HOMER IN THE PERFECT TENSE The Posthomerica of Quintus Smyrnaeus and the Poetics of Impersonation Emma Greensmith Peterhouse This dissertation is submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy August 2017 Abstract Homer in the Perfect Tense: The Posthomerica of Quintus Smyrnaeus and the Poetics of Impersonation Emma Greensmith The thesis has been written as part of the AHRC collaborative research project Greek Epic of the Roman Empire: A Cultural History. This project seeks to give the first cultural-historical analysis of the large, underexploited corpus of Greek epic poetry composed in the transformative period between the 1st and the 6th centuries C.E. The thesis focuses on questions of literary identity in one of the most challenging texts from this corpus, the Posthomerica by Quintus of Smyrna (c. 3rd century C.E.). My central contention is that Quintus’ mimicry of Homer represents a radically new formative poetics, suggesting a cultural movement towards mimesis, necromancy and close encounters with the past. After a detailed study of what I term the reanimating culture of imperial Greece (chapter 1), and a comprehensive reanalysis of the compositional techniques of the text (chapter 2), I identify a number of tropes of poetic identity from different ancient literary modes: programmatic proems (chapter 3), memory (4), filiation (5) and temporality (6). I show how Quintus co-opts these themes for his new poetics, to turn the symbolic toolkit of contrast imitation into a defence of writing inter-Homeric epic. This analysis insists on rethinking the nature of the relationship between the poetry of this era and that of previous aesthetic traditions: particularly, I argue against a view of the Posthomerica as Alexandrian, and see it instead pushing back against the Callimachus school of small, new poetry. Ultimately, the thesis aims to show how the Posthomerica could be pivotal for unpinning current critical assumptions about imperial Greek poetry; revealing a palpable shift in tone in the construct of the literary self. Contents Preface...................................................................................................................................... i Acknowledgements...................................................................................................................ii Introduction: The Poetics of Impersonation..........................................................................1 I. Opposition in Imitation.......................................................................................2 II. Silver Latin, Imperial Greek? .............................................................................5 III. (Non) Parallels: Poetic Impersonation.............................................................10 IV. Homer and the Performance of the Past...........................................................12 V. (Post) Latourian Quintus..................................................................................17 VI. Structure and Scope..........................................................................................19 Part I: Quintus as Homer: Illusion and Imitation Chapter One: Enlarging the Space: Imperial Doubleness, Fixity, Expansion...................26 I. Being and not Being.........................................................................................27 II. Declamation: What Demosthenes Would Have Said.......................................31 III. The Progymnasmata: Practising Expansion.....................................................33 IV. Homeric Performance: Scripts and Spoofs......................................................37 V. Quintus’ Homeric Performance: Songs Within the Song................................47 Conclusions......................................................................................................55 Chapter Two: Writing Homer: Language, Composition and Style....................................58 Introduction: Omerico Ma (Non) Troppo? ......................................................58 I. Language and Formulae...................................................................................62 II. Gnomai and Similes.........................................................................................86 Conclusions....................................................................................................108 Part II: Quintus as Quintus: Antagonism and Assimilation Chapter Three: When Homer Quotes Callimachus: The Proem in the ‘Middle’............110 Introduction: Quintus’ Quale..........................................................................111 I. Imperial Greek Epic and Callimachus: Locating the Slender Muse..............113 II. One Continuous Song.....................................................................................119 III. Muses and Knowledge...................................................................................124 IV. Youth..............................................................................................................126 V. Topography and Grandeur.............................................................................128 VI. Tending Famous Sheep..................................................................................132 Conclusions: Declassifying Quintus..............................................................135 Chapter Four: Selective Memory and Iliadic Revision .....................................................137 Introduction....................................................................................................137 I. Selective Memory and Poetic Selectivity ......................................................139 II. Reported Memories: Homer et cetera............................................................144 III. Memories in Speech: Self-Motivated Selections...........................................150 Conclusions....................................................................................................163 Chapter Five: Prodigal Poetics: Filiation and Succession.................................................166 I. The Ever-Present Anxiety? ...........................................................................167 II. Epic Ecology: Quintus’ Successional Space..................................................174 III. Antagonising Antagonism..............................................................................179 IV. Alternative Relations: Succession Through Impersonation...........................188 Conclusions....................................................................................................210 Chapter Six: Temporality and the Homeric Not Yet..........................................................213 I. Imperial Timing..............................................................................................214 II. Pacing: Acceleration and Delay.....................................................................221 III. Straining: Plot Control and the Counterfactual..............................................233 IV. Bending: Anachrony and Prolepsis................................................................243 V. Unravelling…or Un-Ending...........................................................................252 Coda: Concluding the Continuous Song.............................................................................258 Bibliography.........................................................................................................................260 Preface This dissertation is the result of my own work and includes nothing which is the outcome of work done in collaboration except where specifically indicated in the text. It is not substantially the same as any that I have submitted, or, is being concurrently submitted for a degree or diploma or other qualification at the University of Cambridge or any other University or similar institution except as declared in the Preface and specified in the text. I further state that no substantial part of my dissertation has already been submitted, or, is being concurrently submitted for any such degree, diploma or other qualification at the University of Cambridge or any other University or similar institution. It does not exceed the word limit prescribed by the Faculty of Classics. Acknowledgements This thesis is the result of three years of work on the Imperial Greek Epic project at the University of Cambridge. I am indebted to the AHRC for funding the project and to the team of researchers who brought it to life. Pavlos Avlamis, Emily Kneebone, Laura Miguélez- Cavero and Leyla Ozbek have offered insights, intellectual encouragement and copious amounts of fun along the way. I can think of no better environment in which to have completed this research, and I hope that our collaboration may long continue. To Tim Whitmarsh, the project’s Principal Investigator and my supervisor, I owe more thanks than any acknowledgement could express. He has been unfailingly generous with his time and enthusiasm, his instincts about my research are always uncannily right, and he has become in all respects an inspirational teacher and, I hope, a lifelong friend. Richard Hunter and Thomas Schmitz, the examiners of this thesis, provided numerous helpful suggestions on points large and small, which will enrich the project as I take it forwards. I thank them for a highly intense and hugely enjoyable viva, which I shall always remember fondly. My great gratitude goes to the Cambridge Classics Faculty; to my friends,