the text on the contrast between the virtutes and pietas of the Imperial family and the scelus and nefaria of Piso is quite clear.87 Scelus replaces gloria in public memoria. I cite the portion of the SCPP relevant to the sanctions against Piso below in full, citing portions relevant for specific discussions in footnotes:88
Quas ob res arbitrari senatum non optulisse eum se debitae poenae, sed maiori | et quam inminere sibi ab pietate et severitate iudicantium intellegebant | subtraxisse; itaque his poenis, quas a semet ipso exegisset, adicere: ne quis luc-|tus mortis eius causa a feminis quibus eis more
87 "The list of virtutes pertaining to members of the imperial household constitutes, in effect, a Tiberian successor to the clipeus aureus (RGDA 34.2 virtus, clementia, iustitia, pietas), adducing moderatio, iustitia, pietas, partus, concordia, aequitas, sanctitas morum." Damon and Takáks (1999) 9 describing Potter's contribution to the seminar. Cf. SCPP 132-65 and Potter (1999).
88 The text is based on that of D.S Potter (1999), whose reconstructions are accepted throughout.
- 42 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
maiorum, si hoc senatus consultum factum | non esset, lugendus esset, susciperetur; utique statuae et imagines Cn. Pisonis | patris, quae ubique positae essent, tollerentur; recte et ordine facturos, qui qu-|andoque familiae Calpurniae essent, quive eam familiam cognatione | adfinitateve contingerent, si dedissent operam, si quis eius gentis aut quis eo-|rum, qui cognatus adfinisve Calpurniae familiae fuisset, mortuos esset, lugen-|dus esset, ne inter reliquas imagines,
- 43 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
principis sui adsensus dandam esset arbitraretur, quo facilius | inviolatum senatus benificium ad eum pervenire
The SC is not devoted solely to the listing of the crimes and punishments of Piso. The cultivation on the part of the Senate of an ideology of the principate and the family of the princeps is quite apparent. Potter, in his article in the collection of papers on the SCPP published as AJP 120
(1999), studies the fascinating use of Republican and Augustan virtues in describing Tiberius and
Germanicus.89 The SC cites four matters referred by Tiberius to the Senate for their consideration, of which the case and death of Piso was only the first. Nevertheless, the concerns of Piso will loom large in this section for obvious reasons. I simply draw to the reader's attention that the concerns of the Senate in this SC were wider than Piso alone.
The first sanction recorded against Piso prohibited any mourning by any woman who ought to have mourned him.90 As commentators have remarked, this group of women was
89 Potter (1999).
90 SCPP 73-5.
- 44 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
potentially very large, although we cannot be certain how large.91 Loraux points out that women's mourning had a highly visible and formal role in the life of the community.92 That mourning might have political significance during Piso's time in particular is evidenced by
Tacitus Ann. 6.10 in Tiberius' punishment of Vitia, mother of Fufius Geminus.93 Furthermore, since the period of mourning for women was ten months to one year,94 the display was more protracted than that of the men, whose period of mourning ended after the novemdialis.
Presumably, prohibitions were not applied to men (or professional mourners, for example) since the burial and the novemdialis was probably finished by the time of the final decisions published in the SC.95
The removal (not destruction) of all statues and portraits of Piso Pater has immediate repercussions, of course.96 The wide public recognition of the individual's features are most
91 As Bodel (1999a) 46 points out, quibus more maiorum, while not precise for us, may not have been ambiguous for the Roman reader. Loraux (1990) 50-52 emphasizes the role of the matronae over all others. Flower (1998) 159 suggests that even professional mourners might be included. See discussions in Kierdorf (1980) 196ff and Van Sickle (1987) 45-47.
92 Loraux (1990) 50-51, citing in particular Livy 2.40. On women's grief Loraux writes further (51-2): "La douleur en forme de blessure fait d'elle l'équivalent du soldat couvert de cicatrices." See Sen. Helv. 3.1 and 16 for full development of the metaphor. Further in the same chapter Loraux seems to point to the political nature of women's grieving as Roman interpretation and not a Greek one (53-4).
93 Tac. Ann. 6.10 Ne feminae quidem exsortes periculi. Quia occupandae rei publicae argui non poterant, ob lacrimas incusabantur; necataque est anus Vitia, Fufi Gemini mater, quod filii necem flevisset. Haec apud senatum; Cf. Pl. Ep. 3.16 on Attia. See further below on the political and civic aspects of the aristocratic funeral.
94 See Plut. Num. 12 and Paul. Sent. 1.21.12 as well as Sen. Helv. passim.
95 On the complicated issue of chronology see Talbert (1999) and Flower (1999).
96 SCPP 75-76.
- 45 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
affected, and so one might argue that the person is forgotten in image. The most obvious objection to sanctioned "forgetting" of a person's image is that in most cases the removal or destruction of statues is a public response to an event, rather than to a directive.97 In any case, it is difficult to assess the extent and comprehensiveness of responses to ordered destruction of statues beyond pointing out that in some instances we have reports of statues surviving such destruction.98 In other cases, too, as Vittinghoff pointed out,99 the attack on the images of an individual is a mark of disrespect, an outward expression of changed loyalty or displeasure. This is obviously the case for the principes,100 but equally true of lesser figures. The toppling and destruction of Sejanus' statues is quite celebrated, but apparently motivated by invidia.101
Gregory discusses the close connection of images with political life.102 Among many possible motivations, Gregory suggests, "Many of these physical attacks on statues were intended not simply to harm or kill an individual through his representation but also to obliterate
97 See n. 80.
98 The ones at Rome most revealing: a statue of Domitian was in Rome down to time of Procopius (Hist. Arc. 8); in Augustus’ reign a statue of Brutus was noticed in Mediolanum (Plut. Comp. Brut. and Dio 5; cf. Tac. Ann. 4.35); Augustus let L. Sestius honor Brutus among ancestors (Dio 53.32.4, App. BC 4.51). Names were also found (see Vittinghoff [1936] 29-33).
99 Vittinghoff (1936) 14: "Die Niederreißung der imagines principis ist der Anfang der Revolte gegen den Princeps und wird immer so gedeutet. Wenn bei Demonstration oft zum Zeichen der Sympathie Bilder umhergetragen werden, so ist ihre Zerstörung stärkster Feindschaft." Cf. Gregory (1994) 95.
100 Cf. inter alia accounts of the Year of the Four Emperors, n. 80.
101 Juv. 10.56-7 quosdam praecipitat subiecta potentia magnae | invidiae ...
102 Gregory (1994).
- 46 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
his memory."103 While it cannot be denied that the destruction of images effectively removes an avenue of public commemoration by destroying it, there are other consequences to consider. A great merit of Gregory's article is that he draws attention to the interplay between image and political allegiance or imitation.104 Brutus and Cassius had a long ideological influence in
Imperial Rome, not only in literature, but in visual media as well. As Gregory writes:
The long history of the ideological influence exerted on members of the senatorial order under the Principate by the memory of the liberators, Cassius and Brutus, and of the attacks on those same senators by the emperor and his informers, and other bans on the use of certain imagines, coalesces around this double notion that portraits both indicated political allegiance and prompted political imitation.105
The irony of this observation is, of course, that Brutus and Cassius both suffered sanctions against memory. The comment of Tacitus at Annals 3.72 on the pompa funebris of Junia is telling: Viginti clarissimarum familiarum imagines antelatae sunt, Manlii, Quinctii aliaque eiusdem nobilitatis nomina. Sed praefulgebant Cassius atque Brutus eo ipso quod effigies eorum non visebantur. The political response to images falls also at the other extreme, mob violence.
While among the elite the response to images seems to have been more ideological, Gregory cites Cicero describing the reaction of the general populace to images as emotional.106 The
103 Gregory (1994) 97.
104 See in particular Gregory (1994) 90 ff.
105 Gregory (1994) 92.
106 Gregory (1994) 91 citing Cic. Rab. perd. 9.24 Statuerunt equites Romani illo iudicio improbum civem esse et non retinendum in civitate, qui hominis hostilem in modum seditiosi imagine aut mortem eius
- 47 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
physical attack on an image is the manifestation, as Gregory argues, of the emotional state of the people.107 But in suggesting that, in the majority of cases, the initial impulse for the attacks comes from "above and not from below", Gregory misstates the evidence.108 It is clear from his following examples, and from those I have cited above, that it is really the populace which initiates the action in response to its own perception of events. To take Piso's case, the populace attacked and dragged images of Piso to the Gemonian steps during the trial process. It would be an indulgence to suppose an official or even semi-official impulse for this action. The answer is closer to hand: Tacitus describes the growing anger and grief of the populace over the death of
Germanicus that reached a head during the trial, erupting finally in mob violence. And it is surely worthwhile to point out that Tiberius ordered the statues rescued from the mob and restored to their places.109 It seems more plausible to argue that the crowd was motivated by a desire to signal its own wishes, rather than to respond to the Senate's anticipated verdict.
honestaret, aut desideria imperitorum misericordia commoveret, aut suam significaret imitandae improbitatis voluntatem.
107 Gregory (1994) 93 "Ultimately, the violent reaction focuses itself as a direct physical attack on the image. Such physical attacks manifest themselves in several ways: when Nero entered Rome after the murder of his mother, a leather bag was hung over one of his statues, implying that he should receive the traditional punishment for parricides; statues of Agrippina were pulled down; slogans were written below another. The most intense reaction, of course, is an outright attack on the image: dismemberment of a statue or pulling it down from its position of display."
108 Gregory (1994) 95 "Under the empire the destruction of images often occurred after the emperor or senate had ordained it, or at least when the emperor had made clear his feelings about an individual ... the initial impulse came from above and not from below. Far rarer are the attacks on images of individuals before any formal condemnation by a public body or a genuine fall from power."
109 Tac. Ann. 3.14 Simul populi ante curiam voces audiebantur: non temperaturos manibus si patrum sententias evasisset. Effigiesque Pisonis traxerant in Gemonias ac divellebant, ni iussu principis protectae repositaeque forent.
- 48 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
In the case of Piso Pater, in addition to a general invidia and mob activity (motivations adduced by Gregory in other cases), there are the Senate's motivations to consider. While the comprehensiveness of the Senate's order to remove statues of Piso may have been traditional, it may equally have been motivated by a reaction to Piso's own removal of Augustus' statues
(SCPP 68-70), an act which violated the numen and memoria of Augustus through the dishonor shown; Piso exerted his own control over the display of Augustus' image.110 The Senate thus directed an equal dishonoring of Piso's images through control of their display (and note here that the Senate did not order destruction of the images). It is uncertain whether or not any inscriptions associated with the images were removed. Kajava's hesitations on this question111 are bolstered perhaps by evidence from Sicily in the case of Verres,112 but in the end we cannot truly be certain. To argue that the removal of statues does not also remove the image of the individual from the public space would be wrong-headed. But as the passage from Tacitus on
110 SCPP 68-70 A similar basis of reaction (connection with Augustus) may lie behind the land confiscation in Illyricum; see Flower (1998) 163-5, esp. 165 "Nevertheless, here again the penalty is particularly apt. It was the deified Augustus, whose numen Piso was convicted of violating, who had given him the estate."
111 Kajava (1995) 202.
112 Cf. Cic. Verr. 2.2.160 Tauromenitani, quorum est civitas foederata, homines quietissimi, qui maxime ab iniuriis nostrorum magistratuum remoti consuerant esse praesidio foederis,–hi tamen istius evertere statuam non dubitarunt; qua abiecta basim tamen in foro manere voluerunt, quod gravius in istum fore putabant si scirent homines statuam eius a Tauromenitanis esse deiectam quam si nullam umquam positam esse arbitrarentur. Tyndaritani deiecerunt in foro et eadem de causa equum inanem reliquerunt. Leontinis, misera in civitate atque inani, tamen istius in gymnasio statua deiecta est.
- 49 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
Junia's funeral shows us, image is not synonymous with memoria: Cassius and Brutus were most conspicuous by their absence.113
If we consider the removal of statues with these motivations in mind, it becomes necessary to ask for what reasons such statues were erected in the first place. Public statues were generally an honor reserved for those who had served the state with distinction, who had earned gloria. This is especially true of the Augustan and post-Augustan periods. Removal of the statues effectively removed from public gaze not simply the image of an individual, but the justifications for the presence of that image among other summi viri, that is, the individual's gloria. Gregory has outlined two potential political implications of private statues, emulation and allegiance. The question of the survival of the inscriptions on the bases of these statues, which recorded the name and honors of the man, does not substantially affect this argument: if they survived, the absence of the statue would signal the disgrace more keenly; if not, the public commemoration of the individual's gloria is controlled through removal.
In this context, the removal of Piso's statues and the removal of his imago from public use in Calpurnian funeral processions are largely two sides of the same coin.114 Again, the importance of such a ban lies not so much in the obliteration of the man's physical image (no
113 Tac. Ann. 3.72. Cf. also Tac. Ann. 6.2 on Livilla: atroces sententiae dicebantur in effigies quoque ac memoriam eius.
114 SCPP 76-83. The careful detail of this prohibition concerning the use – not simply display – of the imago (contrast the general statement on the removal of statuae ... quae ubique positae sunt 76; both amount to the same scope of prohibition) underscores its socio-political importance.
- 50 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
mention is made of the destruction of the family's ancestor mask – imago), but in the use of that image in public.115 So, for instance, the imago may not be displayed in the atria of family members; it cannot then contribute to the public display of the family's greatness and political success for clientes or guests, nor can it serve as a model of imitation for family members themselves.116 Furthermore, the ban on the imago in funerary contexts, as Flower so precisely argues, effectively removes that person from public commemoration in the laudatio.117 Without the imago, the gloria of that individual cannot be publicly recalled as part of the family's collective achievement. Again, with Tacitus, we must remember that image is not memory. That image is perhaps more closely tied to honor is the implication of Plutarch's comments on the restoration of Marius' imago to Julia's funeral procession by Caesar: ejpi; touvtw/' ga;r ejnivwn katabohsavntwn tou' Kaivsaro", oJ dh'mo" ajnthvchse, lamprw'/ dexavmeno" krovtw/ kai; qaumavsa" w{sper ejx [Aidou dai; crovnwn pollw'n ajnagonta ta;" Marivou tima;" eij" th;n povlin.118
115 Wesch-Klein (1993) 21-24, 213-214 suggests a similar restraint as the motive behind the granting of the funus publicum during the Augustan and Tiberian period; the funus publicum becomes a means of controlling elite competition in the public arena. Cf. Bodel (1999b) 271 "When Augustus incorporated these honors among his prerogatives as princeps he curbed a potent and possibly dangerous arena of aristocratic competition. Both he and his successor Tiberius were noted for granting public funerals freely; when combined with restraint in the level of pomp authorized, this apparent generosity served effectively to dilute and diminish the honor. Public funerals with eulogies pronounced from the Rostra continued to be awarded to prominent senators outside the Imperial family down through the first century CE, but the task of delivering the oration was now normally assigned to a leading senator, rather than to a descendant, so that the occasion for the exhibition of family pride was transformed into a purely civic ceremony." For comparisons of the funeral procession with the triumph see Versnel (1970) 115-129.
116 Excellent discussion of the civic implications of the funeral in Bodel (1999b), esp. 259-61, see also the more in depth discussion of Flower (1996) Chapter Three.
117 Flower (1996) 29-30, and 128-158. See also Kierdorf (1980) and Vollmer (1892) 446-528. Cf. Polyb. 6.53.3 tou;" pollou;" ajnamimnhskomevnou" kai; lambavnonta" uJpo; th;n o[yin ta; gegonovta ... ejpi; tosou'ton givnesqai sumpaqei'" w{ste mh; tw'n khdeuovntwn i[dion, ajlla; koino;n tou' dhvmou faivnesqai to; suvmptwma.
118 Plut. Caes. 5.3.
- 51 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
The erasure of the name is slightly less problematic than the destruction or removal of statues and the imagines, for here, in the case of Piso at least, we have clear evidence of the extent of official sanction against his name: erasure was only ordered from the titulus of the statue to Germanicus set up on the Campus near the Ara Providentiae by the sodales
Augustales.119 The problems lurking behind the assumption of destruction of memory come into play more strongly on this issue. No comprehensive collection of inscriptions containing erasures exists, but (a small irony) PIR2 lists erased inscriptions as well as those with name intact for many individuals marked by Vittinghoff as having suffered abolitio nominis.120 The erasures are linked to the individual, either because the name is still legible under the erasure, or because the information in the inscription somehow supports an identification. What's more, for every erasure listed there are as many or more inscriptions with name intact. Most important of these, of course, are the fasti, which arguably record – by their very nature – the political achievement of those named. In Piso's case the single "approved" erasure has somewhat more to do with the public commemoration of the relationship between Piso and Germanicus than it has with the commemoration of Piso himself.121 As Flower writes,
119 SCPP 83-84.
120 Vittinghoff lists all those whom he thinks were charged with maiestas or perduellio; the logic of his argument then dictates that they all suffered some form of damnatio memoriae.
121 Bodel (1999a) 51-58 argues for a political symbolism engineered by Tiberius involving the relationship between the Ara Providentiae and structures associated with it. Cf. esp. 58 "Tiberius preferred to reinforce the positive message of a secure succession and domestic solidarity in the areas set aside for the familial piety of the domus Augusta."
- 52 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
The single erasure of Piso's name served an important function, but one that was largely symbolic. It was the honorific link between Piso and Germanicus that had become a political problem. Consequently, Tiberius did not feel the need to enjoin erasure of Piso's name where it appeared with his own in inscriptions recording their joint consulship. The fact that such erasures have been found can now be attributed to private initiative on the part of individuals who are not readily identifiable.122
If we take Piso's case as indicative on the whole of the types of sanctions associated with damnatio memoriae we may be closer to offering a solution to the problem of the lack of comprehensiveness in erasures which has so puzzled scholars; total erasure may never have been intended (and anyway, as Flower indicates, most erasures may have been privately motivated), but rather selective erasure(s) on public monuments which affected how the individual was remembered. In Piso's case, his name in association with Germanicus and the Imperial family – notably in his capacity as sodalis Augustalis – was erased.123 In this case it is not only the erasure which has significance; the SCPP itself signifies whose name has been erased, and why.
The fifth sanction recorded in the SCPP concerns the property and family of Piso, and to a certain extent the effect on the commemoration of Piso himself recedes in the face of the family's future. The confiscation of Piso's entire holdings124 is a standard action against a civis hostis, and signals his loss of rights within the community. The clauses which follow, as Eck-
122 Flower (1998) 162.
123 See n. 119.
124 SCPP 84-5.
- 53 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
Caballos-Fernandez, Bodel, and Flower all note, restore the children of Piso to the community.
Indeed, the Senate is quick to obligate the family to its own and Tiberius' debt through this restoration, invoking the (imperial) virtues of clemency, justice, and magnanimity.125 The patrimony was taken and for the most part returned to Piso's heirs in exchange for a change of praenomen.126 As Flower shows, the division of the goods depends on the laws of intestacy.127
The confiscation of the saltus in Illyricum has been discussed briefly above (see n. 108); it does not seem motivated by any intent to dishonor or destroy memory, except in so far as, if the suggestion above is correct, it removes visible ties of the friendship between the Augustus and
Piso pater.128 At the Senate's urging, and with the reward of his inheritance close to hand, the son changed his praenomen. There are precedents for this mutatio nominis (as an act, however, undertaken and regulated by the family): the Claudii did not use the praenomen Lucius,129 and after the death and conviction of M. Scribonius Libo Drusus, no Scribonius would use the cognomen Drusus. Flower suggests that the ban on the praenomen is "closely linked to the receiving of family property", although Solin sees a subtler manipulation of the politics of
125 SCPP 90-92.
126 SCPP 98-99.
127 Flower (1998).
128 Flower (1998) 163-5; see n. 108. The SCPP also records that the fact that Piso and members of his familia acted wrongly toward those neighbouring this property motivated Tiberius' repossession of the land (SCPP 87-90).
129 Suet. Tib. 1.2 cum praenominibus cognominibusque uariis distingueretur, Luci praenomen consensu repudiauit, postquam e duobus gentilibus praeditis eo alter latrocinii, caedis alter conuictus est.
- 54 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
aristocratic naming practices.130 This directive is prefaced by the stated hope that, on the basis of indications of modestia already evidenced in his conduct, Cn. Piso filius would be utterly unlike his father.131 The change of name may simply have been a way for the younger Piso to prove his modestia towards the Emperor and Senate.
With the last sanction we return again to Piso pater through his domus. The destruction of a portion of Piso's house over the Porta Fontinalis abutting on the forum, an addition which he himself had built, has been closely examined by Bodel.132 Indeed, there has been a great deal of scholarly interest in the social and cultural importance of houses as status symbols in general.133
Tacitus in his description of Piso's arrival in Rome from the East makes clear the physical imposition of the domus that will have stood as a monument to the political prominence of the family.134 The complete razing of the domus of a treasonous person is fairly well attested.135 The partial destruction of Piso's house seems particularly pointed in contrast. It is, as the SCPP makes clear, a portion of the domus for which he was responsible, and Bodel suggests that this
130 Flower (1998) 165; Solin (1989), esp. 252-3, 259.
131 SCPP 95-98.
132 Bodel (1997), (1999a).
133 e.g. Zanker (1988), Saller (1984), Wallace-Hadrill (1988), Clarke (1991), Purcell (1995).
134 Tac. Ann. 3.9.3.
135 See Bodel (1997) 7 for loci classici. Bodel (1997) 7 writes, "Originally, the wholesale destruction of a man's house was associated with a charge of aiming at kingship, and by Cicero's day tradition had settled on a trio of names – Sp. Amelius, Sp. Cassius, and Manlius Capitolinus – to evoke both the folly of regal ambition and the people's traditional manifestation of hostility to it."
- 55 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
destruction "seems designed ... to rectify metaphorically the wounding of the domus Augusta."136
The plot of land left by the destruction of the house of a traitor was often left unused, or dedicated to public or sacred use.137 Occasionally the name of the offender was preserved in a toponym.138 In most cases it is interesting to note that the name of the offender was somehow associated with the land or building left behind after the destruction; it cannot be that the destruction removed memoria of the individual's existence.139 What's more, unless one should argue for the significance of the gap left between the two residences as one might for an erasure of a name, it is difficult to see a purpose behind the destruction of only a portion of Piso's domus beyond the reduction of physical dominance of the forum so adroitly argued by Bodel (1999a). It might even be possible to extrapolate from Tiberius' famous reaction to proposals for monuments, ob externas ea victorias sacrari dictitans, domestica mala tristitia operienda (Tac.
Ann. 3.18), that total destruction of the domus might have indicated that Piso had posed a greater threat than Tiberius would publicly acknowledge.
136 Bodel (1999a) 60.
137 Mommsen (1887) 1189.
138 See Bodel (1997) 7-8 for examples.
139 Bodel (1997) 8, attempting to make a contrast with the Greek practice which commemorated the crime and punishment; Bodel contradicts himself slightly a paragraph later: "It is worth remarking, however, that no new structures were erected on these plots; instead they were left open so that memory of the crime should be associated with nothing but a vacant area." Cic. Dom. 101, which he cites here, indicates otherwise, since the vacant area is named after the wrong-doer (thus both crime and criminal are preserved in memoria): in Vacci pratis domus fuit M. Vacci, quae publicata est et eversa ut illius facinus memoria et nomine loci notaretur. Cf. Livy 8.19.4.
- 56 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
The immediate result of the first four sanctions discussed above, as I have argued, will be best viewed as a dishonoring through control of the public memory of Cn. Piso Pater. The other sanctions, those dealing with Cn. Piso filius and the domus Pisonis – there were also sanctions beyond these against Visellius Karus and Sempronius Bassus, as well as a pardon of M. Piso and
Plancina, Piso's second son and widow – seem motivated more by a concern with the future prominence of the Calpurnius family, although even these sanctions have relevance for the public commemoration of Piso as villain. The case of Scribonius Libo Drusus provides a useful comparandum for this assertion. Convicted of treason after suicide, he too suffered confiscation of his property, the banning of his imago from family funerals, and the disuse of his name.140 As with Piso, I argue that these punishments affected his commemoration, but did not destroy his memoria for posterity. Although with Piso's case we have learned to be cautious about the completeness of Tacitus' reports, there seems to have been no attack on Libo's statues, no restriction on mourning, and no destruction of his domus. Indeed, public thanksgiving was declared for the anniversary of his death, an action that guaranteed his commemoration as a criminal.
The control of memoria after death was a real concern for members of the elite at Rome, seemingly in all periods. There was more at stake than an individual's survival in the memory of posterity; there were real and tangible benefits for the families and descendants if an ancestor was revered in this way. And so, the effort was taken by individuals before death and especially
140 Tac. Ann. 2.32.
- 57 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
by their families after death to publicly preserve their significant achievements and virtutes in some more permanent form. Opponents sought in turn to control the memoria of these individuals themselves, turning public view away from the deeds and achievements as indicators of virtus to a less favorable interpretation. So with Piso, whose wrong actions (and not the qualities and accomplishments, his gloria, which won him the Eastern command in the first place) were closely detailed and defined as scelus in the SCPP, which was posted in every major military center in the Roman world.
1.3.4 Sanctions and Literature: Cremutius Cordus
The implications of this assessment of the evidence from the material sources for sanctions against memory as control, not destruction, greatly influence the interpretation of literary sources concerned with memoria. This is, of course, the goal of the project as far as minor poetry of the Flavian period is concerned. The analysis of one last historical example of the intersection of such sanctions with literary endeavors specifically will demonstrate the value of this approach.
With his portrayal of Cremutius Cordus, tried under Tiberius nominally because of his approbation of Brutus and Cassius in his annales, Tacitus seems to revisit concerns raised in the
Agricola. Tacitus’ Cremutius inveighs against the censure of opinions about men long dead (de iis, quos mors odio aut gratiae exemisset, Tac. Ann. 4.35), who have entered memoria (partem memoriae apud scriptores retinent, Tac. Ann. 4.35), and threatens that by his condemnation not
- 58 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
only would the commemoration of Brutus and Cassius be secured, but also his own (non modo
Cassii et Bruti, set etiam mei meminerint, Tac. Ann. 4.35). After self-starvation, his books were ordered burned (we hear from Seneca that his daughter Marcia preserved some copies; see below). Tacitus comments – in his own voice:
Libros per aediles cremandos censuere patres: set mansuerunt, occultati et editi. Quo magis socordiam eorum inridere libet, qui praesenti potentia credunt extingui posse etiam sequentis aevi memoriam. Nam contra punitis ingeniis gliscit auctoritas, neque aliud externi reges aut qui eadem saevitia usi sunt, nisi dedecus sibi atque illis gloriam peperere. (Tac. Ann. 35)
Hedrick uses this passage to illustrate the paradox of the destruction of memory.141 But caution should be exercised on two accounts. First, there is no indication in any source that Cremutius suffered “damnatio memoriae” at all, and to relate this example to damnatio memoriae specifically seems awkward. Second, I am unwilling to trust Tacitus as the source for the motivations of others in general. More to the point, the interplay of memoria, dedecus, and gloria within the context of the permanence of memoria (in spite of attacks against it) resonate with the arguments presented above that attempts were made to control memoria in the public sphere after
(and even before) death.
The patres, in burning Cremutius’ books, were not seeking to eradicate the memoriae of
Brutus and Cassius, but rather to condemn the eulogistic version of it presented by Cremutius
141 Hedrick (2000) 115, 123, 162-3.
- 59 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
(editis annnalibus laudatoque M. Bruto C. Cassium Romanorum ulitmum dixisset, Tac. Ann.
4.34). There is no indication, as I have already said, that any sentence was passed against
Cremutius beyond the burning of his books, an act which attacks commemoration of him as scriptor more than anything else. But Tacitus in his own Annales, ironically enough through the speech of Cremutius himself, ensures the commemoration of Cremutius Cordus as a scriptor, and even asserts for him a growing auctoritas and fides rerum. Seneca years earlier praised
Marcia for restoring her father’s books to their place among the publica monumenta, and for restoring his ingenium, the very terms used by Tacitus above; rescued from oblivio, Cremutius’ memoria will endure as an exemplum for posterity and he will not fear the passage of time as long as he is read.142 Marcia, as Seneca recognized, not only ensured the existence of her father’s memoria, but ensured that he would be remembered as an ‘historian’ and true vir Romanus. And
Cremutius’ enemies, who procured the destruction of his books? They will be passed over in silence (as Tacitus might have said, they will have no vox to speak for them, see supra pp.25-27), and will be remembered only for their scelera: at illorum carnificum cito scelera quoque, quibus
142 Sen. Ad Marc. 1.3-4: Vt uero aliquam occasionem mutatio temporum dedit, ingenium patris tui, de quo sumptum erat supplicium, in usum hominum reduxisti et a uera illum uindicasti morte ac restituisti in publica monumenta libros quos uir ille fortissimus sanguine suo scripserat. Optime meruisti de Romanis studiis: magna illorum pars arserat; optime de posteris, ad quos ueniet incorrupta rerum fides, auctori suo magno inputata; optime de ipso, cuius uiget uigebitque memoria quam diu in pretio fuerit Romana cognosci, quam diu quisquam erit qui reuerti uelit ad acta maiorum, quam diu quisquam qui uelit scire quid sit uir Romanus, quid subactis iam ceruicibus omnium et ad Seianianum iugum adactis indomitus, quid sit homo ingenio animo manu liber. Magnum mehercules detrimentum res publica ceperat, si illum ob duas res pulcherrimas in obliuionem coniectum, eloquentiam et libertatem, non eruisses: legitur, floret, in manus hominum, in pectora receptus uetustatem nullam timet; at illorum carnificum cito scelera quoque, quibus solis memoriam meruerunt, tacebuntur. See pp. 23-26 for several close parallels framed in the Agricola.
- 60 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
solis memoriam meruerunt, tacebuntur. (Sen. Ad Marc. 1.4).143 The elite at Rome did not leave memoria to chance, nor did they simply seek to rescue it from attack. As we have seen above in the case of Cicero’s consular and post reditum speeches, concern for commemoration was the task of the living. In this general culture of commemoration, it is not unreasonable to expect members of the elite to attempt to construct commemoration on their own terms. Thus it is equally reasonable to expect those who placed importance on literary pursuits to view commemoration from this perspective. And so we turn to Pliny the Younger and Verginius
Rufus in order to begin the transition from historical and documentary examples to the literary milieu of the Flavian period.
1.4 Remembering Rufus
Pliny wrote to Lucceius Albinus in 107 A.D. of a visit to his estate in Alsium, a property which had previously belonged to his guardian L. Verginius Rufus (Pl. Ep. 6.10). On this property, or nearby, Verginius Rufus had arranged to have a monument erected to his memory with the self-epitaph HIC SITUS EST RUFUS, PULSO QUI VINDICE QUONDAM |
IMPERIUM ADSERUIT NON SIBI SED PATRIAE.144 The significance of this inscription
143 It is very tempting to suspect, after reading the Ad Marciam, Annales 4.34-5, and Agricola together, that Tacitus had Seneca’s consolatio in mind for his portrayal of Cremutius, for the emphasis (in both Annales 4.34-35 and Agricola) on vox and libertas, and for the final assertion of the permanence of Agricola’s memoria in 46.4 manet mansurumque est in animis hominum in aeternitate temporum, fama rerum.
144 Pl. Ep. 6.10.4. cf. Dio 68.2.4 to;n de; JRou'fon to;n Oujergivnion, kaivper pollavki" aujtokravtora ojnomasqevnta, oujk w[knhsen uJpateuvsa" sunavrconta proslabei'n: ejf j ou| tw'/ mnhvmati teleuthvsanto" ejpegravfh o{ti nikhvsa" Oujivndika to; kravto" oujc eJautw/' periepoihvsato ajlla; th'/ patrivdi.
- 61 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
would hardly have been missed by any of Pliny's readers. L. Verginius Rufus (whom Brouzas called "the George Washington of Rome"145), consul ordinarius three times (63, 69, and 97), moved in the very highest circles of elite Roman society, despite his undistinguished ancestry.146
Offered the purple by his troops no fewer than three times, he nevertheless survived ten emperors. The first instance, after his defeat of Vindex in 68, is that alluded to in the epitaph above, but he narrowly avoided being made Imperator at the death of Galba and Otho also.147
Pliny is understandably effusive in his praise of Rufus, and expresses intense emotion in the letters concerning him, since Rufus was his guardian and sponsor.148 His confidence in
Rufus' immortality through memoria and writing (specifically history and carmina149) in Ep. 2.1 and other letters150 belies the apprehension expressed at 6.10.5 (parata oblivio mortuorum) in
145 Brouzas (1931). There has been a great deal of work done on Rufus in connection with the events of 68/9 and of Nerva's brief reign. For some pertinent discussion and bibliography see Levick (1985).
146 Tac. Hist. 1.52 merito dubitasse Verginium equestri familia, ignoto patre, imparem si recepisset imperium, tutum si recusasset. Townend (1961) 339, n.3 suggests that these words "would fit Vespasian uncomfortably well."
147 After the defeat of Vindex see Tac. Hist.1.8; after Galba see Plut. Gal. 6.2-3, 10.2; after Otho see Tac. Hist. 2.51.
148 Pl. Ep. 2.1, 6.10, 9.19. Rufus and the Elder Pliny also appear to have had close ties (Pliny entrusted the Younger Pliny to Verginius' care on his death). Chilver (1941, 101) went so far as to posit a Cisalpine clique headed by Verginius, who procured appointments.
149 Pl. Ep. 2.1.2 Triginta annis gloriae suae superuixit; legit scripta de se carmina, legit historias et posteritati suae interfuit. cf. also 6.10.4 where the sad state of the commemorative tomb does not seem to have affected Rufus' fame: Subit indignatio cum miseratione, post decimum mortis annum reliquias neglectumque cinerem sine titulo sine nomine iacere, cuius memoria orbem terrarum gloria peruagetur.
150 Plin. Ep. 2.1.2 Triginta annis gloria suae supervixit; legit scripta de se carmina, legit historias et posteritati interfuit. Cf. 6.10.4, 9.19.3, 6-7. Ep. 2.1 announces the funus publicum of Verginius Rufus, relates his death, and serves as a vehicle for Pliny's expressions of grief and kinship.
- 62 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
regard to the permanence of memory. Remembering Tac. Agr. 46.4 (nam multos veterum velut inglorios et ignobilis oblivio obruit), the latter seems more a general complaint than one specific to Rufus' case. Oblivion here seems to arise from neglect of monuments (as visible symbols of the person) and negligence on the part of relatives in actively remembering that individual. It is surely part of the conceit of 6.10 (and even more so next to the companion pieces 2.1 and 9.19, on which see below) that Pliny has inscribed Verginius Rufus' epitaph for his readers in the letter itself, in addition to the fact at least of the monument's existence and location. Ep. 2.1, the announcement of Verginius' death and funus publicum, is an eloquent portrait of Rufus' res and mores, ending with a sentiment parallel to that seen above in the Agricola.151 In both texts, in addition to following a frank assertion of familial bonds, there are strikingly significant parallels: the hint at the impropriety of grief and the relevance of death for men of accomplishment (cf.
Tac. Agr. 46.1), the survival of the individual in hearts of all men (Tac. Agr. 46.4), the contemplation of virtue (Tac. Agr. 46.1), and the difficult task of emulation (Tac. Agr. 46.2). Ep.
9.19, a defense of Verginius' inscription in the context of a defense of that mode of commemoration in general, also relies heavily on such assertions of gloria and worth. Verginius is worth commemorating for his distinguished military and political actions and social prominence as vir magnus.
151 Pl. Ep. 2.1.10-12 Quibus ex causis necesse est tamquam immaturam mortem eius in sinu tuo defleam, si tamen fas est aut flere aut omnino mortem uocare, qua tanti uiri mortalitas magis finita quam uita est. Viuit enim uiuetque semper, atque etiam latius in memoria hominum et sermone uersabitur, postquam ab oculis recessit. Volo tibi multa alia scribere, sed totus animus in hac una contemplatione defixus est. Verginium cogito, Verginium uideo, Verginium iam uanis imaginibus, recentibus tamen, audio adloquor teneo; cui fortasse ciues aliquos uirtutibus pares et habemus et habebimus, gloria neminem. Vale.
- 63 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
In addition to his preeminence in Pliny's eyes as general and statesman, the subject of Ep.
2.1., 6.10, and 9.19, Verginius Rufus also has a place among the senatorial greats (doctissimos gravissimos sanctissimos homines) listed in Ep. 5.3 who are known to have written nugatory poetry.152 Cicero, Calvus, Asinius Pollio, Messala, Hortensius, Brutus, Sulla, Quintus Catulus,
Scaevola, Servius Sulpicius, Varro, and Torquatus are all invoked as examples from the past. Of his own age, Pliny includes the Torquati, Memmius, Gaetulicus (cf. Mart. Epigr. 1, praef.),
Seneca, and Rufus himself, as well as the emperors Julius Caesar, Augustus, Tiberius, and
Nerva. He would also include Vergil, Nepos, Accius, and Ennius despite the fact that none of them were senators, since sanctitas morum non distat ordinibus.153 While Pliny's motivation in
Ep. 5.3 for emphasizing Verginius' poetic activities is manifestly his own, he deliberately points out in 6.10 and 9.19 that the epitaph is Rufus' own composition. Poetic skill is one of the aspects of Verginius' life that Pliny considers to contribute to his excellence. We have nothing by which to judge the quality of Rufus' poetry beyond the self-epitaph, but even this by itself speaks for a subtlety of thought and expression (see further below).
152 In Epistle 5.3, ostensibly a response to criticisms for reciting his own poetry, Pliny adduces great orators of the past as exempla for his poetic output, and this apologia for reciting is a pointed and, for Pliny, grumpy, reminder of the "private" nature of the recitations. It also reminds us that even Pliny's "private" recitations may go beyond what his exemplars did. This letter seems designed to disassociate his versiculi from his "public" life, and at the same time to justify his writing of poetry as a "private" lusus. (see further Chapter Five)
153 Pl. Ep. 5.3.5
- 64 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
It has been noted that Rufus himself seems to have made a point of not trying to control publicly how certain events were remembered, in particular his part in the affairs of 68 and 69.154
Certainly, the events in Gaul during 68 and 69 are somewhat confused in the sources; a great deal of energy has been spent, not only in sorting out chronology, but also in assessing intent and motivation for the central characters. The motivations and loyalties of Verginius in particular, who with the German legions under his command stemmed Vindex's offensive at Lugdunum in a brutal, one-sided battle, have been the focus for much of the scholarship. Indeed these motivations and loyalties seem to have been questioned in antiquity also. This is surely true for the Flavian dynasty, under whom Verginius received no office; his return to politics, with the advent of Nerva, under the flag of libertas has rightly been seen as a significant indicator of public opinion about him, if not the actual fact of the matter. Barbara Levick, however, has recently made very convincing arguments that seek to make sense of the confused sources for the bellum Neronis; her work also indicates that Verginius may not have been so careless of his memoria and reputation after all. Levick's strategy for dealing with the sources is ingenious, and convincing: she argues that the evidence is most easily reconciled if the existence of different versions of the story is admitted, each put forward after the shifts in power from Galba to Otho to
Vitellius to Vespasian. If so, as I think must be the case, then this inscription by Rufus takes on a real significance for the control of memoria: it represents a version which he himself wished to
154 An interchange is reported in Pl. Ep. 9.19.5-6 Ipse sum testis, familiariter ab eo dilectus probatusque, semel omnino me audiente prouectum, ut de rebus suis hoc unum referret, ita secum aliquando Cluuium locutum: 'Scis, Vergini, quae historiae fides debeatur; proinde si quid in historiis meis legis aliter ac uelis rogo ignoscas.' Ad hoc ille: 'Tune ignoras, Cluui, ideo me fecisse quod feci, ut esset liberum uobis scribere quae libuisset?'
- 65 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
remain in public memoria. Through this inscription Verginius Rufus is attempting to exert his own control over how and for what he is commemorated. Pliny, by including the inscription in his letters (twice), and what's more playing a self-professed familial role,155 disseminates Rufus' version to an even wider elite audience.
The exact events and details of this year are only marginally important for my discussion of Verginius Rufus; I refer the reader to Levick. Whatever the chronology of the movements and declarations of allegiance in 68, Galba held power and Verginius' legions had ravaged Galba's henchman Vindex and his troops at Vesontio. Verginius, probably on the strength of his connections to his German legions, survived the aftermath. But there was a real necessity to integrate his actions with the aims of Galba, since Verginius' apparent loyalty to Nero (the fact of the matter is irrelevant for this argument)156 and his equally apparent delay in recognizing
Galba's rule until the senate's announcement,157 precipitated, in Levick's opinion, friction between Galba and Verginius.158 This friction was reconciled with a version of the events suggesting co-operation between Verginius and Galba all along:
"The price of Verginius' life was that he should allow it to be put about that he had been a sympathizer of Galba's all along, that he had been in
155 Cf. Pl. Ep. 2.1.9: ... me huius aetatis per quem excusaretur elegit, his quidem verbis: 'Etiam si filium haberem, tibi mandarem.'
156 Cf. Tac. Hist. 1.8.2; see Levick (1985) 332-335.
157 Tac. Hist. 1.8.2 nec statim pro Galba Verginius. Cf. Tac. Hist. 52.3. Levick (1985) 336: [To the Senate's decision] "Verginius acquiesced, rejected his troops' offer of the purple, and forced them likewise to acknowledge Galba."
158 Levick (1985) 337.
- 66 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
negotiation with Vindex and that the battle of Vesontio had been a tragic mistake brought about by his legions getting out of control. Perhaps this was the story that Verginius brought to Galba; at any rate he chose to accept it. It had a double advantage: it allowed him to keep Verginius alive and (more important) it forced Verginius to disown his troops."159
Under Otho, with his Neronian leanings, Verginius was "rehabilitated" as loyal to Nero, and given extraordinary acknowledgement with a second consulship.160 A similar motivation on the part of Vitellius to seem the heir of Nero will have ensured Verginius' survival after Otho's death
(when in fact he himself was offered the purple again, Tac. Hist. 2.51; Plut. Otho 18.3).161 Thus the two traditions had a separate existence until the Flavian dynasty when Cluvius Rufus wrote his history. With the advent of Nerva, Tacitus and Suetonius (and later Plutarch and Dio) were free to choose from among the versions as suited their emphasis.162
Verginius Rufus' response to Cluvius Rufus when the latter protested fides historiae for what seems to have been an unflattering account of these years was disingenuous: Tune ignoras,
Cluvi, ideo me fecisse quod feci, ut esset liberum vobis scribere quae libuisset (Pl. Ep. 9.19.5).163
The inscription written by Rufus himself which Pliny reports (twice!) was a less public statement
159 Levick (1985) 337.
160 Tac. Hist. 1.77.2; Plut. Oth. 1.2. See also Townend (1962) 120.
161 Tac. Hist. 2.71.1, 95.1.
162 See Levick (1985) 341-343.
163 See Townend (1961) 338 on quae libuisset as a curious way to describe history.
- 67 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
given its removal from Rome; here we have a case in point for how such 'private' material becomes 'public' whether by oral or written means.
But the inscription has been read as an attempt by Rufus to record for posterity his own position during that troubled time. The text of the inscription thus will bear some scrunity:
HIC SITUS EST RUFUS, PULSO QUI VINDICE QUONDAM IMPERIUM ADSERUIT NON SIBI SED PATRIAE
The placement of quondam at line's end followed by imperium as the first word of the pentameter seems deliberate; in epitaphs quondam may designate the person as deceased (e.g.
CIL 8.4546) in a quasi-adjectival fashion,164 but given the number of opportunities presented him to take on a greater imperium, it seems legitimate to read quondam as a more general temporal marker with imperium adseruit.165 The phrase imperium adseruit – an exceptionally strong one with distinct overtones (see below) – only draws more attention to this nuance, and the final non sibi sed patriae leaves the reader in little doubt as to Rufus' constitutional inclinations.166 We might remember that our sources, by and large, portray a man determined to uphold the right of
164 OLD s.v. quondam 1a.
165 OLD s.v. quondam 1a; cf. Quint. Inst. 12.11.3 Vidi ego longe omnium quos mihi cognoscere contigit summum oratorem Domitium Afrum ualde senem cotidie aliquid ex ea quam meruerat auctoritate perdentem, cum agente illo quem principem fuisse quondam fori non erat dubium alii, quod indignum uideatur, riderent, alii erubescerent: quae occasio illo fuit dicendi malle eum deficere quam desinere. This is the tack taken by sources (Plutarch and Dio) positive towards Rufus who number his salutations as imperator pollavki".
166 Levick (1985) 340, following Sherwin-White (1985) 502, argues that patria and res publica should be read as nationalistic slogans rather than constiutional ones aimed at so-called Imperium Galliarum. But given the emphasis in the sources on Verginius deference to the Senate and the parallels adduced above, I prefer to read these terms as consitutional.
- 68 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
the senate to chose a successor, even at sword point (cf. Dio 63.25; Plut. Gal.10.2). Townend draws attention to the "contrast with Vespasian's reactions to the same situation" in 75.167
Townend points out the similarity of the social and political situations of Verginius and
Vespasian – and the difference of their responses to imperium – as the reason for Verginius' subsequent removal from politics until 97.168 Aliquem asserere seems based in juridical technical uses like aliquem manu asserere and asserere in libertatem, all connected to servitude and its opposite, freedom.169 The phrase here (imperium adseruit non sibi sed patriae) has a number of parallels in literature of the Flavian period, and more specifically from works by authors closely connected with Pliny himself, all of which reflect on the assumption of imperial power. Martial in a poem comparing Domitian to Hercules uses a similar phrase (adseruit possessa malis
Palatia regnis 9.101.13); Suetonius describes likewise the assumption of divine affectation by
Gaius (uerum admonitus et principum et regum se excessisse fastigium, diuinam ex eo maiestatem asserere sibi coepit; Suet. Cal. 22.2) and on that emperor's death notes that the conspirators did not designate a successor (neque coniurati cuiquam imperium destinaverunt,
Suet. Cal. 60.1) but convened the senate to take counsel for the future in asserenda libertate
(loc.cit.)170; so too with Otho.171 The phrase non sibi sed patriae as a republican-like slogan has
167 Townend (1961) 339 Jos. B.J. 4.508-604; but Dio 65.8.3f, Tac. Hist. 2.7 and 74f, Suet. Vesp. 6 make no mention of the incident; see Chilver (1957) 29-35.
168 Townend (1961) 339-41.
169 TLL s.v. assere 2.863.51-864.25 from which it appears other usages devolve.
170 The events surrounding the accession of Claudius are described similarly (... consules cum senatu et cohortibus urbanis forum Capitoliumque occupauerant asserturi communem libertatem. Suet. Cl. 10.3).
- 69 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
several parallels, but I would point in particular to Lucan who, in describing the joyless
(re)marriage of Marcia and Cato before he entered the war, writes hi mores, haec duri immota
Catonis | secta fuit, servare modum finemque tenere | naturamque sequi patriaeque impendere vitam | nec sibi sed toti genitum se credere mundo (Luc. Phars. 2.380-3);172 Silius Italicus writes of the vileness of the leading Capuans nec, quos uile genus despectaque lucis origo |foedabat, sperare sibi et deposcere primi | deerant imperia ac patriae pereuntis habenas (Sil. Pun. 11.48-
50); of the several parallels outside of the Flavian period, I draw attention in particular to
Valerius Maximus on P. Decius Mus173 and Iustin's Epitome of Pompeius Trogus 6.8.5 on
Epaminondas.174 But perhaps the most interesting parallel to the pentameter is the reported advice given by Vindex to Galba ut humano generi assertorem ducemque se accommodaret
(Suet. Gal. 9.2).
On his monument, which he mandated to his heirs, Rufus chose to have his military victory and political achievements (and arguably his political ideology) commemorated for
171 Suet. Oth. 9.3 ac statim moriendi impetum cepit, ut multi nec frustra opinantur, magis pudore, ne tanto rerum hominumque periculo dominationem sibi asserere perseueraret, quam desperatione ulla aut diffidentia copiarum.
172 The substitution of toti mundo for patriae is an appropriately Stoic notion.
173 Val. Max. 5.6.5 P. Decius
174 Pomp. Trog. 6.8.5 Nam et imperium non sibi semper, sed patriae quaesivit, et pecuniae adeo parcus fuit, ut sumptus funeri defuerit. The importance of Epaminondas as an – albeit Greek – exemplum of military and literary virtues cannot be understated (certainly Nepos did not, see Nep. Vit. pref), nor can Pompeius Trogus' place among the four canonical Roman historians.
- 70 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
posterity in an elegant and subtle epigram of his own writing.175 He was attempting to control his memoria. The slight ambiguity of expression – which hides loyalties but not principles – even on a monument removed from Rome, may perhaps be forgiven such an important general and senator, an upholder of the Senate's sovereignty, who nevertheless survived 68/69 and the
Flavian dynasty. Rufus' nomen, preserved within this epigram, would be associated with his deeds for as long as the stones had a family to care for it; this is clearly the thrust of Pliny's criticism and concern in Ep. 6.10. Pliny, to be sure, does assert that Rufus' gloria and memoria still have an existence apart from the physical symbol of the monument, but he also suggests that they will endure only as long as there are friends and family such as he to ensure their continuance.176
Like Tacitus at the close of the Agricola (nam multos veterum velut inglorios et ignobilis oblivio obruit. Tac. Agr. 46.4) and Seneca in his letter to Cremutius Cordus' daughter Marcia
(illum vindicasti morte ... cuius viget vigebit memoria, Sen. Ad Marc. 1.3), Pliny was aware that without action on the part of true intimates personal oblivion (the death of memoria) was inevitable. The scarcity of true friends might lead a man to trust rather in himself (as Cicero did):
Tam rara in amicitiis fides, tam parata oblivio mortuorum, ut ipsi nobis debeamus etiam
175 Pliny himself calls the lines versus (At ille mandauerat caueratque, ut diuinum illud et immortale factum uersibus inscriberetur, Pl. Ep. 6.10.4).
176 The Rufus letters (Ep. 2.1, 6.10, 9.19) are replete with references to memoria; cf. for example 6.10.3 Subit indignatio cum miseratione, post decimum mortis annum reliquias neglectumque cinerem sine titulo sine nomine iacere, cuius memoria orbem terrarum gloria pervagetur. Note Pliny's insistence on filial ties with Verginius in Pl. Ep. 2.1.9: ... me huius aetatis per quem excusaretur elegit, his quidem verbis: 'Etiam si filium haberem, tibi mandarem.'
- 71 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
conditoria exstruere omniaque heredum officia praesumere. Nam cui non est verendum, quod videmus accidisse Verginio? (Pl. Ep. 6.10.5-6). It seems likely that with this inscription, which
Pliny later recorded for posterity in a literary monument – an irony of which he was well aware, and one identical to Tacitus’ Cremutius (see above p. 60) – Verginius Rufus acted from a similar conviction, and commemorated himself in this precise and meaningful way, seeking to retain control of his own memoria. Pliny for his part remembered Rufus not only for his military and political achievements, but also as a composer of nugatory verse (Ep. 5.3) along with a host of some of the most significant political figures of earlier times. Verginius Rufus' self- commemoration does not take this form: his poetic ability is not explicitly mentioned on his monumentum, but is rather covert in the epigram (and even so, it is Pliny who reveals that the epigram is Verginius' own composition).177 When we turn to Pliny, we shall see that he, at least, is much less reluctant to integrate his poetic and political achievements in his own literary monumentum, his Epistles, and to link gloria to poetic achievement.
177 The possibility of figural representation with the monumentum is intriguing in its potential importance for this problem.
- 72 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
Chapter Two: Terms of Praise
There are a great many words in Latin used to praise the excellence of individuals and things, and a number of different modes or qualities in which excellence might manifest itself
(beauty, manliness, skill at speaking, etc.). In this chapter I focus on those words used by poets in the Flavian period to describe their own excellence and success as poets. It will quickly become apparent that five key terms dominate this discussion: fama, laus, nomen, honor(-os), and gloria.
In the following pages I shall attempt to provide a concise semantic description of these important terms and others, especially in relation to each other and their antonyms, as a necessary background for my analysis of the poetic texts in Chapters Three, Four, and Five. My immediate concern here is to map out any conceptual boundaries between the application of these terms in general, and to poets in particular.178 I am interested in ascertaining to what extent and in what ways there may be significance in the specific words a poet uses to describe his success.
Hellegouarc'h produced in the early 1960's a remarkable piece of work that examines the political vocabulary of the late Roman republican period.179 The volume is nearly encyclopedic
178 A discussion of the semantic relationship of a group of words – especially of a group of words so entangled, and which form a web of associations itself entangled with Roman elite culture – has two consequences. First, any analysis, however much it proceeds from the texts themselves, will only be able to present conclusions that attest to the majority of instances of a given word; second, no analysis can be absolute. The conclusions that I draw below are intended to present a general framework from which to discuss the poetic texts of the Flavian period.
179 Hellegouarc'h (1963).
- 73 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
in its scope; a section (entitled "Les récompenses dues à l'homme politique et la notion de célébrité" 363-424) is devoted to the study of many of the terms I shall analyze here. My debt to his discussion will be obvious. But it is the several TLL articles that serve as the basis of my discussion,180 since they provide an appropriately wider perspective than the predominantly
Republican, political exemplars found in the scholarship. In what follows, I buttress the excellent observations of the scholarly literature with examples from the early empire.
2.1.1 Existimatio, Fama
I have chosen to discuss existimatio and fama together for several reasons. First, they both share a curious ambiguity, in the sense that neither is inherently probative;181 this is, perhaps, especially true of fama by the Flavian period. The two terms also depend logically on a reasoned judgment of a sort, an opinio; this is especially true of existimatio at all times. In simple terms both words describe the result of a reaction, an opinion, or a judgment formed by a person or group in consideration of an act or the character, sim., of an individual; as such they are personal.182 But there are significant differences also.
180 Friedrich "Existimatio"; Vetter "Fama"; Knoche "Gloria"; Mehmet "Honor"; von Kamptz "Laus". Forcellini's thesaurus is used for "Nomen".
181 A point made most obvious by the frequent use of phrases such as mala fama, bona fama. Cf. TLL s.v. existimatio, fama passim.
182 By which I mean that the fama or existimatio rests on the individual judged only, and cannot be directly transferred to another.
- 74 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
Existimatio, derived from aestimo, has its roots in the notion of actively setting a value on something. Accordingly, its subjective meanings carry the notion of judgment or opinion
(iudicium, arbitrium, opinio) on courses of action183 or especially individuals.184 In particular, existimatio seems to express the conscious judgment of a person's fitness for political activity; the fact that it seems rarely found outside of prose literature with a political context is telling. As
I said above, however, there is nothing inherently probative in existimatio: it can as naturally reflect a positive as a negative judgment: "Remove," says Seneca to Lucilius, "existimationem hominum; dubia semper est et in partem utramque dividitur."185 The ambiguity of existimatio is also apparent in its objective sense, where the sense approximates the English "reputation".186
Here also uses in bonam partem as well as in malam partem may be found. In general, however, as we shall see with fama, the positive uses outweigh the negative.187
183 Cf. TLL 5.1513, I. (Friedrich); cf. Tac. Hist. 4.7.1 sorte et urna mores non discerni; suffragia et existimationem senatus reperta, ut in cuiusque vitam famamque penetrarent.
184 TLL 5.1513-14; cf. Suet.Caes. 75 (in connection with scurrilous poems): itaque et detectas coniurationes conuentusque nocturnos non ultra arguit, quam ut edicto ostenderet esse sibi notas, et acerbe loquentibus satis habuit pro contione denuntiare ne perseuerarent, Aulique Caecinae criminosissimo libro et Pitholai carminibus maledicentissimis laceratam existimationem suam ciuili animo tulit.
185 Sen. Ep. 26.6; cf. also e.g. Cic. Ver. 2.3.190 In hoc genere facilior est existimatio quam reprehensio, ideo quod eum qui hoc facit avarum possumus existimare, crimen in eo constituere non tam facile possumus, quod videtur concedendum magistratibus nostris esse ut iis quo loco velint frumentum accipere liceat. Rhet. Her. 4.20.11-14 'Quem senatus damnarit, quem populus damnarit, quem omnium exestimatio damnarit, eum vos sententiis vestris absolvatis?'
186 cf. e.g. Suet. Nero 12.1 exhibuit autem ad ferrum etiam quadringentos senatores sescentosque equites Romanos et quosdam fortunae atque existimationis integrae, ex isdem ordinibus confectores quoque ferarum et uaria harenae ministeria.
187 Hellegouarc'h (1963) 363 "les emplois laudatifs l'emportent tellement sur les autres que le mot se trouve couramment seul avec cette nuance. Il est juste cependant de remarquer qu'il est alors très souvent
- 75 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
Existimatio is very rarely found in poetic texts beyond Plautus and Terence (the metrical shape of the word probably plays a part in this restriction). But fama, very nearly an exact synonym,188 is extremely common. Like existimatio, fama has a subjective sense and objective sense possessing basically the same semantic values as those for existimatio. A slightly different nuance, however, can be traced. Hellegouarc'h states:
L'origine différente d'existimatio et fama conduit cependant à une nuance de sens qui ne me paraît pas négligeable. Existimatio désigne la «réputation» qui résulte d'un jugement personnel, fondé sur l'opinon que l'on a de la personnalité d'un individu; fama implique une opinion collective provoquée par des actions importantes, écaltantes.189 This nuance is particularly obvious given the fact that an individual as well as a group can possess in the subjective sense an existimatio of another individual;190 fama, on the other hand, has an inherent general quality, and in the subjective sense does not appear to have been localized to an individual.191 What is more, fama is also often used in the abstract, as if
associé à d'autres mots du même ordre de vocabulaire ou situé dans ue phrase dont le contexte éclaire ce sens laudatif."
188 Cf. Cic. Quinct. 50 cuius bona ex edicto possidentur, huius omnis fama et existimatio cum bonis simul possidetur. Cf. Diff. Gramm. 7.522.32 opinio hominem suspectum facit, fama vel commendat vel destruit, rumor indicat. opinion ostendit, fama iudicat, rumor tumultuatur.
189 Hellegouarc'h (1963) 365.
190 Note, for example, the occurrence of such phrases as existimatio hominum.
191 See TLL s.v. fama 6.211, s.v. II "i.q. opinio vulgi, existimatio hominum"
- 76 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
synonymous with rumor.192 Seneca Minor provides in Ep. 102 a number of important definitions for the terms I examine in this section; of fama he says: fama non est unius sermo.193 Quintilian likewise: famam atque rumores pars altera consensum civitatis.194 These two statements are borne out in the examples from the TLL.
Fama can be rather more disassociated from conscious judgment than existimatio. It is represented as possessing, in a sense, an existence in the same way that a turba or vulgus has an existence beyond the individuals which comprise them. This general understanding of fama is supported by instances in which fama equivocates a sense close to memoria.195 The equivocation with memoria raises some interesting possibilities, to be sure. Most important here, however, is that fama can thus exist, or persist, over time:
parte tamen meliore mei super alta perennis astra ferar, nomenque erit indelebile nostrum,
192 See TLL s.v. fama 6.219.23ff, esp. 219.63-220.17 (cf. e.g. Virg. Aen. 7.563-565 est locus Italiae medio sub montibus altis, | nobilis et fama multis memoratus in oris, | Amsancti valles; Val. Fl. 1.790 nomina magnorum fama sacrata nepotum) and TLL VOL.225-227 s.v. IV Fama personata.
193 Sen. Ep. 102.8.
194 Quint. Inst. Or. 5.3.
195 See TLL 6.209.65ff s.v. IB1; cf. e.g. Lucr. 5.328-29 quo to facta virum totiens cecidere neque usquam | aeternis famae monimentis insita florent? Nep. Phoc. 1.1 itaque huius memoria est nulla, illius autem magna fama, ex quo cognomine Bonus est appellatus. Cic. Fin. 3.3.57.6-15 qui autem post eos fuerunt, cum Carneadem sustinere non possent, hanc, quam dixi, bonam famam ipsam propter se praepositam et sumendam esse dixerunt, esseque hominis ingenui et liberaliter educati velle bene audire a parentibus, a propinquis, a bonis etiam viris, idque propter rem ipsam, non propter usum, dicuntque, ut liberis consultum velimus, etiamsi postumi futuri sint, propter ipsos, sic futurae post mortem famae tamen esse propter rem, etiam detracto usu, consulendum; Pl. Ep. 3.10.3 Neque enim adfectibus meis uno libello carissimam mihi et sanctissimam memoriam prosequi satis est, cuius famae latius consuletur, si dispensata et digesta fuerit.
- 77 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
quaque patet domitis Romana potentia terris, ore legar populi, perque omnia saecula fama, siquid habent veri vatum praesagia, vivam. (Ov. Met. 15.875-79)
Ovid's formulation is hardly exceptional,196 nor is the use of fama. Recall Tacitus on Agricola: quidquid ex Agricola amavimus, quidquid mirati sumus, manet mansurumque est in animis hominum in aeternitate temporum, fama rerum (Tac. Agr. 46.4).197 The manner of the perpetuation of fama is also significant in assessing the qualities distinct from existimatio. The semantic, and even etymological, roots of fama lie in the vehicle for its dissemination: fama is explicitly associated, for example, with sermo in Seneca's definition (given above), and vox or vocalization elsewhere.198 Fama thus, as memoria, seems to imply verbalization.199
Fama and existimatio, then, share some important characteristics, namely their dependence on external judgment; both can also be particularized with defining genitives, as well as generalized. But while existimatio seems more or less localized in either conscious individual judgment, or the conscious collective judgment of a group (e.g. senatus, vulgus), fama can also
196 Cf. most famously, of course, Hor. Carm. 2.20, 3.30. See below for the significance of nomen.
197 Lucan 10.542-46: captus sorte loci pendet; dubiusque timeret | optaretne mori respexit in agmine denso | Scaeuam perpetuae meritum iam nomina famae | ad campos, Epidamne, tuos, ubi solus apertis | obsedit muris calcantem moenia Magnum. Suet. Nero 55 erat illi (sc. Neroni) aeternitatis perpetuaeque famae cupido, sed inconsulta. ideoque multis rebus ac locis uetere appellatione detracta nouam indixit ex suo nomine, mensem quoque Aprilem Neroneum appellauit; destinauerat et Romam Neropolim nuncupare.
198 TLL s.v. fama; cf. esp. 6.219.63-220.58 and e.g. Cic. 2 Verr 2.18 O praeclare coniectum a vulgo in illam provinciam omen communis famae atque sermonis...; Mart. Spec. 1.8 unum pro cunctis fama loquetur opus.
199 For which observation the etymology from Greek fhvmh gives some support; Ernout-Meillet s.v. fama.
- 78 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
take on a pseudo-existence of its own, however logically dependent on a voice to give it utterance. What's more, fama seems not to be dependent on a rational "estimation" of worth, but rather is simply the voicing of a reaction to a person or event; verbal expression of existimatio on the other hand is corollary, and existimatio relies a priore on rational judgment. The pseudo- existence of fama, apparent in certain similarities and even equivocations with memoria, has implications for the perpetuation of memoria, for poets as for those involved in public life, and may explain the preference of poets for this term over existimatio in contexts where either would be suitable.200 Where fama (and to a lesser degree existimatio) differ from the other terms of praise I shall discuss is in the relative ambivalence of the term.
2.1.2 Laus, nomen, honos
"[P]ar nature, laus est, si j'ose dire, toujours laudatif".201 This statement is not quite as banal as it at first appears, for the consistently probative nature of laus marks a distinct movement away from the concepts fama and existimatio. Distinct, too, from fama and existimatio are the fundamental ties of laus to aristocratic culture and virtutes. For, in general terms, laus is the voiced and deliberate naming of an individual in recognition for his specific virtue(s) or specific actions arising from them. Later writers singled out the connection with naming as the earliest meaning of the term (laudare significat prisca lingua nominare
200 The metrical shape of existimatio also excludes it from the majority of verse poetry, and certainly any with a dactylic foundation.
201 Hellegouarc'h (1963) 365.
- 79 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
appellareque, Gell. 2.6.16),202 support for which is provided by Plautus, for example: Iovem supremum testem laudo (Pl. Cap. 462). The constituent elements of the definition offered (voiced and deliberate naming, an individual, virtues) resonate with the elite culture of commemoration described in the first chapter. Indeed, laus as a term is often associated with elite funerary contexts.203
The laudatio, as observed in Chapter One, served as a vehicle for the naming of ancestors and a re-stating of their separate achievements – res gestae – (in terms of magistracies held, etc.) and virtutes, among which the name and achievements of the recently deceased individual would then take place. The notions of "celebrity" or "renown" (including in the Roman mind nomen, see below) thus seem, in this area of the term's semantic range at least, a result of the actual act of laus. Likewise, virtutes, or res (i.e. the actions devolving from the enactment of virtutes), give rise to laus. The very close association of these three elements – especially res (act) and virtus – generates, quite unsurprisingly, some overlap.204 In fact, laus seems sometimes to be a kind of metonymy for virtus.205 In all cases, however, laus is consistently probative and linked to
202 Cf. P. Fest. (L.) 105.9 Laudare apud antiquos ponebatur pro nominare; and other examples in TLL s.v. laudo, 7.1042.16-23. Laudo is glossed in Greek as ejgkomiavzw, ejpainw' (CGL Goetz VIsq.)
203 Cf. e.g. Tac. Ann. 2.73.1 funus per laudes ac memoriam virtutum eius celebre fuit. Luc. 9.216 si Roma sonarent rostra ducis laudes.
204 Laus as "renown" cf. TLL 7.1064.33ff s.v. laus II
205 OLD s.v. laus; none of the examples given under OLD s.v. laus 3a,b are compelling enough to suggest that this nuance is significantly different from the primary meaning. OLD 2 and 3 seem to be described in TLL 7.1064.33ff s.v. laus II. This apparent equivalence of laus and virtus seems to be very early: cf. Sarsila (1982) 23-25 for an discussion of an example from Livius Andronicus (trag. 16f. Ribbeck).
- 80 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
aristocratic virtutes.206 Laus is a transient phenomenon, the intermediary step between virtus/act and "renown".
The importance of nomen for the elite is central to this process of praise, for without a nomen,207 virtues and deeds cannot be associated with a particular individual, or family, by name; in a strict sense, the person cannot receive laus. But nomen is not essentially an elite or political term: Nomen est, quod unicuique personae datur, quo suo quaeque proprio et certo vocabulo appellatur (Cic. Inv. 1.24). Cicero's definition is unremarkable, perhaps, but the notion of making an object or person distinct from others in this way is an essential step to praise, as we shall see with the term honor: making an individual distinct and distinguishable – or known – is a sine qua non. Nomen comprises two basic semantic fields. One centers around rather straightforward "naming"; for an individual this act equivocates to presenting the minimum evidence for individual existence or identity. The particularizing quality of nomen in comparison with words having a similar semantic is made more or less explicit by Varro: Ut in articulis duae partes, finitae et infinitae, sic in [vocabulis]
An intensification of this particularizing quality in the objective senses of the term generates the
206 See Hellegouarc'h (1963) 367-8, and especially Sarsila (1982) passim. Cf. Quint. Inst. Or. 3.7.6 proprium laudis est res amplificare et ornare; 5.10.83 virtus facit laudem..
207 Indeed, the nomen, praenomen, and cognomen were the mark of elite family.
208 See Taylor (1996) 66 for text, and 117 where he comments, "the distinction between common and proper nouns is real, every bit as real as the manifest difference between any mere oppidum and Roma, but Varro does not, either here or elsewhere, elaborate."
- 81 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
other basic semantic field, where nomen takes on a pseudo-existence similar to that seen above for fama – for from the beginning, it seems, nomen was construed as the renown or celebrity of a person (i.e. the extent to which his name is known): Reges per regnum statuasque sepulcraque quaerunt, | aedificant nomen: summa nituntur opum vi (Enn. Ann. 16.411).209 Metonymice, this celebrity becomes "reputation": thus Ovid can say, "corpora si nequeunt, quae possunt, nomina tangunt."(Ov. A.A. 2.633). This objective sense of celebrity or renown is totally lacking in the verbal form nominare. Nomen, then, seems inextricably linked with aspects of praise in Roman conceptual thinking, at least as far as words such as laus are concerned, that is, words which rely on the naming of individuals or their distinctiveness from others. But it is not inextricably confined to elite culture or the political sphere, whatever its importance for both.
Honos, likewise, betrays its fundamental meaning in the distinguishing of one individual over others: Mehmet defines it as id quod aliquem vel aliquid egregium reddit, distinguit, ornat.210 Unlike laus, however, which, although evident earliest in areas of public concern (laus bellica, laus dicendi, laus eloquentiae, laus ducis), later expanded to other areas, honos from very early on seems to denote distinction given alicui by virtue of the position or place held by that individual within the social system.211 In fact, honos seems to have its origins in religious contexts, and finds focus in the reverence due a deity and the respect due individuals in positions
209 Cf. Hor. Ars 400; Ov. A.A. 3.219; Sen. Suas. 2.15; Quint. Inst. Or. 10.1.72; Sil. 13.5
210 TLL 6.2916.80-1, s.v. honor (honos).
211 This is the argument of Klose (1933).
- 82 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
of authority, positions which in the Roman system are sacer (see below).212 Thus honos, apart from ritual contexts, can be applied to those things by which respect is shown to individuals. The consequent association of honos and magistratus is understandable;213 but the words are not synonyms. Hellegouarc'h:
Cependant honos n'est pas pour autant un synonyme exact de magistratus, comme le montre notamment le fait qu'au singulier il peut désigner globalement l'ensemble de magistratures, ce qui tend bien à prouvé que, même dans ces emplois, le sentiment de la valeur primitive d'honos reste parfaitement conscient: l'honos en général, c'est l'‹‹hommage›› du peuple à l'égard d'un homme politique, 'amplissimus honos' est la forme la plus élevée de cet hommage; il se rattache ainsi aux termes exprimant la célébrité, comme existimatio, laus, ou gloria, ce qui n'est point évidemment le cas de magistratus.214
As Klose makes clear, honos also has similar associations with sacerdotium and ornamentum that belie any strict equivalence of honos and magistratus.215 Any number of things that by an act
212 See Klose (1933) 12-15, esp. 13-14 for connections to Lares and familia; Klose cites a passage from Plautus, Rudens 185ff, and comments "Sie [sc. Palaestra] glaubt bei ihrer hervorragenden pietas gegenüber Eltern und Göttern (v. 190, 192), von diesen ungerecht behandelt zu werden, ...Palaestra kränkt es, daß die Götter ihr, obwohl sie keinerlei Schuld auf sich geladen hat, sondern regelmäig allen Verpflichtungen ihnen gegenüber nachgekommen ist (pietas), die Anerkennung [i.e. honos] versagen." (12). See also n. 214 below.
213 See Klose (1933) 35-36, Hellegouarc'h (1963) 384-5.
214 Hellegouarc'h (1963) 385-6, speaking, of course, to the political consequence of honos/magistratus. For a broader view see Klose (1933) 35-37.
215 See Klose (1933) 37-39, where he cites an interesting papyrus by way of example, BGU II 628, II 14/15 Appella[ti]ones vero quae ad miagistratus et sacerdotia et alsios honores pertinebunt ...:
- 83 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
(e.g. sacrifice, setting up a statue, bestowing of ornamenta, etc.) mark the distinguishing of an individual can be called honores.216
Honos, as Klose argues, is an act.217 Thus, like laus, it is granted as a sign of the community's recognition of an individual (or indeed a divinity). While laus is a verbal act conceptually dependent on nomen, the expression of honos can take many forms, including laus.
The semantic boundaries of the laudabile do expand over time; thus the overlap between laus and honos increases. Nomen has roots in a broader social context, and its political importance is merely consequent. But while the connections of honos to the political vocabulary is strong, and of laus exceptionally so, we must also be aware of the cultic/religious background for honos
(esp. in connection with the Manes).218
2.1.3 Gloria
The conceptual nature of the term gloria renders any brief discussion very difficult. In fact, this nebulous term, a nexus for social, ethical, and political imperatives among the elite, is fundamentally tied to notions such as virtus, and finds full expression in relation to other terms, such as honor, laus, memoria, and fama. It is not simply a question of defining gloria, but of
216 Cf. TLL 6.2921.74-2922.54. See further esp. Klose (1933) 75-78, 84-5, cf. 75-6 "Die pietas eines Menschen mu unbedingt von den Göttern anerkannt werden, honos is die Belohnung für die pietas."
217 See Klose (1933) passim, and 10 "Honos besitzt eine aktive Bedeutung, die Person, von der der honos ausgeht und die ihn spendet, ist im stärkstem Maße als beteiligt gedacht und als ständig mitwirkend empfunden (ab summis viris, populi).
218 See Klose (1933) 75, 84-85.
- 84 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
describing its ambit in relation to the social realities described by the other terms. I will argue that gloria is not glory, but a rather more restricted term than the English "glory"; no equivalence should be suggested. The restrictions, as Knoche argued (see below), are two-fold. First, gloria is restricted by its intimate connections to virtus, out of which res bene gestae arise. Second, gloria is restricted to the vir magnus. In the following paragraphs I shall refer to the terms discussed above in order to help define gloria. Indeed, in some cases it is possible to argue for the priority of gloria (as a goal) in the political vocabulary: gloria seems to be the telos of elite public activity and, as such, is necessarily the concern of the vir magnus . "Avec lui [sc. gloria]," writes
Hellegouarc'h, "nous sommes également en présence d'une notion qui touche au plus profond des conceptions politiques des Romains. En effet la recherche de la gloria est la justification fondamentale de leur activité politique..."219 The shifting boundaries or criteria for measuring successful public life or for identifying the vir magnus in the various stages of the development of the Roman state and the Roman elite seem to influence the application of gloria (see below on
Cicero and Seneca); but the basic semantic of gloria as a public recognition by elite peers for virtutes and res gestae is constant.
The value of a secure etymology220 for a correct understanding of gloria is debatable, for it has a very rich history in the Latin language.221 Knoche's TLL article, a substantial work in
219 Hellegourac'h (1963) 369.
220 See Ernout-Meillet s.v. gloria, gloriosus. The suggestions of Hamp (1982) are not convincing.
221 The etymology of gloria is far from certain, although the two linguistically plausible etymologies suggested are discussed by Leeman (1949, 125-7). Both of these possibilities (one connected to klevo",
- 85 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
itself that later resulted in the article discussed above,222 is fundamental. Cicero's definitions in the oratorical and rhetorical works – the later philosophical works, as we shall see, pervert the application of the term somewhat for ethical reasons – clearly point toward the essential meaning of gloria: gloria est frequens de aliquo fama cum laude (Cic. Inv. 2.166); gloria est inlustris et pervagata magnorum vel in suos vel in patriam vel in omne genus humanum fama meritorum
(Cic. Marc. 26); bonam famam bonorum, quae sola vere gloria nominari potest, expetunt (Cic.
Sest. 139).223 Gloria is a lasting, diffuse, positive, and qualitative recognition of the excellence of someone or thing in relation to its "peers"; it is not necessarily an act, and unlike laus it can extend in time beyond the immediate context of praising (thus it does not necessarily depend on voicing).224 In its subjective sense gloria signifies the great distinctiveness of a person or thing, a distinctiveness, however, which reflects on to something/someone else.225 In its objective sense, gloria results for an individual from the perception and approval of virtus expressed in acts or words, res gestae.226 Invidia, a common antonym of gloria in this objective sense, works in
the other to gelei'n [Hesychius s.v. gelei'n : lavmpein] and clarus) are justified by sense as much by any strictly linguistic considerations.
222 Knoche (1934).
223 Other similar definitions are known; cf. TLL s.v. gloria 6.2063.1-25.
224 Although gloria might include all these things. TLL s.v. gloria 6.2062.79-82, I (Knoche's definition) "gloria proprie est frequens fama cum laude, quae ultro sequitur nomen vel facta eorum, qui praeclaras res bene gesserunt, fere i.q. dovxa, klevo", ku'do"."
225 Cf. TLL s.v. gloria 6.2067, I.A.1cb and d.
226 Cf. TLL s.v gloria 6.2067, I.A.1ca.
- 86 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
similar manner: it is the perception and active disapproval of the actions and words of an individual.227
For humankind, not things, gloria is used predominantly in its objective sense, associated with and subsequent to virtus.228 The observations below are directed for the most part to this objective gloria. Virtus, to be sure, finds expression in successful military action (res gestae, res bellicae) in the earliest stages of its development and throughout Latin literature. Accordingly, gloria clearly and consistently results from military success. But, because it is a public recognition of virtus (a term in flux or at least of broad application), gloria shifts with virtus. "It is due to the intellectualization of manliness that virtus developed into the normative characteristic pertaining to all human intentions and actions," writes Sarsila, after demonstrating that this intellectualization of manliness has begun already in Plautus.229 As a consequence, by the time of Cicero, and perhaps (as Guillemin argues following Suster, see below) because of
Cicero himself, the boundaries for gloria have expanded to include res gestae in the wider sense, incorporating political accomplishment, i.e. oratorical, etc. along with military achievements.230
Leeman showed quite clearly how Cicero attempted to value the virtuous life of the philosopher equally against the traditional elements of public life, res gestae; the attempt proceeded from a differently applied notion of virtus (see below, section 2.2.1)
227 Cf. TLL s.v gloria 6.2076.58-62, I.A.1k, and TLL s.v. invidia 7, I.A.2 and II.
228 See Sarsila (1982) 17-22. See also Knoche (1934) 114ff.
229 Sarsila (1982) 133.
230 Cf. TLL s.v. gloria 6.2071.6-2072.21, I.A.2.b.b.
- 87 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
Unlike honos and laus in their primary senses, gloria was not "given" as an act, and certainly not in a specific social context such as religious ceremony or the laudatio. Rather it was a quality (like dignitas, or auctoritas) acquired by the approbation of peers for specific acts arising out of inherent qualities or individual virtutes.231 But it is quite unlike dignitas and auctoritas – qualities possessed by individuals – in that it can be transferred to posterity. Like honos – and laus, too – it was always probative (thus the statement gloria est fama cum laude made by Cicero, see above), but unlike honos and laus in that there was no necessary outward sign of that approval. Gloria had an effect on the following generations – it was the gloria maiorum with which members of the elite vied. Like fama, gloria seems to have had a pseudo- existence of its own, indeed, one as undying as memoria. Gloria immortalis (vel sim.) is a common iunctura; gloria is not as immediately transitory as laus. This pseudo-existence of gloria meant that it could have direct repercussions on the gloria of following generations, and that it came with certain inherent obligations for family members. It is perhaps not entirely surprising that gloria and memoria often appear together, esp. in literature with a "political" focus. Cicero, as we saw in Chapter One, was most concerned to preserve his gloria (his res gestae) through a manipulation of memoria. Habinek, discussing the manipulation of tradition
(here the record of men's deeds and offices) in the laudatio comments:
Yet what is evident to those of us who view the event from afar is the degree to which it manipulates the audience as well. The ritual asks them to believe not only what is said about the recently deceased and about the
231 Cf. TLL s.v. gloria 6.2071.6-2072.21, I.A.2.b
- 88 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
ancestors, but to believe that this is what matters; that is, that the self- congratulatory history of the clan should be the basis against which the actions of the recently deceased, and more importantly, of those still living, are to be measured.232
"What is said" about the ancestors is precisely this, gloria. It is the gloria of the deceased and the ancestors which stands as a benchmark for the family, and which was deemed necessary to commemorate.
With gloria, then, we approach closely the desires and concerns connected with commemoration and memoria examined in Chapter One. A tremendous amount of scholarship has been produced over the last 80 years dealing with the Roman concept of "renown" in the political sphere and the self-fashioning of the elite. A recurring problem in the literature is tendency to equate the notion of renown and "glory" – which is extremely broad – with the Latin word gloria, the application of which is actually quite restricted. In the next section I attempt to focus the discussion on developmental conceptions of the term gloria as it relates to elite life
(especially intellectual life).
232 Habinek (1998) 53.
- 89 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
2.2 Gloria in Elite Society
Knoche's 1934 article, which likely arose out of his close study of the term gloria for the
TLL, ably avoids equivocating "glory" with gloria,233 for his concern seems to have been to examine how gloria functions within the wider notion of elite renown. The thesis of Knoche's article is that gloria (in its objective sense) can only belong to the vir magnus and none else, given by his peers primarily for military and public service.234 The word encapsulates the zero- sum competition that lies at the root of elite interaction in every period of Roman history.235 For
Knoche, there is no strict Greek equivalent for gloria,236 nor are there strict synonyms for the term in Latin; honos and nomen, for example, reflect particular manifestations of, or are requisite for, gloria.237 The centrality of the thirst for glory (der Ruhmbegier), which found its focus for the Roman elite in gloria, led Knoche to theoretical reflection about the role of glory (focusing
233 Throughout this section, I use the term "glory" to denote the broad notion of "renown" not in order to confuse (I might as well have used "renown") but to highlight a problem I see in most of the scholarship, namely the assumption that glory = gloria. It will become apparent that, while gloria shares many aspects with glory, the two words are not equivalent. This distinction is critical for such a semantic study. For instance, Leeman asserts (1949, 174, cf. 190) that Horace speaks of his own "roem"/"glory" in Carm. 3.30: "Maar Horatius' non omnis moriar multaque pars mei / vitabit Libitinam toont ons de dichter van de Augusteische tijd in al zijn zelfbewustheid en met zijn aanspraken op blijvende roem, zolang deze in Rome zijn zetel zal vinden." In fact, neither there nor anywhere in his poetical works does Horace refer to gloria accruing to himself through his poetry. The poetic trope of immortality through poetry has been transmuted like Horace himself in Carm. 2.20 (another "glory" poem) into "glory"; from there "glory" becomes linked or equal to gloria, and the argument has fundamentally shifted. Cf. Ennius' volito vivos per ora virorum (Epigr. 17-18 V = ROL 9-10) similarly treated by Leeman on 135-6.
234 Knoche (1934) 105: "honos ist viel gleichmäßiger als gloria dehalb, weil honos dem vir honestus, dem vir probus, zuteil wird ... gloria indessen nur dem vir magnus".
235 Cf. Knoche (1934) 122: "der Ehrgeiz und Tatwille der Nobilität erschlafft und abstirbt: der Ruhmesgedanke hat seine lebenbestimmende Kraft und Potenz verloren."
236 Knoche (1934) 106.
237 Respectively; see Knoche (1934) 104-5 honos, 108-9 nomen.
- 90 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
on Cicero), especially in terms of who validates individual glory, and on what virtutes that validation rests.238 For Knoche, it is gloria's connection to the vir magnus within competitive elite society that is of the utmost importance in understanding the term's relationship to elite attitudes toward this quality.239
2.2.1 Cicero: gloria and virtus
A good starting point for the discussion of gloria in Cicero is the proefschrift of A.D.
Leeman, Gloria: Cicero's Waardering van de Roem en haar Achtergrond in de hellenistiche
Wijsbegeerte en de romeinse Samenleving (1949). Leeman's work is an "investigation into the history of the valuation of glory"240 limited to an examination of the influences of the concept of renown in Hellenistic philosophy, specifically Panaetius and Posidonius, on the (various) concepts of renown found in Cicero's philosophical works, and in his speeches and letters.
Leeman identifies Panaetius and Posidonius as the Hellenistic sources for certain arguments in
Cicero about renown, its sources, and its rewards. Cicero seems never to have completely reconciled the contradictions arising from the intellectual juxtaposition of the desire for gloria as a "psychological reality" of Roman political life,241 and the different valuation, or indeed sometimes lack of value, placed on renown in the philosophical writers of the Middle Stoa. This
238 Knoche (1934) 120-123.
239 See Habinek (2000) 268 for some very thoughtful and incisive comments about the competitive aspect of gloria in the aftermath of the civil war.
240 Leeman (1949) 177 (excerpt from English summary).
241 Leeman (1949) 148-58, 188-9.
- 91 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
notion of renown for the Greeks, as Leeman points out, is reflected in the use of terms like dovxa and klevo"; these two words, which are difficult enough in and of themselves, have by the time of
Posidonius and Panaetius drawn so closely together that they were often interchangeable.242
Cicero, argues Leeman, adopted the conventional divisions of renown into good/bad, true/false
(a division prevalent in the Hellenistic philosophical texts), and applied these divisions unsuccessfully to gloria. Leeman, who understands the various terms laus, honor, fama, claritas to be "aspects of the idea of glory",243 fails to speak explicitly to the matter of how far the notion of renown in the Hellenistic philosophers actually matches the Roman elite conception of gloria.
The intellectual exercise of melding Roman gloria and Hellenistic conceptions of renown found application (and perhaps a motivation) in the pursuit of otium.
The life devoted to literature, as much as that devoted to philosophy, was necessarily a life of otium, occasionally requiring residence away from the urbs.244 As an otium pursuit, the
242 Leeman (1949) 10-45, 178-9. Cf. also 129 where Leeman argues that certain Latin words are equivalents to Greek terms: "Wanneer wij echter goed toezien blijkt het, dat bijna elk van die termen een Latijns aequivalent heeft: dovxa = gloria, eujdoxiva, eujfhmiva = bona fama, e[paino" = laus, timhv = honor, e.d."
243 Leeman (1949) 186.
244 For examples of the development of this thought, see the observations of Riikonen (1976) 84-5: "The writers of antiquity prescribe a country setting when they discuss poetic dedication. In the choice of environment favourable for poetic creation they very often prefer the country, which is also the theme of their poetry. ... Rhetors, on the other hand, regard the composition and writing of speeches as an essential part of political activity, not suited to being carried out in the country. " Riikonen's assertion of the rhetors' view of the country does not take into account that the prominence of the countryside as a theme in Latin poets is imported from the Hellenistic tradition: Vergil no more wrote his Eclogues only in the countryside than Sergius Catilina only plotted in the urbs. The real antithesis lying behind what Riikonen observed follows not from the physical location, but in the absence or presence of otium.
- 92 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
literary life was necessarily opposed to negotium, i.e. the public activity of the magnus vir. Thus the rewards of negotium for the magnus vir (principally gloria) should not strictly be gained from a life of literature. Anne-Marie Guillemin, in Pline et la vie littéraire de son temps (1926), remarks that one of the major developments in the late Republic was the validation of literary studies during periods of otium as a source of gloire.245 In this she followed Suster (1889), who argued for the increased importance in Ciceronian thought of renown (It. gloria) arising from literary pursuits (studia liberalia, and the otium litteratum) in comparison to traditional avenues for procuring gloria, namely military and political service to the state.246 But Suster's arguments are directed toward the phenomenon of renown through literature, not gloria, both for the poet and for the poet's subject; and he links this renown through literature explicitly through the activities of literary patrons in the Republic.247 Literature, for Suster, is the vehicle for presenting another's gloria, not the poet's.
Certainly, Cicero's attitude to the life led apart from politics, as Leeman points out,248 vacillates according to his own political and "philosophical" fortunes in an often inversely proportional manner. While he evidently did argue for the value of literary studium openly, not
245 Cf. Guillemin (1926) 14: "L'innovation de l'époque de Cicéron fut de consacrer ce temps non seulement au soin de son patrimonie et de ses terres, mais à l'étude". I'm not certain in this case how we should see the literary activities of the early epigrammatists, Naevius (who might be seen as an antecedent of Tacitus' Maternus), or Cato. But her point is essentially valid.
246 This is the thesis of his book; cf. e.g. Suster (1889) 10-13.
247 Suster (1889) 15-6, and 13-27 in general on the importance of Greek writers for this process.
248 Leeman (1949) 158-67.
- 93 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
only in his philosophical writings, but more prominently in speeches such as the Pro Archia, for
Cicero at no time was the production of literature as valuable or as commendable for men with appropriate birth and talents (i.e. viri magni) as active participation in public life. As far as gloria is concerned, I am hard put to find any passages in Cicero in which literary production in otium
(which I separate from the philosopher's virtuous lifestyle) ever produces gloria for a member of the elite. A dominant Ciceronian attitude toward otium is well illustrated by De Officiis 1.21, which I quote in full:
Quapropter et iis forsitan concedendum sit rem publicam non capessentibus, qui excellenti ingenio doctrinae sese dediderunt, et iis, qui aut valitudinis imbecillitate aut aliqua graviore causa impediti a re publica recesserunt, cum eius administrandae potestatem aliis laudemque concederent. Quibus autem talis nulla sit causa, si despicere se dicant ea, quae plerique mirentur, imperia et magistratus, iis non modo non laudi, verum etiam vitio dandum puto. Quorum iudicium in eo, quod gloriam contemnant et pro nihilo putent, difficile factu est non probare, sed videntur labores et molestias, tum offensionum et repulsarum quasi quandam ignominiam timere et infamiam. Sunt enim qui in rebus contrariis parum sibi constent, voluptatem severissime contemnant, in dolore sint molliores, gloriam neglegant, frangantur infamia atque ea quidem non satis constanter. Sed iis qui habent a natura adiumenta rerum gerendarum, abiecta omni cunctatione adipiscendi magistratus et gerenda res publica est; nec enim aliter aut regi civitas aut declarari animi magnitudo potest.
Cicero complains that the man gifted for public office should perform in this capacity to his best ability. Those who do not – despising and avoiding gloria and escaping into a life of otium –
- 94 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
render a disservice to the state and eventually to themselves. Here the antithesis of gloria specifically – and not fama, honos, nomen, or laus – and otium, the prerequisite for "serious" literary production, is explicit. But it is only the vir magnus who avoids gloria through otium.
While the vir magnus may argue for gloria on the basis of the virtutes necessary for the philosophical life, it is not readily apparent in Cicero that he can do so on the basis of his literary output.
2.2.4 Seneca: gloria and Philosophy
If Cicero was interested in the relevance of philosophy for renown, Seneca the Younger was interested in the relevance of renown for philosophy. As Newman writes in his 1988 article on renown (and gloria) in Seneca the Younger:
Seneca represents an important step in the understanding of glory since, as heir to both Roman and Stoic concepts of glory, he synthesized the two and adapted the synthesis to his philosophy of Innerlichkeit by substituting moral definitions for traditional political vocabulary ... Seneca subtly redefined the nature of glory.249 In giving recognition to Seneca on this point rather than Cicero, I wonder whether Newman misses to a certain degree the thrust of Leeman's (and Cicero's) arguments. Newman also falls prey to the tendency to equate gloria and "glory". It cannot be denied that Seneca's writings make the shift in the valuation and the sources of renown for the philosophical life much more explicit; and Seneca certainly attempted to lower the estimation of a life of public service and its attendant traditions enormously in comparison to the virtuous life of the philosopher (Cicero, by
249 Newman (1988) 145.
- 95 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
way of contrast, tried to raise the estimation of the philosopher's virtuous life in comparison to the life of public service). There remains the fundamental problem in equivocating glory and gloria, since gloria and glory, although they do share some characteristics – are not necessarily co-extensive. Newman tries to maintain a delicate balance on this point, dividing glory into different grades (claritas ["the glory of virtue itself"],250 gloria ["the praise of a virtuous act by others"],251 and fama ["the opposite of true glory", or "mere popularity"]252), but this division itself only highlights the problem. The objection might be raised, on the basis of the evidence produced by Newman, that in fact Seneca is redefining the notion of claritas rather than gloria, an objection borne out by Newman's own conclusion (in respect to Seneca's gradation of glory) that "Seneca thus preserved the ultimate importance of virtus and correct opinion without prejudice to the Roman desire for glory."253 In either case, Newman is quite correct in demonstrating Seneca's attempt to manipulate, with protrepic aims similar if not identical to
Cicero's, elite Roman notions of renown; but Seneca seems to be doing this with recourse – here unlike Cicero and perhaps more sensibly – to another term altogether, claritas. Claritas is as closely linked to the interior qualities of the Roman elite male (virtutes) as gloria, but perhaps more malleable in its application to the moral aspects of Roman elite life because it is a quality
250 Newman (1988) 151, cf. 151-56.
251 Newman (1988) ibid; cf. 156-8.
252 Newman (1988) ibid; cf. 158-9.
253 Newman (1988) 159. That Seneca did in fact exploit and refine the term claritas/claritudo is the thesis of Habinek (2000).
- 96 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
intrinsic to the elite.254 Habinek suggests that part of Seneca's popularity with later Roman authors arose, at least in part, out of Seneca's adroitness in claiming claritas for himself. "Instead of gloria, a zero-sum type of honor that involved the diminution of a rival, Seneca enjoyed claritas, or claritudo—brilliance, illumination that differentiated him from the obscure masses yet did not necessarily diminish the brilliance of other leading Romans."255
2.2.4 Gloria in Augustan Minor Poetry
An understanding of the use of gloria in connection with a poet's own renown in
Augustan minor poetry will be beneficial to my investigation of how the term is used in Flavian minor poetry. Gloria in Tibullus, Horace (Epodi, Carmina), Propertius, and Ovid (Amores, Ars
Amatoria, Remedia Amoris) shows little variation from the semantic range and the developments in application noted in previous sections, appearing many times in the usual sense of military and political success or in a metaphor derived from the military sphere (e.g. Tib. 1.8.49; Prop.
2.12.22, 2.16.41, 3.9.18, 3.11.60, 3.12.3, 4.10.3; Hor. Carm. 1.18.15, 3.26.2, Epod. 11.23; Ov.
Am. 2.9.6, 2.12.12).256 Indeed, its intimate connection to a military context is often an integral
254 See TLL s.v. claritas, II and s.v. clarus, III passim. For clarissimus as a designation of senatorial status, see TLL s.v. clarus, III.2.
255 Habinek (2000) 266.
256 Gloria in both subjective and objective senses appears at Tib. 1.4.77, 1.5.2 (=gloriosus), 1.6.3, 1.8.49, 2.1.34, 3.7.29, 208, 3.19.7; Prop. 1.8B46, 2.1.74, 2.3.29, 2.7.17-18, 2.12.22, 2.16.41, 2.21.9, 3.9.9, 3.9.18, 3.11.60, 3.12.3, 3.15.39, 4.3.63, 4.10.3; Hor. Carm. 1.18.15, 3.26.2, Ep. 11.23; Ov. Am. 2.6.20, 2.9.6, 2.12.12, 3.15.8. The passages in which the poets refer to their own renown for their poetry are discussed in the text.
- 97 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
part of the function of gloria within a poem.257 There is, however, an interesting development in
Propertius (foreshadowed perhaps in Tibullus), which also appears in Ovid: the poet – who, it must be said, rejects a traditional lifestyle – seems to suggest that the lover's lifestyle (which includes poetry) and "victories" merit gloria. In what follows, I discuss only the five passages in which the poets use the word in the context of their own renown: Tibullus 1.4 and Propertius 2.7 and 1.8B, and Ovid Amores 2.12 and 3.15.
Tibullus 1.4 foreshadows Propertius' claim for gloria in a number of ways. The self- deprecatory tone of this poem – in which Tibullus reports first the advice of Priapus (taking over the role of magister amorum from Priapus himself) and then his ultimate failure – is unmistakable. There also seems to be vigorous parody of epic and didactic.258 And of course, there is no delicate irony in making Priapus, the god (in the Roman tradition) of violent anal rape and gross sexuality, a teacher in the art of boy-seduction.259 Any statement related to the poet must be evaluated from the perspective of the parodic mode. The careful posturing at the end of the poem further undercuts the claim of success (such as it is) in 1.4.77 gloria cuique sua est260:
257 This is true also of the instances I discuss below.
258 See Putnam (1973) 88-89 "It is a mock-didactic poem... enriched by parody of both hymn and epic, particularly Ennius and Lucretius"; Cairns (1979) 175.
259 Richlin (1992) 121-24; Priapus in 1.4 may be more than a "shadow of his Priapic self", as Richlin comments (1992, 126), if the poem is characterised by the kind of irony I suggest: Priapus' success does not come from seduction and precepts, any more than Tibullus' success. The disjunction between verbal assertions and "reality" in this poem are interesting.
260 Putnam (1973) ad loc. notes that this expression has a "proverbial ring" citing Cat. 22.20 and Verg. Aen. 10.467. More than that however, Tibullus may be playing on Cat. 22 as a whole (in 22 Catullus discusses the poetry of Suffenus, an otherwise pleasant fellow who suffers under the delusion that he is a good poet). Catullus' final comment is suggestive: nimirum idem omnes fallimur, nequest quisquam |
- 98 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
the poet presents himself as subsitute magister amorum (Tib. 1.4.75-80; cf. vos me celebrate magistrum, | quos male habet multa callidus arte puer, Tib. 1.4.75-6) but then – in the lines immediately following (Tib. 1.4.81-4) – bemoans his lack of success with his love-object, suggesting that it will damage his credibility as magister (parce, puer, quaeso, ne turpis fabula fiam, cum mea ridebunt vana magisteria, Tib. 1.4.83-4).
The use of gloria in two poems by Propertius (2.7 and 1.8B) is similarly ironic, but in these poems the poet's gloria is explicitly juxtaposed with the more traditional notions of gloria in the Republican period (i.e. gloria based on military or political success). Thus Propertius seems to be asserting, in some respect, an ideal that runs counter to the kind of success traditionally measured by gloria. Rather than approaching these poems through the problematic issue of Propertius' relation to the Augustan Zeitgeist, I shall discuss how and for what the poems ascribe gloria, especially in their deliberate contrast of traditional gloria with the lover-poet's activities.
Propertius 2.7 maintains a deliberate contrast between traditional public activity and the activity of the lover. This poem – deliberately pits the activity of the lover against the military
quem non in aliqua re videre Suffenum | possis. suus cuique attributus est error: sed non videmus manticae quod in tergost. The similarity of the phrase suus cuique attributus est error may simply arise from a similar proverbial source; but the similar contexts in both poems suggest to me that Tibullus is deliberately tongue in cheek here, paralleling his own perceived "success" as magister (his gloria) with Suffenus' perceived poetic skill (his error). Cf. Murgatroyd (1980) 132 "In 1.4 there are two sets of contrasts, the second mirroring the first: Priapus appears initially as the usual comic and undignified figure, but then is shown in a serious and learned pose; so T. appears next in the same dignified pose, but is finally reduced to a laughing-stock."
- 99 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
concerns of the Emperor. After the intial expressions (Prop. 2.7.1-5) of relief and happiness that a lex,261 whatever it may have been exactly, has been repealed, Propertius concedes that, in any case, not even Juppiter can separate true lovers. An imagined response "At magnus Caesar"
(Prop. 2.7.6) sets up the first contrast between love's success and military success: sed magnus
Caesar in armis: | devictae gentes nil in amore valent, (Prop. 2.7.6-7). The implication is, of course, that the poet is equally successful in love, and equally unsuited for war. The following lines devolve from this basic statement as the poet juxtaposes his love for Cynthia against marriage and war: the poet prefers separation from his puella through beheading to marriage with another (Prop. 2.7.7-10). Marriage and warfare are equated in lines 11-13: the tibia played at the poet's marriage is as "deathly" for Cynthia as the tuba that sounds the charge (tibia funesta tristior illa tuba, Prop. 2.7.12), and children – the proper result of a Roman marriage – are born for military service and victory (unde mihi patriis natos praebere triumphis? Prop. 2.7.13). The poet repeats his rejection of this paradigm in line 14: nullus de nostro sanguine miles erit. Lines
15-16, too, perfect the contrast between the activity of warfare and of love: if love for Cynthia were like warfare, the poet would be a great warrior in her castra (quod si vera meae comitarem castra puellae, | non mihi sat magnus Castoris iret equus, Prop. 2.7.15-16). This devotion to his puella, says the poet, is the source of his gloria lata just as, by implication, military service is the source of gloria for others (and Caesar): hinc etenim tantum meruit mea gloria nomen, | gloria ad hibernos lata Borysthenides (Prop. 2.7.16-17). I suggest that the poet chooses gloria here to
261 It does not seem necessary to explore the problems associated with the Augustan marriage laws and Propertius' possible views on Augustan policy. For opposed views about the nature of the law in relation to this poem see (inter alia) Williams (1968) 531-35 and Stahl (1985) 139-56. For the exact nature of this lex, see Ferrero Radista (1980), Badian (1985).
- 100 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
assert his success not only because it continues the military imagery, but also because it sets his claims in sharp contrast to the military imagery focused around Caesar, imagery for which the term gloria would be better suited. The contrafactuals of lines 15-16 further inform our reading of the poet's claim to gloria, for they remove the claim from reality: the poet derives his gloria from his metaphorical service to his puella, from his willingness to serve an imagined role. In any case, it is difficult to read this image of gloria except as one adopted from the public sphere of the vir magnus, and incongruously applied by the lover-poet – who seems to reject traditional ideals of marriage and military service that perpetuate gloria – to himself.
In Prop. 1.8B the poet crows over Cynthia's willingness to forsake a rival in favor of himself, and travel to the Greek East in favor of residence at Rome; she has, he suggests, been won over by the heartfelt arguments of 1.8A.262 Most commentators link the rival in this poem with a person not only of wealth but also with an important military/political position, i.e. the praetor of 2.16 (cf. Enk (1946) 74-5, Enk (1962) 229-31; also Camps (1967) 130, Hubbard
(1974) 58-9, Baker (1990) 94-5).263 And it is against the rival's wealth that the poet sets his poetry: hanc ego non auro, non Indis flectere conchis, | sed potui blandi carminis obsequio
262 Richardson (1976) 166-7 suggests that Prop. 1.8A and 1.8B be taken together as a "poem within a poem".
263 Richardson (1976) 166 may be right to discount earlier suggestions that the rivalis in 1.8 is the praetor in 2.16, but the coincidence of destinations (Illyria) is remarkable. That Cynthia would enjoy a regna dulcia (given the associations of regnum and imperium) with the rival in 1.8 is also suggestive of a connection to an official.
- 101 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
(Prop. 1.8B.39-40).264 The claim to gloria in 1.8B.45-46 (nec mihi rivalis certos subducit amores:| ista meam norit gloria canitiem) thus seems to rest on this double victory: the poet's victory over his rival, and the victory of poetry over wealth. Propertius' choice of gloria in this context seems to indicate that the poet is co-opting the rival's terms of success just as he co-opts the rewards, i.e. Cynthia.265 The use of gloria in 1.8B (a poem in which the poet sets his art against conventionally valued standards of military/political success and wealth266) thus seems to be a case parallel to 2.7.
Ite triumphales circum mea tempora laurus: | vicimus, writes Ovid at the beginning of
Amores 2.12; Corinna is finally his, captured by ars267 (qua posset ab arte capi) in spite of husband, custos, and door (Ov. Am. 2.12.3-4). The military imagery continues: victoria digna triumpho (2.12.5), sanguine praeda caret (2.12.6), non humiles muri, non parvis oppida fossis | cincta, sed est ductu capta puella meo (2.12.7-8). He has received gloria beyond that of any
264 Baker (1990) 94-5 links 1.8 and 2.16 through money, suggesting that sinus ad 1.8.34 and the references to the rival's wealth are paralleled at 2.16.11-12.
265 Contrast, for example, the more usual formulation of renown for poetry (depending on the assertion of readership and immortality, and using the terms fama, nomen, honos, or laus) Propertius offers in 1.7.9- 10: hic mihi conteritur vitae modus, haec mea famast, | hinc cupio nomen carminis ire mei. Cf. e.g. Cat. 1, 95; Hor. Carm. 2.20, 3.30, Ep. 1.19; Ov. Am. 1.15, 3.15.
266 By contrast, in 1.7 the poet wishes for renown within the context of arguments about the relative value of the different genres relative to each other as inherited from the Alexandrians. The locus classicus for this is Call. Fr. 465 Pf. to; mevga biblivon i[son e[legen ei\nai tw/' megavlw/ kakw/'. Useful lists of testimonia and brief but learned discussion of Propertius' debt to Callimachean and Alexandrian aesthetics may be found in Sullivan (1976) 107-21; cf. also Hubbard (1974) 68-115.
267 It is tempting to assume ars points to his poetry, and of course it does; but it does not point to his poetry alone (anymore than the Ars Amatoria is only about poetry), but rather to the whole "bag of tricks" the lover has at his disposal in the pursuit of his beloved.
- 102 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
miles, and deserves a suitable titulus: he himself was general, he himself soldier, he himself cavalry, he himself infantry, he himself signifer (2.12.11-14). The use of gloria in the context of military images here is of the same kind (but of course less subtle) as that in Prop. 2.7; similarly we must read gloria here as simply one among many military images transferred from the sphere of the magnus vir, and applied to the lover-poet, the miles amoris. In Amores 3.15, the famous statement of everlasting renown with which he ends the collection, Ovid also uses gloria in connection with his poetry (3.15.7-8):
Mantua Vergilio gaudet, Verona Catullo; Paelignae dicar gloria gentis ego The fact that gloria here is used not objectively but predicatively with ego and the possessive
Paelignae gentis is significant: with this utterance Ovid attributes gloria to his municeps, not to himself. The distinction may be a fine one, but as we have seen above (section 2.1.3), to be the gloria of someone/something (a subjective use) is not the same as to possess gloria oneself (an objective use). Contrast the more forthright assertion of everlasting renown in the parallel 1.15: mihi fama perennis | quaeritur, in toto semper ut orbe canar (1.15.7-8). Ovid does not claim gloria for himself because of his nugatory poetry (outside of the context of military imagery).
We shall see in Chapter 4 how Martial extends this subjective use of gloria somewhat further.
A pattern of the use of gloria within the context of Augustan minor poets' assertions of their own renown seems, based on my readings of these important poems, to emerge with
Tibullus 1.4 as a somewhat self-deprecatory assertion, continuing in Propertius 1.8B and 2.7, as well as Ovid Amores 2.12 as an ironic co-option of terminology from the public sphere of the magnus vir associated with military imagery. Ovid's interesting usage in 3.15, although markedly
- 103 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
different from the others in that it is not explicitly linked to military imagery, still does not clearly suggest that the poet himself has gained gloria for his poetry and poetic success. This is particularly significant for Ovid: although he has rejected the public life of the magnus vir, he nevertheless remains a member of the elite.
2.2.5 Tacitus' Dialogus: The Concerns of the Elite
The first half of Tactius' Dialogus de Oratoribus (1-13, the debate between Aper and
Maternus on poetry and oratory) will serve to localize several key observations drawn about gloria (and renown in general) to the Flavian period. In the following paragraphs I focus in particular on the intimate associations of gloria in the Dialogus with the magnus vir, and on how the zero-sum nature of gloria manifests itself in the tensions between otium and negotium. These areas of concern, as we shall see, set the stage for the investigation of Statius', Martial's, and
Pliny's attitudes toward renown and poetry, as well as the concepts associated with their own and other poets' success and renown. In the Conclusions to this project we will return to the
Dialogus for perspective on Statius', Martial's, and Pliny's attitudes towards a poet's renown.
It is quite true that we do not know with any certainty anything more about the two principal actors in the first half of the Dialogus, Curiatus Maternus and Marcus Aper, than
Tacitus tells us.268 But there is something to be said about their characterization; it is through
268 This does not mean that there has been no speculation: for Aper see Syme (1979) 701-2. Maternus in particular has been a source of some controversy; Norden (1909) 324-5 suggested an identification with a "sophist" Maternus said by Dio to have been executed by Domitian in 91, but later recanted. Gudeman (1914) 19 attacked Norden's suggestion. Cameron (1967) 258-61 and Barnes (1986) 239-43 have considered the identification anew. But this is an historical question, not one of characterization.
- 104 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
character that we may best assess the significance (for this project) of what each is saying in this section of the Dialogus.269 It is quite clear that the major actors in the Dialogus should be considered magni viri. All are described in Dial. 1.3 as praestantissimi viri. Secundus and Aper are both clearly connected to forensic oratory in Dial. 2, and Maternus is chided for turning his back on his many clientelae in Dial. 3.4 (he himself describes this as neglecting advocacy in 4.1, desidiam advocationum). And the defense of public life that Aper gives is predicated on the life of status, amicitia, and public service which more or less defines the magnus vir. But they all clearly (as Tacitus has suggested) hold different viewpoints on what activities are suitable for a magnus vir. These magni viri, however – and Maternus and Aper in particular – all share a common zero-sum attitude towards life.
The zero-sum attitude apparent in gloria is endemic to Roman elite culture. There are several ways in which the Dialogus bears this observation out, but most interesting for the continuing discussion is the conflict between otium and negotium, a conflict which underlies
Aper's and Maternus' debate. This conflict often manifests itself in the competing claims of oratory and poetry. For example, in 3.4 Aper suggests that Maternus spends all his time composing his tragedies and none on writing speeches and pleading in court, abandoning entirely thereby his obligations and duties as a magnus vir first to his friends, then his provincial clients
("Adeo te tragoediae istae non satiant," inquit Aper, "quo minus omissis orationum et causarum
269 Tacitus suggests as much himself in the proem: Ita non ingenio, sed memoria et recordatione opus est, ut quae praestantissimis viris et excogitata subtiliter et dicta graviter accepi, cum singuli diversas sed easdem probabiles causas adferrent, dum formam sui quisque et animi et ingenii redderent, isdem nunc numeris isdemque rationibus persequar, servato ordine disputationis.
- 105 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
studiis omne tempus modo circa Thyestem consumas? cum te tot amicorum causae, tot coloniarum et municipiorum clientelae in forum vocent, 3.4). Aper goes on to say that Maternus is bringing trouble on himself with this novum negotium ([clientelae] quibus vix suffeceris, etiam si non novum tibi ipse negotium importasses, 3.4). The use of importare in the contrafactual is pointed,270 and negotium is a remarkably (and deliberately) ironic word to be used for composing a tragedy271 – novum only highlights how out of place the term is. Aper points out here, then, that
Maternus has adopted an all-or-nothing attitude toward these two activities. But he is not suggesting Maternus seek a balance: Maternus would scarcely have enough resources to meet his obligations, let alone undertake anything else (cf. quibus vix suffeceris, 3.4). Maternus' response to Aper, and his request for a ruling from Secundus, explicitly confirm his attitude: Secundus as judge must either forbid Maternus to write poetry, or allow him to forgo oratory in order to cultivate the sacred eloquence of poetry (Quo laetor magis oblatum nobis iudicem qui me vel futurum vetet versus facere, vel, quod iam pridem opto, sua quoque auctoritate compellat ut omissis forensium causarum angustiis, in quibus mihi satis superque sudatum est, sanctiorem illam et augustiorem eloquentiam colam, 4.2).272 Again, Maternus does not allow a middle position.
270 see OLD s.v. importo 2.
271 The sole parallel seems to be Pl. Ep. 1.3.3, for which see Chapter Five.
272 Note the contrast in how Aper and Maternus describe the abandonment of oratory: Aper omissis orationum et causarum studiis, Maternus omissis forensium causarum angustiis.
- 106 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
Just as the portrayal in the Dialogus of concentrated time, effort, and attention spent on otium (poetry) or negotium (oratory) betrays the zero-sum mindset of the Roman elite, so too does Aper's subsequent argument. Aper, anticipating an argumentum ad populum, suggests that
Maternus cannot hide behind the actions of others (i.e. those others who have sought out the life of otium and poetry) because he, as an individual, is suited by nature and circumstance to eloquentia virilis et oratia (5.4). Not everyone possesses this natural suitability for public affairs;
Saleius Bassus (a well-known epic poet) is excused, as would be a Greek (for there exercere ludicras artes is honestum).273 In abusing his gift by expending his energy on poetry, Maternus turns his back on public life in toto. Poetry is fine for others and has its value, says Aper (10.4), but Maternus' gifts should only be used – in accordance with his nature – in the courts (Sed tecum mihi, Materne, res est, quod, cum natura tua in ipsam arcem eloquentiae ferat, errare mavis et summa adepturus in levioribus subsistis, 10.5). Just as a great gladiatorial combatant should not be made to throw the discus, Maternus should be in the courts, not the lecture hall (sic nunc te ab auditoriis et theatris in forum et ad causas et ad vera proelia voco, 10.5).274
It seems clear that the problem underlying the arguments in first half of the Dialogus lies in differing assessments of the value of two different types of eloquentia, and that this problem is made more acute by an elite culture which is still trying to adapt an endemic zero-sum,
273 Saleius Bassus, cf. Tac. Dial. 5.3; Greeks, 10.5.
274 The choice of metaphor here is interesting. Barton (1992) argues strongly for the importation (or relocalization) of traditional manly virtues to Roman thinking about the place of the gladiator in imperial culture. According to Barton (1992) 31-6, the gladiator, as a slightly romanticized figure, enacts for an audience the pursuit of gloria on the battlefield.
- 107 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
competitive mentality to the new political and social realities of the principate. In many respects gloria and renown serve as the focal point for this conflict. In the following three chapters we step away from the immediate concerns of competitive elite culture (while keeping it in sight) in order to address the issue of how minor poets in the Flavian period portray their own renown for poetic success, and how they represent the success and renown of other poets. In the
Conclusions to the dissertation we shall return to the Dialogus to compare our findings from
Statius, Martial, and Pliny with the ways in which Maternus and Aper speak of gloria and renown in public and literary life.
- 108 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
Chapter Three: Statius
In this next chapter I examine applications of terms of renown for poets in Statius' Silvae, including those terms Statius applies to his own work as epic poet and as the poet of the Silvae. I shall proceed by first setting out basic historical information pertinent to the interpretation of
Statius' family history and role in Roman elite society in section 3.1. In section 3.2 I shall describe through close reading of three poems how Statius characterizes the success of three different types of poet at Rome: the elite dilettante (Silvae 1.2), the elite writer of epic – a
"serious" poet – (Silvae 2.7), and a Greek professional poet (Silvae 5.3), his own father.
Discussion of the father will lead to an analysis of the son's views about his own poetry in the
Silvae and in the Thebaid. It will become clear that Statius heavily privileges his epic poetry as the basis for his success and renown, minimizing the importance of his minor poetry, the Silvae, beyond its (albeit very important) function in the web of his patron relationships. In Appendix
A.1 "Terms of Praise in Statius" I describe how the use of terms of praise in the Silvae conform in large part to the semantic descriptions offered in Chapter Two.
3.1 Background
For Statius' family, early life, and career we have, by and large, only that information presented to us by Statius himself in four poems (3.5, 5.3, 5.4, 5.5); of these 5.3 is the most important. The reliability of autobiographical information, especially in poetry, need not – in fact should not – necessarily be taken for granted. As far as Statius is concerned, however, the details of his life seem credible, especially those details which come out of the two "career reviews"
- 109 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
contained in Silvae 5.3, a lament on the death of his father (one deals with his father's career, the other with his own). Because this project centers on the self-presentation of poets, the question for me is not so much whether or not Statius is setting out an accurate account of his life, but what in fact he chooses (and in one case what he does not choose) to relate about his life to the reader. Three subjects of particular interest arise out of Statius' career reviews: his origins in
Naples and ties to Campania, the influence of his father's career on him in general, and the emphasis on his own career at Rome. All of these are imbued with Statius' Greek-ness; the fundamental effect of his Greek heritage on his relationships with his Roman patrons cannot be overstated.
Naples is a point of pride for Statius, not only as his birthplace but also as a center for
Greek culture.275 Indeed, Nero chose Naples as the starting point for his peregrination through the Greek games circuit precisely because it was a Greek city in Roman Italy and famous for its own games: non tamen Romae incipere ausus Neapolim quasi Graecam urbem delegit: inde initium fore ut transgressus in Achaiam insignisque et antiquitus sacras coronas adeptus maiore fama studia civium eliceret (Tac. Ann. 15.33.2). The details of Naples' enduring Greek identity are well documented elsewhere. But it seems important to observe along with others that Naples remained so Greek, at least in part, through the philhellenism of the Roman elite.276 The initial attraction of Campania in general, and Naples in particular, for the elite Roman was not its villa
275 Cf. St. Silv. 1.2.261, 2.2.84, 3.1.93, 152, 3.5.79, 4.8.3, and 5.3 passim.
276 The classic exposition of this point is D'Arms (1970) 13-17 et passim.
- 110 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
culture (for they themselves created that); it was the opportunity to engage otium under Greek influences.
Statius was likely born in Naples sometime between 45 and the early 50's.277 Statius' father moved the family away from Naples to Rome by the end of Nero's reign at the latest
(probably earlier),278 but Statius soon returned to Naples to compete in the Neapolitan Games,279 where he won as his father did years before (see below). From there it is possible, perhaps even likely, that he went on to compete in the games circuit on mainland Greece, but Statius does not choose to make clear the events of the following years. In any case, his return to Rome and the literary circles of the Roman elite seems to have been cemented by his marriage to Claudia, a poet's widow. After a disappointing defeat at Rome, he returned to Naples by 95 at the latest; the composition Silvae 4.praef. and 4.4 are both securely placed at Naples in 95.280 It seems very likely that Statius regularly spent time in Campania at the villas of his patrons throughout his career. Indeed, Hardie has suggested that Statius' associations with the literary coterie of Polla
277 These are the traditional dates, based on references in the Silvae to his father's death at age 65 (St. Sil. 2.1.34f and 5.3; both poems were probably written in 90) and on hints at his own senium in 3.5.13 (cf. 4.4.69, and 5.2.158f). Coleman rightly notes that Statius' claim of senium in these passages anticipates the approach of old age or emphasizes it for rhetorical effect (Coleman [1988] xix-xx and ad 4.4.70). In the early to mid-90's, when these poems were written, he was probably in his mid-forties, and so actually very close to being a senex (if the traditional life cycle passed on by Aulus Gellius 10.28.1-8 – which places seniores over the age of 46 in Tullus' reign – has any relevance).
278 Cf. St. Silv. 5.3.195-7.
279 St. Silv. 5.3.225
280 See Coleman (1988) xix-xx.
- 111 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
and Lucan came out of shared connections to Campania.281 It is clear that Statius had extremely strong connections to Campania and to the literary scene in Naples, connections which were fostered during his absence at Rome through patrons with their own interests in Campania.
"One factor should be kept constantly in mind in assessing Statius' career: his father was a professional poet and grammaticus, who worked for prize money and fees. Despite the growth of professionalism at Rome, for example in the legal profession, this background sets Statius still further apart from the western poets of the time, including Martial, and from the tradition of the equestrian provincials who wrote poetry at Rome."282 The career of Statius' father, the elder
Papinius, is elaborated in Silvae 5.3, an epicedion which emphasizes the father's Greek origins and his service as teacher to the proceri futuri of the Roman elite. The elder Papinius was born in the Latin municipium of Velia apparently to freeborn parents. Statius, significantly, gives Velia its Greek name Hyele (Graia Hyele 5.3.127), underscoring further its older Greek heritage, I think, with reference to its occupation by Latins (Latiis ascita colonis [sc. Hyele] 5.3. 126) and by allusion to Palinurus' drowning in Vergil's Aeneid 6 (gravidus qua puppe magister | excidit et mediis miser evigilavit in undis 5.3.126-7).283 While it is certain that the family was freeborn
(non tibi deformes obscuri sanguinis ortus, 5.3.116), and of sufficient wealth in his childhood
281 Hardie (1982) 59.
282 Hardie (1982) 59.
283 The allusion to Vergil is certainly the more ambiguous of the two references. While it seems clear that it places the existence of the Greek city of Hyele prior to even the arrival of Aeneas in Latium in a chronological schema, it may be that the allusion also hints at a cultural priority for Hyele.
- 112 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
(nec sine luce genus, 5.3.117), it was likely not of equestrian status.284 There is little point in speculation here, since the facts suffice: the family, a good one, fell on hard times after the elder
Papinius put on the toga praetexta, and his future was guaranteed by his notable successes as an epideictic poet in the Greek games. After victories at the Neapolitan,285 Pythian, Nemean, and
Isthmian Games,286 the father returned to Naples and began to teach. Statius tells us that his father taught Greek epic and didactic (Homer, Hesiod, Epicharmus), lyric (Pindar, Ibycus,
Alcman, Stesichorus, Sappho), and elegiac (Callimachus, Lycophron, Sophron, Corrina) poetry.287 But Statius does not explicitly say whom his father taught in Naples; given the general emphasis in the following passage on Roman youths, it seems safe to assume he was teaching sons of wealthy Neapolitans. The careful parallelism of generosaque pubes at the end of 5.3.146,
284 For the arguments against equestrian status see Frère (1961), Aricò (1980) 15, Hardie (1982) 201, n.35; arguments for, see Coleman (1988) xv, Nauta (2002) 198. Hardie argues that the family's wealth, probably derived from commerce, seems to have been swallowed up in the elder Papinius' depositio (see Hardie [1982] 5-6 citing St. Silv. 5.3.117-20 nec sine luce genus (quamquam fortuna parentum | artior expensis); etenim te divite ritu | ponere purpureos Infantia legit amictus | stirpis honore datos et nobile pectoris aurum). Nauta suggests that Statius grandparents were decuriones in Velia, and that their wealth was exhausted through benefactions (Nauta [2002] 198-99); but this is not the sense of expensa/expensum, (the word on which Nauta's argument is based): expensa/expensum is clearly associated with the notion of keeping accounts of debts and describing regular expenses (See TLL 5.1643- 47 s.v. expendo (expensum) et expendo (expensa); the notion that expensa = beneficium appears to be a late development, see TLL 5.1646-7 s.v. expendo (expensa) IA1b). Hardie, the most sensible of the lot, suggests that Statius may have been, "tendentiously, explaining away the absence of a status which the family had never held at all."
285 Possibly in 42 under Claudius, but the dates both for the elder Papinius' birth (15 or 25), and his actual age at the Neapolitan games, which make a date entirely uncertain. Hardie assumes Papinius to be 17 at the time, based on certamina ... vix implenda viris (5.3.134-5, indicating that he was not yet a vir) and primaeva ad carmina (5.3.136).
286 St. Silv. 5.3.141-5. On the use of victoria as a possible Graecism (which suggests further emphasis on his Greek-ness) see Hardie (1982) 7. An inscription (IG II2 3919) from the middle of the 1st century AD found at Eleusis may refer to the elder Papinius; see Clinton (1972).
287 St. Silv. 5.3.146ff.
- 113 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
the section dealing with his teaching in Naples, and proceresque futuros at 5.3.176, the section treating his Roman students, creates a strong antithesis which supports this assumption. The elder Papinius, then, seems to have been teaching Roman youths at the end of Nero's reign.288
The suggestion that he taught the puer Domitian is possible,289 but in any case it is clear that he was teaching the sons of elite families at the end of the 60's, probably in Rome.290 The outcome of the chaos of 69 and perhaps the desire – on the part of someone with ties to Nero – to express allegiance to the new power prompted the elder Papinius to compose a poetic lament (its exact nature is unclear) on the destruction of the temples in Rome.291 Statius suggests that this effort was rewarded by the emperor, and the existence of the family's Alban estate tends to support this
288 Hardie (1982) 12 suggests that the move to Rome may have come out of Nero's interest in Naples and the Neapolitan games.
289 The point, one with a long history of controversy (see Hardie [1982] 203, n.68) is argued by Hardie (1982) 11 on the basis of an extended passage in 5.3 (176ff) in which Statius' father is portrayed as instructor of the proceres futuri, and a specific mention at 5.3.178-80 (sub te Dardanius facis explorator opertae | qui Diomedei celat penetralia furti, | crevit et inde sacrum didicit puer) which Hardie argues explicitly points to the Pontifex Maximus, i.e. Domitian "the only Pontifex Maximus who could have received tuition from Statius' father" (11). Hardie's suggestion that the association of Domitian as student of Statius' father was deliberately played down as perhaps impertinent is suggestive of not only the times, but also Statius' apparent disfavor in the nineties. Nauta (2002) 201 rightly cautions against any assumptions on this point.
290 See Curcio (1893) 8, Gossage (1965) 175, Hardie (1982) 10-11. While arguments have been made that he taught Roman youths in Naples (see d'Arms [1965] 144-5 referring to a comment by Aulus Gellius – far too late and referring to education of a different kind – and Vessey [1973] 52), it seems nearly inconceivable that the kind of religious instruction Statius describes here could take place outside of Rome; it is also more likely that Statius' father went to Rome to teach as a means to further his social contacts. Naples was no Athens, and even so Romans did not go to Athens to learn Roman religious traditions, but Greek literature and philosophy.
291 St. Silv. 5.3.199-204.
- 114 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
suggestion.292 The elder Papinius died at the age of 65293 after the eruption of Vesuvius,294 but before Statius' victory in the Alban games in March 90.295 It seems likely, based on Statius' remarks that his father supported his early efforts on the Thebaid (te nostra magistro | Thebais urgebat priscorum exordia vatum, 5.3.233-4), but did not see the Alban victory (5.3.227-229), and that he died well before March 90; but the evidence is far from conclusive.296
Although we cannot be certain what course Statius' own education followed in those early years, it does not seem unreasonable to suppose that Statius' father was responsible for his education as a whole; 5.3.211-14 suggests that he taught him how to write poetry at the very least.297 The very brief review Statius presents in Silvae 5.3 for his career reveals a tension between the Roman context for his poetry and his Greek background that did not exist for his father. For example Statius, in a long tradition of Greek poets, describes an encounter with the
Greek Muses (Me quoque vocales lucos Boeotaque tempe | pulsantem, 5.3.209-10); interestingly, his acceptance by the Muses seems to have been guaranteed by his parentage (cum stirpe tua
292 St. Silv. 5.3.36-40 (cf. 3.1.61-4, 4.5, and 4.8.39) mentions it as the burial place of his father. We know Domitian had a villa nearby (Dio 66.3.4, 66.9.4). See Hardie (1982) 12-13, and Nauta (2002) 202 who thinks Domitian made a gift of the estate.
293 St. Silv. 5.3.253.
294 St. Silv. 5.3.205-8. See Legras (1907) 338, who argues that the death occurred within a short time after Vesuvius erupted.
295 For the dating of this victory to March 90, see n. 298.
296 See Coleman (1988) xviii-xix, following Härtel (1900) 47ff on the possibility that 5.3.225-33 may be an accretion.
297 St. Silv. 5.3.211-214 nec enim mihi sidera tantum | aequoraque et terras, quae mos debere parenti, | sed decus hoc quodcumque lyrae primusque dedisti | non vulgare loqui et famam sperare sepulcro.
- 115 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
descendere dixi, | admisere deae, 5.3.10-11). Thus we have an entirely Greek claim to inspiration. But the first audience Statius claims is composed of Latii patres, and he draws attention only to his victory at the Augustalia in Naples, the Alban victory (likely in March 90), and his defeat at the Capitoline Games (again probably in 90).298 This first performance, however, before the Latii patres, is presented as if a contest at the Olympic games with his father present as spectator.299 Thus the victories are in Roman venues, before Roman audiences and, except at the Augustalia, for Latin compositions. But his poetic heritage is Greek. A further example: Statius associates his father with Homer and Hesiod (Maeonium Ascraeeumque senem, non segnior umbra | accolis alternumque sonas et carmina misces, 5.3.26-7), but likens himself to Homer and Vergil (atque ibi me moresque tuos et facta canentem | fors et magniloquo non posthabuisset Homero, | tenderet et torvo pietas aequare Maroni. 5.3.61-3, cf. St. Theb.
12.816ff).
298 The date for the victory at the Augustalia in Naples is not certain. The most likely Alban games for Statius' victory are those held in March 90 with the repulsa at the Capitoline games coming later that same year. Since the Alban games were held every year, however, it is possible that Statius won in 91 or 92, thus putting the Capitoline defeat in 94. Domitian's triumph in 89, and the publication of the Thebaid (very likely) before 93 provide termini post and antequem for the problem, but the whole issue actually hangs inconclusively on the date of the Alban victory. See Coleman (1988) xvi-xvii for an explanation of the full evidence.
299 St. Silv. 5.3.215-7 qualis eras, Latios quotiens ego carmine patres | mulcerem felixque tui spectator adesses | muneris. 5.3.220-224 talis Olympiaca iuvenem cum spectat harena | qui genuit, plus ipse ferit, plus corde sub alto | caeditur; attendunt cunei, spectatur Achaeis | ille magis, crebro dum lumina pulveris haustu | obruit et prensa vovet exspirare corona.
- 116 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
Hardie has suggested that after the victory in Naples Statius would likely have continued on the Greek circuit as had his father.300 Admittedly, Statius tells us nothing at all of his career beyond these essentials; but some facts may be gleaned from other poems and from other sources. Juvenal, in a satiric portrayal, suggests that Statius prostituted himself by making a living selling libretti to Paris, a pantomime artist favored by Domitian, even while enjoying public success for recitations of his Thebaid.301 Statius' omission of this poetic activity in 5.3 may be the result of Paris' fall from favor, but it may also be the case that Statius did not consider that kind of poetic activity an equal contributor to his renown as poet (note here that Statius does not mention his Silvae either). It is clear from reading the list of addressees to the published
Silvae – we may reasonably assume a larger number of poems – that Statius had found amici among the elite at Rome and in Campania who were willing to support, by more traditional means, his activity as a poet.302 As Hardie says, "[Statius] could not really claim full social equality with his Roman addressees. His literary persona is based upon his status as a professional poet, and his relationships with his addressees derive, in almost all cases, from his activity as a poet rather than from the amicitia existing between private individuals living within the same orbit of Roman society."303 Juvenal's treatment of Statius writing pantomime for Paris may be significant: by portraying the exchange as a sale (Juv. 7.87 intactam Paridi nisi vendit
300 Hardie (1982) 59.
301 Juv. 7.79-87. On the sexual imagery of this passage see Rudd (1976) 101-5.
302 The exact nature of this support is, unsurprisingly, never as clearly articulated by Statius as it is by Martial. But it is hinted at in the prefaces to each book (1-4; 5 does not have a preface). See Nauta (2002) 240-44.
303 Hardie (1982) 59.
- 117 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
Agaven), Juvenal seems to be indicating the absence of amicitia, thereby presenting a radically different characterization of the social relationship to the detriment, I think, of Paris: Statius is not portrayed as an amicus of the disgraced Paris, and Juvenal seems to absolve him in lines 93-7
(e.g. haut tamen invideas vati quem pulpita pascent, Juv. 7.93).304 Statius was a Greek professional poet whose excellence lies most of all in his adaptation of Greek epideictic models to Roman literary and social tastes.
3.1.1 In the Poet's Image
For Statius, then, the poems he composed for his patron-amici305 represent their amicitia, rather than record it. As Bright put it, "The poet in most instances witnessed the events, but was not a participant in them."306 The lesser valuation of the Silvae, however, does not mean that the amicitia they represent is held in a corresponding lesser regard; the only person after all to whom
Statius could dedicate his greater works (his epics) was the Emperor. Terms such as serious/less serious, greater/lesser, etc. are, of course, relative.307 But it seems significant that in the preface
304 For absence of gratia required for amicitia in such a "transaction" see Nauta (2002) 29-30 (who, however, seems to miss the point in Juvenal's treatment of Statius and Paris; see above p.119).
305 White (1993) argues against the use of the term "patron". But there is a certain value to our use of the term and a tradition in the scholarship that is not easily argued away. Amicus is certainly too diffuse. Patron-amicus is my (unsatisfying and clunky) compromise. For a summary of the issues and problems with terminology see Nauta (2002) 11-29.
306 Bright (1980) 3.
307 See a series of articles by Eyres (1937) (1940) (1944a) (1944b), Wagenvoort's interesting article on the "Ludus Poeticus" (1956), and the series of article's by Muth on Martial and the ludus poeticus (1972) (1976) (1979).
- 118 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
to a collection of poems addressed to his important patron-amici Statius asserts that these poems are the playful work of an epic poet with allusions to Vergil's Culex and Homer's
Batrachomachia (Sed et Culicem legimus et Batrachomachiam etiam agnoscimus, nec quisquam est inlustrium poetarum qui non aliquid operibus suis stilo remissiore praeluserit, 1.praef.).
Hardie suggested that "what matters is not the poem, considered as a work of art, but the fact that it fulfills a social obligation in a timely and appropriate way."308 But this is not in fact true, since
Statius is at pains to remind his readers that his serious efforts (his true art) are to be found in his epic poetry.
It should not be forgotten that nearly all of these poems are presented as occasional pieces directed to individuals in a specific context.309 Statius probably did not write these specifically with future publication in mind, i.e. with a reading public in mind, since the only anxiety expressed over the poems' reception is one resulting from the loss of context. Statius worries in the preface to Book 1 of the Silvae that the speed of composition – something which played a large role in their initial reception at specific occasions – may work against their proper appreciation as individual, occasional poems when in collected book form (Sed apud ceteros necesse est multum illis pereat ex venia, cum amiserint quam solam habuerunt gratiam celeritatis 1.praef).310 A similar concern is shown in the preface to Book 2 when Statius
308 Hardie (1982) 139. For a contrary view see Bright (1980) who argues for artistic unity of the collection.
309 Cf. St. Silv. 1.praef.1 cum singuli de sinu meo prodierint.
310 Bright (1980) 29-32; on Statius' Silvae "Defining the novelty is less easy than recognizing." (1980, 1)
- 119 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
discusses the epicedion sent to Melior on the death of his slave Glaukion.311 Here Statius' anxiety revolves around the readers' awareness of the poem's original context, and of the poem's (now exhausted) social function. The image of himself Statius projects in the Silvae, that of a "serious" poet writing "less than serious" poetry is not incompatible with the notion that this poetry is an expression of gratia towards his patron-amici. Such poetry is simply a reflex arising from the obligations of amicitia. Later we shall see that amicitia manifests itself differently in Martial and
Pliny, namely as an integral part of the composition and publication process. For Statius, his
Silvae are an indication of the relationship with his patron-amici as a professional poet. Thus, for the "serious" professional poet "less-than-serious" poetry will not bring lasting and significant renown.312
While Statius is more or less silent on the subject of his own success as a composer of minor poetry, he does remark on his success as an epic poet, and he does praise other poets. In the following paragraphs I shall examine three poems in which Statius praises poets who are representative, I think, of three types of poets at Rome in the Flavian period: the elite dilettante
311 Cf. St. Silv. 2.praef.5ff on the epicedion for Melior on the death of his slave Glaukion (Silv. 2.1): Huius amissi recens vulnus, ut scis, epicedio prosecutus sum adeo festinanter, ut excusandum habuerim affectibus tuis celeritatem. Nec nunc eam apud te iacto, qui nosti, sed et ceteris indico, ne quis asperiore lima carmen examinet et a confuso scriptum et dolenti datum, cum paene supervacua sint tarda solacia.
312 In an epistle to Vitorius Marcellus (St. Silv. 4.4) Statius writes – as contrast to Marcellus' success on the battlefield and in the courts – nos otia vitae | solamur cantu ventosaque gaudia famae | quaerimus (4.4.49-51). While this may refer to poems such as those in the Silvae, it seems much more likely that Statius is referring to his epic poems: the lines immediately following (51-55) describe him sitting before Vergil's shrine (and cf. 4.7.25-8 quippe te fido monitore nostra | Thebais multa cruciata lima | temptat audaci fide Mantuanae | gaudia famae.), and the conclusion of the epistle describes his work on the Achilleid (87-100).
- 120 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
poet (L. Arruntius Stella, Silvae 1.2), the "serious" elite poet (Lucan, Silvae 2.7), and the professional (Statius' father, Silvae 5.3). Then I shall discuss Statius' statements connected to renown arising from his minor poetry contrasted with that arising from his epic poetry. My aim in doing this is to establish that Statius heavily and almost exclusively privileges epic poetry over minor poetry as an avenue to lasting renown for the poet. This will prove to be in marked contrast to Martial and Pliny.
3.2 The Poets
The three different types of poets (elite dilettante, elite writing serious poetry, professional poet) – at least in so far as they are portrayed by Statius in the Silvae – accrue different sorts of renown. In the following pages I shall examine how each is presented as a poet by Statius, and discuss as far as possible the implications of the terms and images associated with their success and renown in the immediate context of their poems.
3.2.1 Stella and the end (?) of poetry
L. Arruntius Stella was a significant promoter and patron of poetry in the Domitianic period, known from Martial in particular for his support of recitations and improvisations. A native of Patavium, Stella in the Silvae is a young man poised on the brink of a very successful career. We discover through Venus in Silvae 1.2 that he was at the time of that poem one of the
- 121 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
XVviri sacris faciundis,313 and almost certainly then involved in the celebrations of the Secular
Games in 88 which this group organized.314 The prediction by Venus of curule office (1.2.179) and a position in charge of the games for Domitian's triumph over the Dacians (1.2.180-1) ensures that Stella had at least been given these honors before the poem was composed, if he had not already discharged them.315 These internal dates set the composition of the poem sometime between 89 (when the Dacian triumph was held) and 93 (the probable date of his praetorship, which would certainly have received mention316). Stella seems to have received a suffect consulship in 100.317 In the preface to Silvae Book One, however, possibly some 10 years earlier,
Statius identifies Stella as iuvenis optime et in studiis nostris eminentissime, qua parte voluisti
(1.praef.1), a point later elaborated along with his potential for public office in the epithalamium dedicated to him on the occasion of his marriage to the wealthy Neapolitan widow Violentilla,
Silvae 1.2.
313 St. Silv. 1.2.176-77.
314 Cf. Tac. Ann. 11.11.
315 Vollmer (1898) 253 and Frère (1961) 1.26, n.1 suggest that the curule office (which must be the aedileship) may not have been discharged at the time the poem was composed.
316 See Mart. 8.78, and the inscriptions discussed in Eck (1970) 148-9. The praetorship in 93 has been suggested as the probable reason for and capacity in which Stella could celebrate such games (Nauta [2002] 212 comments that Stella – because the victory over the Suebi and Sarmatians in 93 was not an official triumph – may have dedicated the normal games given by the praetor to Domitian in thanksgiving for the victory.) It also fits with the date of Stella's consulship in 100; cf. Mart. 12.2[3].
317 Nauta (2002) 212 suggests that Stella's "closeness to the old regime" may account for the fact that he received only a suffect consulship under Trajan although patrician, while Pliny – no patrician – a year later gained the ordinary consulship. This seems likely (although Pliny had strong ties to Domitian also); but it is also telling for his importance and influence even after Domitian's death that he gained the suffect consulship at all and so quickly. Cf. the discussion of Verginius Rufus, section 1.4.
- 122 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
There is an explicit recognition in Silvae 1.2 of Stella's dual existence as a love poet and statesman. No attempt is made in the poem to reconcile the two. Rather, by the end of the poem,
Stella as love poet is dismissed in favor of Stella as statesman (and possibly Stella as epic poet, see below); the marriage which is the subject of the poem acts as a watershed for Stella's activities. The poem318 opens (1.2.1-23), after an invocation of the Muses and Elegeia, with the conclusion of the wedding: a chorus sings the epithalamium (te concinnit iste | – pande fores – te, Stella, chorus, 1.2.16-7) for Violentilla and Stella after the deductio (duxit, 1.2.11; ipsa [sc.
Venus] toros et sacra parat , 1.2.12).319 There follows (1.2.24-45) a "retrospective" on Stella's wooing of Violentilla as love poet (subiit leges et frena momordit | ille solutus amor: consumpta est fabula vulgi | et narrata diu viderunt oscula cives, 1.2.28-30). This retrospective ends with a breathless injunction to Stella to set aside his activity as love poet now that he is married (pone, o dulcis, suspiria, vates, | pone: tua est, 1.2.32-33) because the object of his desire has been met.
The suggestion of the obsolescence of love poetry for Stella is solidified by the references to the terminated paraclausithyron (licet expositum per limen aperto | ire, redire gradu: iam nusquam ianitor aut lex | aut pudor, 1.2.34-36) and to the achievement of the hoped-for bliss (amplexu tandem satiare petito – contigit! 1.2.35-6); but amor as a husbandly activity is cleverly presented as the alternative.320 The bulk of the poem, however, looks back in time through an epic-like
318 Nauta (2002) 262-3 rightly argues that the poem as a mimetic composition, not an improvisation. This seems hardly necessary, since Statius admits as much himself (St. Silv. 1.praef. Respondebis illi tu, Stella carissime, qui epithalamion tuum, quod mihi iniunxeras, scis biduo scriptum.)
319 A curious detail in a poem intended to be an epithalamium itself (St. Silv. 1.praef).
320 In these lines there are several verbal cues to themes and vocabulary of love poetry, some of which are quite explicit and not without wit. The cues and allusions, in fact, point to the success of Stella's love against those of his elegiac predecessors, and highlight the fact that he is a coniunx amatorius, normally a
- 123 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
narration of the intervention of Amor and Venus to precipitate the marriage, ending at line 240 with a description of the marriage guests. After an invocation of Erato, three speeches are presented: Amor persuading Venus to act for her servant Stella, Venus replying in the affirmative and praising Violentilla, and lastly Venus as the advocate of marriage (and Stella) to
Violentilla.
Amor pleads on behalf of Stella for a happy resolution to his love agonies,321 citing first his ancestry,322 then the sustained savagery of his own onslaught and Stella's dedicated
contradiction in terms in elegiac poetry. Suspiria has some obvious parallels as an indication of unrequited love in Tibullus, Propertius and Ovid as well as Catullus, which clearly emphasize Stella's paradoxical success as "coniunx amatorius" (Cf. Cat. 64.98 of Ariadne for Theseus, Tib. 1.6.33-36 and 4.5.11-12, Prop. 2.22.47-8 and 3.8 Ov. Am. 2.19.55); limen expositum clearly alludes to the paraclausithyron (there is a curious parallel in Pliny Ep. 7.5). Aperto may refer to the end of "illegitimate" amor and the beginning of amor in marriage with an allusion to Propertius (cf. Prop. 4.3.49- 50 omnis amor magnus, sed aperto in coniuge maior | hanc Venus, ut vivat, ventilat ipsa facem), an allusion made all the stronger by Venus' agency in the union (see further below). Ianitor, lex, and pudor are the three obstacles to coitus in Propertius, for example (cf. Prop. 3.13.46-50, the "reality" after a nostalgic look at "golden era" love – which Stella and Violentilla would seem to exemplify – at nunc desertis cessant sacraria lucis: | aurum omnes victa iam pietate colunt. | auro pulsa fides, auro venalia iura, | aurum lex sequitur, mox sine lege pudor. 2.24.1-5 'tu loqueris, cum sis iam noto fabula libro | et tua sit toto Cynthia lecta foro?' | cui non his verbis aspergat tempora sudor? | aut pudor ingenuis aut reticendus amor) and the others, but here are no longer obstacles to Stella (thus he remains respectable in a way Propertius denies for himself in Prop. 2.7) since the coitus is made legitimate by marriage. While amplexus is not inherently a sexual term, its meaning is made clear in context and there are good parallels with husbands and wives in Ov. Her. 14.69-70 Hypermnestra describing to Lynceus her decision not to kill as he slept, 16.263-8; cf. Verg. Aen. 8.404-06 ea verba locutus | optatos dedit amplexus placidumque petivit | coniugis infusus gremio per membra soporem. (satiare with amplexus may have quite explicit connotations, cf. Petr. Sat. 131.11.13-14, Apul. Met. 2.17.4-8).
321 The resolution is depicted as marriage (thalamus), a rare thought: see Prop. 3.10 annua solvamus thalamo sollemnia nostro.
322 St. Silv. 1.2.70-3 clarus de gente Latina|est iuvenis, quem patriciis maioribus ortum|nobilitas gavisa tulit praesagaque formae|protinus e nostro posuit cognomina caelo. For clarus as a social designation peculiar to the nobiles see TLL 3.1275-6 s.v. clarus III,A,2. The importance of the mention of ancestry in the rhetorical tradition of epithalamia is underscored by Menander Rhetor, R.G. 3.404.17 (Spengel), but it
- 124 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
suffering,323 and finally Stella's choice to write love poetry and not epic.324 This passage offers a strong image of the elite poet, which could be easily paralleled in Ovid, for example: young and explicitly without political distinction, nobilis, recused from more socially acceptable literary pursuits such as epic in favor of erotic poetry: hic iuvenum lapsus suaque aut externa revolvit | vulnera (1.2.100-1). Venus' response to Amor, which serves as Violentilla's encomium, outlines her beauty and family, as well as her animus,325 and promises the hoped-for marriage union; she notes in passing the fact that Violentilla is already warming to the idea (ipsam iam cedere sensi | inque vicem tepuisse viro, 1.2.39-40). After an epic procession to Violentilla's dwelling, Venus' speech to Violentilla begins with an exhortation to marry before her charms are lost,326 followed by praise for Stella,327 and finally encomium-like praise for marriage.328 Here also, in her praise for Stella, Venus seems to distinguish clearly the youthful activity of poetry from the more mature pursuits in public life.329 The epic section breaks off here, and the narrative of the past
need not be developed; cf. Men. Rhet. 3.402.21-404.14 (Spengel). The bulk of Amor's speech is otherwise directed.
323 St. Silv. 1.2.74-92. cf. esp. 1.2.83 haud ulli vehementior umquam | incubui, genetrix, iterataque vulnera fodi followed by the conventional mythological exempla (Hippomenes and Leander) and 1.2.90- 91 tu veteres, iuvenis, transgressus amores. | ipse ego te tantos stupui durasse per aestus ...
324 St. Silv. 1.2.92-102. cf. esp. 1.2.95-99 noster comes ille piusque | signifer; armiferos poterat memorare labores | claraque facta virum et torrentes sanguine campos, | sed tibi plectra dedit mitisque incedere vates | maluit et nostra laurum subtexere myrto.
325 Traditional themes for a woman's encomium in epithalamia, see n. 322.
326 St. Silv. 1.2.162-170.
327 St. Silv. 1.2.170-181.
328 St. Silv. 1.2.182-193.
329 Only 11 words describe his activity as a poet against 7 lines for public career.
- 125 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
events is resumed up to the singing contest outside of the thalamus.330 In the concluding section,331 which technically may be considered an epithalamium itself,332 Statius seems also to alter Stella's identity as poet, linking him strongly to an epic tradition in contrast to the elegiac erotic poets Philetas, Callimachus, Tibullus, Propertius, and Ovid.333
Most interesting for our examination of poet's renown is the twofold nature, young lover then public careerist, of Stella's persona in this poem, and how it correlates to the application of terms and descriptions of renown. Stella entertains, as Venus tells us, a certain notoriety as love poet: but the extent of the notoriety is strictly delimited socially and not characterized using any term of praise (docta per urbem | carmina qui iuvenes, quae non didicere puellae, 1.2.172-3).
Rather, his renown is suggested through the popularity of his poems and is connected with his private life.334 His future, however, "foretold" in the section immediately following, is acted out in the public sphere, and his success as magistrate in charge of games that accompanied
Domitian's victory over the Dacians is characterized as providing gloria (fas mihi, purpureos
330 St. Silv. 1.2.194-246.
331 St. Silv. 1.2.247-77.
332 See Hardie (1983) 115.
333 St. Silv. 1.2.250-255 invokes the love poets by name, with the immediate contrast: me certe non unus amor simplexque canendi | causa trahit: tecum similes iunctaeque Camenae, | Stella mihi, multumque pares bacchamur ad aras | et sociam doctis haurimus ab amnibus undam (1.2.256-9). Statius' Camenae are clearly associated with his epic poetry (cf. St. Silv. 4.7.21-28, the only other occurrence of the word), although Camenae as sources of inspiration are also claimed by non-epic poets.
334 For a comparison, see below on Martial who bases his success and renown in the later period on his widespread popularity and broad readership. Pliny, however, is similarly more interested in success within a strictly delimited social sphere, albeit a social sphere of very different composition.
- 126 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
habitus iuvenique curule | indulgebit ebur Dacasque – haec gloria maior – | exuvias laurosque dabit celebrare recentes, 1.2.179-181). Thus for Stella, an elite dilettante, not only can we see a boundary between the practice of minor (erotic) poetry and the onset of marriage and public life, but we can see this boundary implicitly expressed in the choice of terms and images used to describe success in each sphere. The curious development here, if my interpretation of 1.2.257-8 is correct (tecum similes iunctaeque Camenae, | Stella, mihi, multumque pares ad aras bacchamur ad aras | et sociam doctis haurimus ab amnibus undam), is the shift implied (or hoped for) by Statius from erotic to epic poetry in the context of discussing the "new" career life.
3.2.2 Laudatio Lucani: Silvae 2.7
Statius expresses the renown of Lucan as epic poet in concrete terms in Silvae 2.7.109-
10: At tu, seu rapidum poli per axem | Famae curribus arduis levatus, | qua surgunt animae potentiores, terras despicis et sepulcra rides. This poem, too, includes a prophecy about its subject set within a quasi-epic context, but in this case the prophecy occurs during Lucan's infancy and predicts not his future public success, but his achievements as poet. Statius' estimation of Lucan in Silvae 2.7, best understood as a genethliacon,335 has met with negative interpretation. Malamud, for example, points out:
335 This is the term applied to it by Statius himself in the preface to Book Two (Cludit volumen genethliacon Lucani, quod Polla Argentaria, rarissima uxorum, cum hunc diem forte consuleremus, imputari sibi voluit, 2.praef.), although given the fact that Lucan was dead, the poem also makes use of elements from the consolatio. For Statius' fast and loose manipulation of generic boundaries, see Hardie (1983) 91-118. But as Van Dam (1984) 451 points out, of all the poems we possess which could be called 'real' genethliaca "the most common conspicuous trait is their originality and independence."
- 127 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
This insistence [in the preface to Book 2] that 2.7 is a birthday ode makes the intrusion of the consolatory elements ... quite striking. The genres collide, and since their functions are antithetical, the collision, or collusion, creates an extreme tension in the poem, leaving the reader in an interpretive quandary. Are we celebrating or mourning Lucan? Is he alive or dead? Do these distinctions matter or do they not?336
Malamud's suggestion for a method of reading the poem is inherently a negative one: the
"generic fusion" which she recognizes quickly becomes a "collision, or collusion" of genres, the consolatory elements "intrude", and the choice of hexameter along with the fact that the poem
"should be 'credited' to Lucan's widow, Polla Argentaria" removes Statius as a "challenger to
Lucan on the field of epic poetry" and distances him "from the task of celebrating his predecessor".337 Although in combination these points suggest a certain ambiguity for the assessment of Statius' aims in the poem, each is itself less than certain. The poem reads more as straightforward praise of Lucan and Polla.
Because the manipulations of generic conventions can provide a framework for interpretation, suggests Malamud, the "generic fusion suggests more than a virtuoso's indulgence in variatio".338 The consolatory elements, however, do not simply draw attention to Polla's grief, but to the portrayal of Polla grieving in the presence of Lucan himself as genius. More on this
336 Malamud (1995) 2.
337 ibid.
338 ibid.
- 128 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
below. The avoidance of hexameters, says Statius himself, is an indication of his reverentia for
Lucan (Ego non potui maiorem tanti auctoris habere reverentiam quam quod laudes eius dicturus hexametros meos timui, 2.praef), a word not lightly used in Statius, and one which sets
Lucan on par with Rutilius Gallicus, Domitian, and Venus.339 The fact that the poem is "credited to" Polla340 does not distance Statius from his task: it defines the relationship between Polla and
Statius as that of patron and poet. Indeed, Nauta suggests (citing this passage and two others,
1.praef.21, 2.praef.24) that by such overt indications of what he calls "patron initiative" a poet
"gives publicity to his connection with the patron, ... documents the value the patron sets upon his work, and ... strengthens his claims on the patron's gratitude and support."341 The language of commerce and the terminology of debt and credit seem to have been extraordinarily appropriate in the Roman mind to literary patronage (as indeed in any kind of amicitia).342 Imputare holds a
339 The use of the word reverentia, which has distinct overtones in the Domitianic period, is significant. The word is extremely uncommon in the pre-Augustan period. In Ciceronian times the emphasis in semantic lies more towards the notion of pudor and metus, from which derive "respect" (See Forcellini [1871] s.v. I.1,2). By the time of Martial and Statius, however, reverentia seems to have adopted a meaning closer to awareness of status (Mafioso "respect"), and recognition of worth (See Forcellini [1871] s.v. II.1-10). Other uses of reverentia in the Silvae all indicate this position of respect: cf. 1.2.101 (of Stella towards Venus), 1.4.49 (of the City of Rome towards Rutilius Gallicus), 1.6.45 (for Domitian as god), 3.3.189 (for Aeneas).
340 Malamud (1995) 2.
341 Nauta (2002) 245. Cf. White (1993) 64-91.
342 See Nauta (2002) 24-5 with references to earlier works. Statius also uses this kind of terminology in the preface to Book 2 when he suggests to the dedicatee Atedius Melior that Flavius Ursus (the recipient of 2.6) will credit him with the honor he derives from the poem quia honorem eius tibi laturus accepto.
- 129 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
significant place among the terms.343 Thus there is no indication that Statius is distancing himself from his task at all.
3.2.2.1 Incongruity and Praise
There is an incongruity – in addressing a genethliacon to someone who is dead, and in introducing into it consolatory material344 – which must be addressed if we are to interpret the praise element of this poem correctly. The importance of remembering the birthdays of significant dead (especially poets) in this period certainly provides a serviceable reason for the incongruity.345 Statius, too, is given to stretching generic boundaries (there is no reason to think that Polla commissioned a genethliacon rather than simply a poem) by conflating modes and topoi.346 Furthermore, Statius' often remarkable attempts at variatio are one of his hallmarks, a
343 Nauta correctly identifies the sense of the term here, and astutely contrasts it with the earlier financial imagery used for Ursus: for Polla, the use of imputari indicates that "an obligation to reciprocate is implied" while in the case of Ursus it is clear that Statius' consolatio is a return for an earlier beneficium (for similar examples in Martial see Mart. 4.8, 5.80). Cf. Cludit volumen genethliacon Lucani, quod Polla Argentaria, rarissima uxorum, cum hunc diem forte consuleremus, imputari sibi voluit, St. Silv. 2.praef. For imputare see the excellent notes in Nauta (2002) 241-2, nn. 159-60. Consuleremus diem seems hopelessly corrupt (and is unparalleled). Van Dam (1984) agrees, but finds no suggested emendation suitable. I prefer Vollmer's coleremus (cf. 2.7.23, 126), but keep Van Dam's reading. It does not affect the interpretation of the financial imagery. For the possible significance of velle here see White (1993) 64-66, esp. the examples on 66. Ursus: Ad Ursum quoque nostrum ... scriptam ... consolationem super ea quae ipsi debeo huic libro libenter inserui, quia honorem eius tibi laturus accepto est. The addition of another layer of "owing" through mention of Melior's relationship with Ursus does not complicate Statius' relationship with Ursus; but note here also the language of finance with accepto ferre (see TLL 1.321.8- 322.7 s.v. accipio, subst. acceptum). See further Nauta (2002) 241-44.
344 This is the only genethliacon which does, but see n. 335.
345 Sen. Ep. 64.8 quidni ego magnorum virorum ... natales celebrem. cf. Diog. 50.10.14, 18; Plut. Quaest. Conv. 8.1.1; Pl. Ep. 3.7.8; Mart. 12.67; Juv. 5.36-7; Suet. Dom. 10. See Schmidt (1908) 44-45 for a very brief overview of Roman examples, and 37ff for the ancient world in general.
- 130 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
stylistic trait carefully elaborated by Cancik and Hardie.347 None of these reasons, however, resolve the incongruity resulting from the juxtaposition of genres and its effect on the praise elements of the poem, although they explain how it might come about.
I suggest that the incongruity of this attempt at variatio (pace Malamud) is resolved through the immediacy of Lucan's presence in the poem, a spiritual presence: at the beginning of the poem he is invoked as sacerdos chori Romani (2.7.19-24), and at the end he takes on more substance in his vultus (2.7.124-131, cf. esp. 128-9 ac solacia vana subminstrat | vultus) and his genius-like presence watching over his grieving widow's restless sleep. The choice of vultus (not imago or effigies) is significant here, I think: vultus when indicating a "face", or the like, seems to refer only to living beings.348 Polla also addresses Lucan not as a falsum numen, but procax as if for a party (haec te non thiasis procax dolosis | falsi numinis induit figura, 2.7.124-5). Statius uses vultus to describe the face of a living person, or of a person wished/brought back from the dead. For example, in the consolatio to Etruscus on the death of his wife Statius uses the more personal vultus in apparent contrast to the more formal effigies used in ritual: te lucida saxa, | te similem doctae referet mihi linea cerae; | nunc ebur et fulvum vultus imitabitur aurum, 3.3.198-
200. Etruscus cries out in sorrow to Etrusca and promises to worship her effigies (ego rite minor
346 Hardie (1983) 115ff. links the poem to the encomium of a dead person (e.g. Lucian's Encomium of Demosthenes), rather than a consolatio. It is not too far-fetched to suggest that Statius conflated this kind of encomium with the genethliacon to achieve a measure of originality and uniqueness. For generic modifications to the genethliacon see Hardie (1983) 116-18.
347 Cancik (1965) 33-42; Hardie (1983) 103-18.
348 see Forcellini (1871) 447 s.v. vultus. Forcellini 447(7) suggests that vultus as pro imagine is a later development. cf. also OLD s.v. vultus.
- 131 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
semperque secundus | assiduas libabo dapes et pocula sacris | manibus effigiesque colam,
3.3.200), but likenesses of her features are kept permanent for him in stone, wax, ivory, and gold
(te lucida saxa, | te similem doctae referet mihi linea cerae, | nunc ebur et fulvum vultus imitabitur aurum, St. Silv. 3.3.200-3). Likewise at 5.1.1-6 in a consolatio to Abascantus on the death of his wife Priscilla, Statius offers the immortality of a poem instead of physical representations in wax, ivory or gold and suggests that the egregia pietas of Abascantus would be rewarded by her return to life; she would return to comfort her husband (reddare dolenti), were she Apelleo vultus signata colore, or Phidiaca nata manu.349 Although incubare often has negative connotations it indicates simply "a watching over" (thus its use is sacred dreaming or healing) – the results may be positive or negative depending on the "incubator".350 Of the five occurrences in the Silvae of incubare only one is unquestionably negative, and even this has a positive result (1.2.84; the union of Stella and Violentilla, see above); 1.3.18 refers to trees leaning over a stream, and 3.4.25 refers to Asclepius as healer-god. 2.3.55 and 5.1.201, however, are more pertinent parallels. In 2.3 Pan has raped a nymph who subsequently sought refuge
(perhaps from the angry Artemis most of all) at the bottom of a pond; unable to reach her, Pan plants a plane tree to memorialize his unwilling paramour and to protect her from the ravages of the sun. The tree grows out over the pond, protecting the Naiad and seeking the waters' embrace
(illa dei veteres animata calores | uberibus stagnis obliquo pendula trunco | incubat atque
349 For a similar context using imago, but without the desire for the spirit/person's actual presence, see Pl. Ep. 2.1.12 (note the emphasis on Pliny's own perception) Verginium cogito, Verginium video, Verginium iam vanis imaginibus, recentibus tamen, audio adloquor teneo.
350 See TLL 7.1.1061-3, esp. 1063,55-70 s.v. IA1a, II passim; cf. also OLD s.v. 1c, d5. In the Silvae cf. St. Silv. 1.2.84 of Amor's attack on Stella.
- 132 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
umbris scrutatur amantibus undas. 2.3.53-55), but is denied (sperat et amplexus, sed aquarum spiritus arcet | nec patitur tactus. 2.3.56-57); it then grows upward, now loved and desired in turn by the Naiad. At 5.1.201, in an epicedion for Priscilla the wife of Abascantus, Abascantus is lost in the depths of his grief, now wailing, now seeking to take his life, and finally leans over his wife – if this is the sense of ore ligato – to kiss her (nunc in ore ligato incubat amissae, 5.1.200-
201). In both these cases, especially the latter, a desired union is denied by circumstance (both are dead or death-like), and the person/thing instead resorts to "incubation". In 2.7 the roles are reversed, perhaps significantly if the rest of my reading is correct: the "not-so-dead" Lucan
"incubates" his wife Polla, union with whom is denied by death. By presenting his material in this way Statius emphasizes that both the loss of Lucan and his continuing spiritual presence have a profound affect on two fronts: in the public literary sphere (he is sacerdos chori Romani), and in a very intimate way for Polla alone. Lucan's presence or at least "awareness" also figures in Mart. 7.23.3-4 tu, Polla, maritum | saepe colas et se sentiat ille coli. Indeed, it is Lucan's spiritual presence throughout the poem, not the oddity of the combination of genres, which is the key to reading the poem and to understanding the tenor of the praise. Statius signals this to the reader through a generic fusion that highlights both the incongruity and Lucan's spiritual aspect.
In the genethliacon Statius celebrates a continuing life (now spiritual), and offers consolation to the bereaved who is denied physical contact with the deceased.
3.2.2.2 Praising Lucan
A pseudo-existence very akin to the concepts fama and memoria must be understood for
Lucan in 2.7. Accordingly, the expressions of success and renown in it take on a certain
- 133 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
significance, for we must read them as applying to a "living memory". Aside from Statius' own admission that the poem is laus (laudes eius dicturus, 2.praef – quite possibly evoking the laudatio), the first indication of Lucan's success as poet is implicit in his designation as sacerdos chori Romani (2.7.23). The impression of Lucan's physical presence is heightened here if we contrast this passage with 5.3.56ff where Statius himself acts as sacerdos umbrarum animaeque, singing the dirge for his dead father, moresque tuos et facta canentem (5.3.61). The fact that
Lucan is worshipped as a quasi-deity in what appears – with the invitation to quisquis ... docto pectora concitatus oestro (2.7.2-3) – to be a public ritual context, rather than the more intimate domestic worship of Polla (see 2.7.124ff), carries with it the suggestion at the very least of a lasting honor,351 although this is not explicitly stated in the text. The three alternatives352 for
Lucan's "activities" after death presented in 2.7.107-119 – riding on Fama's chariot up to the heavens (2.7.107-10), singing for Pompey and Cato in Elysium (111-15), visiting Tartarus to hear Nero (116-19) – are not presented as permanent states (i.e. Lucan is not always and only doing one or the other).353 But as we can see from close parallels each activity indicates a share of fama for the poet Lucan; taken together he is always acting out his fama. The idea that a poet may be lifted up to the heavens by fama, for example, has significant parallels in Vergil
(temptanda via est, qua me quoque possim | tollere humo victorque virum volitare per ora, Verg.
Georg. 3.8-9) and Propertius (exactus tenui pumice versus eat, – | quo me fama levat terra
351 On the religious roots of honor, see section 2.1.2. On a related point see my n. 339 on reverentia above: note that it is a term applied to deities also (Venus and Domitian).
352 Such alternatives are often given in this context in consolatory literature; cf. St. Silv. 5.3.27 (here also part of a kletic address), Tac. Agr. 46.
353 This is not only logically certain but also guaranteed by seu.
- 134 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
sublimis, Prop. 3.1.7-9).354 Similarly, the image presented in terras despicis et sepulcra rides
(2.7.110) is strongly reminiscent of that in Horace 2.20 (conpesce clamorem ac sepulcri | mitte supervacuos honores. Hor. Carm. 2.20.23-4), where flight also figures prominently. And, of course, all three parallels adduced above deal with a poet's declaration of fame and success. At the end of the poem Lucan's origo is praised, a practice common in epicedia and laudationes to be sure, but also in poetry about poets' renown (Felix – heu nimis! – et beata tellus, | ... Lucanum potes imputare terris! | hoc plus quam Senecam dedisse mundo | aut dulcem generasse
Gallionem. | attolat refluos in astra fontes | Graio nobilior Melete Baetis; | Baetim, Mantua, provocare noli. 2.7.24, 30-35).355 The passage, what is more, sets Lucan above the Senecas,
Homer and Vergil. This is clearly hyperbole of the highest order: Statius himself only wishes to be equal to these greatest of poets in his father's eyes as he sings the dirge (5.3.61-3), and at the end of his Thebaid he is more modest (Theb. 12.816ff). But this is praise poetry. The shade of
Lucan, then, an active presence both for Polla herself as for poets in general (quisquis collibus
Isthmiae Diones | docto pectora concitatus oestro | pendentis bibit ungulae liquorem, 2.7.2-4),
354 Van Dam (1984) 496 suggests that "a chariot of Fame seems to be without parallel", but the following lines in Prop. 3.1 are highly suggestive: et a me | nata coronatis Musa triumphat equis, | et mecum in curru parvi vectantur Amores, | scriptorumque meas turba secuta rotas, Prop. 3.1.9-12. Cf. Hor. Carm. 2.2.5-8 (vivet extento Proculeius aevo | notus in fratres animi paterni; | illum aget pinna metuente solvi | Fama superstes), in light of which we might very well read the qua in St. Silv. 2.7.109 as an instrumental ablative relative pronoun of Fama not poli per axem (see Van Dam [1984] ad loc. who reads it for poli per axem).
355 Cf. Mart. 1.61. Note the use of imputare here; see pp. 131-2 and n. 343 above. Baetis is the Guadalquivir, the largest river in ancient Baetica; Lucan was born Baetican Corduba. The Meles is near Smyrna, one of the reputed birth places of Homer; Van Dam (1984) ad loc. also points out that "sometimes the Homeric Lives make Homer the son of the river-god Meles or say that he was born near the stream" citing RE XV1 492-4. Mantua is, of course, the birthplace of Vergil.
- 135 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
receives in this poem (which Statius also calls a laus in the preface to Book 2) an hommage from
Statius, who indicates Lucan's significance, successes, and renown as a writer of epic.
3.2.3 The Elder and the Younger Papinii
Silvae 5.3, the epicedion on his father's death in which Statius includes the two "career reviews", is an elaborate poem and difficult to characterize beyond simply saying it is an epicedion. In a sense this poem represents all that is good and bad about Statius' poetry. Enough has been said about 5.3 itself (see above), but there remain one or two items of interest relating to how Statius describes his father's renown and success. The most obvious place to start is not with the beginning of the poem, but rather the end, for it is here that Statius explicitly states what sort of renown his father has been granted: his tibi pro meritis famam laudesque benignas | iudex cura deum nulloque e vulnere tristem | concessit (5.3.250-2).356 As with Lucan, fama and laus seem to be the due reward of the poet: frondentia vatum | praemia laudato, genitor, tibi rite ligarem. (5.3.56-7). Another statement concerning the father's renown through success is juxtaposed with that of the son: quam tuus ille dies, quam non mihi gloria maior! (5.3.219). The nature of this early performance before the Latii patres (discussed above) is not at all clear. Its positioning in the poem, immediately after Statius describes his initiation into poetry, but before his major successes, suggests that it may be an early performance of epic poetry. The suggestion
356 his meritis need not simply refer to the preceding lines (from quid referam to senectus, St. Silv. 5.3.246-249) but in fact the whole preceding section which outlines the elder Papinius' many qualities and accomplishments (see OLD s.v. meritum 3). It seems a logical transition from his earthly life (treated in 104-249) to his dying (252-276) and after-life (277-293).
- 136 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
of gloria is a curious claim on Statius' part: he is clearly no vir magnus: but this is the only such claim – and for his epic poetry – and it is somewhat in keeping with the other excesses in the poem.
3.2.3.1 Statius' Renown
Statius' role and persona in the Silvae as serious epic poet writing "playful" poetry helps to explain two other observations connected to his own poetic renown which, as we shall see, stand in stark contrast to Martial and Pliny. First, there is little expressed concern for the reaction of a wider readership to the poems beyond that already mentioned, the anxiety over the speed of composition and over the proper recognition of their social utility and appropriateness. What is more, the anxiety that is expressed is found in the prefaces, not in the poems themselves. As I remarked above, such poetry is simply a reflex arising from the obligations of amicitia: for
Statius, his Silvae are an indication of the relationship with his patron-amici as a professional poet. The anxiety, then, arises out of the need to avoid a potential misunderstanding of his poetic project: for the "serious" professional poet "less-than-serious" poetry will not bring lasting and significant renown. The second observation, which comes out of the first, is that Statius shows no interest in the permanence of these poems: there is no expressed concern over the future of the Silvae as a set of poetry books, nor for the contribution of the Silvae to his renown as a poet
(although his inability to write has the potential to detract from his honos, see 2.1.26-7). Statius looks rather to his epic poetry to secure his renown as poet. As a "serious" poet at the end of his
- 137 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
Thebaid, Statius – apostrophizing his work (in a peculiar conceit for epic357) – expects for it fama and honos:
iam certe praesens tibi Fama benignum strauit iter coepitque nouam monstrare futuris. iam te magnanimus dignatur noscere Caesar, Itala iam studio discit memoratque iuuentus. uiue, precor; nec tu diuinam Aeneida tempta, sed longe sequere et uestigia semper adora. mox, tibi si quis adhuc praetendit nubila liuor, occidet, et meriti post me referentur honores. (St. Theb. 12.816-823)
In 5.3.213-14 Statius credits his father with his desire for fama (dedisti non vulgare loqui et famam sperare sepulcro). Silvae 4.4 (see n. 312) is another excellent case in point, for here he suggests that his work as an epic poet is motivated (in part at least) by the "delights of renown"
(gaudia famae, 4.4.50),358 and asks Marcellus to retain "honor for him as poet/vates" (vatis honorem corde exire veta, 4.4.101-2). In his Silvae, however, we see Statius the professional poet not hoping or working explicitly for lasting renown, but (tasks of no less importance than the quest for fame, mind you) discharging his obligations, incurring others, and furthering relationships with his patron-amici. It is his work as epic poet, clearly, which Statius privileges in his own pursuit of renown.
357 Apostrophy of a work occurs most often in minor genres; cf. for example Hor. Ep. 1.20, Mart. 1.3, 1.4, 1.86, 3.2, 4.89, 7.97, 8.1, 8.72, 10.19, 10.104, 11.1.
358 cf. n. 312 above for St. Silv. 4.4.
- 138 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
Chapter Four: Martial
In this next chapter I examine applications of terms and themes of renown and success for poets in Martial's Epigrammata, including those Martial applies to his own work as a minor poet. I shall proceed by first setting out in section 4.1 basic historical information pertinent to the discussions following (especially Martial's probable status and place in Roman elite society), and a basic chronology for the Epigrammata. In section 4.2 I address in broad terms the question of how Martial describes poets' success and renown in the Epigrammata, first of poets in general
(sections 4.2.1-2) then of himself (sections 4.2.3-4). A discussion of Martial's characterization of his own success and renown (section 4.3) concludes this chapter. In Appendix A.2 "Terms of
Praise in Martial" I describe how the use of terms of praise in the Epigrammata conform in large part to the semantic descriptions offered in section 2.1; but I identify a possible shift in the application of gloria in the subjective sense.
4.1 Background
The biographical information for Martial's life, as is the case for Statius and most other poets in antiquity, derives in large part from the poems themselves; Pliny Epistles 3.21 – an obituary notice – is the only other piece of information we have about Martial. Unlike, for example, Ovid (Tristia 4.10) and Statius (Silvae 5.3), however, Martial does not give his readers a life/career review. There are, to be sure, many details woven into the fabric of the
Epigrammata that might easily be extrapolated into quite a comprehensive – however contradictory – "biography". Indeed, most literary histories on Martial do just that, or avoid the
- 139 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
question altogether. Friedlaender, in this as in so many other things, was one of the first to attempt to assess the historicity of the details preserved in the Epigrammata as a significant factor in assessing Martial's portrayal of himself as poet.359
There are a number of ways to deal with the problem of how the "historical" Martial affects our interpretation of his poetic persona. Lorenz (2002), for example, would prefer to completely dissociate the persona presented in the Epigrammata from an historical person.
Others, as I have already indicated, have created an historical person out of the details presented in the Epigrammata, covering up or dismissing inconsistencies in the final picture. As far as
Statius was concerned, I suggested that a complete biographical picture was not required, since in his career review he provided the information he wanted his reader to have: he was constructing an image of himself for his audience. Martial's poetry cannot be approached in precisely the same way, for the often contradictory image he creates for his audience is refracted and scattered across 1,556 poems produced over a period of about 15 years. The possibility, which most scholars tend to ignore, that this image actually changed over time is very real.
4.1.1 Vital Statistics and Vital Speculations
The problems in assessing Martial's biography are difficult.360 Even so, there are a few basic pieces of information about Martial that we must more or less take on faith and that are
359 Friedlaender (1887) 1-26.
360 The most important attempts among many are Friedlaender (1887) 1-26; Scamuzzi (1966); Citroni (1975) xxi-xxv; Allen (1970); Sullivan (1991) 56-77.
- 140 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
essential to our assessment of success and renown. The first is that Martial was from Bilbilis, a small town in Hispania Terraconensis. As a Spaniard, he seems to have held close connections to many important fellow-Spaniards in Rome; to many of these he addresses epigrams and/or dedicates individual books.361 It is generally agreed that Martial came to Rome between 61 and
64, an assumption based on 10.24 (in which he claims to be 54 years old) and 10.103 (in which he claims he has been absent from Bilbilis for 34 years); the latest date for Book 10 is 98, the earliest probably 95 (for the date of Book 10, see below). As a Spaniard of status coming to
Rome at this time, he presumably would have been introduced to other important Spaniards in
Nero's court. The destruction of the Annaean family's influence in the aftermath of the Pisonian conspiracy, and the fall from favor of those connected to that literary coterie (Seneca, Annaeus
Mela, Junius Gallio, Memmius Gemellus, Vibius Crispus, etc.), may account for Martial's absence from the literary record until the Liber de Spectaculis (which can be securely dated to
80). The convenience of this chronology cannot be denied, for it seems to answer one of the most puzzling questions about Martial: just what was he doing before 80? For many commentators
Martial was attempting to make new connections and promote his damaged situation after the clades of 64.
361 See Weinrib (1968) 163. Syme (1982/3), esp. for Martial 254-6, enumerates important Spaniards who took up residence in Tibur. On Pliny and the Gallic origins of many of his correspondents see below, section 5.1.
- 141 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
But there is little reason to think that Martial was a starving artist during these years, a young talent fallen on hard times.362 Allen (1970) suggests a more realistic approach:
Martial, like Tibullus and Ovid before him, was a Roman knight. That simple fact colors our acceptance of what the poet says about himself and his patrons. While a literal interpretation of Martial's conventional epigrammatic treatment of literary patronage could produce a picture of Martial as the shabby, starving poet of the third-floor garret, our author has deliberately included in his epigrams autobiographical material that he must have intended as a correction to such false impression ... He is careful to inform his contemporary reader that such patronage was not required as a means of rescuing him from the proletariat. (1970, 345).
Indeed Allen, who is generally not given the attention he deserves, makes several interesting observations concerning Martial's life and means, especially in the early years, which raise serious issues for our interpretation of Martial's portrayal of himself in the Epigrammata. As with Statius, it is not of any real importance whether or not the "autobiographical" material provided by Martial is true: Martial is creating an image for his reading audience. The starting point for Allen's arguments comes from the signifiers of social status provided for the reader by
Martial (ius trium liberorum 2.92, 3.95, 9.97; a tribunate 3.95; that he was an eques 5.13, 9.49,
12.29). Since the order in which these pieces of information appear in the Epigrammata probably does not relate to their chronological sequence relative to each other, Allen examines each singly. The tribuneship and equestrian rank are clearly closely related, since any tribunate was at least an equestrian position. And although Friedlaender, perhaps on the analogy of Horace, suggested that Martial became equestrian as a result of the tribunate363 – a suggestion most
362 So argued by example Sullivan (1991) 2-3.
363 Friedlaender (1886) I, 6.
- 142 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
modern commentators follow – the question whether he was equestrian before the tribunate still remains largely open.364 Two types of office are the most likely365: the tribunatus supranumerarus instituted by Claudius, and the tribunatus semestris (for which see Demougin
[1988] 294-298 and 328-9 respectively). According to Demougin, both tended to draw candidates from existing members of the equester ordo since there was such heavy competition for the distinction conferred. Claudius, who instituted this reform, used the tribunatus supranumerarus to confer distinction on equestrians unlikely to continue in a military career.366
The ius trium liberorum has traditionally been thought to have been granted to Martial first by
Titus, then renewed by Domitian. The dates of the tribunate and the granting of ius trium liberorum remain (and are likely to remain) uncertain. But it seems almost certain that Martial enjoyed equestrian status throughout his time in Rome. Most important for our discussion is that
Martial indicates these three elements of his status fairly early on, by the end of Book 3 (3.95 contains references to all three). Historical questions aside, Martial is directing his reader to consider his persona an equestrian, though not exceedingly wealthy, who, although once active in the public sphere, now writes witty and abusive poetry to his friends and enemies.
364 Scamuzzi (1966) 172-5, 180-7; Allen (1970) 345-6.
365 The suggestion of Richard (1931) I 452, n. 641 that M. was a tribunus plebis seems rather unlikely. The lack of external sources for Martial's life is felt most acutely here. It may in fact be the case that Martial did hold a "real" military tribunate.
366 Demougin (1988) 295-6 "En revanche, l'une des innovations de Claude devait lui survivre: c'est l'institution de la milice honoraire. Celle-ci permettait d'octroyer une distinction à tel ou tel personnage, mais en le dispensant de séjourner effectivement sous les enseignes, et donc en ne tenant pas compte des aptitudes physiques, par example; le grade visé était sans doute, en premier lieu le tribunat de légion."
- 143 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
Other pieces of information gleaned from the Epigrammata fill out our picture of
Martial's portrayal of himself. If 10.103 (the notice of his birthday) was part of the original Book
10 (and so likely published in 95 not 98), readers must place the poet in Rome in 61, not 64.
Allen – whose approach, remember, is more strictly biographical – proposes somewhat cautiously that Martial came to Rome in the early sixties and obtained the tribunate through the influence of the Senecas or Piso, an appointment which either gave him equestrian status, or more likely distinguished him from other young provincial equestrians at Rome.367 In an historical biography such as Allen's the rest can only be surmised: having discharged his post, the poet "retires" from public life to pursue an otium litteratum; after a number of years, Martial writes a small libellus of epigrams on the games offered by Titus in 80, for which he receives the ius trium liberorum at the age of about 39 (apparently a normal age for this distinction368); with the encouragement of friends, Martial begins to publish his books of epigrams, which gain for him recognition at court; after the fall of Domitian, Martial returns to Spain. This reconstruction is hypothetical, of course, but not at all improbable. We shall see in our discussion of Pliny how closely the poet of the Epigrammata that Martial presents, and the observations which may be extrapolated to fill out this personality, fit the description of many of Pliny's literary friends. For now, perhaps Suetonius will serve as a sufficient parallel.
367 See n. 372 below.
368 See below on Pliny and Suetonius, for example.
- 144 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
Suetonius, Martial's much younger contemporary (born circa 70), provides a useful comparandus – most of the biographical information we possess for Suetonius also comes from his own writings. A member of an equestrian family (his father had been military tribune), perhaps from Africa,369 Suetonius received formal education in grammar and rhetoric probably in Rome. As a young man, so we learn from Pliny, he seems to have had a go at a legal career, perhaps half-heartedly.370 Pliny somewhat later pushed him to make his literary efforts (perhaps poetry) public, after much delay (Pl. Ep. 5.10).371 Pliny also secured for Suetonius a military tribunate, although Suetonius changed his mind and passed it on to a relation (Pl. Ep. 3.8).372 As for the ius trium liberorum, it was a remarkable privilege, which Pliny secured for Suetonius in
110 (Pl. Ep. 10.94) at the age of about 40: Pliny himself received it in 98 (cf. Ep. 10.2) while in his late thirties. Martial, too, suggests that he received training as a youth with grammaticus and rhetor (9.73.7-8), and there is ample evidence of the influence of such training in his writing.373
369 Cf. the inscription found at Hippo Regius first published by Marec and Pflaum (1952); Syme (1958) suggested Pisaurum as his native town.
370 He begged Pliny to postpone his case in the Centumviral Court, Pl. Ep. 1.18.
371 Sherwin-White is probably right to suggest that this early literary effort resulted in a volume of verses; cf. his note on Pl. Ep. 5.10.1
372 Wallace-Hadrill (1984) 5, n.6 suggests that simply the offer of a tribunate may have been distinction enough, pointing to parallels cited by Champlin (1980) 99.
373 For the most comprehensive treatment see Barwick (1959); cf. also Pertsch (1911), and Joepgen (1967). The emphasis on "reality" in Martial, as Sullivan briefly suggests (no one to my knowledge has followed this line of inquiry), "may be seen as a rhetorical mode, the pursuit of ejnavrgeia (cf. Quint. Inst. 6.2.25-36)" (1991, 222). Interesting: Quintilian views ejnavrgeia as a tool in the production of pathos in the hearer, and views laughter/ioci (the topic of the next section in the Institutiones) as a type of solvent or foil for strong emotions. The Xenia and Apophoreta might also be thought of as rhetorical exercises.
- 145 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
Like Suetonius, it is entirely likely that Martial's family was equestrian.374 And there are a number of parallels in Martial for Pliny the encouraging senior amicus of Suetonius, notably
Arruntius Stella, the dedicatee of the first book of the Epigrammata.
The biographical picture that Martial presents in the Epigrammata needs to be carefully re-assessed in the light of evidence of equestrian provincials and the literary culture of the period in a full length study. For this study, however, it seems sufficient to note the incongruities in
Martial's portrayal of himself – a mendicant poet taking advantage of sportulae, who is also an eques, an ex-tribune, and owner of two estates and an urban house. The essential element of
Martial's portrayal of himself for this study is that this poet, whether starving or comfortable, is nevertheless a member of the elite and displays an abiding interest in his own success and renown.
4.1.2 Chronology of the Books
Friedlaender's monumental work on the chronology of the publication of Martial's epigram books has become more or less definitive. But the greatest difficulty any commentator
374 Rufino (1999), who notes a rise in the number of known Spanish equestrians in the Flavian period (which was followed by an enormous increase with Trajan and Hadrian, records a number of equestrian Valerii (including Martial) having their origin in both Hispania Citerior (Tarraconensis), the province of Bilbilis, and Ulterior (Baetica), the province of Corduba and home of the Senecas. For example, a P. Valerius P. f. Galerius Priscus (cf. Degrassi [1967] p.18-25, for the inscription p. 19 – Rufino's CIL citation [VI.3654] seems to be incorrect, although Degrassi, who quotes this number, does seem to know it from Rome) at least seems to be contemporary with Martial; Degrassi firmly dates the long list of military positions (which include campaigns) to the middle to end of the 1st century – see his pp. 21-23.
- 146 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
faces with Martial is the date of the poems themselves, not the published books.375 In the following section I describe the chronology offered by Friedlaender and slightly revised by
Citroni, and discuss how the chronology of the editions relates to a conceptual division of the poems which I employ below as a framework for my discussion of success and renown.
The Liber de Spectaculis, the Xenia, and the Apophoreta, which are not a part of this study, are the earliest works we possess of Martial; he also mentions a collection of iuvenalia in
1.113. These iuvenalia are undatable, of course. But the date of the Liber de Spectaculis, 80, is virtually guaranteed by the subject matter, the dedicatory games of the Flavian Amphitheater.
Lack of references to a living Vespasian, or to Domitian, as well as an emphasis on Titus, more or less cement the date.376 Friedlaender thought the Xenia and Apophoreta were published in the same year, either 84 or 85.377 But, following Citroni (1988) and Leary (1996, 2001), I prefer 83 or 84 for the Xenia and 85 for the Apophoreta.378 Books 1 and 2 of the Epigrammata were published the following year, and Book 3 in 87.379 Book 4, a book that shows a new interest in
375 See Dau (1887) 56-78.
376 The state of the text of this book (Lindsay [1903] 49 conjectures that as much as half is missing) does not encourage definitive statements about what its original content might have been. For some possible references to Domitian cf. Caratello (1981) 15-16. Dau seems to have suggested that the liber may have been published in connection with Domitian's Dacian triumph of 89 (Dau [1887] 8-35).
377 See Friedlaender (1886) 16-17, Pitcher (1985) 330, Martin (1980) 61.
378 Cf. Citroni (1988) 11-12, whence Leary (1996) 9-13, (2001) 12-14.
379 Mart. 1.1 and 1.2 are omitted in one main branch of the textual history (Lindsay's BA) and displaced in the other (CA) to the end of the preface before the poem there beginning nosses iocosae. The communis opinio (which started with Dau [1887] and continues in Holzberg [2002]) has these poems inserted in the other main branch (AA) from a position extra ordinem paginarum given them after a re-edition or revision
- 147 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
the emperor and his politics, seems to have been published in 89, and Books 5-9 followed in consecutive years. The first edition of Book 10, too, followed directly upon the last in 95, but we possess a revised edition from 98. In between the first and second editions, of course, contemporary affairs at Rome had changed considerably; Book 11, probably published at the end of 96, shows signs of a new direction in Martial's writing with the renewal of his declarations of
Saturnalian license. There seems to have been a considerable break between Books 10 and 11 and Book 12, which seems to date from about 101. Book 12 as we have it may be a conflation of a small book with material added by a posthumous editor.380 Martial's poetic output can be conceptualized, then, in three stages: an early period (Books 1-3) up to 87, a middle period of regular production from 89 to 96, and a period of irregular production with the revision of Book
10 in 98 and Book 12 (whatever form it originally took) around 101. On the basis of Pliny's obituary notice (Ep. 3.21) Martial's death is usually placed around 103-4.
4.2 A Poet's Renown
When we turn to Martial's treatment of poets' renown, it is necessary to implement a strategy to examine not only the body of material but also potential changes in stance over time.
Accordingly, in sections 4.2.1-2 I discuss Martial's statements concerning the renown and success of poets in general synchronically, focusing on important examples and themes. Then, in
of a collection of books (possibly, following Sullivan [1991] 15, n.31, the edition of Books 1-7) around 93. The problems with dating lead me to exclude them from this immediate discussion. See further Citroni (1988).
380 See Sullivan (1991) 52-4 for references.
- 148 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
section 4.2.3, I present a diachronic analysis of Martial's statements about his own success and renown built around the thematic framework used in sections 4.2.1-2. In section 4.2.4 I use the notion of readership as another means to assess Martial's stance towards his success and renown.
In the conclusion (section 4.3) I outline how Martial characterizes the rewards for success in terms of his own renown.
4.2.1 Failure
Introductory to this section, and indeed the following, I must first comment that the number of poems directly addressing a poet's renown and success is very small, both over the whole corpus and over individual books. However much importance modern scholars – like myself, admittedly – attach to these poems collectively or individually, it seems essential to keep in mind that there are more poems dealing directly with fellatio than poets' renown in the
Epigrammata. When we compare the number of renown poems with that of more weighty themes (such as the patron-amicus or praise of the emperor), the imbalance is even more pronounced.
It becomes clear upon reading the Epigrammata that certain kinds of approval can be bought, and that others must be earned. This is nowhere more apparent than in Martial's treatment of other poets. Martial directly addresses a number of poets on the subject of their success or renown. The following discussion presents a thematic examination of comments in the
Epigrammata about other poets' success and renown in three parts. First, I discuss characterizations of the "unsuccessful" poet. Next, I examine some implicit and explicit criteria
- 149 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
for success that may be garnered from the Epigrammata. Last, I outline the rewards of success.
This synchronic approach has its dangers, of course, chief among them the assumption that such a large and varied corpus will present a consistent set of ideas. It is not my purpose in this section, however, to present any consistencies or inconsistencies over time, but rather to present the variety of expression about success and renown to be found in the Epigrammata.
Unsuccessful poets in the Epigrammata fall into two main categories: those whose poetry is derided under the semblance of praise, and those whose poetry (or whose abilities as poets) is derided outright. As far as the latter category is concerned, a number of poets are abused simply for writing bad poetry. Ligurinus,381 for example, is criticized for reciting bad poetry too often, and especially at dinner: in 3.44 Ligurinus recites to Martial constantly (nimis poeta est. | hoc valde vitium periculosum est, 3.44.4-5), in 3.45 his recitations put the diners off their food, and in
3.50 Martial accuses Ligurinus of inviting him to dine only so that he may have an audience for his poetry (haec tibi, non alia, est ad cenam causa vocandi, | versiculos recites ut, Ligurine, tuos,
3.50.1-2). In 5.53 Martial suggests that a certain Bassus,382 who seems to have written tragedy383 on standard mythological themes, writes poetry that deserves to be drowned or burned (Colchida
381 This figure only appears in Book 3 of the Epigrammata (3.44, 3.45, 3.50)
382 Bassus (probably more than one person to judge from the content of the epigrams) is addressed in 1.37, 3.47, 3.58, 3.76, 5.23, 7.96, 8.10, 9.100, 12.97. None of these poems are of a particularly literary nature, although 3.47, 3.58, and 7.96 all describe the sort of individual one finds dabbling in literary composition in Pliny's Epistulae.
383 On the popularity and safety of mythological themes in this period, see Juv. 1.162-4. But cf. contra Tac. Dial. 3, where Maternus (after being warned for his politically dangerous tragedy about Cato), claims that whatever was left unsaid by Cato will be said by Thyestes (quod si qua omisit Cato, sequenti recitatione Thyestes dicet Tac. Dial. 3.2-3). For these titles indicating tragedy, see Howell (1995) ad loc.
- 150 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
quid scribis, quid scribis, amice, Thyesten? | quo tibi vel Nioben, Basse, vel Andromachen? materia est, mihi crede, tuis aptissima chartis | Deucalion vel, si non placet hic, Phaethon.
5.53.1-4). The joke almost certainly plays, as Burnikel – and Friedlander before him – pointed out, on an epigram by Lucilius addressed to Menestratus (Anth. Pal. 11.214384); Bassus has written twice as much bad poetry as Menestratus. Interestingly, although we can read the poem against the earlier tradition of this motif, the point of the epigram (the number of poems, and the cleverness of the metonymy) depends on the reader's knowledge of Lucilius. Another poet,
Varus, shows good taste in not publishing his poems, but bad taste in writing them at all – or perhaps in writing so many385: cum facias versus nulla non luce ducenos | Vare, nihil recitas. non
384 Anth. Pal. 11.214 (Lucilius) Gravfa" Deukalivwna, Menevstrate, kai; Faevqonta, | zhtei'" tiv" touvtwn a[xio" ejsti tivno". | toi'" ijdivoi" aujtou;" timhvsomen: a[xio" o[ntw" | ejsti puro;" Faevqwn, Deukalivwn d j u{dato". Burnikel (1980) 18 claims that Martial's poem depends on Lucilius' both for sense and for quality "Lukill hat ein gutes Epigramm gemacht, Martial ein noch wirkungsvolleres. Man wird allerdings zugeben müssen, daß sein Gedicht ohne die Folie des Originals kaum verständlich ist, in einem gewissen Sinn also auf Kosten Lukills lebt." While it cannot be denied that Martial owes his inspiration to Lucilius in this case, and while we appreciate Martial's clever allusions more knowing the Lucilius epigram, it can hardly be said that Martial's poem can only be understood against the "original": the motifs are a literary commonplace (see Mart 1.5 Do tibi naumachiam, tu das epigrammata nobis: | vis, puto, cum libro, Marco, natare tuo). Punishment by fire and "drowning" is suggested for his own iambi by Horace in Carm. 1.16.1-4 (O matre pulchra filia pulchrior, | quem criminosis cumque voles modum | pones iambis, sive flamma | sive mari libet Hadriano); see Nisbet-Hubbard ad loc. Cf. also Cat. 36.4-8 (fire), Tib. 1.9.49-50 (fire and water), Ov. Tr. 4.10.61-2 (fire), Juv. 7.24-5 (fire). Martial uses the image quite often (see 1.5, 3.100, 9.58, 14.96). A letter of Cicero's to Quintus suggests what might happen to soaked writing (Cic. Q.fr. 2.13.4).
385 For the amount of poetry produced by Varus, cf. St. Silv. 1.praef. where he claims that Silvae 1.2 (the epithalamion for Stella; 277 lines long) was written in two days (Respondebis illi tu, Stella carissime, qui epithalamium tuum, quod iniunxeras, scis biduo scriptum. St. Silv. 1.praef.), and that all the others were written in one or two days (Nullum enim ex illis biduo longius tractum, quaedam et in singulis diebus effusa. St. Silv. 1.praef.).
- 151 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
sapis, atque sapis 8.20).386 Martial suggests – quite cleverly – that Gaditanus, though he claims to be a poet, does not write poetry (Qua factus ratione sit requiris, | qui numquam futuit, pater
Philinus? | Gaditanus, Avite, dicat istud, | qui scribit nihil et tamen poeta est. 10.102). The implication here is that, just as Philinus did not father his own child(ren), Gaditanus did not
"father" his own poetry. This epigram picks up another common theme of abuse against poets, especially in Book 1: theft.387
Theft of another's poems, too, can have implications for the thief-poet's renown, especially if the source is well known in his own right (as Martial claims to be against all would be thieves of his poetry; see n. 394). In 1.66 Martial attacks an unnamed fur avarus:
Erras, meorum fur auare librorum, fieri poetam posse qui putas tanti, scriptura quanti constet et tomus uilis: non sex paratur aut decem sophos nummis. Secreta quaere carmina et rudes curas 5 quas nouit unus scrinioque signatas custodit ipse uirginis pater chartae, quae trita duro non inhorruit mento: mutare dominum non potest liber notus. Sed pumicata fronte si quis est nondum 10
386 For a similar thought cf. Mart. 2.88. For sapio as a term connoting good judgment in literary matters in Martial, cf. Mart. 1.117, 3.2, 11.94; for the "nose" as indicating good critical taste cf. Mart. 1.3, 12.88, 13.2.
387 Cf. Mart. 1.29, 1.38, 1.52, 1.53, 1.63, 1.66, 1.72, 2.20, 7.77, 10.100, 11.94, 12.63. The heavy concentration of these poems in Book 1 may actually argue against the common supposition that Martial was a well-known poet of epigrams by 85.
- 152 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
nec umbilicis cultus atque membrana, mercare: tales habeo; nec sciet quisquam. Aliena quisquis recitat et petit famam, non emere librum, sed silentium debet.
The epigram has two movements. In the first (lines 1-9) Martial declares to the plagiarist that he cannot get approval (sophos388) simply by copying and passing off for his own the circulated poems of another poet, since the reading public (presumably) already knows the author: mutare dominum non potest liber notus (1.66.9). Instead, suggests Martial in the second movement, the fur should buy an uncirculated book; the epigram's conceit lies in Martial's offer to sell the thief one of his own such books (1.66.10-12) – on the sly of course. 1.66 is essentially an elaboration of Epigrammata 1.29 in which Fidentinus is presented as a plagiarist:
Fama refert nostros te, Fidentine, libellos non aliter populo quam recitare tuos. si mea vis dici, gratis tibi carmina mittam: si dici tua vis, hoc eme, ne mea sint.
The final lines of 1.66, however, offer an interesting play on fama when read against 1.29
(especially the end): in 1.29 Martial reports to Fidentinus that he is the subject of fama (bad connotation) while in 1.66 he implies that those who recite another's work – like Fidentinus in
1.29 – do so to gain fama (good connotation). The play, of course, is that the plagiarist will in fact get fama, just not the kind he wants (see section 2.1.1).
388 For sophos (sofw'") as an expression of appreciation for literature or public speaking in Martial, Cf. also Mart. 1.3.7, 1.49.37, 3.46.8, 6.48.1, 7.32.4.
- 153 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
Poets are also presented as ultimately unsuccessful in the Epigrammata by emphasizing the emptiness of the approval they win: the sycophant offers insincere praise for tangible rewards. Martial recommends Selius in 2.27 as a willing toady for a pleader or reciter
(Laudantem Selium cenae cum retia tendit | accipe, sive legas sive patronus agas: | "Effecte! graviter! cito! nequiter! euge! beate!" | hoc volui: facta est iam tibi cenae, tace.). In 5.63 Martial portrays himself as a flatterer to a certain Ponticus ("Quid sentis", inquis, "de nostris, Marce, libellis?" | sic me sollicitus, Pontice, saepe rogas. | admiror, stupeo: nihil est perfectius illis, | ipse tuo cedet Regulus ingenio. | "Hoc sentis?" inquis "faciat tibi sic bene Caesar, | sic
Capitolinus Juppiter." immo tibi, 5.63); likewise 12.40 (Mentiris, credo: recitas mala carmina, laudo: | cantas, canto: bibas, Pontiliane, bibo: | pedis, dissimulo: gemma vis ludere, vincor: | res una est sine me quam facis, et taceo. | nil tamen omnino praestas mihi. "Mortuus" inquis" | accipiam bene te." nil volo: sed morere). These poems are attacks on sycophancy, of course, both against the flatterer, and against the flattered: in 2.27 the sole motivation of the flatterer is dinner, and the implication of the initial lines is that any dinner will do (cenae cum retia tendit,
2.27.1), in 12.40 the motivation is an inheritance, and in 5.63 and 12.40 Martial deftly suggests that empty praise meets with equally empty rewards. Martial rejects the role of flattery entirely in
8.76: "Dic verum mihi, Marce, dic amabo; | nil est quod magis audiam libenter." | sic et cum recitas tuos libellos, | et causam quotiens agis clientis, | oras, Gallice, me rogasque semper. | durum est me tibi quod petis negare. | vero verius ergo quid sit audi: | verum, Gallice, non libenter audis. Interestingly, 2.27, 5.63, and 8.76 address the problem of sycophancy in a context broader than just poetry, one which also extends to the courts (and amicitia in general in 12.40).
Like Pliny in Epistles 2.14, where he speaks out against "listeners like actors" in the Centumviral
- 154 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
Courts (Sequuntur auditores actoribus similes, conducti et redempti ... in media basilica tam palam sportula quam in triclinio dantur; ex iudicio in iudicium pari mercede transitur. Pl. Ep.
2.14.4), Martial seems to be suggesting that this kind of flattery is base commercium (see p. 109 above on Statius and Juvenal). 8.76, then, ought to be read in contrast to the other poems as a positive and cleverly inoffensive portrayal of such judgments between amici: by speaking truly
(verius) Martial delicately avoids giving an explicitly negative assessment or false flattery, and his amicus Gallicus avoids having it given him.389
4.2.2 Being Successful
What then are the criteria for a poet's success and renown in Martial? Here, as one might expect, there are several standards against which poetic output could be measured, and these differing standards intersect with a number of literary debates within the Epigrammata. Martial seems quite content to acknowledge the validity of different standards, although he rarely does so without privileging his own. The different standards and the literary debates on which they are based have been well examined by other scholars.390 Most interesting for my project is the role of the reader/listener in the success and renown of a poet.391 For Martial, the success of the poet
389 On the importance of faithful criticisms on literary matters between friends, cf. for example Pl. Ep. 2.5, 3.10, 3.15 and Hoffer (1999) 10-12 and 17-28.
390 Cf. Friedlaender (1889) 18-26, Sullivan (1985) 78-100, Laurens (1989), Lorenz (2002) 1-50, Holzberg (2002).
391 For the reader in Martial see now Spisak (1997); in this article Spisak establishes that Martial incorporates many of the attitudes towards readership which can be identified in satire from Lucilius to Juvenal, especially in terms of targeting an audience which is learned, but not too critical – the targeting
- 155 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
and his poetry rested on whether or not the poems were read. Obviously, Martial was himself a reader of other poetry; as an "audience" he presents a valuable if somewhat Protean perspective.
There is a sense in which Martial measures other poets of epigram by his own standard(s). His opinions on other genres of poetry are strongly negative (cf. 4.49); but he never denies their place in the poetic culture. In what follows I examine the importance of reader/listener for
Martial's perspective on other poets' success.
In 2.86 Martial directly attacks certain styles of ineptiae or nugae – the carmen supinum,
Sotadics,392 versus echoici,393 galliambic poetry (with perhaps a hint towards Catullus' Attis, Cat.
63) – suggesting that the effort spent on them by their authors runs contrary to the nature of nugatory poetry: quid si per gracilis vias petauri | invitum iubeas subire Ladan? | turpe est difficiles habere nugas | et stultus labor est ineptiarum (2.86.7-10). Martial does not entirely reject this type of highly technical poetry394 (although he does judge it), but rather suggests that he himself cannot write in that way by nature. The viability (if not the value) of both kinds of
of this audience is related to the stance of these poets against the pretentious erudition evident in the major genres.
392 Pliny admits to understanding or appreciating Sotadics (Pl. Ep. 5.3.2). Martial wrote at least one poem in Sotadic metre, Mart. 3.29.
393 But cf. Mart. 1.32 non amo te, Sabidi, nec possum dicere quare: | hoc tantum possum dicere, non amo te.
394 Sullivan rightly connects this polemic statement with Martial's negative views on the Callimachean and neoteric aesthetic: "...of the Alexandrian and neoteric poetic heritage Martial felt able to accept only the short poem, the epigram, which dispensed with mythology, bombast and also recherché learning, in favour of realism and common experience. Callimachean brevity (ojligosticiva) could be accepted, but not the metrical experiments and sophisticated Alexandrian forms such as sotadics and galliambics or versus recurrentes, versus reciproci and palindromes." (Sullivan [1991] 75). But like so much in Martial, general statements are dangerous.
- 156 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
poetry is clearly suggested in the final lines of the poem where Martial acknowledges two types of audience for the two types of poetry: an assembled crowd (circuli) and a select group (rari aures): scribat carmina circulis Palaemon: | me raris iuvat auribus placere (2.86.11-12).395
Martial writes for a select audience. Later we shall see that Martial, in fact, changes his position on this point over time.
Another division of reader/listener may be seen in 3.69, where Martial praises396 a nameless poet for his casta verba (omnia quod scribis castis epigrammatis verbis | inque tuis nulla est mentula carminibus, | admiror, laudo; nihil est te sanctius uno, 3.69.1-3), contrasting his own verses.397 This "chaste" type of epigram deserves a correspondingly "chaste" audience
(at tua, Cosconi, venerandaque sanctaque verba | a pueris debent virginibus legi, 3.69.7-8), just as his own deserve the opposite (haec igitur nequam iuvenes facilesque puellae, | haec senior, sed quem torquet amica, legat, 3.69.5-6). The intersection of obscenity and audience is a prominent theme in the Epigrammata. While there is a great deal of jocular play with the theme
(cf. for example the pairing of 3.68, where matrons are warned of the following epigrams' obscene nature, and 3.86, where Martial admonishes them for still reading), Martial's criticisms in this regard are sometimes more strongly focused on the value or success of the poetry. For
395 A. Remmius Palaemon was a famous improvisatoire who seems to have specialized in extempore composition, and wrote using exotic metres. Cf. Suet. De Gram. 22 nec non etiam poemata fecit extempore; scripsit vero variis nec volgaribus metris.
396 The tone may be ironic or sarcastic, but there is no reason to suppose it must be.
397 On Martial's attitudes towards obscenity in epigrams, see also Mart. 1.35, 3.68, 3.86, 7.68, 11.2, 11.6, 11.20, 12.43; for the familiar apologiae for obscenity in poetry see Mart. 1.4, 11.15; for reduction of obscenity see Mart. 5.2.
- 157 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
example, in 7.25 Martial suggests that "chaste" poetry will not be read (Dulcia cum tantum scribas epigrammata semper | et cerussata candidiora cute, | nullaque mica salis nec amari fellis in illis | gutta sit, o demens, vis tamen illa legi! 7.25.1-4), and ends the poem with a division of audience similar to that in 3.69 (infanti melimela dato fatuasque marsicas: | nam mihi, quae novit pungere, Chia sapit. 7.25.7-8).
The most interesting evidence from the Epigrammata, however, points to a disjunction visible between success and recognition arising from a select group of readers and that which comes from the reading populace at large. There is a discernible tension in Martial's statements about his own success between a select readership (presumably his patrons and their circle of friends) and a general readership398; I examine this question below in section 4.2.3. The importance of readership for poetic success and renown is evident in Martial's assessment of other poets; obtaining a readership (whether select or general) is central to the poet's task for
Martial. For example, in 4.49 Martial attacks poetry on mythological themes,399 claiming that, while this poetry wins general commendation, epigram is actually read ("illa tamen laudant
398 The question of what kind this readership was for Martial has been addressed by Best (1968). Against Best's claims that nearly every level of Roman society read Martial see Harris (1989) 227, Kenney in CHCL 2 (1983) 10. Starr (1987) addresses the circulation of literary texts; his discussion of the widening circles of publication is matched by what I observe in the Epigrammata in relation to the types of readers addressed. But the actuality of this readership is secondary to the notion of readership as a trope; Martial may have been "one of the first authors to write for a general public" (Kay [1985] 101) or he may not. But as Pliny said on the permanence of Martial's poetry ille tamen scripsit tamquam essent [sc. aeterna].
399 Mart. 4.49 and 10.4 are often adduced as evidence for a rivalry between Statius and Martial (neither mentions the other in his works [but see Colton (1977) 544], even though they were active at the same time). See Heuvel (1937), who sees it as a direct attack on Statius; Citroni (1968) 296, n.22 has a more balanced point of view. The arguments are based largely on shadows and dust.
- 158 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
omnes, mirantur, adorant." | confiteor: laudant illa sed ista legunt, 4.49.9-10). This poem, more than any other, highlights the tension between praise (which as we saw above may be counterfeit) and true literary success. Martial also wrote epigrams on several successful poets which explicitly mention their "currency": 5.10 (Ennius), 10.35 (Sulpicia), 7.63 (Silius), 7.97
(Turnus), 10.78 (himself). And Martial claims that Cerrinius, who withholds his epigrams from the public, would be read more than even he (Si tua, Cerrini, promas epigrammata vulgo, | vel mecum possis vel prior ipse legi: | sed tibi tantus inest veteris respectus amici, | carior ut mea sit quam tua fama tibi. 8.18.1-4). Conversely, not being read is a signal of some kind of failure (cf.
3.9 versiculos in me narratur scribere Cinna. | non scribit, cuius carmina nemo legit, and 6.61); failure to be read also lies behind Martial's attack on Sextus in 10.21 (scribere te quae vix intellegat ipse Modestus | et vix Claranus quid rogo, Sexte, iuvat? | non lectore tuis opus est sed
Apolline libris: | iudice te maior Cinna Marone fuit. | sic tua laudentur sane: mea carmina,
Sexte, | grammaticis placeant, ut sine grammaticis).
4.2.3 Martial's success
If we measure Martial by the criteria discussed above, it seems clear that he has created a success of kinds for himself. Created, because we cannot truly measure the actuality of his success except through statements in his poetry matched with the scarce biographical facts from other sources. Pliny, it is true, in a letter written to the consular Cornelius Priscus on Martial's
- 159 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
death,400 commends Martial and his poetry. In this last letter of Epistulae Book 3 (3.21), Pliny presents a curious separation of the man as amicus and the man as poet (one similar to that which
Martial often asserted401), claiming that Martial erat homo ingeniosus acutus acer (3.21.1), who wrote with wit, venom, and lucidity (qui plurimum in scribendo et salis haberet et fellis, nec candoris minus, 3.21.1). This separation is maintained when Pliny mentions the gift of a viaticum for Martial's return to Spain in 101: it was given for amicitia's sake and for the verses Martial wrote about him (Prosecutus eram viatico secendentem; dederam hoc amicitiae, dederam etiam versiculis quos de me composuit. 3.21.2).402 Curiously, Pliny seems at pains at the end of the letter to justify his largess, for the poem does not end well: the final line makes him a rigidus
Cato403 and so, in Martial's poetics, one fundamentally unsuited to hear his poetry (cf. 8.3.17-18 scribant isti graves nimium nimiumque severi, | quos media miseros nocte lucerna videt.). Here again, Pliny keeps a separation between poet and amicus: Meritone cum qui haec de me scripsit et tunc dimisi amicissime et nunc ut amicissimum defunctum esse doleo? (3.21.6) The final response (foreshadowed in 3.21.3), is that Pliny is grateful for what he thinks Martial gave to him through this poem: gloria, laus, et aeternitas (3.21.6). To the imagined criticism that
400 See Pl. Ep. 5.20.7 Cornelius Priscus consularis, and Birley (2000) 52-3 s.v. Cornelius Priscus.
401 Cf. Mart. 1.4.8, 10.47, 11.20.
402 Pliny also thanks A. Gellius Sentius Augurinus (later procos. of Macedonia; cf. PIR2 G 135) for the same kind of poem in Pl. Ep. 9.8 (cf. Ep. 4.27).
403 There is almost certainly a play on the obscene sense of rigidus; cf. OLD s.v. 3b. For an exact parallel cf. 11.3.4 a rigido teritur centurione liber of a centurion reading Martial's poems (similarly ambiguous, but with the addition of teritur [cf. s.v. tero 1b] hardly obscure); less ambiguous are Mart. 6.49.2 (of Priapus) nec quae stat rigida supina vena and 11.16.5 (of a lector nimium gravis) o quotiens rigida pulsabis pallia vena. The sexual context in Mart. 12.42.1 (Barbatus rigido nupsit Callistratus Afro | hac qua lege viro nubere virgo solet, 12.42.1-2) helps with the reading.
- 160 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
Martial's poetry will not be aeterna, Pliny only responds non erunt fortasse, ille tamen scripsit tamquam essent futura (3.21.6).
What does this letter say about Martial's success? The absence of any real approbation from Pliny for Martial's poetry except the brief characterization in 3.21.1 clearly suggests that praising Martial's poetry was not uppermost in Pliny's mind; the letter focuses more on the praise-function of poetry in general (3.21.3 finis) and of Martial's poetry in particular (3.21.6), as well as the deterioration of the regular exchange between patron-amicus and poet. He also seems to maintain a division between Martial as amicus and Martial as poet, a division evident in
Martial's epigrams on patronage: Martia, too, often portrays himself as an amicus who also writes poetry (see above section 4.1.1). If any elements of Martial's success lie buried in this letter, they surely find expression in the fact that Pliny gave his amicus Martial a viaticum and that Pliny expects Martial's poetry to be read now and in the future (to his own benefit).
If no help is to be found in determining the actuality of Martial's success and the quality of the praise he received from his readership, then we must return to Martial's characterization of his own success and renown. In the following paragraphs I examine diachronically Martial's poems dealing with his own success and renown, relating them to the themes introduced above. I understand Books 1-3, Books 4-9, and Books 10-12 to represent separate stages in Martial's writing.404
404 See section 4.1.2 above.
- 161 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
4.2.3.1 Books 1-3
Books 1-3, as published, contain a few scattered references to Martial's own success and renown, and only one poem (3.95) which can be said to address directly Martial's awareness of success and renown at the time of publication. Indeed, in the preface to Book 1, Martial seems to suggest that fama is yet to be achieved (mihi fama vilius constet et probetur in me novissimum ingenium, 1.praef.2), and in 1.107 he seems to favor the higher genres of lyric and epic as sources for renown (recall Statius) in a dig for patronage (condere victuras temptem per saecula curas | et nomen flammis eripuisse meum, 1.107.5-6). There are no poems that address his own renown in Book 2. In 3.1 (hunc legis et laudas librum fortasse priorem, 3.1.3) Martial anticipates laus from an unnamed reader, but in 3.95 attacks Naevolus for, apparently, refusing to recognize his status and social importance: Naevolus only returns the have (Numquam dicis have sed reddis, Naevole, semper, | quod prior et corvus dicere saepe solet. | cur hoc expectes a me, rogo, dicas: | nam puto, nec melior, Naevole, nec prior es. 3.95.1-4). In response, Martial asserts his social importance and status in four stages. First, he claims praise and rewards from two Caesars,
Titus and Domitian, as well as the ius triorum librorum (for which cf. 2.91): praemia laudato tribuit mihi Caesar uterque | natorumque dedit iura paterna trium (3.95.5-6). Then he asserts that nomen and fama have come to him through his poetry: ore legor multo notumque per oppida nomen | non expectato dat mihi fama rogo (3.95.7-8). Third, Martial makes clear his equestrian rank arising from his tribunate (est in hoc aliquid: vidit me Roma tribunum | et sedeo qua te suscitat Oceanus, 3.95.9-10), suggesting that the office was granted because of the recognition garnered through his poetry. Last, Martial claims influence with the emperor (and a social importance for those who received the franchise through him): quot mihi Caesareo facti sunt
- 162 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
munere cives, | nec famulos totidem suspicior esse tibi (3.95.11-12). Naevolus' only claim to priority – and with this the poem ends – is a physical one: sed pedicaris, sed pulchre, Naevole, ceves. | iam, iam tu prior es, Naevole, vincis: have. (3.95.13-14). The poem is a characteristically brilliant piece of abuse; as Pliny wrote, plurimum salis et fellis, nec minus candoris.405 Martial, then, at the end of Book 3 portrays a poet who is aware of its success through fama and nomen. It is clear too that he is aware of "being praised", that he has received laus. But his own success and renown never becomes at all a prominent theme, with only four (possibly five) examples in 311 poems.
4.2.3.2 Books 4 – 9
Books 4-9, however, (the very books dedicated to the Emperor Domitian) show a marginally heightened interest in success (13 of 551 poems): Books 5 (4 epigrams) and 8 (3 epigrams) show a relatively higher concentration of poems relating to Martial's success and renown. On the basis of 3.95 (see above), it seems to me likely that Martial may have desired to promote (or exaggerate) the extent of his popularity as an indication of his value for Domitian.
4.27 (the only example from that book) focuses like 3.95 on the Emperor's role as a benefactor of
Martial; in it Martial urges Domitian to punish an invidus (whom we might consider any invidus of Martial) by giving him all the more (Saepe meos laudare soles, Auguste, libellos. | invidus ecce negat: num minus ergo soles? | quid quod honorato non sola voce dedisti, | non alius poterat quae dare dona mihi? | ecce iterum nigros conrodit lividus ungues. | da, Caesar, tanto tu
405 The ending of the poem is deliciously ambiguous, since it seems to imply that Martial will treat Naevolus as "prior" in this one respect only, and so seems to be threatening to sodomize him.
- 163 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
magis, ut doleat. 4.27). Clearly, Martial sets Domitian's praise (laudare soles) at a high premium in the first two lines, even to the extent of claiming that public awareness of Domitian's praise is immaterial (num minus ergo soles?). But his use in this poem of honos (the first instance for
Martial) is, I think, instructive. Here, instead of Statius' honos vatis, Martial seems to refer in
4.27.3-4 (quid quod honorato non sola voce dedisti, | non alius poterat quae dare dona mihi?) to the ius trium liberorum and the tribuneship mentioned in 3.95.
Book 5, a book designed with Domitian in mind (see 5.2) contains two pairs of poems, one pair dealing explicitly with Martial's renown (5.10 and 5.13), the other with the relationship between success and benefit from patron-amici (5.15 and 5.16). 5.10 develops as a response to
Regulus' comment that few readers prefer to read living poets – as a result they are denied fama
("Esse quid hoc dicam vivis quo fama negatur | et sua quod rarus tempora lector amat?" 5.10.1-
2). Martial responds that a certain nostalgia for the past has always been strong and that it is motivated by invidia (5.10.3-10), citing examples from architecture and poetry. In the final lines of the poem Martial reverses a conceit which he employs to great effect elsewhere against targets of abuse,406 and states that he is not willing to die to achieve renown (vos tamen o nostri ne festinate libelli: | si post fata venit gloria, non propero, 5.10.11-12). The use of gloria here is remarkable, even more so than it was in Silvae 5.3, because of the contrast with invidia (a political catchword of the period) and the resonances with similar themes connected to the
406 Cf. Mart. 4.33, 5.66, 7.24, 8.69, 11.67, 12.40.
- 164 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
pursuit of gloria in Pliny's Epistulae (more on this below). Kay407 invites comparison with 1.1.4-
6 (where decus is used), Ovid Tr. 4.10.121-2 (tu mihi, quod rarum est, vivo sublime dedisti | nomen, ab exequiis quod dare fama solet – I would add from this same poem lines 41-2, temporis illius colui fovique poetas, | quotque aderant, rebar esse deos, which stand in stark contrast to Regulus' statement), and Quintilian Inst. 12.11.7 (famam in tuto conlocarit et sentiet vivus eam quae post fata praestari magis solet venerationem et quid apud posteros futurus sit videbit). But none of these examples use gloria. The parallels adduced by Kay demonstrate further the significance of the conjunction of death and renown (cf. e.g. Hor. Carm. 2.20, 3.30,
Ov. Am. 1.15.39-42), although in these the trope in Ovid and Quintilian is reversed (fame before death). Kay also points to 5.13 for a contrasting stance; there Martial extols his success to
Callistratus, and suggests that it is more valuable than Callistratus' vast wealth.
Here, of course, Kay is on the right track: 5.10 and 5.13, given their proximity and theme, form a diptych. Sullivan, in a masterful analysis of 5.34 and 5.37 (poems on the death of a girl,
Erotion), argues that Martial characteristically uses the technique of opposing diptychs to generate irony, ambiguity, and new meaning in much the same way he uses cycles. In 5.10 and
5.13, I suggest, Martial juxtaposes the poetic tropes of renown after death and renown before death. 5.13 thus becomes a new, and frankly disapproving, response to Regulus' comment in 5.10
(Callistratus in 5.13, then, corresponds to Regulus): whatever you may think, says Martial, I at
407 Kay (1995) ad loc. is a good example of the problem discussed in section 2.2 concerning the conflation of "glory" and gloria: "It is interesting to contrast this joke with Martial's proud claim in 1.1.4- 6 that he is a poet 'to whom, enthusiastic reader, you have given, while he is alive and can appreciate it, such glory as few poets have even after their deaths.'" (my italics).
- 165 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
least am indeed well-known and read everywhere (sed non obscurus nec male notus eques, | sed toto legor orbe frequens et dicitur "hic est," 5.13.2-3), a success and renown I enjoy while still alive (quodque cinis paucis hoc mihi vita dedit 5.13.4). The following verses of 5.13 add a subversive note to the exchange, for they set a higher value on this renown of the poet, though an eques pauper (Sum, fateor, semperfui, Callistrate, pauper, sed non obscurus nec male notus eques, 5.13.1-2), than on extraordinary wealth408: "This is who we are, you and I – but I am what you cannot be. What you are absolutely anyone can be" (hoc ego tuque sumus: sed quod sum non potes esse. | tu quod es e populo quilibet esse potest. 5.13.9-10).
5.15 and 5.16, another diptych in Book 5, work on a similar model. In 5.15, addressed to
Domitian, Martial asserts the positive social function of his poetry for praise (Quintus nostrorum liber est, Auguste, iocorum | et queritur laesus carmine nemo meo, | gaudet honorato sed multus nomine lector, | cui victura meo munere fama datur , 5.15.1-4) and expressly denies – in response to an imagined question from Domitian himself – any gain from the activity ("Quid tamen haec prosunt quamvis venerantia multos?" | non prosint sane, me tamen ista iuvant.
5.15.5-6). 5.16, however, presents the opposite point of view: Martial, who offers his poetry for the delight of all although he could be earning a living in the courts (5.16.1-8), has been taken advantage of and receives no fair recompense (5.16.9-10). He then calls his readership to account, finding them wanting in comparison to the generosity of generations past (11-12). Laus is not sufficient return: "Belle" inquis "dixti: iuvat et laudabimus usque." | dissimulas? facies me,
408 For Regulus' wealth see Pl. Ep. 1.5.
- 166 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
puto, causidicum (5.16.13-14). In both poems Martial boasts, again, of his readership. In 5.15
Martial claims that he has many satisfied "customers" (gaudet honorato sed multus nomine lector | cui victura meo munere fama datur, 5.15.3-4), referring almost certainly to an elite group of readers. In 5.16 Martial addresses the generalized lector at Rome from whom he receives laus
(...tu causa es, lector amice mihi | qui legis et tota cantas mea carmina Roma ... "Belle" inquis
"dixti: iuvat et laudabimus usque", 5.16.2-3, 13); the implication is that he is read all over Rome.
In 6.60, Martial portrays Roma herself as his enthusiastic reader (laudat, amat,409 cantat nostros mea Roma libellos, |meque sinus omnes, me manus omnis habet, 6.60.1-2). The trend of presenting success through readership has obviously developed enough that Martial can now introduce a twist: Martial knows that all Rome reads his works because all show it on their faces
(ecce rubet quidam, pallet, stupet, oscitat, odit, 6.60.3). Hoc volo, says Martial, nunc nobis carmina nostra placent. (6.60.4). But Martial's teasing tone in 6.60 turns vicious in 6.64 where he elaborates the same conceit in a threat directed at someone who is emending his poems and even writing poems against him. As in 6.60, Martial bases the power of his poetry to harm partly on the fact that it is widely read, not only in general (meos, quos novit fama libellos, 6.64.6; totaque legetur in urbe, 6.64.25), but also by the most important men: proceres urbisque forique,
Silius Italicus, Regulus, Sura, and Caesar himself (6.64.8-15). In 7.12 (cf. 10.3), however,
Martial suggests that he does not enjoy fama as a result of using poems to harm (as he has suggested he could in 6.60 and 6.64). Rather, his poems are innocuous ioci, and others are using
409 Cf. Mart. 5.10.2 et sua quod rarus tempora lector amat?
- 167 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
his nomen to spread scurrilous attacks. In 7.12, then, there is an assertion of fama and an insinuation that Martial's nomen is now such that others seek to use it to circulate abusive poetry.
In the preface to Book 8 Martial continues to conflate readership and success, but now the sophistication of the model increases as Martial adopts this stance to the demands of a book dedicated in toto to the Emperor: Domitian (whom Martial addresses as a patron-amicus) gave fama to Martial's libelli which now act as suppliants before him; because of this they will be read
(Omnes quidem libelli mei, domine, quibus tu famam, id est vitam, dedisti, tibi supplicant; et, puto, propter hoc legentur. 8.praef.1). Domitian, certainly, is the focus of this preface, and becomes the cause of Martial's success. As I suggested above for 3.95 and 4.27, however, part of
Martial's value for Domitian from the beginning will have been the fact that people read Martial's poems. And so Martial is careful to assert a readership for himself at the beginning and at the end of the preface (quod ut custoditurum me lecturi sciant, 8.praef. fin). 8.3 is a rather elaborate epigram depicting a dialogue between Martial and Thalia, the Muse of epigram, which owes a debt to Ovid Am. 3.1 and Horace Carm. 4.1. Interestingly, in 8.3 Martial claims that he can achieve no greater fama than he has already (iam plus addere nobis | fama potest, 8.3.3-4) because his books are read everywhere and will be read even after other monuments are ruined.
Again, we can see that Martial is equating success and renown with widespread readership.
Likewise in 8.18, where Martial suggests to Cerrinius that if he were to publish his epigrams, he might be read even more than Martial himself (si tua, Cerrini, promas epigrammata vulgo | vel mecum possis vel prior ipse legi, 8.18.1-2), but that he does not out of respect for Martial – as an
- 168 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
amicus – and his fama (sed tibi tantus inest veteris respectus amici, | carior ut mea sit quam tua fama tibi, 8.18.3-4).
In the preface to Book 9 Martial mentions to his absent friend Toranius that the epigram post ordinem paginarum addressing an Avitus, was written for Stertinus Avitus, probably the consul of 92. This poem post ordinem falls neatly into two halves, the first a response to Avitus' request (as we learn in the prose section of the preface) to place a bust of Martial in his bybliotheca. The second half is the inscription Martial has composed to accompany the bust:
"Ille ego sum nulli nugarum laude secundus, quem non miraris sed puto, lector, amas. 5 maiores maiores sonent: mihi parva locuto sufficit in vestras saepe redire manus."
The mutable context of the poem cum inscription makes the referent lector variable. At one point, lector will refer to Avitus, at another to any intimate of Avitus who uses his bybliotheca, at another (i.e. as in the poem itself) to anyone who reads the poem Martial wrote in response to
Avitus' request, and after the publication of Book 9 to any reader at all. In this epitaphic epigram, then, Martial manages to incorporate the various circles of readership (Emperor, individual, amici, select readership, general readership), all of whom are important for Martial's representation of his success and renown. Martial here claims laus for his poetry and, interestingly, further claims what he did not in 5.13 – but does in 6.60 – namely that the reader loves him (sed puto, lector, amas, 9.praef.5), as Regulus suggests contemporary readers do not
(cf. 5.13.1-2).
- 169 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
4.2.3.3 Books 10 – 12
The trend towards correlating success and readership which we saw developing in the earlier books is absent from Book 10, perhaps a result not only of the extensive reworking of poems from an earlier edition, but also the addition of new material, in response to the changing times. Books 11 and 12, too, show a marked shift as Martial seems to be adjusting his stance towards the readership and his success. Martial may be at his best as a poet in Book 10, but in terms of asserting his future success he seems much less certain, much less secure. In 10.2 (in part an explanation and justification for the revision), Martial – as he had in 8.praef. to Domitian
– points to his reader, a gift of Roma herself, as the source of his renown in the future: pigra per hunc fugies ingrate flumina Lethes | et meliore tui parte superstes eris... at chartis nec furta nocent et saecula prosunt, | solaque non norunt haec monumenta mori (10.2.7-8, 11-12). The allusions to Horace Carm. 3.30 exegi monumentum are unmistakable, but the tone is quite different. Exegi (3.30.1), non omnis moriar (3.30.6), ego postera crescam laude recens (3.30.7-
8), dicar (3.30.10): Horace's assertions of success and future renown are in the first person.
Martial, on the other hand, embeds his success so that it is spoken by Roma, and emphasizes its dependence on the lector: per hunc fugies ... et meliore tui parte superstes eris (10.2.7-8).
Another early poem in Book 10 seems to offer a slightly jejune view of renown. In 10.9 Martial laments that, in spite of his renown both in Rome and elsewhere (notus gentibus ille Martialis | et notus populis), none need be invidus: a race horse is more famous than he (non sum
Andramemone notior caballo, 10.9.5). In 10.103 Martial addresses his municipes in a poem which suggests his intention to return to Bilbilis, although with some anxiety over his welcome
(excipitis placida reducem si mente, venimus; | aspera si geritis corda, redire licet, 10.103.11-
- 170 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
12). In contrast with 10.2 and 10.9, Martial seems entirely confident of his success: ecquid laeta iuvant vestri vos gloria vatis? | nam decus et nomen famaque vestra sumus, | nec sua plus debet tenui Verona Catullo | meque velit dici non minus illa sum (10.103.3-5). Indeed, as far as the terms of praise which underlie this study, this poem is the boldest assertion of success and renown in the Epigrammata. But the renown is diverted, channeled onto Bilbilis (vestri vos gloria vatis ... vestra sumus). The focus here is not so much on Martial's success and renown, but on what that success and renown mean for Bilbilis and her citizens. What is more, the reader (at
Rome or elsewhere, cf. 10.9) has disappeared.
In 11.3 Martial indicates that success through a readership does not pay (sed meus in
Geticis ad Martia signa pruinis | a rigido teritur centurione liber, | dicitur et nostros cantare
Britania versus. | quid prodest? nescit sacculus ista meus 11.3.2-5), but rather that a generous patron – like Maecenas – is needed for a poet to produce everlasting work (at quam victuras poteramus pangere chartas ... et Maecenatem si tibi, Roma, darent! 11.3.7, 10). The poem has a close thematic parallel in the diptych 5.15 and 5.16, as we have seen. But it is clear here also that
Martial is no longer content even to claim that he finds delight without profit (cf. 5.15.6 non prosint sane, me tamen ista iuvant.). He also seems to have rejected the possibility that many patron-amici can compensate for one great one.410
410 For Martial's continuing wish for a Maecenas see Mart. 1.55, 1.107, 5.16, 8.55. A sad footnote to this question: Martial finally finds his Maecenas in Terentius Priscus (Quod Flacco Varioque fuit summoque Maroni | Maecenas, atavis regibus ortus eques, | gentibus et populis hoc te mihi, Prisce Terenti, | fama fuisse loquax chartaque dicet anus. | tu facis ingenium, tu, si quid posse videmur; | tu das ingenuae ius mihi pigritiae. 12.4), to whom he dedicated the libellus sent to Rome from Spain (whatever form it may have taken); but out of the whole corpus, Martial only addresses 8.45, 12.praef, 12.4, and 12.14 to him.
- 171 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
Martial's interest in his readership returns in Book 12, part of which seems to have been sent to Rome in 101 or 102 from Spain.411 A pair of poems, 12.3 and 12.11, identify Martial's readership in toto; to these his poems will be given by appropriate intermediaries, his patron- amici. In 12.3 Martial apostrophizes his book, urging it to seek out Arruntius Stella's house.
Stella will publish the book to the wider readership: ille dabit populo patribusque equitique legendum (12.3.15); the order in which the readers are presented is significant. They in turn will recognize his writing even without a titulus: clamabunt omnes te, liber, esse meum (12.3.18).412
Martial suggests Parthenius as his promoter before Nerva to his Muse in 12.11, neatly distinguishing the emperor as a separate audience (as he had Domitian in 8.praef.) by giving him a separate poem on this theme. Martial urges the Muse to bid Parthenius offer Nerva a brevis libellus413 at an opportune moment and say "Hunc tua Roma legit." (12.11.7).
4.2.4 Readership and Success
The conflation of readership and success, then, which for Martial often finds expression in terms like fama and nomen, seems to be the most useful barometer for measuring how the poet
411 Sullivan (1991) 52-3 suggests that the book as we have it may have been altered by a posthumous editor, based on the "weakness of some of the epigrams and the abrupt close of the book with an address to the new governor of Hispania Tarraconensis." Neither piece of evidence seems particularly compelling – Martial in any case spends much more energy on the beginnning of his books, generally.
412 Perhaps an echo of Mart. 11.2.7-8 lectores tetrici salebrosum ediscite Santram: nil mihi vobiscum est: iste liber meus est!
413 Some kind of digest (not preserved) built out of Books 11 and 10; cf. Mart. 12.5.1-2 longior undecimi nobis decimique libelli | artatus labor est et breve rasit opus.
- 172 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
represents success for himself and other poets in the Epigrammata. Of course, as I indicated above, Martial's statements about his own poetry are not objective assessments, only assertions about his own success. How can we evaluate them? The notion of readership may provide an unique perspective on how Martial manipulates his portrayal of success, not in terms of the accuracy of these assertions, but rather in respect to which readership Martial points as the indicator of his own success and renown.
As we have seen already, there is an interesting tension within the Epigrammata between the relative importance of the different types of readership, which seem to move in concentric circles outward, from the amicus to broader elite circles to a general readership unknown personally to Martial. These readerships for some, if not most, of the Epigrammata probably reflect the reality of the composition of occasional poetry: first for the recipient, occasion, vel sim. singly or in small libelli, then arranged in Books – probably with new material also – at a later stage. Although at all stages – in the career we have preserved for us through the published books – the gamut of readerships are in evidence, there seems to be in the Epigrammata a perceptible growth in Martial's interest in a general readership (usually indicated by an address to an anonymous lector). In later books this growing interest culminates in an exceptionally prominent role for the anonymous lector in Books 10 and 11. Martial thus seems to play down the importance of the Emperor-as-patron and the patron-amicus in the dissemination of his poetry (and therefore also in his success as poet), refocusing the measure of his success instead
- 173 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
on the support of an unknown and depersonalized lector. This ambiguous lector's support can only be manifested in the reading of Martial's books.414
The beginnings of this shift in focus on different readerships may correlate to the apparently growing success of Martial's poetry with Domitian and his court and to the difficulty of the transitions after Domitian's murder. It seems too much a coincidence that just when
Martial's opportunities for imperial favor are terminated by Domitian's death and the establishment of a strongly anti-Domitian regime Martial begins to place the anonymous reader and Roma in the role of patron-amici. Martial was no longer willing or able to depend on any socially influential individuals and their circles of amici who had not been associated with
Domitian. As Sullivan says,
[Martial] was still identified in the public mind with the old court poetry, while the new regime was professing a different attitude to imperial power ... It was fortunate that Martial had earlier addressed friendly compliments to Nerva himself (8.70; 9.26) and that Parthenius had been a long-time friend and patron since at least 88. But none of this would help Martial regain his position as an accepted court poet under the new rulers. (Sullivan [1991] 47)
414 A fact which Martial bemoans in, e.g., Mart. 11.3. Curious problem: how does Martial know who and how many are reading his works? Cf. Pl. Ep. 1.2.6 libelli quos emisimus dicuntur in manibus esse, quamvis iam gratiam novitatis exuerint; nisi tamen auribus nostris bibliopolae blandiuntur. Sed sane blandiantur, dum per hoc mendacium nobis studia nostra commendent.
- 174 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
Martial – denied the protection afforded by great wealth and rank to people like Pliny in times of political upheaval, too closely associated with Domitian, and hardly important enough for Nerva to favor415 – turns to the only readership he has left to him: the general readership.
This love of the general reader was not always in evidence. An early poem, 1.3, with an irony deeper than any Martial might have planned, betrays a level of anxiety about publication to a general readership quite rare in the Epigrammata:
Argiletanas mauis habitare tabernas, cum tibi, parue liber, scrinia nostra uacent. Nescis, heu, nescis dominae fastidia Romae: crede mihi, nimium Martia turba sapit. Maiores nusquam rhonchi: iuuenesque senesque et pueri rhinocerotis habent. Audieris cum grande sophos, dum basia iactas, ibis ab excusso missus in astra sago. Sed tu ne totiens domini patiare lituras neue notet lusus tristis harundo tuos, aetherias, lasciue, cupis uolitare per auras: i, fuge; sed poteras tutior esse domi.
The initial reservations about the utility of a general readership are allayed so that by Book 4 there is a distinct set of readers: Emperor, elite individuals and their circles, and the anonymous general reader. Then after Domitian's fall, in Books 10 and 11 the anonymous reader becomes
415 Contrast the consules ter Verginius Rufus and Vestricius Spurinna who, although themselves active in Domitian's government, were granted consulship early on by Nerva and Trajan (see Chapter 5 below for details), or Tacitus and Pliny.
- 175 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
Martial's only support in the Epigrammata. But in Book 12, Martial's apparent attempt to return to literary society after his retreat to Spain, the anonymous lector yields place again to the
Emperor and elite individual readers.
In the first Book of Epigrammata Martial seems more focused on a select group of readers, although a wider readership is certainly expected. 1.113, mentioning his iuvenalia, and
1.117 are similar both imply a wider readership, and Martial is elsewhere aware of the effect of a wider readership on the reception of his poems, especially the potential for theft – of a poem or of his identity. But the overwhelming impression is that Martial's poems are meant for individuals – the anonymous lector or his readership is not addressed in Book 1 except in 1.1.416
Martial directly addresses the anonymous lector in 2.8 – not, however, on good terms, for he is anticipating criticism. There is also an interesting developed "dialogue" between Martial and reader in the epigrams on Postumus (2.10, 2.12, 2.21 - 2.23). But in 2.86 Martial makes plain his views on a wider general readership with an established literary trope (scribat carmina circulis
Palaemon: | me raris iuvat auribus placere, 2.86.11-12)417: Martial does not write for the general
416 Mart. 1.1 and 1.2 are omitted in one main branch of the textual history (Lindsay's BA) and displaced in the other (CA) to the end of the preface before the poem there beginning nosses iocosae. The communis opinio (which started with Dau [1887] and continues in Holzberg [2002]) has these poems inserted in the other main branch (AA) from a position extra ordinem paginarum given them after a re-edition or revision of a collection of books (possibly, following Sullivan [1991] 15, n.31, the edition of Books 1-7) around 93. The problems with dating lead me to exclude them from this immediate discussion. See further Citroni (1988).
417 Cp. Hor. Carm. 3.1.1 odi profanum vulgus et arceo; the assertion in Martial (and in Horace) may be somewhat tongue in cheek, since it runs counter to expressions of poet's success in the Roman tradition clear back to Ennius. But there is a sense in which Martial here (and Horace in 3.1) is in fact delimiting the range of valued reader, rather than (as later) apparently appealing to any reader.
- 176 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
public. A number of epigrams in Book 3, however, begin to show a heightened interest in the general reader – an interest that apparently coincides with Martial's interest in success and renown (see section 4.2.2 above). Indeed, the introductory epigram addresses an anonymous tu
(Hoc tibi ... hunc legis et laudas librum fortasse priorem, 3.1.1, 3). 3.4 introduces Roma herself as an interested reader (cf. 1.3 above, and further below). 3.68 and 3.86, addressed to matronae
(see discussion above) hold a liminal place in the division of readership under discussion, presenting a curtailed general readership. But it is the suggestion made in 3.95 that ore legor multo notumque per oppida nomen (also the first real expression of wide-spread success, as we saw above) that seems to signal for the first time Martial's awareness of a wide general readership for the Epigrammata.
The bold assertion in Book 4.49.9-10 ("Illa tamen laudant omnes, mirantur, adorant." | confiteor: laudant illa sed ista legunt) – that Martial's poetry is less a lusus or iocus than tragedy or epic, and that, although it does not receive explicit approval from readers, it nevertheless is read more than epic and tragedy – highlights the ambivalence of praise noted in Appendix A.2.
Praise does not always indicate authentic approval, but reading does. Nevertheless, the general or anonymous reader is nearly absent from Book 4 except for 4.89, the last poem of the Book, in which Martial suggests that the reader has grown tired of reading (iam lector queritur deficitque;
| iam librarius hoc et ipse dicit | Ohe, iam satis est, ohe, libelle, 4.89.6-8). 5.2 is addressed to
Matronae puerique virginesque who will be the readers of these casta epigrammata and also contains allusions to the wider readership of his earlier books (tu, quem nequitiae procaciores | delectant nimium salesque nudi, | lascivos elige quattor libellos, 5.2.3-5). And Martial also
- 177 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
emphasizes a wider readership through the anonymous lector in 5.13 (sed toto legor orbe frequens et dicitur "Hic est", 5.13.3), 5.15 (gaudet honorato sed multus nomine lector, 5.15.13) and 5.16 (lector amice ... qui legis et tota cantas mea carmina Roma, 5.16.2,3). Book 6, like
Book 4, does not address to any great extent the concerns of readership, except that in 6.60
Martial first personalizes Roma as reader (Laudat, amat, cantat nostros mea Roma libellos, | meque sinus omnes, me manus omnis habet, 6.60.1-2; cf. 1.3) and in 6.64 indicates that he has gained some significance as a poet because he is read in very high circles (6.64.8-15); these poems are discussed above. In 7.88, Martial reports that he is being read by all in Vienna (me legit omnis ibi senior iuvenisque puerque | et coram tetrico casta puella viro, 7.88.3-4), and in
7.97, addressing his book, he suggests that Caesius Sabinus will promote it so that the book will be read by all (te convivia, te forum sonabit | aedes compita porticus tabernae. | uni mitteris, omnibus legeris, 7.97.11-13). Likewise, in the preface to Book 8 and 8.3 Martial suggests that his general readership has become quite wide. There are some problems in the interpretation of the titulus epigram in 9.praef (for which see above), but 9.81 is more straightforward: here, too,
Martial can assert that a general readership enjoys his poems, even if poets criticize them (Lector et auditor nostros probat, Aule, libellos, | sed quidam exactos esse poeta negat. | non nimium curo: nam cenae fercula nostrae | malim conviviis quam placuisse cocis, 9.81). This stance comes close to a volte-face compared with the rari aures of 2.86. In 9.97 the fact that Martial is read and enjoyed by Roma herself has prompted invidia (quod me Roma legit, rumpitur invidia,
... rumpitur invidia quod amamur quodque probamur, 9.97.2).
- 178 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
There is a marked change in Book 10 in the significance attached by Martial to the anonymous lector, or general readership. In 10.1 and 10.2 Martial again addresses the anonymous lector; but there are no other dedicatory epigrams, nor a preface, and I am tempted to say that Martial has dedicated this revised edition to the general reader in place of another dedicatee, probably one connected to Domitian's court. General anonymous reader, then, has supplanted Emperor and elite individual as patron-amicus – paradoxically a patron-amicus completely unknown to Martial (and quite unable to make appropriate return in the amicitia relationship). What is more, 10.9, 10.45, and 10.59 are all addressed to the anonymous lector.
Like Book 10, the initial poems of Book 11 focus in part at least on the anonymous lector. In
11.1 the general readership becomes Martial's only readership since Parthenius (Domitian's assassin, and a patron-figure earlier instrumental in bringing Martial to his attention) ignores his epigrams: ecquid te satis aestimas beatum, | contingunt tibi si manus minores? ... sunt illic [sc. in several named portici] duo tresve qui revolvant | nostrarum tineas ineptiarum (11.1.6-7, 13-14).
11.2 wards off "lectores tetrici", stern readers, from his poems (implicitly inviting all others), and in 11.3 Martial suggests that he is read by those fighting in Getic campaigns and in Britain.
In 11.6, Roma becomes his patron/reader (versu ludere non laborioso | permittis, puto, pilleata
Roma. | risisti; licet ergo, non vetamur, 11.6.3-5). 11.16, like 11.2, plays with the conceit that the too stern reader should not read Martial's poems; his poems rather belong to the urbana toga
(11.16.2) and puellae (11.16.7-10). Other epigrams are addressed to individuals who, however, do not read: 11.52, 11.57, 11.90, 11.106, 11.107. Thus, while in earlier Books Martial maintained a variety of different readerships (Emperor, individual patron-amici and their circles, and a general readership), in Book 11 he is reduced to only one. The final epigram in Book 11
- 179 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
(11.108) is a parting address to the anonymous lector. The first poems in Book 10 seemed to place the anonymous lector in the position of patron-amicus; in 10.1 Martial seems to suggest that the reader now owes him for his poetry (cf. 5.16), just as for example Julius Faustinus – a delinquent beneficiary of poetic immortality and one of Martial's most constant patron-amici in the Epigrammata418 – in 5.36. Book 12 seems to mark a return of interest on the part of elite readers, since it contains epigrams addressed to Nerva (12.5, 11), and individual members of the elite (12.1, 4, 21); what is more, although the anonymous general lector appears in 12.3 and
12.11, he is no longer addressed as patron, nor does he figure significantly in Martial's assertions of success. It all ends on a happy note: although Martial does not seem to regain imperial favor, he does finally find his "patrons", as Terentius Priscus becomes his Maecenas (Quod Flacco
Varioque fuit summoque Maroni | Maecenas, atavis regibus ortus eques, | Gentibus et populis, hoc te mihi, Prisce Terenti, | Fama fuisse loquax chartaque dicet anus | Tu facis ingenium, tu, si quid posse videmur; | Tu das ingenuae ius mihi pigritiae, 12.4), and Marcella his Roma (Tu desiderium dominae mihi mitius urbis | Esse iubes: Romam tu mihi sola facis, 12.21.9-10).
4.3 Conclusions: The Rewards of Success
It seems clear from 8.18 (in which Martial suggests that Cerrinus' readership would exceed his own if only Cerrinus would publish) and the discussions above that the reward for being read, which I have suggested is the fundamental criteria for success in Martial, is fama and nomen. Indeed, fama and nomen, against laus, honos, or gloria seem to be the desired
418 Cf. Mart. 1.25, 3.2, 3.58, 4.10, 4.57, 7.12, 10.51.
- 180 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
expressions for a poet's renown in Martial's Epigrammata. Laus is consistently downplayed by
Martial as an indicator of success and renown (cf. 4.49), and so cannot serve as a reliable indicator of success (see section 4.2.1). The reasons for Martial's relative disinterest in laus (the notable exception is laus received from the Emperor; cf. 3.95) are evident in his portrayal of laus for other poets. Honos does not figure as a significant term of praise for poets in the
Epigrammata either; when Martial uses it of his own success in 3.95, it plainly refers (in the usual metonymic sense) to the office bestowed on him by Domitian. Martial makes no clear assertion of gloria for himself either. The relative absence of honos, laus, and gloria as terms of praise, given Martial's social status and poetic persona, may be significant. Statius, as Hardie asserted, "could not really claim full social equality with his Roman addressees. His literary persona is based upon his status as a professional poet, and his relationships with his addressees derive, in almost all cases, from his activity as a poet rather than from the amicitia existing between private individuals living within the same orbit of Roman society."419 As a vates Statius' success as poet determined his social importance; and so, to the extent that his minor poetry and epic poetry advanced that importance, Statius achieved honos and laus. But the portrayal Martial presents in the Epigrammata is not solely that of a poet, but rather a man of equestrian status, seeking and promoting his social importance in a number of ways including the writing of occasional poetry. Martial has constructed an image that in many respects can claim, as Statius' cannot, a much fuller social equality (if not, however, an equal social importance) with his patron-amici. Where Statius only records amicitia in the Silvae for his patron-amici, Martial in
419 Hardie (1982) 59.
- 181 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
addition presents to the reader a vision of amicitia that can often pass the boundaries of his own personal relationships with significant individuals. Thus, it may be that Martial, a member of elite society but no magnus vir, has no basis for a claim of honos or gloria, because he has not pursued a public career (the arena in which these distinctions were traditionally won) as a military man or as an advocate.
- 182 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
Chapter Five: Pliny
In this final chapter I examine applications of terms and themes of renown and success for poets in Pliny the Younger's Epistulae, including those Pliny applies to his own work as a minor poet. I shall proceed by first setting out in section 5.1 basic information about Pliny pertinent to the discussions following, especially his status and position within Roman elite society, and in section 5.1.1 a minimalistic discussion of the chronology of the Epistulae. In section 5.1.2 I describe the term studia and discuss its importance for understanding Pliny's attitude towards literature. In section 5.1.2.1 I briefly describe the history of the term as a referent for literature and literary pursuits, continuing in section 5.1.2.2 to examine in detail to what the term studia refers in Pliny's Epistulae. In section 5.1.2.3 I explore how Pliny utilizes this term in the abstract to indicate elite literary culture in general, and in section 5.1.2.4 I describe how studia (i.e. literary works and culture) are connected to the diametrically opposed concepts of otium and negotium. I discuss the explicit motivations for literary production in the
Epistulae in section 5.1.3 and suggest that these motivations echo precisely those motivations adduced for the construction and preservation of memoria in Chapter One. In section 5.2 I address in broad terms the question of how Pliny describes poets' success and renown in the
Epistulae, examining in section 5.2.1 how Pliny characterizes success and renown of poets apart from gloria. I continue in section 5.2.2 to examine success and renown of poets, but now in terms of gloria alone. In section 5.3.1 I explore the question of literary gloria and the magnus vir in Pliny's Epistulae; in section 5.3.2 I examine Pliny's own literary gloria, looking in particular
- 183 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
at the remarkable Epistula 9.25. In Appendix A.3 "Terms of Praise in Pliny", I return to the semantic analysis, and show how the use of terms of praise in the Epistulae conform in large part to the semantic descriptions offered in section 2.1.
5.1 Background
We are fortunate in our reconstruction of Pliny's life and career to have sources available to us beyond his own letters (for with the letters we are arguably on the same ground – autobiographically speaking – as we were with Martial's epigrams or Statius' poems). Principal among these are two inscriptions, CIL 5.5263 from Como and CIL 5.5667 from Fecchio (near
Como). Many of the biographical details which Pliny offers in his Epistulae and which the inscriptions tend to confirm are well known; no purpose would be served in re-examining them here.420 Essential for the present study are the following facts. First, Pliny has, by the time of the publication of Book 1 (see below), held the consulship and could consider himself an extraordinarily successful and influential man. Second, Pliny fosters and pursues in his letters connections to men similarly minded, either by virtue of their origin (a large number of his correspondents are Gauls421), their literary tastes, and/or their importance for current affairs; there is accordingly a fair degree of continuity in Pliny's attitudes towards literature presented in the Epistulae. Third, Pliny clearly considers the exchange and criticism of literary works and the publication of these works (his studia; see below), either in recitation among friends or more
420 I direct the reader to Sherwin-White's excellent summary and discussion (1985, 69-82).
421 See Syme (1968) (= RP II.694-723).
- 184 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
widely in book form, to be an integral part of amicitia.422 For these reasons it seems impossible to divorce Pliny's literary society from his society in general – the one is a reflection in miniature of the other.423
5.1.1 Publication of letters
The chronology for the publication of the individual books of letters depends, as does that of the works of Statius and Martial, on termini post quem deducible from the contents of each book. The accuracy of this modus operandi, as we have already seen, is somewhat debatable, and in any case does not extend in actuality to every letter in individual books. In fact, dates for individual letters, or groups of letters, are often more easily ascertainable as the events described in the letters can be related to information found in other sources. Detailed discussion of the problem and the history of the debate about the publication of the books can be found in
Sherwin-White (1985) 52-56; no significant advance in our understanding of this complex (and probably insoluble) problem has been published since then. Again, what is important for our purposes in this study is that mention is made by Pliny of his own poetry starting in letters found in Book 4 (dated from 104-105), and continuously from then until the letters of Book 9 (dated
106-108, with a few exceptions). Pliny, however, is concerned with the production, exchange
422 Hoffer (1999) 10, "Pliny's letters are above all an ideal record of friendship."
423 Much recent scholarship on Pliny focuses on placing him within Roman elite culture of this period; cf. e.g. White (1975), White (1993), Hershkowitz (1995), McEwen (1995), Hoffer (1999). Another major trend focuses on Pliny's self-representation; cf. e.g. Leach (1990), Riggsby (1995), Riggsby (1998). See also Bütler (1970).
- 185 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
and publication of literary works over the whole corpus of the Epistulae. Poetry is a significant later element in his literary output, certainly, but for Pliny poetry is also simply a part of a larger whole: studia.
5.1.2 Studia
Any examination of Pliny's attitudes towards his nugatory poetry needs to be grounded in
Pliny's notion of studia, the conceptual place of studia in his world, and the significance of studia for memoria; Pliny sets studia at the center of his portrayal of elite literary culture.424 In section 5.1.2.1, then, I detail to what the term studia refers in Pliny, both as a generic term for any literary accomplishment, and specifically as a term indicating speeches given in court, speeches recited or revised for physical publication, historical writing, major genres of poetry, and finally even nugatory poetry. In other words, studia in Pliny acts as a signifier for elite literary culture in general. One of the ways in which Pliny accomplishes this is to abstract the notion of studia so that it becomes a generic reference to any literary activity among the elite.
With this definition of studia in hand, I next suggest in section 5.1.2.2 that for Pliny studia seem to occupy a conceptual space which bridges traditionally distinct public activities and private enjoyment of literature; I illustrate this point briefly by contrasting Pliny's characterization of studia as an activity which spans the private realm of otium and the villa and the public man's world of negotium. In section 5.1.2.3 I relate this conflated and bivalent concept of studia to
424 For a slightly different perspective on studia in Pliny's Epistulae see Bütler (1970) 28-40 who concentrates on localizing the concept of studia within a rhetorical context, rather than a social one.
- 186 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
Pliny's motivations for producing literature, motivations which are based on the desire to perpetuate memoria.
5.1.2.1 Studium/Studia
Studium has for a primary definition "earnest application of one's attention or energies to some specified or implicit object".425 The object could, seemingly in every period, include any number of different pursuits undertaken by any number of different people or groups of people.
In Ter. Andr. 55-7, for example, Simo gives an indication of the range of the term for adulescentuli, from horse-raising to hunting dogs to the study of philosophy (quod plerique omnes faciunt adulescentuli, | ut animum ad aliquod studium adiungant, aut equos | alere aut canes ad venandum aut ad philosophos). For Cato farming was a studium (at ex agricolis et viri fortissimi et milites strenuissimi gignuntur, maximeque pius quaestus stabilissimusque consequitur minimeque male cogitantes sunt qui in eo studio occupati sunt, Cato Agr. pr. 4).
Studium also has a long association with political affairs.426 The use of studium specifically for the intellectual pursuit of literature, however, seems to date at least from the time of Cicero.427
An example: of Archias Cicero states that on reaching manhood he undertook the study of literary arts (se ad scribendi studium contulit) and excelled even at Antioch, a city renowned for its men of great learning and for its literary culture (celebri quondam urbe et copiosa atque
425 Cf. OLD s.v. studium 1a.
426 Cf. OLD s.v. studium 5.
427 Or, put otherwise, the prominence of intellectual literary pursuits as an activity to which one directed studium grew during this period. Cf. OLD and Forcellini s.v. studium 7.
- 187 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
eruditissimis hominibus liberalissimisque studiis adfluenti).428 But the other uses of studium429 in
Cicero – in either the singular or the plural – are equally attested.
Pliny in the Epistulae employs studia in the plural to denote only writing or specific aspects of literary culture, and studium in the singular for the other uses of the term. The sole exception to this rule can be found in 7.4, a letter to Pontius Allifanus in which Pliny describes the development of his interest in composing poetry; the purpose of the letter seems to be a justification for his composition of nugatory poetry, and he holds up Cicero as an exemplum of a serious man writing ineptiae. Pliny relates that, after hearing an epigram of Cicero's, he found himself wondering how the greatest orators had found this sort of writing – hoc studii genus – delightful and praiseworthy.430 Cicero (on the basis of a survey I carried out of the Epistulae ad
Atticum and the ad Familiares) seems to use the singular of studium much more frequently than the plural for literary matters, and we should see in Pliny's statement a deliberate affectation of
Cicero (the phrase hoc studii genus has a close parallel at Cic. Fam. 13.16.4 valet ingenio, habet usum, iam pridem in eo genere studi litterarumque versatur).
428 Cic. Arch. 4 Nam ut primum ex pueris excessit Archias atque ab eis artibus quibus aetas puerilis ad humanitatem informari solet, se ad scribendi studium contulit, primum Antiochae – nam ibi natus est loco nobili – celebri quondam urbe et copiosa atuqe eruditissimis hominibus liberalissimisque studiis adfluenti, celeriter antecellere omnibus ingeni gloria coepit. Cf. Cic. Arch. 5 Erat Italia tum plena Graecarum artium ac disciplinarum, studiaque haec et in Latio vehementius tum colebantur.
429 Described directly above; see OLD s.v. studium for more detail.
430 Pl. Ep. 7.4.4 coepi reputare maximos oratores hoc studii genus et in oblectationibus habuisse et in laude posuisse.
- 188 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
5.1.2.2 Studia in Pliny
In 2.18, a letter in which Pliny agrees to help Junius Mauricus hire a praeceptor for his sons431 and finds himself enjoying being back "at school", Pliny suggests that he has gained a certain auctoritas among the students from his studia (sedeo inter iuvenes ut solebam, atque etiam experior quantum apud illos auctoritatis ex studiis habeam, 2.18.1); this can only mean his speeches, given the context and the fact that Pliny had not yet begun to release his letters to a wider public.432 Studia in 2.18.1 probably refers to speeches destined for publication after they have been given, such as those indicated in 1.2433 and 7.30.434 Studia might equally suggest speeches given in recitation before a small group of amici, an activity that seems only a slight variation of the declamation Pliny attends in 2.18. In 3.18, a description of his recitation of the
Panegyricus, Pliny wonders whether the constancy of his friends should be considered a tribute to himself or to studia (Mihi hunc honorem habitum putem an studiis? 3.18.5); for the speech extended over three days and was, as Pliny makes plain, an event for amici by invitation only
431 It seems from Pl. Ep. 3.3 and 4.13 that a praeceptor taught rhetoric to praetexti either at home or in a school after they were finished with the grammaticus, but before they entered their advanced rhetorical training as young men at around 17. On the importance of the choice of praeceptor (and so the signficance of Pliny's role in choosing) see Sherwin-White (1985) on Pl. Ep. 3.3.
432 Books 1-3 of the Epistles where likely published separately between 96-103 (see above section 5.1.2 and Sherwin-White [1985] loc. cit.).
433 Sherwin-White (see ad loc.) suggests that the earlier libelli mentioned in Pl. Ep. 1.2.6 libelli quos emissimus dicuntur in manibus probably refer to the Sermo de bybliotheca (cf. Pl. Ep. 1.8) and the de Helividi ultione or the Pro patria (the other being the speech – not yet published – under discussion in this letter). These date from the period between 96-98.
434 Pl. Ep. 7.30 discusses the de Helividii ultione originally given before the Senate in 97 to vindicate Helvidius, and published shortly thereafter. C. Helividius Priscus was condemned to death under Domitian in 93. See Pl. Ep. 9.13 where Pliny writes to Quadratus, who has just been reading this speech. Cf. also Pl. Ep. 3.11.3, 4.21, 7.30.4; Tac. Agr. 45; Suet. Dom. 10.
- 189 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
(hunc librum cum amicis recitare voluissem, non per codicillos, non per libellos, sed 'si commodum' et 'si valde vacaret' admoniti ... ut adicerem tertium diem exegerunt, 3.18.4). Clearly recited speeches and speeches in the process of being revised for publication are considered studia.
More interesting is Pliny's assertion that speeches in court are also studia. In a letter to
Cornelius Minicianus (3.9) commenting on the resolution of a series of actiones against
Caecilius Classicus (who held a too-profitable proconsulship in Baetica, cf. 3.4, 6.29.8) Pliny remarks on the singleness of purpose between himself and Lucceius Albinus (who also spoke on behalf of the Baetici), and suggests that he and Albinus were not affected by the general reluctance to share success, even though this reluctance is especially acute for studia (Habet quidem gloria, in studiis praesertim, quiddam ajkoinwvnhton; nobis tamen nullum certamen nulla contentio, cum uterque pari iugo non pro se sed pro causa niteretur, 3.9.8). Of Valerius
Licinianus, a praetorian senator and prominent orator (inter eloquentissimos causarum actores habebatur, 4.11.1), Pliny claims that he fouled studia (i.e. oratory itself) when he violated a
Vestal (haec ipsa studia incesti scelere macularit, 4.11.4). Similarly, when Pliny crows over the apparent resurgence of oratory – and his own popularity – in 4.16 he calls it studia (Gaude meo, gaude tuo, gaude etiam publico nomine: adhuc honor studiis durat, 4.16.1). Compare 4.24.4 on
Pliny's debt to oratory (Studiis processimus, studiis periclitati sumus, rursusque processimus),
6.2.1 on Regulus' dedication to oratory (Soleo numquam in iudiciis quaerere M. Regulum; nolo enim dicere desiderare. Cur ergo quaero? Habebat studiis honorem), 6.11.3 on the promise of two young orators (Quid enim aut publice laetius quam clarissimos iuvenes nomen et famam ex
- 190 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
studiis petere), and 7.6.8 in which Pliny discusses the details of a recent case (quid enim prohibet
... de studiis disputare). These examples make it clear further that Pliny considered oratory in toto to be studia.
While oratory in toto can be called studia, studia in toto is not simply oratory. 3.5, the letter to Baebius Macer which lists the Elder Pliny's works, is indication enough of this; at several points Pliny refers to the totality of his uncle's literary endeavors as studia.435 Philosophy and rhetoric also hold a place in Pliny's notion of studia. In 1.10 Pliny extols the virtues of the philosopher Euphrates, commenting that he is proof enough of the strength of liberalia studia at
Rome.436 Rhetorical studies, as we saw above in the discussion of 3.3 and 4.13 (see n. 431), certainly also fell within the ambit of studia.
That poetry for Pliny also falls under the term studia is clear from a number of letters addressed to or discussing his literary friends. For example, in 1.3 Pliny exhorts Caninius Rufus, a friend of his from Comum and a frequent correspondent (and subject) for literary matters,437 to
435 Cf. Pl. Ep. 3.5.5 "Dubii sermones octo": scripsit sub Nerone novissimis annis, cum omne studiorum genus paulo liberius et ercetius periculosum servitus fecisset; 3.5.8 erat sane somni paratissimi, non numquam etiam inter ipsa studia instantis et deserentis. Cf. also 3.5.9 reversus domum, quod reliquum temporis, studiis reddebat; 3.5.16 nam perire omne tempus arbitrabatur, quod studiis laboris non impenderetur. These works include a technical work on weapons use, a biography, histories (including his Natural History), a grammatical work, and a work on the training of the orator. See Pl. Ep. 3.5.3-6 for details.
436 Pl. Ep. 1.10.1 Si quando urbs nostra liberalibus studiis floruit, nunc maxime floret. Multa claraque exempla sunt; sufficeret unum, Euphrates philosophus.
437 Pl. Ep. 1.3, 2.8, 3.7, 6.21, 7.25, 8.4, 9.38.
- 191 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
engage more fully in studia (Quin tu (tempus enim) humiles et sordidas curas aliis mandas, et ipse te in alto isto pinguique secessu studiis adseris? 1.3.3). 8.4, in which Pliny discusses Rufus' plans to write an epic poem on the Dacian war, and other letters – when they deal with literature
– all suggest clearly that Caninius Rufus is a poet(taster) who probably writes hexameter poetry.438 Similarly in 2.10, Pliny exhorts Octavius Rufus to publish the results of his studia
(Hominem te patientem vel potius durum ac paene crudelem, qui tam insignes libros tam diu teneas, 2.10.1 ... desine studia tua infinita ista cunctatione fraudare, 2.10.8); 2.10.3 tells us that these books are poetry (Enotuerunt quidam tui versus, et invito te claustra sua refregerunt). The poetry of Spurrina (3.1, comedy and lyric), Silius Italicus (3.7, epic), Passenus Paulus (9.22, elegy), and Pliny himself (cf. chiefly 8.21 and 9.25, nugatory) is characterized as studia. It seems clear that for Pliny nearly the whole gamut of elite literary writing at Rome falls under the term studia.
The broad application of the term studia to almost any literary work (rather than simply oratory) can in some cases elicit a subtly different interpretation of a given passage. 9.23 is a good case in point. In 9.23439 Pliny narrates an event reported to him by Tacitus. Tacitus meets an eques at the games who, after discussions on various learned topics asks Tacitus his origin,
Italy or one of the provinces (hunc post varios eruditosque sermones requisse, "Italicus es an
438 Cf. Pl. Ep. 3.7 to Caninius Rufus is Silius Italicus' obituary, 6.21 (by gentilicium only) is on a reading given by Vergilius Romanus of his new comedy, 9.33 in which Pliny relates a tale about a boy saved by a dolphin as potential material for a poem.
439 The date of this letter is bound up in its close connections to other letters that date from 106-7. It is later than Pl. Ep. 7.20, a letter which mentions Tacitus' imminent publication of either the Dial. or the Hist.
- 192 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
provincialis?", 9.23.2). Tacitus replies that the man knows him ex studiis, to which the response is, "Tacitus es an Plinius? (9.23.3)". Pliny begins this letter by suggesting that the equation of
Tacitus and himself on the grounds of studia brings him as much joy as the praise of the
Centumviral Court and the Senate; it is possible to understand studia here to indicate simply oratory. Two considerations, however, suggest that Pliny in fact means their other literary works.
First, the initial mention of the Centumviral Court, then the Senate, and last studia suggests that
Pliny is deliberately describing his areas of studia: speeches in court,440 speeches in curia,441 literary publications. Second, Pliny remarks on his delight that his and Tacitus' names are linked to litterae together. Pliny only uses litterae for epistles,442 or literature other than speeches.443 By the time of this letter Pliny had published Books 1-6 of his Epistles (at least444) as well as any number of speeches, and Tacitus the Agricola, the Germania, and Dialogus de Oratoribus (he was also collecting material for the Histories at this time); there were certainly reasons enough to compare the two men on the basis of writings other than oratory.445 The comparison of the more public life of the Centumviral Court and Curia and the more private life of litterae has close ties
440 E.g. Pro Attia (cf. Pl. Ep. 6.33, Sid. Apoll. Epist. 8.10.3), In Priscum (Pl. Ep. 2.11).
441 E.g. Panegyricus, de Helividi ultione (Pl. Ep. 7.30.5).
442 Pl. Ep. 2.2.2, 3.20.11, 5.21.1, 6.7.3, 9.28.2.
443 Pl. Ep. 1.22.1 in reference to Titus Aristo, composer of light verse (cf. 5.3), and 8.24.2 on Greece as the birthplace of literature (illam veram et meram Graeciam, in qua primum humanitas litterae).
444 See Sherwin-White (1985) 19-41 on the complicated chronology of the individual letters, and the basic chronology of the publication of the books.
445 This does not include Pliny's poetry, which seems to have had a very restricted audience at this time.
- 193 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
to another letter very important for understanding the rewards of success for his nugatory poetry,
9.25 (see further below).
Pliny is not an innovator in his use of the plural studia to denote a wide range of writing of a literary nature. Tacitus' Aper, to take only one example, seems to place eloquentia and studia within a similarly broad framework (above other arts) in his characterization of literary endeavors suitable for those not by nature gifted for oratory:
neque hunc meum sermonem sic accipi volo, tamquam eos, quibus
natura sua oratorium ingenium denegavit, deterream a
carminibus, si modo in hac studiorum parte oblectare otium et
nomen inserere possunt famae. ego vero omnem eloquentiam
omnisque eius partis sacras et venerabilis puto, nec solum
cothurnum vestrum aut heroici carminis sonum, sed lyricorum
quoque iucunditatem et elegorum lascivas et iamborum
amaitudinem et epigrammatum lusus et quamcumque aliam
speciem eloquentia habet, anteponendam ceteris aliarum artium
studiis credo. (Tac. Dial. 10.3-4)
Where Pliny does seem to innovate is in the centrality of studia for his notion of elite culture.
One of the ways in which he accomplishes this is to abstract studia so that it becomes a generic reference to any literary activity among the elite.
- 194 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
5.1.2.3 Abstracting Studia
Sherwin-White, in a note on 2.18.1 (sedeo inter iuvenes ut solebam, atque etiam experior quantum apud illos auctoritatis ex studiis habeo) glosses an example of this generic studiis, "sc.
'eloquentiae', as often in the Letters". If he understands eloquentia in the same way as Tacitus'
Aper, Sherwin-White is suggesting the same set of literary activities I describe above. There are indications elsewhere that Sherwin-White often considers studia (and so in 2.18, at least, eloquentia) to be oratory.446 While the context in 2.18 – Pliny's attendance at declamations and the respect given him by the students ex studiis – confirms Sherwin-White's interpretation, in some instances such a gloss is not entirely obvious or at least unwarranted (recall 9.23). In any case, Pliny himself did not include a modifying genitive, and only very rarely includes any kind of modifier beyond a possessive adjective.447
Context often does suggest to what type of literary activity studia points in any given passage. But there are a number of instances in which studia must indicate an abstract "idea" of literary activity rather than anything specific (i.e. recitation, or other publication), and it may be that in other cases context actually prejudices our interpretation of the word studia. For example, in 1.13 Pliny reports to Sosius Senecio that studia is thriving, as evidenced by a well attended recitation (Iuvat me quod studia vigent, 1.13.1); Pliny seems to have poetry in mind (cf. 1.13.1
446 Cf. Sherwin-White (1985) 506 ad Pl. Ep. 9.23.2 "As commonly in Pliny studia means forensic oratory." See above for another possible interpretation of Pl. Ep. 9.23.
447 Only 2 out of 69 instances: Pl. Ep. 1.10.1 liberalibus studiis, 5.16.8 altioribus studiis artibusque. To these we might add 3.5.5 cum omne studiorum genus paulo liberius et erectius periculosum servitus fecisset.
- 195 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
Magnum proventum poetarum), but he later compares the disrespect of modern audiences to those under Claudius, citing the example of Nonianus' recitation (M. Servilius Nonianus, cos. 35, well known orator and patron of Persius).448 It seems to me prudent to assume Pliny has a wide notion of studia in mind when he uses the term. In other instances studia is more strictly abstracted. In 4.11, for example, Pliny condemns Valerius Licinianus for sullying studia (qui haec ipsa studia incesti scelere macularit, 4.11.4), in 4.28 Pliny suggests to Vibius Severus that he shows reverentia towards studia (tibi studiorum summa reverentia, summus amor studiosorum, postremo quod patriam tuam omnesque, qui nomen eius auxerunt, ut patriam ipsam veneraris et diligis. 4.28.2). In 6.2 Pliny laments the loss of Regulus' high esteem for studia (though not Regulus himself!449). Here was a man, writes Pliny to Arrianus, who as an adherent of ritual had the proper reverence for studia (Habebat studiis honorem ... a nimia superstitione sed tamen a magno studiorum honore veniebat, 6.2.2); by contrast, others now show no respect for studia (Tanta neglegentia tanta desidia, tanta denique inreverentia studiorum periculorumque est). While 6.2 obviously refers to Regulus' dedication to oratory, the negligence of audiences is a theme in letters dealing with poetic recitations also.450 In 8.12, a
448 Cf. Tac. Ann. 14.19 Sequuntur virorum inlustrium mortes, Domitii Afri et M. Servilii, qui summis honoribus et multa eloquentia viguerant, ille orando causas, Servilius diu foro, mox tradendis rebus Romanis celebris et elegantia vitae quam clariorem effecit, ut par ingenio, ita morum diversus. The recitation was probably from these histories.
449 Pliny's feud with Regulus is legendary, and ugly; cf. Pl. Ep. 1.5, 2.11.22, 2.20.2-6, 4.2, 4.7.
450 Cf. Pl. Ep. 6.17.2-4 Recitabatur liber absolutissimus. Hunc duo aut tres, ut sibi et paucis videntur, dierti surdis mutisque similes audiebant. Non labra diduxerunt, non moverunt manum, non deique adsurrexerunt saltem lassitudine sedendi. Quae tanta gravitas? Quae tanta sapientia? Quae immo pigritia adrogantia sinsteritas ac potius amentia, in hoc totum diem impendere ut offendas, ut inimicum relinquas ad quem tamquam amicissimum veneris. Disertior ipse es? Tanto magis invideris; nam qui invidet minor est.
- 196 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
letter to his young protégé and countryman Minicianus, Pliny holds up Titinius Capito as a paradigm for studia: Colit studia,451 studiosos amat fovet provehit, multorum qui aliqua componunt portus sinus gremium, omnium exemplum, ipsarum denique litterarum iam senescentium reductor ac reformator (8.12.1). Titinius Capito is an important person for Pliny, a man of significant achievement and influence in the political realm.452 Pliny's approbation here of Capito as a man of learning and promoter of literary activity seems paradigmatic of studia in the Epistulae.
The abstraction of studia seems to me a significant step in Pliny's conceptualization of literary achievement for elite culture in two ways. First, the abstraction gives a single name to a long and varied tradition of literary pursuits among the elite. Second, the conflation of oratory and other literature under one rubric through this abstraction suggests that the traditional social consequences associated with success in oratory and the political arena (prestige, influence, office, amici, etc.) may have been (or are in the process of being) by Pliny's time transferred to
"literature" and the literary arena depicted in the Epistles. For example, as we saw, Pliny
451 For the implications of colitur as a religious technical term see TLL 3.1679-1690 s.v. colere esp. VA2, VB.
452 Cn. Octavius Titinius Capito (cf. Pl. Ep. 1.17 where Pliny reports he has erected statue in the forum to L. Junius Silanus; in the same letter we discover that Capito writes poetry: Idem clarissimi cuiusque vitam egregiis carminibus exornat, 1.17.3; cf. Bardon (1952) II.221; in 8.12 Pliny tells us that he also composed works on the deaths of famous men [8.12.4]). He encouraged Pliny to write history (cf. Pl. Ep. 5.8). Capito (cf. ILS 1448) served under Domitian in the Dacian wars and became ab epistulis / a patrimonio to Domitian, then Nerva and Trajan both, until he became praefectus vigilum for Trajan before Trajan began to use the name Daccius (i.e. just before 102). "He is the first of the equestrians known regularly to have held one of the great secretariats formerly found in the hands of imperial freedmen." (Sherwin-White [1985] 125)
- 197 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
suggests strongly that Titinius Capito aids in the promotion of studiosi, a word elsewhere used of students of rhetoric who attach themselves to a magnus vir.453 In a limited and simplified sense, the aristocratic ideals of the Republic and the early years of the principate, including Pliny's own time, are being mapped onto a parallel social construct in which these ideals may be acted out in an apolitical (and so less dangerous) manner.454 Studia can act as a point of transference because it comprises both activities traditionally associated with the political activity (political and forensic speeches) and activities more purely literary (poetry, comedy, history, speeches, etc.).455
453 Cf. Pl. Ep. 6.6.3 erat non studiorum tantum, verum etiam studiosorum amantissimus ac prope cotidie ad audiendos, quos tunc ego frequentabam, Quintilianum, Niceten Sacerdotem ventitabat, vir alioqui clarus et gravis, et qui prodesse filio memoria sui debeat and Tac. Dial. 21.2.3 at hercule in omnium studiosorum manibus versantur accusationes quae in Vatinium inscribuntur, ac praecipue secunda ex his oratio. See also Sherwin-White (1985) 66-67. It is hard to construe provehere in 8.12 as anything other than "furthering careers", given Capito's status and office (cf. OLD s.v. provehere 4). Pliny (who seems to have been a junior friend of Capito) does the same for his own junior friends (such as Suetonius). Cf. letters of commendation in which studia serves as an indicator of worth: Pl. Ep. 2.13 on Voconius Rufus (In primis ama hominem; nam licet tribuas ei quantum amplissimum potes, nihil tamen amplius potes amicitia tua; cuius esse eum usque ad intimam familiaritatem capacem quo magis scires, breviter tibi studia mores omnem denique vitam eius expressi, 2.13.10), 6.26 on betrothal of Servianus' daughter to Fuscus Salinator (Gaudeo et gratulor, quod Fusco Salinatori filiam tuam destinasti. Domus patricia, pater honestissimus, mater pari laude; ipse studiosus litteratus etiam disertus, puer simplicitate comitate iuvenis senex gravitate, 6.26.1), 7.20 to Tacitus (Quae omnia huc spectant, ut invicem ardentius diligamus, cum tot vinculis nos studia mores fama, suprema denique hominum iudicia constringant, 7.20.7) 7.22 on Cornelius Minicianus (Natus splendide abundat facultatibus, amat studia ut solent pauperes. 7.22.2), 7.31 on Claudius Pollio (nam studia quoque sicut alias bonas artes veneratur, 7.31.5).
454 This is not necessarily an essential distinction, since literature can reflect political aims and interests as much as a speech; the Dialogus of Tacitus has its inception in this problem as Maternus' friends point out the risks he has taken with his tragedy. But it remains true that political activity (i.e. in the forum and in the courts) and poetic activity under a patron-amicus (i.e. as a primary activity, as with e.g. Horace) appear not to have been carried out by the same people before Pliny's age. Note that Pliny does not acknowledge a patron-amicus.
455 Although literary pursuits can be seen as exercises and/or preparatory for oratorical training. In this regard Pliny is unlike Quintilian, for example, since he obviously endorses the continuation of literary studia, giving them a cultural and indeed, as we shall see, social value for the orator beyond the expediency of developing eloquentia. See below on Pl. Ep. 7.9 and 9.25.
- 198 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
In the following section I shall explore this conflation of arenas in studia which I suggest by examining how Pliny conceptualizes studia as an activity in terms of both otium and negotium.456
5.1.2.4 The otium and negotium of studia
Otium and negotium are conceptually distinct categories in Roman thought, as their etymology implies, which are strongly connected to literature on the one hand, and public affairs
(including oratory) on the other.457 And so, in conceptual terms, poetry is composed during periods of otium, and oratory performed as a negotium.458 Pliny is constantly holding up life in secessu (i.e. otium or lack of business) as an essential component of the life of studia; as far as
456 A traditional way of viewing literary activity against political activity of any kind. In Tac. Dial., for instance, the traditional career activities of the elite male (his negotium), through which he and his family maintained or increased status, prominence, and wealth, have been set aside by Maternus. From Aper's point of view, Maternus is not fulfilling his duty to family, friends, and state, his social contract. Aper's specific criticisms in Dial. 5 and 9 are revealing when set against the earlier arguments of Cicero in Off. 1 concerning the virtuous man (cf. Cic. Off. 1.22 non nobis solum nati sumus ortusque nostri partem patria vindicat, partem amici; 1.69 (also 70-73) Vacandum autem omni est animi perturbatione, cum cupiditate et metu, tum etiam aegritudine et voluptate nimia et iracundia, ut tranquillitas animi et securitas adsit, quae affert cum constantiam tum etiam dignitatem. Multi autem et sunt et fuerunt, qui eam, quam dico, tranquillitatem expetentes a negotiis publicis se removerint ad otiumque perfugerint, in his et nobilissimi philosophi longeque principes et quidam homines severi et graves, nec populi nec principum mores ferre potuerunt vixeruntque non nulli in agris delectati re sua familiari.) inasmuch as together they show a continuity of thought about the civic/political duties of members of the elite, and the antithetical nature of literary pursuits in this conceptual framework.
457 Cf. André (1966) – still, and likely to remain, the fundamental work on otium – 531 "L'otium a toujours été écartelé entre l'otium-pax et l'otium-relaxatio." Negotium, on the other hand, arises from lack of relaxatio and from military activity.
458 Cf. esp. Dial. 5.3 'Securus sit,' inquit Aper, 'et Saleius Bassus et quisquis alius studium poeticae et carminum gloriam fovet, cum causas agere non possit. ego enim, quatenus arbitrum litis huius †inveniri, non patiar Maternum societate plurium defendi, sed ipsum solum apud †eos arguam, quod natus ad eloquentiam virilem et oratoriam, qua parere simul et tueri amicitias, adsciscere necessitudines, complecti provincias possit, omittit studium, quo non aliud in civitate nostra vel ad utilitatem fructuosius
- 199 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
oratory (traditionally a negotium) in concerned, otium is needed for the revision of speeches for publication, though not for the practice of oratory. Recall that speeches given in court (actiones) are a part of studia. Thus, even though Pliny's studia conflates traditionally separate oratory
(both given and published speeches) and poetry under one rubric, otium and negotium as conceptual categories remain in force: oratory as negotium (actio) becomes distinct from oratory in secessu (oratio).459
The tendency in Roman literature to view otium as the well-spring of creative activity for writing of all kinds in particular finds its best expression in Pliny's letters on the villa life (cf. e.g.
1.3, 1.9, 2.17, 5.6, 9.3, etc.). Most recently Hoffer (1999) has explored the theme in his The
Anxieties of Pliny the Younger.460 As he makes clear there, the topos of an otium litteratum is an old one, and deeply ingrained in Roman literary culture.461 I have suggested that one aspect of
Pliny's studia – speeches given in court – was without exception considered negotium, while another – speeches revised for publication – seems to be more strongly conceptualized as an otium activity. But if studia (as all literary activity) is acting as a point of transference for oratory
459 Bütler (1970) 41-57 takes the opposite approach, tracing the conflicts between otium and negotium in Pliny's Epistulae. On the difference between spoken and published speech, cf. Pl. Ep. 1.20.9 At [sc. you will object] aliud est actio bona, aliud oratio. Scio nonnullis ita videri, sed ego (forsitan fallar) persuasum habeo posse fieri ut sit actio bona quae non sit bona oratio, non posse non bonam actionem esse quae sit bona oratio.
460 See Guillemin (1926) and (1937), André (1966) "Troisiême Partie" 385-403, and most recently Hoffer (1999) 29-44, 111-118.
461 Otium Litteratum as Guillemin remarked sometime ago was becoming more and more acceptable at least since Cicero (we scarcely have the means to address the question before him in any case); see Guillemin (1929) 14, Bütler 1970, 42, and Riggsby (1998) 86 n.27. But Tac. Dial. serves as a corrective in assuming that constant otium had little social consequence.
- 200 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
between negotium and otium, it may also be possible that Pliny and his literary friends could conceptualize an aspect of studia (e.g. poetry) traditionally considered an otium activity as a negotium.
The suggestion that poetry might have a social consequence similar to negotium will be examined in depth below in connection with gloria and Pliny's attitudes towards success. For now, however, a few examples will suffice to illustrate how the broad conception of studia may act to blur the lines between the consequences of otium and negotium. Early in Book 1 of the
Epistulae (1.3) Pliny urges Caninius Rufus to turn over day-to-day affairs, retreat into his home, and write something (Quin tu (tempus enim) humiles et sordidas curas aliis mandas, et ipse te in alto isto pinguique secessu studiis adseris? 1.3.3).462 Rufus is urged, paradoxically, to make writing his negotium and his otium (hoc sit negotium tuum, hoc otium, 1.3.3). The series of paradoxes which follow (hic labor, haec quies; in his vigilia, in his etiam somnus reponantur,
1.3.3) serves to accentuate the consuming intensity of the proposed effort, and perhaps its importance: it will serve as an everlasting memorial for Caninius, one which will outlast any other possession (effinge aliquid et excude, quod sit perpetuo tuum. Nam reliqua rerum tuarum post te alium atque alium dominum sortientur, hoc numquam tuum desinet esse si semel coeperit,
1.3.4). This statement of Pliny's (and, for example, the curiously similar Hor. Carm. 3.30 exegi monumentum) draws on the attitudes described in the discussion of memoria, political success, and elite culture in Chapter One; I explore this connection further below in section 5.1.3.
462 We later learn that Caninius Rufus writes poetry. Cf. Pl. Ep. 2.8, 3.7, 6.21, 7.25, 8.4, 9.38.
- 201 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
Pliny gives justifications for holding recitations by exploiting parallels to negotium activities: seeking iudicium and certain aspects of amicitia. As Hoffer suggests, this tactic may very well be employed to counter the dangers of invidia.463 This seems to be the underlying motive in a letter to Caecilius Celer (7.17), who has recently reported some criticisms leveled against Pliny for reading speeches to friends: we discover that Pliny is soliciting the advice and critical thoughts of his friends in order to improve the work for broader publication, for it is the wider audience – i.e. after publication – which will bring him praise (Nec vero ego dum recito laudari, sed dum legor cupio, 7.17.7). He often characterizes this solicitation for criticism as iudicium, a term often applied to the formal advice given in legal cases.464 Pliny's reasons for attending recitations appear to be likewise motivated and fueled by a desire to reciprocate
(gratia) and by a sense of duty (officium), two other characteristic qualities of elite amicitia: in
Ep. 8.12 Pliny reports that he will attend a recitation about to be given by Titinius Capito without fail out of respect for Capito's service to studia (recitaturus est Titinius Capito, quem ego audire nescio magis debeam an cupiam, 8.12.1 ... porro tanto turpius gratiam non referre, quanto honestior causa referendae, 8.12.2).
463 Hoffer (1999) 10-11: "Pliny therefore emphasizes the mutual benefits that arise from friendly exchange, what one might call a "virtuous cycle" of friendship. Rather than being stuck in a vicious circle of envy, detraction, and revenge, they eagerly and selflessly help each other, and they incidently derive benefit for themselves as a side-effect."
464 Cf. Pl. Ep. 1.7.3 Tenebo ergo hoc temperamentum, ut ex duobus, quorum alterutrum petis, eligam id potius, in quo non solum studio tuo verum etiam iudicio satisfaciam; Pl. Ep. 3.4.2 Nam cuius integra re consilium exquirere optassem, huius etiam peracta iudicium nosse mire concupisco.
- 202 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
Recitations themselves can function in ways similar to like events connected with negotium. For instance, in 5.17 the recitation given by the young Calpurnius Piso (who later becomes cos. ord. in 111) of his poem katasterismoiv is described in a manner similar to the report in 6.11 of two young men (Fuscus Salinator – cos. ord. 118, and Ummidius Quadratus – cos. suff. 118) facing off in the Centumviral Court.465 What is more, Calpurnius Piso and his supportive brother both earn, in Pliny's opinion, the approval of their family's imagines (quae
[imagines] nunc mihi adulescentes tacitae laudare adhortari, et quod amborum gloriae satis magnum est agnoscere videntur.), just as Pliny hopes the two young orators continue on their own path to success (Quid enim aut publice laetus quam clarissimos iuvenes nomen et famam ex studiis petere, 6.11.3). There seems to be, then, a considerable overlay in Pliny of otium and negotium brought about by the conflation of the two arenas under the term studia and the general influence of amicitia in the Epistulae.
5.1.3 Memoria and Motivations
We are in a unique position to examine elite motives for writing poetry, for Pliny presents these to us in the letters. Pliny's motivation for his studia (in all its aspects), and the motivation which he holds before his literary friends in their own pursuits, is quite clearly articulated in a number of letters. We have already seen how in 1.3 Pliny attempts to persuade
465 In both letters Pliny discusses the fact that these iuvenes are exceptional (Pl. Ep. 5.17.1, 6.11.1), comments on their future potential (5.17.4, 6.11.1) and their ingenium (5.17.3, 6.11.2), and enumerates the qualities of eloquentia displayed in each case (5.17.2-3, 6.11.2). Both events serve as an important indicator of the rise of studia (5.17.3, 6.11.3).
- 203 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
Caninius Rufus to write and publish in order to preserve something of himself after death (see above). This is by no means an uncommon sentiment in the Epistulae; the link between studia and memoria in the Epistulae is organic. For Pliny and his friends, the drive to write – and more important publish – is a manifestation of the drive to be commemorated, to have a share in memoria. For our purposes a few examples will suffice to illustrate how Pliny's Epistulae reflect traditional ways of thinking about literature and memoria.
A number of Pliny's letters suggest motivations for writing identical to Tacitus' motivations for writing the de vita Agricolae (see above section 1.4). In 3.5, for example, Pliny lists among the catalogue of his uncle's writings the de vita Pomponi Secundi (in two books):
"because he had been so greatly loved by him, he produced this for the memoria of his friend as if he discharged a debt owed" (a quo singulariter amatus hoc memoriae amici quasi debitum munus exsolvit, 3.5.3). Pliny himself wrote a work in an attempt to honor the memoria of the son of Vestricius Spurinna and Cottia (neque enim adfectibus meis uno libello carissimam mihi sanctissimam memoriam prosequi satis est, cuius famae latius consuletur, si dispensata et digesta fuerit, 3.10.3). He also gives in his letters detailed narratives on illustrious men (laudes hominum and obituaries 1.10, 12, 22; 2.1, 3; 3.1, 5, 7, 11, 21; 4.21; 5.5, 6, 21; 6.6; 7.19, 24, 25;
8.5, 23; 9.9, 36, 40), some of which are explicitly aimed at perpetuating memoria, and all implicitly so. At the end of Chapter One, I explored in detail the significance of memoria for why and how Pliny chose to remember Verginius Rufus.
- 204 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
A man might also preserve his own memoria through his writing. In 5.5, for example,
Pliny announces the death of Gaius Fannius, who died before completing his last great work, a history of those killed or banished under Nero which was popular with readers (Quamvis enim agendis causis distringeretur, scribebat tamen exitus occisorum aut relegatorum a Nerone et iam tres libros absolverat subtiles et diligentes et Latinos atque inter sermonem historiamque medios, ac tanto magis reliquos perficere cupiebat, quanto frequentius hi lectitabantur, 5.5.3).
Pliny laments that death always overtakes those engaged in immortale aliquid in an untimely fashion, for they, thinking of their posterity, are always working on some project in order to preserve their own memoria (qui vero posteros cogitant, et memoriam sui operibus extendunt, his nulla mors repentina est, ut quae semper incohatum aliquid abrumpat, 5.5.4).
The effort to be remembered through his own literary works is also explicitly connected to memoria by Pliny. In 5.8 Pliny makes reply to Titinius Capito's suggestion that he write history. Pliny likes the idea (although he appears not to have written one; cf. 1.1.1) because it allows an author to spread abroad his own fama along with that of those he saves from being lost to memory (quia mihi pulchrum in primis videtur non pati occidere, quibus aeternitas debeatur, aliorumque famam cum sua extendere, 5.8.1). It is the desire for a lasting memoria which underlies his eagerness to write, says Pliny, a desire which is most worthy of the effort, especially for a man who has no anxiety about what memoria will remember (Me autem nihil aeque ac diuturnitatis amor et cupido sollicitat, res homine dignissima, ego praesertim qui nullius sibi conscius culpae posteritatis memoriam non reformidet, 5.8.2).
- 205 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
The novelty of Pliny's approach to the organic link between writing/studia and memoria is that he extends the commemorative function of nugatory poetry to include the author (and not just the subjects) of the poems. Ep. 2.10, for example, embraces a number of the issues which have arisen so far in the discussion of studium, and which resonate strongly with earlier discussions about memoria in Chapter One, as well as with Martial's anxiety about theft and authorship in Chapter Four. Pliny writes to Octavius Rufus,466 scolding him for withholding his versus, and accusing him of denying himself laus and Pliny voluptas (Quousque et tibi et nobis invidebis, tibi maxima laude, nobis voluptate? Ep. 2.10.1). Pliny, with an allusion to Ennius, demands that Rufus allow the verses to be made public;467 the situation is made more pressing because some of his poems are circulating already, and may be "stolen" by other poets (a theme prevalent in Martial, see above).468 These poems will be a monument which will outlast any human frailty.469 For Pliny it is the publication of Rufus' poems to a wider audience (and the renown which will result for his friend) which will be the source of his voluptas, not simply
466 Generally held to be C. Marius Marcellus Octavius Publius Cluvius Rufus (cos. suff. 80).
467 Pl. Ep. 2.10.2 Sine per ora hominum ferantur isdemque quibus lingua Romana spatiis pervagentur. Cf. Enn. Epigrams 17-18 V (=ROL 9-10) nemo me lacrumis decoret neu funera fletu | faxit. cur? volito vivo' per ora virum.
468 Pl. Ep. 2.10.3-4 Enotuerunt quidam tui versus, et invito te claustra sua refregerunt. Hos nisi retrahis in corpus, quandoque ut errones aliquem cuius dicantur invenient.
469 Including dependence on friends to publish them after his death (cf. 2.10.4, 5 sed dispice ne sit parum providum, sperare ex aliis quod tibi ipse non praestes. ... Habe ante oculos mortalitate, a qua adserere te hoc uno monimento potes; nam cetera fragilia et caduca non minus quam ipsi homines occidunt desinuntque.
- 206 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
reading them,470 since it seems likely from Ep. 1.7 that Rufus has already sent him some of the poems (at least the ones which are circulating without his consent) as part of an informal exchange between amici.471 Likewise, the permanent monument Rufus' poems will provide him requires an audience, just as memoria requires posterity to bear witness to it (see above, section
1.1). Julius Avitus (cf. 5.21), as far as Pliny is concerned, serves as a sad reminder of the consequences of not publishing studia: Quo ille studiorum amore flagrabat! quantum legit, quantum etiam scripsit! quae nunc omnia cum ipso sine fructu posteritatis abierunt (Ep. 5.21.5).
As Pliny writes in Ep. 4.16, there is no shortage of readers or listeners for worthy literary works, it is simply a question of making worthy literary works available to them (Sunt qui audiant, sunt qui legant nos modo dignum aliquid auribus dignum chartis elaboremus. Ep. 4.16.3).
Julius Avitus had, tragically, been a young man when he died. Octavius Rufus, however, as far as it is possible to tell (see n. 466) had been suffect consul in 80 (i.e. well before the letter was written), and had thus arguably earned a certain renown already. Cn. Pedanius Fuscus
470 Cf. Ep. 5.10 the letter to Suetonius, in which Pliny exhorts Suetonius to publish his verses in order to garner a name for himself (note here to the use of voluptas for pleasure arising from another's renown): Patere me videre titulum tuum, patere audire describi legi venire volumia Tranquilli mei. Aequum est nos in amore tam mutuo eandem percipere ex te voluptatem, qua tu perfrueris ex nobis. Ep. 5.10.3.
471 This seems to have been a step preliminary to recitation before a group of amici then publication (see Starr [1987]). In 7.17.12 Pliny explains his own practice to Caecilius Celer: Ego enim non populum advocare sed certos electosque soleo, quos intuear quibus credam, quos denique et tamquam singulos observem et tamquam non singulos timeam. Cf. also 8.19.2 Est autem mihi moris, quod sum daturus in manus hominum, ante amicorum iudicio examinare, in primis tuo, and the angry(?) final word to his critics on reciting poetry in 5.3.11 Atque haec ita disputo quasi populum in auditorium, non in cubiculum amicos advocarim, quos plures habere multis gloriosum, reprehensioni nemini fuit. Vale. See Wallace- Hadrill (1988) 54 and Riggsby (1997) 48 on the degree of intimacy indicated by the cubiculum.
- 207 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
Salinator, later to become cos. ord. in 118 and the first colleague of Hadrian,472 receives quite different advice in 7.9. At the time of the letter (106) Fuscus Salinator seems to have been around 25 years of age, and fully embarked on a career in the courts (recall Ep. 6.11 in which
Pliny suggests that he and Ummidius Quadratus are destined for greatness); cf. 7.9.7 Scio nunc tibi esse praecipuum studium orandi; sed non ideo semper pugnacem hunc et quasi bellatorium stilum suaserim. Pliny advises Salinator to practice several types of composition in secessu (i.e. a period of otium) in order to develop further his facility in both speaking and writing.473 Among the types of composition endorsed is light verse: Fas est et carmine remitti, non dico continuo et longo (id enim perfici nisi in otio non potest), sed hoc arguto et brevi, quod apte quanta libet occupationes curasque distinguit (7.9.9). The tone of the letter from 7.9.10ff is decidedly protreptic, as Pliny offers justifications for composing such poetry similar to those offered in his own defense in 5.3.5-6 (see above). Remarkable among the comments in this section is the opening thought of this protreptic: Lusus vocantur; sed hi lusus non minorem gloriam quam seria consequuntur (7.9.10). Nugatory poetry, according to Pliny, could bring Salinator gloria equal to that earned by his seria.474 But Pliny does not suggest to Salinator that he publish his
472 He also seems to have entertained hopes for the succession through marriage with Hadrian's daughter; cf. SHA Hadr. 23.2.
473 Cf. 7.9.2 Utile in primis, et multi praecipiunt, vel ex Graeco in Latinum vel ex Latino vertere in Graecum. Quo genere exercitationis proprietas splendorque verbroum, copia figurarum, vis explicandi, praeterea imitatione optimorum similia inveniendi facultas paratur ... intelligentia ex hoc et iudicium adquiritur.
474 The context of the letter suggests that seria be construed as forensic oratory. Elsewhere in the Epistulae seria is contrasted with ioci (Pl. Ep. 2.13.5), and it is often used in the context of speaking about orators or oratory (cf. Pl. Ep. 5.3.4, 7.4.6, 8.14.8). The classic example is 8.21.3: describing how he was called away from a recitation to the courts, Pliny says, Addidi hunc ordinem me et in scribendo sequi, ut necessitates voluptatibus, seria iucundis anteferrem, ac primum amicis tum mihi scriberem.
- 208 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
poetry, nor that he recite it before a small group of friends (as he had Octavius Rufus), although he holds out the tantalizing possibility of gloria from literary efforts if he should be successful.
In Pliny's world-view nugatory poetry plays a surprisingly active and vital role in the public lives of the political elite. Because nugatory poetry has become a more public activity for the elite in general it is not entirely unforeseen that members of the political elite (like Pliny) would interpret – and more important anticipate – the motivations and consequences of success in the literary arena in terms of their motivations and success in the political arena. We shall see in the following pages what importance this basic assumption has for our interpretation of a poet's success and renown, and the organic link between memoria, gloria, and poetry in Pliny's literary world.
5.2 Success in poetry
What becomes most curiously obvious from the examination of terms of praise applied to poets is how restricted Pliny's use of terms is. The reasons for this are logical, and arise, I think, from Pliny's political culture. In the Epistulae Pliny characterizes the success and renown of poets almost entirely in terms of laus/laudare. To be sure, Livy has nomen in 2.3, perhaps for philosophical writing (see below), Pliny and Tacitus share nomen for studia in 9.23 (see above), and Pliny suggests that he might further his fama by writing history in 5.8. But for poets (with only two exceptions), the marker of success and renown is laus. In section 5.2.1 I present examples of laus for poets (dividing the instances into those given in the context of recitation,
- 209 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
and those given as exchange between amici) as well as the two exceptions. In section 5.2.2 I present examples of laus applied to Pliny as poet.
5.2.1 Praising Poets
Recitation is the most common forum for laus, one entirely in keeping with the basic semantic for the term (voiced and public naming, a transient phenomenon). In 1.13 Pliny extends laus to poets who in writing and reciting their poetry risk the scorn and disrespect of certain
"literary" figures (Sed tanto magis laudandi probandique sunt, quos a scribendique studio haec auditorum vel desidia vel superbia non retardat, 1.13.5). Recitation is likewise the venue for laus in 2.10 (Quousque et tibi et nobis invidebis, tibi maxima laude, nobis voluptate? 2.10.2). In
5.17 the young Calpurnius Piso who recited his Greek poem on the stars receives laudes from
Pliny himself (incitavi laudibus, 5.17.4) which he describes as the most motivating form of encouragement (qui est acerrimus stimulus monendi, 5.17.4). In 6.17 an undisclosed amicus suffered the rejection of an inconsiderate audience; Pliny suggests that one should give laus as a social courtesy, rather than withholding it out of some misplaced invidia.
Laus is also given outside of the context of recitation, as between friends. In 3.7.3, Silius managed, after a danger-strewn career, to live and die in laudabile otium – which was spent writing poetry. In 6.21 Pliny comments that the world can still produce poetry worth praising
- 210 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
(Neque enim quasi lassa et effeta natura mihi nihil iam laudabile parit, 6.21.1).475 In 7.4 Pliny remarks that Cicero and earlier orators had composed nugatory poetry for oblectatio and laus
(coepi reputare maximos oratores hoc studii genus et in oblectationibus habuisse et in laude posuisse, 7.4.4). Fuscus Salinator is urged in 7.9 to attempt translation from Greek to Latin; successful translations often bring laus (multos videmus eius modi certamina sibi cum multa laude sumpsisse, 7.9.4). In 8.4 Pliny offers laus to his friend Caninius Rufus for his nugatory poetry (In summa potero fortasse scripta tua magis probare laudare, quanto illa tardius cautiusque, sed ipsum te magis amabo magisque laudabo, quanto celerius et incautius miseris,
8.4.8). Pliny, anxious that his praise should be construed as sincere, is careful to characterize his favorable judgment of Sentius Augurinus' poems as the iudicium of an equal rather than the gratia of an inferior (Si laudatus a te laudare te coepero, vereor ne non tam proferre iudicium meum quam referre gratiam videar, 9.8.1). A similar anxiety underlies praise offered to Sardus in 9.31 (Laudem pariter et gratias agam? 9.31.2) and Caninius Rufus in 9.38 (Ego verum Rufum nostro laudo, non quia tu ut ita facerem petisti sed quia est ille dignissimus, 9.38.1).
There are two exceptions to the observation that laus predominates as a term of praise.476
In 1.16, a poem to Erucius Clarus about Pompeius Saturninus, Pliny suggests that Saturninus is due the honor nowadays often granted only dead writers (eiusdem nunc honor praesentis et
475 Cf. Mart. 5.10, and discussion above.
476 In Pl. Ep. 3.21.3 (Fuit moris antiqui, eos qui vel singulorum laudes vel urbium scripserat, aut honoribus aut pecunia ornare) honoribus should be construed in its metonymic sense, i.e. "office", "statue", vel. sim. And in any case, this passage implicitly denies Martial honor.
- 211 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
gratia quasi satietate languescit? 1.16.8). Pliny laments likewise in 7.25 that many a brilliant talent is lost to fama through modesty or non-participation (O quantum eruditorum aut modestia ipsorum aut quies operit ac subtrahit famae! 7.25.1).
5.2.2 Praising Pliny
Pliny himself also suggests laus for his poetry. In 4.14 Pliny states that he shows his appreciation of Plinius Paternus' opinion in giving him the whole work to read and judge, instead of giving him a selection simply to admire (Ego quanti faciam iudicium tuum, vel ex hoc potes aestimare, quod malui omnia a te pensitari quam electa laudari, 4.14.6). And in 5.3 Pliny suggests that the emulation of the great men of the past both in seria and in lusus (here nugatory poetry) is laudabile (Ab illis autem quibus notum est, quos quantosque auctores sequar, facile impetrari posse confido, ut errare me sed cum illis sinant, quorum non seria modo verum etiam lusus exprimere laudabile est, 5.3.4).
5.3 Literary gloria in Pliny's Epistulae and the magnus vir
In the following sections I examine how Pliny characterizes success in poetry within the context of the semantic of gloria and previous discussions connecting gloria to the magnus vir.
The use of gloria in this way in Pliny's Epistulae is, I think, significant in several ways. First, because laus is predominant as a term of praise for poetry in Pliny (almost to the exclusion of other terms), the use of gloria in the same context is conspicuous. Second, Pliny's literary life, as
- 212 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
we saw above, seems carefully structured to generate the minimum of invidia;477 a claim of gloria for his poetry seems to run counter to this general trend. Last – an observation that takes its significance from the preceding comments – Pliny does not otherwise talk a great deal about his reputation as a poet. The claims for his poetry in 9.25, which we shall examine in detail below, are all the more remarkable. In section 5.4.1 I explain how Pliny attributes gloria for literary accomplishments only to individuals who are not active in the pursuit of political gloria, and suggests literature's potential for young men embarking on the pursuit of gloria. In section
5.4.2 I examine Pliny's characterization of his own achievements in terms of gloria in a close reading of Epistle 9.25.
5.3.1 All for gloria, and gloria for all?
Pliny singles out only a very few people in the Epistulae as recipients of gloria for their literary achievements (Vestricius Spurinna in 1.16, Livy in 2.3.8, and the two Calpurnii Pisones in 5.17), and holds the possibility of gloria before a couple of others as a lure toward the literary life (Atilius Crescens in 6.8 and Fuscus Salinator in 7.9). These occurrences of gloria make up the rest of the exceptions to the observation that gloria in Pliny is most often applied to a vir magnus for public duties (these were listed at the end of section 5.2.1). These examples have one thing in common: either by virtue of their retirement (Spurinna), age (Calpurnii Pisones), or means and inclination (Atilius Crescens) all of the individuals who receive gloria through their
477 This reluctance to generate invidia may be the reason for the use of laus, rather than honor and fama, both of which in Pliny are significant markers of political success.
- 213 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
studia/poetry are not politically active.478 Also noteworthy is the fact that all of these are of independent means, and unattached to any particular patron-amicus for their literary efforts; it may be significant that these two characteristics are requisite for the vir magnus.
Passenus Paulus is an excellent counter-example in this regard. He does not merit gloria himself, but Pliny suggests that his recovery from a serious illness will render gloria to litterae.
Passenus is a descendent of Propertius (Pl. Ep. 9.22.2; cf. ILS 2925 C. PASSENNO | C. f. SERG.
| PAULLO | PROPERTIO | BLAESO) and so probably likewise an eques. But 6.15 (a letter describing the debacle of his recent recitation) makes it clear that Paulus has not the status of a
Pliny: Prisce iubes (6.15.2) sets Paulus in the role of poet addressing a patron-amicus, and the uncomfortable incident which results (Priscus shouts out from the audience "Ego vero non iubeo") is, I think, Pliny's polite criticism of a social equal479 for his conduct towards his lesser friends (i.e. Priscus' conduct toward Passenus). Pliny, for example, never describes a request for his poetry or letters in this way, preferring to use flagitare (cf. 1.8, 4.14, 9.2, 9.25). White (1993)
266-8 (his "Appendix One") discusses the importance of iubere for literary requests:
Clearly the examples are numerous enough that it is fair to
characterize iubere as being a conventional term in such contexts
... But what is more important about the use of iubere is that (as
478 For Fuscus Salinator's liminal position between otium and negotium see below (Fuscus has not yet explicitly earned gloria, although Pliny suggests it might be in the future).
479 C. Octavius Tidius Tossianus Lucius Javolenus Priscus (cos. suff. 86), PIR2 I 14, a prominent jurist and member of Trajan's consilium was a distinguished legatus for the Emperor; cf. ILS 1015.
- 214 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
with "tell" and "bid" in English) the nuance of the command
which it conveys is significantly weaker than in other Latin verbs
meaning "order" or "command".480
White goes on to suggest that in these cases iubere reflects the original use of an imperative. This is an interesting observation, and important. But I would call into question other elements of his analysis. First, all "literary requests" are not alike; it is important to distinguish among his examples those directed to poets and those directed to others (whether historical or informational or declamatory). Corollary to this observation is the overturning of White's suggestion that there is no essential indication of status disparity between "initiator" and "recipient" of a request.481 If we focus on recipients of the request who are poets and put aside fictive or unknown initiators, every example in White's data is in fact "initiator" of superior status to poet "recipient".482 Given the context painted in Ep. 6.15 and the actual use of iubere in requests for poetry, it seems safe to argue that Passenus Paulus is a poet dependent – as Pliny and his friends are not – on the support of a magnus vir. The following examples are instances in which Pliny ascribes gloria to a magnus vir for literary matters.
480 White (1993) 267.
481 White (1993) 267 "... it is the recipient rather than the initiator of a request who resorts to peremptory terms to characterize it, ... peremptory language does not necessarily correlate with superior status. ... while the initiator often does enjoy superior status or wield greater authority than the recipient of the request, that is evidently not the case in nos. 1, 2, 3, 9, 11, 15, 18." White's observation is made on the basis of 7 out of 27 examples: but in 7 (Prop. 3.3.16), 9 (Hor. Ep. 2.263), and 15 (Mart. Epigr. 4.17.1) the intiator is fictive or unknown.
482 White (1993) 267-8, examples 4 (Verg. Ecl. 6.9), 5 (Verg. Ecl. 8.11), 6 (Verg. G. 3.41), 8 (Prop. 3.9.52), 10 (Ov. Am. 2.1.3), 13 (Stat. Silv. 1.pr.3), 14 (Mart. 2.6.1), 16 (Mart. 11.42.3), 17 (Pl. Ep. 6.15.2), 22 (Ausonius, Praefationes 3.9 Green), 23 (Ausonius, Epigrammata 7 titulus Green), and 24 (Ausonius Cento nuptialis praef.).
- 215 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
Vestricius Spurinna is the magnus vir whose conduct in otium Pliny holds up as a model of behavior. Although the details of Spurinna's career are not known in full detail, it is quite certain that he was one of the most prominent members of the political elite in Pliny's time. He was a consul ter, holding his first probably under Vespasian.483 A number of military appointments are likely (he seems to have been praetorius under Otho already in 69 and cf. 2.7.2 for his generalship in Germany).484 His second consulship in 98 (with Trajan as absent colleague), and third in 100 are indicators of his importance in securing the transfer of power (as also his consulship under Vespasian). He also served on Nerva's economy commission with
Verginius Rufus and Julius Frontinus (Pl. Ep. 1.9). If one could claim gloria on the traditional military and political grounds, it would be Spurinna.
Curiously, although Pliny clearly regards Spurinna's political accomplishments as an example to emulate, it is his lifestyle in otium and his literary accomplishments to which Pliny devotes the most attention in 3.1.485 We might contrast Spurinna's colleague Verginius Rufus, whom Pliny extols most of all for his political success (although he also claims Rufus as a
483 The first consulship "must precede his legateship of Lower Germany under Vespasian or early Domitian." Sherwin-White (1985) 154.
484 Cf. Tac. Hist. 2.11, 2.18, 2.23, 2.36.
485 Cf. Pl. Ep. 3.1.11-12 Hanc ego vitam voto et cogitatione praesumo, ingressurus avidissime, ut primum ratio aetatis receptui canere permiserit. Interim mille laboribus conteror, quorum mihi et solacium et exemplum est idem Spurinna; nam ille quoque, quoad honestum fuit, obiit officia, gessit magistratus, provincias rexit, multoque labore hoc otium meruit. Igitur eundem mihi cursum, eundem terminum statuo, idque iam nunc apud te subsigno ut, si me longius evehi videris, in ius voces ad hanc epistulam meam et quiescere iubeas, cum inertiae crimen effugero. Cf. Johnson (2000).
- 216 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
devotee of light poetry); it is from Rufus' involvement in the turmoil of 69 that his gloria arose.486 I might also point out that Verginius receives the initial letter of Book 2, and Spurinna that of Book 3. Pliny asserts in 1.16 that Spurinna, now in retirement, is deserving of gloria for letters which he claims were written by his wife, either because he wrote and passed them off as hers (he also writes orationes, historia, verses quales Catullus meus aut Calvus as well as lyric odes), or because he has refined the literary taste of a young woman (Quae sive uxoris sunt ut adfirmat, sive ipsius ut negat, pari gloria dignus, qui aut illa componat, aut uxorem quam virginem accepit, tam doctam politamque reddiderit, 1.16.6).
Livy, according to Pliny, enjoyed enough nomen and gloria to draw a sightseer from
Cadiz in 2.3.8 (Numquam legisti, Gaditanum quendam Titi Livi nomine gloriaque commotum ad visendum eum ab ultimo terrarum orbe venisse, statimque ut viderat abisse?).487 It is difficult to be entirely certain why Livy would have been so famous in his lifetime; the temptation is, of course, to suppose that it was because of his historical writing (this is for what Livy is famous in our eyes). The context of the letter suggests that we should be thinking here of Livy's rhetorical works.488 Pliny is writing to Maecilius Nepos about Isaeus, a scholasticus489 who practices
486 Cf. esp. Pl. Ep. 2.1.2 Triginta annis gloriae suae supervixit; legit scripta de se carmina, legit historias et posteritati suae interfuit.
487 This is in the context of persuading Maecilius Nepos to come see Isaeus, the epideictic orator. According to Sherwin-White (1985) ad loc. this anecdote is preserved nowhere else.
488 Livy also had a distinguished reputation for his philosophical works. Speaking of the philosopher Fabianus Papirius, Seneca suggests that he be placed third among the greatest philosophical writers, after Cicero and Asinius Pollio and before Livy: Adfer quem Fabiano possis praeponere. Dic Ciceronem, cuius libri ad philosophiam pertinentes paene totidem sunt quot Fabiani: cedam, sed non statim pusillum est si quid maximo minus est. Dic Asinium Pollionem: cedam, et respondeamus: in re tanta eminere est post
- 217 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
extempore speeches in the Greek sophistic manner, and encourages him to come to Rome to witness the spectacle, citing as a precedent the man from Gades who came to see Livy.
Atilius Crescens excels in studia not from a desire for profit, but for pleasure and gloria
(nam studia, quibus plurimum praestat, ad voluptatem tantum et gloriam exercet, 6.8.6). Atilius in the Epistulae is a very Martialian figure – a man of Pliny's social class but not Pliny's rank, given to witty turns of phrase which can be entertaining or abusive, a friend to important men, but without the means to support the financial obligations of such friendships.490 This letter seems to me an important indication of how Pliny applies gloria because although Atilius is presented as a near parallel for Pliny himself – except for his poverty and lack of influence; and more important he (of a similar age to Pliny491) does not seem to have pursued a public career.
The young Calpurnii Pisones are singled out by Pliny in 5.17 for gloria as exemplars of the potential of the younger generation. Recall the context: a recitation was given by the young
duos esse. Nomina adhuc T. Livium; scripsit enim dialogos, quos non magis philosophiae adnumerare possis quam historias, et ex professo philosophiarum continentis libros: huic quoque dabo locum (Sen Ep. 100.9).
489 Pliny uses the same term of Suetonius, in a rather disparaging way however, in a letter asking Baebius Hispanus to help him find a suburban property: Scholasticis porro dominis, ut hic est, sufficit abunde tantum soli, ut relevare caput, reficier oculos, reptare perlimitem unamque semitam terere omnesque viteculas suas nosse numerare arbusculas possint (Pl. Ep. 1.24.4) In Pl. Ep. 2.20.9 lege scholastica refers to the rhetorical principle of threes (cf. Quint. Inst. Or. 4.5.3 ne illos quidem probaverim qui partitionem ultra tris propositiones extendunt).
490 Cf. Pl. Ep. 6.8. Indirectly quoted witticisms at 1.9.8 and 2.14.2.
491 Cf. Pl. Ep. 6.8.2 ipsi amare invicem, qui est flagrantissimus amor, adulescentuli coepimus.
- 218 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
Calpurnius Piso (who later becomes cos. ord. in 111) of his poem katasterismoiv. Calpurnius
Piso and his supportive brother both earn, in Pliny's opinion, the approval of their family's imagines (quae [imagines] nunc mihi adulescentes tacitae laudare adhortari, et quod amborum gloriae satis magnum est agnoscere videntur, 5.17.6) and gloria for both pietas and eloquentia
(Gratulatus sum optimae matri, gratulatus et fratri, qui ex auditorio illo non minorem pietatis gloriam quam ille alter eloquentiae retulit: tam nobilitater pro fratre recitante primum metus eius, mox gaudium eminuit, 5.17.5). The event described is very similar to the report of two young men (Fuscus Salinator – cos. ord. 118, and Ummidius Quadratus – cos. suff. 118) facing off in the Centumviral Court given in 6.11; and just as Pliny hopes those two young orators continue on their own path to success (Quid enim aut publice laetus quam clarissimos iuvenes nomen et famam ex studiis petere, 6.11.3), he suggests that these two young Pisones will live up to their family's gloria. The young man's eloquence and his brother's pietas are symbols of their nobilitas. I suggested above that recitations themselves can function in ways similar to venues connected with negotium. Here the qualities exhibited by these young men (and the way in which they are presented) smack more of potential in the oratorical (political) arena than the literary.
Fuscus Salinator is also an interesting case since he, unlike the others (except perhaps
Spurinna) is explicitly linked to political life. Pliny clearly has great hopes for this young man, and portrays him in the letters as a younger protégé.492 From the perspective of the issues identified as central to Pliny's conception of literary works (studia, above), Fuscus is a
492 Cf. Pl. Ep. 6.11, 6.26, 7.9, 9.36, 9.40.
- 219 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
paradigmatic case. A young man, only just entered on his career (cf. 6.11), Fuscus seems to have solicited from Pliny advice for his time in secessu, to which request Pliny replies in 7.9. Pliny's response, as I suggested above, seems entirely protreptic. Pliny advises Salinator to practice several types of composition in secessu (i.e. a period of otium), light verse among them, in order to develop further his facility in both speaking and writing.493 Lusus vocantur, writes Pliny, sed hi lusus non minorem gloriam quam seria consequuntur (7.9.10). Nugatory poetry, then, could bring Salinator gloria in Pliny's eyes equal to that earned by his speeches in court. But Pliny does not suggest (yet) to Salinator that he publish his poetry, nor that he recite it before a small group of friends (as he had Silius Proculus, Suetonius, Octavius Rufus, or Caninius Rufus), only that he use it as a tool to develop his eloquence. I suggest that this attempt to turn Fuscus to literary composition without encouraging him to publish, in light of the other examples, indicates that for
Pliny gloria arising from literary works for one of his and Fuscus' status and career path is not the same as gloria arising from public duties. The two activities do not compete – negotium always displaces otium (as the letters make plain494). The others, neither Spurinna, nor Atilius, nor Livy, have no competing political gloria for which to work – either they have gained it
(Spurinna), or they lack the potential (Atilius Crescens, Livy). Pliny seems to be suggesting that
Fuscus, however, like the Calpurnii Pisones, has potential for political gloria to which all else is, for the time being, subordinate.
493 Cf. Pl. Ep. 7.9.2, 7.9.9.
494 Cf. esp. Pl. Ep. 8.21, and my discussion below.
- 220 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
5.3.2 Pliny's Literary Success and gloria
This hierarchy of gloria, negotium, and otium fits well with Pliny's own literary efforts.
There are a number of clear indications in the Epistulae before Book 9 that Pliny consistently recognizes firm boundaries between his public duties and his lusus (nugatory poetry); that is, because Pliny is a public man his poetry remains a private affair, for himself and close friends.
As we have seen, even though Pliny's use of the term studia conflates – contrary to traditional thought – oratory (both given and published speeches) and poetry under one rubric, otium and negotium as conceptual categories for literary activity remain in force: negotium always takes precedence over otium. Seen in this way, his orationes, for example, are appropriate material for publication to a wider audience because they deal with his public activities. For the public man poetry must remain subordinate to his public duties.495
Ep. 4.14, a letter to Plinius Paternus and the first mention in the Epistulae of Pliny's hendecasyllabic poems, is another excellent example of the valuation of oratory (negotium) over other literary pursuits, especially nugatory poetry, and the role of Pliny's friends in his composition of poetry. Here Pliny explicitly dissociates oratory and poetry in the very first
495 Hershkowitz (1995) 177 – who argues for the primacy of oratory over poetry in Pliny's Epistulae – comments briefly on this letter "While Pliny is, of course, being ironic here, as is further made clear by his subsequent promise to send his 'little sparrows and doves' to Mamilianus, who can either allow them to go among his eagles or can put them in a cage or nest, nevertheless there is a sense that something genuine underlies the remarks." Herkowitz recognizes "something genuine" but chooses to see Pliny's zeal in regard to poetry as different in kind from Cicero's (where I see a difference only in the application of zeal to poetic genres). My reading of this letter (see below section 5.3.4) sets, I hope, the attitudes expressed in this letter within the context of Pliny's attitude to gloria among the elite, and the integration (not sub-ordination) of literary pursuits and public duties under studia – the reading thus sees the metaphor of the doves and eagles in a different light.
- 221 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
sentence: Tu fortasse orationem, ut soles, et flagitas et exspectas; at ego quasi ex peregrina delicataque merce lusus meos tibi prodo (4.14.1). The letter continues to describe the character of these poems in some detail. The close of the letter, however, shows clearly that these lusus are subordinate to public life. Pliny feels comfortable asking for honest criticism (recall Mart. 8.76 – p. 163 above – where Gallicus begs for veritas496) because rejection would not be so difficult to endure as it would if these poems were his only or greatest work (A simplicitate tua peto, quod de libello meo dicturus es alii, mihi dicas; neque est difficile quod postulo. Nam si hoc opusculum nostrum aut potissimum esset aut solum fortasse posset durum videri dicere: 'Quaere quod agas'; molle et humanum est: 'Habes quod agas', 4.14.10). Pliny reminds Plinius Paternus that his public duties are his real work.
Ep. 5.3 likewise reveals a hierarchy of importance for Pliny's nugatory poetry, and moves us from personal peer-to-peer interaction to a slightly wider field. Ostensibly a response to unidentified peer complaints that he should be writing this kind of poetry, and worse, reciting it,
Pliny adduces great senators of the past (doctissimos gravissimos sanctissimos homines, 5.3.3) and even Accius, Ennius, Vergil, and Nepos (non quidem hi senatores, sed sanctitas morum non distat ordinibus, 5.3.6); all these in order to justify writing nugatory poetry at all. His apologia for reciting his own works is a pointed reminder of the private nature of the recitations, since it is confined to amici (Atque haec ita disputo quasi populum in auditorum, non in cubiculum amicos
496 Mart. 8.76 'Dic verum mihi, Marce, dic amabo;| nil est quod magis audiam libenter.'|sic et cum recitas tuos libellos,| et causam quotiens agis clientis,| oras, Gallice, me rogasque semper.| durum est me tibi quod petis negare.| vero verius ergo quid sit audi:| verum, Gallice, non libenter audis.
- 222 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
advocarim, quos plures habere multis gloriosum, reprehensioni nemini fuit, 5.3.11). The letter seems designed to justify the practice of poetry as a private otium pastime suitable for a public man of his status and rank, one to be shared with friends, not the general public.
5.3.3 Private lusus
As we have seen it is clear that through Book 5 (likely published in 105-106) Pliny's versiculi remain essentially a private affair, and have no part in his public life. Contrast, for example, Pliny's suggestion already in 1.2 that his speeches have been published widely to the general public (edendum autem ex pluribus causis, maxime quod libelli quos emisimus dicuntur in manibus esse, quamvis iam gratiam novitatis exuerint; nisi tamen auribus nostris bibliopolae blandiuntur, 1.2.6). At the time of Book 7, too, (107) Pliny's nugatory poetry almost certainly remains in the hands and ears of friends only.497 7.17, in which Pliny describes the process of revision, recitation, and publication of speeches, indicates as much. He revises with the advice of individual friends, and then recites to a small group of friends (Ego enim non populum advocare sed certos et electos soleo, 7.17.12). It is only after this that Pliny feels a speech may be released to a wider audience: Cogito quam sit magnum dare aliquid in manus hominum, nec persuadere
497 Cf. Pl. Ep. 7.4 to Pontius Allifanus, a literary friend (see Pl. Ep. 5.14, 6.28) who has read Pliny's verses – but it seems clear from Pl. Ep. 7.9 that the young Fuscus Salinator has not. In 7.4.6 Pliny brags that his libelli of verses legitur describitur cantatur etiam, et a Graecis quoque, quos Latine huius libelli amor docuit, nunc cithara nunc lyra personatur. Quite apart from astonishing assertion that Greeks are learning Latin because they love his verses (a slightly illogical statement in any case), there is no indication that this means wide publication. The fact that Pliny specifies the readers suggests to me that he has in mind a certain group of Greeks; that they are being put to music brings to mind Pliny's own wife (cf. Pl. Ep. 4.19.4 Versus quidem meos cantat etiam formatque cithara non aritfice aliquo docente, sed amore qui magister est optimus).
- 223 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
mihi possum non et cum multis et saepe tractandum, quod placere et semper et omnibus cupias
(7.17.15). We do not hear with any certainty of verses widely published under Pliny's name.498
The pattern continues unbroken to Book 8 (circa 107-8). In 8.21, for example, Pliny describes an incident in which, after calling his amici together for a recitation of his versiculi, he himself was summoned to give legal advice. Pliny was able to make something of it in his introductory remarks: he hoped his amici would not mind that although he had set time aside to recite for them (a small group of friends: amicis et paucis, 8.21.3) he could not abstain from other friends in the forum and negotia (Sum enim deprecatus, ne quis ut inreverentem operis augeret, quod recitaturus, quamquam et amicis et paucis, id est iterum amicis, foro et negotiis non abstinuissem, 8.21.3). Pliny goes on to say that this is his attitude towards writing: duty before pleasure, friends before himself (Addidi hunc ordinem me et in scribendo sequi, ut necessitates voluptatibus, seria iucundis anteferrem,499 ac primum amicis tum mihi scriberem,
8.21.3). Pliny's versus are consistently portrayed as a private affair, one involving only close peers.
498 In Pl. Ep. 9.11 we do hear that Pliny's libellos are being sold by bibliopolae (Pl. Ep. 1.2, and 9.11 and Mart. 4.72.2 are the only instances of this word in extant Latin before Porphyry) in Lyons. But the context of the letter, i.e. the suitability of certain letters for inclusion in a published work, strongly suggests that this refers to Pliny's Epistulae. In Pl. Ep. 1.2 bibliopolae sell his speeches as libelli. Although Pliny does occasionally use libellus, libelli to refer to his versus (cf. for example Pl. Ep. 4.14.10, 7.4.9), he prefers the diminutive opusculum (cf. for example Pl. Ep. 4.13.1, 4.14.5, 4.14.10, 6.6.6, 7.9.13, 8.21.4), especially in the later books.
499 Note here the juxtaposition of seria with his nugatory poetry. See below on Pl. Ep. 9.25.
- 224 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
5.3.4 Ep. 9.25 and gloria
This trend of peer interaction and hierarchical importance for his poetry (relative to his negotium) takes on great significance when we turn to Ep. 9.25, as we shall in a moment, for in this letter Pliny claims that he is seeking gloria through his minor poetry, his versus. This letter seems an expression in miniature of the tensions inherent in the nexus of studia, otium, and negotium that I traced above. In fact, I read this letter as a deliberate attempt to express a view of gloria which cuts against the traditional construct for one of Pliny's rank and status (i.e. gloria through negotium), and which sets the potential for gloria among his peers arising from the composition and publication of poetry closer to par with that of traditional negotia. 9.25 encapsulates the notion advanced in the letter about Atilius Crescens (6.8) and the letter to
Fuscus Salinator (7.9) that personal gloria for someone of Pliny's status and rank might be acquired through poetic works. But it challenges the boundaries of otium and negotium which were discernible in these earlier examples; for Pliny claims gloria for himself in the midst of his public activities. Pliny is juxtaposing in this eloquent letter poetic success and political success, the fruits of otium and negotium.
Ep. 9.25: C. Plinius Mamiliano suo
Quereris de turba castrensium negotiorum et, tamquam summo otio perfruare, lusus et ineptias nostras legis amas flagitas, meque ad similia condenda non mediocriter incitas. [2] Incipio enim ex hoc genere studiorum non solum oblectationem verum etiam gloriam petere, post iudicium tuum viri eruditissimi gravissimi ac super haec verissimi. [3] Nunc me rerum actus modice sed tamen distringit; quo finito aliquid
- 225 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
earundem Camenarum in istum benignissimum sinum mittam. Tu passerculis et columbulis nostris inter aquilas vestras dabis pennas, si tamen et tibi placebunt; si tantum sibi, continendos cavea nidove curabis. Vale. You mutter about a host of camp duties and, as though you were relaxing at a villa, you read, love, and require my playful little verses; you even urge me on to similar efforts no worse. I am beginning, you see, to seek gloria and not only my own pleasure from this type of studia in view of your ruling – you, a very cultured man of great consequence and what's more very truthful. As it is now, some public business is occupying me, not too much but enough. When it is concluded I shall put something from the same Camenae into your most kind care. Please, only if you like them mind you, let my little sparrows and doves fly among your eagles; if you don't please confine them to a cage or their nest. Farewell.
Incipio enim ex hoc genere studiorum non solum oblectationem verum etiam gloriam petere ...
This bald remark has passed unnoticed, buried in the midst of a short letter, itself buried in the middle of Book 9. A thorough exegesis of 9.25 in the context of literary gloria will occupy the rest of this section. I shall argue on three points that the tensions already examined in the
Epistulae surrounding studia and literary success and renown are captured deliberately in this poetic letter. First, I suggest that the gloria of Mamilianus' military duties, his negotium, are explicitly (and somewhat ironically) contrasted with the gloria of Pliny's nugatory verse (Pliny's otium) – in the letter, reading these verses becomes a part of Mamilianus' limited otium while on campaign. Second, I argue that, through the transitional phrase incipio gloriam petere, Pliny's poetic studia are contrasted with his own oratorical studia, and are defined in a carefully crafted and allusive metaphor against the predecessors of the poetic genre. Hoc genus studiorum in 9.25
- 226 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
is in fact Pliny's hendecasyllabic poetry, and he clearly sees himself in the tradition of Catullus and the love poets. Third, I shall argue that throughout the whole letter Pliny's dependence on the elite reader, here represented by Mamilianus, for this reward of gloria is consistent with the basic semantic of gloria, and is reminiscent of Catullus 1, Horace Carmina 1.1, Epistulae 1.20, and the prologue to Book 2 of Statius Silvae, to take only four examples. Pliny thus, to a degree, puts himself forward as a poet. But, as we shall see, by calling attention to gloria as his goal, as well as to his public duties, Pliny also uniquely constructs for himself a cultural space within his elite society in which all forms of studia can be concomitant contributors to an individual's gloria.
Here I might remark that no other individual in the Epistulae is specified as having gloria from both literary and political arenas during the same period of life.
5.3.4.1 Pliny's political gloria
Prior to this letter, the only mention of gloria for Pliny in connection with literary matters is in 3.21, his tribute to Martial. But even though he claims in this letter that Martial's poem will grant him gloria, laus, and aeternitas,500 it is his political and judicial achievements which are praised in the poem; and it is his ability to judge poetry good, not to write good poetry, that takes second mention:501
Sed ne tempore non tuo disertam Pulses ebria ianuam, videto: Totos dat tetricae dies Minervae,
500 Pl. Ep. 3.21.6 Tametsi quid homini potest dari maius, quam gloria et laus et aeternitas?
501 Pliny only quotes Mart. 10.20.12ff.
- 227 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
Dum centum studet auribus virorum 15 Hoc quod saecula posterique possint Arpinis quoque conparare chartis. Seras tutior ibis ad lucernas: Haec hora est tua, cum furit Lyaeus, Cum regnat rosa, cum madent capilli: 20 Tunc me vel rigidi legant Catones. What's more, as I suggested in above (p. 162, n. 403), the final phrase may not be particularly flattering.
Pliny is not silent on the subject of gloria arising from his public duties. In 1.8 Pliny's concern for his public image dominates: he is worried about the publication of a sermo given after a significant beneficium (the library and alimenta at Comum).502 The self-laudatory aspect of publishing a sermo that emphasizes his munificentium and those of his family before him may reflect badly on him personally because the sermo dwells too much on the resulting gloria.
Advocacy, Pliny's major public activity, also plays a role in Pliny's quest for gloria. In 3.9.8, for example, a passage already much discussed (habet quidem gloria ...), Pliny holds up gloria as the source for competitive spirit in the courts. In reference to his own political offices Pliny modestly does not make use of the term (cf. his reluctance in 3.14 to bruit about his munificence; see n.
491); but he freely metes out advice to others concerning political gloria in 3.16, 3.18, 5.13, 6.6,
6.22, and 7.31. Let us now turn our attention to gloria in 9.25.
502 Cf. also Pl. Ep. 3.14 Praeterea meminimus quanto maiore animo honestatis fructus in conscientia quam in fama reponantur. Sequi enim gloria, non adpeti debet, nec, si casu aliquo non sequatur, idcirco quod gloriam meruit minus pulchrum est.
- 228 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
5.3.4.2 Epistula 9.25
We should start first with the addressee, for, as I have been arguing, an essential element of gloria is peer recognition. It seems likely that the Mamilianus of this letter is Pomponius
Mamilianus,503 an ex-consular and of very distinguished family; at the time of this letter he is likely military legate in Britain. Thus he is of senatorial rank, and still active in the public arena.
The date will be around 107-8.504 The date is important, since it situates this letter (and presumably the attitudes contained therein) as last in sequence with the letters examined above concerning Pliny's attitude toward publishing his poetry. Mamilianus' receipt of Pliny's new book of novi versiculi (in mixed metres) is foreshadowed in 9.16, a letter in which Pliny also makes clear a shared pastime (and, I think, social standing, see n. 517) and one which – like 9.25 – also ends epigrammatically. The tone in both is much the same: brief but friendly, though not entirely familiar.505
The first lines of the letter bring up the contrast between otium and negotium, and the position of poetic studia between the two (Quereris de turba castrensium negotiorum et, tamquam summo otio perfruare, lusus et ineptias nostras legis amas flagitas, meque ad similia
503 See Sherwin-White (1985) ad loc.
504 Cf. Sherwin-White (1985) ad 9.16 for references to prosopographical and chronological evidence.
505 On hunting as an activity of the elite in otio see Pl. Ep. 1.6, 2.8, 3.19, 5.6, 5.18, 9.10, 9.16, 9.36. Two letters to Tacitus present an interesting contrast in Pliny's attitude towards hunting: in them Pliny seems to have little skill or enjoyment in hunting (Pl. Ep. 1.6, 9.10, cf. 5.6, 5.18). But in Pl. Ep. 9.16 his reasons for not hunting are blamed on his engagement with a bad harvest (another "rich man" theme found in Pl. Ep. 8.2.1-2, 8.5, 9.20, 9.28).
- 229 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
condenda non mediocriter incitas, 9.25.1). The interesting pleonasm castrensium negotiorum set against the phrase summo otio only draws attention to the antithesis. The descriptors lusus and ineptias are key to our understanding of the letter since they identify for us the object of
Mamilianus' appreciation (as 9.11 did not), Pliny's nugatory poetry. The next sentence (incipio enim ex hoc genere studiorum non solum oblectationem verum etiam gloriam petere, post iudicium tuum viri eruditissimi gravissimi ac super ista verissimi, 9.25.2), has some specific resonances with earlier statements in the Epistulae. Not least of these is the report of a peer's favorable judgment, and Pliny's approbation of his capacity to judge.506 In this respect the descriptors (gravissimus, eruditissimus, verissimus) of the judge are telling: they describe a member of Pliny's elite who is cultured enough to judge and important enough to matter (cf.
Plinius Paternus in 4.14).507 Verbal reminiscences are strong also, and confirm all the more that
Pliny's hendecasyllabic poetry is under consideration: the use of oblectatio alludes without a doubt to 7.4, as does hoc genus studiorum (coepi reputare maximos oratores hoc studii genus et in oblectationibus habuisse et in laude posuisse, 7.4.4).508 The allusion to 7.4 in particular is very significant, for Pliny has altered the terms of engagement in respect to composing poetry: Cicero and the other greats did so for oblectatio and laus, Pliny for oblectatio and gloria:
(Pl. Ep. 7.4) coepi reputare maximos oratores hoc studii genus et in oblectationibus habuisse et in laude posuisse.
506 Cf. e.g. Pl. Ep.1.1, 1.2, 4.14, 5.3 (where he emphasizes an exclusive group of critics), etc.
507 Cf.gravissimus Pl. Ep. 2.9.3, 3.3.1, 4.8.12, 4.14.4, 4.26.2, 4.27.6, 5.3.3, 7.31.5; eruditus see esp. Pl. Ep. 2.19.9, 4.14.4.
508 Cf. also Pl. Ep. 1.6.2, 3.5.5, 4.14.8, 5.3.2, 6.21.4, 9.29.1. Recall Atilius Crescens in Pl. Ep. 6.8.6 Nam studia ... ad voluptatem tantum et gloriam exercet.
- 230 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
(Pl. Ep. 9.25) incipio enim ex hoc genere studiorum non solum oblectationem verum etiam gloriam petere ...
I suggest that the clear allusions to 4.14, a defense of the practice of reciting to larger groups of amici that has drawn criticism, and especially 7.4, a letter devoted to the justification and praise of Pliny's poetic endeavors, highlight the development of Pliny's professed attitude to his poetry.
There his poetry was justified as a private, pleasurable diversion in which other summi viri in the past and the present engaged. The consequences of literary success, however, were explicitly played down in 7.4 and his role as poet questioned (sed quid ego tam gloriose? Quamquam poetis fuere concessum est, 7.4.10). Here, however, while poetry retains its private quality (in being restricted to a group of amici), and still remains subordinate to his negotia (Nunc me rerum actus modice sed tamen distringit, 9.25.3), Pliny espouses a new significance for his poetry in the eyes of members of his elite. This poetry may bring him not only laus but gloria.
In this light, the metaphor that is developed next is not simply, I would argue, a witty closing to a brief letter. Rather, in it Pliny asserts his role as poet and puts Mamilianus, a peer, in the role of patron-amicus:
aliquid earundem Camenarum in istum benignissimum sinum
mittam. Tu passerculis et columbulis nostris inter aquilas vestras
dabis pennas, si tamen et tibi placebunt; si tantum sibi,
continendos cavea nidove curabis (9.25.3)
- 231 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
The reference to the Camenae, Roman Muses, is clearly in the tradition of Horace, Propertius, and Martial,509 and the charming metaphor is a clever reference to Pliny's poetic predecessors: passerculis for Catullus,510 columbulis for love poetry in general.
Pliny seems to become a poet who promises verse to Mamilianus his patron-amicus;
Mamilianus' approbation of his offering is paramount. Contrast for example the end of 7.4 where
Pliny is interested in but not influenced by the iudicium of others for his poetry. The solicitation of approval for a work is common enough among poets writing to patron-amici; istum benignissimum sinum has the flavor, at least, of Hor. Epod. 1.31.2 (satis superque me benignitas tua ditavit). Perhaps closer are Cat. 1, Hor. Carm. 1.1, or the preface to Book 2 of the Silvae. In any case, Pliny asserts that without Mamilianus' approval, this new book of hendecasyllabic poetry will not pass on to a wider audience, as did his first collection. But is Pliny really casting himself in the role of a subordinate amicus in this letter? Has a peer become his patron-amicus?
It seems from the evidence adduced above in section 5.1.2 in connection with literary requests and iudicium, that in 9.25 (and 9.16, the other letter addressed to Mamilianus) Pliny is recording literary exchange between equals, an observation bolstered by Pliny's use of flagitare
(not iubere) here. Although Pliny seems to be putting himself in the subordinate role of a poet dependant on a patron-amicus, his requirement for a friend's approval (iudicium) in fact shows
509 Cf. Hor. Carm. 2.16.38, 3.4.21, 4.6.27, 4.9.8; Serm. 1.10.45; Ep. 1.1.1, 1.18.47, 1.19.5; Prop. 3.10.1; Mart. 2.6.16, 4.14.10, 6.47.4, 7.68.1, 8.66.2, 12.94.5.
510 Cf inter plura Mart. 1.7.3, and Howell's (1980) introductory note to 1.7.
- 232 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
only that he values that individual as a judge of his affairs; Pliny uses the term to describe the opinions of his amici in every conceivable context, as we have seen. What is more, Mamilianus' role in this letter is no different from Pliny's own to his peers, as we have seen in other letters.511
And Pliny makes explicit the importance of his negotium as advocate by putting off the composition of new verses until the resolution of his rerum actus. Pliny explicitly remains Pliny, advocate and senator, magnus vir.
By claiming that gloria may be sought through poetry512 as through seria – recall 8.21.3
Addidi hunc ordinem me et in scribendo sequi, ut necessitates voluptatibus, seria iucundis anteferrem – Pliny seeks from his peers a type of recognition for literary success otherwise restricted in the Epistulae to individuals not active in public affairs; elsewhere in the Epistulae
Pliny earns gloria in more traditional ways by virtue of his rank, status, and degree of public activity (see above). I have already hinted at the subtle irony of a poet claiming gloria for hendecasyllables in a letter to a military man on campaign. The final metaphor, not only a clever reference to Pliny's poetic tradition, highlights the perceived incompatibility of poetry and negotia (and so the radical nature of what he is claiming): sparrows and turtledoves do not fly with eagles – the latter prey on the others. Pliny here suggests a peaceful, and complementary, existence.
511 E.g. Caninius Rufus Pl. Ep. 1.3, Octavius Rufus Pl. Ep. 2.10, Suetonius Pl. Ep. 5.10.
512 Perhaps the phrase gloriam petere has a political tone: OLD s.v. petere 9.
- 233 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
The refined elegance in meaning brought about by the reconciliation of opposites described in Ep. 9.25 is strongly reminiscent of the best poetry. Pliny presents in Ep. 9.25 a model of compatibility between otium and negotium; Mamilianus and Pliny both exemplify elite literary culture and the traditional pursuit of military and political gloria in different ways: Pliny as magnus vir and advocate, a writer of poetry and Mamilianus as magnus vir and military man, a reader of poetry. The extension of gloria, as the indicator par excellence of the magnus vir, to poetry (even nugatory poetry) is in this context astoundingly natural. Thus the exemplary man as he evolves in Pliny – for whom gloria and memoria are primary goals and eternal rewards – is both a man of military/political accomplishments and a man of literary culture.
- 234 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
Conclusions
In this project I undertook a detailed and targeted investigation of how elite interest in literature during the Flavian period – especially poetry in the minor genres – and memoria interlock.
Through a series of illustrative examples designed to demonstrate the pervasive concern for commemoration and, in particular, the drive to manipulate memoria to one's own benefit, I suggested that the major motivation underpinning the need to commemorate is the desire to ensure individual posterity and to assure a corporate family influence. Cicero's post-consular and post reditum writings and Tacitus' Agricola were adduced in order to highlight the individual's concern for his own memoria and an individual's concern for the memoria of a relative. I next examined the phenomenon of the so-called damnatio memoriae, re-assessing the importance of these sanctions in light of their importance for the perpetuation of an individual's memoria. I argued that in the case of Cn. Piso, who was condemned in 20, the sanctions against him described in the SCPP seemed designed to perpetuate a memory of his crime, not erase the individual from memoria. The sanctions were not intended to destroy or to eradicate memoria but to control how and for what this individual (and his family) would be remembered in the public arena by diverting public attention from gloria to scelus. In an effort to synthesize the findings of Chapter One, and to localize our thinking to the early imperial period in anticipation of Chapters Three, Four, and Five, I discussed – in what amounts to a case-study – the circumstances of two figures, Cremutius Cordus and L. Verginius Rufus, assessing their actions and presence in the literary sources from the perspective of memoria. These examples provided a
- 235 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
foreground for the discussion of how and why poets – especially elite poets – might commemorate their own success and renown as poets.
In Chapter Two, I turned our attention to semantic issues surrounding a number of terms of praise, those most commonly used by poets of the Flavian period to describe their own renown (fama, laus, nomen, honos, gloria). Most complex among these terms was gloria, for which an extended discussion revealed that the term was essentially related in its objective sense to the magnus vir. The use of gloria in Cicero's and Seneca's philosophies was introduced to demonstrate how the essential indicators of gloria (virtutes, res gestae, peer approval) were susceptible to re-interpretation as a result of the intellectualization of core elite values. It was necessary to examine briefly how the Augustan poets used the term gloria in connection with their success and renown as poets in order to situate the developments of the Flavian period within the broader literary tradition. As a focal point for my discussion of gloria and elite culture, I turned at the end of Chapter Two to the Dialogus de Oratoribus of Tacitus in order to explore the intimate associations of gloria in the that work with the magnus vir, and how the zero-sum nature of gloria manifests itself in the tensions between otium and negotium.
Over the course of the final three chapters of the dissertation I followed three main threads of inquiry which arose out of Chapters One and Two: the relationship of poetry to memoria, the relationship of poetry to gloria, and poetry to renown – all from the perspective of how a poet commemorates his own success and renown. It is to Tacitus' Dialogus that I turn once more as a background against which to interpret the findings of Chapters Three, Four, and
- 236 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
Five. For in the Dialogus we find a comparable, implicit interest in the consequences of success in composing poetry for gloria and memoria among the elite, and similar uses of terms of praise describing the poet's renown.
Aper's characterization of renown through composing speeches or poetry coordinates with the zero-sum attitude which underlies his rejection of poetry as a pursuit worthy of
Maternus, a magnus vir whose circumstance and abilities as orator set him apart, in Aper's view, for public service and personal advancement (see above section 2.2.4). Men like Saleius Bassus, for example, because they are unsuited for the oratorical arena (cum causas agere non possit,
Tac. Dial. 5.3), might pursue studium poeticae et carminum gloria513 (Tac. Dial. 5.3); but
Maternus cannot because he is suited for a life of public service as a magnus vir. It is significant in this regard that Aper does not launch an attack on the practice of poetry among the elite per se
(a strategy on which Maternus comments in 11.1 fore enim arbitrabar ut a laudatione eorum digressus detrectaret poetas atque carminum studium prosterneret), but rather attempts to present a set of compelling arguments which underscore the importance of oratory for the vir magnus on the basis of utilitas, voluptas, dignitas, and fama urbis et notitia. Only then does Aper turn to the question of poetry – again, from these four perspectives. In what follows I restrict my comments to questions of the poet's own renown, although there are in fact many interesting parallels in Pliny's Epistulae and Martial's Epigrammata to a number of points raised by Aper in arguing for the utilitas, voluptas, and dignitas of oratory.
513 The nuance of the genitive here is difficult to interpret: is carminum possessive? or of origin? (i.e. "poetry's gloria" or "gloria arising from poetry"). Cf. Mart. 10.103 and n. 537 above.
- 237 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
Dial. 7.2-4 exemplifies Aper's attitude towards elite renown, and presents an interesting distinction of terms: Quid? fama et laus cuius artis cum oratorum gloria comparanda est?
Noteworthy is the opposition of fama and laus to gloria, and the use of the genitives: abstract ars for fama and laus,514 concrete oratores for gloria. Orators, claims Aper, have a nomen both in
Rome and elsewhere (Dial. 7.3-4). Carmina and versus (which also deny their authors dignitas, do not have utilitas, and provide only a passing voluptas) offer empty and unproductive laus
(laudem inanem et infructuosam). But if poets seek laus for their versus, Aper suggests that they seek fama for themselves: ne opinio quidem et fama, cui soli serviunt et quod unum esse pretium omnis laboris sui fatentur (Tac. Dial. 10.1). Even here, however, Aper argues that this primary goal and reward is elusive, for only the best poets become known, and then only to few
(mediocres poetas nemo novit, bonos pauci, Tac. Dial. 10.1). To return to the central point of
Aper's argument: it is not so much that poetry will never yield fama nor that a poet will never be known (cf. Tac. Dial. 10.3), but rather that for Maternus, because the composition of poetry is not an appropriate use of his gifts and position, poetry will not bring the appropriate renown: instead of fama and inanis et infructuosa laus through his poetry, Maternus should be working towards gloria through his oratory. Aper, then, seems to be suggesting that poetry does have a place in elite culture, and indeed can (and should) be pursued as a possible vehicle of memoria for the poet: poetry can provide a poet fama and nomen. But as far as Aper is concerned, poetic composition should never interfere with the obligations of the vir magnus – as long as the vir
514 Again, the ambiguity in interpretation is curious, all the more so in contrast to oratorum gloria, a straightforward possessive.
- 238 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
magnus is active in his public role, poetry must remain a casual pastime. Poetry cannot bring gloria.
Aper's recapitulation of his main arguments (Dial. 10.5–8) flows out of a precise disagreement with Maternus on the role poetry plays in Maternus' life, and how his poetry interferes with his social obligations as vir magnus. The response that Maternus makes, however, is a rejection of social obligations and public life. Maternus does not want to have many dependents, nor does he want the anxiety of defending his own or another's well-being (Tac.
Dial. 11.3). The retreat from society criticized by Aper in 10.8 becomes the focus for Maternus' objections to the public life of the magnus vir (Tac. Dial. 12): salutationes, insincerity, "gain- getting, blood-letting oratory" (lucrosae huius et sanguinitatis eloquentiae) are signs of a debased society (ex malis moribus). Instead, the poet chooses his own society, one without anxieties (ac ne fortunam quidem vatum et illud felix contubernium comparare timuerim cum inquieta et anxia oratorum vita, Tac. Dial. 13.1), despite the fact that these anxieties can be prelude to the consulship.
As far as renown is concerned, Maternus points out that he himself took the first steps on the road to renown (fama) when through his dramatic readings he brought about the removal of
Vatinius515 under Nero (recitatione tragoediarum et ingredi famam auspicatus sum, cum quidem
515 Probably the Vatinius of Tac. Ann. 15.34 Vatinius inter foedissima eius aulae ostenta fuit, sutrinae tabernae alumnus, corpore detracto, facetiis scurrilibus; primo in contumelias adsumptus, dehinc optimi cuiusque criminatione eo usque valuit ut gratia pecunia vi nocendi etiam malos praemineret.
- 239 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
imperante Nerone improbam et studiorum quoque sacra profanantem Vatinii potentiam fregi,
Tac. Dial. 11.2); if he has a nomen or a share of notitia, says Maternus, it comes more from carminum gloria than orationum gloria (hodie si quid in nobis notitiae ac nominis est, magis arbitror carminum quam orationum gloria partum, Tac. Dial. 11.3). A poet, according to
Maternus, even though he may not be active in public life, nevertheless could win the favor of the people as much as the emperor: Vergil serves as his exemplum, and Maternus suggests that
Pomponius Secundus enjoys as much renown (perpetuitate famae, Tac. Dial. 13.3) as Domitius
Afer. Homer is as well known as Demosthenes, and Sophocles and Euripides as Lysias or
Hyperides (non minorem honorem Homero quam Demostheni apud posteros, nec angustioribus terminis famam Euripidis aut Sophoclis quam Lysiae aut Hyperidis includi, Tac. Dial. 12.5). As far as Roman authors are concerned, Maternus (in an odd negative comparison) suggests that there are as many detractors of Cicero's gloria as there are of Vergil's. Maternus, then, can claim
– like Aper – that poetry can bring fama and honor to the poet just as oratory can to the orator, but he fails to respond to Aper's insinuation that oratory can bring gloria besides. Maternus implicitly confirms our understanding of gloria: for in (at least in theory; see below) removing himself from public life to become a poet, he has no claim to gloria as it would be understood among the elite.
The many problems and layers of meaning in the Dialogus cannot be addressed fully here. For example, how significant is the irony that Maternus' first steps on the road to fama through poetry resulted from the fall of a political rival? Or that the very purpose of Aper's visit was to recommend caution in regards to the public/political character of Maternus' tragedies? Or
- 240 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
that Pomponius Secundus (a poet equal in perpetuitate famae to Domitius Afer the orator) was suffect consul in 44, and the subject of a biography by his friend Pliny the Elder? But it is clear that in the Dialogus – however much Maternus and Aper are at odds over the place of poetry in
Maternus' life – there is a distinction made by both parties over the kinds of renown available to certain people for certain types of activity. A poet may receive fama, nomen, and a debased sort of laus while the orator receives these and gloria as well.
The constant concern with the place of poetry in the life of the public man evident in the
Dialogus (Maternus cannot entirely escape being a magnus vir) finds, as we have already seen, distinct echoes in Martial and Pliny especially. Maternus ended his reply to Aper with a rejection of public commemoration (statuarque tumulo non maestus et atrox, sed hilaris et coronatus, et pro memoria mei nec consulat quisquam nec roget, Tac. Dial. 13.6). But for Pliny the production of nugatory poetry was not only an attempt to secure for himself renown as a poet, or even gloria, during his own lifetime, but also a means to perpetuate his individual memoria after death
(see section 5.1.3). The stance Pliny adopts towards gloria through his poetry is markedly different from that adopted by Tibullus, Propertius, and Ovid: where they pitted renown for the poet through poetry against traditional notions of gloria and elite success, Pliny, however, (and in contrast to Maternus and Aper in Tacitus' Dialogus) attempts to reconcile public life and poetry precisely through gloria. What is more, Pliny seems to restrictthe application of gloria only to magni viri; Propertius and Tibullus would likely not have merited gloria (as Passenus
Paullus did not), although Ovid, perhaps, might have. In his letters, from a literary point of view,
Pliny presents himself and his friends as cultured, lettered magni viri, fully engaged in elite
- 241 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
society and fully engaged in studia. The Epistulae, then, serve to preserve their interactions and opinions – as well as a great deal else besides – in memoria. Pliny's nugatory poetry seems to have been intended as a personal monumentum to his own poetic eloquentia and success, a tangible piece of memoria for this aspect of his life as magnus vir. The Martial's stance towards the ultimate value of his poems – very much in keeping with earlier minor poetry (cf. for example Cat. 1, Hor. Ep. 1.20) – can be somewhat more ambivalent (cf. e.g. Mart. 1.107, 4.29; but see also 4.49 and 8.3). But there is no attempt on his part, as there was in Tibullus,
Propertius, and Ovid to make a claim for gloria within the context of military imagery. In general, as we have seen above, Martial is more concerned with renown during life than renown after death (cf. Mart. 5.13 and sections 4.2.3-4.2.4); but there are still indications that he was aware of the potential of nugatory verse for this sort of immortality (cf. Mart. 1.25, 5.10, 6.61,
8.3). Martial does not make explicit a desire to have his memoria perpetuated as often or as deliberately as does Pliny; Mart. 8.3 – so reminiscent of Hor. Carm. 3.30 – is exceptional. But we must be careful not to place too much importance on this observation, since Pliny's Epistulae give us an unparalleled glimpse at the motivations of an elite poet, a glimpse denied for Martial.
And, as we have seen, Martial and Pliny share similar concerns over the significance of readership and use terms of praise in similar fashion – although not with the same valuation – laus/laudare for poetic success, and both have a somewhat individual take on gloria.
Furthermore, Pliny's motivations for asserting the permanence and value of his work may stem from the desire to enhance his peculiar standing as magnus vir. It is very important to note that
Pliny's audience for his poetry was restricted to his peers, by whom alone his gloria could be recognized. But Martial can claim some measure of social equality (if not social significance); as
- 242 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
a member of elite society but no magnus vir, Martial has no basis for a specific claim of gloria, but he can betray interests in renown and attitudes towards poetry and memoria similar to
Pliny's. Thus Martial turns outward to a wider general readership for validation only when his selected readership disappears. Statius, outside the social group, betrays no interest (implicitly or explicitly) in the perpetuation of his memoria through his nugatory poetry.
The three poets under investigation in this dissertation seem – in terms of the importance of their own nugatory poetry for their own renown – dissimilar in many respects. The most obvious division should be made between Statius and the others: Statius' attitudes towards renown and the vocabulary used to describe it, in comparison with Martial and Pliny, clearly set him apart, probably as one involved in – but not truly a part of – the concerns of the elite. Statius in the Silvae betrays significant interest in poetry as a source for renown for himself only in terms of his epic poetry. But his non-epic poetry scarcely receives mention in this regard, and seems to act more as a vehicle for the praise of his patron-amici. Although a recital of epic poetry before a group of Latii patres (probably at a young age) brought a suggestion of gloria for himself and his father (cf. St. Silv. 5.3.219 and section 3.2.3), Statius places much more emphasis on epic poetry as a source of fama and honor – honor in these examples was linked to the religious notion of the vatis, rather than the political sphere (recall also that honor in the
Silvae has a considerably wider application than in the Epigrammata or the Epistulae, see
Appendix A). Statius' persona in the Silvae – that of a serious epic poet writing playful poetry – is consonant with the apparent lack of concern for the Silvae as a lasting poetic achievement.
There is concern expressed (in the prefaces) over the perceived social utility and appropriateness
- 243 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
of poems so "speedily" composed, and the importance of individual poems for the memoria of their subjects, but it is to his epic poetry that Statius looks to secure his renown (fama and honores; St. Theb. 12.816-23). As far as the debate in the Dialogus is concerned, Statius' portrayal of Lucan ("serious" epic poet in otium) and Stella are consonant with the zero-sum attitude described above. For Stella, an elite dilettante, not only can we see a boundary between the practice of minor (erotic) poetry and the onset of marriage and public life, but we can also see this boundary implicitly expressed in the choice of terms and images used to describe success in each sphere.
Martial in the Epigrammata, as we saw, placed the most significance on the fama and nomen which result from being read: fama and nomen are preferred over honos, laus, and gloria as indicators of poetic renown. The value of laus is consistently played down by Martial (with a notable exception – laus from the emperor – in Mart. 3.95) as unreliable and motivated by the self-interest of the flatterer who gives it and the unworthy who wants it. This is perhaps the sort of laus to which Aper alludes (inanis et infructuosa): in the Epigrammata this sort of laus is commonly presented as sycophancy, and works against the proper social dynamic of amicitia
(see above sections 4.2.1 and 4.2.3.2). Honos does not figure as a significant term of praise for poets in the Epigrammata; when Martial uses it of himself it is clearly referring to his tribunate
(see above section 4.1.1). And Martial makes no clear assertion of gloria for himself as nugatory poet. Statius' persona was based on his status as professional poet. Martial's persona, however, is not solely that of a poet, but rather of a man of an equestrian status who, although he held public office, is no longer active in public life; it is interesting to note, in light of the Dialogus, the
- 244 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
several recusationes of oratory.516 Martial, an eques (also a poet) not active in public life and not cut out to be a lawyer, seeking to promote his social importance in a number of ways including writing nugatory poetry,517 would not, perhaps, find fault in Aper's eyes in asserting for himself fama and nomen.
Pliny's Ep. 9.25, and the other letters in which literary gloria is claimed for an individual poet, has some interesting similarities and dissimilarities to the arguments presented by Maternus and Aper in the Dialogus. For Aper the public recognition that poetry provides is ephemeral and
– although it is the expressed goal of poets – empty in any case. But the rewards of a public life as an orator are lasting and far greater (albeit just as difficult to achieve). Maternus' response to
Aper presents the contrast of the literary life of otium with the public life of negotium. For
Maternus and Aper both it is ostensibly a choice between two lifestyles – public or private – even though Maternus' "private" lifestyle (with characteristic Tacitean irony) has brought about a visit from friends in order to urge a lower profile. Martial likewise chose a "private" life; with
Martial also we see an acute concern for the political and social innocuousness of his epigrams: absit malignus interpres (Mart. 1.praef.). As a nugatory poet, Pliny may have responded to this concern by writing poetry which is not explicitly political.
516 Cf. Mart. 1.17, 2.30, 2.90, 12.68.
517 This view of Martial's persona is consistent with the picture painted by Pliny in Ep. 3.21, Martial's obituary notice Pliny there makes a sharp division between Martial the amicus and Martial the poet. See above section 4.1).
- 245 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
Pliny, who attempts throughout the Epistulae to bring the otium lifestyle into some kind of harmony with public life, seems in Ep. 9.25 to be suggesting that the two lifestyles are not totally incompatible after all. If my arguments about gloria and this letter are correct, and if I am right to read Ep. 9.25 in the context of the debate exemplified in the Dialogus, could it be possible that this letter is a partial response to Tacitus' Aper and Maternus? Whatever the precise motivation for Ep. 9.25, I do believe that I am correct to read it in the context of this particular debate about the place of poetry in elite culture and the role of poetry in the life of the magnus vir. I believe I am also correct in suggesting, through an analysis of gloria in the Epistulae and in
9.25 specifically, that Pliny is attempting to establish a compromise solution to some of the problems posed by his friend's Dialogus de Oratoribus. (It is not necessarily the case, however, that Pliny is taking a position against the zero-sum competition endemic to Roman elite society, for he still competes with his amici in producing verse, and with others in the courts.) First, Pliny seems to be suggesting that for a magnus vir such as himself status and rank, reflected in his gloria, can be maintained or augmented in negotium and in otium, as orator and as poet. Second,
Pliny – in attributing gloria for poetic success to Spurinna and Atilius Crescens – seems to be holding out the promise of gloria for those who are not currently active in the political arena (the traditional venue for achieving gloria), thus continuing – but in a reconciling manner and restricting gloria to the elite – the assertions of gloria made by Propertius and Ovid for their own poetry. Counter examples show the development clearly: Passenus Paulus (a low-level equestrian) does not seem to merit gloria entirely, and Fuscus Salinator (a promising young politician), like the two young Calpurnii, has strong potential for political gloria to which literary gloria is for the time being subordinate.
- 246 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
Pliny's solution is not radical. The hierarchy of gloria, negotium, and otium described in section 5.3.1 is as focused on the concerns of the elite as Maternus' and Aper's debate, and
Pliny's gloria was validated by a restricted group of elite readers. The significance of what Pliny suggests about the nature of gloria in the Epistulae is dual, first in its application to individuals among the elite who have no competing political duties, and second in its application for success in poetry composed in otio for individuals who do have political duties. Both of these developments seem to arise out of trends traced for gloria in Chapter Two; both can be explained as the result of the intellectualization of virtutes (on which gloria rests), and the widening of the competitive arenas in which elite members vied with one another, as competition in the traditional arenas became increasingly uncertain and dangerous.
- 247 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
Bibliography
Ancient Authors Catullus R.A.B. Mynors (1958), C. Valerii Catulli Carmina, Oxford
Cato Malcovati, H. (1967-), Oratorum Romanaorum fragmenta liberae rei publicae, Aug. Taurinorum-Mediolani-Patavi
Cicero Achard, G. (1994), De l'invention, Paris
A.C. Clark (1976=1918), M. Tulli Ciceronis Orationes Pro Milone Pro Marcello Pro Ligario Pro Rege Deiotaro Philippicae I-XIV, Oxford
A.C. Clark (1968=1911), M. Tulli Ciceronis Orationes Pro Tullio Pro Fonteio Pro Sulla Pro Archia Pro Plancio Pro Scauro, Oxford
Dyck, A.R. (1996), A Commentary on Cicero, De Officiis, Ann Arbor
Peterson, W. (1973=1911), M. Tulli Ciceronis Orationes Cum senatui gratias egit Cum populo gratias egit De domo sua De haruspicium responso Pro Sestio In Vatinium De provinciis consularibus Pro Balbo, Oxford
Purser, L.C. (1901-3) M. Tulli Ciceronis Epistulae, Oxford
Watt, W.S. (1982), M. Tulli Ciceronis Epistulae, 2nd ed., Oxford
Columella de St.-Denis, E. (1969-) De l'agriculture, Paris
Dio Dindorf, L. and J. Melber (1890), Dionis Cassii Cocceiani Historia Romana, Leipzig
Ennius Skutsch, O. (1985), The Annals of Q. Ennius, Oxford
Horace Shackelton Bailey, D.R. (1985), Q. Horati Flacci Opera, Stuttgart
Juvenal Clausen, W.V. (1992), A. Persi Flacci et D. Iuni Iuvenalis Saturae, Oxford
Livy Ogilivie, M. (1974-), Titi Livi ab Urbe condita, Oxford
Lucan Shackelton Bailey, D.R. (1988), M. Annaei Lucani De bello civili libri X, Stuttgart
- 248 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
Stuttgart
Martial Lindsay, W.M. (1902), M. Val. Martialis Epigrammata, Oxford
Menander Rhetor Spengel, L. (1894-), Rhetores Graeci, Leipzig
Nepos Marshall, P.K. (1977), Cornelii Nepotis Vitae cum fragmentis, Leipzig
Ovid Anderson, W.S. (1996), P. Ovidii Nasonis Metamorphoses, Stuttgart
Kenney, E.J. (1965), P. Ovidi Nasonis Amores Medicamina Faciei Femineae Ars Amatoria Remedia Amoris, Oxford
Pliny Mynors, R.A.B., C. Plini Caecili Secundi Epistularum libri decem, Oxford
Polybius Dindorf, L. and Th. Buettner-Wobst (1889-1905), Polybii Historiae, 5 vols., Leipzig
Propertius Barber, E.A. (1960), Sexti Properti Carmina, editio altera, Oxford
Quintilian Winterbottom, M. (1970), Institutionis oratoriae libri duodecim, Oxford
ROL Warmington, E.H. (1967), Remains of Old Latin, Cambridge, MA
SHR Callu, J.-P., A. Gaden, and O. Desbordes (1992-), Histoire Auguste, Paris
SCPP Eck, W., A. Caballos, F. Fernandez (1996) Das Senatus Consultum de Cn. Pisone patre, Munich
Seneca Maior Edward, W.A. (1928), The Suasoriae of Seneca the Elder, Cambridge
Seneca Minor Reynolds, L.D. (1965), L. Annaei Senecae Ad Lucilium epistulae morales, Oxford
Reynolds, L.D. (1977), L. Annaei Senecae dialogorum libri duodecim, Oxford
Silius Italicus Delz, J. (1987), Sili Italici Punica, Stuttgart
Statius Courtney, E. (1990), P. Papini Stati Silvae, Oxford
Klotz, A. (1973), P. Papini Stati Thebais, Leipzig
Marastoni, A. (1974), P. Papini Stati Achilleis, Leipzig
- 249 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
Suetonius Bradley, K.R. (1997-1998), Suetonius, Works, Cambridge, MA
Kaster, R.A. (1995), De Grammaticis et rhetoribus, Oxford
Tacitus Fisher, C.D. (1906), Cornelii Taciti Annalium libri, Oxford
Fisher, C.D. (1910), Cornelii Taciti Historiarum libri, Oxford
Furneaux, H. and J.G.C. Anderson (1939), Cornelii Taciti Opera Minora, Oxford
Tibullus Postgate, J.P. (1915), Tibulli Aliorumque Carminum Libri Tres, Oxford
Valerius Maximus Briscoe, J. (1998), Valeri Maximi facta et dicta memorabilium libri IX, Stuttgart
Varro Taylor, D.J. (1996), De Lingua latina X, Philadelphia
Vergil Mynors, R.A.B. (1969), P. Vergili Maronis Opera, Oxford
Modern Scholarship and Commentaries on Ancient Authors
Adamik, T. (1976), Pliny and Martial (Epist. 3,21)", AUB 4, pp. 169-176
Adams, J.N. (1983), The Latin Sexual Vocabulary, London
Ahl, F.M. (1984), "The Rider and the Horse: Politics and Power in Roman Poetry from Horace to Statius", ANRW 32.1 II, pp. 40-124
Allen, W. Jr. (1954), "Cicero's Conceit", TAPA 85, pp. 121-144
Allen, W. (1970), "Martial: Knight, Publisher, and Poet", CJ 65, pp. 345-357
Anderson, W.S. (1970), "Lascivia vs. ira: Martial and Juvenal", CSCA 3, pp. 1-34
André, J.M. (1966), L'Otium dans la vie morale et intellectuelle romaine, des origines à l'époque augustéenne, Paris
Aricò, G. (1980), Richerche staziane, Palermo
Astin, A.E. (1978), Cato the Censor, Oxford
- 250 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
Austin, R.G. (1939), "The Epilogue to the Agricola", CR 53, pp. 116-117
Badian, E. (1985), "A Phantom Marriage Law", Philologus 129, pp. 82-98
Baker, R.J. (1990), Propertius I, Armidale
Bardon, H. (1952), La Littérature latine inconnue, Paris
Bardon, H. (1962), "Le goût à l'époque des Flaviens", Latomus 26, pp. 732-748
Barnes, T.D. (1986), "The Significance of the Tacitus' Dialogus de Oratoribus", HSCP 90, pp. 225-244
Barton, C.A. (1992), The Sorrows of the Ancient Romans: The Gladiator and the Monster, Princeton
Barwick, K. (1932), "Zur Kompositionstechnik und Erklärung Martials", Philologus 87, pp. 63- 79
Barwick, K. (1959), "Martial und die zietgenössig Rhetorik", in Ber. über die Verhandlung der Sachs. Akad. der Wiss. zu Leipzig 104, pp. 3-48
Bauwin, P. (1943), Les Poèmes de Martial sur son oeuvre: étude analytique et critique (Thes. Louvain)
Best, E.E. (1968), "Martial's Readers in the Roman World", CJ 65, pp. 208-212
Birley, A.R. (2000), Onomasticon to the Younger Pliny: Letters and Panegyric, München
Birt, Th. (1882), Das antike Buchwesen, Berlin
Bodel, J. (1997), "Monumental Villas and Villa Monuments", JRA 10, pp. 5-35
Bodel, J. (1999a), "Punishing Piso", AJP 120(1), pp. 43-64
Bodel, J. (1999b), "Death on Display: Looking at Roman Funerals", in B. Bergmann and C. Kondoleon (eds), The Art of Ancient Spectacle, Washington, pp. 259-282.
Bright, D.F. (1980), Elaborate Disarray: The Nature of Statius' Silvae, Meisenheim am Glan
Brouzas, C.G. (1931), "The George Washington of Rome", Proceedings of the American Philological Association 62, pp. xli-xlii.
- 251 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
Buchheit, V. (1960), "Statius' Geburgstaggedicht zu ehren Lucans (Silv. 2.7)", Hermes 88, pp. 231-49
Burnikel, W. (1980), Untersuchungen zur Stuktur des Witzepigramms bei Lukillius und Martial, Wiesbaden
Bütler, H.-P. (1970), Die geistige Welt des Jüngeren Plinius: Studien zur Thematik seiner Briefe, Heidelberg
Cairns, F. (1979), Tibullus: A Hellenistic Poet at Rome, Cambridge
Cameron, A.D.L. (1967), "Tacitus and the Date of Curatius Maternus' Death", CR 81, pp. 258- 261
Camps, W.A. (1967), Propertius Elegies Book II, Cambridge
Cancik, H. (1965), Untersuchungen zur lyrischen Kunst des Publius Papinius Statius, Hildesheim
Caratello, U. (1981), Epigrammaton liber, Rome
Champlin, E. (1980), Fronto and Antonine Rome, Cambridge
Chilver, G.E.F. (1941), Cisalpine Gaul: Social and Economic History from 49 B.C. to the Death of Trajan, Oxford
Chilver, G.E.F. (1957), "The Army in Politics, AD 68-70", JRS 47, pp. 29-35
Citroni, M. (1968), "Motivi di polemica litteraria negli epigrammi di Marziale", Darch 2, pp. 259-301
Citroni, M. (1975), M. Valerii Martialis Epigrammaton liber primus. Introduzione, Testo, Apparato Critico e Commento. Firenze
Citroni, M. (1988), "Pubblicazzione e diediche dei libri in Marziale", Maia 40, pp. 3-39
Clarke, J.R. (1991), The Houses of Roman Italy, 100 B.C.-A.D. 250: Ritual, Space, and Decoration, Berkeley
Clinton, K. (1972), "Inscriptions from Eleusis", AE, pp. 81-136
Coleman, K. (1986), "The Emperor Domitian and Literature", ANRW 32.5, pp. 3087-3115
Coleman, K. (1988), Silvae 4: Statius, Oxford
- 252 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
Colton, R.E. (1991), Juvenal's Use of Martial's Epigrams: A Study of Literary Influence, Amsterdam
Corbier, M. (1987) "L'écriture dans l'éspace public romain", in L'Urbs. Espace urbain et histoire 1er siècle av. J.C. – III siècle ap. J.C. Actes du colloque international organisé par le CNRS et l'École française à Rome 8-12 mai 1985, Collection de l'École française à Rome 98, 27-60.
Crawford, J.W. (1984), M. Tullius Cicero: The Lost and Unpublished Orations, Göttingen
Curcio, G. (1893), Studio su P. Papinio Stazio, Catania
Damon C. and S. Takáks (1999), "Introduction", AJP 120(1), pp. 1-12
D'Arms, J.H. (1970), Romans on the Bay of Naples: A Social and Cultural Study of the Villas and their Owners from 150 B.C. to A.D. 400, Cambridge
Dau, A. (1887), De M. Valerii Martialis libellorum ratione temporibusque, Diss. Rostock
Degrassi, A. (1967), "Epigrafica III", MAL Ser. 8a 13.1, pp. 1-53
Demougin, S. (1988), L'Ordre équestre sous les Julio-Claudiens, Rome
Eck, W., A. Caballos, and F. Fernández (1996), Das Senatus Consultum de Cn. Pisone Patre, München
Eck, W. (1987), "Römische Grabinschriften. Aussagabsicht und Assagefähigkeit im funären Kontext", in H. von Hesberg and P. Zanker (eds), Römische Gräberstrafen. Selbstdarstellung – Status – Standard, München, pp. 25-41.
Eck, W. (1970), Senatoren von Vespasian bis Hadrian: Prosopographie Untersuchungen mi Einschluss d. Jahres u. Provinzialfasten d. Statthalter, München
Enk, P. J. (1946), Sex. Propertii Elegiarum Liber I (Monobiblos), Leiden
Enk, P.J. (1962), Sex. Propertii Elegiarum Liber Secundus, Leiden
Ernout, A. and A. Meillet (1967), Dictionnaire étymologique de la langue latine, histoire des mots 4e édition, Paris
Ewbanks, W.W. (1933), The Poems of Cicero, London
Eyres, E. (1937), "Ludus Elegiacus", G&R 7, pp. 56-57
- 253 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
Eyres, E. (1940), "Ludus Iambicus", G&R 10, pp. 41-43
Eyres, E. (1944a), "Ludus Elegiacus continued" G&R 13, p. 67
Eyres, E. (1944b), "Ludus Elegiacus continued", G&R 13, p. 72
Ferrero Radista, L. (1980), "Augustus' Legislation Concerning Marriage", in ANRW 2.13, pp. 278-329.
Flower, H.I. (1996), Ancestor Masks and Aristocratic Power in Roman Culture, Oxford
Flower, H.I. (1998), "Rethinking Damnatio Memoriae: The Case of Cn. Calpurnius Piso Pater in AD 20", CA 17(2), pp. 155-87
Flower, H.I. (1999), "Piso in Chicago: A Commentary on the APA/AIA Joint Seminar on the Senatus Consultum de Pisone Patre", AJP 120(1), pp. 99-115
Flower, H.I. (2000), "Damnatio Memoriae and Epigraphy", in E.R. Varner (ed), From Caligula to Constantine: Tyranny & Transformation in Roman Portraiture, Atlanta, pp. 58-69
Forcellini, A. (1958-75), Totius Latinitatis Lexicon, Prati
Frère, H. (1961), "Stace, Silvae IV praef. 5 suiv.", in Mélanges Paul Thomas: Receuil de mémoires concernant la philologie classique dédié a Paul Thomas, Paris, pp. 300-311
Friedlaender, L. (1886), M. Valerii Martialis epigrammaton libri, 2 vols., Leipzig
Geyssen, J.W. (1996), Imperial Panegyric in Statius: a Literary Commentary on Silvae 1.1, New York
Goetz, G. (1888-1923), Corpus Glossariorum Latinorum vols. 1-7, Leipzig
Gold, B.K. (ed) (1982), Literary and Artistic Patronage in Ancient Rome, Austin
Gossage, A.J. (1965), "Papinius, the Father of Statius", Romanitas 6-7, pp. 171-79
Gregory, A.P. (1994), "'Powerful Images': Responses to Portraits and the Political Uses of Images at Rome", JRA 7, pp. 80-99
Greenwood, M.A. (1998), "Martial, Gossip, and the language of Rumour", in Toto notus in orbe. Perspektiven der Martial-Interpretation, F. Grewing (ed), Stuttgart
Grewing, F. (1997), Martial, Buch VI (ein Kommentar), Göttingen
- 254 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
Gudeman, A. (1914), P. Cornelii Taciti Dialogus de Oratoribus 2nd edition, Leipzig
Guillemin, A.-M. (1926), Pline et la vie littéraire de sons temps, Paris
Guillemin, A.-M. (1937), Le public et la vie littéraire à Rome, Paris
Habinek, T.N. (1998), The Politics of Latin Literature, Princeton
Habinek , T.N. (2000), "Seneca's Renown: Gloria, Claritudo, and the Replication of the Roman Elite", CA 19(2), pp. 264-303
Hamp (1982), "Gloria", AJP 103, pp. 447-448
Hardie, P. (1982), Statius and the Silvae: Poets, Patrons, and Epideixis in the Graeco-Roman World, Liverpool
Harris, W.V. (1989), Ancient Literacy, Cambridge
Härtel, W. (1900) Studia Statiana, Diss. Leipzig
Hedrick, C.W. (2000), History and Silence: Purge and Rehabilitation of Memory in Late Antiquity, Austin
Hellegouarc'h, J. (1963), Le Vocabulaire latin des relations et des partis politiques sous la République, Paris
Henriksén, C. (1998-9), Martial, Book IX. A Commentary, 2 volsUppsala
Henriksén, C. (1998), "Martial und Statius", in Toto notus in orbe. Perspektiven der Martial- Interpretation, F. Grewing (ed), Stuttgart
Hershkowitz, D. (1995), "Pliny the Poet", G&R 42.2, pp. 169-181
Heuvel, H. (1937), "De inimicitiarum, quae inter Martialem et Statium fuisse dicuntur, indiciis", Mnemosyne 4, pp. 299-330
Hoffer, S.E. (1999), The Anxieties of Pliny the Younger, Atlanta
Holzberg, N. (2002), Martial und das Antike Epigramm, Darmstadt
Horsfall, N. (1989), Cornelius Nepos: A Selection, Including the Lives of Cato and Atticus, Oxford
Howell, P. (1980), A Commentary on Book One of the Epigrams of Martial, London
- 255 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
Hubbard, M. (1974), Propertius, London
Joepgen, U. (1967), Wortspiele bei Martial, Diss. Bonn
Johnson, W.A. (2000), "Towards a Sociology of Reading in Classical Antiquity", AJP 121, pp. 593-627.
Jones, F.C. (1934), "Martial the Client", CJ 30, pp. 355-61
Kajava, L. (1995), "Some Remarks on the Erasure of Inscriptions in the Roman World (with special reference to the case of Cn. Piso cos. 7 B.C.)" in Heikki Solin, Ollie Salomes, Uta-Maria Liertz (eds) Acta Colloquii Epigraphici Latini, Helsinki, pp. 201-210
Kay, N.M. (1985), Martial, Book XI: A Commentary, London
Kenney, E.J. (1983), "Books and Readers in the Roman World" in CHCL II.1, pp. 3-31
Ker, W.C.A. (1961), Martial: Epigrams, 2 vols, London
Kierdorf, W. (1980), Laudatio funebris: Interpretationen u. Unters. zur Entwicklung d. röm. Leichenrede, Meisenheim am Glan
Klose, F. (1933), Die Bedeutung von honos und honestus, Diss. Breslau
Knoche, U. (1934), "Der römische Ruhmesgedanke", Philologus 89, pp. 102-124
Laurens, P. (1989) L'abeille dans l'ambre: Célébration de l'epigramme de l'époque alexandrine à la fin de la Renaissance, Paris
Leach, E.W. (1990), "The Politics of Self-Presentation: Pliny's Letters and Roman Portrait Sculpture", CA 9, pp. 14-39
Leary, T. (1996), Martial Book XIV. The Apophoreta, London
Leary, T. (2001), Martial Book XIII: The Xenia, London
Leeman, A.D. (1949), Gloria. Cicero's waardering van der roem en haar achtergrond in hellenistische wijsbegeerte en de romeinse samenleving, Diss. Leiden-Rotterdam
Legras, L. (1907), "Les dernières années de Stace", REA 9, pp. 338-49
Levick, B. (1985), "L. Verginius Rufus and the Four Emperors", RhM 128, pp. 319-346.
- 256 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
Linderski, J. (1987), "A Missing Ponticus", AJAH 12.2, pp. 148-166
Lindsay, W.M. (1903), "Notes on the text of Martial", CR 17, pp. 48-52.
Lindsay, W.M. (1929), M. Valeriis Martialis epigrammata (editio altera), Oxford
Loraux, N. (1990), Les Mères en deuil, Paris
Lorenz, S. (2002), Erotik und Panegyrik: Martials Epigrammatische Kaiser, Tübingen
Mack, D. (1937), Senatsreden und Volksreden bei Cicero, Würzburg
MacMullen, R. (1982), "The Epigraphic Habit in the Roman Empire", AJP 103, pp. 233-46
Malamud, M. (1995), "Happy Birthday, Dead Lucan: (P)raising the Dead in Silvae 2.7", Ramus 24, pp. 1-31
Marec, E. and H.G. Pflaum (1952), "Nouvelle inscription sur la carrière de Suétone, l'historien", Comptes rendus des séances – Académie des inscriptions et belles lettres, Paris, pp. 76-85
Martin, A. (1980), "Quand Martial publia-t-il ses Apophoreta?", ACD 16, pp. 61-64
Matheson, S. (2000), "The Private Sector: Reworked Portraits Outside the Imperial Circle", in E.R. Varner (ed), From Caligula to Constantine: Tyranny & Transformation in Roman Portraiture, Atlanta, pp. 70-80
McEwen, I.K. (1995), "Housing Fame: In the Tuscan Villa of Pliny the Younger", Res 27, pp. 11-24
Meyer, E.A. (1990), "Explaining the Epigraphic Habit in the Roman Empire: The Evidence of Epitaphs", JRS 80, pp. 74-96
Mommsen, Th. (1887), Römisches Staatsrecht, Leipzig
Murgatroyd, P. (1980), Tibullus I, Pietermaritzburg
Muth, R. (1972), "Poeta Ludens", in Serta Philologica Aenipontana II, Innsbrücker Beiträge zur Kulturwissenschaft 17, pp. 65-82.
Muth, R. (1976), "Martials Spiel mit dem ludus poeticus", in Studies in Greek, Latin, and Indoeuropean Linguistics offered to L.R. Palmer, Innsbruck, pp. 199-207
- 257 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
Muth, R. (1979), "Martials ludus poeticus und die Dichtungskritik bei nachaugusteischen Dichtern", in Serta Philologica Aenipontana II, Innsbrücker Beiträge zur Kulturwissenschaft 20, pp. 215-253
Nauta, R.R. (2002), Poetry for Patrons: Literary Communication in the Age Domitian, Leiden
Newman, R.J. (1988), "In Umbra Virtutis: Gloria in the thought of Seneca the Philosopher", Eranos 86, pp. 145-59
Nicholson, J. (1992), Cicero's Return from Exile: The Orations Post Reditum. New York
Nisbet, R.G.M. and M. Hubbard (1970), A Commentary on Horace, Odes Book I, Oxford
Nisbet, R.G.M. and M. Hubbard (1978), A Commentary on Horace, Odes Book II, Oxford
Norden, E. (1909) Die antike Kunstprosa vom VI. Jahrhundert v. Chr. bis in die Zeit der Renaissance, Leipzig
O'Connor, E. (1998), "Martial the Moral Jester: Priapic Motifs and the Restoration of Order in the Epigrams", in Toto notus in orbe. Perspektiven der Martial-Interpretation, F. Grewing (ed), Stuttgart
Ogilivie, R.M. and Sir Ian Richmond (1967), Cornelii Taciti de Vita Agricolae, Oxford
Ogilivie, R.M. (1991), "An Interim Report on Tacitus' Agricola", ANRW II.33.3, pp. 1714-1740
Pailler, R. and J.M. Sablayrolles (1994), "Damnatio Memoriae. Une vraie perpetuité", Pallas 40, pp. 11-55
Pertsch, E. (1911), De Valerio Martiale graecorum poetarum imitatore, Diss. Berlin
Petersmann, G. (1991), Die Agricola-Biographie des Tacitus – Versuch einer Deutung, ANRW II.33.3, pp. 1785-1806
Pitcher, R.A. (1985), "The Dating of Martial Book XIII and XIV", Hermes 113, p. 330
Potter, D.S. (1999), The Senatus Consultum de Cn. Pisone Patre", AJP 120(1), pp. 13-42
Purcell, N. (1995), "The Roman Villa and the Landscape of Production" in T. Cornell and K. Lomas (eds), Urban Society in Roman Italy, London, pp. 151-179
Putnam, M.C. J. (1973), Tibullus: A Commentary, Norman
Richard, P. (1931), Martial, les épigrammes, Paris
- 258 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
Richardson, L.Jr. (1977), Propertius Elegies I-IV, Norman
Riggsby, A.M. (1995), "Pliny on Cicero and Oratory: Self-fashioning in the Public Eye", AJP 116, pp. 123-35
Riggsby, A.M. (1997), "'Public' and 'Private' in Roman Culture: the Case of the Cubiculum", JRA 10, pp. 36-56
Riggsby, A.M. (1998), "Self and Community in the Younger Pliny", Arethusa 31, pp. 75-97
Riikonen, H. (1976), "The Attitude of Roman Poets and Orators to the Countryside as a Place for Creative Work", Arctos 10, pp. 75-85
Rudd, N. (1976), Lines of Inquiry: Studies in Latin Poetry, Cambridge
Rufino, A.C. (1999), "Los caballeros romanos originarios de las provincias de Hispania" in S. Démougin, H. Devijver, M.-T. Raepsaet-Charlier (1999), L'ordre équestre: histoire d'un aristocratie (Iie siècle av. J.-C. – IIIe siècle ap. J.-C.), Rome, pp. 463-512
Russell, D.A. and N.G. Wilson (1981), Menander Rhetor, edited with a translation and commentary, Oxford
Sage, E.T. (1919), "The Publication of Martial's Poems", TAPA 50, pp. 168-176
Saller, R.P. (1983), "Martial on Patronage and Literature", CQ 33, pp. 246-257
Saller, R.P. (1984), Personal Patronage under the Early Empire, Cambridge
Sarsila, J. (1982), Some aspects of the concept of virtus in Roman Literature until Livy, Jyväskyla
Scamuzzi, U. (1966), "Contributa ad una obiettiva conoscenza della vita e dell'opera di Marco Valerio Marziale", Rivista di Studi Classici 40, pp. 149-207
Schmidt, W. (1908), Geburtstag im alterum, Giessen
Shackelton Bailey, D.R. (1990), M. Valerii Martialis epigrammata, Stuttgart
Shackelton Bailey, D.R. (1993), Martial: Epigrams, London
Sherwin-White, A.N. (1985), The Letters of Pliny: A Historical and Social Commentary, Oxford
- 259 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
Solin, H. (1989), "Namenweschel und besondere Vornamen römischer Senatoren. Betrachtungen zur kaiserlichen Namepolitik", Philologus 133, pp. 252-259
Spisak, A.L. (1992), Terms of Literary Comment in the Epigrams of Martial, Diss. Chicago
Spisak, A.L. (1997), "Martial's Special Relation with his Reader", in C. Deroux (ed) Studies in Latin Literature and Roman History, Bruxelles
Starr, R.J. (1987), "The Circulation of Literary Texts in the Roman World", CQ 37, pp. 213-223
Sullivan, F.A. (1941), "Cicero and Gloria", TAPA 72, pp. 382-91
Sullivan, J.P. (1976), Propertius: A Critical Introduction, Cambridge
Sullivan, J.P. (1991), Martial: the Unexpected Classic, Cambridge
Suster, G. (1889), Il sentimento della gloria nella letteratura romana, Lanciano
Syme, R. (1958), Tacitus, Oxford
Syme, R. (1979), Roman Papers, E.Badian and A.R. Birley (eds), Oxford
Talbert, R.J.A. (1999), "Tacitus and the Senatus Consultum de Pisone Patre", AJP 120(1), pp. 89-98
Taylor, D.J. (1996), Varro De Lingua Latina X, Amsterdam
Timpe, D. (1996), "Memoria und Geschichtsschreiberung bei den Römern", in H.-J. Gehrke and A. Möller (eds), Vergangenheit und Lebenswelt. Soziale Kommunikation, Traditionsbildung und historiches Bewußtsein, pp. 277-299
Townend, G.B. (1961), "The Reputation of Verginius Rufus". Latomus 20, pp. 337-41.
Townend, G.B. (1962), "The Consuls of A.D. 69/70", AJP 83, pp. 113-129
Townend, G.B. (1964), "Cluvius Rufus in the Histories of Tacitus", AJP 85, pp. 337-77
Turner, A.J. (1997), "Approaches to Tacitus' Agricola", Latomus 56.3, pp. 582-593
Van Sickle, J. (1987), "The Elogia of the Cornelii Scipiones and the Origin of Epigram at Rome", AJP 108, pp. 41-55.
Varner, E.R. (1993), Damnatio Memoriae and Roman Imperial Portraiture, Diss. Yale
- 260 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
Varner, E.R. (ed) (2000), From Caligula to Constantine: Tyranny and Transformation in Roman Portraiture, Atlanta
Versnel, H.S. (1970), Triumphus: An Inquiry into the Origin, Development, and Meaning of the Roman Triumph, Leiden
Vessey, D. (1973), Statius and the Thebaid, Cambridge
Van Dam, H.-J. (1984), P. Papinius Statius, Silvae Book II: a Commentary, Leiden
Víden, G. (1992), Women in Roman Literature: Attitudes of Authors under the Early Empire, Göteborg
Vittinghoff, F. (1936), Der Stattsfeind in der Römischen Kaiserzeit: Untersuchungen zur 'damnatio memoriae', Berlin
Vollmer, F. (1892), De funero publico Romanorum, Leipzig
Vollmer, F. (1898), P. Papinii Statii Silvarum libri, Leipzig
Wagenvoort, H. (1956), "Ludus Poeticus" in Studies in Latin Literature, Culture, and Religion, Leiden, pp. 30-42.
Wallace-Hadrill, A. (1984), Suetonius: The Scholar and his Caesars, New Haven
Wallace-Hadrill, A. (1988), "The Social Structure of the Roman House", PBSR 56, pp. 43-97
Weinrib, E.J. (1968), "The Spaniards in Rome from Marius to Domitian", Diss. Harvard
Wesch-Klein, G. (1993), Funus Publicum: eine Studie zur öffentlichen Beisetzung und Gewährung von Ehrengräbern in Rom und den Westprovinzen, Stuttgart
White, P. (1974), "The Presentation and Dedication of the Silvae and the Epigrams", JRS 64, pp. 40-61
White, P. (1975), "The Friends of Martial, Statius, and Pliny and the Dispersal of Patronage", HSCP 79, 265-300
White, P. (1978), "Amicitia and the Profession of Poetry in Early Imperial Rome", JRS 68, pp. 74-92
White, P. (1993), Promised Verse, Cambridge, MA
White, P. (1996), "Martial and Pre-Publication Texts", EMC 15, pp. 397-412
- 261 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
Wijkström, B. (1937), Studier över parafrasen i latinsk prosa, Göteberg
Yardley, J.C. and Heckel, W (1997), Epitome of the Phillipic History of Pompeius Trogus, Oxford
Zanker, P. (1988), The Power of Images in the Age of Augustus, Ann Arbor
Zedler, G. (1885), De memoria damnatione quae dicitur, Diss. Darmstadt
- 262 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
Appendix A: Terms of Praise
A.1 Terms of Praise in Statius
Statius is best known in the Silvae as a panegyricist, and there is a great deal of material to discuss in detail concerning the mechanisms of praise in poems not addressed to the
Emperor.518 In general, however, it is clear that the semantic boundaries identified above for the several terms are in effect in Statius; a notable exception is laus. Fama is well represented in the
Silvae both in its objective and subjective senses. In its subjective sense, as noted in section
2.1.1, fama often takes on a pseudo-existence as an abstract personalization. This personalization is found in extreme form in Silvae 1.1.(Nunc age Fama prior notum per saecula nomen |
Dardanii miretur equi, 1.1.8-9), 1.3 (sestiacos nunc Fama sinus pelagasque natatum | iactet et audaci victos delphinas ephebo, 1.3.27-8), and 2.7 (at tu, seu poli per axem | Famae curribus arduis levatus, 2.7.107-9). A perhaps less extreme personalization – which still retains a strong notion of pseudo-existence – is found in 1.4 (sileant peioris murmura famae, 1.4.14), and 4.4
(tibi sublimi iam nunc celeberrima fama | eminet, 4.4.44-45; ventosaque gaudia famae | quaerimus, 4.4.50-1). In 1.3.28 and 1.4.14 the verbalization implicit in the word fama is made explicit by the context. Note also that the ambiguity of fama seems mitigated by the context of praise toward the positive in the Silvae: in 1.4.14 the negative connotation of fama is made clear by the adjective peior, but it otherwise stands alone and yet is clearly positive. Fama in the
Silvae, in its objective and subjective senses, is almost universally the result of some personal
518 For panegyric of the Emperor Domitian see Geyssen (1996).
- 263 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
virtue, success, or merit. This is most explicit in 5.3 (of his father, his tibi pro meritis famam laudesque benignas | iudex cura deum nulloque e vulnere tristem concessit, 5.3.250-2) but is quite apparent elsewhere. Again, the prevalence of praise contexts privileges positive readings.
In its objective sense fama retains the notion of a generalized independent existence as in 2.2 (ite per annos | saeculaque et priscae titulos praecedite famae, 2.2.145-6), 2.6 (Dignus et
Haemonium Pyladen praecedere fama, 2.6.54), 3.3 (Quis sublime genus formamque insignis
Etruscae | nesciat? haud quaquam proprio mihi cognita visu, | sed decus eximium famae par reddit imago, 3.3.111-113), 5.3 (si tu [sc. Parthenope] stirpe vacans famaeque obscura iaceres nil gentile tenens, 5.3.109-110; 5.3.213-4 dedisti | ... famam sperare sepulcro; and 5.3.250-2 cited above). In its objective sense fama in the Silvae is not explicitly verbalized; but as I noted in section 2.1.1, verbalization of some sort, even figurative, is implicit in the word itself.
Laus as a significant term of praise is surprisingly rare in the Silvae, with only seven instances in four poems. While laus clearly retains in the Silvae its characteristics as an act (and so a transient phenomenon), its specific connection to virtutes is sometimes diluted in the uses of the verb laudare: thus in 1.2.254 (ambissent laudare diem) a "day" would receive laus and in
1.3.81 (bifera Alcinoi laudem pomaria) the mythical orchards of Alcinous likewise. Less extreme is 5.1.11 (laudati iuvenis rarissima coniunx), where, however, no cause for the laus of the iuvenis (here Abascantus, Domitian's ab epistulis) is made explicit. In its use as a substantive, however, laus is specifically connected with virtus in some way. In 5.1.51-6 Statius dwells specifically on the connection of laus to worth, contrasting the laus given to women for ancestry or beauty only with that due Abascantus' wife Priscilla for ancestry, beauty, and fidelity to her
- 264 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
husband.519 In 5.2 (disce, puer, – nec enim externo monitore petendus | virtutis tibi pulcher amor
: cognata ministret | laus animos, 5.2.51-3) and 5.3 (tu laudis origo, 5.3.190),520 laus is clearly linked to the res and virtutes of the battlefield and government. I remarked in the semantic description of laus that, although its earliest associations are with areas and actions of public concern (associations which persist) through the concept of virtus, the application of the term broadens along with the range of laudable virtutes; we can see here, in the case of Priscilla, expansion of the term to women's virtues. Honos is applied to pre-eminence in women in what seems a parallel expansion of usage. But, as we shall see, the use of honos is not explicitly linked to virtus. Thus the basic semantic boundaries of these two terms honos and laus – the latter granted for virtus, the former for pre-eminence within a social group or for a position within the social system – seem to remain in effect.
Nomen as a term of praise indicating renown is not used in the Silvae.
The semantic descriptions offered in section 2.1.2 may have value when considering the preference for honos in the Silvae relative to laus as a term of praise. As I noted in section 2.1.2 over time honos and laus seem to become almost synonymous. But a significant distinction remains: laus is the deliberate public recognition of virtus while honos represents the distinction
519 St. Silv. 5.1.51-6 laudantur proavis seu pulchrae munere formae, | quae morum caruere bonis, falsoque potentes | laudis egent verae : tibi quamquam et origo niteret et felix species multumque optanda maritis, | ex te maior honos, unum novisse cubile, | unum secretis agitare sub ossibus ignem. See Víden (1992) 95-106, 129-132 for brief discussion of womanly virtues.
520 The preceding verses dwell on the current activities and successes of Statius' father's students in public life.
- 265 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
of one individual over another in a social system. To be sure, honos in the Silvae is an act recognizing some pre-eminence, sometimes metonymically, or represents the recognition due an action or quality (often with defining genitive) which is pre-eminent in some way. But it is not confined, as laus normally is, to a direct association with virtutes and res. It may be that Statius, as a praise poet, was more concerned to demonstrate his subjects' pre-eminence in areas other than those traditionally associated with virtutes, or that the use of honos (and the notable rarity of laus) suggests lessened emphasis on public recognition (see below on Martial and Pliny). This is especially true of non-males and poets: the majority of instances of honos occur in contexts praising women, eunuchs, and poets. When honos occurs in the context of praising men (only three times of two men521), the usage is explicitly in a public context: triumph (3.3.140), granting of equestrian status (3.3.143-5), and magistracies – or at least public service (5.2.173-4).
In Silvae 3.3 we see honos as an act which signals pre-eminence expressed in a more familiar and traditional context in the triumph (honore triumphi, 3.3.140) and the granting of equestrian status (at que idem in cuneos populo deduxit equestres | mutavitque genus laevaeque ignobile ferrum | exuit et celso natorum aequavit honorem, 3.3.143-45). The metonymic use of honos, in which an object becomes honos, may be seen in 4.5 (Parvi beatus ruris honoribus, | qua prisca Teucros Alba colit lares, 4.5.1-2) where Statius refers to the estate granted to his father by Domitian, and in 5.1 (sed mortalis honos, agilis quem dextra laborat, 5.1.10) where
Statius contrasts the transient honos of a painting or sculpture with the enduring honos of song.
521 In Silvae 3.3 Statius praises the dead Claudius Etruscus' career and accomplishments; in 5.2 he praises Crispinus, the son of Vettius Bolanus, who is embarking on his public career.
- 266 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
In 5.2 (en! ingens reserat tibi limen honorum | Caesar et Ausonii committit munia ferri, 5.2.173-
4) we have the only use in the Silvae of honos metonymically for magistracy. Honos as
"recognition due" is used in connection with non-males (women or slaves/eunuchs) for pre- eminence in beauty. Although we can see how honos is related to pre-eminence in beauty in 1.2
(formae egregium ... decus, cui gloria patrum | et generis certabat honos, 1.2.107-8) where the quality of a woman's beauty rivals the gloria patrum and the honos generis, the link between honos and beauty is much more clearly articulated in 2.1 (genis optatus honos, 2.1.52)522 as
Statius lists the different reasons for which the slave Glaucias' beauty might have been a subject of praise. Likewise, in 3.4 Apollo's hair is a source of honos (forsan et ipse comae numquam labentis honorem | praemetet atque alio clusum tibi ponet in auro, 3.4.10-11). The nature of honos as an act of recognition which often attaches to a specific position in society is most clearly articulated for the poet as vates.523 In 2.1.26-7 Statius, in an epicedion on the death of
Melior's favorite slave Glaucias, exclaims that his own grief is hindering his ability to express consolation to Melior and praise to Glaucias through his poetry, and that as a result his honos as vates is destroyed (et nunc, heu, vittis et frondtis honore soluto | infaustus vates, 2.1.26-7). The sacred origins for honos argued by Klose is apparent in 2.7 where the honos canendi which comes from Mercury, Bacchus, Apollo, and the Muses (quos penes est honor canendi, | vocalis citharae repertor Arcas | et tu Bassaridum rotator Euhan et Paean et Hyantiae sorores, 2.7.23)
522 Cf. the whole passage from St. Silv. 2.1.39-54 describing Glaucias' forma as one of the possible subjects for praise.
523 For the essentially sacred/religious background of the term see OLD and Forcellini s.v.
- 267 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
is granted to Lucan on his posthumous birthday as sacerdos chori Romani.524 4.4, likewise, suggests that honos is due the epic poet/vates (Iamque vale et penitus voti tibi vatis honorem | corde exire veta, 4.4.101-2). In 5.5 (sed nec solitae mihi vertice laurus | nec fronti vittatus honos,
5.5.28-9), the honos of a poet is linked to a specific act that shows pre-eminence, victory.
Gloria in the Silvae, with one important exception, confirms the basic semantic for the term outlined in section 2.1.3. The major difference to the application of the term in comparison with laus and honos was in its restriction to the vir magnus: like laus, gloria is connected with res and virtus – like honos to pre-eminence within a social system. This basic distinction and restriction is completely compatible with instances of the term in Silvae 1.2 (gloria patrum,
1.2.107-9 – of Violentilla's ancestry – and haec gloria maior, 178-81 – of Stella's political appointment to celebrate Domitian's victory over the Dacians – see section 3.2.1), 1.4.68ff, esp.
90-91 (of the military and political successes of Rutilius Gallicus, especially his generalship against the Dacians), and 5.2.142 quanta Caledonias attollet gloria campos! (of Crispinus' future military success). Very likely of the same sort is 2.3.76-77 te sub teste situm fugitura tacentem | ardua magnanimi revirescit gloria Blaesi, although the figure of Blaesus seems shrouded in mystery.525 Two poets of mythic distinction are connected to expressions of gloria although
524 For the implications of colitur as a religious technical term see TLL 3.1679-1690 s.v. colere esp. VA2, VB.
525 See PIR2 B 137. Blaesus also figures prominently in 2.1 (an epicedion for Melior's delicatus Glaucias) acting as a sort of ancestor to Melior in the underworld. Apparently the same Blaesus appears in Mart. 8.38 (where Melior is credited with establishing a fund to celebrate Blaesus' birthday in perpetuity); no secure identification has been made, although De Rhoden and Dessau suggest in PIR2 Velleius Blaesus, the locuples consularis whose inheritance Regulus snagged so unscrupulously (see PIR2 V 234; Pl. Ep. 2.20.7-8). Van Dam (1984) 166 rightly notes that he "must have been of high birth" because of the epithet
- 268 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
neither instance is used in the objective sense: Getici cedat tibi gloria plectri (2.2.61; suggesting that Pollius Felix's power to move rock is greater than Orpheus') and alit victos immanis gloria falsi (5.3.132 of cities' false claims to be Homer's birthplace). In 5.3.219, however, gloria here again in the subjective sense seems to result for Statius' father and Statius himself from his early performance before the Latii patres (mentioned above). The peculiarity of this statement in the context of the term's basic semantic and the consistency of its application elsewhere in the Silvae is remarkable, and deserves more comment below. In general, however, the instances of gloria in the Silvae exhibit a pattern of application consistent with the semantic analysis offered in section
2.1.3.
A.2 Terms of Praise in Martial
As we might expect in a corpus as large as the Epigrammata, and one focused by and large on elite society, there is an abundance of material to discuss concerning the mechanisms of praise. I examine here the praise terms identified in section 2.1 – terms most often used by
Martial in these remarks – in order to establish similarities and differences in their semantic boundaries in relation to those offered in section 2.1. Although Statius seems to employ laus with a slightly different emphasis, Martial seems to modify the application of gloria. Fama is very well represented in Martial's poetry in all of the aspects treated in section 2.1.1, with over
generosi (2.1.191) citing St. Silv. 5.2.22 (titulis generosi avitis of Crispinius, son of Vettius Bolanus) and 5.3.146 (generosa pubes, of Neapolitan aristocrats).
- 269 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
40 instances. Fama in its subjective sense in the Epigrammata is characteristically526 personalized or abstracted by Martial (especially in the later books), giving fama a stronger impression overall of a pseudo-existence in the Epigrammata. Personalization may be found in extreme form in 1.25.5 (ante fores stantem dubitas admittere Famam), 1.29.1 (Fama refert ...),
1.39.2 (quales prisca fides famaque novit), 1.49.41-2 (non impudenter vita quod relicum est petit, | cum fama quod satis habet), 1.78.9-10 (hanc mortem fatis magni praeferre Catonis | fama potest), 1.93.6 (famaque quod raro novit, amicus erat), 4.75.6 (nec minor Alcestin fama sub astra ferat), 6.64.6-7 (emendare meos, quos novit fama, libellos| ... tibi permittis), 7.6.4 (Credo tibi, verum dicere, Fama, soles), 7.12.9-10 (iuro potentis | per genium Famae ...), 8.3.3-4 (iam nihil addere nobis | fama potest), 8.38.8 (praestas hoc, Melior, sciente fama), and 12.4.3-4 (hoc te mihi ... fama fuisse loquax ... dicet). In these instances the agency of fama is strongly emphasized. In the Epigrammata the notion of a pseudo-existence remains very strong for abstracted fama: see 1.111.1 (cum tibi sit sophiae par fama et cura deorum), 5.10.1 ("Esse quid hoc dicam vivis quod fama negatur ..."), 5.25.12 (quae tibi fama perit!), 6.56.2 (verba putas famae te, Charideme, dare), 7.12.4 (et mihi de nullo fama rubore placet), 7.88.1 (si vera est fama), 10.3.9 (procul a libellis nigra sit meis fama). In these instances the notion of agency is lessened or absent. The verbalization inherent in fama (see section 2.1.1) is made explicit at
1.29.1 referet, 6.56.2 verba, 7.6.4 dicere, and 12.4.3-4 fama loquax dicet. In 7.12.3-4 (ut mea nec iuste quos odit pagina laesit | et mihi de nullo fama rubore placet) fama is implicitly verbalized in the context of the written word (mea pagina). Fama is also found in a strictly subjective sense
526 Of the thirty instances I identify as subjective, 21 are personalized or abstract examples.
- 270 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
in the Epigrammata: 7.27.1-2 (aper ... | ... Aetolae fama secunda ferae), 8.28.1-2 (Dic, toga, ... | esse velis cuius fama decusque gregis?), 8.73.6 (fama est arguti Nemesis formosa Tibulli), 9.28.1
(dulce decus scaenae, ludorum fama, Latinus), 9.43.2, 5 (deus [sc. Hercules]|... non est fama recens nec nostri gloria caeli), 9.71.1 (Massyli leo fama iugi), 9.101.1-2 (Appia ... | ... Ausoniae maxima fama viae), 10.103.4 (nam decus et nomen famaque vestra sumus), 11.9.1-2 (Romani fama coturni | ... Memor). In these instances, as well as for the instances of personalization and abstraction listed above, the fundamental ambiguity of the term pointed out in the semantic description in section 2.1.1 seems mitigated by the context, and fama in the Epigrammata is nearly always positive. In 10.3.9 a negative connotation for fama is made clear by the adjective nigra. Elsewhere a positive modifier makes the meaning plain, or fama stands alone, yet clearly positive. Fama in its objective sense, rather than being associated with a personal virtue as in the
Silvae (see above A.1), ensues most commonly after an event or activity, supposed or real:
1.praef (mihi fama vilius constet), 1.8.5 (redemit ... sanguine famam), 1.39.1-2 (si quis erit raros inter numerandos amicos, | quales prisca fides famaque novit anus),1.66.13 (petit famam),
3.95.7-8 (nomen | non expectato dat mihi fama rogo), 5.15.4 (cui victura meo munere fama datur), 5.25.5 (quem chartis famaeque damus populisque loquendum), 5.56.6 (famae Tutilium suae relinquat), 5.60.3 (certum est hanc tibi pernegare famam), 6.61.6 ("sed famae non est hoc, mihi crede, satis..."), 6.66.1(famae non nimium bonae puellam), 7.51.10 (sed famae mavult ille favere meae), 8.praef. (tu famam, id est vitam, dedisti), 8.18.4 (carior ut mea sit quam tua fama tibi), 8.70.6 ([maluit]...famae nec dare vela suae), 11.41.1-2 (Amyntas | ... gaudet fama luxuriaque gregis). This usage conforms to the general semantic description given in section
2.1.1. Again, fama in the objective sense in the Epigrammata is nearly always positive; at 6.66.1
- 271 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
famae is modified as non nimium bonae (famae non nimium bonae puellam). In its objective sense fama is not explicitly verbalized in the Epigrammata; but we have already seen that verbalization, even figurative, is implicit in the word itself.
While laus is infrequent in the Epigrammata as a term of praise (4 instances), the verbal form is very common (45 instances). The constituent elements of laus in the definition offered in section 2.1.2 (i.e. voiced and deliberate naming of an individual, virtutes) seem to be reduced only to naming in the Epigrammata. Thus the importance of virtus for laus, operative in the
Silvae, seems to be further diluted or, indeed, absent in both the substantive and the verbal form in the Epigrammata. In Martial, laus/laudare can simply be glossed as probare and often lacks any specific connection to virtus. Rather, the emphasis (if any at all) seems to be on an act (res); if any particular virtus or set of virtutes lie behind the act, their presence is at best implicit, at worst phantasmal. Two representative examples follow. In 1.49 Martial suggests that
Licinianus527 will return in retirement to Spain, leaving behind his duties as advocate (videbis altem, Liciniane, Bilbilin, 1.49.3); Sura,528 presumably acting in his place or at least in similar fashion, would receive public acclaim (cf. 1.49.37 mereatur alius grande et insanum sophos529).
In 4.51 the poet observes in satiric mode that Caecilianus, recently enriched, has adopted new habits, walking instead of being carried on a litter by six men: "quid tibi pro meritis et tantis
527 Licinianus (cf. PIR2 L 170) appears in this epigram and in 1.61; he seems to have been a Spaniard, senator, and successful orator.
528 L. Licinius Sura (PIR2 L 253), another Spaniard. Martial names him in 6.64 as one of his readers along with Silius Italicus, Regulus, and Caesar.
529 For sophos for oratical speech and recitations see above, p. 155 and n. 388.
- 272 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
laudibus optem," asks the poet. Laudibus represents here, metonymically, the laudable act.530 It can still be said that in the Epigrammata laus/laudare represents a transient phenomenon, the intermediary step between virtus/act and "renown". It was suggested in section 2.1.2 that virtutes, or the actions (res) devolving from the enactment of virtutes, give rise to laus. In the
Epigrammata Martial places emphasis on the laudability of res or the individual not the laudability of virtus (thus virtus itself is bypassed or downplayed). This emphasis may in turn explain Martial's preference for the verbal form.
Naming is indicated by our ancient lexicographical sources as an essential element of laus (see section 2.1.2) and renown. As I noted in section 2.1.2 the act of making an object or person distinct from others in this way is an essential step to praise and renown (cf. 5.15). The two basic semantic fields identified section 2.1.2 for nomen are well represented in the
Epigrammata (as they were not in the Silvae; see A.1), with 66 instances. The first semantic field
(with 49 instances) centers around rather straightforward "naming", the minimum evidence for individual existence or identity: 1.96, 1.114, 1.117, 2.2 bis, 2.61, 2.68, 3.1, 3.5, 3.11, 3.58, 3.68,
4.11, 4.19, 4.30, 4.31 bis, 4.44 (var. lec.), 4.55 bis, 5.15, 5.21, 5.34, 5.78, 6.3, 7.12, 7.24, 7.32,
7.96, 8.praef., 8.33, 8.66, 9.1, 9.11, 9.12, 9.13, 9.16, 9.44, 9.72, 9.93, 9.95, 10.26, 10.73, 11.4,
11.5, 11.8, 11.43, 11.50, 12.8, 12.44. The result of this individualization (nomen takes on a pseudo-existence similar to that of fama – nomen is construed in this case as "reputation", i.e. the extent to which his name is known) is apparent in the objective uses of the term: 1.praef., 1.105,
530 Cf. section 2.1.2 and TLL 7.1064.33-72 s.v. laus IIA.
- 273 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
1.107, 5.17, 6.61, 7.44, 7.97, 8.38 bis, 9.49, 9.84, 9.101, 10.73, 10.103, 11.49. Martial demonstrates this dual nature of nomen with a clever play on meanings in 2.4:
O quam blandus es, Ammiane, matri! quam blanda est tibi mater, Ammiane! fratrem te vocat, et soror vocatur. cur vos nomina nequiora tangunt? quare non iuvat hoc quo estis esse? lusum creditis hoc iocumque? non est: matrem, quae cupit esse se sororem, nec matrem iuvat esse nec sororem.
The objective sense of celebrity or renown is quite apparent in 3.95.7-8 (ore legor multo notumque per oppida nomen | non expectato dat mihi fama rogo). The inherent similarity between "being known" and nomen is clearly signaled by nomen notum (here perhaps even a pleonasm); this similarity leads us to consider passages based on notus vel sim., such as 1.1.2
(toto notus in orbe), 5.13.2 (sed non obscurus nec male notus eques), 7.40.1 (hic iacet ille senex
Augusta notus in aula), and 10.9-10 (notus gentibus ille Martialis | et notus populis), when discussing renown below. So, nomen as "reputation", then, relies on the naming of individuals as a means of distinguishing them from others. While this distinction may be negative (e.g. 2.4.4 cur vos nomina nequiora tangunt?), when nomen stands alone it is usually probative. As I remarked already, without a nomen, renown cannot accrue to an individual by name. Thus, in a strict sense (cf. Gell. 2.6.16 laudare significat prisca lingua nominare appellareque), only with the nomen can a person receive the voiced and deliberate public recognition which is laus.
- 274 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
There is a marked preference in the Epigrammata for the voiced and public recognition inherent in both nomen and laus/laudare (over 110 instances) in comparison to the distinction – not necessarily voiced – given to a person within a social system represented by honos (21 instances). Recall that this was essentially the opposite case in the Silvae, where honos seems to be preferred to laus and where nomen as a term of praise was absent altogether. Honos, as I noted in section 2.1.2, is an act. Thus, like laus, it is a symbol of the community's recognition of an individual (or indeed a divinity). But while laus is a verbal act conceptually dependent on nomen, the expression of honos can take many forms, including laus or nomen: cf. 5.15.3-4
(gaudet honorato sed multus nomine lector, | cui victura meo munere fama datur). Honos in the
Epigrammata most often (13 instances) signals pre-eminence metonymically as the object becomes the honos. In 4.40 (plenus honorum531), 8.8.3-4 (te [sc. Janus] primum pia tura rogent, te vota salutent, | purpura te felix, te colat omnis honos532), 8.66 (sacros honores, referring to consulships granted by Domitian), and 9.64.7 (hunc [sc. Caesar] magnas rogat alter opes, rogat alter honores) honos is used metonymically for chief magistracies (a regular usage); in 10.79.7-8
(consule Torquato vici fuit ille magister, | non minor in tanto visus honore sibi) Martial derides
Otacilius for considering his minor position (magister vici) as equivalent in honos to Torquatus, a consul. In 8.78 and 12.62 honos is used in connection with triumphal processions. In 8.78, through a flattering conceit worthy of a Statius, Martial suggests that Caesar's presence at the
531 The assumption that honorum in 4.40.7 refers to offices rests on 4.40.1-4 (Atria Pisonum stabant cum stemmate toto | et docti Senecae ter numeranda domus, | praetulimus tantis solum te, Postume, regnis; | pauper eras et eques sed mihi consul eras): the implication of the contrast evoked is that Postumus has now achieved similar status and rank.
532 The zeugma here between purpura felix and honos highlights the metonymy, and the new year associated with Janus is evocative of the assumption of office in January (cf. 8.66).
- 275 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
games associated with his own triumph is itself a greater honos (omnia sed, Caesar, tanto superantur honore, | quod spectatorem te tua laurus habet, 8.78.15-16); 11.32 (cf. mentiris vanoque tibi blandiris honore, 11.32.7) is based on a similar conceit. In 3.2 (of a book), 6.80 (of a season), and 8.55 (of a lion), honos clearly signals some pre-eminence: in 3.2 and 6.80 this pre- eminent quality is not explicit – in 8.55 the lion is distinguished by his mane (o quantum per colla decus, quem sparsit honorem | aurea lunatae, cum stetit, umbra iubae, 8.55.9-10). In four other instances honos is used of things distinguished by their sacredness. In 1.116 the close early connection between honos and the dead suggested by Klose (see section 2.1.2) is apparent (Hoc nemus aeterno cinerum sacravit honore Faenius, 1.116.1); in 8.80.4 (sic priscis servatur honos te praeside templis), and 9.3.7-8 (pro Capitolinis quid enim tibi solvere templis, | quid pro
Tarpeiae frondis honore potest?), honos relates to a temple and in 9.61.21 (perpetuos sperare licet tibi frondis honores) refers to a tree made sacer by Domitian. These uses are consistent with the semantic description offered in section 2.1.2.
The emphasis in the Epigrammata on voiced recognition (as noted above) may have affected Martial's use of honos in connection with poetry. Poetry in the Epigrammata, rather than giving expression to the subject's honos as in the Silvae,533 actually seems to give honos to its subject : 1.88.8 (hic tibi perpetuo tempore vivet honor, contrasting a poem's permanence with that of a sepulcher; cf. St. Silv. 5.1), 4.31.1-2 (quod cupis in nostris dicique legique libellis | et nonnullus honos creditur iste tibi), 5.15.3 (gaudet honorato sed multus nomine lector), and
533 The exception is Silvae 5.1.10 (sed mortalis honos, agilis quem dextra laborat) where Statius contrasts the transient honos of painting or sculpture with the enduring honos of song.
- 276 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
10.45.2 (si quid honorificum pagina blanda sonat). Clearly, for Martial a poem can be an honos
(metonymically) for its subject. Honos, however, is not a significant term for the expression of his own "renown": in 3.2, an address to his book, Martial cleverly alludes to the poet's wreath with a play on frons,534 and in 4.27 Martial claims to have been "honored" by Domitian non sola voce because of his poetry.535 These, however, are the only uses of honos which can be connected to a poets' own renown.
Gloria in the Epigrammata, while it does confirm the basic semantic offered in section
2.1.3, also appears to be more widely applied. The major difference noted in section 2.1.3 of the application of gloria in comparison with laus and honos was in its restriction to the vir magnus: like laus, gloria is connected with res and virtutes – like honos, to pre-eminence within a social system. This basic semantic is apparent in subjective usage in the Epigrammata: 2.90.1-2
(Quintiliane, vagae moderator summae iuventae, | gloria Romanae, Quintiliane, togae), 2.91.1
(Rerum certa salus, terrarum gloria, Caesar), 4.55.1 (Luci, gloria temporum tuorum), 5.24.14
(Hermes, gloria Martis universi), 9.99.3-4 (Marcus Palladiae non infitianda Tolosae | gloria, quem genuit Pacis alumna Quies). But some uses of gloria in a subjective sense are even wider in application: 4.75.1-2 (O felix animo, felix, Nigrina, marito | atque inter Latias gloria prima nurus; cf. 10.63.7-8 (contigit et thalami mihi gloria rara fuitque | una pudicitiae mentula nota
534 Mart. 3.2.8 et frontis gemino decens honore. cf. St. Silv. 5.5.28-9 sed nec solitae mihi vertice laurus | nec fronti vittatus honos. The frontes (identical to the fastigia) were the ends of the papyrus roll, one of which may have had an identifying mark or words; see Birt (1959) 66-67.
535 Mart. 4.27 Saepe meos laudare soles, Auguste, libellos. | invidus ecce negat: num minus ergo soles? | quid quod honorato non sola voce dedisti, | non alius poterat quae dare dona mihi? | ecce iterum nigros conrodit lividus ungues. | Da, Caesar, tanto tu magis, ut doleat.
- 277 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
meae and 12.21.7-8 on Marcella536 nec cito ridebit peregrini gloria partus, | Romanam deceat quam magis esse nurum), 7.50.1-2 (fons dominae, regina loci quo gaudet Ianthis, | gloria conspicuae deliciumque domus), 9.43.2, 5 (deus [sc. Hercules]|... non est fama recens nec nostri gloria caeli; cf. 10.89.1 Iuno labor, Polyclite, tuus et gloria felix), 9.60.4 ([corona] seu modo
Campani gloria ruris eras). Gloria is even extended in a subjective sense to artisans and poets as a source of gloria for others: 8.82.5 (fer vates, Auguste, tuos: nos gloria dulcis, | nos tua cura prior deliciaeque sumus), 10.64 (of Lucan, ille tuus vates, Heliconis gloria nostri), 10.89.1 (Iuno labor, Polyclite, tuus et gloria felix), 10.103 (of Martial, ecquid laeta iuvat vestri vos gloria vatis?537). While this extension of subjective gloria seems to draw the subject closer to the notion of gloria (e.g. Lucan seems to accrue gloria in 10.64), in fact the basic dynamic stays the same: it is not the subject which receives the gloria but the associated object or person (e.g. 10.64 ille tuus vates, Heliconis gloria nostri "that vates of yours, our Helicon's gloria"). The "possessor" of the gloria is almost without exception clearly marked by the use of a possessive genitive or adjective.538
536 Marcella appears to have been a wealthy widow in Bilbilis whose generosity towards Martial on his return there after the years in Rome is recorded in Book 12.21, 31. Early scholars tried to make her Martial's wife (see Sullivan [1991] 24).
537 I read the genitive not as possessive but of origin, especially in light of the following line (ecquid laeta iuvat vestri vos gloria vatis? | nam decus et nomen famaque vestra sumus, | nec sua plus debet tenui Verona Catullo | meque velit dici non minus illa suum: "Does the pleasant gloria arising from your poet delight you? I am your ornament, your name to fame – to trifling Catullus his Verona owes no more and she would wish me called hers no less." For parallels to these last lines, cf. esp. 1.61, but also 1.49 and 4.55.
538 Except 4.75.1-2, 10.89.1.
- 278 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
Gloria continues, in the objective sense, to pertain to the vir magnus and his traditional arenas of activity (cf. 8.15.1 of Domitian dum nova Pannonici numeratur gloria belli; 1.51.5 desperanda tibi est ingentis gloria fati on the death of a hare in the arena plays with this conceit).
But the shifting boundaries or criteria for measuring successful public life or for identifying the vir magnus – a primary concern of Cicero and Seneca, for example (see sections 2.2.2-2.2.3) – seem to influence the application of gloria in the objective sense. So, for example, in 1.21
Mucius Scaevola earns gloria for his steadfastness in the face of pain (cf. 8.30). The basic semantic of gloria as a public recognition of virtus and/or res and an indication of pre-eminence for the vir magnus seems to remain in place in these few instances (3 of 31). But for other instances we must shift our understanding of virtus to accommodate the basic semantic without explicit help from the text, and without the presence of the vir magnus. It seems that the tendency to downplay or bypass virtus described for laus/laudare also affects gloria. For example, in 4.63.3-4 (gloria quante perit vobis! haec monstra Neroni | nec iussae quondam praestiteratis, aquae) and 6.80.6 (tantaque Paestani gloria ruris erat), what virtutes are we to assign water or countryside? Likewise in 5.10.12 (si post fata venit gloria, non propero, referring to a poet's fama after death; cf. 5.10.1-2) and 7.97.10 (o quae gloria! referring to Martial's book's popularity; cf. 7.97.13 uni mitteris, omnibus legeris). In these cases gloria, lacking explicit reference to virtus or a natural context for virtus (i.e. battle), seems to be expressing something closer to bona fama. While this accommodation is not entirely incompatible with certain trends connected with gloria described in section 2.2 (Cicero, after all, defined gloria as fama cum laude), the lack of connection with either res gestae or virtus in these instances is suggestive, as is the absence of the vir magnus. The claim made by Statius in this light is more understandable.
- 279 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
It may be the case that gloria in the Epigrammata approaches the semantic field of honos and fama (but not laus, which was often associated with an act) more closely in Books 4-10; in
Books 1-3, as we have seen, gloria conforms to normal expectations. This suggestion finds support in the difficulty – for a number of the examples from Books 4-10 already examined – of attaching a specific virtus or res to a claim of gloria; we have also seen this to be true of honos in general (see above). So, for example, a piece of sculpture becomes gloria for Polyclitus (Iuno labor, Polyclite, tuus et gloria felix, 10.89.1). The extension in application of gloria from the vir magnus to others (especially women and the inanimate) is also significant in comparison to the uses of honos in Statius.
A.3 Terms of Praise in Pliny
Given the number of letters on literary topics, Pliny's uses of praise terms explicitly in connection with poetry are few, although fascinating and suggestive. Below I examine the use of these terms more generally in order to establish similarities and differences in relation to both the semantic descriptions offered in section 2.1 for fama, laus, nomen, honos, and gloria, as well as those offered for Statius and Martial.
Like Martial's Epigrammata, Pliny's Epistulae concern themselves with the activities of elite society; accordingly, there is a similar abundance of material to discuss in connection with the mechanisms of praise. Fama is the least represented praise term of the five with which I am
- 280 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
chiefly concerned (about 50 instances). Fama in the subjective sense is not personalized or abstracted as often as in the Epigrammata. Nevertheless, there are four examples of fama in which some degree of personalization seems indicated: 1.18.4 (prospere cessit, atque adeo illa actio mihi aures hominum, illa ianuam famae), 2.3.1 (Magna Isaeum fama praecesserat, maior inventus est), 4.11.15 (summam enim rerum nuntiat fama, non ordinem), 9.33.5 (Serpit per coloniam fama concurrere omnes, ipsum puerum tamquam miraculum adspicere, interrogare, audire, narrare). On the other hand, fama in Pliny often carries a very strong suggestion of pseudo-existence in the subjective sense: cf. 2.11.10 (praeterea causae amplitudo auctaque dilatione exspectatio et fama insitumque mortalibus studium magna et inusitata noscendi omnes undique exciverat), 2.19.2 (iudicum concessus, celebritas advocatorum, exspectatio eventus, fama non unius actoris), 3.16 (cum interim illud quidem ingens fama, haec nulla circumfert),
4.9.22 (fecerat eum favorabilem renovata discriminum vetus fama notumque periculis nomen et in procero corpore maesta et squalida senectus), 7.25.1 (O quantum eruditorum aut modestia ipsorum aut quies operit ac subtrahit famae!). Unlike in Statius and Martial, the verbalization inherent in fama (see section 2.1.1) is not often made explicit in the subjective sense (cf. only
4.11.15 above).539 As in the Epigrammata, fama in the Epistulae is nearly always positive in the subjective sense; in the Silvae, as we saw, the nearly ubiquitous concern for praise likewise mitigates the natural ambiguity of the term.
539 The objective uses of fama in Martial's Epigrammata are also not explicitly verbalized.
- 281 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
Fama is far more common in the objective sense in Pliny's Epistulae. Rather than being associated directly with a personal virtue as in the Silvae, Pliny's usage is closer to that of Martial in connecting fama to an event or activity: 1.5.7 (me laus et gratulatio secuta est, quod nec famam meam aliquo responso, utili fortasse, inhonesto tamen, laeseram nec me laqueis tam insodiosae interrogationis involveram), 3.7.3 (laeserat famam suam sub Nerone), 4.17.7
(quantum ille famae meae domi, in publico, quantum etiam apud principem adstruxit!), 6.23.2
(nam mire concupisco bonos iuvenes ostendere foro, adsignare famae), 8.24.8 (Accedit, quod tibi certamen est tecum: onerat te quaesturae fama, quam ex Bithynia optimam revexisti), 9.3.1
Alius alium, ego beatissimum existimo, qui bonae mansuraeque famae praesumptione perfruitur certusque posteritatis cum futura gloria vivit), 9.5.2 (plerique autem, dum verentur, ne gratiae potentium nimium impertire videantur, sinisteritatis atque etiam malignitatis famam consequuntur), 9.14.2 (pergamus modo itinere instituto, quod ut paucos in lucem famamque provexit, ita multos e tenebris et silentio protulit), 9.19.3 (omnes ego, qui magnum aliquid memorandumque fecerunt, non modo venia, erum etiam laude dignissimos iudico, si immortalitatem, quam meruere, sectantur victurique nominis famam supremis etiam titulis prorogare nituntur). Most often – a significant departure from Martial – that event is political in nature: fama in Pliny often seems to be a political indicator. Occasionally, however, it is made clear that the event or activity is the result of some particular virtue: 4.9.21 (Paulinus tamen et iustitiae famam et constantiae tulit), 9.1.3 (salva sit tibi constantiae fama!), 9.30.2 (sunt ingenio simili, qui, quod huic donant, auferunt illi famamque liberalitatis avaritia petunt). In the objective sense, as in the Epigrammata, fama is rarely explicitly verbalized; 9.14.2 (pergamus modo itinere instituto, quod ut paucos in lucem famamque provexit, ita multos e tenebris et
- 282 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
silentio protulit) seems the lone example. As in the subjective sense, fama in the objective sense in Pliny's Epistulae is nearly always positive, although in 9.5.2 Pliny comments that many officials earn sinisteritatis atque etiam malignitatis fama.540 Again, like Martial and Statius both, fama is not explicitly verbalized in the Epistulae, although 9.14, perhaps, betrays an awareness of the verbalization inherent in the word itself through an antithesis of light/dark, fama/silence
(pergamus modo itinere instituto, quod ut paucos in lucem famamque provexit, ita multos e tenebris et silentio protulit, 9.14.2).541
Laus/laudo in the Epistulae is by far the most common of all the terms of praise (131 instances), as it was in the Epigrammata – recall that laus was not often used in the Silvae. As for Martial, for Pliny laus conveys public (often voiced) approval for an act/res much more often than for a virtue alone. A virtus or set of virtutes, however, is very rarely expressed; in some cases virtutes could be extrapolated from the context of the event – but they are not explicitly mentioned. Thus the constituent elements of laus identified in section 2.1.1 – (1) voiced and deliberate naming of an individual, (2) virtus – are, as in Martial, more or less reduced to the former; but virtus does still play a role (cf. 1.8.9, 5.16.9, 6.26.1, 7.31.3). That laus is construed as a public response to an act can be seen in a number of letters. In 1.5 – one example of many –
Pliny receives laus for his actions and responses when questioned in court: me laus et gratulatio
540 Note also that there are several instances in which fama (positive) can be harmed: cf. 1.5.7, 3.7.3, 8.24.8.
541 Recall Tac. Agr. 2.3 memoriam quoque ipsam cum voce perdidissemus, si tam in nostra potestate esset oblivisci quam tacere (see above, pp. 26-7).
- 283 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
secuta est, quod nec famam meam aliquo responso, utili fortasse, inhonesto tamen, laeseram nec me laqueis interrogationis involveram (1.5.7). The connection can be seen even more clearly in passages where res is made explicit. In 3.21, for example, Pliny complains that society no longer values the praise which poets can give, if only because no one does anything worth praising anymore (Nam postquam desimus facere laudanda, laudari quoque ineptum putamus, 3.21.4).
Likewise in 4.17 Pliny relates how when as a young man he was having laus heaped upon him for his speaking (Nam cum forte de bonis iuvenibus apud Nervam imperatorem sermo incidisset, et plerique me laudibus ferrent, paulisper se intra silentium tenuit, quod illi plurimum auctoritatis addebat, 4.17.8), his supporter Corellius said that he ought to be sparing in his praise for Pliny since Pliny had his advice in all that he did (Necesse est inquit parcius laudem
Secundum, quia nihil ex consilio meo facit, 4.17.9). The implication is that the res (actions) were laudable. Laus/laudare still retains the quality of a transient phenomenon, the intermediary step between virtus/act and "renown". A possible exception: in 7.31.3 Pliny suggests that Claudius
Pollio, through his good actions, has never broken his continuam laudem humanitatis (numquam officiorum varietate continuam laudem humanitatis infregit, 7.31.3). As for Martial, laus for
Pliny can sometimes be affected and insincere: in 2.14 expresses his disgust over the teneris clamoribus (2.14.12), the ululatus (ululatus quidem (neque enim alio vocabulo potest exprimi theatris quoque indecora laudatio, 2.14.13), which – bought and paid for – accompany speeches in his time. Pliny's complaints about the honors offered Pallas in 8.6 are similarly motivated. On the other hand, Pliny points out, laus can be sincere: in 3.18 Pliny claims to offer the Emperor veri laudes in the Panegyricus (ut imperatori nostro virtutes suae veris laudibus commendarentur, 3.18.2) But except for this particular instance, in the Epistulae – as in the
- 284 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
Epigrammata (but not the Silvae) – emphasis is placed more on the laudability of res or the individual, not primarily on the laudability of virtus.
Naming is indicated in our lexicographical sources as an essential element of laus (see section 2.1.2) and renown. As I noted in section 2.1.2, the act of making an object or person distinct from others is a necessary step to praise and renown. The two basic semantic fields identified in section 2.1.2 for nomen are well represented in Pliny's Epistulae, as they were in the
Epigrammata (but not in the Silvae). The first semantic field centers around the straightforward naming of a person or thing (i.e. the minimum evidence for individual existence or identity): cf.
1.12.12, 1.23.1, 2.11.23, 2.13.4, 2.14.5, 3.6.5, 3.8.4, 3.9.20, 3.9.31, 3.18.1, 3.18.11, 3.20.5, 4.1.4,
4.7.3, 4.15.3, 4.21.3, 4.25.1, 4.25.2, 5.6.35, 5.6.36, , 5.11.1, 5.14.2, 6.10.3, 6.21.6, 6.28.1, 6.31.2,
6.31.6, 6.31.17, 7.22.1, 8.4.3, 8.6.5 bis, 8.8.5, 8.18.5, 8.20.3, 8.24.3, 8.24.4, 9.13.20, 9.23.3. The distinct individuality that results from naming, as we saw in Martial's Epigrammata (but not the
Silvae), can often be construed as "reputation", i.e. the extent to which one's name is known. This objective sense is well represented in the Epistulae. The inherent similarity between "being known" and nomen has already been shown for Martial. It seems no less true for Pliny: cf. e.g.
3.11.3 (Atque haec feci, cum septem amicis meis aut occisis aut relegatis, occisis Senecione
Rustico Heluidio, relegatis Maurico Gratilla Arria Fannia, tot circa me iactis fulminibus quasi ambustus mihi quoque impendere idem exitium certis quibusdam notis augurarer.), 4.9.22
- 285 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
(Fecerat eum fauorabilem renouata discriminum uetus fama, notumque periculis nomen, et in procero corpore maesta et squalida senectus.).542
Honos in the Epistulae, like nomen, laus, and gloria, is concerned most of all with the activities of those of Pliny's group of friends. And like the other terms, honos is well represented as a term of praise, and adheres to the semantic boundaries elucidated in section 2.1.2. As I noted earlier, honos is an act. Thus, like laus, it is a symbol of the community's recognition of an individual (or indeed a divinity), or of an individual's recognition of another, through an act. For example, when Pliny grants a beneficium to Comum in the form of alimenta for children, he suggests that it is an honor granted to few (praesertim cum enitendum haberemus, ut, quod parentibus dabatur, et orbis probaretur, honoremque paucorum ceteri patienter et exspectarent et merentur, 1.8.12). But while laus is primarily a verbal act conceptually dependent on nomen, the expression of honos can take many forms, including laus. Honos in the Epistulae is used overwhelmingly in its metonymic sense, i.e. as office, statue (or other ornamenta), or state funeral (as it had been in the Epigrammata, and most often in the Silvae): 1.10.8, 1.17.2, 1.17.4,
1.19.4, 1.23.1, 2.1.3, 2.1.7, 2.1.8, 2.7.3, 2.7.4, 2.7.5, 2.7.7, 2.12.3, 3.4.3, 3.6.5, 3.8.2, 4.1.4, 4.8.4,
4.15.13, 4.16.1, 4.17.2, 4.17.6 bis, 5.14.2, 5.14.6, 6.6.1, 6.6.9, 6.19.4, 6.31.4, 6.31.14, 7.22.3,
7.25.2, 7.26.2, 7.27.2, 7.29.2, 8.6.1, 8.6.5, 8.6.10, 8.6.11, 8.6.12, 8.6.14, 8.6.16, 8.10.3, 8.14.5,
8.23.2, 8.23.6, 8.23.8. In 1.23, for example, Pliny suggests that the tribunate is not an office empty of significance: plurimum refert, quid esse tribunatum putes, 'inanem umbram' et 'sine
542 Cf. also Pl. Ep. 7.33.10, 9.1.3, 9.23.5, etc. Compare nomen notum in Mart. 3.95.8.
- 286 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
honore nomen', an potestatem sancrosanctam et quam in ordinem cogi ut a nullo ita ne a se quidem deceat (1.23.1). In 2.1.3 Pliny remarks that the state funeral for Verginius Rufus is an exceptional honor: Caesares, quibus suspectus atque etiam invisus virtutibus fuerat, evasit, reliquit incolumem optimum atque amicissimum, tamquam ad hunc ipsum honorem publici funeris reservatus (2.1.3). And in 2.7 a statue for Cottius is an honor: Et hoc quidem virtutus praemium, illud solacium doloris accepit, quod filio eius Cottio, quem amisit absens, habitus est honor statuae (2.7.3). Social pre-eminence in particular is indicated by honos in the remaining examples: for the daughter of Corellius Rufus in 3.3, Pliny's special (unice) affection serves to bring her honor: teque et in memoriam eius et in honorem tuum unice diligam, (3.3.1). In 5.1
Pliny receives a legacy from an old rival as an act of recognition of a pre-eminent act: Ille ergo
Cirianus legatum mihi reliquit et factum meum, nisi blandior mihi antiquum, notabili honore signavit (5.1.11). In 6.2 Regulus shows honor towards oratory (see above).543 Pliny does exhibit some anxiety concerning this act of recognition for pre-eminence of some sort, primarily it seems because it could be mis-construed. Thus in 7.24 a hint of concern over how he should describe the recognition given to Quadratilla (the owner of a successful mime group) by a mob of theatre-goers: at hercule alienissimi homines in honorem Quadratillae (pudet me dixisse honorem) per adulationis officium in theatrum cursitabant, 7.24.7). Statius had quite a different
543 This seems most likely to arise out of the religious origins of the term. Note the prominence of ritual acts in Pliny's description of what the honor comprises (illud ipsum, quod oculum modo dextrum, modo sinistrum circumlinebat, dextrum, si a petitore, alterum, si a possessore esset acturus, quod candidum splenium in hoc aut in illud supercilium transferebat, quod semper haruspices consulebat de actionis eventu, a nimia superstitione, sed tamen a magno studiorum honore veniebat, 6.2.2). Regulus was notably interested in ritual: cf. Pl. Ep. 2.20. Recall that Martial had several more uses of honos in connection with sacred things or ritual.
- 287 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
view of honor for women (see A.1). In 8.24.3 Pliny advises Valerius Maximus to show proper honor to Greece, for her pre-eminence as the cradle of civilization: revere conditores deos et nomina deorm, revere gloriam veterem et hanc ipsam senectutem, quae in homine venerabilis, in urbibus sacra! Three remaining examples of honor signaling pre-eminence are more fully examined in section 5.2.3 above, as they deal with literary matters.
Gloria in the Epistulae adheres much more closely to the basic semantic offered in section 2.1.3 than it does in the Epigrammata; thus Pliny's application of the term is nearer that of Statius' in the Silvae. But, of course, gloria in Pliny is much more frequent than in either poet.
The major differences noted in section 2.1.3 in the application of gloria in comparison with other terms of praise was in its restriction to the magnus vir (this restriction is closely observed in Pliny's letters): like laus, gloria is connected with res and virtus; like honos, with pre- eminence within a closed social system. Gloria in Pliny seems to result from the actions or deeds
(res)544 of great men (i.e. those involved in public affairs) with only a few exceptions (1.16, 2.3,
3.16, 5.6, 5.17, 7.9, 8.18, 8.24, 9.22, 9.25, 9.33). And even these exceptions should be understood as reflecting the basic semantic (see below).
In its subjective sense the pre-eminence within a peer group which gloria represents is sometimes made explicit: in 2.7 a statue is granted by the Senate for Pliny's greater friend
544 Either in the courts or on campaign, or occasionally through some act only possible by a great man (e.g. in 3.8 Pliny suggests that he will get gloria for the position he arranged for Suetonius: praeterea intellego mihi quoque gloriae fore, si ex hoc tuo facto non fuerit ignotum amicos meos non gerere tantum tribunatus posse, verum etiam dare, 3.8.3)
- 288 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
Vestricius Spurinna and his son Cottius for their separate deeds which will represent their honor and gloria just as imagines represent the dead (Etenim si defunctorum imagines domi positae dolorem nostrum levant, quanto magis hae quibus in celeberrimo loco non modo species et vultus illorum, sed honor etiam et gloria refertur! 2.7.7). 5.11.2 (of a portico) is similar. But more often the pre-eminence which gloria suggests is implicit in the subjective sense: in 2.1
Pliny comments that Verginius Rufus surpasses any in gloria, although he may have his match in virtutes (cui [Verginius Rufus] fortasse cives aliquos virtutibus pares et habemus et habebimus, gloria neminem, 2.1.12) – cf. 1.8.14, 2.1.2, 2.7.7, 3.9.8, 3.16.6, 6.10.3, 6.22.5, 6.29.3, 7.20.4,
7.31.4, 9.19.4, 9.22.3. Gloria in the subjective sense is also attributed to women for their faithfulness to their husbands (Arria 3.16.6, Tullus' second wife 8.18.10),545 to Pliny for his villa
(5.6.46),546 to Greece as a place of ancient culture (8.24.3); these account for four of the eleven exceptions to gloria applied to viri magni for public duties. The remaining exceptions (but one; see immediately below) are all connected to literary matters, and are more fully examined above, in section 5.2.3.
Gloria as a measure of pre-eminence in a social system is most clearly seen in another of the few exceptions. In 9.33 Pliny writes to Caninius Rufus, relating a tale that could serve as material for a new work of poetry. The tale concerns the involvement of a dolphin in the life of the citizens of Hippo in Africa. The tale begins with a swimming race in the local harbor; boys
545 Statius uses honor as a term of approbation for these qualities in a woman; see above, section 3.2.
546 For the luxury villa as a symbol of elite status (in both a negative and a positive sense) see Bodel (1997), Hoffer (1999) 29-42.
- 289 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
compete amongst their peers in a display of courage and strength. To swim far out over the deep water is for these boys virtus and gloria (His gloria et virtus altissime provehi, 9.33.3). 3.9, in which Pliny discusses the co-operation between himself and Lucceius Albinus, likewise betrays the competition which lies behind gloria (habet quidem gloria, in studiis praesertim, quiddam ajkoinwvnhton, nobis tamen nullum certamen, nulla contentio, cum uterque pari iugo non pro se, sed pro causa niteretur, 3.9.8). Similarly, nearly every reference to a person's gloria (i.e. in the objective sense) in Pliny can be situated with reference to an act within a specific social context, most often that of the political arena.
The uses of gloria in the objective sense most often refer to peer recognition resulting from an act consistent with the vir magnus. For example, in 9.19 Pliny remarks on the attitude of
Verginius Rufus towards his reputation that he showed as much modesty (verecundia) in speaking about his affairs as he gained gloria in doing them (Nec facile quemquam nisi
Verginium invenio, cuius tanta in praedicando verecundia, quanta gloria ex facto, 9.19.4).
Gloria in 1.8.5, 1.8.6, 1.8.14, 2.1.2, 2.1.12, 2.5.3, 3.11.4, 3.18.2, 3.20.1, 3.21.6, 4.12.6, 4.12.7,
4.19.5, 5.11.2, 6.6.4, 6.8.6, 6.10.3, 6.16.1, 6.17.4, 6.22.5, 6.29.3, 7.20.4, 7.24.9, 7.31.4, 9.3.1,
9.13.5, 9.19.8 likewise arises from actions of magni viri. In 3.7 (the obituary notice of Silius
Italicus) Pliny suggests that Silius damaged his reputation under Nero, but returned from his governorship in Asia with gloria (laeserat famam suam sub Nerone (credebatur sponte accusasse), sed in Vitelli amicitia sapienter se et comiter gesserat, ex proconsulatu Asiae gloriam reportaverat, maculam veteris industriae laudabili otio abluerat, 3.7.3). This passage is extraordinarily interesting for its division of terms of praise for the magnus vir: fama relating to
- 290 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
suspected actions (credebatur), gloria derived from actions in public sphere, laus from actions in otium (which, it is clear, was spent writing poetry). A further indication of gloria as (positive) peer recognition can be seen in its opposition to reprehensio: 3.20.1 referring to the consequences of a piece of legislation (Meministi ne saepe legisse, quantas contentiones excitarit lex tabellaria quantumque ipsi latori vel gloriae vel reprehensionis attulerit?) and 5.3.11 where
Pliny suggests his large circle of amici brings him gloria (atque haec disputo, quasi populorum in auditorium, non in cubiculum amicos advocarim, quos plures habere multis gloriosum, reprehensioni nemini fuit). The actions (res) of the public man extend, of course, to the courts. In
6.29 Pliny relates to Ummidius Quadratus (one of the two young men whose future success Pliny predicts in 6.11) the criteria by which Avidius Quietus (cos. suff. 93) counseled him to take on cases. To these Pliny adds another: a case involving important people547 which will bring gloria and fama (Ad haec ego genera causarum ambitiose fortasse, addam tamen claras et inlustres.
Aequum est enim agere non numquam gloriae et famae, id est suam causam, 6.29.3).
547 This is how I understand claras et inlustres causas.
- 291 - 'Fame is the Spur': Memoria, Gloria, and Poetry among the Elite in Flavian Rome
Index of Passages Discussed
Cato 180; 10.2: 171, 180; 10.9: 171- 9.22: 215-6; 9.23: 193; 9.25: Cato Agr. praef. 4: 188 2; 10.20: 228-9; 10.21: 160; 226-35; 9.31: 212; 9.38: 212; 10.24: 142; 10.103: 142, 145, Cicero 172; [11] 11.1: 180; 11.2: 180; Propertius 11.3: 172, 180; 11.16: 180; Cic. Arch. 4: 188-9 Prop. 1.8B: 102-3, 2.7: 100-2 11.108: 180; [12] 12.3: 173; Cic. Att. 1.16: 5 12.4: 181; 12.11:173; 12.21: Cic. Fam. 5.12: 16-21 181; 12.29: 143; 12.40: 155 Statius (See also App. A.1) Cic. Off. 1.21: 95-6 Stat. Silv. [1] 1.praef.: 120, Cic. Red.Sen. 1: 22; 3: 22; 4- Ovid 123; 1.2: 122-28; [2] 2.praef: 8: 23 Ovid Am. 2.12: 103-4; 3.15: 120-1, 130, 135; 2.3: 133-4; 104 2.7: 128-37; [3] 3.3: 132-3; Horace [4] 4.praef.: 112; 4.4: 112, Hor. Carm. 3.30: 91, 91 Pliny (See also App. A.3) 121 n.312, 139; 4.7: 127; [5] n.233, 171, 202, 243 Pl. [1] 1.2: 224; 1.3: 192-3, 5.1:133; 5.3: 111-8, 135 202, 204-5; 1.7: 208; 1.8: Stat. Theb. 12.816ff: 136, Juvenal 229; 1.10: 192; 1.13: 196-7, 138-9 Juv. 7.93: 118-9 211; 1.16: 212-3, 218; [2] 2.1: 62-3, 64; 2.10: 193, 207, Suetonius Lucilius 211; 2.14: 155-6; 2.18: 190, Suet. Cal. 60: 33 n.69 AP 11.214: 152, 152 n.384 196; 2.38: 218-9; [3] 3.1: Suet. Dom. 23: 33 n.69 217; 3.3: 190 n.431, 192; 3.5: Martial (See also App. A.2) 192, 192 n.435, 205; 3.7; Tacitus Mart. [1] 1.praef: 163; 1.1: 211; 3.8: 146; 3.9: 191, 229; Tac. Agr. 1: 24-5; 1-2: 29-30; 148-9 n.379; 1.2:148-9 n.379; 3.10: 205; 3.18: 190-1; 3.21: 46: 25-8; 30, 63-4 1.3: 176; 1.29: 154; 1.66: 160, 212 n.476, 228-9; [4] Tac. Ann. 3.14: 48; 3.17: 39- 153-4; 1.107:163; [2] 2.27: 4.11: 191, 197; 4.13: 190 40; 3.72: 47-8; 4.35: 58-61; 155; 2.86: 157-8, 177-8; n.431, 192; 4.14: 222; 4.16: 15.33: 111 2.92: 143; [3] 3.1: 163; 3.9: 191, 208; 4.24: 191; 4.28: Tac. Dial. 1-5: 105-8; 5: 238; 160; 3.44: 151-2; 3.45: 151; 197; [5] 5.3: 64-5, 209, 223; 7: 239; 10: 108, 195, 239-40; 3.69:158; 3.95: 143, 144, 5.5: 206; 5.8: 206-7; 5.10: 11: 238, 240-1; 12: 240, 241; 163; [4] 4.27: 164-5; 4.49: 146, 208 n.470; 5.17: 204, 13: 240, 241, 242 159-60, 159 n.399, 178; 4.89: 211, 219-20; 5.21: 4, 208; [6] 178; [5] 5.2:178; 5.10: 165; 6.2: 197; 6.8: 219; 6.10: 61-2; Terence 5.13: 143, 166-7, 179; 5.15: 6.11: 191, 204, 220; 6.15: Ter. Andr. 55-7: 188 167, 179; 5.16: 167, 179; 216; 6.17: 211; 6.21: 211; 5.53: 151-2; 5.63: 155; [6] 6.63: 199 n.453; [7] 7.4: 189, Tibullus 6.60: 168, 179; 6.64: 168-9, 179; 212, 224 n.497; 7.6: 192; 7.9: Tib. 1.4: 99-100 [7] 7.12: 168; 7.23: 134; 7.25: 159; 7.88: 179; 7.97: 179; [8] 209, 212, 220-1; 7.17: 203, 8.praef.: 169, 179; 8.3: 161, 224-5; 7.25: 213; 7.30: 190 179; 8.18: 160, 169-70, 181; n.434; [8] 8.4: 193, 212; 8.20: 152-3; 8.76: 155-6; [9] 8.12: 197-8, 203; 8.21: 225, 9.praef.: 170; 9.49: 143; 9.81: 234; [9] 9.8: 212; 9.16: 230, 179; 9.97: 143, 179; [10] 10.1: 230 n.3059.19: 62-4, 68;
- 292 -