Fragments of Autobiography in "" 1 Author(s): Emily Gowers Source: , Vol. 22, No. 1 (Apr., 2003), pp. 55-91 Published by: University of California Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/25011166 Accessed: 10/08/2009 23:11

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ucal.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We work with the scholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform that promotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

University of California Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Classical Antiquity.

http://www.jstor.org EMILY GOWERS

Fragments of Autobiography in Horace Satires 1

"When I was a young man, I arrived in Hollywood with very little money, checked into a cheap motel, showered, shaved, then I came here to talk to you."-Tony Curtis, asked by a TV chat show host to sum up his life so far "How one becomes what one is"-subtitle of Nietzsche's Ecce Homo

The idea that Horace's Satires 1 is a kind of autobiography is far from being a new one. In 1874, James Lonsdale and Samuel Lee, translators of Horace, wrote: "We might call his works 'Horace's Autobiography.' We can see him as he really was, both body and soul. Everything about him is familiar to us."' Reminiscences about his life are a well-known ingredient of all Horace's collections of poems, and his debut in Satires 1 sets the pattern.An autobiographical element was virtually prescribed for Horace by his forerunner in , Lucilius,2 while the intimate disclosures he makes in the Satires about personal discomforts or mundane activities have helped to make him in turn one of the most biographized of ancient

Earlier versions of this paper were given at theUniversity of Pennsylvania, Stanford University, the University of California at Berkeley, and Princeton University. I am very grateful to the various audiences for their comments and advice; and would also like to thank Classical Antiquity's anonymous referees for their extremely helpful suggestions. In September 2000 the Department of at Princeton University gave me the opportunity for a reinvention of my own, and its members will know what I owe to them. 1. Lonsdale and Lee 1874: 9. All references are toHorace, Satires 1, unless otherwise specified. I have used Klingner's text (Leipzig, 1970) with minor changes in orthography and punctuation; aremy own. 2. Contra Harrison 1987, who argues thatHorace was in fact rejecting Lucilian autobiographi cal satire in S. 2.1 when he referred to Lucilius laying out his whole life (32-34 omnis /... uita) like a votive tablet.

Classical Antiquity. Volume 22, Number 1, pages 55-92. ISSN 0278-6656(p); 1067-8344 (e). Copyright C 2003 by The Regents of theUniversity of California. All rights reserved. Send requests for permission to reprint to:Rights and Permissions. University of California Press, 2000 Center Street, Ste 303, Berkeley, CA 94704-1223. 56 CLASSICAL ANTIQUITY Volume 22/No. 1 /April 2003

.3 As one biographer, Clarence Cary, wrote in 1904: "Lives of Horace are as the leaves of Vallombrosa,"4 and the tradition is still flourishing. Nevertheless, many modern readers of Horatian satire regard the autobiographical elements, once so affectionately cherished, with suspicion and as a superficial distraction from the real business of the poems: the putting into practice of literary and moral principles. This paper is an attempt to rehabilitate the autobiographical in Horace, and indeed to treat it as the driving force behind Book 1. My use of "autobiography" first needs an apology, since the old-fashioned tendency to take Horace's accounts of his life as gospel truth, and then proceed to fill in the gaps, has given the word something of a stigma in Horatian studies. W. S. Anderson (1982: originally 1964) was the first to oppose the words "autobi ography," in this old sense, and "art" (even though his eventual conclusion is that the two are interdependent). J.E. G. Zetzel (1980), in a ground-breaking article on why Satires 1 should not be taken literally, drew a far stronger distinction between "autobiography" on the one hand and "literature" on the other. He took as an extreme example Horace's S. 1.8, spoken in the first person but through the mouth of a garden gnome statue of the god Priapus. Since that is clearly not autobiographical, why take any other of Horace's first-person accounts as autobiographical? And yet he was adamant that Book 1 is in some sense "an imagined life" or "a portrait of Horace." Anderson, Zetzel, and more recently Kirk Freudenburg andCatherine Schlegel have established the current orthodoxy as far as Horace's account of his life goes: the personality presented in these as in other Roman satires is artificially constructed and attuned to the demands of the genre-in the case of satire, to be humble and self-deflating-and to the type of performance required by specific poems.5 The "author" is invisible behind an inconsistent and floating composite of personae based on comic stereotypes-the parasite, the buffoon, the unkempt philosopher, the cowed son, and so on.6 However, since Zetzel's article, the boundaries around theword "autobiogra phy" have softened, and the distinctions between autobiography and literature are no longer so clear-cut. These days we are only too aware that any life-story is at best partial and strategic, determined by all kinds of generic, ideological, and rhetorical demands; how it is often a justification or defense of a particular way of ending up; and how only certain episodes are chosen to support a particular effect or style of self-presentation.7 Even so, many of Horace's readers still find the

3. See e.g. Levi 1997. For the genre of writing portraits or lives of Horace throughhis poems see e.g. Shackleton Bailey 1982, Armstrong 1989. For continued speculation about childhood traumas and paternal pressures see Johnson 1993, Anderson 1995. 4. Cary 1904: 14. 5. Zetzel 1980, Freudenburg 1993: 3-51, Schlegel 1994. See also Turpin 1998 and now Keane 2002. On persona-theory inRoman satire seeWinkler 1983: 1-22. 6. Leach 1971: 616 argues against Fraenkel's assertion 1957: 153 thatHorace's observations are accurate and sincere. 7. Among a vast number of recent discussions of autobiography themost stimulating include de Man 1984, Olney 1980, LeJeune 1989, Sturrock 1993. On classical autobiography seeMisch 1950, GOWERS:Fragments ofAutobiography inHorace Satires 1 57 word "autobiography"off-puttingly simple. In Schlegel's words, "Interpretations of the satires as the 's autobiographymistake a generically prompted strategy designed to disarm the reader for a factual account of the poet's life."-8 Others, while circumspect enough about the accuracy or completeness of the life-story Horace presents in his poems, are committed to the idea that, since personalities are unfixed in and out of literature, Horace's several poetic self-portraits are as meaningfully "Horace" as any flesh-and-blood person could have been.9 There was a real Horace manipulating the personal information he put into his poems, composing his public "face," but we have to accept that we can never reach him beyond the , and that the "Horaces" he created have always been open to idiosyncratic interpretation by different ages and individuals.'0 And so, in a much more fluid definition now, theword "autobiography" is creeping back into use: Satires 1 has recently been described as "the fragments of what appear to be an autobiography," "Horace's first essay in autobiography," a collection of "autobiographical satire[s]," and a book "flesh[ed] . . .out with a biography.""II When I use the word "autobiography" here, then, it is really shorthand for "partial, generically, ideologically, and rhetorically determined justification of one's life," but Iwill persist in using it for two reasons. First, while it is impossible to return to the age of innocent faith in the details of Horace's life-story, and while the current emphasis on "persona" is a very necessary corrective to more literal interpretations, there is some danger in all this of losing sight of the historical figure Horace and his connections with a particular period, the uncertain time of the second ."2 In other words, there was a life-story to be told, an image to be fashioned, a position to be defended, even if these were tailored to generic and rhetorical demands.'3 Secondly, words like "persona" and "self representation," with their emphasis on the immediate performance, do not do enough to convey the element of reminiscence in the Satires, the gap Horace

and the collections of Baslez-Hoffmann-Pernot 1993, Arighetti-Montanari 1993, Gallo-Nicastri 1995. On autobiography inRoman satire:Citroni 1993. The complicated question of the relationship between the rise of personal literature in the Hellenistic and late Republican periods and wider cultural changes in the concept of elite identity is beyond the scope of this paper, but a good starting point might be Labate 1990. 8. Schlegel 1994. 9. Martindale 1993: 16-18 deconstructs the opposition between the "unstable" personality of literature and the "stable" one of life, and asks (16): "Is to talk about Horace, or to find a sense of personality in his writings, necessarily to commit oneself to the 'biographical fallacy' or the 'poetics of presence'?" Martindale in general gives an excellent statement of his position. Oliensis 1998 prefers the sociological term "face" to theNew Critical "persona" in order to keep the idea of interaction between mask and author, arguing that (2) "Horace is present in his personae ... not because these personae are authentic and accurate impressions of his true self, but because they effectively construct that self." 10. Martindale 1993: 1: "there are, and always have been, many Horaces, not one Horace." 11. Martindale 1993: 11, Oliensis 1998: 15, Habash 1999: 295, Henderson 1999: 184. 12. DuQuesnay 1984 is an essential guide to the historical dimension of Satires 1. I3. Cf. Shackleton Bailey 1982: 14-15, Oliensis 1998: 2-5. 58 CLASSICAL ANTIQUITY Volume 22/No. I/April 2003 makes between his present and his past, which is largely what will concern me here. That is to say, I am in broad agreement with the idea that Horace's satirical personality is artistically constructed, but want to stress that this persona or self portrait has a strong temporal dimension. I will also take a more flexible view of what counts as autobiography, and suggest that there ismuch more of it in the book than at firstmeets the eye. Although inconsistency and muddle are undeniably features of Horatian satire and the Horatian self, the various autobiographical elements do, on closer examination, fall into some consistent patterns. It is true that the most noticeable aspect of Horace's handling of his autobi ography is how disorganized it is. Yet there is also a contradictory impression of underlying structure. One reader detects "no eccentric chat or artless self unburdening, but a studied self-presentation."'4Of course it is both at once. This is not a chronological life-story like, say, ' in 4.1, or like 's in Tr. 4.10 which lays out in orderly fashion: birthplace, family, education, career, marriage, ruin, exile.'5 However, if all the jumbled fragments are put together, a life-story for Horace can be extracted which presents a coherent sequence of facts: his upbringing in Southern , followed by an education in ; a disastrous experience as military under Brutus, proscription, and defeat at Philippi; miraculous rebirth under Octavian; the crucial introduction to the mogul Maecenas, thanks to the talent-spottersVirgil andVarius; acceptance into an exclusive literary group; and finally a deceptively ordinary life as a celebrity.'6 But the casual nature of the remembering, theway it is just slipped into the trainof thought in a book entitled "Conversations," is striking. These are informal ways of telling a life-story, like the kind listed in a recent book on contemporary autobi ography: "career resumes, interviews, court testimonies, passing conversations over coffee, life reminiscences with friends and children, retrospective sessions in therapy."'7 As it turns out, almost every item on this list has its ancient equivalent in Horace's book, and one could add to both lists epitaphs, travel journals, and talking to one's hairdresser. Even those Horatian readers who accept that the Satires are autobiographical in a looser and more sophisticated sense still tend to assume that autobiographical elements are confined to certain parts of certain poems (only about fifty percent of the poems have any obvious such element, and straight autobiography is just one ingredient along with such varied subjects as ethical philosophy, anecdotes, and

14. Shackleton Bailey 1982: 14. Sturrock 1993 writes of autobiography as transcending "the piecemeal logging of the past" (30), the "chaos of inconsequential incidents" (48), the "aimless sum of reminiscence" or a "lived farrago" (20). Yet Horace succeeds in partly preserving the impression of unsifted information. 15. On Ovid's autobiography see Fredericks 1976: 154: "both a poet's autobiography ... and a poetic autobiography." 16. On the facts of Horace's life-story see Fraenkel 1957: 1-23, Armstrong 1986, Williams 1995. 17. Freadman 2001: 17. GOWERS:Fragments of Autobiography in Horace Satires 1 59

). Iwill suggest a different way of envisaging autobiography in Satires 1: not just as a series of disjointed, isolated glimpses, confined to certain satires-though, as I have said, it is important, as far as first impressions go, that it looks that way-but as something global, soaked into the fabric of the whole book."8 Satires 1 is after all Horace's first public appearance as far as his Roman readers are concerned. Published in 36/5 BC when he was about thirty, it is the first of many different autobiographies he wrote in his different sets of poems. The current consensus, quite reasonably, is that amore complete picture of Horace emerges as the book goes on. Zetzel speaks of a "disembodied voice" leading us towards the circle of Maecenas.20 Iwill argue that Horace leaves traces of himself right from the very opening phrase, but that often these are only traces. This is inmany ways a suppressed life, and it takes outside or retrospective knowledge from his other works to fill in the gaps. It is a truism that there is something in the experience of reading him that makes us feel that we "know" Horace.2" His backstage revelations about failures, embarrassments, and practice sessions create an illusion of authentic ity and privileged access to a private world.22 Yet for every intimate glimpse of his daily activity there is a door closed in our face. "You know me: I'm an intellectual," says the pest to Horace, to which Horace replies: "I'm off to see someone you don't know." His friend Aristius Fuscus "knows" the pest only too well.23 Autobiography has become the genre of exculpa tion ("to know me is to forgive me"), yet in "forgiving" is connected with "not knowing."24 The best joke of Satires 1 is to call the unnamed pest "someone known to me only by name" (S. 9.3 notus mihi nomine tan tum); scattered names of real and fictional people are among Horace's most effective authenticating devices. And yet he himself, his family, his sexual partners all remain safely anonymous.25 As will become clear, it is actually hard to get to know Horace through the poems if you do not know him al

18. Sturrock 1993: 15: "The original thinkerwho writes an autobiography can represent himself there as something more than a 'face,' he can be the inherent of an integral 'body' of thought." 19. E.g. Od. 1.22, 2.7, 2.13, 2.19, 3.4;Ep. 1.1.1-27,94-108, 1.7, 1.14and 1.16 (onthe Sabine farm), 1.20.20-28, 2.2.46-52. 20. Zetzel 1980: 68-69. 21. Leach 1993: 271; Martindale 1993: 1. 22. E.g. thewet dream (S. 5.82-85), the entanglement with the pest (S. 9), the first interview with Maecenas (S. 6.56-62), rehearsals of social encounters (S. 4.133-38). Oliensis 1998: 168, 186 uses Erving Goffman's notion (1959: 112-13) of the "backstage," the normally concealed place where social impressions are "painstakingly fabricated," in the context of Horace's calculatedly i"negligent"display of his preparations in the . 23. S. 9.7 "noris nos," 17 quendam uolo uisere non tibi notum, 61-62 illum/qui pulchre nosset. 24. Witness Horace's puns on ignosco I ignotus at S. 3.22-23. 25. E.g. the anonymous puella at S. 5.82, and thewomen with fantasy names at S. 2.125-26. Sturrock 1993: 12-13: "we shall never be given to read a book entitled The Autobiography of an Anonymous Man, or if we are, only so that we can know that one anonymous man at least has made his namneby being so." 60 CLASSICALANTIQUITY Volume22/No. 1/April 2003

ready. And the book is an even more ungenerous introduction to his patron Maecenas. Perhaps, therefore, we should be looking at Satires 1 as a kind of anti autobiography instead, a patchy one inwhich certain disarming details of Horace's daily life are exposed-the "still life"26of his dining table, his routes around the city, his stomach upsets, even a wet dream-while other more discreditable, antagonizing, and, indeed, importantaspects-his proscription by the triumvirs, his involvement at Philippi, his social mobility, his poetic genius-are apparently concealed. Horace's standpoint in the book is defensive: he is an unexpected success who is the victim of envy; he needs to suggest that his arrival is an innocent one and deflect the charge of social climbing.27 Pitting himself against the standard Republican memoir of the consul recording his res gestae,28 on the one hand, and complicating the casual anecdotal style of previous poetic autobiographers like Lucilius and , on the other, he produces something new: the alternative life-story of a self-made but self-effacing man.29 To write an autobiography is to advertise one's singularity, to explain why it was worth making an exception to record this one face from among the crowd (Horace's "stupid crowd" looks ahead to 's "detestable herd" and Nietzsche's "faceless herd").30But Horace is very inconsistent about thematter of his singularity. By this time, he was a "somebody," sifted out from the crowd by Maecenas.3" Yet he wants to keep the option of being a "nobody" too, being able to merge back into the crowd. When the spotlight falls on him, he tries to disappear (the most famous example is in S. 5, when he reveals himself at the moment when he is smearing black cream over his sore eyes).32 He takes passive, subordinate roles: witness, victim, bystander.We have the impression that he is dragged or propelled through life by other people. From this ambiguous position on the edge of crowds, Horace constructs a fluid personality adapted to the of indecorous satire. We glimpse him "making up" his social front when he rehearses social encounters at S. 4.135-36 (sic dulcis amicis/occurram), a front which is not then fixed but liable to wildly contradictory misunderstandings (S. 3.49-67; cf. S. 2.1.1-2: "I look either too sharp and outrageous or too feeble"). The motto "change the name and the story's

26. Fraenkel's phrase (1957: 104), adopted by Rudd 1966: 45. 27. Oliensis 1998: 19. 28. Misch 1950: 208-86. 29. Oliensis 1998: 13-14 on Horace as the forerunner of the "upwardlymobile Renaissance self-fashioners" identified by Greenblatt 1980. 30. S. 6.15-16 populo ... stultus .. ./... ineptus; Sturrock 1993: 62, 12-15 on Petrarch and Nietzsche; 16 on Freud and the "compactmajority." 31. Oliensis 1998: 46. Sturrock 1993: 229 on Gertrude Stein's provocative title "Everybody's Autobiography": "only a Somebody can write an autobiography." 32. S. 5.30-31 hic oculis ego nigra meis collyria lippus linlinere. Schlegel 1994: 102; Oliensis 1998: 28: "History's witness has sealed his eyes shut. Rather than expose his friend's secrets, the satirist literally defaces himself." GOWERS:Fragments of Autobiography inHorace Satires 1 61

about you" (S. 1.69-70) looks like a straight denial of individual identity. So do the grotesque types who populate the Satires. But does Horace cut himself off from them ormerge with them?The so-called "disembodied voice" is fleshed out with a grotesque, porous body, focused on the lower regions, the "obscene groin" (obscenum inguen) or the stomach (supinum uentrem) of a man with typhoid or lying on his back after a wet dream, by contrast with the "uplifted head" (sublimi uertice) of the .33 Horace comes with a satirical or a lyric body, then, tomatch the genre inwhich he is writing, just as different aspects of his history or his genealogy come into focus to suit generic requirements.34Sore eyes are his distinguishing feature in Satires 1, and yet theymake him indistinguishable from the faceless hordes of the morally blinkered, or bleary-eyed gossips at the barber's.35By smearing his eyes with black ointment (truly homeopathic) and his personality with minor defects, Horace preempts the blackening of his character by other people. Yet at moments of separation he boasts of his intactness and his incorruptibility: S. 6.64, uita et pectorepuro. Can the two bodies, one stained, one pure, be reconciled? Should we be looking for consistency in an individualwho embodies thismost inconsistent of genres? One image stands out-that of the outstanding body blotched with moles (S. 6.67, egregio inspersos ... corpore naeuos)-as the incarnationnot just of Horatian morality, but also of Horatian satire. Horace is telling the story of how he came of age and arrived in society,36 and he does not so much give us a chain of events as replay over and over again the same act of emergence. He is forever "making an entrance" (e.g. S. 3.63-64 me .../obtulerim tibi; S. 6.56, 61 ueni coram ... abeo, let reuocas; S. 6.112 incedo, S. 9.1 ibamforte)-sometimes purposefully, sometimes just blundering in, then bowing out and making an entrance all over again. That idea is reproduced in the format of the poems: Horace is drawing attention to the similarities between conversations and journeys, especially themessy journey of his life, by giving the poems random openings, unexpected diversions, and inconclusive endings.37 There are similar maneuvers in the argument or train of thought as well: at one point Horace claims to be returning where he came from (S. 1.108 illuc, unde abii, redeo), though that turns out to be not quite true; once he claims to be returning to himself (S. 6.45 ad me redeo), a place from which, in another poem, he says he is never absent (S. 4.133-34 neque .. ./... desum mihi).

33. S. 2.26, 8.5; 5.85 (cf. 7 uentri, 19 supinus); Od. 1.1.36. On the satirical body in general seeMiller 1998. 34. Traditional events in "the poet's life" take on a satirical tinge too. Instead of a Sibyl's prophecy, Horace hears a gypsy's horoscope (S. 9.29 with Henderson 1999: 217: "Sabella for Sibulla"). Instead of theMuses, Horace dreams of Quirinus (S. 10.32). 35. S. 3.25, 7.3. Cf. Schlegel 1994: 118. 36. Henderson 1999: 221: "Horace has now 'come of age,' as programmed," comparing S. 9.34, simul atque adoleuerit aetas and 4.119 simul atque durauerit aetas. 37. Gowers 1993. 62 CLASSICAL ANTIQUITY Volume 22/No. 1/April 2003

In this story of repeated emergence, three central facts or emphases can be detected. The first is "self-preservation," coupled with a process of reinvention.38 The most importantevent in this category was Horace's rescue from the losing side at Philippi, followed by his rebirth as a civil servant, a cog in the new machine.39 Horace clung onto what he had: reputation, money, and status. And yet these sensitive facts are hardlymentioned in theirbare form. Instead they aremediated throughmetaphor, displaced activity, and protreptic advice.40 The second could be called "socialization." This is a formation story about a boy from the outback with a nervous stammer and a bad haircut, changed by a classy education and a little help from friends in high places into an easy-going, articulate Roman citizen.4' The Satires are about getting on in society in all senses of the word, how the satirist, potentially a loathed out sider, rubs up against other people,42 how he can fit into a society that is itself coming together again. All through the book there are images connected with personal "grooming"-shaving, bathing, dressing, hair-combing, nail-clipping (the necessary preliminaries to putting oneself on view)-which, I will argue, linkmore general-seeming discussions about the history of civilization, writing satire, or the Augustan regime to Horace's own progress from gaucheness to savoir faire. The third (and this is almost inevitable when the implied frame of the book is "'conversation") is the development of Horace's speech. The Sermones are conceived as the end product of his splendid upbringing and the justification of his singling-out as a conversationalist. In that sense, they are not just spur-of-the moment effusions, but a careful teleological justification of Horace's coming-to-be as a satirist: a kind of Wordsworthian "Growth of a Poet's Mind."43 In addition, they are a record of his development as a speaker from infancy to the present day;

38. Henderson 1993: 88 n. 17: "seruare could be a one-word summary of Horatian psychology." 39. In the Odes, themiraculous escape from Philippi, like his escapes from other dangers, is represented as sparingHorace for his vocation as a lyric poet: Citroni 2000: 51-52. 40. E.g. S. 1.89 seruare ... amicos, 3.54 seruat amicos, 4.117 traditum ab antiquis morem seruare tuamque, 6.83-84 seruauit ab omni/non solum facto, uerum opprobrio quoque turpi, 9.78 sic me seruauit . 41. Coe 1984: 9: "the hero of the Bildungsroman ... will ... use the account which he has written of his later formative years as evidence that he is at last a worthy member of a sophisticated and articulate society." 42. NB the frequency of ob-words in Satires 1 suggesting social collisions, coincidences of fate, obstacles or dialectical objections. 43. Cf. Anderson 1982: 66-67, Davis 1991: 78-144, Lowrie 1997: 187-88 on the autobiograph ical poems among Horace's Odes as poetic histories or justifications of his emergence as a lyric poet; Davis 1991: 78 on "a set of procedures that have as their outcome the authentication of the poet's peculiar calling"; Lowrie 1997: 188: "The poet's autobiography tells us how Horace gets to the point where he can write such poetry." On 's poetic career as a teleology established by intertextual references (summarized by the alternative ille ego opening to theAeneid) see Lipking 1981: 77, Ziolkowski 1993: 27-56, Theodorakopoulos 1997. See also Most inArighetti-Montanari 1993: 91 for a similar phenomenon inHesiod: "Hesiodic autobiography not only represents the self textually: it constructs the text intertextually.Hence it is profoundly ironic that the only means Hesiod hadwith GOWERS:Fragments of Autobiography in Horace Satires 1 63

they contain the residue of several earlier stages in his acquisition of language. That partly explains why there are so many self-correcting checks and apologies ("this is boring," "enough of this digression," "where is all this leading?")4 punctuating the flow of his speech. It is as though Horace is putting on show a kind of "before and after" process; that is why he leaves in traces of his original nervous stammer.45 In common with many autobiographers, Horace gives a disproportionate amount of space to his childhood. Why is there this weighting towards the early years? It cannot just be that early memories are more vivid. In his study of autobiography and childhood, When theGrass was Taller, Richard Coe has suggested that it is because the distance between the spontaneous, inarticulate child and the self-conscious adult in some way reflects the distance between the autobiographer and his former self, whose messy experience he is organizing into a coherent shape.46Horace's accounts of his innocent childhood, his self scrutinizing adulthood, and the evolution of his language put him at the start of a great Western autobiographical tradition. Rousseau, for example, regarded a particular occasion when he plucked up the courage to speak to a teenage girl as themost significantmoment of his adolescence.47 To sum up: Horace is always interested in the gap between the "then" and the "'now" in his personal history, and he jumps abruptly between the two. Again and again, he harks back to a series of formative moments when he separated from the past and began to assume his present identity: these include learning to talk, leaving Venusia in Southern Italy for Rome, and being rescued from the and saved for the service of the new regime. In fact, as I have said, he does not mention any of these events as such, but I will argue that they are all alluded to indirectly in various parts of the book. From this point onwards Iwill consider some "fragments of autobiography."41 Some of them are not obviously autobiographical, because they are not on the surface about Horace, but I will suggest that they replay important episodes in other guises. Others clearly are about Horace, and here, too, I will depart from conventional thinking and suggest that they do not just record a specific moment, but conflate an entire aspect of the poet's development in all its different stages.

which to establish the unity of an identifiable scriptural characterwere discrepancies and distortions, self-corrections and self-contradictions." 44. E.g. S. 1.14 ne temorer; S. 1.95 non longa estfabula; S. 2.23 "quo res haec pertinet?" 45. S. 6.57. 46. Coe 1984: 9: "The formal literary structure is complete exactly at the point at which the immature self of childhood is conscious of its transformation into themature self of the adult who is the narrator of the earlier experience." Ibid. 2: "Childhood constitutes an alternative dimension, which cannot be conveyed by the utilitarian logic of the rational adult." Sturrock 1993: 20 on autobiography as "a 'conversion' of merely brute experience." 47. Sturrock 1993: 145 on J-J.Rousseau, Confessions (Harmondsworth, 1953: 96-97). 48. The phrase comes fromMisch 1950: 380. 64 CLASSICALANTIQUITY Volume 22/No. I/April 2003

Both kinds of passages, despite seemingly trying to put us off the scent, rework the plot of his life-story in cryptic ways.

Qui fit,Maecenas, ut nemo, quam sibi sortem seu ratio dederit seu fors obiecerit, illa contentus uiuat, laudet diuersa sequentis? 1.1-3 How does it come about,Maecenas, that no one, whether his lot in life was planned by choice or thruston him by chance, is happy with it, but always envies men in other walks of life?

These are the first lines of Satire 1.1, and I shall have most to say about this poem. Satires 1.1-3 are the so-called "diatribe"poems, lectures about how to survive in society and avoid giving offense in three areas:material success, sex, and social relations. In some sense they could be regarded as autobiographical because this is the obstacle course Horace has got through.And together theymake a kind of didactic package about coming of age: there is a great deal about fathers and sons, sexual adventures, putting on the uirilis, and preserving the family fortunes. On the surface, however, they are clearly not about Horace, but about everyone else instead. The speaker launches in with a generalization about humanity: no man is happy with his own lot. In the absence of any specific Platonic-style context for thesewords, the scenario now generally accepted is thatHorace is playing some graceless philosopher accosting Maecenas in the street.49It is in fact difficult to judge the tenor of the opening address, except to say that Horace is choosing a neutral form of his addressee's name, rather than any over-intimate praenomen or deferential periphrasis.50Indeed, one might equally well argue that this looks like a sample of a "normal" conversation switched on inmedias res, as though Horace had prefaced it with the words, aiebam Maecenati, sicut meus est mos.51 The opening, prosaic Qui fit suggests a sub-LucretianDe Hominum Natura, an ethical or didactic poem about the causes of human behavior.52 After three lines, the focus swerves away fromHorace and his addressee,Maecenas, towards a seething anthill of discontented human beings. All the recycled Hellenistic philosophy that follows might be regarded, then, as a kind of diversionary "white noise," to deny us any gossip (a possible meaning of sermo)53 about Horace or

49. Zetzel 1980: 69, Freudenburg 1993: 11-12; contra Coffey 1989: 71: "In a conversation piece addressed toMaecenas Horace cannot pontificate like an itinerant preacher." 50. S. 2.5.32-33 (ironic) "Quinte" puta aut "Publi "-gaudent praenomine molles/auriculae; Ep. 2.1.4 si longo sermone morer tua tempora, . 51. Or that this is a rehearsal of words into thin air (there is, after all, no proof thatMaecenas is listening): cf. S. 4.133-39. 52. It is also reminiscent of the introductory 8L&TL ("why is it?") of all ps.-Arist. Problemata. 53. OLD s.v. GOWERS:Fragments of Autobiography inHorace Satires 1 65

Maecenas. Maecenas is immediately balanced by nemo, "nobody," and thatcomes as a disappointment, or a blocking device. From this point therewill be no more significant names. Still, the leaked name "Maecenas" is there from the start, and thatmakes all the difference. It is not just a name to arrest the audience in their tracks, but the detail thatgives these abstractions theirhistorical context and theirpersonal perspective. Here are Horace andMaecenas sitting pretty after a revolution, content with a manufactured status quo, stable representatives of a reinvented way of being.54 Horace, who in fact has undergone a huge life-change, claims to be happywhere he is" -and thatmakes the rest of us, the anonymous unaddressed eavesdroppers on this "conversation," green with envy.56Fit, in the language of Roman arithmetic, means to be the total of a calculation, the end result of a sum, like "makes" in English.57 So in a perverse way Horace is beginning at the end of his story, and there is a conclusion already waiting to be drawn: he has arrived; he is talking toMaecenas. That makes it plausible to read Qui fit? not just as a quizzical inquiry into other people's motivations, but as the outline of an investigation into Horace himself. How did Horace get where he is now-alive and contented-and talking to Maecenas? One could at a pinch translate nemo not as "nobody" but as "'anobody."58 "How did a nobody get where he is now?" Alternatively, and less controversially, we could read "nobody" as a frustrating substitute for the name we really want to hear: Horace. Either way, Qui fit is asking to be read between the lines as a label for a document of self-justification, one man's explanation of how he arrived at his present vantage point-that is to say, since no more is available to us at the moment, the bare fact of his "speaking to Maecenas." Such an interpretation may look perverse, but what clinches it is the parenthe sis that follows: "whether his lot in life was planned by choice or thrust on him by chance." The question of the role of chance or destiny in Horace's startling rise to prominence turns out to be an obsession of the Satires (and indeed the controversy over free will and determinism is something with which, it can be argued, all auto biographers engage).59 For example, Horace states unequivocally at S. 6.52-54

54. Cf. Oliensis 1998: 106 on Od. 1.1: "In this priamel, men compete for political distinction, farmerswork their ancestral lands,merchants sail the seas, and soldiers wage wars, as if the civil war had never disrupted, prohibited, or perverted these pursuits." S. I is a satirically inverted priamel: " everyone is unhappy in his own way-except for you and me." Gold 1992: 168 speaks of "a privileged group of two, who are not quite included with the rest of mankind." 55. Cf. Oliensis 1998: 17: "Horace introduces the theme of man's discontent with his lot ... while waving the banner of Maecenas' name-Maecenas, whose favor changed the 'lot' of this Republican considerably." 56. Dramatically, then, the eavesdroppers are assimilated to the hapless inuidi of the poem. 57. OLD s.v. 58. OLD s.v. 4 cites Cic. Quinct. 68, Att. 7.3.8. 59. See Freadman 2001. 66 CLASSICALANTIQUITY Volume 22/No. 1/April 2003

that it was not luck that won him Maecenas' friendship but a recommendation from Virgil and Varius: felicem dicere non hoc/me possim, casu quod te sortitus amicum;Inulla etenim mihi te fors obtulit. There is also the outright blasphemy put into the pest's mouth at S. 9.45: "nemo dexterius est usus ;6` and the ever-present slur of S. 2.6.49: "Fortunaefilius" omnes. It could be that the stammer here in the words sibi sortem seu ratio dederit seufors ismeant to suggest a lingering discomfort. There follows a catalogue of discontented types (a soldier who wants to be a merchant, a merchant who wants to be a soldier, a lawyer who wants to be a farmer, a farmer who wants to be a lawyer), the "other people" Horace and Maecenas observe from the terra firma of emotional (and financial) stability.6' We do not yet know that Horace himself was dragged from the countryside into the city (11 rure extractus in urbem) 62 or that his own fortune was decided on the battlefield in the twinkling of an eye (7-8 horae/momento). Nor can we yet appreciate the irony in Horace's cartoon portrait of an irate offering these benighted people the chance to change their roles (18 mutatis ... partibus) and expostulating at theirperverse refusal. Itwas Horace's own willingness to change sides that saved his skin.63 Quifit can be read, then, as the wrapper for a very oblique personal tale about how Horace came to be what he is today, a 'just-so story" about his survival and refashioning. The opening question is finally, if inadequately, answered in the witness box at the end of the ninth out of ten satires: sic me seruauit Apollo (9.78 "that's how Apollo saved me")-which should be read not just as a momentary sigh of relief on getting rid of the pest, but as a general conclusion about being saved by the beneficent powers above.' Horace's Satires will not just be a tolerant investigation of other people's ways of behaving, but a partial uncovering of himself, an obfuscated how-dunnit which supplies partial answers to the implied question shadowed in the first line and all the questions that follow. How did he escape justice and how did Apollo save him? How did he end up in Brundisium? How did a statue of Priapus come to have a split backside? The explanations that are offered are often hopelessly unsatisfactory aetiologies, which sidestep questions with bold statements of fact: this was the end of the road; this is the end of the story.

60. Referring ambiguously toHorace orMaecenas. 61. Gold 1992: 164 speaks of the "choppy phrasing" of everyday speech here. Words like iactantibus 6, infiet 21, uertit 28, inuersum 36 suggest storm-tossed fortunes and give more than a hint of ' suaue mari magno. 62. Cf. S. 6.76 sed puerum est ausus Romam portare. 63. Jupiter is a mock-Maecenas /Octavian: 1.22 uotis ut praebeat aurem; cf. 9.76-77 ego uero/oppono auriculam, 2.1.18-19 nisi dextro tempore Flacciluerba per attentam non ibunt Caesaris aurem. Cf. also S. 2.6.52 deos quoniam propius contingis; Ep. 1.19.43-44 Iouis auribus ista Iseruas. 64. Pace Mazurek 1997 who reads this as ironic:Horace really is in the soup by being hauled into court. GOWERS:Fragments of Autobiography in Horace Satires 1 67

This ambiguous, unanswered Qui fit sets the pattern for the book, which is full of questions we would like to ask about Horace but which turn out to be just small talk or directed at other people:

"quo res haec pertinet?" (2.23 "where is this leading?") "quo pacto iudicium illud/fugerit? " (4.99-100 "how on earth was he not convicted?") "tquis homo hic est? quo patre natus?" (6.29 "who is this man? who was his father?" cf. 5.55) "quid agis? " (9.4 "what are you up to?") "unde uenis/et quo tendis?" (9.62-63 "where have you come from and where are you heading?") "quo tu, turpissime?" (9.75 "where are you going, scumbag?")

The most blatant question of the book, "Maecenas quomodo tecum?" ("what's Maecenas like when he's with you?"), asked by the pest at 9.43, is stigmatized as beyond the pale.65 There is a further personal or, rather, professional reason for starting the book with a question. Horace's official position when he wrote the Satires was that of quaestorius, quaestorial scribe, literally "secretary to the investigators" (the original meaning of quaestores). By his time these civil servants dealt largely with fiscal matters, such as the internal revenue.66 Never in Book 1 does Horace explicitly lay claim to this office (which the Suetonian Vita Horati tells us he bought when he mended his fortunes after Philippi), though he does mention it in Book 2.67 Indeed he is often satirical about scribes and other petty officials in the course of the book.68 There is a kind of unspoken paradox involved in being offered "conversations" recorded by a secretary (enjoyed by Horace with his references to paper, pens, and dictation at the end of S. 5 and S. 10). In other words, it was Horace's job-description to ask questions, to audit and inspect accounts. S. 1 shows him going through the motions of his professional life. The secretary to the investigators starts, dutifully enough, with an inquiry, but ends, in his other persona as poet-philosopher, by rejecting the idea of quaerere, in its sense of go-getting or pursuing money.69 Throughout the poem financial vocabulary-adding, subtracting,multiplying, totting up-is played off against

65. This question sounds like another way of putting S. 1.1 Qui fit,Maecenas. JohnHenderson points out tome that since this opening half-line could, unpunctuated, have been the ancient subtitle of the book, it is not justHorace's defensive autobiography but alsoMaecenas' defensive biographv that is being announced here. 66. Purcell 1983: 147 on the ancients' lack of distinction between literacy and numeracy in the apparitorial sphere; Armstrong 1986: 263-67 on Horace as scriba. See Plin. Ep. 1.10.9 on tedious administrative duties: nam distringor officio, ut maximo sic molestissimo: sedeo pro tribunali, subnoto libellos, conficio tabulas, scribo plurimas sed inlitteratissimas litteras. 67. S. 2.6.36-37 "de re communi scribae magna atque noua te/orabant hodie meminisses, Quinte, reuerti." 68. S. 5.35, 66-69; cf. S. 2.5.55-56 recoctus/scriba ex quinqueuiro. 69. S. 1.92 denique sitfinis quaerendi; cf. 38 quaesitis; 27 quaeramus seria. 68 CLASSICALANTIQUITY Volume22/No. I/April 2003 philosophical terms. In the first lines alone, fit can mean the sum total of a calculation, ratio can mean accounting, sors a lump sum or capital.70 So the poem as a whole could be regarded as an ironic inspection of human accounts, which diverts attention fromHorace andMaecenas' own fortunes; the instruction sitfinis quaerendi (92 "let there be an end to searching") is a caution to the reader as well: put an end to your inquiries. The satire is infused throughout with a "civil service" coloring, with its talk of rainy-day savings and pensions schemes, weights and measures, and clerks with sore eyes.7" It is proof of where Horace has ended up and a parody of his working life. At the end of the poem Horace puts his economic principles into poetic practice with two exemplary images: one of a frantically competitive chariot race, seemingly arrested inmidstream (113-16), and the other of a contented man leaving life like a well-fed dinner guest (uti conuiua satur 119)-a discreet thank-you toMaecenas. The line-endings currus ("chariot" 114) and uita ("life" 1 8) round off a poem which in effect gives us the curriculum uitae of an unhurried man. In the last lines Horace bows out early with another typical Callimachean or Epicurean gesture: (120-21): "That's enough now. In case you think I've ransacked the book boxes of sore-eyed Crispinus [assumed to be a verbose Stoic philosopher], I shan't add another word." This also works as a kind of early retirement speech. Sore eyes were famously an occupational hazard for scribes (and sore eyes, for all kinds of reasons, are a kind of distinguishing mark on Horace's passport throughout the book).72The last phrase, uerbum non amplius addam (121 "I shan't add another word"), would, incidentally, make an appropriate scribe's epitaph.73 Horace's present existence, then, is alluded to covertly throughout the poem, but it is also under-laid with elements of his past. This, after all, is his sermo primus, and as such it has the flavor of a child's first socialized speech: the

70. OLD svv. Cf. analogies between life and accounting at Ter.Ad. 855-70. For autobiography as banking: Sturrock 1993: 212. At Ep. 1.1.12 Horace represents philosophy as a lump sum for his retirement: condo et compono quae mox depromere possim. 71. S. 1.31-35;45,50-51,54-55,74; 120. 72. E.g. Cic. Att. 7.13a.3 (= 137.3 SB) dictaui propter lippitudinem; S. 3.25, 5.30, 7.3. See Cucchiarelli 2002: 70 on breuitas as a necessary virtue for a scriba lippus: e.g. Cic. Att. 8.13.1 (= 163.1 SB): lippitudinismeae signum tibi sit librariimanus et eadem causa breuitatis. 73. Cf. CIL 1 1012.3 QVI ISTIC SEPVLTVS EST NEC LOQVI NEC SERMONARE POTEST. See Ferri 1993: 131-37 on Horace's debt in the language of the Epistles to formulaic epitaphs for "littlemen"; also Oliensis 1998: 168 on the book at Ep. 1.20 as bearer of a biographical "epitaph" for Horace. For autobiographical epitaphs see Armstrong 1989. Purcell 1983: 136 speaks of the stigma attached to the scribe "as a menial, a plebeian, a social climber and perhaps a foreigner," which provoked snobbish remarks like the one recorded about Flavius Liberalis of Ferentium (Suet. Vesp. 3): nec quicquam amplius quam quaestorio scriba. Does Horace's ending here (non amplius) suggest the limits of his social ambition too? Freudenburg 2001: 33-34 sees an allusion in non amplius addam to Lucr. 3.941 cur amplius addere quaeris, very close in the text to the simile comparing life to a banquet (3.938 ut plenus uitae conuiua recedis) which is generally acknowledged to be behind Horace's uti conuiua satur (1.1 19). GOWERS:Fragments ofAutobiography inHorace Satires 1 69

"naive"Qui fit? ("How come?"), animal fables (the ant and the grasshopper, the stubborn donkey, the neighbor's goat), and the outlines of elementary arithmetic and geometry. Horace is often mildly satirical about thematerialistic slant of Roman elementary education,74 and in the first three poems he substitutes his own moral ABC for these rudimentaryaccounting skills: satisfaction with limited resources, distinguishing between right and wrong, avoidance of ambition and other extreme forms of behavior, preservation of resources, family and friends.75 At 25-26 comes the famous image of schoolmasters bribing childrenwith biscuits to learn their prima elementa, which means both the alphabet and the first principles of a philosophical system.76 This image marks the start of a mini uita, from the schoolroom (25 ut pueris olim) to earning a serious living in the real world (27 amoto quaeramus seria ludo)77 to retirement (31 senes ut in otia tuta recedant). The story about a greedy man drowned in the river Aufidus (59-60) personalizes thewell-known Callimachean metaphor of themuddy Euphrates.78 This is perhaps meant to look like one of Horace's father's cautionary tales (the Aufidus was Horace's local childhood river).79 So it comes about (cf. 1 17 inde fit) thatmany differentHoraces-Horace the scribe andHorace thepoet-philosopher, Horace the child, and Horace the adult-are commemorated simultaneously in a poem which looks on the surface as though it is about everyone else.

insueuit pater optimus hoc me, ut fugerem exemplis uitiorum quaeque notando. cum me hortaretur, parce frugaliter atque

74. E.g. AP 325 Romani pueri longis rationibus assem/discunt in partis centum diducere. "dicat/filius Albini [orAlbani]: si de quincunce remota est/uncia, quid superat? poteras dixisse. " "triens"" "eu,Irem poteris seruare tuam. redit uncia, quid fit? "/ "semis"; Ep. 1.1.53-56: "o ciues, ciues, quaerenda pecunia primum est; luirtus post nummos ": haec Ianus summus ab imo/prodocet, haec recinunt iuuenes dictata senesque. /laeuo suspensi loculos tabulamque lacerto (the last line, possibly interpolated, is repeated from S. 6.74). 75. Lipking 1981: 16, 59: W. B. Yeats called Per amica silentia lunae an "alphabet." 76. The first of many "childish" images of Horace learning his basic skills: the intimidated schoolboy removed from local bullies (S. 6.72-75), the stammering interviewee (6.57), the dreaded prospect of becoming school dictation material himself (10.74-75, fulfilled by the final dictation of 10.92: i,puer, atque meo citus haec subscribe libello), and the final destination of his first book of Epistles, personified as an aging pedagogue teaching syllables in elementary school (Ep. 1.20.17: hoc quoque temanet, ut pueros elementa docentem/occupet extremis in uicis balba senectus). Cf. also Ep. 1.1.22-27, 1.18.13-14, 2.1.126. For an interesting parallel, see Hunter 1989: 2 n. 5 on the writing-tablets handed to in theAetia prologue: "Critics differ as to whether vv. 21-27 refer toCallimachus' first attempt atwriting poetry or to his first efforts atwriting when a little boy ... Itmay be in fact thatCallimachus thinks of the twomoments as coincidental." 77. Cf. Quint. 1.2.1 sed nobis iampaulatim adcrescere puer et exire de gremio et discere serio incipiat. 78. Eofit (S. 1.56) has the concluding tone of amoralizing just-so story. 79. The Aufidus also seals Horace's lyric autobiography (ex humili potens) at Od. 3.30.10 quae uiolens obstrepit Aufidus (echoing his louder, lyric voice), and backs up his claim to be writing "far-sounding" poetry at Od. 4.9.2 longe sonantem .. .Aufidum. 70 CLASSICALANTIQUITY Volume 22/No. 1/April 2003

uiuerem uti contentus eo quod mi ipse parasset: "nonne uides Albi ut male uiuat filius utque Baius inops?magnum documentum, ne patriam rem perdere quis uelit." a turpimeretricis amore cum deterreret: "Scetani dissimilis sis." ne sequerermoechas, concessa cum uenere uti possem: "deprensi non bella est fama Treboni" aiebat. "sapiens, uitatu quidque petitu sit melius, causas reddet tibi; mi satis est si traditumab antiquismorem seruare tuamque, dum custodis eges, uitam famamque tueri incolumem possum; simul ac durauerit aetas membra animumque tuum, nabis sine cortice." sic me formabatpuerum dictis.... 4.105-21

Itwas my splendid father who instilled this habit inme; he labeled various vices with examples, to dissuade me. Urging me to live within my means, content with what he had himself provided for me, he would say: "Can't you see how badly Albius' son performs, or that hopeless bankrupt Baius? A vital lesson not to throw away the family fortunes." To warn me off affairs with whores, he'd say: "Don't act like Scetanus." To stop me going aftermarried girls, when I could choose above-board sex instead, he'd say: "Trebonius got caught, and his reputation's not a nice one. Some day a will tell you why some things are worth avoiding, while others you should go for; enough for me if I can keep old family customs going, and help you stay afloat, and, while you need a guardian, keep your life and name intact. As soon as time has made your mind and body firm, you'll swim without your water-wings." That was how he used his words to shape me in my boyhood.

After the prima elementa of S. 1, the ABC as an elementary list to be continued figures again as a kind of yardstick for satirical teaching and development. Horace's stern father, a central figure in Satires 1, is credited with being the chief cause, the original quifit, behind his good intentions as a satirist; at 6.71 he says causa fuit pater his. His satirical impulses, he wants to suggest, are a moral reflex planted in him as part of a standard Roman upbringing.80 The passage has a teleological aspect, then, and a disarming one too. For the father, Roman adolescence is a survival course: the tender limbs and mind hardened off by age (simul ac durauerit aetas/membra animumque tuum); the child molded by maxims (sic melformabat puerum dictis) and learning to

80. Schrijvers 1993: 48 notes thatHorace and Trebatius' discussion about satire in S. 2.1 is also a dialogue between a father (12 pater optime) and a child (60 puer). GOWERS:Fragments of Autobiography inHorace Satires 1 71

float unaided above the surface of a treacherous society (nabis sine cortice).8' This glimpse of a lesson at his knee is exemplary and metonymic; it is itself the kind of magnum documentum (4.1 10 "important lesson"), as far asHorace's moral education goes, that the father sees in the behavior of others. That is because all the father's themes here-"don't squander your money," "don't bother with married women or prostitutes when you can get easier sex somewhere in between," his emphasis on preserving oneself, one's resources, and one's reputation (utfugerem, ne perdere, morem seruare tuamque, deprensi non bella est fama Treboni), the institution of a way of life (insueuit, morem), the idea of living contentedly (uiuerem uti contentus), even theHoratian catchword satis est-all these have been the subjectmatter of the first three satires, the templateHorace has obediently followed in his own satirical teaching so far.82 This can be illustrated by a small detail in S. 4. At line 28 Horace, now practicing satire himself, plucks examples at random from the crowd: hunc capit argenti splendor; stupetAlbius aere. One man is lured by silver's glitter; Albius goes mad for bronze.

Why Albius? Horace's subsequent recollection of the paternal homily reveals that this name too is textbook copy from his father: (109-10): Albi .. .filius. Both sets of names are alphabetically generated (Horace's Al-bius, his father's Al-bi filius ... Baius), as if to suggest that moral education is a natural progression from the child's firstABC.83 Yet it is not only Horace's elementary education that is recalled here. This sample lesson also looks ahead to his student education in philosophy. The father's basic moral teaching lies somewhere in the middle; the word notando links him with Horace's conception of "primitive" satire, related to Athenian Old Comedy, as finger-pointing at sinners in a community and strict adherence to the letter of the law.84 But Horace's father goes on to defer to a philosopher's (1 15 sapiens) ability to give his son more sophisticated explanations (116 causas reddet, another qui

81. For the formation of a child's speech cf. Ep. 2.1.126 os tenerumpueri balbumque poeta figurat. Horace and his father give themodel version of the dysfunctional comic scene between an angry father and his prodigal son staged at 4.48-52. Leach 1971: 620-21 sees theirs as a comic tableau, too, born out of Horace's more general discussion of comedy's relation to satire throughout the poem. 82. Oliensis 1998: 25 on the emphasis on "contentment" in both versions. 83. For what it isworth, the two other names in the father's speech, Scetanus and Trebonius, are alphabetically adjacent. In the arithmetic lesson atAP 325, another "boy A" (filiusAlbini orAlbani) gets his sum right and is told: "You'll be able to take care of your money" (rem seruare). Oliensis 1998: 178 notes how the elementary philosophical lessons repeated at Ep. 1.1.27 (elementis) are reduced to elementary ABC lessons at Ep. 1.20.17 (pueros elementa docentem), when the book is thrown onto the scrapheap to become an aging schoolteacher: the reduction of the book to its component letters is suggested by the onomatopoeic adjective balba, "stammering," with its jumbled a- and b-sounds. 84. S. 4.3-5 siquis erat dignus describi, quod malus acfur, /quod moechusforet aut sicarius aut alioqui/famosus, multa cum libertate notabant (of Old Comedy). 72 CLASSICAL ANTIQUITY Volume 22/No. I/April 2003 fit) of abstract questions about how to negotiate his way through life (115-16 uitatu quidque petitulsit melius). His son, it is implied, is going to be educated out of this early dogmatism into a more flexible, philosophical attitude towards writing satire.85 Horace makes several extravagant gestures of respect towards this humble yet aspiring father, but it has proved tricky to reconcile his apparent sincerity with theworrying echo of didactic fathers fromNew Comedy in the father's turn of speech.86There is a double genealogy on display here: satire's descent from comedy, togetherwith the sophisticated son's descent from the rustic father.87But another reason why such a figure (a tough-speaking salesman or auctioneer, we are told)88 needs to be so prominent in the Satires, in addition to bearing the load of his son's provincial ambition and being the focus of his pietas, is to measure Horace's progress away from an over-simple way of behaving and of writing satire, to show how far he has come. To put it brutally, the father is just another of the obstacles Horace has got past. simplicior quis et est, qualem me saepe libenter obtulerim tibi,Maecenas, ut forte legentem aut tacitum impellat quouis sermonemolestus: "communi sensu plane caret" inquimus. eheu, quam temere in nosmet legem sancimus iniquam. 3.63-67

Or say a man's a bit naive (the kind of man I'd like to think I often strike you as, Maecenas), the type who barges in on someone as he reads or sits in silence, and pesters him with uninvited conversation. "What a total lack of tact!" we cry. Oh dear, unwise of us to put our blessing on a rule that works against us.

In this passage it is Horace's social development that is spanned in a short space. S. 3 in general proposes a social contract between satirist and society, speaker and listener. Horace condemns the vindictive Rome he lives in and asks: why can't we all be like indulgent fathers, who give loving names to their ill-favored sons' personal defects? (One wonders whether he regarded as a greater insult

85. RichardMartin suggests tome that the line-stopped phrasing of the father's moral precepts represents an old-fashioned, unsubtle kind of diction. For uitatu ... petitu 115 as "schoolmasterly pedantry" seeMarouzeau 1972: 67. 86. At S. 6.93-96 he declares that he would not change his father if given the chance to go back in time (nam si natura iuberetla certis annis aeuum remeare peractum ... mneiscontentus honestos/... nollem mihi sumere), an attitude of contentment itself in linewith his father's teaching. See above all Leach 1971 on echoes of 's dogmatic Demea. 87. Schlegel 2000. 88. S. 6.86 praeco ... aut, utfuit ipse, coactor. The praeco was traditionally associated with a loud-mouthed sales-pitch and self-promotion; in this poem cf. 6.42-44 (43 sonabit/cornua quod uincatque tubas); Johnson 1993: 29 on the father: "spouting hillbilly sentiments in hillbilly talk at the top of his lungs." GOWERS:Fragments of Autobiography inHorace Satires 1 73 or endearment.) A vignette of a "messy young genius" with a lopsided haircut, trailing toga, and flapping shoes (30-34) looks like a self-deprecating portrait of Horace,89 but so does another of a man who is over-cautious about the pitfalls of a bitterly vindictive society (hicfugit omnis/insidias nullique malo latus obdit apertum, Icum genus hoc inter uitae uersemur ubi acris/inuidia atque uigent ubi crimina 58-61). After a list of people who deviate from the norm in various forgivable ways, the poem suddenly becomes unquestionably personal, as Horace recalls his own tendency to butt in onMaecenas' silence or quiet reading and "annoy [him]with some unwanted conversation or other" (quouis sermonemolestus).90 The example is there to illustrate crass behavior (simplicior), but it is worth noting that it is described as deliberate (libenter) and habitual (saepe).91As BarbaraGold notes in her shrewd analysis of this passage, there are at least three different versions of Horace here: the brash intruder,who does not think before disturbing his patron; the critical sophisticate, who courts solidarity with Maecenas by condemning these gauche manners; and finally themellow Socratic satirist,who is too humbly aware of his own faults to cast the first stone.92 The passage could also be read as a kind of layered autobiography: theHorace of today is first censorious, then indulgent to his former self, whom he has not entirely shaken off. The implication of me saepe ... lobtulerim is that this kind of incident is likely to be repeated. That is because the point of the poem is to claim a kind of indulgence fromMaecenas. S. 3 contains several pointed examples of inconsiderate speakers and tolerant or helpless listeners: first the prima donna Tigellius, given free rein by Caesar (4 Caesar, qui cogere posset); then Rufo themoneylender, who bludgeons a captive audience of debtors (89 porrecto iugulo) into hearing out his unpalatable histories. Horace's intrusion intoMaecenas' perfectly satisfactory silence could be seen as a self-deprecating scenario for the Sermones as a whole, a more secluded alternative to the accepted picture of Horace as a philosopher accosting the great man in the street. The conversations, according to this satirically distorted picture, are seen not as a two way process, but as a tedious interruptionby a pest (65 quouis sermonemolestus) of someone fastidious but too beautifully mannered to throw him out (of course, throughout the Satires, Maecenas is never given a chance to answer back).93 But a serious presumption about amicitia lies behind all this.The same fluid equilibrium

89. Armstrong 1989: 38; Hawtrey 1979: 250-5 1. 90. I takemolestus with the preceding clause here. Apologies for interruptingAugustus: cf. Ep. 1. 13.1 7-1 8, Ep. 2.1.4. 91. Woodcock 1938: 9 establishes that obtulerim here refers not to the past, but potentially to the future. 63-64 me. .obtulerim picks up S. 1.2 seufors obiecerit: in this version of the encounter, Horace denies that ratio is involved (cp. S. 6.54 nulla etenim mihi tefors obtulit; and cf. S. 9.1-4 forte .. .accurrit, 60-61 ecce!... occurrit-though in this poem again allusions toOedipus-gout, crossroads, Apollo-suggest a counter-element of fate). 92. Gold 1992: 170-71. 93. Horace is there to give an autobiographical apologia onMaecenas' behalf (see above n. 66). 74 CLASSICALANTIQUITY Volume 22/No. 1/April 2003

between importunate speaker and indulgent listener forms the basic protocol of theSatires: Maecenas held to ransom by his own noblesse oblige; Horace granted a freedom of speech which has the potential to strain the limits of considerate behavior.

Sometimes Horace's own life is mirrored in other types of historical pro gression. Later in the same satire, Horace produces a Cynic's history of human civilization, which is often read as botched and trivializing ,94 but is also doing some of the serious work of autobiography: cum prorepserunt primis animalia terris, mutum et turpepecus, glandem atque cubilia propter unguibus et pugnis, dein fustibus atque ita porro pugnabant armis, quae post fabricaueratusus, donec uerba, quibus uoces sensusque notarent, nominaque inuenere; dehinc absistere bello, oppida coeperuntmunire, et ponere leges, ne quis fur esset neu latro neu quis adulter. nam fuit anteHelenam cunnus taeterrimabelli causa, sed ignotis perieruntmortibus illi, quos uenerem incertam rapientismore ferarum uiribus editior caedebat ut in grege taurus. iura inuenta metu iniusti fateare necesse est, tempora si fastosque uelis euoluere mundi. nec natura potest iusto secernere iniquum, diuidit ut bona diuersis, fugienda petendis.... 3.99-1 14

When living creatures poked their heads out from primeval peat, a dumb and brutish herd, they'd tussle over caves and acorns, first with claws and fists, and then with clubs, and in due course with weapons that experience had fashioned; they then came up with verbs and nouns to label grunts and mute sensations. In time they ceased from war, built towns, and started putting laws in place, to put an end to thieves, adulterers, and brigands. Even before Helen's time, the foulest cause of war was cunt. But those men died forgotten deaths, slaughtered, as they snatched haphazard sex like beasts, by stronger men, like bulls among their herd. You have to own that justice was invented to avoid injustice, if you care to unroll the annals of the history of the world. And nature cannot separate unjust and just, as she can sift out good from bad, or disadvantage from advantage.

Horace tells how early man crawled out from the primeval swamp; he was brutish and dumb, he mated promiscuously, he fought with fists and claws. Then he invented weapons to sort out his disputes, and language, verbs and nouns, to

94. Armstrong 1989: 40. GOWERS:Fragments of Autobiography inHorace Satires 1 75

label his grunts and sensations. The final stage was city life and institutionalized justice: criminals could be eradicated (ne quis fur esset neu latro neu quis adulter: an allusion to the ), and there is a hint of later, more abstract distinctions made between right andwrong. If one wanted to read this civilizing process as an analogy for something else, the most obvious parallel would be the history of satire-from bare-fisted confrontation to verbal vindictiveness and stigmatization of sinners, and beyond that to restraintand deference before the law. However, it works equally well as a prehistory of Horace himself. He too was an aboriginal who crawled out from his native soil to become articulate and civil. He too discovered language, verbs and nouns (or words and names), to label his early grunts and sensations; theword notarent makes him a finger-pointing proto-satirist in his father's image.95He too learned to forgo destructive relations with women owned by other men (the subject of S. 2), to exchange unknown death (ignotis mortibus) for an unknown life, and to draw in his claws. Civil-war violence, Horace's own Dark Ages, is suggested inpugnabant armis; while even the taboo name of Brutus, Horace's disgraced ex-rex, is glossed or paraphrased in mutum et turpepecus ("dumb and ugly herd").96 fueritLucilius, inquam, comis et urbanus, fuerit limatior idem quam rudis et Graecis intacti carminis auctor quamque poetarum seniorum turba; sed ille, si foret hoc nostrum fato delatus in aeuum, detereret sibi multa, recideret omne quod ultra perfectum traheretur,et in uersu faciendo saepe caput scaberet uiuos et roderet unguis. 10.64-71

Let's say Lucilius was witty and urbane, that he had more polish than the first practitioner of makeshift verse no Greek had touched, and than the crowd of older poets. But, if fate transported him to modern times, he'd pare his stuff right down, prune anything that overran the limits of perfection, and when he wrote his verse, he'd tend to scratch his head and gnaw his nails down to the quick.

S. 10 again reworks Horace's civilizing process, this time in a literary context. Lucilius is viewed as a kind of transitional figure between primitive early satire and Horace's exactingly polished product. The poem charts the development of satire from backwoods crudity, via a smoothed-up Lucilius (64-66fuerit Lucilius, inquam, Icomis et urbanus, fuerit limatior idem/quam rudis et Graecis intacti carminis auctor), who "rubbed the city down with salt" (3-4), yet whose poems always contained tollenda (51; cf. 4.11 quod tollere uelles, "things you'd want

95. Cf. 4.106 notando, 4.5 notabant. 96. Henderson 1998: 81-82 on Brutus puns in S. 7; see also Feeney 1992: 11. 76 CLASSICAL ANTIQUITY Volume 22/No. 1 /April 2003

to take away"), all the way to the obsessive perfectionist of the present day, who channels his violent impulses into literary "grooming." This is the kind of behind-the-scenes revelation thatgives such an illusion of authenticity toHorace's autobiography, like the urgent private rehearsals of social encounters put on show at S. 4.133. Even in this final poem which presents the confident, finishedHorace on parade, surroundedby his sophisticated literary friends, there is still something "primitive" about what goes on behind the dressing-room door before he can make a public appearance. The poet is revealed scraping, sawing, scratching, and gnawing the quicks of his fingernails (uiuos et roderet unguis)-the only live victims of present-day satire!9

incipit ex illomontis notos ostentare mihi, quos torretAtabulus et quos numquam erepsemus, nisi nos uicina Triuici uilla recepisset lacrimoso non sine fumo, udos cum foliis ramos urente camino. hic ego mendacem stultissimus usque puellam ad mediam noctem exspecto; somnus tamen aufert intentumVeneri; tum immundo somnia uisu nocturnam uestem maculant uentremque supinum. 5.77-85

From that point Apulia began to show me her familiar hills, scorched by the Sirocco, from which we'd never have emerged if a villa near Trivicum had not let us in, with teary smoke, a fireplace burning branches still with leaves on. Here, like an idiot, Iwaited up till midnight for a lying whore. But sleep transported me away, all keyed up for Venus; then dirty visions in my dreams besmirched my nightshirt and my stomach as I lay in bed.

In S. 5 Horace returns to his roots in Southern Italy, in the train of an official embassy to make peace between Octavian and Antony. Here one would expect the three-way metaphor of the satires (life=journey=conversation) to have the most potential. But Horace perversely does not replay the country boy's arrival in Rome. Instead he makes a backwards journey (5.1 Egressum magna me accepit Aricia Roma) down the Via Appia and the Via Minucia to his homeland of Apulia.98 This passage comes at the point where, following the signposts Horace has provided, we would expect to be arriving at his birthplace Venusia. Unlike other Augustan poets, whose glorification of their home towns plays a large part in their

97. Cf. the cavemen at S. 3.101-102 unguibus ... Ipugnabant, and thewitches at S. 8.26-27 scalpere terram/unguibus. Imperfectly filed nails are a source of friction between Horace and Maecenas at Ep. 1.1.104-105, 7.51, 19.46; cf. AP 294. 98. A movement reworked in the direction of the argument at 1.108 illuc, unde abii, redeo. GOWERS:Fragments of Autobiography in Horace Satires 1 77

often brief autobiographies,99Horace waits until S. 2.1.35 to reveal, very casually, that he is Venusinus. Here there are only a few cryptic clues that he is revisiting his origins. First, he marks this homecoming stage as his own incipit (the first word of the section), and identifies the mountains as notos, an adjective normally used of incriminating labels in the Satires, to make them the distinguishing feature of his childhood landscape."0 They are "familiar" to him, and yet how "well known" are they to those who do not yet know Horace? Then incipit ... Apulia ... lostentare mihi personifies Apulia as a kind of "show and tell" elementary teacher (like Apulia/Pullia the primitive nurse in Od. 3.4).101The phrase quos numquam erepsemus restages Horace's lucky primal act of emergence,102while the welcome reception at the villa at Trivicum (recepisset), one of a series in the poem, stands in for all the other miraculous or impassive "arrivals" in his life."'3 But at this point smoke gets in his eyes (lacrimoso non sine fumo). Horace suddenly defaults on his own promise of incipit ... /ostentare (that he has begun to show us something) and starts to hold back. This comes at the moment when he is stood up by an anonymous girl with whom he had a tryst (ego ... stultissimus "idiot that I was"), which causes him to have a wet dream. The words intentum Veneri ("keyed up for sex," "bent on Venus") are a nod and a wink to those who already know Horace's origins. They fix our sights on his birthplace, Venusia, only to divert us from it, just as sleep carries Horace away (somnus tamen aufert).104 We wake to find ourselves clattering down a different road. The final part of the poem acts out a kind of learning process, a further reemergence from Venusia: from 82 ego stultissimus (contrastingwith 2-3 He liodorus/Graecorum longe doctissimus), through 90-91 callidus ... uiator, to 100-101 credat Iudaeus Apella, Inon ego; namque ... didici. Horace the dupe, diddled by cheating landlords, a deceitful girl, and malicious mosquitoes, is finally

99. E.g. Virg. G. 4.563-64 illo Vergilium me temporedulcis alebat/Parthenope; VitaDonati 36 Mantua me genuit, Calabri rapuere, tenet nunc/Parthenope; cecini pascua rura duces; Prop. 4.1.62 mi folia ex hedera porrige, Bacche, tua, lut nostris tumefacta superbiat Umbria libris, /Umbria Romani patria Callimachi; Ovid Tr. 4.10.3 Sulmo mihi patria est, gelidis uberrimus undis, Imihi qui nouies distat ab urbe decem. 100. Cf. Prop. 1.22.3 si Perusina tibipatriae sunt nota sepulcra. 101. Od. 3.4.10 nutricis extra limenApuliae (or limina Pulliae). Does the similarity with S. 5 help toweight the probability there towardsApuliae? 102. Like the first beings emerging from the primeval swamp (S. 3.99 prorepserunt). Repeated crawling movements within Satires I (cf. S. 5.25 repimus, 1.37 prorepit) are in accordance with the humble locomotion of the genre itself: Ep. 2.1.250-51 sermones ... Irepentis per humum; see Gowers 1993: 57. 103. Cf. S. 5.1-2 me accepit Aricia ... /hospitio modico; S. 5.50 hinc nos Coccei recipit plenissima uilla. 104. Gowers 1993: 59-60. Freudenburg 2001: 54 notes thatHorace continues to tease us with the similar-sounding uestem and uentrem. The echo possibly goes furtherwith uersu, uenit uilissimus. and uiator (87-90). 78 CLASSICAL ANTIQUITY Volume 22/No. I/April 2003

educated (didici) into Epicurean scepticism or agnosticism, separated from and sneering at the provincial clerks and runaway slaves he has left behind.'05

ut ueni coram, singultim pauca locutus infans namque pudor prohibebat plura profari non ego me claro natum patre, non ego circum me Satureiano uectari rura caballo, sed quod eram narro. respondes, ut tuus est mos, pauca; abeo, et reuocas nono postmense iubesque esse in amicorum numero.magnum hoc ego duco quod placui tibi, qui turpi secernis honestum, non patre praeclaro, sed uita et pectore puro. 6.56-64

When I came face to face with you, I blurted out some paltry words; for speechless shyness held me back from further burbling. I did not say my father was well known, or that I rode round my estates on plump Italian horseflesh. Instead, I told you what I was. And your reply, as is your style, was brief. I left, and nine months later, got your call to be among your friends. It means a lot to me to be accepted by you, when I know you know the difference between what's base and what is noble, not because I had a famous father, but because my history and my morals were unstained.

The most straightforward statement of autobiographical intent (quod eram narro: "I relate what I used to be," "I speak of my past") comes in the middle of the most obviously autobiographical poem in the book, S. 6, in the context of the most crucial preliminary conversation inHorace's history, his first interviewwith Maecenas. Horatian ironymakes this into a non-conversation par excellence, one be tween a naturally shy interviewee,Horace (singultimpauca loCutUs),06 and a char acteristically laconic interviewer,Maecenas (respondes, ut tuus est mos, /pauca). It is the shared lack of small talk, in one case natural, in the other learned, that bonds the two men and creates the opportunity for all their future "conversations." Once again, this conversation stands for every other conversation too, past and fu ture.Horace's nervous stammer (infans namque pudor prohibebat plura profari) replays the first burbling sounds of a pre-linguistic child (bringing out the double meaning of infans) at this moment of initiation into a new kind of adult speech.l07

105. Cf. Leach 1978: 90 on "how far the man of humble country origins has come as a sophisticated city dweller keenly sensitive to the incommodities of provincial accommodation." 106. Cf. S. 4.17-18 di benefecerunt, inopisme quodquepusilli/finxeruntanimi, raro etperpauca loquentis. 107. Cf. Henderson 1999: 184 on Maecenas' ten-month "gestation" of Horace, and the "mid wifery" of Virgil. Joshua Katz points out to me that "p" is one of the first sounds uttered by a baby GOWERS:Fragments of Autobiography inHorace Satires 1 79

(The same stammer is given another run inHorace's subsequent protestation of his credentials: 64 non patre praeclaro, sed uita et pectore puro.) Yet theway in which the conversation is recorded is controlled by all thediplomatic skills Horace has since learned fromMaecenas. The content of the interview is censored, not blurted out, and it is a new kind of embarrassment (pudor) which now prevents Horace from saying more. The satire as a whole poses as a "conversation" with Maecenas which su persedes this early encounter. Horace has no more need of the intermediaries Virgil and Varius (55 dixere, quid essem) and offers a more confident rethink ing of the "naive" first satire (the relaxed opening Non quia, Maecenas clearly picks up S. 1.1 Quifit, Maecenas)."08 Face to face with his patron again (cf. 56 ueni coram), he claims a "cat may look at a king" solidarity with him in their shared regard for innate nobility as opposed to blue blood.109 The comparatively open autobiography which surrounds thememory of the first stifled interview (partly expanding quod eram narro and justifying uita et pectore puro) is based on a series of removals from the lumpen crowd, first from school bullies in the local small pond, then from the "huge populace" (79 magno ... populo) of Rome, and finally from those rejected inMaecenas' selection process (cf. 18 a uulgo longe longeque remotos; 92-93 longemea discrepat istis/et uox et ratio). Horace is careful to practice the same discrimination in his arguments (e.g. 49 dissimile hoc illi est) thatMaecenas used in his choice of friends (63 qui turpi secernis honestum), in particular displaying lavish noblesse oblige towards his honest father.'10 As a result, the gap between the snob with the aquiline nose and the freedman's son is considerably narrowed. The opening pedigree of Lydian and Etruscan ancestors may look like a learned compliment, but it also marks Maecenas' family as outsiders in Rome, who took the same path from the coun tryside to military command and the center of things as the modest schoolboy Horace (2 incoluitfinis; 4 magnis legionibus imperitarent; cf. 71 macro ... ag ello, 76 puerum est ausus Romam portare, 48 quod mihi pareret legio Romana tribuno). "'

and therefore quintessentially "infantile," and that thismay account for its repetition at S. 3.99-102 prorepserunt primis. ./... turpe pecus ... propterl... pugnis ... porro/pugnabant ... post and S. 7.1-4 Proscripti.... Rupili pus .../... pacto ... ... opinorl... lippis .. .Persius ... permagna-in both cases also in the context of Horace's primitive "pre-history." For more "baby talk" cf. S. 3.45 appellat paetum pater, et pullum, male paruus, Pers. S. 3.17-18 pueris pappare minutum/poscis. 108. The judicious Non quia ... is also symbolic of the ability to discriminate thatHorace has learned fromMaecenas. See below n. 111. 109. There are probably conscious echoes of the poor man's bios contained in Bion's letter to King Antigonus (F IA Kindstrand = Diog. Laert.4.46-47: "my fatherwas a freedman ... that's the story about me ... judgeme by myself"). 110. S. 6.89 nil me paeniteat sanum patris huius. Rudd 1966: 52 on the use of anairesis (i.e. "not this, but that") in the poem, signifying "an attempt to re-educate themoral judgement." I 1. Uniting them both with the farmer of 1.11 qui rure extractus in urbem est. Shackleton Bailey 1982: 17: "Maecenas too was a parvenu from the traditionalRoman standpoint, a 'foreigner' 80 CLASSICALANTIQUITY Volume22/No. I/April 2003

Horace's backwards glance at the Republican in this poem also has a personal dimension. His roll call of antique names has curious sim ilarities with significant figures in his own life: an "Etruscan" , Tarquin (Maecenas' equivalent?), or the ignobly born king Tullius (anotherhigh and-mighty ?)."2 A token present-day aristocrat,Laevinus, is called Valeri genus (12), reminding us that his ancestor P. Valerius Poplicola was co-consul with L. lunius Brutus, ancestor of Horace's unmentionable patron,whom Horace thuswrites out of history.113Among this cluster of Republican figures anotherhero is conspicuously missing: Horatius Cocles ("One-eyed"), spurious noble ancestor of Horatius lippus.114 In the "Diary of a Nobody" which ends the satire ( 1 1-28), a description of a typical day in his present life, Horace displays a way of being which emulates Maecenas' in its air of separation and aristocratic ease: 60 ut tuus est mos [ ... ita est meus]."5 Horace is no scurrying client with urgent duties, but a solitary being who sleeps late and dictates his own timetable. This is reinforced by his re-routing of the language of clientela at every stage of theday: percontor, adsisto, ministratur, sustinet, adstat, obeundus, iuuet, admonuit, interpellet, consolor."6 All the attending, lobbying, supporting, pleasing, advising, waiting on, and comforting is done by Horace or the inanimate objects around him-a sideboard, a salt-cellar, the sun-to serve his own purposes. Having deflected charges of social and political ambition, he courts an alternative kind of envy for his carefree and quiet existence. His parting sentiment-that this life he describes (128-29 haec estluita) is sweeter than if his ancestors had been (the lowest rung of the nobility)-is petty inverse snobbery as pointed as thehypothetical aristocratic sneer at the start of the poem (5 naso suspendis adunco)."7 It is as though Horace

like Cicero." Horace's emergence from a humble farm (macro ... agello) is alluded to as part of a poetic teleology at Od. 3.30.12 ex humili potens and Ep. 1.20.20-21 me libertino natum patre et in tenui re /maiores pinnas nido extendisse, an emergence reenacted at the level of textual / intertextual autobiography: from humble satire to grander poetry (and paralleled in Horace's progress from satirical crawling out of the swamp / along the ground to lyric flight and collision with the stars). 112. Cicero is never mentioned explicitly in the Satires. Griffin 1993: 5-6 speculates on the reasons for this. 113. DuQuesnay 1984: 46. 114. John Henderson points out tome that Trebatius' advice to thewarrior-satirist at S. 2.1.8 includes swimming the Tiber, another "Horatian" allusion? At 9.18 the sickbed of Horace's friend ("someone you don't know") lies trans Tiberim: the new Horatius is destroying the bridge that gave him access to "knowing people" (cf. Henderson 1999: 223 on S. 6: "pulling up the draw-bridge after himself"). 115. Cf. S. 9.1 sicutmeus est mos; and the father's allusion to family tradition at S. 4.117 traditum ab antiquis morem seruare tuamque. 116. Cf. e.g. P1.Amph. 993 subparasitor, hortor, asto, admoneo, gaudeo. 117. Compare 72-75 where Horace mocks the pretensions to grandeur of the centurions' sons at his village school (magni/quopueri magnis e centurionibus orti) paying their small-time fees. Does 74 suspensi, used of the boys trailing their satchels and slates, remind us thatHorace is now speaking de haut en bas and aping the aristocratic snobbery of 5 naso suspendis adunco? GOWERS:Fragments of Autobiography inHorace Satires ] 81 wanted momentarily to say toMaecenas: nemo [Mr.Nobody] generosior est te (cf. 2) or at least tam generosus est.

There is a different way in which the Satires can be seen to represent Horace's history: that is, in the turningpoints between individual poems. Satires 1 specializes in seemingly decisive, even preemptive endings-the freeze-framed chariot-race of 1, the coitus interruptus of 2, "all-change" at Brundisium in 5, the stay of execution in 7, theuproar thatdrowns out conversation in9-followed immediately by a kind of rebirth, the satirical voice starting up afresh. S. 1, for example, ends with a promise of silence: 121 uerbum non amplius addam. This pious vow, which, as I have suggested, would make a good epitaph for a scribe, ought properly to come at the end of the book, not at the end of the first out of ten Satires. Its premature placing gives a rather subversive undertow to the Callimachean drift of the first poem: perhaps this satura is not satis after all?"8 It turns out that the hint is dramatically confirmed by the beginning of the next poem, where the last syllable of S. 1, -am, is repeated (with the ghost of a stammer or at least a clearing of the throat) as the first syllable of S. 2: Am-bubaiarum, a uerbum amplissimum if anything is. This proceeds to generate itself alphabetically into an exotic mantra-Am-bu-baiarum collegia (the "corporationof go-go girls")-like abracadabra, or a Roman schoolroom tongue-twister for practicing syllables."`9 The ABC (prima elementa) of S. 1 is being recited all over again at the start of what turns out to be an obituary for someone else,'20 while Horace starts with a clean slate and gets his breath back. The abrupt ending of S. 5-104 Brundisium longaefinis chartaeque uiaeque est ("Brundisium is the end of a long road and a long piece of paper")-comes as something of a surprise. Brundisium is not Tarentum (the most obvious site of a treaty between Octavian and Antony), Sicily (Lucilius' port of call in the poem Horace was imitating), or any more predictable destination.'2' This time the motto at the end looks like an epitaph for a uiator. A real epitaph survives from a merchant's tomb at Brundisium (CIL 9.60), playing on the twin meanings of terminus as "end of life" and "end of a journey": terminus hicce est. Brundisium is the place where Virgil did die, and Horace's ending here, too, looks emphatically final. Yet S. 6 starts up provocatively with the wordfinis used in a different sense, not "end" but "boundary," surrounded by words-Maecenas, quia, nemo-which, we have seen, recall the opening of S. 1. Horace launches in again with a second wind for the second half of the book.

18. See now Dufallo 2000. 119. Quint. 1.1.37. 120. Horsfall 1976: 91 suggests thatwriting epitaphic poems was one of the activities of the scribae. 121. Gowers 1993: 59-60. Horace's progress in the satire is only fromA(ricia) toB(rundisium). Reckford 1999 suggests thatHorace was left behind at Brundisium: a satirist was only useful to Maecenas up to a certain point. 82 CLASSICAL ANTIQUITY Volume 22/No. I /April 2003

A third example is the junction between S. 7 and S. 8. Satires 7-9 make a cycle of anecdote poems, which are not literally autobiographical, but can be seen with a leap of the imagination to be playing out Horace's evolution through displaced activity of various kinds: the lawsuit in 7 standing in for the "pus and poison" of his own dubious Republican past; 8, reenacting his snap reinstatementwithin the new regime through the story of the Priapus statue inMaecenas' revamped pleasure gardens; and 9, where one minor episode representsHorace's "polite" repossession of the streets of Rome from rivals and interlopers. 122Once again, this life-history works in parallel with the civilizing of satire. Acrimonious personal litigation in 7 becomes the hands-off disposal of society's scapegoats through the law-courts in 9, while the uncontrolled flood of Republican invective is replaced by themuffled remarks and inhibited gestures of Horace's encounterwith the pest. S. 7 is another poem from which Horace removes every trace of himself, and yet the subject matter, a joke made during a lawsuit in Brutus' camp in Asia Minor before Philippi, labeled as the kind of stale anecdote one might hear in the barber's chair, is still part of his own awkward pre-history. The repressed memory surfaces in the first line, where there is squeezed the name of the fateful battle: Ru-pili pus. The poem ends with a challenge to Brutus from one of the litigants to slit the other's throat, because his name happens to be Rex, "King," and because, after all, Brutus is a tyrannicide. Throat-slitting was not the usual method of judicial execution, or the way in which the tyrannicides killed . It was, however, especially associated with the victims of proscription, who may possibly have included Horace himself.'23 So just as Proscripti, the first word of the poem, reminds us obliquely that Horace and Brutus were proscribed, so iugulas at the end reminds us that Horace nearly lost his head and Brutus did lose his. Brutus is struck dumb by the challenge, and stuck forever in history as a "dumb brute," while Horace escapes into the next poem and gets his voice back. 124 S. 8 opens among the wreckage with the words: Olim truncus eram, "I used to be a tree-trunk." The speaker is narrating his past, like Horace in S. 6 (contrasting 1 olim with 14 nunc), and relating how he was transformed from raw material, "dead wood" (1 inutile lignum), into an artifact, the statue of a minor god, albeit the rather ungodly Priapus. So this is another "How come?" poem, with the usual passivity in the metamorphosis (Horace is not the faber, but the faber's creation). However, as this portrait is a caricature, Horace here allows more for the element of chance: this was a fluke decision by a puzzled craftsman, uncertain whether to fashion a footstool or a god. '25Horace's own fashioning by his father

122. Henderson 1999: 222 calls the cycle "serial progression"; see also Henderson 1998: 83-84. 123. See Hinard 1985: 41. 124. I expand this paragraph and the next one inGowers 2002. 125. The influence of Call. . 7 and 9, both aetiologies spoken by ithyphallic herms, has been recognized, but commentators do not mention Call. Iamb. 6 = 196Pf., which according to the GOWERS:Fragments of Autobiography inHorace Satires 1 83

4.120-21 sicme/formabat puerum dictis, and 4.119-20 simul ac durauerit aetas / membra animumque tuum, nabis sine cortice-finds a parallel in the finished god's emergence from the rough outer layer of the tree-trunk (the primary sense of cortex).'26However, commentators overlook the fact that truncus has another common meaning: "a body without a head." So it is as though Horace is imagining himself for amoment killed off by the proscriptions in S. 7, before being granted a snap reprieve and starting all over again with a new voice.127 Pace Zetzel, even this poem can be read as obliquely autobiographical, while the knife-edge between 7 and 8 contains the whole story of Horace's salvaging and reinvention.128 Priapus' tall tale of his coming-to-be and his meeting with some unreformed witches in Maecenas' wholesome new park works as a miniature, caricature version of Horace's redeemed life and territorial attitude to his little patch. The dramatis personae of Lucilius-the freeloader Pantolabus and the playboy Nomentanus-are laid to rest in a common grave, and the Augustan satirist plays gamekeeper, not poacher, in the sacred precincts of the new regime. 29 Inscriptions and decrees are parodied-licenses (14 licet); prohibitions against trespassing, repossession, and defilement (7 uetat, 13 ne sequeretur, 38 inme ueniat mictum atque cacatum); agrimensorial records (12-13 mille pedes in fronte, trecentos cippus in agrum/hic dabat).'30The double use of theword testis, "witness" (36, 44), makes this male citizen a pillar of reliability.13' However, as before, this is all extemporizing and posturing: the farting "satyr" hardly lives up to his bravado, and the cleansing of Rome is far from complete.'32 The role of autobiography as testimony becomes even clearer in S. 9, where Horace gets rid of the pest who dogs him around the streets of Rome only by agreeing to serve as witness to his arrest (76 antestari). In fact, one could read

Diegesis tabled the dimensions of the statue of Zeus atOlympia, togetherwith those of his pedestal and footstool (scamnummight translate either word inGreek). 126. Cf. Habash 1999: 286-87, who also notes the similarity between 1 inutile and S. 4.124-25 an hoc inhonestum et inutilefactu/necne sit, addubites. 127. The contrast between 8.1 olim and 8.14 nunc (cf. 8.8 prius) is anticipated at 6.47 nunc, quia sim tibi,Maecenas, conuictor, at olim, Iquod mihi pareret legio Romana tribuno. 128. For other arguments for the quasi-autobiographical / programmatic stance of this poem see Anderson 1982: 80-83, Richlin 1992: 66, Habash 1999, Henderson 1999: 188. 129. See now Habash 1999: 290: "Like the grounds themselves thatPriapus oversees, satire too has been cleaned up, given a definite shape, and confined by the limits of law." See also Welch 2001 on the uses of topography in this and other Satires. 130. The whole poem may involve an agrimensorial conceit: scamnum (cf. 2) and striga (cf. It. strega, witch, from Lat. striga l , evil spirit, ) were technical terms for breadthways and lengthways measurements (OLD s.vv.) and are paraphrased here at 12 in fronte ... in agrum. Horace would be reusing the language of yet another branch of the Roman civil service. 131. Richlin 1992: 256n.70, Henderson 1999: 190. Puns on testis, "witness"/"testicle," are ubiquitous in the Priapea. The graveyard bawdy here has something of the spirit of John Lennon's skit, "His LastWill and Testicle" (from A Spaniard in theWorks, London, 1965). 132. Anderson 1982: 79, Zetzel 1980: 71. Anderson 1982: 76-77: Priapus' jutting red pole is still inutile lignum (a phrase used in a blatantly obscene sense at Priap. 73.3 and reused by Ovid at Am. l.12.13). 84 CLASSICALANTIQUITY Volume 22/No. 1/April 2003

the whole poem retrospectively as the evidence he is about to give in court: "I was just walking along minding my own business ... itmust have been 10 o'clock when we reached the temple of Vesta," and so on. But the poem is also testimony for Horace's present attractive way of life (5 "suauiter, ut nunc est"), as the parenthesis sicut meus est mos ("as is my habit") at the beginning suggests.'33 At the end, the Homeric paraphrase sic me seruauit Apollo (78), which might be also be playing on the formulaic "so help me God" of a Latin oath, sets another temporary seal on Horace's life-story.'34

After all this, the question remains: to what extent is the Horace of Satires 1 the product of his education and Maecenas' finishing school, and how much is he still rough around the edges? So far, my argument may have given a rather misleading impression that Horace has ended up refined and smooth. But this would be to ignore the presence of a boorish, pre-civilized Horace-who makes himself felt so plainly thatZetzel 1980 and Freudenburg 1993 have arguedwith much justification that Horace is using the persona of a bumbling oaf from comedy and Cynic diatribe.'35 In fact an impressive list can be made of all the antisocial, offensive charac teristics Horace ascribes to himself in the course of the book, or nearly ascribes to himself, inhis different personalmanifestations (which include dyspeptic traveler, obscene Priapus, social menace, and incorrigible philanderer): black-smeared, pus-filled eyes, sweaty feet, sloppy hair, flapping shoes, farts, warts, moles, runny nose, head-scratching, squinting, clothes stained by awet dream, exposed genitals, and incontinence on the dinner couch. I have cheated a fair bit in making this list; sometimes these aspects of Horace are only to be inferred by contrast, or only indirectly ascribed to himself. But that is how the satirical self is conceived, always in relation to other people, whether compared with them or making an impression on them. 136These offensive characteristics are a way of preempting or disarming criticism; Horace's admission of his minor faults is a protective charm against inuidia, like the deliberate flaw in every Turkish carpet.'37 An English humorist once wrote that the world is divided into people who think they have bad breath and don't have it, and people who don't think they have bad breath but do have it. The satirical Horace puts himself in the first camp, the pest in the second.

133. Leveling with Maecenas (6.60 ut tuus est mos) and the other moguls (2.85 regibus hic mos est), as well as realizing his father's aristocratic pretensions (4.117 traditum ab antiquis morem seruare tuamque). 134. E.g. PI. Poen. 1258 at med ita di seruent, Ter. Ph. 807 at ita me seruet luppiter. 135. Zetzel 1980, Freudenburg 1993: see above n. 5. 136. On Horace's private rehearsals of how to impress his friends (4.134-37 sic dulcis ami cis/occurram) as a way of internalizing his father's voice: see Oliensis 1998: 25. Schrijvers 1993: 75 compares Goffman 1967: 36 on the pragmatics of "saving face." 137. S. 3.19-20, 3.70, 4.139-40, 6.65. GOWERS:Fragments of Autobiography inHorace Satires 1 85

There are several reasons for these unflattering self-portraits. One very importantone is generic: the decorum of satire, themessy and imperfect genre, requires an undignified caricature of the speaker, "bumbling incompetence," as Zetzel puts it.'38One could, however, could see this in anotherway, ironically, as a mark of sophistication and self-consciousness, Horace's development into a self critical, socialized adult.Horace ispracticing what the sociologist Erving Goffman has labeled the "virtual offense," that is to say, a kind of defense mechanism in social relations where a speaker anticipates the worst possible reception of his words or actions by portraying them in advance in theworst possible light. 139Next to the ultra-refined, hypercriticalMaecenas, Horace is always going to appear to bad advantage."4Another reason forHorace to present himself as rough around the edges is to assert his independence from Maecenas."4' He is not the kind of diplomatic smooth operator he describes as ad unguem/factus homo (5.32-33), a man you could rub your nails on. It will make the friendship seem more genuine to keep a token element of abrasiveness, to be a rough diamond, enfant terrible,or prima donna.

haec dum agit, ecce Fuscus Aristius occurrit,mihi carus et illum qui pulchre nosset. consistimus. "unde uenis et quo tendis?" rogat et respondet. uellere coepi, et prensaremanu lentissima bracchia, nutans, distorquens oculos, ut me eriperet.male salsus ridens dissimulare; meum iecur urere bilis. "4certenescio quid secreto uelle loqui te aiebas mecum." "memini bene, sedmeliore tempore dicam; hodie tricesima sabbata:uin tu curtis Iudaeis oppedere?" "nullamihi" inquam "religio est." "atmi: sum paulo infirmior,unus multorum. ignosces; alias loquar."huncine solem tamnigrum surrexemihi! fugit improbus acme sub cultro linquit.... 9.60-74

He was going on like this when up came Aristius Fuscus, a dear old friend of mine, who knew what's-his-name well too. We stopped, exchanged

138. Zetzel 1980: 76-77 n. 62. 139. Goffman 1971: 108-18. 140. Although many seemingly contradictory types in the Satires look like different aspects of Horace, there are certain caricature pairings, for example the stinking Gargonius and the perfumed Rufillus (2.27, 4.92), or the anonymous man with exposed groin and Maltinus of the mincing walk (2.25-26), or the scurra Pantolabus and the spendthrift Nomentanus (8.11) which split more obviously into "Horace" and "Maecenas." ForMaecenas as fastidious about personal appearance hair, nails, dress-and Horace as still incurably lax, see Ep. 1.1.94-97, 104-105. 141. See above all Oliensis 1998: 17-63 passim. 86 CLASSICALANTIQUITY Volume22/No. I/April 2003

civilities: "Where you off to?Where've you been?" I tried to tug him, squeeze his unresponsive arm; I yanked my head and rolled my eyes, tomake him get me out of there. Sick joker that he was, he chose to laugh and fake incomprehension; inside I seethed with bile. "I'm sure there was some reason why you wanted words with me in private." "No need to jog my memory, but now's not so good for me; today's the thirtieth Sabbath, and you wouldn't want to cause offense to all those snipped-off Jews, now would you?" "I've got no religious scruples." "But I have," he replied; "I'm somewhat more susceptible, I'm one of themajority. Excuse me now: let's speak another time." I wish that such an evil day had never dawned on me! The bastard did a bunk, and left me in the soup.

One last example, from the end of S. 9, tells us something about how far along the evolutionary path Horace thinks he has come. The pest has a brash style Horace shudders to think his own might once have looked like. But his present attempts to kill the conversation come across as rude and inept (complete with blatantly excluding remarks like "Sorry, I'm off to see someone you don't know"), and his awkward demeanor-shuffling, mumbling, and sweaty-is hardly thatof the suave press secretary toMaecenas. Along comes his friendAristius Fuscus and shows him the proper way to do it: in the process of disentangling himself from Horace, he manages to be self-deprecating (sumpaulo infirmior, ignosces), face saving (memini bene), pious (hodie tricesima sabbata), procrastinating (alias loquar), self-effacing (sum ... unus/multorum)-and get away with it (fugit improbus)-in a way that leaves Horace himself far behind. Aristius Fuscus is a portrait of the ideal satirist for the new regime: smooth, humble, and above all elu sive. Even the curse Horace hurls after him is really an obscure compliment from one satirist to another: 72-73 huncine solem/tam nigrum surrexe mihi!J42 The first words of their conversation are the Platonic exchange "Where have you come from and where are you going?"'143 This poem tells us. The friend's satirical performance is Horace's esprit d'escalier, his memo to himself to do better next time. We are left, then, with a picture of "Horace" as a bundle of contradictions, not very different in the end, admittedly, from the one of current orthodoxy: one Horace who has been smoothed out by his education and other civilizing processes, and another one who is still stuck in the unreformed brutishness of the past. Yet if we regard the passage from uncivilized to civilized behavior as the implied trajectory of Horace's evolution in the Satires, an aimed-for pattern of personal development that runs in parallel with the projected development of satire itself, it becomes possible to plaster the two together into a consistent self-portrait. That said, Horace represents himself and his satires, for reasons of realism, self-protection, and satirical self-mockery, as having not yet reached the end of the process.

142. For Fuscus as awriter of comedies see Porph. ad Ep. 1.10.1. 143. Cf. Phaed. 227a. GOWERS:Fragments of Autobiography in Horace Satires 1 87

Horace's autobiography in Satires 1 is a life in progress, a life in transit, the first of many autobiographies in the different series of poems he wrote. The last line of S. 10 (a poem with the character of a stop-press or postscript), "Go, boy, and tack this on to the bottom of my book," suggests an open-endedness that contrasts with the perverse finality of S. 1 and other poems."44 There is still room left for revisions; Horace's life and opinions are not yet set in stone. In one sense he has arrived, he has overcome obstacles, he is in the last stages of acclimatization, he canwrite sicutmeus est mos: "this is theway I do things."But the personality he describes has not yet received the finishing touches; he is not yet smooth to the fingernails.'45In S. 6 Horace is still visiting the fortune-tellers, waiting to see what will happen.'46 The satirist's representationof himself in the fiction of his satires is alternately evasive and preemptively unflattering. These are postures whose continuity can be illustrated by a passage of contemporary satirical autobiography, the cameo appearance of the English novelist Martin Amis in his classic 1980s novel Money, as seen through the eyes of its charmless anti-hero, John Self.'47 Usually Martin Amis cultivates a style that is distinctly less low-key than Horace's, but here he gives a defensive, downplaying picture of himself that is very reminiscent of the pest satire, though here the story is told from the pest's point of view. John Self recalls their first encounter in a London pub:

I was just sitting there, not stirring, not even breathing, like the pub's pet reptile, when who should sit down opposite me but that guy Martin Amis, the writer. He had a glass of wine, and a cigarette-also a book, a paperback. It looked quite serious. So did he in a way. Small, compact, wears his rug fairly long....

An awkward conversation follows, in which Martin Amis makes himself the pas sive, monosyllabic, self-effacing subject of his own autobiography,with emphasis on the heels: the sales, the vanity, the famous father, the paranoia. John Self plays the enfant terrible:

144. Horace the scriba delegates/ dictates to a puer: subscribe libello. Yet the roles are reversed again in S. 2. 1,where Horace invites Trebatius to dictate to him: 5 quid faciam praescribe. 145. Martindale 1993: 17: "Personalities are not fixed, but in a constant state of coming into being." See Misch 1950: 404-35, Martindale 1993: 14; and Edwards 1997 on the idea of the fluid, self-scrutinizing self in Seneca's Epistles. 146. S. 6.114 adsisto diuinis, a ritual repeated from childhood: cf. S. 9.29-30 namque instat fatum mihi triste, Sabella/quod puero cecinit diuina mota anus urna. At Od. 1.11.1-3, by contrast, Horace tells Leuconoe not to consult her Babylonian charts. 147. M. Amis, Money (London, 1984: 87-88). Sutherland 1998: 105 discusses the first four extracts in the context of an author's "Hitchcockian" appearance in his or her own work. It is true thatmany contemporary writers, not just satirists, err on the side of self-deprecation in their cameos. Sutherland 102 cites Malcolm Bradbury's anonymous "tousled-haired ... depressed-looking ... lecturer in the English department," in The History Man (London, 1975: 204-205), for example. Similarly, I notice thatA. S. Byatt draws attention to a girl with "an incipient double chin... who ... has not read Proust" in Still Life (London, 1985: 298). 88 CLASSICALANTIQUITY Volume22/No. 1/April 2003

"Sold a million yet?" "Sorry?" "Sold a million yet?" He relaxed. His off-center smile refused to own up to something. "Be serious," he said. "What you sell, then?" "Oh, a reasonable amount."

Then:

"Hey," I said, "Your dad, he's a writer, too, isn't he? Bet that made it easier." "Oh sure. It's just like taking over the family pub." Finally, likeHorace, Amis even preempts open dislike and resentment. John Self watches him disappear,with an invidious look:

"I didn't much like his superior tone, come to think of it, or his tan, or his book. Or the way he stares at me in the street."

Martin Amis of course went on towrite his own large-scale defensive autobiogra phy, but one can see it anticipated here in this little record of how he thought others saw him in a particularly successful decade of his life. In one of the snatches of conversation, there is a small pointer to that:

"Hey," I said. "When you, do you sort of make it up, or is it just, you know, likewhat happens?" "Neither." "Autobiographical," I said.

[email protected] University of Cambridge

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Anderson, W. S. 1982. Essays on Roman Satire. Princeton. . 1995. "Horatius Liber, Child and Freedman's Son." Arethusa 28: 151-64. Arighetti, G., and F.Montanari, eds., 1993. La componente autobiografica nella poesia greca e latinafra realta e artificio letterario. Pisa. Armstrong,D. 1986. "Horatiuseques et scriba:Satires 1.6 and2.7." TAPA116: 255-88. . 1989. Horace. New Haven. Baslez, M-F., P. Hoffmann, and L. Pernot, eds. 1993. L'invention de I'autobiographie d'Hesiode a Saint Augustin. Paris. Cary, C. 1904. Horace. His Life, Friendships and Philosophy as Told by Himself. New York. Citroni, M. 1993. "L'autobiografia nella satira e nell'epigramma latino." In Baslez Hoffmann-Pernot 1993, 275-92. .2000. "TheMemory of Philippi inHorace and the Interpretation of Ep. 1.20.23.'" CJ 96.1: 27-56. Coffey, M. 1989. Roman satire. 2nd ed. London. Coe, R. N. 1984. When the Grass Was Taller: Autobiography and the Experience of Childhood. New Haven. Cucchiarelli, A. 2002. La satira e il poeta. Orazio tra Epodi e Satire. Biblioteca di Materiali e discussioni per l'analisi dei testi classici 17. Pisa. 90 CLASSICALANTIQUITY Volume 22/No. I/April 2003

Horsfall, N. 1976. "The collegium poetarum." BICS 23: 79-95. Hunter, R. L. 1989. "Winged Callimachus," ZPE 76: 1-2. Johnson, W. R. 1993. Horace and the Dialectic of Freedom: Readings in Epistles I. Ithaca and London. Keane, C. 2002. "Satiric Memories: Autobiography and the Construction of Genre." CJ 97: 215-31. Kindstrand, J. F., ed. 1976. Bion of Borysthenes. A Collection of the Fragments with Introduction and Commentary. Uppsala. Leach, E. W. 1971. "Horace's pater optimus and Terence's Demea: Autobiographical Fiction and Comedy in Serm. 1.4." AJP 92: 616-32. 1978. "Vergil, Horace, ; Three Collections of Ten." Ramus 7: 79-105. 1993. "Horace's Sabine Topography in Lyric and Verse." AJP 114: 271-302. Lejay, P., ed. 1911. Oeuvres d'Horace. Satires. Paris (repr. Hildesheim, 1966). LeJeune, P. 1989. On Autobiography. Minneapolis. Levi, P. 1997. Horace, a Life. London. Lipking, L. 1981. The Life of the Poet: Beginning and Ending Poetic Careers. Chicago. Lonsdale, J., and S. Lee. 1874. The Works of Horace, Rendered into English Prose. London. Lowrie, M. 1997. Horace's Narrative Odes. Oxford. Marouzeau, J. 1972. "Horaz als Meister der Lautmalerei." In H. Oppermann, ed., Wege zur Horaz, 62-73. Darmstadt. Martindale, C. 1993. "Introduction." In C. Martindale and D. Hopkins, eds., Horace Made New: Horatian Influences on British Writing from the Renaissance to the Twentieth Century, 1-26. Cambridge. Mazurek, T. R. 1997. "Self-parody and the Law inHorace's Satires 1.9." CJ 93: 1-17. Miller, P.A. 1998. "The Bodily Grotesque in Roman Satire." Arethusa 31: 257-84. Misch, G. 1950. A History of Autobiography inAntiquity. 2 vols. London. Most, G. 1995. "Hesiod and the Textualization of Personal Temporality." InArighetti Montanari, 72-92. Oliensis, E. 1998. Horace and the of Authority. Cambridge. Olney, J., ed. 1980. Autobiography: Essays Theoretical and Critical. Princeton. Purcell, N. 1983. "The apparitores: A Study in Social Mobility." PBSR 38: 125-73. Reckford, K. J. 1999. "Only aWet Dream? Hope and Skepticism in Horace, Satire 1.5." AJP 120: 525- 54. Richlin, A. 1992. The Garden of Priapus. Sexuality and Aggression in Roman Humor. 2nd ed. Oxford. Rudd, N. 1966. The Satires of Horace. Cambridge. Shackleton Bailey, D. R. 1982. Portrait of Horace. London. Schlegel, C. M. 1994. The Satirist Makes Satire: Self-definition and the Power of Speech inHorace, Satires I. Diss., University of California at Los Angeles. . 2000. "Horace and his Fathers: Satires 1.4 and 1.6." AJP 121: 93-119. Schrijvers, P. 1993. "Horace moraliste." In W. Ludwig, ed., Horace, l'oeuvre et les imitations: un siecle d'interpretation (= Entretiens sur l'antiquite' classique 39), 41-90. Geneva. Sturrock, J. 1993. The Language ofAutobiography: Studies in the First Person Singular. Cambridge. GOWERS:Fragments of Autobiography in Horace Satires 1 89

Davis, G. 1991. Polyhymnia: The Rhetoric of Horatian Lyric Discourse. Berkeley. de Man, P. 1984. "Autobiography as De-facement," In The Rhetoric of , 67-81. New York. Dufallo, B. 2000. "Satislsatura: Reconsidering the Programmatic Intent of Horace's Satires 1. 1." CW 93: 579-90. DuQuesnay, I.M. leM. 1984. "Horace andMaecenas: the Propaganda Value of Sermones I." In T. Woodman and D. West, eds., Poetry and Politics in the Age of , 19-58. Cambridge. Edwards, C. 1997. "Self-scrutiny and Self-transformation in Seneca's Letters." G&R 44: 23-38. Feeney, D. C. 1992. "Si licet et fas est: Ovid's Fasti and the Problem of Free Speech under the ." InA. Powell, ed., Roman poetry and propaganda in the age of Augustus, 1-25. Bristol. Ferri, R. 1993. 1l dispiacere di un epicureo: uno studio sulla poetica oraziana delle Epistole (con un capitolo su Persio). Pisa. Fraenkel, E. 1957. Horace. Oxford. Freadman, R. 2001. Threads of Life: Autobiography and theWill. Chicago. Fredericks, B. R. 1976. "A Poet's Autobiography and Poetical Autobiography: Tristia IV, 10." TAPA 101: 139-54. Freudenburg, K. 1993. The Walking Muse: Horace on the Theory of Satire. Princeton. .2001. Satires of Rome: Threatening Posesfrom Lucilius to . Cambridge. Gallo, I., and L. Nicastri, eds. 1995. Biografia e autobiografia degli antichi e dei moderni. Naples. Goffman, E. 1959. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. New York. . 1967. Interaction Ritual. New York. 1971. Relations in Public: Microstudies of the Public Order. London. Gold, B. 1992. "Openings in Horace's Satires and Odes: Poet, Patron and Audience." YCS 29: 161-86. Greenblatt, S. 1980. Renaissance Self-Fashioning. Chicago. Gowers, E. 1993. "Horace, Satires 1.5: An Inconsequential Journey." PCPS 39: 48-66. - . 2002. "Blind Eyes and Cut Throats: Amnesia and Silence in Horace Satires 1.7" CPh 97: 145-61. Griffin, J. 1993. "Horace in the Thirties." In N. Rudd, ed., Horace 2000: A Celebration. Essays for the Bimillennium, 1-22. London. Habash, M. 1999. "Priapus: a Portrait of Horace?" CJ 94: 285-97. Harrison, G. 1987. "The Confessions of Lucilius (Horace, Sat. 2.1.30-34): A Defense of Autobiographical Satire?" ClAnt 6: 38-52. Hawtrey, 1979. "The Poet as Example: Horace's Use of Himself." In C. Deroux, ed., Studies in and Roman History. Vol. I, Collection Latomus 164: 249-56. Henderson, J. 1993. "Be Alert (Your Country Needs Lerts): Horace, Satires 1.9." PCPS 39: 48-66. - . 1998. Fighting for Rome. Poets and Caesars, History and Civil War. Cam bridge. - - . 1999. Writing Down Rome: Satire, Comedy and Other Offences inLatin Poetry. Oxford. Hendrickson, G. C. 1900. "Sermo 1 4: A Protest and a Programme." AJP 21: 121-42. Hinard, F. 1985. Les proscriptions de la Rome re'publicaine. Paris. GOWERS:Fragments of Autobiography in Horace Satires 1 91

Sutherland, J. 1998. "The Hitchcock Hallmark." InWhere was Rebecca Shot? Puzzles, Curiosities & Conundrums inModern Fiction, 99-106. London. Theodorakopoulos, E. 1997. "Closure: The Book of Virgil." In C. Martindale, ed., The Cambridge Companion to Virgil, 155-65. Cambridge. Turpin, W. 1998. "The Epicurean Parasite: Horace, Satires 1. 1.-3." Ramus 27: 127-40. Williams, G. 1995. "Libertino Patre Natus: True or False?" In S. J.Harrison, ed., Homage toHorace: A Bimillenary Celebration, 296-313. Oxford. Winkler, M. M. 1983. The persona in Three Satires of Juvenal. Hildesheim. Woodcock, E. C. 1938. "Satires I, 3, 63-6." CR 52: 9. Zetzel. J. E. G.1980. "Horace's LiberSermonum: The Structure of Ambiguity." Arethusa 13: 59-77. Ziolkowski, T. 1993. Virgil and theModerns. Princeton.