De novis libris iudicia / N.W. Bernstein / Mnemosyne 62 (2009) 323-326 323

Ganiban, R.T. 2007. Statius and Virgil. Th e Th ebaid and the Reinterpretation of the Aeneid. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. x, 258 p. Pr. £50.00 (hb).

Only a few decades after prominent Latinists could sneer that Statius’ Th ebaid was “about nothing”, a derivative production wholly inferior to the Aeneid, the epic currently enjoys an unprecedented degree of scholarly respect. 2007 saw the pub- lication of two Cambridge monographs devoted exclusively to the Th ebaid;1) sev- eral other studies, commentaries, editions and translations have appeared in the last few years.2) Th e critical trends in scholarship on the Th ebaid can seem to reflect those on the Aeneid, in that certain aspects of the debate can be divided into ‘pes- simistic’ and ‘optimistic’ camps.3) G.’s study, which originated as a Princeton dis- sertation, examines the epic’s dialogue with the Aeneid on the subject of the virtues and their relation to monarchal power. Vergil’s epic celebrates pietas as the central virtue, but Statius repeatedly demonstrates its irrelevance in a bleak world domi- nated by civil war and intrafamilial conflict. Nine chapters trace the epic’s dialogue with the Aeneid and other key intertexts in selected episodes throughout the Th ebaid. Readings of two narratives from Th e- baid 1, Oedipus’ curse and the Apollo and Coroebus episode, establish the prin- ciples that later episodes will corroborate: the irrelevance of pietas and the overwhelming power of nefas (chs. 1-2). Th e vengeful Apollo does not spare Coroebus’ life because of the pietas that assimilates the human being to Aeneas; the god instead chooses to exercise his clementia in an arbitrary, tyrannical fashion. Th e Olympian and infernal responses to Oedipus’ prayer articulate the contrast between this epic’s theodicy and the Aeneid ’s. Tisiphone is the first to respond to Oedipus’ prayer, and Jupiter’s declared intention to punish Th ebes and Argos is based on a personal grudge rather than deserved punishment enacted by a just

1) In addition to the work under review, see McNelis, C. 2007. Statius’ Th ebaid and the Poetics of Civil War (Cambridge). 2) E.g., Lovatt, H. 2005. Statius and Epic Games: Sport, Politics, and Poetics in the Th ebaid (Cambridge); Georgacopoulou, S. 2005. Aux frontières du récit épique: l’emploi de l’apostrophe du narrateur dans la Th ébaïde de Stace (Bruxelles); Pollmann, K.F.L. 2004. Statius, Th ebaid 12 (Paderborn); C.S. Ross’ English verse translation (Baltimore 2004); D.R. Shackleton Bai- ley’s Loeb Classical Library edition (Cambridge, MA 2003). Th e extent of the revival of scholarly interest in Statius’ Silvae has been even more remarkable. 3) Dominik, W.J. 1994. Th e Mythic Voice of Statius: Power and Politics in the Th ebaid (Lei- den) best represents the ‘pessimistic’ camp, and Franchet d’Espèrey, S. 1999. Conflit, vio- lence et non-violence dans la « Th ébaïde » de Stace (Paris) the ‘optimistic’ camp.

© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2009 DOI: 10.1163/156852508X321392 324 De novis libris iudicia / N.W. Bernstein / Mnemosyne 62 (2009) 323-326 ruler. G. carefully shows how both episodes demonstrate the disjunction between autocracy and morality through their pointed responses to Vergilian narratives. In lieu of the promise of an eventual return to peace and order offered in the Aeneid, Statius shows nefas predominating over pietas and the forces of disorder ranging throughout the cosmos. In the second half of the epic, the excesses of Tydeus and Capaneus characterize nefas, while the failure of Hopleus and Dymas dramatizes the maxim inuida fata piis (ch. 6). Examples of further failures of pietas precede the inevitable fratricide, such as the futile attempts by Jocasta and Adras- tus to create delay and Tisiphone’s banishment of personified Pietas from the battlefield (ch. 7). Th rough the narrative of the ultimate nefas, the fratricidal duel itself, Statius offers a revision of the Aeneid ’s climactic scenes (ch. 8). Th e moral indistinguishability of the feuding brothers suggests a reading that assimilates Aeneas and Turnus, while the succession of the autocratic Creon implies that the future holds continued tyranny rather than a Golden Age. Th ese chapters develop in full detail insights presented briefly by P.R. Hardie:4) the narrative drive for the Th ebaid, like the other Flavian epics, is supplied in large part by infernal forces, and the unresolved moral and political issues of the Aeneid provide this epic with major intellectual foci. If pietas has no significant role to play in the Th ebaid, the virtue that remains is clementia. Worshipped at an altar in Athens, clementia is the key virtue in this world of tyrannical rulers and gods (ch. 9). As Statius represents clementia, accord- ing to G., it is closer to what Seneca called misericordia, automatic pity for a suffering individual rather than a response based on a full moral evaluation of the causes of that suffering. Th eseus’ behavior demonstrates the limitations of monar- chal ideals based on this virtue: as G. justly observes, “moral concerns are sub- sumed in the will and judgment of the autocrat” (231). Th eseus may be a ‘good’ king, but only in the sense that he is the best that powerless subjects can hope for. His autocratic power can just as easily be turned toward negative ends, as wit- nessed in the abuses of power perpetrated by Eteocles and Creon. Th ough the epic presents kingship in a generally unfavorable light, G. reasonably maintains that Statius’ critique of monarchal power should not be read as direct criticism of Domitian but as a reflection on political ideals. By attending carefully to the Th ebaid ’s manifold connections with earlier liter- ary texts, G.’s study also offers a valuable contribution to the study of the tech- niques of intertextuality. G. limits the appeal to authorial intention in the interpretation of allusion. Th e poet cannot be held responsible for every imagined

4) 1993. Th e Epic Successors of Virgil: A Study in the Dynamics of a Tradition (Cambridge).