INFORMATION TO USERS

This material was produced from a microfilm copy of the original document. While the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of the original submitted.

The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand markings or patterns which may appear on this reproduction.

1. The sign or "target" for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is "Missing Page(s)". If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting thru an image and duplicating adjacent pages to insure you complete continuity.

2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a large round black mark, it is an indication that the photographer suspected that the copy may have moved during exposure and thus cause a blurred image. You will find a good image of the page in the adjacent frame.

3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., was part of the material being photographed the photographer followed a definite method in "sectioning" the material. It is customary to begin photoing at the upper left hand corner of a large sheet and to continue photoing from left to right in equal sections with a small overlap. If necessary, sectioning is continued again — beginning below the first row and continuing on until complete.

4. The majority of users indicate that the textual content is of greatest value, however, a somewhat higher quality reproduction could be made from "photographs" if essential to the understanding of the dissertation. Silver prints of "photc^raphs" may be ordered at additional charge by writing the Order Department, giving the catalog number, title, author and specific pages you wish reproduced.

5. PLEASE NOTE: Some pages may have indistinct print. Filmed as received.

University Microfilms International 300 North Zeeb Road Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106 USA St. John's Road, Tyler's Green High Wycombe, Bucks, England HP10 8HR 78- 12,340

HAAG, Roland Francis, 1942- CIVIL WAR AND THE CITIZEN: DEVIATIONS FROM SOME POLITICAL NORMS IN LUCAN.

The Ohio State University, Ph.D., 1978 Language, classical

University Microfilms International, Ann Arbor, n

< £ >^ cCopyright by Roland F ra n cis Haag 1978 CIVIL WAR AND THE CITIZEN;

DEVIATIONS FROM SOME POLITICAL NORMS

IN LUCAN

DISSERTATION

Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for

the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate

School of The Ohio State University

By

Roland F ran cis Haag, A .B ., M.A.

The Ohio S ta te U n iv ersity 1978

Reading Committee: Approved By

P ro fesso r Mark P. 0 . Morford

Professor Dennis Kratz

Professor Charles L. Babcock A dviser Department of Classics Parentibus Carissimis

i l ACKKOIÆELGMEIÎTS

I wish to express my thanks to my dissertation supervisor

Professor Mark P, 0, Morford, Chairman of the Department of

Classics, and to the members of the reading committee. Professor

Dennis Kratz and Professor Charles Babcock, for their time and efforts toward the completion of this work.

I ov?e an incalculable debt of gratitude to Dr. A. F.

Johnson for innumerable kindnesses shown me during the months of research and writing.

My greatest debt is acknowledged in the dedication. September 16, 19i|2 ...... Born - Cleveland, Ohio

I 96U ...... A.B., John Carroll University, Cleveland, Ohio

196 6 ...... M .A., The Ohio S ta te University, Columbus, Ohio

1967 - 1970...... Teaching Associate, Department of Classics, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio

1970 - 1 9 7 6...... Instructor, Department o f C la s sic s , The Ohio State Univeristy, M ansfield R egional Campus Mansfield, Ohio TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS...... l i i

VITA...... iv

LIST OF TABLES...... v i

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS...... v i i

INTRODUCTION ...... 1

Chapter

I . INTRODUCTION: 1. 67-69 18 ROME...... 21

I I . CAESAR POLITICUS ...... 6?

I I I . ARIMENUM...... 107 MASSILIA...... Illi LARISA...... 121 I'lYTILENE...... 129

IV. THE CATALOGUE OF FORCES...... 137

V. THE EXPULSION OF THE TRIBUNES...... 12:7 THE SENATE IN EXILE...... 1^6 THE MUTINIES...... 167

VI.. POMPEÏ POLITICUS...... 182:

V II. CATO POLITICUS ET SAPIENS...... 192:

V III. THE CAI'IPS OPPOSITE...... 217 THE MSS SUICIDE...... 23k SCAEVA...... 22:0

IX. ALEXANDRIA...... 2^2

X. CONCLUSION...... 286

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY ...... 296 LIST OF TABLES

1. Scenes in Order of Occurrence ...... 13

2. Scenes in Order of Treatment . ' 15 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

AJP American Journal of Philology

GB The Classical Bulletin

GJ The C la s sic a l Jo u rn a l

GPh Classical Philology

CQ Classical Quarterly

CR Classical Review

CVJ The C la s sic a l World

CScM Classica et Mediaevalia

GPvBS Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies

HSCP Harvard Studies in Classical Philology

HTR Harvard Theological Review

JRS J o u rn a l of Roman S tu d ies

REA Revue des Etudes Anciennes

REL Revue des Etudes Latines

RFC Rivista di Filologia e di Istruzione Classica

RhM R heinisches Museum

TAPA Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association

ÏCS Yale Classical Studies INTRODUCTION

The subj îct matter of Lucan's poem De belle civili is a portion of the civil war which convulsed the city of Rome and the

Roman w orld from h9 B.C. to US B.C. and resulted in the collapse

of the Republican Constitution and the assumption of supreme power by Julius Caesar as Dictator perpetuus in February W: B.C.

L ucan's poem, u n fin ish e d as i t has come down to u s, t r e a t s th e years B.C. to U7 B.C.—from Caesar's crossing of the Rubicon

to his temporary entrapment in the palace at Alexandria after the

defeat of the Pompeians at Pharsalia and the assassination of

Pompey.

The theme of Lucan's poem is the deterioration of the moral

and spiritual values^—the civic virtues—that took place during

the period of civil upheaval and chaos. These civic virtues were

the soul of the five-hundred-year-old Roman Republic, and are an

essential part of civilized existence in any political and social

e n ti t y .

For Lucan, living in the era of the Principate, as for

Cicero in the era of the Republic, and for Vergil and Horace in

the transition period between the two regimes, "Rome" is synonymous

with the ideal of civilization achieved within an ordered constitution.

Further, the achievement that was Rorrie's was meant to embrace the Lucan shares in part the attitude toward the Civil War of

Vergil and Horace. For both these authors the war represented an interruption in the continuity of Roman political existence; and the devastation, physical and spiritual, was a traumatic experience which required a vigorous moral effort to put right again.^ But the advent of Augustus and the benefits conferred by the Augustan

Age—a new order under the Princeps which meant the rebirth of

Roman civil and political existence based on traditional Roman

rule of law—were things to be celebrated.^

The Civil War represented for Lucan, however, in contrast

to his predecessors, a devastation so great—political, social,

moral, economic, cultural, and spiritual—that Rome and Rome’s

civilizing mission w ill not recover.^ Just as Rome embraces the

whole world and all mankind under its aegis of law, order, and

civilization, so, too, the devastation worked by the Civil War cannot

help, in Lacan’s vision, but affect the orderly and civilized existence

of other political entities that have fallen under the control of

the imperial city. The destiny of Rome is necessarily the destiny

of the rest of the civilized world—because Rome is the civilized

w orld.

The poet gives an indication of his vision of the magnitude

of the effects of the Civil War in the opening line of the poem:

bella per Bnathios plus quam ciuilia campos.

The ancient interpretation of this line is as a reference to the fam ily t i e c re a ted 'between th e two p r in c ip a ls , Pompey and J u liu s

Caesar, by Pompey’s marriage to Caesar’s daughter Julia in 59

Otto S. Due has pointed out that there is far more depth to Lucan’s poetic vision that simply the domestic conflict within one house­ hold resulting from conflicting political loyalties or ambition:

. , . the idea about kinship between the two fighting parties may fall within the meaning of the words (plus quam ciuilia bella), but cannot be the constituting elem ent ...... The phrase ius . . . datum sceleri is generally interpreted to the effect that the scelus is the civil war, where citizens and relations k ill each other; the idea that this is a crime again and again appears in Lucan’s poem, and sometimes the acting characters .regard such crimes as righteous deeds; but it is more likely that Lucan thinks of the civil war and its consequences as a universal crime and not of the particular crimes ...... It is now possible to realize the meaning of the words plus Qusm ciuilia: what distinguishes this civil war from all others is its consequence; and its consequence is laid down from the beginning as the conclusion of a dilemma: if one party is victorious, tyranny will follow, and if the other party is victorious, tyranny will also follow, and as one of the parties must be victorious, then tyranny must follow, and the * old Rome with its ideals and institutions will be crushed under the right of the victor.^

Lucan effectively and dramatically shows his reader

p re c is e ly how th e c o n f l i c t betw een Pompey and Caesar was p lu s quam

ciuilia in a series of carefully constructed scenes, each of which

explores a facet of ciuilia of the first line of the poem. These

scenes are listed below in Table 1 (which shows the scenes in order

of occurrence in the order of books of the poem) and in Table 2

(which shows the order of treatment in this work). The selecting

out of these episodes and the juxtaposition of related episodes L

(for example, the Catalogues of Forces, the Mutinies) is not intended to suggest that Lucan constructed his poem around a specific number of episodes or a certain and limited kind of dramatic scene.

Rather, this study proposes to furnish a new insight into the poet's

conception of his subject matter by pulling certain scenes out of the narrative—though not out of context—in order to focus more

sharply on major thematic elements that recur throughout the poem.

The episodic quality of the Pharsalia, which is generally recognized by scholars,^ does not preclude a consistent and identifiable attitude

of the poet toward his subject matter and theme as well as toward

each of the characters that permeates all of the scenes and holds

the Individual episodes together. It is for the pupose of casting

new light on the poet's thought and attitude toward his theme that

the schema of episodes in this study has been devised.

The ease with which episodes and scenes may be extracted

from Lucan's narrative is both a hindrance to a just appreciation

of the poem and a help in understanding the poet's method and artistic

conception of his material. It is a hindrance inasmuch as the poetic

form that Lucan chose as his vehicle has its roots in a thousand-year-

old Greek tradition brought to perfection by the Greeks and recast

and Romanized by Vergil who, in turn, perfected the form in Latin.

Any attempt at epic composition must necessarily be measured against

the standards set by Homer and the perfection of structure conceived

by Vergil. At first glance, Lucan seems to lose on both counts.

If, however, the reader and critic grant the fact that Lucan is neither 5

Homer nor Vergil, but a poet working within the tradition established by both with a new and personal poetic vision developed within a social and political context different from his predecessors', he can more easily see the merit that is in the Pharsalia. Lucan works within the epic tradition but at the same time is experimenting with new techniques within that form. This experimentation results not

only from the poet's desire to satisfy his own creative impulse but also from the fact that the form itself has been "exhausted,"

■ that is, brought to perfection by Homer and Vergil. To tamper with

an art form already worked to its capacity by artistic genius not

only invites criticism and failure but also necessitates a startling

and new approach, Lucan's major break with the Homeric and Vergilian

canons of epic composition is the abandonment of the traditional

Olympian gods as major characters and actors within the narrative

scheme. Besides being a new approach to the epic convention, it

allows Lucan scope to concentrate on the human responsibility for

the events of his narrative. It places not only the burden of

choice directly on men's shoulders, but also the tragedy of the wrong

choice of action, Caesar—unlike Achilles, Odysseus, Telemachus,

Aeneas—is not aided and instructed, inspired and chastised by a

protecting and ever-watchful deity. He is not pressed by the gods

to fu lfill either a divinely-willed destiny or to serve the larger

needs of the community to which he belongs. Rather, Caesar himself

is the source of his own inspiration—a product of his own disordered

ambition and greed. The tragedy of his choice of action is portrayed 6 in the people who are affected by his decision and who are either crushed by him as he makes his way toward his goal or, as in the case of those who choose to follow him and do his bidding, are transformed by him and his personal vision of himself.

Pompey, better by far than Caesar, less than Cato, is a human being subject to weaknesses and bad judgment. He too, however, is responsible for what he does. It is not some god who clouds his vision to bring him to disaster,

Cato, who replaces the divine machinery of older epic

( 9. 601-60U)j represents the ideal of human wisdom and action.

VJhat Caesar and Pompey— and a l l o f th e o th er c h a ra c te rs as w ell—

should be is illustrated for the reader in the figure of Cato. Here

to o , however, i s a source of tra g e d y . Pompey i s h in d ered by h is own

personality from attaining the perfection and purity of a Cato—and

he will end in disaster. Cato, who attained the perfection of wisdom,

cannot e x e rt power s u f f i c i e n t to change a Pompey—

quin publica signa duceraque Porapeium sequim ur? nec s i fo rtu n a fa u e b it hunc quoque totius sibi ius promittere mundi non bene compertura est

2 . 319-322

—and he vainly wishes to offer himself as some sort of sacrificial

victim to end the civil strife and return the State to the ideal it

once possessed (2. 306-319)

o utinam caelique deis Erebique liceret hoc caput in cunctas daranatum exponere poenas?

2 . 306-307 7

Cato's actions during the initial stages of the war, his leadership during the desert march after Pompey*s death, and his suicide at

Utica all demonstrate the depth and perfection of his personal vlrtus, pietas, sapientia. His death will even give him the ultimate victory over Caesar—a moral victory—through his assertion of complete personal libertas in the face of the tyrant. The tragedy lies, however, in his very victory; for Caesar is still victorious on the battlefield, he still gains control of Rome and of the rest of the world, he s till becomes the tyrant,

Caesar, Pompey, Cato, and a ll the other characters of the poem are caught up in a political drama. The word "political" here is not restricted to the constitutional machinery of governement; rather, the term is used in the sense in which, for example,

Aristophanes is termed a political dramatist. Politics embraces the

entire community in all its constitutional, social, economic, cultural,

and spiritual aspects. Lucan's goal is to portray the deterioration

of political life within the poisonous atmosphere of the civil strife

of the middle of the last century B.C.—an atmosphere created by the

personal ambition, greed, and immorality of a few individuals prepared

to stick at nothing in order to secure the fulfillment of that

ambition and to satisfy that greed.

The scenes selected for the purposes of this study fall

into two major groups, one complementary to the other. The first

comprises those scenes in which Lucan shows his reader the effects

of the Civil War upon citizens in.thin the context and dramatic setting of a specifically named city; Rome, Arirainum, Massilia, Larisa,

Mytilene, Alexandria. In these episodes the poet portrays the effects of civil strife, often described in terms of madness, disease, chaos, and in words suggestive of deviation from orderly political life, upon the social, moral, religious, and economic norms of formal urban existence. The poet depicts the impact of the civil upheaval and the influence of its perpetrators upon the normal functioning of orderly urban existence and its adherents over a wide spectrum: (l) the progressive infection and deterioration of

Roman moral fiber due to the increase of Rome's power and the delete­ rious effects of luxuria which give an immoral and unscrupulous man the opportunity to thrust himself forward and seize the reins of government; (2) the victimization of other cities, like Ariminum, willing but unable to defend itself against Caesar and consequently- sacrificed to Caesar's ambition and relentless pursuit of power;

(3) the display and defeat of virtus, pietasy and fides in armed resistance to Caesar's onslaught at M assilia, where the invocation

of traditional civic virtues by the Hassiliotes has no meaning for

Caesar, and his complete rejection of all things held in reverence by men and gods spells the end of political order based on morality.

The resistance of Larisa and of Mytilene is symbolic. In their

futile offering of refuge and materiel to the defeated Pompey, they

exhibit the same adherence to virtus, fides, and pietas that Massilia

showed in combat. (U) The end point of Rome's progressive

deterioration is shown in the poet's description of Alexandria. 9

The depths of decadence to which the Egyptian city has sunk, the total abandonment of rational political existence in favor of internal wrangling among court subordinates, the abandonment of all political idealism in favor of a policy of practicality and expediency that varies from day to day and devised by men i-rith only their own personal aggrandizement in view, w ill be the end of Rome's present course.

The second group consists of episodes that are cast outside the setting of specific cities and are thematic in content. Each of

these scenes—Caesar Politicus, the Catalogues, the Expulsion of the

T ribunes, th e S enate in E x ile , th e M u tin ies, Pompey P o litic u s , Cato

Politicus et S^^piens, the Camps Oppposite, the Mass Suicide, Scaeva—

present a certain aspect of political life, altered under the ever-

increasing pressure of the Roman civil troubles. "Political life,"

as used here, is defined in broader terms than simply the formal

constitutional processes and machinery of government. Here the term

"political" includes all the governmental, social, cultural, and moral

elements that make up the civi and affect the life of the civis.

Lucan's presentation shows us cives affected by the Civil War in such

a way that once the normal framework of the civitas has been under­

mined, the cives conduct themselves in ways that deviate from the

normal and proper conduct of cives.

The second group of episodes is as important as the first

for Lucan's picture of the gravity and massive devastation of the

war. The first classification of scenes shows the expected

disruption of civil order concomitant with such a conflict. However, 10 a city may recover physically, with more or less ease, from the depradations of an invading force of armed infantry—as in the case

of Ariminuml^ The second set shows a picture much more sinister.

Cives, caught up, willingly or unwillingly, in the strife between

the two contestants for supreme power w ill suffer a spiritual

destruction that will be irreversible. The destruction that Lucan

p ortrays is twofold and is the linking element in the two sets of

scenes laid under examination here. The destruction of the normal

structure of the urbs—as portrayed in the first set of scenes—leaves,

for some, only terror in the face of what is happening, apprehension

about what is to come, and confusion over where to turn for stability

and order. In others, however, the destruction of urban political

life is carried one step farther when they become willing and active

participants in the destruction by enlisting themselves in the service

of the tyrant and readily do his bidding. The twisting of values and

the perversion of civic virtue: fides and pietas directed in the service

of a tyrant, as in the case of Vulteius, Scaeva, Curio, mark the

ultimate destruction of civic life in the Roman world. In addition

to the declared enemies of the old Republican order—Caesar and his

henchmen—Lucan shows us a third kind of destruction of civic morality

in the paradoxical situation involving the Republican officers

Petreius and Afranius. Petreius, at first glance, seems to represent

the old fashioned Roman m ilitary virtue in rallying his men back to

the fighting when they seem about to put an end to the war by their

friendly association with the enemy. Afranius, on the other hand. 11 seems to represent the cowardly betrayal of martial valor in his humiliating submission to Caesar and his withdrawal from the fighting. The kind of war that has drawn these men together creates a paradox. The right order of things has been turned upside down. The poet has allowed his reader room for thought, there is no simple answer to the dilemma posed in the Petreius and Afranius scene. Should Afranius, apart from his own humiliating self- abasement, weaken the Republican war effort by withdrawing his forces from the fighting? Is not Petreius right in so passionately espousing the cause of war against a tyrant? In this scene the common soldiers have found the answer to the dilemma in their own natural inclinations: their association with one another renews the bonds that once held them together before.the artificially imposed strictures of the camp and civil war drove them apart.

There can be no virtue in furthering a war that pits Roman against .

fellow Roman; there can be no betrayal of virtue in a withdrawal

from such a war to seek the stable and rational life of peace and

o rd e r.

Immediately before the political chaos of the past months

explodes on the field in the climactic battle of Pharsalia, the poet

inserts his own voice into the narrative:

hae facient dextrae, quidquid non expleat aetas u l l a nec humanum r e p a r e t genus omnibus a n n is , ut uacet a ferro. gentes Mars iste futuras obruet, et populos aeui uenientis in orbem erepto natale feret. tunc omne Latinum fa b u la nomen e r i t .

7. 387-392 12

He makes clear the dramatic implications of both groups of scenes: the disruption of Roman civil order affects first the city of Rome itself, and then other cities within the Roman orbit. Further, the impact upon the individual citizen—leaving him bereft of any stable structure on the one hand, and perverting him into an instrument of civic destruction on the other—spells the reversal of the right order of things. The reversal, described in the passage above and in the one following, is a necessary result of the civil conflict. The civil war itself is a reversal of the right order of things;

omne tib i bellum gentes dedit omnibus annis: te geminum Titan procedere uidit in axem. baud multum terrae spatium restabat Eoae, ut tibi nox tibi tota dies tibi curreret aether, omniaque e rra n te s s te l l a e Romana u id e r e n t. sed retro tua fata tu lit par omnibus annis Eknathiae funesta dies, hac luce cruenta effectum ut Latios non horreat India fasces, nec uetitos errare Dahas in moenia ducat Sarmaticumque premat succinctus consul aratnun: quod semper saeuas debet tib i Parthia poenas, quod fu g ien s c iu i l e n e fa s red itu ra q u e numquam l ib e r t a s u l t r a Tigrim Rhenumque r e c e s s it , ac totiens nobis iugulo quaesita uagatur, Germanum Scythicumque bonum, nec r e s p i c i t u l t r a Ausoniam, uellem, populis incognita nostris .11

7. U21-U36 SCENES IN ORDER OF OCCURRENCE

BOOK ONE Rome i ...... 70-222 Caesar Politicus i ...... 223-230 A rim inum ...... 231 -261 Expulsion of the Tribunes ...... 261-291 Caesar Politicus ii ...... 291-391 Catalogue of Forces (C aesarian) ...... 392-1:6$ Rome i i ...... U66-522

BOOK TWO Rome i i i ...... 16-233 Cato Politicus et Sapiens i ...... 23U-32$ Cato Politicus et Sapiens i i ...... 371+-391 Pompey P o litic u s i ...... $26-609 Catalogue of Forces (Pompeian i ) ...... 631-61:9

BOOK THREE Caesar Politicus i i i ...... 1:6-168 Catalogue of Forces (Pompeian ii) ..... 169-297 M a ssilia ...... 298-762

BOOK FOUR Camps O pposite i ...... l68-2$9 Camps O pposite i i ...... 337-1:01 The Mass S u icid e ...... l:7i:-$8l

BOOK FIVE Senate in Exile i ...... 7-6$ Mutiny (Caesarian) ...... 237-380 Caesar Politicus iv ...... 381-1:02

BOOK SIX Scaeva ...... 138-262

BOOK SEVEN Pompey P o litic u s i i ...... U$-123 L a risa ...... 712-727 11:

TABLE 1— Continued

BOOK EIGHT Mytilene ...... 109-158 Catalogue of Forces (Pompeian iii) .... 202-2U3 Senate in Exile ii ...... 258-1:55 A lexandria i ...... 1:60-576

BOOK NDIE Cato Politicus et Sapiens iii 19-50 Cato Politicus et Sapiens iv 190-211: Mutiny (Pompeian) ...... 215-293 Cato Politicus et S^^piens v , 51U:-60l: Caesar Politicus v ..... 106U-1103

BOOK TEÎ1 Alexandria ii , 9-U33 IS

TABLE 2

SCENES IN ORDER OF TREATMENT

1. Rome: 1. 70-222; 1. 1:66-522; 2, 16-233

2. Caesar Politicus: 1 . 223-230; 1. 291-391; 3. 1:6-1 68; 5. 381-1:02 9 . 1061:-1108

3. Ariminur^; 1. 231-261 M assilia; 3. 298-762 Larisa: ?. 712-72? M y tilen e: 8 . 109-158

1:. CatalRues of Forces: Caesarian; 1. 392-1:65 Pompeian: 2. 631 -61:9; 3. 169-297; 8. 202-21:3

5. The Expulsion of the Tribunes: 1, 261-291 The Senate in E x ile : 5» 7-65; 8. 258-1:55 The M utinies: C aesarian ; 5» 237-380 Pompeian: 9. 215-293

6. Pompey P o l it ic u s : 2. 526-609; 7. 1:5-123

7. Cato P o litic u s e t S ap ien s: 2. 23l:-325j 2 . 37U-391 ; 9 . 19-50; 9. 190-211:; 9. 5W:-60l:

8. The Camps O pposite: U. 168-259; h» 337-1:01 The Mass S u ic id e : k» l;7l:-58l Scaeva: 6 . 138-262

9. A lex an d ria: 8 . 1:60-576; 10, 9-1:33 16

NOTES

1. "... la Pharsale devait de^crire, comme le declare son auteur dans le proème, une guerre monstrueuse qui avait fait du crime un droit et dresse Romain contre Romain.” (Berthe Marti, "La structure de la Pharsale.” In M. Durry (éd.), Lucain (Fondation Hardt, Entretiens 1^), Geneva, 1970, 33).

2. Rome's mission hymned in Vergil Aeneid 6. 81:7-833.

3. For the subsequent identification of and synonymity among the term s genus humanum, o rb is Romanus, and imperium Romanum, see Pierre Grenade, "Le mythe de Pompée et les Pompéiens sous les Ce'sars," ^ 32 (1950); 1:9-30.

i:. Horace Carm. 3.6.1-1:; Vergil Aeneid 6. 826-833.

3. Vergil Aeneid 6. 791-791:

6. "It is clear that Lucan has in mind not so much the quantity of the loss, as the quality, the loss of Roman blood in the strict sense, a loss that in his belief shattered for all time to come the imperial mission of a free Rome." (L. A. MacKay, "Pharsalus and the Roman Fate," Phoenix 6 (1952): 11:8 ). Of. Eva M. Sanford, "Lucan and Civil War," GPh 28 (1933): 222.

7. a qualitate,ut (pote) inter generum et socerum gesta. ubi et filii cum parentibus et fratres dimicauere cum fratribus. ( Commenta B em en sia, H. Usener ( e d .) , L eip zig , 1869).

8. Otto Steen Due, "An Essay on L^can," C&M 23 (1962): 116, 11?. Note also p. 108. ^ See also Jacqueline Brisset, Les idees politiques de Lucain, (Paris, 1961:), p. 33; and A, W. Lintott, "Lucan and the History o f th e C iv il War," CQ 21 (1971): 1:93.

9. Cf. Marti, "La structure," pp. 3-6; and Werner Rutz, "Lucan 191:3- 1963," Lustrum 9 (1961:): 262-271.

10. The inhabitants w ill bear witness to their recovery in the past at 1. 251:-257.

11. These and all subsequent quotations from the Pharsalia are taken from the edition by C. E, Haskins, (London, 1 ÔÔf)'i Haskins' reading of 7. 387-388 is accepted here in preference to A. E, Housraan's deletion of line 388 and his conjectured reading. Haskins, untroubled by the passage, adequately justifies Lucan's use of the indefinite relative quidquid and the verb expiere t h a t give Housraan pause. See Housrnan's discussion in the prefatory section of his edition of the Pharsalia, 2d impression (corrected), Oxford, ^92^; reprint edition, 1950, pp. xxiii-xxv. CHAPTER I

A. INTRODUCTION: 1. 67-69

B. ROME: 1. 70-222

C. ROME: 1. U66-522

D. ROME: 2. 16-233

A. Introduction: 1. 67-69

Lucan established the dramatic tone for his narrative with the opening line of the Proem. The Proem (1-32)—a over Rome and her fate—a fate for which in large measure Rome her­ self is responsible

quis furor, o ciues, quae tan ta licentia ferri gentibus inuisis Latium praebere cruorem? cumque superba f o r e t Babylon sp o lian d a tro p a e is Ausoniis, umbraque erraret Crassus inulta, bella geri placuit nullos habitura triumphos?

1. 8-12 b u ild s th e atm osphere o f f e a r , g r ie f , and impending doom. The Proem concludes with a dire picture of Rome’s ultimate fate

at nunc semirutis pendent quod moenia tectis urbibus Italiae, lapsisque ingentia muris saxa ia c e n t, nuU oque domus custode te n e n tu r, rarus et antiquis habitator in urbibus errat, horrida quod dumis raultosque inarata per annos Hesperia est, desuntque manus poscentibus aruis, non tu, Pyrrhe ferox, nec tantis cladibus auctor Poenus erit: nulli penitus descenders ferro contigit: alta sedent ciuilis uolnera dextrae.

1. 2U-32

18 19

There follows the brief Laus Heronis (33-66), after which comes a three line Introduction ( 67- 69) to the narrative proper

fert animus causas tantarum expromere rerum, imrnensumque a p e r itu r opus, quid in arma furentem , impulerit populura, quid pacera excusserit orbi.

1. 67-69

Line 67 is readily compared to the opening line of Ovid’s

Metamorphoses. 0, C. Phillips has noted the solemnity of the opening

words of Ovid’s poem and has suggested that that solemnity appealed

to Lucan as it had to Ovid.^

The poet says that his intention is causas tantarum expromere

rerum and he describes the narrative upon which he is about to

embark; imrnensumque a p e r itu r opus . . . Lucan i s h ere a s s o c ia tin g

himself with his predecessors in the epic genre.^ However, by

dispensing with the divine machinery of Homeric and Vergilian epic,

he is able to concentrate on the human agency and responsibility both

for the establishment and preservation of a civilized political order

and, its corollary, the deterioration and destruction of that order.

Two indirect questions follow, and are the lead-in for his

explanation and specification of causas tantarum . . . rerum. The

first clearly echoes the note of madness and impending doom first

struck in the Proem (quis furor, o ciues, quae tanta licentia ferri, 8);

quid in arma furentem / impulerit populum.

The second suggests the poet’s vision of the impact of Rome's civil

strife on the world at large and the identity of Rome's fate and that

of the world: quid pacem excusserit orbi. 20

The Roman C iv il War w i l l n o t only a f f e c t th e c itiz e n s of Rome, b u t, because Rome herself represents world civilization and order, will cause them to break down on a world wide scale. B. Rome; 1 . 70-222

The narrative proper begins at line 70. The poet’s initial focus is on the city of Rone itself and a poetic analysis of what elements were present in the city to bring it to the point of destruction. He scrutinizes the two areas of human existence: the social and the political, in order to specify the areas of breakdovm that ultimately issued in the destruction at Pharsalia. That Rome occupies the reader's attention to such a great extent in the early books of the poem is necessary for Lucan's poetic conception of his su b je c t m a tte r. The beginning o f th in g s i s a t Rome: she i s th e source of political and social order and discipline and the model of constitutional wisdom. This is in agreement with the Augustan picture of Rome's function in the universe. But for Lucan and for his picture, the coming of the turbulence and destruction of the civil war crippled Rome as the generator of a civilizing influence for mankind. Lucan must show us the deterioration first at Rome; and then show it spreading to the rest of the world.

The episode may be o u tlin e d as fo llo w s : i . CHAOS IN NATURE...... 70-82 i i . CHAOS IN SOCIETY...... 82-93 i i i . CHAOS IN POLITICS ...... 93-97(Historical) i v . CHAOS IN POLITICS ...... 98-157(Contemporary)

V . CHAOS IN SOCIETY ...... 158-182

V i . CHAOS IN NATURE...... 183-222

21 22

These sections are established quite clearly in the text.

Sections i and ii each conclude with a “terminal sententia.”^

in se magna ruunt: laetis hunc numina rebus crescendi posuere modum;

81-82

nulla Tides regni sociis omnisque potestas impatiens consortis erit.

The beginning of sections ii and iii is further emphasized by the repetition in identical positions of the half-line nec gentibus ullis (82, 93).

Sections iv and vi each conclude with a simile: the first likening Caesar and his restless ambition to the restless and frenetic activity of the lightning bolt; the second comparing his

relentless pursuit of the war to the growing rage of a Libyan lion

in the face of his hunters

qualiter expressum uentis per nubila fulmen aetheris irapulsi sonitu raundique fragore eraicuit rupitque diem populosque pauentis terruit obliqua praestringens luraina flamraa: in sua templa furit: nullaque exire uetante m a te ria , raagnamque cadens magnamque re u e rte n s dat stragem late sparsosque recolligit ignes.

1S1-1S7 23

sicut squalentibus aruis a e s tif e r a e Libyes u iso leo cornminus h o ste subsedit dubius totam duia colligit iram; mox sibi se saeuae stinulauit uerbere caudae, erexitque iubas, uasto et graue murmur hiatu in fre m u lt, turn t o r t a le u is s i lan cea Mauri haereat aut latum subeant uenabula pectus, per ferrum tanti seourus uolneris exit,

205-212

Sections iii and v show nothing so clearly identifiable as a rhetorical sententia or a carefully constructed simile like the two cited above. However, the tightness of construction and expression in both places is very close to that of sententiae. In the

conclusion of section iii, the poet sums up the reasons for the

conflict between Home’s founding brothers, with the implied contrast to the modern day pair—father-in-law and son-in-law, Romulus and

Remus did not wage such a mighty struggle for world dominion—rather

exiguom dominos commisit asylum. 9%

In similarly deliberate phrasing, the poet concludes section v—

hinc usura uorax auidumque in tempora faenus^ et concussa fides et multis utile bellum,

181-182

—concussa fides balances utile bellum, with multis the indirect

object for both. This alternation of section-markings provides an

interesting variation and avoids monotony.

The first Homan episode of the poem sets the tone for Lucan’s

treatment of Home, and, at the same time, gives the (poetic) reasons

for the imminent disaster of the war. It begins with a short picture

(70-82) of a state of chaos in nature si'mbolic of what is happening 2h to Rome and to the rest of the civilized world. Rome pursued a policy of growth, expansion, and world conquest which necessarily set in motion forces outside Rome's control

inuida fatorura series ... 70 and which act according to immutable law

laetis hunc numina rebus crescendi posuere modum;

81-82

and the result is inevitable

nec se Roma ferens 72

in se magna ruunt. 8l

Lucan then presents Rome's present condition within the context of

Stoic eschatology when all things w ill return to primeval chaos.

It has already been pointed out that the concept of Rome and the

concept of the civilized world are not sharply distinguished in the

poet's vision.^ The eschatological vision predicts the fate of the

world at its final hour (saecula tot mundi suprema coegerit hora, 73);

but, for the poet, the final hour for Rome has already arrived. He

suggests this by balancing the two phrases which enclose this

eschatological picture^

nec se Roma ferens 72

in se magna ru u n t. ^

In this section, the poet gives the explanation for and the answer

to the two indirecd questions of the Introduction (1. 68-69): 25

tu causa rnalorura, f a c ta tr ib u s d o n in is communis, Roma, nec umquara in turbam missi feralia foedera regni.

81-86

The machinations of the men of the Triuirivirate begin inside the city of Rome and bring chaos there first. Soon the contest is between only two men whose quarrel w ill envelop the world.^

The poet has fashioned a balance between these two sections

(82-93, 93-97) by means of a series of phrases descriptive of the

chaotic conditions that he portrays

(1) mixtis / sidera sideribus concurrent: (2) ignea pontum / astra petent: (3) tellus extendere litora nolet / excutietque freturn; ih ) fratri contraria Phoebe / ibit, et obliquom bigas agitare per orbem / indignata diem poscet sibi: (5) totaque dlscors / machina diuolsi turbabit foedera mundi.

7i;-80 which is balanced by another series of five in the second section.

Chaos in Society:

(1) f a c ta tr ib u s dom inis communis, Roma, (2) nec umquam / in turbara missi feralia foedera regni. (3) o male concordes (it) nimiaque cupidine caeci, / (5) quid mlscere iuuat uires orbemque tenere / in medium?

The vision of the universe returning to the primeval state of chaos

that existed before the "creation" is, in point of fact, actually

happening when Rome hands herself over to the three rivals (tribus

dominis). The vision of the fiery stars mingling themselves with the

waters of the sea (pontum astra petent) is balanced by the equally

abnormal compact among the three antagonists for power through 26 feralia foedera re:~ni. The abnormality of and astonishing—almost sacrilegious—character of this situation (contained in feralia foedera, and, of course, in the flavor of the word regni) is further underscored by nec umcuam. The poet's vision of the seas being denied the shores by Earth and refusing to hold to the traditional boundaries established for the two elements (excutietcue (sc. tellus) freturn) is mirrored in the brief description of Rome's political life: o male concordes .... The poet's vision of the two luminaries of the universe in opposition to one another and the refusal of the moon, who requires her brother's light for her own existence, to retain her o;m place and, instead seeking the place of the sun—which would result only in darkness since the moon has no light-giving power of h e r o\m.—is echoed in Lucan's statement of the attitude of those who seek a place beyond the confines of order and reason; nimiacue

cupidine caeci. Finally, the poet suggests the final collapse of the

structure of the universe (foedera mundi) after its allotted time

. has run out. ^he same structural collapse is hinted at in the

corresponding section: cuid miscere iuuat uires orbemque tenere in

medium? The poet returns to the astronomical motif to solidify the

connection between the two sections and emphasize the totality of

the destruction (a) on the last day; and, (b) of the Civil War:

dum terra fretum terrmaque leuabit aer et longi uluent Titana labores, noxque diem caelo totidem per signa sequetur, nulla fides regni sociis omnisque potestas impatiens consortis erit.

59-93 27

The poet tu rn s now more s p e c if ic a lly to Rome's s itu a tio n . In a sh o rt

allusion to Roman history ( 9 3 - 9 7 he suggests that Rome's present

day troubles are not novel but have been played out already—albeit

on a much smaller scale. This section begins, as pointed out

above, with nec gentibus ullis, as did the section before it.

Nec longe fatorum exempla petantur (9h) balances and provides a

reference to the first section (70-82); inuida fatorum series. Lucan

alludes to the political struggles in newly-founded Rome between

th e founding b ro th e rs Romulus and Remus

fratemo primi raaduerunt sanguine muri. 95

In describing the situation in Rome's early days, Lucan calls the

struggle between the brothers a "madness"^^

nec pretium tanti tellus pontusque furoris. 96

This short scene is very important for Lucan's view of the events

he will describe and for the personalities that he will introduce.

Lucan has reached into the past for an exemplum—a key to conduct

or attitude. The past, whether historical, serai-historical, or

mythological (and the boundaries among the three classes were never

that sharply drawn) was an aid for the present. However, the exemplum

that Lucan offers is not a standard to follow nor a model of action,

but an indictment both of the actions and the motives of the founders

o f Rome, too greedy f o r p o l i t i c a l power. The s tru g g le between Romulus

and Remus was different, at least quantitatively; exiguom dominos

commisist asylum. Their heirs now struggle over the whole world 28

. , . orbemque tenere in medium?

. . . quae totum poasidet orbem non cepit fortuna duos.

110-111

From the very brief historical exemplum fatorum, Lucan proceeds to a much longer statement and description of the era of the Civil

War, and a modern Chaos in Politics (98-1^7). The relentless march of fate (inuida fatorum series . . . 70) is here evident in Lucan's vision of the events that led up to the ultimate armed struggle and the fall of the Republican constitution. The image of madness, abnormality, chaos, and deterioration is maintained; and, because he now speaks of modem Rome, th e m o tif i s em phasized. The a s so c ia tio n among th e Trium virs was a concordia d isc o rs (98) w hile Crassus was y e t alive.There was peace while Crassus lived, but it was pax . . . non sponte ducum (9 9 ). Crassus served as a b u ffe r between the saeua arma (103-1 Ol:) of the antagonists. His death in battle with the Parthians, however,

. . . Romanos so lu e ru n t damna f u r o r is 106

Like Crassus before his death, Julia also was the peacemaker among the contenders for ÿower. Inexorable fate carried her off, too, and moved events one step farther toward the ultimate disaster.

The ètmosphere of dread envelops Lucan's references to Julia 29

nam p ig n o ra i ’on c ti sangi-iinis et diro ferales onine taedas abstulit ad mânes Parcarum Iulia saeua intercepta manu.

111-11 il

Just as Crassus’ death drove the two survivors farther apart, so

Julia's death precluded whatever efforts she might have exerted in favor of peace and order^^

ouodsi tibi fata dedissent maiores in luce moras, tu sola furencem inde uirum poteras atque hinc retinere parentem, armatasque manus excusso iungere ferro.

1 1 W 1 7

The remainder of this section concerns itself vri.th a

concentrated comparison between the two remaining Triumvirs; and

the poet returns to the questions posed in the Introduction (67-69):

quis iustius induit arma.. scire nefas: magno se iudice quisque tuetur.

126-127

The contrasting picture of Pompey and Caesar presented by

Lucan in this section is one of extremes that bring trouble to a

well-ordered state. Although both men are concerned about personal

glory and prestige (their dignitas, virtus, and auctoritas),

stimulos dedit aemula uirtus, 1 20

Pompey i s p rese n ted as a s t a t i c f ig u r e

tu noua ne ueteres obscurent acta triumphos, et uictis cedat piratica laurea Gallis, I-iagne, tim es:

121-123 30

alter uergentibus annis in senium longoque togae tranquillior usu dedidicit iam pace ducem;

129-131 content (or preferring) to draw interest on his past achievements and taking inordinate delight in popular acclaim

famaeque petitor multa dare in uolgusj totus popularibus auris impelli plausuque sui gaudere theatri:lL nec reparare nouas uires, multumque priori credere fortunae.

131-13$

The poet caps his description with a simile in which he d istills the essential elements of his Pompey for the reader. The aged oak tree that carries the burden and honor and respect due its years— but has no potential for further greatness—is used to symbolize

Pompey^ ^

stat magni nominis umbra: qualis frugifero quercus sublimis in agro exuuias ueteres populi sacrataque gestans dona ducum: nec iam ualidis radicibus haerens pondéré fixa suo est: nudosque per aera ramos effundens trunco non frondibus efficit umbram; et quamuis primo nutet casura sub Euro, tot circum siluae firmo se robore tollant, sola tamen colitur.

135-1U3

0, S. Due calls attention to the pun on Pompey’s name contained in

the first line of the simile, which he criticizes as a "not very

well-timed pun.”^^ However, he does not point out the striking

double echo of the simile and the pun later in the poem. In Book

Three, where Lucan describes the gathering of the forces of Pompey (which w ill be considered in more detail below), Lucan writes

interea totum Magni fortuna per orbem secum casuras in proelia mouerat urbes.

3. 169-170

Not only does the same magni appear, but also the future participle of cadere—in each instance foreshadowing Pompey's dovmfall as a result of the civil conflict.

Caesar is described in terms of frenetic activity and restless energy and anxiety to achieve ever more

acer et indomitus; quo spes quoque ira uocasset f e r r e manum, e t numquam tenerando p a rc e re f e r r o : successus urgere suos, instare fauori numinis: impellens quidquid sibi summa petenti obstaret, gaudensque uiam fecisse ruina.

116-1 SO

Caesar, too, is summarized by a simile—the wild and unpredictable activity of the lightning bolt is chosen to depict him (iSl-lS?).^*^

It is both these extremes that will bring the great troubles upon

Rome and upon the world.

In section v (158-182) Lucan specifies what elements within the Roman state brought her to civil war. This section, which is here designated Chaos in Society, might equally be called the Catalogue of

Vices. Here the poet lists for his reader the traditional vices of which the poets and historians, already before Lucan's time, have

convicted the R om ans.In this relatively short section, Lucan presents a concentrated picture of the deterioration of the populace because of Rome's tremendous increase in wealth and power and territory. 32

It is both these extremes that will bring the great troubles upon

Rome and upon the world.

In section v (15)8-182) Lucan specifies what elements vâthin the Roman State brought her to civil war. This section, which is here designated Chaos in Society, might equally well be called the Catalogue of Vices. Here the poet lists for the reader the traditional vices of which the poets and historians, already before Lucan's time, have convicted the Romans.^ ^ In this relatively short section, Lucan presents a concentrated picture of the deterioration of the populace because of Rome's tremendous increase in wealth and power and territory.

The p ic tu r e p ain ted f o r us may be d iv id ed in to e ig h t se c tio n s: 158-162: ______INTRODUCTION hae ducibus causae suberant: sed publica belli / semina, quae populos semper mersere potentis. namque u t opes mundo nim ias fo rtu n e subacto intulit et rebus mores cessere secundis, praedaque et hostiles luxum suasere rapinae:

163-167; LUXURIA: AI-PLiSSING OF MONEY, LUXURIOUS HOMES, ■ FOODS. OUTLAiNDlSH STAI^DAiüDS AND TASTES IN CLOTHING non auro tectisque modus: mensasque priores / aspernata fames: cultus gestare decoros / uix nuribus rapuere mares: fecunda uirorum / paupertas fugitur; totoque accersitur orbe / quo gens quaeque perit. 167-170:______BUILDING UP OF EXTENSIVE lulND HOLDINGS turn longos iungere fin e s agrorum, e t quondam duro s u lc a ta C am illi uomere et antiques Curiorum passa ligones .g longa sub ignotis extendere rura colonis. 1 7 1 -1 7 2 :

From this description of luxury and greed, the poet passes on to a description of the effects of these personal and private vices on the political structure of the city.

non erat is populus quern pax tranquilla iuuaret, quern sua libertas imnotis pasceret armis.

173-175:______POLITICAL UIIRFST

inde irae faciles; et quod suasisset egestas u i l e n e fa s ; magnumque decus ferro q u e petendura plus patria potuisse sua; mensuraque iuris u is e r a t :

176-177:______POLITICAL UI1REST LEADS TO POLITICAL CORRUPTION IN OFFICIALS

hinc leges et plébiscita coactae, et cum consulibus turbantes iura tribuni:

178-180; ______AND CORRUPTION IN THE PEOPLE

hinc rapti fasces pretio sectorque fauoris ipse sui populus, letailsque ambitus urbi, annua uenali referens certamina Canpo:

181-182: ______CORRUPTION SPRZADS FROM THE POLITICAL SPHSRZ TO THF ECONOMIC: WAR-PROFITZLRING

hinc usura uorax auidumque in tempora faenus^^ et concussa fides et multis utile bellum.

Lucan shows his reader in this passage the progressive deterioration of the social and political fabric of Rome. Sach of the kinds of vices that the poet describes proceeds from the one before it, as is shown by the choice of transitional particles: turn (167); inde (173); hinc (176, 178, I3l). The final section in the first Roman episode (183-222) brings one of the contestants—the one most active and energetically

fomenting the troubles and chaos—Caesar, in confrontation with Rome

herself. Roma, the personification of the City, its ideal and its

soul, accosts Caesar as he is about to march against her.

This portion of the narrative is termed "Chaos in Nature"

and balances the first section of the episode. The "chaos" here is

not the overt violence of the previous passages. In this passage the

poet very subtly hints at the potential power—the potential violence—

of natural forces posed momentarily in the background, just as Caesar

and his armies are poised momentarily near Rome, before the violence

of war breaks out.

Lucan first points to the icy snows of the impenetrable

mountains separating Italy from Northern Europe

iam gelidas Caesar cursu superauerat Alpes 183

and the potential power of the Alpine snows able to enlarge the

normally placid Rubicon into a powerful river

tum uires praebebat hiemps atque auxerat undas tertia iam grauido pluuialis Qynthia cornu, et madidis Euri resolutae flatibus Alpes.

217-219

Just as the natural forces sometimes break the normal restraints of

nature and erupt in violence, so, too, Caesar has broken the normal

restraints of the constitutional order and is about to unleash violence

against Rome and the rest of the world.

Between these two allusions to inaniraate nature, Lucan compares 35

Caesar to a Libyan lion about to confront his hunters and potential c a p to rs

sicut squalentibus aruis aestiferae Libyes uiso leo cornminus hoste subsedit dubius totam dum colligit iram; mox ubi se saeuae stimulauit uerbere caudae, erexitque iubas, uasto et graue murmur hiatu infremuit, tum torta leuis si lancea Mauri haereat aut latum subeant uenabula pectus, per ferrum tanti securus uolneris exit.

205-212

In this atmosphere of nature’s implied powers, Caesar meets the vision

o f Roma.^'* The t h r e a t o f what C aesar and h is fo rc e s a re a b le to do

causes the spirit of Rome to appear to the Conqueror and try to per­

suade him away. She reproaches him with the unconstitutionality of

his actions, for he approaches the city armed and leading an armed

force. Caesar hesitates momentarily—and has a momentary experience

of fear (horror, 192);^^ but his recovery from his fear is rapid (mox)

and he bursts into a fit of bravado^^ that both admits of Roma's charge

of unconstitutionality and also serves as an apologia in the face of

the charge.

With this scene, Lucan has brought his picture of Rome at the

brink of Civil War to a full circle. The chaos of the last day,

envisioned by the poet in his brief Stoic eschatology, is now about

to be translated into reality by Caesar's armed advance toward the

city. The cooperation of the citizens of Home, because of their lack

of wisdom amidst their wealth, power, and personal luxury, with Caesar's

own personal ambition, brings Rome to this point of destruction. c. Rome; 1. L66-S22

The second Roman episode differs from the first in its heightened concentration on only two segments of Roman society, Lucan here increases the dramatic tension begun in the first episode by narrowing the focus of the reader's attention upon the deleterious effect of the civil war on the two traditional pillars of Roman political order; the Senate and the People.

This episode follows immediately upon the Catalogue of

Caesarian Forces. Lines U66-it68 form not only a transition between

the Catalogue and the Roman episode but also help establish a mood

of impending disaster

Caesar ut immensae collecte robore uires audendi maiora fidem fecere per omnem spargitur Italiam uicinaque moenia complet.

1;66-It66

Audendi maiora and fidem fecere (1^6?) are significant echoes of other

parts of the poem. The strength described in the Catalogue of Forces

that Caesar has gathered around himself encourages him (fidem fecere)

to strive for greater achievement (audendi maiora). Audendi maiora

is a reflection of Caesar's own words at 1. 310 where he defends his

reputation to his men against the supposed insults offered him by

Pompey. He tells his men that his oim success over the past ten years

is a justification of his present course of action. Not only do his

successes justify him, but superique ad summa uocantes. 2h

36 37

The "greater things" that he dares, and the "heights" to which, in his o\m estiiaation, the gods call him >ri.ll be clearly defined by Caesar himself in Book Nine in his conversation with the Egyptians at the palace in Alexandria

frustra ciuilibus armis miscuimus gentes, si qua est hoc orbe potestas altera quam Caesar, si tellus ulla duorum est.

9. 1076-1078

Lucan's use of the idiom fidem fecere at 1, L6? is not only

a description of Caesar's attitude as he tallies up the forces that

have massed behind him and by means of which he m il realize his

dreams of conquest, but also a complex reminder for the reader of the

distortion of civic virtues and political values that has taken place

because of Caesar and his dreams of conquest. His massed armies

"induce belief . . . persuade, convince" him of the possibility of

success and are also the elements in which he places his "conviction,

credence, trust, confidence"as the basis of his political morality,

Caesar explicitly abandoned the traditional foundation stones of

political morality at the Rubicon: pax, iura, foedera (1, 22^-226),

and now relies on the force of arms Çutendum est iudice bello, 1, 227).

Immensae collecte robore uires give him an "assurance" or a "pledge"

of victory—a victory that w ill mean massive destruction and untold

suffering for the Roman world.

The breakdown of the social fabric of Rome results from Caesar's

progress through Italy, Lucan begins his description of the turmoil

of the city with a description of Fama, Fama acts as an ally of Caesar,

unknotm to him, but creating panic and confusion and paralyzing terror 38 among the populace that w ill render them ultimately more submissive and docile at his entry into the city. With Fama's activities on behalf of Caesar we might compare the activities of Julia's ghost who appears to Pompey in Book T hree, a t 8-UO, readying him f o r d i s a s t e r .

The rapid spread of false information in times of national crisis is a motif fam iliar enough in the reader's own experience and from similar

accounts in other poets—notably Vergil and Ovid. Lucan's description

of Fama is quite different from Vergil's in Aeneid ii. 173-195 and from

the two descriptions in Ovid's Metamorphoses at 9. I 36-II16 and a t

12, 39- 63, in one respect. In the Vergilian passage Fama moves

swiftly through Africa spreading tales about the relationship between

Dido and her guest-friend Aeneas, but her information contains a slight

admixture of truth

tarn ficti pravique tenax quam nuntia veri Aen. it. 1?8

I n O v id 's d e s c r ip tio n , to o , Fama has some c o n ta c t w ith tru e

fa ct

, , cum Fama loquax p r a e c e s s it ad a u re s , Deianira, tuas, quae veris addere falso gaudet , , ,

M et, 9 . 137-139

I n Book Twelve, Ovid g iv es an o th e r d e s c r ip tio n o f Fama a t work b e fo re

the Greeks arrive at Troy, Here, too, there is some grain of truth

i n what she spreads abroad

• . euntque mixtaque cum veris passim commenta vagantur m ilia Rumorum , , ,

Met. 12. 53-55 39

Lucan's Fana, however, has absolutely no contact with truth whatever; she is uana . . . faraa (U69) and she

innumeras soluit falsa in praeconia linguas. h72

The stories that Fpma spreads cause a general breakdown in the morale of the populace and the mixture of rumor and the people's already growing terror causes a mass exodus from the city. Even the Senate, which should be the stabilizing influence amid the unreasoned terror

(sic puisque pauendo / dat uires famae; nulloque auctore / quae

finxere timent, Ii8ii-U86) is rendered helpless in the face of Caesar's

approach and abandons its post

sed curia et ipsi sedibus exsiluere Patres inuisaque belli consulibus fugiens mandat décréta senatus.

W 7-L 8;

Lucan sums up the picture of chaos in both the Senate and the People

in three similes, the first two of which compare Rome's disorder to

disasters that befall a city: fire (ignited by its captors) and

earthquake

credas aut tecta nefandas corripuisse faces . . . h93-h9h

aut iam quatiente ruina nutantis pendere doraos: sic turba per urbem praecipiti lymphata gradu . . .

1*91-196

He sharpens his picture of the chaos in the third simile which employs

the figure of a ship in the midst of a storm. This picture of the 10 smaller "society”—that of a ship's crew—concentrates the image of terror, confusion, and helplessness in the face of uncontrollable forces in the process of working destruction and emphasizes in the last three lines the abandonment of Rome by her magister (the Senate)

qualis, cum turbidus Auster r e p p u lit a L ib y cis immensum S y rtib u s aequor fractaque ueliferi sonuerunt pondéra mali, desilit in fluctus deserta puppe magister nauitaque et nondum sparsa compage carinae naufragium sibi quisque facit.

198-503

Lucan adds vignettes of the populace to complete his description of

the chaos and the total reversal of the normal order of things, and

the deterioration of the social and political framework at Rome.

He shows the breakdown of the domestic pietas of family ties and

l o y a ltie s

nullum iam languidus aeuo eualuit reuocare parens coniunxue maritum fletibus. . .

50U-506

the breakdown of religious ties

aut patrii dubiae dum uota salutis conciperent tenuere Lares. . .

506-507

and of domestic ties

nec limine quisquam haesit et extrerao tum forsitan urbis amatae plenus abit uisu:

507-509 im til the picture of mass exodus is complete

ruit irreuocabile uolgus. ^09

This portion of the scene ends in a sententia which serves to se p ara te i t from an in tr u s iv e comment by th e p o et h im se lf,

o faciles dare summa decs eademque tueri difficiles.

510-^11

Lucan's comment, very much like a dramatic Chorus, explains for the reader the implications of what he has just described and he takes great pains to direct the reader's emotional and intellectual response to the narrative. Lucan describes the reputation of the Roman legionaries and their constancy and bravery in battle and disregard for danger when fighting in a foreign land

cum pressus ab hoste c la u d itu r e x te m is m iles Romanus i n o r is , effugit exiguo noctuma pericula uallo, et subitus rapti munimine caespitis agger praebet secures intra tentoria somnos.

SIWIB

But now, the natural order of things is completely reversed

t u tantum au d ito bellorum nomine, Roma, desererisj nox una tuis non crédita muris.

Si 9-^20

Lucan concludes with a comment summarizing the events he has just

d escrib ed

danda tamen uenia est tantorum danda pauorum; Porapeio fugiente timent,

S21-S22 U2

The staccato of the d, t, and o sounds and the heavy -or of tantonjn and pauori-in add to the atmosphere of oppressive terror and panic.

The terminal sententia of the passage (Pompeio fugiente tinent) explains the events that have taken place, but also serves to give a warning ofterrors to come.^^ The concluding sententia is also directly related to the ship simile of U 9Ô-503 and is echoed later in the poem. In the simile, the master of the doomed ship deserts his post and the crew follow his example—trying to find safety, b u t,

naufragium sibi puisque facit. $03

So, Pompey has abandoned I t a l y and th e r e s u l t i s s im ila r in Rome.

The ship’s captain of the simile is called magister (501). This

word most directly suggests the magister of Rome, namely, the Senate,

as pointed out above 3 but the term also has an echo in rector,

applied to Pompey at 7. 85 (ingemuit rector sensitcue deorum / esse

dolos et fata suae contraria mente), and in Cato who is called tutor

a t 9. 2lj.-25 (patriam tutcre carentem / excepit, oopuli treoidantia

membra refouit). The abandonment of the State by the Senate and by

Pompey w i l l be made good ag ain by th e v ig o ro u s a tte n tio n o f th e new

tutor, Cato, after Pompey's death. Cato vri.ll be what Pompey was and,

in addition, vri.ll substitute his perfection in virtus for Pompey’s

weaknesses and failings. Lucan’s Cato will fu lfill the standards

set dovm by Cicero in De re publica for the ideal rector of the State^^

that he perhaps once saw in Pcmpey.^^ Although Lucan is clearly

sympathetic to Pompey, his ideal still resides in the staunch Ii3 discipline and austerity of Cato who understands the implications

of pietas and civic virtue, and aims at no position of power for

m e al -f* p. Rome; 2. 16-233

The third Roman episode, 2. 16-233, is narrower s till in its focus. In this scene Lucan is primarily interested in the effect of the Civil War on the People and their emotional reaction to the events totally beyond their control.

The Proem to Book Ti;o (1-15) serv es as a t r a n s it i o n and lin k s the second book with the description of portents, the religious ritual, and the prophetic ravings of the matron at the end of Book

O ne.3'

All the events of Book One are summarized in the opening words; iamoue irae patuere deum. The poet describes an intimate connection between the turmoil of Rome and the structure of the universe—the workings of one affect the other

legesque et foedera rerum praescia monstrifero uertit natura tumultu indixitque nefas.

The emphasis on nefas is significant, for this is the cause of irae . . . deum.

Lucan prepares the reader forthe description of the panic a t Rome, which occupies about o n e -th ird o f Book Two, by a sh o rt address to Jupiter (rector 01:/mpi, k ) in which he complains that the portents and signs sent by the gods warning of approaching disaster, place an almost unbearable burden on mankind (sollicitis uisum m o rtalib u s addere cur am, 5 ) . ijl; There follow Lucan's speculations on the divine plan and the relationship between Fatuia and Fortuna

siue parens rerun , . .

fixit in aeternun causas ...... et saecula iussa ferentem fatorum iiiinoto d i u i s i t l im ite mundum; siue nihil positun est sed Fors incerta uagatur fertque refertque uices et habet mortalia casus.

The poet comes to no certain conclusion about the divine plan

( quodcumque p a ra s , lU), but begs Jupiter to allow mankind one favor:

sit caeca futuri' mens hominum f a t i : l i c e a t s p e ra re tim e n ti.

i M i

The emphasis on the last word of the line (timenti) sets the tone for

the following description of Rome that is losing hope and in the

grip of fear.

Lucan c re a te s a l in k to th e Roman episodes o f Book One w ith

a brief allusion to the complete breakdovm of political order

. . . ferale per urbem iustitium: latuit plebeio tectus amictu omnis honor: nullos comitata est purpura fasces,

17-19

and then turns his attention to the fear of the populace. He builds

a picture of progressively growing terror among the people beginning

with dumb grief

turn questus ten u e re suos magnusque p er onrnes errabat sine uoce dolor 1^6 and culminating in a pitch of frenzied hysteria^^

maestaque tenent delubra cateruae. hae lacririiis sparsere decs, hae pectora dure adfixere solo: lacerasque in limine sacro attonitae fudere comas: uotisque uocari adsuetas crebris feriunt ululatibus aures.

29 z 33

Lucan begins with a simile which calls before the reader a

scene in a family home at the death of one of its members. Lucan

s e le c ts th e p re c is e moment when th e m ourners a re caught a t th e b rin k

of emotion between paralyzing shock and the emotional release of tears

sic funere primo a tto n ita e tac u e re domus, cum corpora nondura conclamata iacent nec mater crine soluto exigit ad saeuos famularura bracchia planetus:

necdum est ille dolor sed iam metus: incubât amens m iratu rq u e malum.

21- 21:, 27-28

The household of the simile has its parallel in the larger domestic

context of the city. The emotional release that will occur to the

individuals of the simile occurs in the individuals of Rome's populace.

The mourners of the simile are specified for the reader

. . . nec mater crine soluto exigit . . .

2 3 - 21:

and the equivalence between the mater of the simile and the matronae

of the subsequent description is easily seen (note parens, 36). h?

The motif of a death in the farriily occurs again in Book

Tv/o, at the introduction of Cato. There Cato describes himself and his fidelity to Rome and to libertas in terms of a father escorting the body of his dead son to its grave, and the father's unwilling­ ness to be parted from even the lifeless remains of his son

ceu morte parentem natorum orbatum Iongum producere funus ad tumulum iubet ipse dolor; iuuat ignibus atris inseruisse menus constructoque aggere busti ipsum atras tenuisse faces: non ante reuellar exanimem quam te com plectar, Roma, tuomque nomen, Libertas, et inanem prosequar umbraia.

297-303

The matrons are not as articulate about the reasons for their grief as is Cato. Cato makes the specific connection between the funeral of the simile and the death of libertas at Rome.

The m o tif in th ese two sim ile s appears w ith some v a ria tio n in Book Three, and the symbol becomes a reality for the people of

Massilia. There, those slain in battle are returned to grieving parents and wives

quis in urbe parentum fletus erat: quanti matrum per litora planctus.

3. 7S6-7S7

Lucan adds a touch of bitter irony that strips away the glory and the heroics of war

coniunx saepe sui confusis uoltibus unda credidit orâ u iri Romanum amplexa cadauer: accensisque rogis miseri de corpore trunco certauere patres.

3. 758-761 18

This last scene is especially important for the Roman episodes of

Book One and Book Twoj inasmuch as M a ssilia , e s p e c ia lly , i s a

"paradigm of Rome."^^

To re tu r n to th e scene a t Rome in Book Tvjo, th e l a s t sen ten ce of the death-scene simile, touching in its simplicity of statement, prepares the reader for the following narrative

. . . in cu b ât amens m iraturque malum.

,

The emotional release begins and the drama builds in the first scene with the matronae of the city laying siege to the temples and complaining against the gods for the present calamities

uotisque uocari adsuetas crebris feriunt ululatibus aures. nec cunctae summi tem plo ia c u e re T o n an tis: diuisere decs; et nullis defuit aris inuidiam factura parens.

32-36

Lucan gives one of the matronae a short "prophetic" speech—not divinely inspired, as in the case of the woman at the end of Book

One, but just as accurate—

nunc, ait, o miserae contundite pectora matres, nunc laniate comas, neue hunc differte dolorem e t summis se ru a te m a lis: nunc f l e r e p o te s ta s dum pendet fortuna ducum: cum uicerit alter gaudendum est.

38-12

The second group that Lucan focuses upon is the men of m ilitary

age (. . . bella uiri diuersaque castra patentes, li3) and the reader h 9 hears their complaints about the state of affairs at Rome (effunclunt iustas in numina saeua querelas, 14i). Their complaints are not motivated by cowardice. They would gladly fight any of Rome's foreign enemies for conquest or in defense of the city

non pacem petimus, superi: date gentibus iras: nunc urbes excite feras: coniuret in arma mundus,

h7-h9 but they make clear their attitude toward the coming war

o miserae sortis quod non in Punica nati tempora Cannarum fuimus Trebiaeque iuuentus.

U5-U6

The great disasters of the Second Punic War are far more desirable

than the conflict that will soon involve them. The struggle against

Hannibal imposed the greatest demands on Roman endurance, and

required the utmost of their discipline and self-sacrifice. The

Romans of the third century were able to meet the challenge and not

only survive, but emerge victorious. The war that faces them now,

pitting Roman against Roman, is a power-struggle based on greed; and

Lucan has already described the condition of the Roman moral fiber.

The men are not only affected by the civil turmoil, as are

the matronae of the previous scene, and the aged in the next, but they

are also active participants, as the others are not, inasmuch as they

will be serving in the army of one or the other of the antagonists

(diuersaque castra patentes, h3 )j and their expression of fear is

founded in the present 50

saeue parens, utrasque simul partesque ducesque dura nondura rneruere f e r i . tan to n e nouorura prouentu scelerum quaerunt uter imperet urbi?

They conclude with an ironie sententia

uix tanti fuerat ciuilia bella mouere ut neuter (sc. imperet).

62-63

Civil war is indeed too great a price to pay to give free rein to one man’s boundless arabition and greed. The irony lies in the last two words (u t n e u te r ) . The rea d e r knows th a t one raan w ill emerge victorious and the price will be not only the hardships of the fighting, but also the loss of freedom.

Lucan points out a further irony of the situation

tales pietas peritura querelas e g e r i t.

63-61

The noble sentiments, the longing for the old days of discipline and struggle, and the condemnation of the ambition of the two contenders, w ill soon fade away as the men become accustomed to this new war and its infection begins to eat away at their spirit. They vail become no better than the two leaders.

The last and longest Segment of this scene is a remembrance

of the past evils of the days of Marius and Sulla, put in the mouth of an o ld man at miseros angit sua cura parentes, oderuntque grauis uiuacia fata senectae seruatosque iterura bellis ciuilibus annos.

6U-66

Lucan uses this portion of the scene for an exeraplum from history or paradigm of what is about to happen to Rome once again. It confirms the "prophecy" of the matrona and complements the irony of the condemnation of Caesar and the Civil War by the u iri.

One is almost tempted to dismiss this speech as a Kestorian harangue, but actually it is vital to the structure of the e p ic . The c itiz e n r y i s p r a e te r itio u e memor . . . metuensque futuri (2. 233). Since the populace is "mindful of the past," what would be more apropos than an embittered reminiscence of the Marian horrors? . . . Is it not ironic that prior to this digression . . . Lucan has Caesar swear allegiance to (Fortuna)? Thus the destinies of uncle and nephew, of past and present, become inextricably linked in an excursus that is by no means a mere remembrance of things past.3^

The violent disruption of Rome's political stability consequent upon Marius' growing popularity—and proportionate influence—and the inability of the constitutional process to control him is being played out once again vjith Caesar, whom the Republican constitution is likewise unable to control—Caesar has blatantly dismissed it as a thing of no consequence—and who w ill bring horrors upon Rome to outstrip those wrought by his uncle. The old man's recollection of the Marian era is, indeed, no "mere remembrance of things past" because

Rome is set on a now irreversible course that will end only in the destruction of the Republic and the tyranny of Julius Caesar. Caesar brings worse troubles than Marius did because Caesar advances one more

step than Marius did. He will be successful where Marius failed. 52

NQT_5S

1. 0, C. Phillips, Jr., "The Influence of Ovid on Lucan's Bellum civile," (Ph. D. dissertation. University of Chicago, 1 962), p . 66.

2. Much more clearly stated at 980-986. Cf. Suetonius’ Vita Lucani. lines it-6 in the text reproduced in Carl Hosius, ed., M. Annaei Lucani Belli civilis libri decern, 3d. ed., Leipzig, 1913, p. 332; and the Vita attributed to Vacca, lines 1-7 in the same edition, p. 33$.

3. "An important feature of Lucan's use of the sententia . . . is his skill in placing it at the terminal point of a passage ...... (th e se s e n te n tia e ) make a n e a t summing up o f th e s itu a tio n o r p rese n t a s tr ik in g comment on what has preceded, and th ey a re often highly rhetorical in form ...... Lucan is fond of using the terminal sententia not only at the end of speeches, but also at the end of sections of his narrative." (Stanley F. Bonner, "Lucan and the Declamation Schools," AJP 6? ( 1966): 26I4, 265, 266). See also Robert A. Tucker, "Sententiae in the Bellum civile of L^^can and Earlier Latin Epics," (Ph.D. dissertation, Johns Hopkins ” University, 196?), pp. 197-198.

L. The possible explanations of this difficult phrase are noted in C. E. Haskins, ed., M. Annaei Lucani Pharsalia, London, I 887, note to line I 80, p . 13.

5. Cf. Petron. Sat. 118; Praeter curandura est ne sententiae emineant extra corpus orationis expressae, sed intexto vestibus colore niteant.

6 . Cf. 1. 88- 89, 109- 110.

7. Cf. Horace, Carm. 3 .L .65-68.

8. "the cause of all those ills was this, that thou Rome wast made the common property of three masters, and that baleful bond of tyranny was entrusted to a number as had ne’er been done before." Haskins, Pharsalia, note to line 8U, p. 7.

9. Rome’s difficulties lie, of course, in the fact that the three contenders for power do not wish to share, but rather each seeks sole and complete power for himself—something that was totally contrary and repulsive to Roman constitutional tradition for nearly five hundred years. The tradj.tion of annual tenure and 53

collegiality araong the civil magistrates, wherein the force of political power was spread very thin and over a wide area to preclude its concentration in one spot, was now being violated by the schemes of Caesar, Grassus, and Pompey. Cf. Ho H. Scullard, From the Gracchi to Nero, 3d. ed. (London, Barnes and Noble, University Paperbacks, 15^70), pp. 5-10; and Erich S. Gruen, The Last Generation of the Roman Rppublic (Berkeley, 197U), pp. U7f.

10. Cf. 1. 66-69: . . . quid in arma furentem impulerit populum , . .

11. Of. o male concordes, 87; Ovid Met. 1. 5-20 and Petron. Sat. 118.

12. Lucan will present Julia in a different light, however, when she appears to Pompey in a dream a t 3 . it-UO. Here h er purpose i s to illustrate the unrelenting progress of Fate.

13. Lucan suggests by his use of nefas here that there is something almost sacrilegious about (I) inquiring into the reasons for the war; and, (2) attempting to give any sort of justification to either party for perpetrating civil discord. The translation o ffe re d by J . D. Duff (lo eb e d itio n ) i s sim ply: "we may n o t know," but his English version cannot convey the flavor of nefas which is more than simply an equivalent of non potest or non possumus. Cf. P. Jal, "Les dieux et les guerres civiles dans la Rome de la fin de la R^ublique," REL W (1962): 170-200, especially 170- 171.

1U. The image of Pompey's theater w ill return at 7. 9~2k in a dream before the battle. The significance of the stone theater—an immovable monument to his besi days is suggestive of Pompey's c h a ra c te r both here in Book Che and throughout th e course o f th e war—until his apotheosis after his death in Egypt.

15 . Due, "Essay," 110-111.

16. Ibid., p. 111.

17. Of. the detailed note in C. M. Francken, ed., M. Annaei Lucyii Pharsalia, 2 vols. (A. W. Sijthoff, lugduni Batavorum, 1896), 1:9j and M. P. 0. Morford, The Poet Liican (Oxford, 1967), p. 55. 18. R. J. Getty, De belle civili, liber I (Cambridge, 19i|0), cites for comparison: Sail. Cat. 5«9; Her, Carm. 2. 15, ii.li.35-36; Livy Praef. 9; Tac. Hist. 2.38; Florus 1 ,h7 (3.12.7); Sen. Epp. lia.9TTiT.8-9; Tac. 3.53. . Cf. Petron. Sat. 120. See also the detailed notes throughout this section in Haskins, P h a r s a lia , pp. 1_1-13; and Donald E a rl, The Moral and P o l it ic a l T ra d itio n of Rome, ( Ith a c a , 196?), pp. 11, 96-121.

19» Camillus and Curius, as examples of the old-fashioned morality, w ill be mentioned again at 6. 786-78?, where the corpse brought back to life by Erichtho will describe the sadness of these ancient heroes at the sight of Rome's present troubles.

20. See above p. lUj note i;.

21. For the confrontation of Caesar and Roma, note the discussion and citation to pertinent ancient testimonia in Morford, The Pr,et Lucan, pp. 77-79.

22. For horror as the regular consequence of a literary vision: Vergil Aeneid 2. 77ii; Sen. Tro. U57, Octavia 123, 735-736.

23. Cf. R, J, Getty, "Lucan and Caesar's Crossing of the Rubicon," in L audatores Temporis A c ti: S tu d ie s in Memory of W allace E v e rett Caldwell, The James Sprunt Studies in History and Political Science, vol. ii6 (Chapel H ill, 196U), p. 81.

2U. 1. 310 is also an echo of a previous passage, at 1. 226, at the Rubicon: te, Fortuna, sequor.

25. Cf. Haskins, Pharsalia, note to line U67, p. 27. See also Oxford Latin Dictionary/- (Oxi'ord. 1971 )j s.v. fides, sections 11 and 12, fascicle III, p. 698.

26. Cf. Stanley F. Bonner, "Lucan and the Schools," 26it-266.

27. The motif of **terrors to come" vri.ll be the subject of the concluding lines of Book One, which are devoted to the portents and signs of future disaster (522-583, 67it-695) and the futile attempts of the seers and priests to placate the deities and avert the coming doom (58U -6?2).

28. Cic. De re publica 6. 1-2.

29. Cic. De lege Manilla, passim. ^5

30. Cf. David Stockton, Cicero; A Political Biography, (Oxford, 1971)> pp. 1*1-63.

31. “The proem to Book 2 does n o t mark th e beginning of a new chapter; it serves rather as a bridge between the matron's predictions and the actual commencement of the second book's action with the panic at Rone." (Bernard F. Dick, "The Technique of Prophecy in Lucan," TAPA 9h (1963): M)«

32. Compare the similar building of terror at 1. 581;-69p. Lucan there begins with the Etruscan seer-Arruns and a solemn liturgical procession around the city, increases the tension vdth the dire speech of Figulus, and climaxes with the wild frenzy of the divinely inspired matrona.

33* Robert J. Rowland, "The Significance of M assilia in Lucan," Hermes 97 (1969): 201*.

3U. Bernard F. Dick, "Fatum and Fortuna in Lucan's Bellum civile," ^ 62 (1967): 237. , Cf. Jacqueline Brisset, Les idees politiques de Lucain,(Paris, 1961*). Additional Note on Lucan’s Use of Robur

In the transition between the Catalogue of Caesarian Forces and the second Roman episode, Lucan uses the word robur at 1. Ii66 to describe Caesar’s gathering armies. The sense in which he uses the word there has a number of echoes throughout the poem. The word occurs sixty-two times, but seventeen of these instances are indicative of a deliberate pattern. W. E. Heitland"* levels sharp criticism against Lucan for "poor vocabulary" and elicits a number of examples of the use of robur in Book Three which he considers objectionable. Three of Heitland's citations are included here in this pattern. The interconnection of scenes in which this word is used seems to be too deliberate to be the result of a mere lack of fluency on the poet’s part.

The seventeen passages in which the use of robur indicates a pattern are listed below in four categories according to content:

(1) CAESAR (2) POMPEI 1. It66 1. Ilt2 5. 722 1. 280 2. 52? 7 . 669 8 . 72

(3) MASSILIA (TRESS. SACRED GROVE. SEA BATTLE) 37195 371135 liiU W t U30 729 517

(U) MISCELLANEOUS The S en ate: 5* 18 The Libyan Winds: 9« ^52 The City of Troy: 9. 966

56 57

The most direct echo of line U66 in Book One, the first book of the first tetrad, occurs in the first book of the second tetrad at 5« 722 that begins the quickening pace toward the clLmactic

undique collatis in robur Caesaris armis, suiama uidens d u ri Magnus d isc rim in a M artis iam castris instare suis . . ,

5 . 722-721

In both scenes the allusion to Caesar’s gathered strength is an introduction to terrifying experiences—in Book One for Borne, in

Book Five for Cornelia, who is dispatched to Lesbos for safety in the face of the coming battle.

L ine ko6 of Book On© has a less direct echo in the first

Roman episode at 1. Ili2. There Lucan has likened Pompey to an aged

oak tree whose fruitful years have passed and is now an object of veneration solely because of its advanced age. The tree is

surrounded by much younger and more vibrant trees

tot circum siluae firmo se robore tollant. 1. 11|2

%e reality behind this simile is shown the reader in the passage

describing Caesar’s gathering forces and is summed up at .1. h66.

Closely related to this allusion to Pompey's failing strength

is the passage at 1 . 280 where Curio addresses Caesar, urging him to

bold action. Curio advises Caesar to strike (tolle moras, 281)

dum trepidant nullo fim atae robore partes. 1. 2oO

The irony of Curio’s words becomes apparent with a consideration of

Lucan's oak simile and the allusion to Caesar's gathering strength. This irony is further enhanced in the scene at 2. 527, in which

Pompey i s shovm about to ad d ress h is r e lu c ta n t tro o p s , try in g to

encourage them for a coming battle

nescius interea capti arma parabat Magnus ut immixto firmaret robore partes.

2. 526-527

Pompey attem p ts to p ass on to h is s o ld ie rs a s tre n g th which he

himself no longer possesses—as is suggested symbolically in the

oak simile of 1. 1i;2 and is here once again shovm by the reaction to

his hortatory address

uerba ducis nullo partes claraore sequuntur, nec matura petunt promissae classica pugnae.

2. 596-597

The irony ceases, however, once the battle has been fought and lost

and Pompey's fate draws closer, Lucan is at some pains to justify

Pompey's leaving the battlefield when Caesar's victory becomes a

certainty.^ As the battle comes to an end, Lucan aims at increasing

the reader's sympathy for Pompey, both for the sake of the emotional

content of the scene and to prepare the reader for the apotheosis at

9. 1-18:^ ■

nec deerat robur in enses ire duci, iuguloque pati uel pectore letum.

7 . 669-670

A t 8, 72 the word robur is put in Pompey's mouth in a conver­

sation with Cornelia. Here, in this first meeting between Pompey and

his wife after the disaster at Pharsalia, Lucan achieves a measure of

irony in Pompey's reference to his past fame, and the reader can ^9 perceive an echo of the oak simile of Book One

nobile cur robur Fortunae uolnere primo, femina tantorum titu lis insignis auorum, fra n g is?

8 . 72-71

Of the seven occurrences of robur in the Massilia scene of

Book Three, one deals with the groves of the city and four with the

Sacred Grove desecrated by Caesar, An important aspect of the M assilia episode has been pointed out by I, Opelt^ and by R, J. Rowland, who, in amplifying Opelt's observations, charaterizes the episode as

"integrally linked to the major themes of Lucan's epic . . . (and) paradigmatic of Rome , , .

The wanton destruction worked by Caesar upon the trees of

Massilia and, more dramatically, on M assilia’s Sacred Grove^ can also be viewed, in Rowland’s terms, as pradigmatic of the wanton destruction worked on Caesar’s opponents in the field of Pharsalia.

The aged, gnarled, and venerable trees of M assilia—worthy of worship—

are reminiscences of the oak simile of Book One.

In the two remaining passages of the I^assilia episode, Lucan

uses robur in reference to humans. In the first, at 3, 516, he

describes the spirit of the Greek community of Massilia resisting the

onslaught of Caesar

nec non et Graia iuuentus omne suom f a t i s u o l u it com m ittere ro b u r, grandaeuosque senes mixtis am auit ephebis.

3 . 516-518 60

In the second he describes one of the gruesome deaths of the sea-engagement, that of Argus’ father who is now too old to fight effectively, but nevertheless finds his place in the frontline and sees his son mortally wounded in combat

non ille iuuentae tempore Phocaicis uU i cessurus in armis: uictum aeuo robur cecidit, fessusque senecta exemplum non m iles e r a t .

3. 727-730

In these contrasting pictures—one of youth (iuuentus) and one of old age (fessusque senecta)—each plunging headlong to its doom,

the poet presents his reader with a paradigm of Pompey. Lucan echoes the oak simile of Book One not only in the use of robur but also with the repetition of the verb cadere at 3. 726 and 3. 728, which

recalls the description of the oak at 1. at quamuis primo nut et

casura sub Euro.

A t th e op

of the Senate in exile at Epirus. It is at this session of the Senate

that Lentulus places the burden of leadership on Pompey’s shoulders

nostrum exhausto ius clauditur anno: uos, quorum finem non est sensura potestas, c o n su lt te in medium. P a tre s , I-Iagnumque iu b e te e sse ducem

5. hh-hl

with the agreement of the rest of the Senate

la e to nomen clam ore sen atu s excipit: et Magno fatum patriaeque suomque im p o sait.

S. 1:7-19 61

In the opening of his address Lentulus uses the word robur to describe the inner strength of w ill of the Republican party

indole si dignrnn Latia, si sanguine prisco robur inest animis . . .

5. 17-18

The in tim a te connection between th e S enate and Pompey i s e s ta b lis h e d

in the short proem of Book Five just before Lentulus speaks

docuit populos uenerabilis ordo non Magni partes sed Magnum in partibus esse.

5 . 13-1 It

Pompey becomes part of the robur of the Senate in exile (18-19)

and with the advice of Lentulus and the consent of the rest

of the Senators (ii7-U9) becomes the object of senatorial hopes.

The tragic irony that is contained here results from the realization

that the robur of the Senate—dependent upon Pompey—will fall before

the superior strength of Caesar.

The last two passages, both in Book Nine, show pictures of

desolation and barrenness that are symbolic of the effects of Caesar's

victory. At 9» U52, in the midst of his description of Libya, through

which Cato w ill have to lead the remnants of the Pompeian forces after

Pompey's death, Lucan describes the flatness of the country and the

devastation wreaked by the forces of the winds

non montibus ilium aduersis frangit Libye scopulisque repulsum dissipât, et liquidas e turbine soluit in auras: nec m it in siluas annosaque robora torquens lassatur: patet omne solum, liberque meatu Aeoliam rabiem totis exercet habenis. 9 . hh9-h^h 62

Here, again, the barren landscape and the emptiness of the terrain remind the reader of the barren and sterile oak used to symbolize

Pompey in Book One (nudosque per a era ramos / effundens trunco non frondibus efficit umbram, 1. 139-1W ). The Pompeian cause—as the

Pompeian cause—is barren and unfruitful because dependent upon

Pompey uho sought something f o r h im self from h is involvem ent in t h is war—as Cato points out at 2. 320-322—but could not measure up to the image he entertained of himself (stat magni nominis umbra, 1. 13$; quis nom inis umbram / h o rre a t? 8. hU^-U^O) no r to th e energy of

Caesar's effort for the destruction of the Republic (sed non in

Caesare tantum / nomen erat nec fama ducis, 1. 11^3-1 Wi).

In the second passage, Lucan describes Caesar's tour of the site of Troy whose ruins (exustae nomen memorabile Troiae) hold a great fascination for the conqueror. The site is described by Lucan in terms of an absolute desolation and ruin. The glory of Troy is now submerged in a barren field

iam siluae stériles et putres robore trunci Assaraci pressere domes, et terapla deorum iam lassa radice tenent, ac tota teguntur Pergama dumetis; etiam periere ruinae.

9 . 966-969

The ruin and sterility of Troy, with Caesar strolling through it, immediately after leaving the battlefield of Pharsalia, is the fate that is descending upon Rome. Putres robore trunci / Assaraci pressere domes not only describes one physical aspect of the ancient site of

Troy, but also describes symbolically the condition of Rome's repub­ lican tradition. The sterile and aged oak that was Pompey, the 63

robur t h a t was th e R epublican Senate dependent upon Pompey a re now weakened and decayed almost beyond rejuvenation. The efforts of

Cato, described in the previous 9h9 lin e s o f Book N ine, b rin g a

fresh discipline and moral fervor to the Republican camp, but

Cato and his forces are doomed. Cato himself will be victorious

over Caesar's tyranny by his suicide at Utica—but Caesar will

s till destroy the Roman Republic—id.ll s till become the tyrant. CONCLUSION

This study of Lucan’s use of robur shows the poet’s ability to make a word echo throughout the poem in order to elicit from the reader a complicated structure of imagery. In the first two passages, referring to Caesar, Lucan uses the word by metonymy in its ordinary meaning of "strength," and it is a true description of Caesar’s massed armies. The passages referring to Pompey all use the word in an ironic sense; for all these passages, from the first at 1.1 ij2—the simile of the aged and sterile oak—are suggestive of the sterility and impotence of Pompey.

The five passages of the Massilia episode, referring to the trees and the Sacred Grove, recall, first, the oak simile (Pompey), and, secondly, the Caesarian passages. Lucan shows a confrontation between Caesar’s robur (which he has already shown to be real and grovàng) and the robur of M assilia’s forests—both literally, the

"trees," which Caesar destroys for his siege operations, and her sacred trees—which Caesar also destorys for the sake of his war e f f o r t .

The last two passages in the Massilia episode, referring to humans, show robur again used by metonymy to mean "strength." Here

the poet shows a contrast between Caesar’s robur and the robur of

the Massiliotes who mount a valiant defense against him—to be over­

come by C aesar’s s u p e rio r fo rc e s .

6U 6^

The last three passages^ referring to the Senate, Libya, and Troy, are all suggestive of impending doom—the doom of the

S enate, lin k e d to Pompey and fac in g d e fe a t by C aesar, th e doom of the desert with all its attendant dangers and terror, and the doom that befell Troy—a foreshadowing of what awaits Rome at the hands of Caesar and his armies. 66

KOTES

ADDITIONAL NOTE ON ROBUR

1. W, E, Heitland, Introduction to Lucani Pharsalia, C. E. Haskins, ed., pp. Ixxxi-lxxxiv.

2. Of. Ahl, Lucan, pp. l6?-l68.

3. Of. Berthe Marti, "The Meaning of the Pharsalia," AJP 66 (19ü^): 3^2- 376, especially 367-368. Although Professor Marti's analysis of Pompey as a Stoic proficiens is generally rejected, she is right i n say in g : "... (he) is neither black nor white . . . (but) an ordinary man, a very human f ig u r e made up o f v ic e s and v irtu e s ..." (p . 367). It is this kind of character that is most able to enlist the sympathy and emotional reaction of the- reader.

It. Ilona Opelt, "Die Seeschlacht vor Massilia bei Lucan," Hermes 85 (1957): U35-I0i5.

5 . Robert J. Rowland, "The Significance of M assilia in Lucan," Hermes 97 (1969): 20it.

6. Cf. 0. C, Phillips, "The Influence of Ovid," pp. 26-30. CAESAR POLITIGUS: A. 1. 223-230; B. 1. 291-391

C. 3. Ii6-168; D. 9 . 382-1:02; £ . 9- 1061-1108^

These scenes in which Lucan presents Caesar acting primarily in a political context will be treated as a unit.

The contexts in which Caesar appears in this guise maintain the atmosphere of madness, abnormality, and deterioration, both of individual leaders and of the cives as a group, that began in 2 Book One.

The first two scenes, 1. 223-230 and 1. 291-391, which take place outside Rome, are a preparation for the two scenes at

Rome; the first at the Treasury, 3* 1:6-168, the other, the second entry of Caesar into Rome, 5» 382-U02.

The very short picture of Caesar declaring his own political principles at 1, 233-230 is balanced by another relatively short picture at 5* 382-1:02 where those principles are put into action.

The long outburst by Caesar at 1. 291-391 (including the rejoinder by Laelius) is set between these and reflects elements of both. The plundering of the Treasury in Book Three is symbolic of what is happening to Rome and prepares us for the plundering of the Roman constitutional order in Book Five. The last episode included in this group contrasts with the others inasmuch as it is set at Alexandria

67 68 after the battle of Pharsalia has been fought and portrays the symbolic end of Rome’s resistance to Caesar in the presentation of the murdered

Pompey's head to Caesar. The response Caesar makes to those who bring him this "tribute ’’ is political in content and illustrative of Caesar’s own picture of himself and of his goals.

Lucan achieves dramatic impact by allowing Caesar to speak for himself and reveal his personal political program through his retort to Roma after having listened to her admonitions and pleas at the Rubicon at 1. 225-227^ and in his speech to his men and the response of Laelius at 1. 291-391> and then by allowing his reader to see Caesar put his political philosophy into practice at Rome. Caesar Politicus; A. 1. 223-230

Caesar, as he prepares to cross the Rubicon, succinctly states his political principles

hie, ait, hie pacem temerataque iura relinquo; te, Fortuna, sequor. procul hinc iam foedera sunto. credidiinus fatis.^ utendum est iudice bello.

22^-227

In his statement Caesar discards three essential elements of rational political order—pax, ius, and foedus—and replaces them with three others of his own that are to form the base of his platform—Fortuna, fatum, and bellum. Pax and iura are absolute essentials of well- ordered political (and civilized) existence. These two elements are intertwined and mutually dependent—iura secure the peaceful existence of a community and guarantee the continuation of that existence. An atmosphere of peace is necessary to establish sound and beneficial iura. These essentials are explicitly abandoned in favor of Fortuna— a Fortuna in which Caesar places complete confidence, but which is hardly a basis for a well-ordered state. Iura are controlled and predictable, Fortuna is not.^

. . . when Fortune becomes the principal divine force in an epic, the question of the propriety of individual actions can be raised more easily . . . There is no Venus, no Olympian god, to carry the unwilling Caesar to his great destiny. Instead, Caesar willingly follows Fortune; his actions become an amoral response to what Shakespeare’s Brutus calls the ’’tide in the affairs of men."^

69 70

Caesar's response is more than "amoral," however. It is, in fact, immoral; for it denies the political virtues that are the foundation of the Roman civitas. The abandonment of the rationality of ius in favor of the irrationality of an uncontrollable Fortuna is a death blow aimed at the heart of political order. Further,

Fortuna that Caesar invokes is not the popular goddess of the entire

city and its populace, at whose festival all could participate.^

Caesar obviously does not have the welfare of the community at heart.

His fortuna—and it is precesely that: his own personal deity—is what

leads him on to the fulfillm ent of his ambition, namely, the control

of the State and the enslavement of the people to his w ill. By

transferring one of the deities of the State to his own personal

service, he in effect equates himself with the state. By identifying

himself vdth the state and pursuing a goal of absolute power, Caesar

violates both the spirit and the letter of the Republican tradition.

The third element, foedus, traded off for fatum and bellum,

has a double meaning here. Caesar has in mind, first, the foedus

that led to the Triumvirate of Pompey, Caesar, and Crassus. Crassus is

dead, and he now marches against his erstwhile associate. Foedera

also represent agreements, compacts, contracts that are hammered out

through rational discussion and reasoned argument in order to secure

mutual benefits or fights or privileges between two parties without

one party infringing upon or destroying the other's benefits, rights,

or privileges. Foedera, too, are necessary elements for orderly 71

constitutional life, and especially for the co-existence of disparate peoples in the kind of political community that "Rome" (that is,

Rome as a world-power) had become. Caesar casts aside these and w ill

put his trust in fatum. The fatum that Caesar here acknowledges is not the Stoic fatum that determines the boundaries of human existence.

To struggle against Fate is to struggle against death; and to struggle against death is to rebel against the only knowledge that man has ...... Stoic determinism ironically, can yield only one totally positive statement about life: what is bom must die. Since death is the only knowledge and the only certainty, it is, paradoxically, the only event in life over which th e in d iv id u a l may e x e rc ise some c o n tr o l.°

Caesar is not at all interested in the limitations of human

existence and effort, and especially not in the ultimate lim it of

an individual’s earthly existence. In the scene at the palace in

Alexandria, treated in more detail below, Caesar makes plain where his

concern lies

frustra ciuilibus armis miscuimus gentes, si qua est hoc orbe potestas altera quam Caesar, si tellus ulla duorum est.

9 . 1076-1078

Caesar . . . views life from a different perspective, his preoccupation is with the purely temporal, that which lies between birth and death, that dimension of existence that is the province of Fortune.9

The means by which he w ill implement his policy and achieve

the goal that, in his estimation, Fortuna holds out for him and that

he conceives to be his fatum, concludes his statement:

utendum est iudice bello. 72

Iudice bello baualnces temerataque iura of 22$ and gives a kind of constitutional ring—perverted constitutionality—to Caesar’s declaration. Lucan has also given the first brief insight into

Caesar's thinking. For Caesar this is political action.

The final irony for Lucan, however, is that Caesar w ill make his political program work and will be ultimately successful. The old and long-standing Republican constitution is not prepared to cope with Caesar, nor is it able to control his ambition. The ancient tradition of devotion to the State—pietas—that causes a citizen and statesman to spend himself for the preservation and betterment of the community is simply not a part of Caesar's philosophy. Even

Pompey, who is designated by the Senate to represent the old tradition a t $ . liU-l;?, is not the perfect example of unselfish and patriotic virtue. Cato says of him at 2, 320-322:

nec si fortuna fauebit hunc quoque totius sibi ius promittere rmindi non bene compertum est.

The use of fortuna and ius in reference to Pompey reminds the reader of Caesar's words and suggests the near equivalence of the two men in

Cato's mind. It is Cato who sits most competently in judgment of the political situation in Rome and of the two contenders for power, for he. is the model of civil and civic virtue and unselfishness—pietas.

The political and moral confusion that has been brought on by the activities of the men of the Triumvirate—and now by the two survivors—was summed up by Lucan at 1. 126-128 : 73

quis iustius induit arma scire nefas: magno se iudice quisque tuetur, uictrix causa deis placuit sed uicta Catoni.

That either party could be thought to have justification for plunging the city into civil war is absurd and—in Lucan's vision—immoral

(scire nefas). However, he says: magno se iudice puisque tuetur, and he suggests here the breakdown of the moral order and the complete reversal of the right order of things. The verse means literally:

"each one protects iiimself (=is defended) by a mighty judge," The judge of each of the antagonists' cause is identified in the following verses: uictrix causa deis placuit, and, 'sed uicta Catoni. The uictrix causa, that is, Caesar's, pleases the gods—but only because

it is uictrix—not because it is just. That the immorality of

Caesar's cause should be favored by the gods is part of the total

reversal of the right order of things that was the essence of the

conflict. The conquered cause, that is, Pompey's (and the State’s)

is the one favored by Cato because it is the just one and Cato, in

Lucan's mind, replaces the gods as the repository of the virtues

that guarantee the stability of a political system.^^ Caesar Politicus; B. 1. 291-391

The second, and rmich longer, scene at 1. 291-391 shows us the basis for Caesar’s words and policy. The dramatic setting is Caesar delivering a speech to his soldiers in answer to a speech addressed to him by Curio, one of the tribunes expelled by the Senate. Caesar’s words, in the form of an exhortatio to his men to fire their ardor, is really a series of sixteen questions. It may be divided into three large sections according to subject:^^

i. 299-311 CAESAR ii. 311-337 POMPFI iii. 338-351 CAESAR

In the opening section, Caesar makes an indignant statement complaining of the denigration of two very important qualities that ■ a tta c h to th e p o l i t i c a l man o f Rome^^ and which Caesar p ro fe sse s to possess and to value over everything else: gloria and dignitas.

In his opening lines Caesar purports to question the value of, and complain of the lack of reward for his m ilitary campaigns in

Europe for the past ten years

bellorum o socii, qui mille pericula Martis mecura, a i t , e x p e rt! decimo iam u i n c i t i s anno, hoc cruor Arctois meruit diffusus in aruis uolneraque et mortes hiemesque sub Alpibus actae?

299-302

His claim is, in reality, on behalf of an injured gloria which should

Ik 7$ have been the just and proper result of his m ilitary efforts on behalf of Rome.”*^ But even more vital for Caesar is the integrity of his dignitas, as he himself asserted”*^

Sibi semper primam fuisse dignitatem vitaque potiorem.

B.C. 1.9.2.

The exploits that should earn him gloria have brought him only, in his estimation, a threat to that integrity

implentur ualido tirone cohortes: in class sn cadit omne neraus: terraque marique iussus Caesar agi. quid? si mihi signa iacerent Marte sub aduerso ruerentque in terga feroces Gallorum populi? nunc, cum Fortuna secundis mecum rebus a g a t superique ad summa uocantes tem ptam ur.

30^-311

The complaint against the raising of an armed force against him

(iussus Caesar agi)—which is the action taken against an outlavz— represents the supreme insult.

Caesar indicates his confidence in the care of Fortuna (cum

fortuna/secundis mecum rebus agat . . . 309-310) as he did when he

enunciated-his political principles at the Rubicon (1. 225-227);

but here he displays explicit confidence in a much broader superhuman

support as the guarantor of his efforts (. . . superique ad summa

uo c a n te s) .

After establishing the injury done to his dignitas, Caesar

proceeds to an indictment of the man whom he sees as the motive force

behind the injury done him, Pompey.The v e rb a l a s s a u lt on Pompey

(311-335) is aimed at the qualities that Caesar feels slighted in 76 himself. Those things that Pompey might justly claim to be the basis for his dignitas, namely, his tenure of political office and service to the State in a civil magistracy^ ^ Caesar claims to be stolen prerogatives (raptos honores, 31?) to which Pompey was not entitled.

Caesar addresses his men as socii (299), but Pompey's adherents are contemptuously termed empti clientes (3lU). The four

s c i l i c e t extrem i Pompeium em ptique c lie n te s continue per tot sociabunt tempera regno? i l l e re g e t currus nondura p a tie n tib u s annis? i l l e semel rap to s nuraquam d im itte t honores?

31U-317 contain a serious charge of unconstitutional behavior on Pompey’s part: the use of the word regno (315) and reget (316) with the un-Republican connotation of that root; and the abuse of his office in Caesar's allusion to Pompey's multiple holding of political office.

There is irony, of course, in Caesar's choice of words. Regnum is precisely what Caesar himself is striving for.

Vihat Pompey m ight j u s t l y claim as a le g itim a te (and even beneficial) exercise of his auctoritas is branded by Caesar as criminal malfeasance at the expense of the State^^

quid iam rura querar totum suppressa per orbem ac iussam s e ru ire famem? q u is c a s tr a ttm e n ti nescit mixta foro, gladii cum triste minantes indicium insolita trepidum cinxere corona, at que auso médias perrurapere m ilite leges Pompeiana reum clauserunt signa Milonem?

318-323 77

The f i n a l s e ctio n of C aesar’ s speech a g a in s t Pompey {32ii-337) concludes with a reference to what Pompey would call his gloria—the quality with which Caesar begain in reference to himself. Once again, in Pompey’s case, the noble quality becomes the basis for a criminal charge

nunc quoque ne lassum teneat priuata senectus bella nefanda parat suetus ciuilibus armis et docilis Sullara sceleris uicisse magistrum.

321-326

quern tamen inueniet tarn longa potentia finem? quis scelerum modus est? ex hoc te iam, improbe, regno ille tuus saltern doceat discedere Sulla. post Cilicasne uagos et lassi Pontica regis proelia barbarico uix consummata ueneno

333-337

Here a triple charge leveled at Pompey: (a) the influence of Sulla on Pompey and the letter’s re-institution of the worst abuses of the

Sullanum reg n u m (b) th e charge th a t Pompey i s th e one lea d in g th e

State into civil war because of his perverted sense of auctoritas. dignitas. and gloria:

. . . ne lassum teneat priuata senectus bella nefanda parat suetus ciuilibus armis;

3-2U-325

and, (c) the repetition of regno at 33U, this time in close association with an almost equaliy disreputable word: potentia (333)*^^ 78

In his concluding remarks (338-351), Caesar again turns to his own case. In this portion Caesar’s emphasis is on his ovm auctoritas, that has been thwarted and slighted in his efforts to provide for his veterans mustered out of service. Caesar's emphasis is on this aspect while addressing those very men who will later look to him for their veteran’s benefits

mihi si merces erepta laborum est his saltern longi non cum duce praemia belli reddantur: miles sub quolibet iste triumphet. conferet exsanguis quo se post bella senectus? quae sedes erit emeritis? quae rura dabuntur quae noster ueteranus aret? quae moenia fessis? an melius fient piratae, Magne, coloni?

310-3^6

The epilogue to the speech is almost a mirror image of the first scene at the Rubicon (1. 225-22?). The two scenes may be compared thus:

hie, ait, hie pacem temerataque iura relinquoj te, Fortuna, sequor. procul hinc iam foedera sunto. credidimus fatis. utendum est iudice bello.

1 . 225-227

tollite iampridem uictricia tollite signa: uiribus utendum est quas fecimus: arma tenenti omnia dat qui iusta negat: nec numina deerunt: nam nec praeda meis neque regnum quaeritur armis, detrahimus dominos urbi seruire paratae.

1. 317-351

Tollite iampridem uictricia . . . signa (31:7) is a restatement of the

first scene's hie . . . pacem relinquo (225). The similarity in

phrasing between utendum est iudice bello (227) and uiribus utendum est

(3Ü8) suggests a restatement of the attitude and intention contained in 79 the first scene. Arma tenenti / omnia dat qui iusta negat (3U8-3li9) recalls the "legal" or "constitutional" reference in temerataque iura (relinquo) (22^). Neque numina deerunt mirrors Caesar's call upon Fortuna; te, Fortuna, sequor (226), Detrahimus dominos urbi seruire paratae (391) represents the first statement of Caesar’s intentions and elucidates what was contained behind procul hinc iam foedera sunto (226). The irony of Caesar's statement is the climax of the speech. Caesar, the future tyrant, claims to be coming to remove a tyrant.

The speech of Laelius, made immediately after Caesar's

( 399- 386) is included within this second episode of Caesar Politicus because Laelius is a reflection of Caesar himself who shares Caesar's ambitions and is motivated by a kind of sensitivity to dignitas.

Lucan's Laelius is identified as having been decorated for bravery in the field

summi turn raunera p i li ^ ^ Laelius eraeritique gerens insignia doni seruati ciuis referentem praemia quercum.

396-398

An immediate rapport with Caesar is established inasmuch as Caesar himself had won the corona civica during the campaign against l-Iithradates in 81 B.C. The irony of these two men, each once decorated

for having saved the lives of fellow citizens in battle, now prepared

to take the lives of fellow citizens in the process of satisfying their

personal ambitions and greed, is the baais for the entire interchange. The purpose of Laelius’ speech is to fortify Caesar's oto intentions and resolve and to aid him in sparking the men to action and to the support of Caesar. The major emphasis throughout these two speeches has been on dignitas, auctoritas, gloria, and virtus— all noble concepts rooted in the idealism of the Roman Republican tradition. However, in the hands of Caesar and of Laelius, these noble concepts deteriorate into excuses for the destruction of Rome and of her citizens. The men do indeed feel the effect of Caesar's speech and the support of Laelius' rejoinder. The corruption of dignitas, auctoritas, gloria, and virtus works its way into their spirits, and these ancient noble qualities are replaced by those which Caesar brings with him in his train, namely, dims ferri amor and metus ;

at dubium non claro murmure uolgus secum incerta frémit: pietas patriique penates quamquam caede f e r a s m entes animosque tum entis franguntj sed diro ferri reuocantur amore ductorisque metu.

3S2-356 Caesar Foljticus: C. 3. U6-168

In the scene at 3» it6-l68, Caesar, now in uncontested control of Italy after Pompey’s departure (. . . et 11tore solus / dux stetit

H esperio , . . malces read y to p lay th e p a r t o f th e c iv i l ia n m ag istra te

turn p e c to re curas expulit armorum pacique intentus agebat, quoque modo uanos populi conciret amores.

The position of this scene is noteworthy. Book Three opens w ith Pompey on h is sea jo urney from Brundisiura to E p iru s. As he travels, he is confronted with a dream-vision of the ghost of his former wife Julia^^ who promises to haunt him as he prosecutes the war: . . . regesque silentum / permisere sequi ( 29- 30) j and she prophesies final disaster for Pompey in the war: . . . bellum / te faciet ciuile meum (33-3^). Julia acts almost in concert with

Caesar—although Caesar is, of course, ignorant of the efforts of his ghostly ally—threatening Pompey and pointing the way to disaster

ille , del quarauis cladem rtanesque minentur, p, maior in arma ru it certa cum mente malorum.

36-37

Even the laws governing the Underworld have been apparently suspended in favor of Caesar and his daughter-ally 82

me non Lethaeae, coniunx, obliuia ripae immemorem fecere tu i . . .

28-29

Lucan's purpose in producing Julia at this point is clear, even though she >7ill not carry out most of her threats to haunt Pompey during the war. V/hat Lucan portrays for us here i s Caesar, a t le a s t one o f whose a l li e s comes from the depths o f Tartarus to aid him in h is progress toward the seizure of Rome and of the vworld, as he is about to assume the guise of the civilizn and play the role of magistrate.

The illusion that sinister and demonic forces enlist themselves in

Caesar's cause helps to color the picture of Caesar as he moves in to Rome.

Caesar's first concern as he moves toward the city is securing for himself a favorable base of public support. %e means that he determines to use contains an echo of a charge that he made against

Pompey in Book One

gnarus et irarum causas et summa fauoris annona momenta tr a h i, namque a d se r it urbes sola fames, emiturque metus cum segne potentes uolgus alunt: nescit plebes ieiuna timere.

quid iam rura querar totum suppressa per orbem ac iussam seruire famem?

1. 318-319

He dispatches subordinates to make secure the lines of supply from

S ic ily and Sardinia; and then proceeds on h is way to the c it y . 83

The description of Caesar's approach to the city is intended by the poet to recall the description of Caesar's confrontation with

Roma in Book One. In both in sta n ces Caesar pauses for a moment—in

Book One to contemplate the vision of the spirit of the city; here, in Book Three, to contem plate the c it y i t s e l f . In Book One the

Protectress of the city confronts Caesar with the illegality of his

a c tio n s—th at he moves toward Rome armed and w ith an armed fo rce

quo tenditis ultra? quo fertis mea signa, uiri? si iure uenitis, si clues, hue usque licet. 1 . 190-192

Now, in Book Three, as Caesar approaches the city, there is no one

to confront him or to challenge him: . . . et urbem / attonitam

terrors subit (97-98). Caesar's overwhelming superiority and his

reputation have crushed the spirit of his opponents and there is none

to face him

namque ignibus atris creditur ut captae rapturus moenia Romae sparsurusque deos: fu it haec mensura tim oris, uelle putant quaecumque potest. 3 . 98-101

In both scenes, Caesar utters a short monologue as he contemplates

the city. In each case he reveàls something of his intentions and

of the picture he has of himself. In Book One, he replies to Roma's

challenge—after a moment of hesitation, a moment of fear, at the

sight of the apparition^^

turn perculit horror membra duels, riguere comae, gressusque coercens languor in extrema tenuit uestigia ripa. 1. 192-191: eu

He recovers hinself quickly (mox, 19$) to reply first with an invocation to Jupiter the Thunderer and to his otm personal and ancestral—

Trojan—gods, and then to deliver his ovm apologia

non te furialibus armis persequor: en adsura uictor terraque marique Caesar ubique tuus, liceat modo, nunc quoque miles,

1 . 200-202

He has responded to Roma's charge—and, in reality, admitted the truth of it—but his triple self-justification is meant to cloak that adm ission:

1. non . . . furialibus armis 2. . . . uictor terraque marique 3» . . . ubique tuus . . . nunc quoque miles. and the blame for whatever actions he w ill have to take in future is cast on other shoulders

ille erit ille nocens qui me tibi fecerit hostem.

1 . 203

In Book Three, as he contemplates the city, he reveals a little more of his attitude toward his own position

tene, deum sedes, non ullo Marte coacti g, deseiuere uiri? pro qua pugnabitur urbe?

3. 91-92

habenti tarn pauidum t i b i , Roma, ducem Fortuna p ep ercit quod bellum c iu ile f u i t ,

3. 9$-97

It is clear, however, that the picture Caesar entertains of himself

does not correspond with the view taken of him by the citizens of 85

Rome: . . . urbem / a tto n ita ia te r r o r e ....

The atmosphere of terror and apprehension that greets

Caesar's entry suggests the two opposing interpretations of Caesar's mission (98-101).^"^ The celebration that would greet him if his vision of himself corresponded with the public's is absent—rather, his entry is greeted with just the opposite attitude

non omina festa non fictas laeto uoces simulare tumultu, uix odisse uacat.

101-103

The breakdown of the constitution is revealed as soon as Caesar enters the city

Phoebea palatia complet turba Patrum nullo cogendi iure senatus e latebris educta suis, non consule sacrae fulserunt sedes: non proxima lege potestas praetor adest: uacuaeque loco cessere curules.

103-107

Lucan underscores the devastation of Rome's political life by the negative description of the "official body" that scrambles out of its hiding place to greet Caesar. The ancient institutions of Rome's political order have simply disappeared in the face of Caesar's progress, and have been replaced by Caesar himself: omnia Caesar erat

(108); and, priuatae curia uocis / testis adest (103-109).

Lucan continues in an almost Tacitean strain^® to describe

the subservience of the few civil officers present in the city and now

in attendance upon Caesar's word 86

sedere Patres censere parati, si regnum, si terapla sibi, iugulumque senatus exsilium petat.

109-111

Lucan closes with the bitterest of irony:

melius quod plura iubere e ru b u it quam Roma p a ti ,

111-112

That Lucan uses the word Roma, rather than senatus or patres or ciues, is significant and can be explained on grounds other than purely m etrical. The poet intends us to remember the Roma of

Book One, the challenge at the Rubicon, and the Rome of 1. 1:66-

2. 333. He intends us to perceive the progressive deterioration of the spirit of the city that has taken place as Caesar moves forward. How that he is in Rome, that spirit has, for all practical purposes, died at Caesar's hands (Caesar omnia erat).

The political collapse, signalled first by the subservience of the remnants of the political structure of Rome, will be further and more completely illustrated in the next part of this scene.

Caesar's first concern was to secure the grain supply in an attempt to curry popular favor; his second concern is to finance his operations, and to this matter he now turns his attention.

The intention of Caesar is to take the money stored in the

Temple of Saturn to provide for his expenses. He is met with oppo­ sition in the person of the tribune Metellus. The picture of Metellus resisting Caesar's attempted robbery begins in a fashion seemingly 87 laudatory of Metellus* action

tamen exit in iram u irib u s an p o ssen t o b s is te re iu r a per unum libertas experta uirum: pugnaxque Metellus ut uidet ingenti Saturnia templa reuelli mole, rapit gressus, et Caesaris agnina rumpens ante fores nondum reseratae oonstitit aedis.

112-117

But Lucaji carefully and deliberately directs the reader’s reaction to Metellus by again intruding himself into the narrative to make

certain that the correct estimate of the situation is in the r e a d e r 's mind

usque adeo solus ferrum mortemque timere auri nescit amor, pereunt discrimine nullo amissae leges; sed pars uilissim a rerum certamen mouistis opes.

118-121

The poet’s attitude here is of a piece viith that expressed in

Book One’s Catalogue o f V ices (1 , 158-182).

In the short but fiery interchange between the two men,

Lucan again puts noble sentiments into Metellus’ mouth—the sanctity

of the place and the traditional inviolability of the tribune’s

person^^ are contrasted with Caesar’s criminal act of robbery and

the divine vengeance that it will merit

non nisi per nostrum uobis perçus sa patebunt templa latus nullasque feres nisi sanguine sacro sparsas, raptor, opes, certe uiolata potestas inuenit ista deos: Crassumque in bella secutae saeua tribuniciàe uouerunt proelia dirae.

123-127 Metellus seemingly makes a gallant stand against Caesar's force

detege iam ferrum: neque enira t i b i turba uerenda e s t spectatrix scelerum: deserta stamus in urbe.

128-129

Caesar’s reply is short and to the point: he has no intention of murdering civil officials, especially one of such little consequence as Metellus

uanam spem m ortis honestae concipis: haud, inquit, iugulo se polluet isto n o stra , M etelle, manus. dignum te Caesaris ir a nullus honos faciet. te uindice tuta relicta est libertas? non usque adeo permiscuit imis longus summa dies, ut non, si uoce Metelli seruentur leges, raalint a Caesare to lli.

13L-1L0

It also serves another dramatic purpose: the poet gives us yet another insight into Caesar's view of himself and his mission and he provides a key to his conception of the chaotic situation of

Roman politics. Metellus the civil official who should care for the laws does not act the part (pereunt discrimine nullo / amissae leges:

sed pars uilissim a rerum / certamen mouistis opes); Caesar who is not a civil officer (priuata curia uocis) acts as though he were.

He has no care for the established laws and institutions either,

although Caesar's vision extends to horizons far beyond Metellus'

(si uoce Metelli / seruentur leges, malint a Caesare to lli).

The crisis that rapidly grows more severe is headed off by

the intervention of Cotta who is introduced to explain the political

reality to Metellus—and to the reader. The political reality that exists now is Caesar (Caesar omnia erat) and liberty and the ancient

Republican institutions that supported it are crumbling away;

l i b e r t a s . . . p o p u li quern regna c o ercen t libertate perit;^ and all that is left is the semblance of things past

cuius se ru a u e ris umbram, si quidquid iubeare uelis.

Cotta’s remark echoes Caesar's own retort to Metellus in the use of the verb seruare: it explains Caesar's statement and corrects

Metellus' erroneous conception of his own position. Cotta, like

Caesar, produces an apologia—in Cotta's case for his and his colleagues' subservience—based on an understanding of the realities of the situation

uenia est haec sola pudoris degenerisque metus n il iam potuisse negari.

118-119

To Cotta’s mind the only alternatives are to submit or to die; and of these, the latter is simply impractical. Metellus' action in

opposing Caesar's entry into the Treasury is both (according to Lucan) misdirected and (according to Cotta) useless. Cotta concludes his

short lecture to Metellus with a sententia

non sibi sed domino grauis est quae serait egestas.

The scene concludes with a glimpse into the Treasury as Caesar

opens the doors. The catalogue of the Treasury's contents recalls 90 the ancient glories of Rome's past conquests and is intended to cause the reader to contrast the past glory with the present corruption of Rome’s political life. In the catalogue, Lucan balances four of

Rome’s eai-ly enemies with four of Rome’s heroes; Punica bella (l57)j

Perses (1^8), P?/rrhus (l59)j Fabricius (l60), Metello (I 63), Cato ( I 6U),

Pompeianis * . . triumphis (I 66). A contrast is established between

Cato and Pompey, on the one hand, who s till retain the spirit and ideals of Rome’s early days, and Metellus, on the other, who is hardly a shadow of the earlier Metellus Creticus. The inclusion of

Cato’s name in this list of Roman heroes is intended to recall to the reader the account of Cato’s activities in Cyprus in $8 B.C.

Cato’s task there was to arrange for the confiscation of the royal property of Ptolemy, King of Cyprus, and the annexation of the island to the province of Cilicia on the charge that Ptolemy had cooperated with the pirates to the detriment of Rome. No resistance to Roman authority was offered by the Cypriots; and, in fact, Ptolemy poisoned himself. Cato arranged for the public auction of the royal property and through vigorous efficiency managed to realize seven thousand talents from the sale.^^ This sum was then shipped intact to Rome.

Cato’s scrupulous attention to the sale of the property and his unimpeachable honesty in seeing to it that every penny found its way into the Roman treasury became a rhetorical exemplum.^^ Lucan here contrasts the rapacity of Caesar and his disregard for the law with Cato’s impeccable honesty and devotion to duty and to the law. 91

Lucan concludes the episode with a sententia that is susceptible of more than one meaning

p au p erio rque f u i t turn prirnum Caesare Roma, 166

The reference to the seizure of the Treasury's money is obvious.

Lucan, however, has been at pains to paint a picture of another kind of poverty that Rome now experiences—a poverty in its ideals and spiritual strength that prevents it from facing Caesar's onslaught.

Metellus the tribune is a jejune imitation of Rome's earlier Metellus

Creticusj Cotta the realist w ill bend in whatever direction the current wind is blowing; and Caesar, recognizing all this, cannot resist taking advantage of a city that is so ripe for the picking. Caesar P o lit i eus; D. 5« 382-lt02

The scene at 38l-l;02 carries Caesar one step farther to­ ward his goal and brings him to a confrontation with the People,

The primary emphasis up to this point has been placed upon Caesar's actions. Now the reader observes the effect of Caesar's political a c ts and h is presence upon th e people o f Rome. The atm osphere o f political deterioration and breakdovm is especially heavy in this scene, which is the culmination of the two previous scenes; and it also, in a sense, is the culmination of the first Roman episode of

Book One, especially 158-182 (Chaos in Society; The Catalogue of

Vices). Here the two converge—the insatiable hunger of Caesar and the weakened body politic of Rome. Not only is Caesar's hie . . . pacem temerataque iura relinquo brought to its logical conclusion, but also Rome as causa malorum is brought to its logical and ultimate f a t e .

The placement of this episode at the mid-point of Book Five is also significant. For it is in the silent entry of Caesar into

Rome that the final collapse of Rome's constitutional structure is brought about, together with the deterioration of the three major aspects of urban life: social (381-382), political (382-39U), and spiritual (395-^02).

The relationship of this scene to the opening scenes of Book

Five is also of importance. The book opens with the summoning of the

Republican Senate in exile by the consul Laelius. The Senate there is 92 93 the repository of the ancient Republican constitutional order and represents determined resistance to Caesar's aggression. The contrast between that body in session in Epirus and the terrified populace cowering before Caesar—and Caesar w ithout an array—

ipse petit trepidam tutus sine m ilite Roraara iam doctam seruire togae

381-382 is sharp and illustrates the crumbling of the social fabric in the face of Caesar's ever-increasing power.The people are forced to act in a manner totally inconsistent with the past five-hundred years of political tradition.

The Caesar of the Mutiny episode (which w ill be treated in detail below), which immediately precedes this scene (5. 237-380), also provides a contrast and illustrates for the reader the subtle • presentation of a very complicated character. The Caesar of the mutiny, in a daring stroke, rescues his momentarily teetering position by means o f bold and aggressive actio n and the force of h is person­ ality. In the entry into Rome he is a silent presence—exerting the same fo rce—but much more s in is t e r .

The p o l it ic a l breakdown i s ex h ib ited in the usurpation of constitutional and political office by Caesar, as well as the readi­ ness of the people to allow, and even aid in, this usurpation. The people's part in their ovm destruction is emphasized by presenting

Caesar as the silent and passive recipient of the honors bestowed upon him by the populace. Caesar's is the ominous presence, silent

while the people unwittingly destory their own political existence. 9 k

populoque precanti scilicet indulgens sujimum dictator honorera contigit et laetos fecit se consule fastos. naraque omnes uoces per quas iara terapore tanto mentimur dorainis haec priraura repperit aetas, qua sibi ne ferri ius ullura Caesar abesset Ausonias uoluit gladiis miscere secures, addidit et fasces aquilis, et noraen inane iraperii rapiens signauit terapora digna raaesta n o ta , nara quo raelius P h a rsa lic u s annus consule notus erit?

382-392

Perhaps more important for Lucan's picture of the breakdown of the political life of Rome is the picture of the travesty of the voting procedure that follows. This signals the most serious effect of

Caesar's power over Horae. In Rome—and in any free political entity— the suffrage, no matter how regulated or conducted, is the vital principle of stable government; it is the voice of the people and a

check on the power of magistrates. Now, with Caesar gaining control

of Rome, the voting process becomes a mockery, the power of the

people is vitiated and their liberty is destroyed

fingit sollemnia Campus, et non admissae dirim it suffragia plebis, decantatque tribus et uana uersat in uma.

392-39U

Finally, the religious aspect of Roman political life is completely

undermined—the religious ritual that, for the Romans, stood behind

the political processes.is also perverted and its meaning taken away.

All that is left is the empty pretence of normality; the vital principle

of the Roman governing process is dead: 95 nec caelum seruaro licet: tonat augure surdo, et laetae iurantur aues bubone sinistre, inde p e r i t priraum quondam ueneranda p o te s ta s iuris inops: careat tantum ne nomine tempus menstruus in fastos distinguit saecula consul, nec non Iliacae numen quod praesidet Albae baud meritum Latio sollemnia sacra subacto uidit flamraifera confectas nocte Latinas.

395-L02 Caesar Politicus; £. 9« IO6J4-IIO 8

The last scene of this group, 9. 106ii-1108, is set at

Alexandria after the battle. Pompey has been assassinated and the perpetrators of the murder present the severed head to Caesar. The response given by Caesar to the Egyptians who bring him Pompey's head, which is the focus of this scene, is preceded by a political speech by th e Egyptians and an ex p lan ato ry comment by Lucan.

In this bizarre scene the perversion and deterioration of political life reaches a point of climax. The Egyptian "delegates" speak to Caesar in the language of diplomacy and statesmanship—all the while holding the severed head of Pompey, concealed by a veil, ready for presentation at the critical moment. This ghastly stage- setting in which the discussion takes place is managed by Lucan to

suggest the state of perversion that the civilized world has reached.

The Egyptians have long been in an impossible situation.

Alexandria has been disrupted for some time by the dynastic quarrel between Cleopatra and the boy-king, her brother, Ptolemy; the added

chaos of palace in-fighting among the king's retainers, Pothinus and

Achillas, has aggravated the situation. The domestic political chaos

has increased in intensity by the approach of the Roman civil troubles

t h a t th re a te n to draw Egypt f a r t h e r in to th e o r b it o f Rome. The

Egyptians have had to decide between Pompey and Caesar and play to

96 97 the stronger—or to the winner.Caesar turned out to be the winner and it is the task of the Egyptians to woo him in order to maintain their position in Alexandria and try to avoid a wholesale a b so rp tio n in to th e Roman w orld. The means to woo him i s Pompey’s head.

The Egyptian begins with the inevitable adulation:

terraru m d om itor, Romanae maxime g e n tis , lOlU and immdeiately attempts to create the illusion that a benefit has been conferred upon Caesar that he could not otherwise have counted upon vjithout Egyptian intervention

et quod adhuc nescis genero peremptoj rex tib i Pellaeus terrae pelagique labores donat, et Bmathiis quod solum defuit armis exhibet: absenti bellum ciuile peractum est,

1015-1018

The use of rex . . . Pellaeus is intended to recall to their listener’s mind the name of Alexander the Great. The attempt to create the illusion of a discussion between equals—if not between the slightly superior heirs of Alexander and the Roman soldier-conqueror—and the

suggestion that Egyptian intervention has neatly wrapped up a very nasty business for Caesar—leads to the attempt to bind Caesar with the obligations he owes for services rendered

tanto te pignore, Caesar, emimus; hoc tecum percussum est sanguine foedus.

1020-1021

The suggestion of superiority contained in the delegate’s use of 98 emimus is obvious. But the most emphatic word of this section of the speech comes at 1021 with foedus. Caesar had given his opinion of foedus as an element of political action in Book One, and the

Egyptian attempt to negotiate this bizarre one with him clearly portrays the political decay of the era.

The delegate returns to a note of subservience that balances

the opening line of the speech in "presenting" to Caesar the land

o f Egypt;

accipe regna Phari nullo quaesita cruore: accipe Niliaci ius gurgitis: accipe quidquid pro Magni ceruice dares.

1022-102h

The most important point in this specious surrender of Egypt to

Caesar is contained in nullo quaesita cruore—that is, a plea on

the part of the Egyptians that Caesar not disturb the status quo

by any massive changes in the political structure of Egj'pt that

assim ilation into the Roman provincial system and administration

would entail. The Egyptian concludes his speech with a conceit

si scelus est, plus te nobis debere fateris, quod scelus hoc non ipse facis.

1031-1032

Caesar's reply to the Egyptian delegation begins at 106U.

He reads the Egyptians much more accurately than they imagine; and

he is at pains not to let the superior position that he holds slip

away in this conversation or give the Egyptians a psychological

upper hand by involving himself in obligations that he does not wish 99 to acknowledge—much l e s s to fulfill.Caesar's reply opens sharply and with a note of contempt

aufer ab adspectu nostro funesta, satelles, regis dona tui.

1061-1065

The term satelles is ambiguous, but has a pejorative sense definite enough to be a mark of contempt here.^*^

Caesar matches the Egyptians' claim of service with a reference to the prerogative that he had long carefully associated with himself; his dementia

unica belli praemia ciuilis uictis donare salutem perdidimusj

1066-1068 and at the same time charges them with interference into Roman a f f a ir s

seereta quid arma mouit et ins em it nostro sua tela labori?

1 0 71-1072

The reference to Macedon by the Egyptians is echoed by Caesar, but the inference of Caesar's superiority is clear

ergo in Thessalicis Pellaeo fecimus am is lus gladio? uestris quaesita licentia regnis?

1 0 7 3 -1 07U

Caesar then makes a clear statement of his goal and the purpose of th e e n tir e v en tu re a g a in s t Pompey non tulerara Magnum mecum Romana regentem ; te, Ptolemaee, feram? frustra ciuilibus armis miscuirtius g entes, si qua est hoc orbe potestas altera quam Caesar, si tellus ulla duorum est.

107g-1078

Lucan's purpose in putting this speech into Caesar's mouth is to let Caesar himself state precisely what his intentions have been since the beginning of the conflict. He presses again his superior position with a second reference to his prerogative of dementia and denies that any obligation to Egypt attaches to him

sciat hac pro caede tyrannus nil uenia plus posse dari.

1088-1089

The rex o f 1065 has now tu rn ed to ty ra n n u s. The same contem pt th a t was behind satelles of 1061; is also behind this word.

Caesar's speech concludes with a vision conjured up by him o f how th in g s m ight have tu rn ed o u t; r e c o n c ilia tio n w ith Pompey and a kind of peaceful cooperation between the two, and a return of the amity that once existed between them

ut te complexus positis felicibus armis adfectus abs te ueteres utamque rogarem, Magne, tuam: dignaque satis mercede laborum contentus, par esse tibi, turn pace fideli fecissera ut uictus posses ignoscere diuis, fecisses, ut Roma mihi,

1099-1101;

The auditors correctly judge the falsity of Caesar's supposed wish

and his display of sorrow at the sight of Pompey's head. But, just

as the citizens of Ariminum (l. 257-261) and those of Rome (3. 101-

103) were required to mask their true feelings in the presence of 101

Caesar, so, too, here his audience finds it more politic to arrange a face that will suit Caesar’s mood

nec talia fatus inuenit fletus comitem, nec turba querenti credidit: abscondunt geraitus et pectora laeta fronte tegunt, hilaresque nefas spectare cruentum, o bona libertas, cum Caesar lugeat audent.

11 Oh-1108 In this set of episodes Lucan has gradually shaped and defined his Caesar, bringing him from the brief statement of policy and procedure at 1. 225-227 to the definitive statement of his ambitions and goal in Alexandria at 9* 1076-1078. He has followed Fortuna, as he vowed at 1 . 226, and his statement to the Egyptians in Book

Nine defines what fatum (1. 227) means for him.

Caesar, the true heir of Marius and Sulla (contrary to what he says of Pompey at 1. 325-326) brings the violence that had become part of political life at Rome since the Gracchi in the last third of the second century to a new intensity. Caesar's political methods and policy cannot co-exist with the Republican tradition—

as a result, republicanism gives way and crumbles in the face of

C a e s a r's new p o lic ie s and a new p o l i t i c a l r e a l i t y .

Caesar's actions within the political structure of Rome

create a chaos and upheaval which Rome is neither prepared for nor

able to cope with. As a consequence, the social and spiritual life

of Rome begins to crumble and to decay along with the political life.

Caesar opens a new era—announced at Alexandria—and the

cost of that new era, shown in this set of episodes, culminates there

with the presentation of Pompey's head to Caesar—and Lucan's bitter

o bona libertas at the close of the book. 103

MOTES

1. For the title , see M. Gelzer, Caesar: Politician and Statesman, (Cambridge, Hass., 1968). Lucan, of course, is not interested in an unbiased approach to Caesar's statesmanlike contributions to Roman history. His approach is that of the poet, not the h i s t o r ia n . Of. A. V/, Lintott, "Lucan and the History of the Civil War," eg 21 (1971): i|89-ii90.

2. First in the general statements aimed at Rome and the Romans:

quis furor, o ciues . . . 1 . 8

« . . quid in arma furentem impulerit populum . . . 1 . 68-69

then in his specific references to an exemolum from the past: the fratricidal struggle between Romulus and Remus:

nec pretium tant! tellus pontusque furoris tunc erat . . . 1 . 96-97

and the loss of Julia as the last possible hope for peace. Julia is linked with the Sabine women who successfully restored peace between their husbands and former countrymen:

. . . tu sola furentem inde uirum poteras atque hinc retinere parentem, armatasque manus excusso iungere ferro, ut generos mediae soceris iunxere Sabinae. morte tua discussa fides bellumque mouere p erm issum d u cib u s.

1 . 11^-120

3. Cf. Getty, "Lucan and Caesar's Crossing," p. 81.

U. The MS reading fatis is adopted here. A. £. Housmah's emendation to satis his seems unsatisfactory. "Housman's substitution of satis his for fatis is an unnecessary emendation which yields a weak line in terms of meter, syntax, and sense." (Ahl, Lucan, p. 303, note U6). Cf. E. Fraenkel, Review of A. E. Housman, K. Annaei Lucani Belli clv ills, lib ri decern editorum in usum edidit (Oxford, 1926), Gnomon 2 ( 1926) : 510. 10U

Cf. Elizabeth Tappan, "Julius Caesar’s Luck," CJ 2? (1931-1932); 3-1 h.

6. Ahl, Lucan, p. 29$. See also pp. 300-301.

7. Cf. R. M. O g ilv ie , The Romans and T heir Gods in the Age of Aijpustus (Hew York, 19^9), pp. 91-92, who cites Gic. De fini'-ms 5. 70 and Ovid Fasti 6. 77$ff. For Lucan’s use of Fortune and fatum, see Wolf-Hartmut Friedrich "Cato, Caesar und Fortuna bei Lucan," in W. Rutz (ed.) Lucan (Vfege der Forschung, 235), Darmstadt, 1970, p. 8$, pp. 90-95.

8. Ahl, Lucan, p. 301. Cf. Cato’s response to Labienus at the Oracle o f Ammon in Book Mine a t 501-581;.

9. Ibid., p. 303.

10. After Pompey’s death, as Cato assumes the party leadership, he w ill say o f Pompey:

ciuis obit . . . multum maioribus impar nosce modum iuris . . . 9. 190-191

11. 9. 601-601;:

ecce parens uerus patriae dignissimus aris Roma, t u i s ; p er quern numquam iu ra r e p u d e b it, e t quern, s i s t e t e r i s umquam c e ru ic e s o lu ta , nunc olim factura deum.

12. This very general division is meant only for purposes of illustration here. For a detailed analysis of this speech see Wolfgang Tasler, Die Reden in Lucans Pharsalia (Bonn, 1972), pp. 29-i;0.

13. Cf. F. E. Adcock, Roman Political Ideas and Practice (Ann Arbor: Ann Arbor Paperbacks, 1961;), pp. 12-l5j and Ch. V/irszubski, Libertas as a P olitic^ Idea at Rome During the Late Republic and Early Principate (Cambridge, 1?5o), p . 36. lU. "Political warfare among the nobiles was fought out in senatorial debate, electoral contests, criminal trials and disputes over m ilitary commands. Dignitas and gloria were the ends ..." (Gruen, The Last Generation, p. l;Tn

15 . Cf. Wirszubski, Libertas, pp. 77-78 for additional citations indicating the tradition of Caesar’s great sensitivity to the worth of his dignitas. 105

16. Ibid., pp. 78- 79. See also p. l5.

17. Ibid., pp. 36- 37.

18. Pompey, sole consul in 52 B.C., ringed the courtroom -with armed soldiers during the trial of T. Annius Mile. The street violence incited by political factionalism and perpetrated both by Milo’s supporters and his enemies created an atmosphere of tension. Pompey’s action, although open to other interpretations, could be seen as a measure to preclude further violence, in an already explosive atmosphere, in the courtroom, ^j^cero so asserted. See Gruen, The last Generation, pp. 338-3U5.

19. There follows a simile (327-332) likening Pompey to an Hyrcanian tiger who feeds and nurtures her ferocity and bloodthirsty nature by slaughter. Note how Lucan echoed the image of the Libyan lion he used in reference to Caesar at 1. 205-212. The lion there is wounded—Caesar claims that his dignitas has been wounded by Pompey’s alleged insults. Caesar’s reaction w ill be very much like that of the lion: per ferrum tanti securus uolneris exit.

20. Cf. the picture of the Marian and Sullan era at 2. U5-232.

21. Cf. Scullard, From the Gracchi to Nero, p. 7.

22. Cf. the explanatory note in Haskins, Pharsalia, p. 21.

23. Cf.. M orford, The Poet Lucan, pp. 79-81.

2U. certa = ”though well assured of misfortune.” Haskins, Pharsalia, note to line 37, p. 78.

25 . The one of three instances where Caesar displays even a hint of t h a t em otion. The o th ers a re a t U. 121 and 10. L58-!;60. Ahl notes only one instance, however, namely, the. one cited in Book Ten, in Lucan, p . 225. Cf. Getty, ’’Lucan and Caesar’s Crossing," p. 81.

26. Cf. 1. 169-522.

27. Cf. 1 . 1;69-U86.

28. Cf. Tac. 1- 3 .

29. Cf. Curio and Caesar in Book One a t 27 ? ff. Curio and h is comrades fled to Caesarr on the alleged grounds that their constitutional rights had been violated and the inviolability of their persons as tribunes had been ignored. 106

30. Cf. John Iîakov;ski, "Death and Liberty in Lucan's Pharsalia,” (Ph.D. dissertation, Princeton University, p. 15.

31. "libertas the freedom of a people bound dovm by tyranny perished by freedom, i.e. by the assertion of it, i.e. Oud. cf. Sen. dial, ix v 3 (Socrates) qui tuto insultauerat agmini tyrannorum ciuis, eius libertatem libertas non tu lit. Cf. a lso Ov. H eroid. xv 6? , 68 Me quoque quod monui bene multa fideliter, odit: hoc mihi libertas hoc pia lingua dedit." (Haskins, Pharsalia, note to line li^S, p. 83).

32. Plut. Cat, min. 36, 37.

33. Valerius Maximus 2. 3. 2.; 8. 1^. 10. See also M. P. 0. Morford, "Some Aspects of Lucan's Rhetoric," (Ph.D. dissertation, University of London, 1963), pp. U9-50. For Clodius, Cato, and Cyprus, see H. H. Scullard, From the Gracchi to Hero, pp. 120-121 ; and Stewart I. Oost, "Cato Uticensis and the Annexation of Cyprus," CPh. $0 (1955): 98-112.

3li. Cf. 1. 351 : detrahimus dominos urbi seruire paratae. Also Sallust Jugur'tha 35. 10:

sed postquam Roma egressus est (sc. Jugurtha), fertur saepe eo tacitus respiciens postremo dixisse: 'urbem venalem et mature perituram, si emptorem invenerit.®

35 . This technique of step by step progression and narrowing of focus was also observed in the Roman episodes, 1 . 70-222, L66-S22; 2. 16-233.

36. The brief allusion to the portion of the Senate in Rome at 1. 1^87-^89 also contrasts with these two episodes in Book Five.

37. For the rhetoric of the speeches, see Morford, The Poet Lucan, p p . 10-12.

38. Of. the plot and the Egyptian, like Cotta's, understanding of the political realities facing them—8. ii72-5ii2.

39. He tells the delegates just how accurately he can read them at IO8I-IO8U. His assessment of their intentions is shown to be correct at 10. 3U5f.—note especially 3U7-3i;8, i;0. Of. Lewis and Short, s.v. p. l632:

"In Cicero more frequently in a bad sense: Agr. 2.13.32; Prov. Cons. 3.5; Cat. 1.3.7; Fin. 2.12.37; Inv. 1.2.2." CHAPTER III

A. ARIMINUM: 1. 231-261; B. MASSILIA: 3. 298-762

C. LARISA: ? . 712-72?; D. lOTILENE: 8. 109-1 $8

These four scenes may be considered together and are intended by the poet to present the effects of the Roman Civil War on communities other than that of the city of Rome itself.

The poet has fashioned a dramatic progression and balance among th es e scenes; two (Ariminum and M a ssilia ) b e fo re th e b a t t l e , and two (Larisa and Mytilene) after the battle. Ariminum represents the earliest pre-war effects of Caesarian political activity;

Massilia is the closest to the war itself and is a much expanded portrayal of involvement in Roman affairs. The confrontation of the M assiliotes with Caesar is much more serious and dramatic than that of the populace of Ariminum.

Larisa and % tilene show the aftermath of the battle and the postwar chaos, with a change of emphasis from Caesar to the defeated Pompey.

Finally, each of these city-scenes presents a foil for

L ucan's p o r tr a y a l o f Rome.

107 A. Ariminum: 1. 231-261

The occupation of Ariminum follows immediately upon the scene at the Rubicon. The transition between Caesar's declaration of policy at the Rubicon and the scene at Ariminiua is a simile likening Caesar to the trajectory of a missile hurled by a Balearic slinger and to that of a Parthian archer's arrow

. . . et torto Balearis uerbere fundae ocior et missa Parthi post terga sagitta.

229-230

This simile must have struck a responsive chord in Lucan!s contemporary readers for whom the earlier and frightening experience of the

Balearis . . . fundae and the more recent, but equally devastating, experience of the Parthi . . . sagitta had become a part of Roman t r a d i ti o n t h a t surrounded th e image o f H annibal and th e memory of Crassus' defeat at the hands of the Parthians.^

This short scene devoted to the occupation of Ariminum is designed to give the reader a preview of what is to happen to

Rome. The in tro d u c to ry lin e s show us i n v iv id fash io n th e

implementation of his principles of action by Caesar—this is

Caesar Politicus in action, having abandoned the traditional elements

of political action: ius and foedus and their goal: pax, in favor o f bellum .

108 109

For this first overt act of aggression (iainque dies primos belli uisura tumultus / exoritur, 233-23h) Lucan piles up words denoting the oppressive atmosphere and confusion of the coming war

uicinuraque minæc inuadit Ariminon. ignes soli8 lucifero fugiebant astra relicto, iamque dies primos belli uisura tumultus exoritur. seu sponte deum, seu turbidus Auster impulerat, maestam tenuerunt nubila lucem,

231-23$

In three lines the occupation of the city’s forum is complete; and the stage is set for a confrontation between Caesar's men and the townspeople

constitit ut capto iussus deponere miles signa foro, stridor lituora clangorque tubarum non pia concinuit cum rauco classica comu.

236-239

The operation takes place quite impersonally. Caesar is not mentioned as issuing the orders in the forum of Ariminum—Lucan says, simply, iussus . . . miles.^ The bugles sound the call, the town—up till now enveloped in sleep—is abruptly aroused to face its occupiers (rupta quies populi, 239).

The immediate rush to defend themselves w ill ultimately

. . . stratisque excita iuuentus deripuit sacris adfixa penatibus arma quae pax longa dabat; nuda iam crate fluentis inuadunt clupeos curuataque cuspide pila et scabros nigrae morsu robiginis enses.

239-2U 3 The arsenals of Ariminum have become accustomed to a peaceful existence.^ The terms in which Lucan describes Ariminum here, and

Pompey e a r l ie r , both to become v ictim s of C a esar's su p e rio r arm s, are strikingly similar. The deterioration of the weaponry of the people of Arimj.num was brought about through d isu se during th e pax longa. The reader hears an echo of the poet's earlier description of Pompey

alter uergentibus annis in senium longoque togae tranquillior usu dedidicit iam pace ducem.

1 . 129-131

Pompey's interests have turned to civilian pursuits—longoque

togae . . . usu—and

famaeque petitor multa dare in uolgus . . . plausuque sui gaudere theatri,

as th o se of th e people o f Ariminum have. Pompey i s n o t moved to bestir himself to any positive action to fortify his position, but,

r a th e r

. . . multumque priori credere fortunae.

1. 13 W 3 S

It is Fortuna to whom the people of Ariminum complain in their lament

over t h e i r p re se n t p lig h t—both Pompey and th e townspeople were

abandoned by her in the final crisis, she belongs to her favorite— melius, Fortuna, dedisses orbe sub fioo sedera gelidaque sub A rcto e rra n tis q u e domos L a tii quam c la u s tra t u e r i .

2S1-253

%e oak simile with which Lucan completes his description of Pompey in Book One a t 135-1U3, fin d s an analogue in th e scene at Ariminum, The oak that represents Pompey has stood too long and has passed beyond its productive lifetim e. It stands now simply by its sheer bulk

nec iam ualidis readicibus haerens ponders fixa suo est; nudosque per aera ramos effundens trunco non frondibus efficit urabram.

138-110

The sorrow and fear at what has happened to their city can find no outlet in the presence of Caesar and his occupation force

gemitu sic quisque latenti non ausus timuisse palam: uox nulla dolori c r é d ita .

257-259

Lucan sums up the townspeople’s fear and frustration in a simile

sed quantum, uolucres cum bruma coercet, rura silent mediusque tacet sine murmure pontus, tanta quies.

259-261

The citizens of Ariminum had achieved the desirable normalcy

of peaceful urban existence. The arsenals of the city have not

been opened for about half a century.^ But now the city falls

victim to Caesar’s political ambitions, to which he offers the citizens as a sacrifice. At his vision of Roma on the bank of the Rubicon, Caesar called upon his gods for a blessing for his forthcoming enterprise

0 magnae qui moenia prospicis urbis Tarpeia de rupe Tonans Phrygiique penates gentis luleae et rapti seereta Quirini et residens celsa Latialis luppiter Alba Vestalesque Foci . . .

1 . 19^-199

The gods whom he addressed there are, in one aspect or another,

associated with the peaceful and orderly domestic and poltical

existence of Rome.^ By a reversal of the order of things, Caesar

sacrifices the peace and security of this relatively insignificant

but strategically positioned town, as he w ill eventually sacrifice

The fu tility of armed resistance impresses itself upon

the townspeople when they come to see clearly what odds they are

up a g a in s t

u t n o tae f u ls e r e a q u ila e Romanque s ig n a , et celsus medio conspectus in agmine Caesar. 2hh-2h$

The effect of Caesar’s principles translated into deeds registers

upon their consciousness

deriguere metu, gelidus pauor occupât artus. 2hS

The town is held in the grip of Caesar's legionaries, the people

are held in the grip of terror as they look on helplessly.^ 113

The impersonal tone of the seizure of the city is matched by the anonymity of the inserted by Lucan, representing the secret thoughts of the inhabitants as they observe the intruder in their midst

et tacito mutos uoluunt in pectore questüs; 2h7

gemitu sic quisque latenti non ausus timuisse pal am: uox nulla dolori c r é d ita .

257-258

By presenting their secret thoughts, by not identifying any individual, by not portraying even a fictitious character, the poet succeeds in fashioning a completely impersonal—and thereby even more devastating—pervasive atmosphere of doom

o male uicinis haec moenia condita Gallis, o tristi damnata loco, pax alta per omnes et tranquilla quies populos : nos praeda furentum primaque castra sumus. melius, Fortuna, dedisses orbe sub Eoo sedem gelidaque sub Arcto e rr a n tis q u e domos L a t ii quam c la u s t r a t u e r i . nos p rim i Senonum motus Cirabrumque r u e n tem uidimus et Martem Libyes cursumque furoris Teutonici. quotiens Romam Fortuna lacessit, hac iter est bellis.

2U8-257

The doom is that of the pax longa to which the citizenry had become

accustomed; the victory is that of fear, madness, chaos, and war.

Pax, ius, and foedus have yielded to the decision of war (iudice bello, 227). But the tragic element is that the war that now

affects the populace is a civil war—they are involved in the struggle

that pits Roman citizen against Roman citizen and brings its strife

to this once peaceful community. B. Massilia; 3. 298-762

The p o rtra y a l of th e events a t H a s s ilia i s much f u l l e r than the scene at Ariminum, as the poet brings his reader one

step closer to the final catastrophe. The clash of interests be­ tween Caesar and the Massiliotes portrays the inextricable link between Roman affairs and other communities.

Caesar’s own account of his operations at Hassilia in

Bellum Civile 1. 3U-36, is brief, but clearly shifts the blame

for H assilia's involvement upon the Massiliotes themselves.

Caesar asserts that the town, at Pompey's urging, had closed its

gates to Caesar and enlisted allies to aid them against him.

Caesar suggests that he exerted great effort to convince a delegation

o f f if te e n lead in g c itiz e n s , whom he had summoned to a con feren ce,

that all Italy was behind him and that Pompey was the aggressor.

After consultation with their superiors, the Massiliot

delegation returned to Caesar to claim neutrality in the dispute

between him and Pompey, inasmuch as both contestants had conferred

benefits on the city and because they did not have sufficient in­

formation to be able to judge between the claims of each of them.

The city, they said, remained closed to both men. While the con­

ference was in progress, Hassilia placed the city under the command

of Domitius and prepared for siege and war. This action of H assilia's

stirred Caesar to take severe punitive measures against the city's

l lii 115 p e rfid y and he summoned th re e leg io n s and p rep ared to reduce th e c ity .

The episode in Lucan’ s poem fo llo w s im m ediately upon th e

Catalogue of Pompeian forces. This juxtaposition of scenes contains a striking complement to the Catalogue: the centers of ancient civilization of Greece and Asia Minor that have enrolled them­ selves in Pompey's cause and follow him in this war with Caesar w ill fall along with Pompey's forces at Pharsalia; Massilia, a center of Greek civilization in Western Europe since the early sixth century, offers resistance to Caesar and will also fall.

Here again, in dealing with foreign peoples, Caesar id.ll rely on the principle of political action enunciated at the Rubicon..

That philolsophy will be reflected in the interchange of the two

speeches which make up the first part of the events at Massilia:

an opening speech by the envoys from the city who approach Caesar

in an attempt to come to terms with him without a battle, and a

rejoinder by Caesar in response to the reception he receives from

the delegates.

The first echo of Caesarian policy is in the short transition

between the Catalogue of Pompeian Forces and the speech. The allusion

to geographical and meteorological settings is similar to that at

the scene at the Rubicon

ille ubi deseruit trépidantes moenia Roraae agmine nubiferam rapto supereuolat Alpem,

3 . 298-299 116

turn u ire s p raeb eb at hiemps atque a u x erat undas tertia iam grauido pluuialis Cynthia cornu, et madidis Euri resolutae flatibus Alpes.

1 . 217 -2 1 9

As Caesar approaches the M assiliot community, Lucan distinguishes

Massilia from all other cities that have had to face Caesar

cumque a l i i famae p o p u li t e r r o r e p a u eren t, Phocais in dubiis ausa est seruare iuuentus non Graia leuitate fidera signataque iura, et causas non fata sequi.

3. 300-303

Massilia will translate its own adherence to civic virtue into

action in the confrontation with Caesar who is, at the same time,

implementing what he considers to be principles of political action.

The confrontation of the two theories of political morality is the

basis of the entire scene.

The purpose for the attempted discussion with Caesar is the

preservation of peace and order for Massilia. The M assiliot will

state clearly in his speech that the tow 's desire is to avoid

involvement in this war; . . . lacrimas ciuilibus armis / secretumoue

damus (313-31Ü)* Lucan tells us their motivation for the opposition

to this war and to Caesar's part in fomenting war

... ausa est seruare iuuentus 301

. . . fidem signataque iura, 302

et causas . . . s e q u i . 303

Fidem represents adherence to foedus. loyalty and fidelity pledged 117 and kept—principles at the base of the traditional Roman code of political morality. Foedus, here implied, will be explicitly stated a little later in the M assiliot’s speech

sit locus exceptas sceleri Magnoque tibique tutus, ut inuictae fatum si consulat urbi foedera si placeant sit quo ueniatis inermes.

333-335

Signataque iura, which recalls Caesar’s own words at 1. 225; temerataque iura relinquo, is closely and intentionally linked with fidem; and the adherence of the city to fides is the major boast of the Massiliotes

et post translatas exustae Phocidos arces, moenibus exiguis aliène in litore tuti, illustrât quos sola fides.^2

3liO-3lt2

In contrast to Ariminum, Massilia declares that it will

defend itself in the face of any aggression on Caesar’s part,

Ariminum was a victim, caught unawares while the city slept.

Massilia has more time in which to mount a defense than was afforded

Ariminum, and the result is open defiance and armed resistance to

The essence of Caesar’s response to the delegation is con­

tained in the conluding lines of his speech

dabitis poenas pro pace petita: et nihil esse meo discetis tutius aeuo quam duce me bellum ,

37 0-372 118

The complete reversal of good political order and rational urban existence is contained in that first line of Caesar’s retort.

The ab so lu te in s a n ity of th e a s s e r tio n e t n i h i l esse . . . tu tiu s

• • • . . . bellum is obvious. Caesar forces the Massiliotes to trade their rational political existence for the insanity that he brings in his train. The hint of the loss of libertas for the

M assiliotes—and ultimately for Rome—is contained in Caesar’s duce me.

Lucan inserts an encomium to M assilia's courage and sense of m o ra lity

iam s a t i s hoc G raiae memorandum c o n ti g i t u r b i aetemumque decus, quod non impulsa nec ipso strata metu tenuit flagrantis in omnia belli praecipitem cursum, raptisque a Caesare cunctis uincitur una mora.

388-392

The opposition to Caesar's plan offered by Massilia is a distinction

that places this Greek city on a higher moral plane than that of

Rome itse lf. Rome (tu causa malorum / facta tribus dominis communis

. . . nec umquam / in turbam mis si f e r a l i a fo ed era r e g n i, 1. 81^-86)

was powerless to control her own citizens. Massilia cannot

countenanc e involvement in a conflict whose inevitable climax

is the mutual slaughter of Roman citizens by Roman citizens in a

civil war meant to thrust one man into the position of supreme power.

Two more scenes follow the debate between Caesar and the

embassy: (a) Caesar's preparations for siege and battle; and, (b) an

account meant as the climax of the picture of Caesar and establish 119

with absolute certainty the reader's emotional reaction to Caesar.

Caesar requires timber for his siege operations and he and his men

have denuded the countryside in ther quest for a sufficient supply.

S till in need of wood, Caesar approaches a grove of trees sacred to

unspecified deities—and, in fact, one which men do not approach

for worship, so awesome is the place

non uolgatis sacrata figuris numina sic metuunt: tantum terroribus addit quam tim ean t non nosse d eos.

Ul^-lt17

non ilium cultu populi propiore fréquentant, sed cessere deis.

U22-U23

• VJithout regard for the sanctity of the place and caring nothing for

the religious awe and scruples of the populace, Caesar commandeers

the grove. His legionaries find themselves in a dilemma: they

fear both the gods and Caesar but to them the wrath of their

commander appears, at the time, to be the more terrible, and so they

accede to the order for the destruction of the sacred trees—after

Caesar sets an example for them

implicitas magno Caesar torpore cohortes ut uidit, primus raptam uibrare bipennem ausus et aeriam ferre proscindere quercum effatur merso uiolata in robora ferro: iam ne quis uestrum dubitet subuertere siluam crédité me fecisse nefas.

U32-I137 tu n p a ru it omnis imperils non sublato secura pauore turba, sed expensa superorum et Caesaris ira.

137-139

The incident seems to be a creation of Lucan's own for the specific purpose of delineating Caesar's character and creating an emotional atmosphere for the reader.

The cutting of the Massiliote grove . . , appears to be a nonhistorical incident inserted first by Lucan into the account of the siege. The incident seems to have been suggested by Ovid's story of Zrysichthon, as not only content but even verbal borrov/ings indicate. . . . we recognize that the poet seized upon an episode from myth, specifically from Ovid, which served to symbolize rather than report historically the character of C a e s a r .^3

Immediately after the destruction of the grove, Caesar leaves the implementation of the siege operations to his subordinates and legionaries while he proceeds to affairs in Spain. Lucan emphasizes the ever-restless nature of Caesar and his inability

dux tamen impatiens haesuri ad moenia Martis uersus ad Hispanas acies extremaque mundi iussit bella geri.

The siege of Massilia proceeds; although Caesar himself has departed for Spain, his presence is still felt and Lucsn goes to great lengths to insure the reader's awareness of Caesar's presence; in the final words to the delegation (dabitis poenas pro pace petita.

370), the flamboyant act of destruction of the Sacred Grove and its 121 trees, and his challenge (crédité me fecisse nefas, ii37) which, in effect, denies the sacred character of the trees that all other men hold in awe.

The ultimate result of the battle is very briefly told by

Lucan, but the picture he presents contains the essence of what the effect of Caesar's appearance at Massilia was for the community

quis in urbe parentum fletus erat: quanti matrum per litora planctus. coniunx saepe sui confusis uoltibus unda credidit ora u iri Romanum amplexa cadauer: accensisque rogis mi'seri de corpore trunco certauere patres.

756-761

For Lucan there is no glory in the engagement between Caesaÿ's forces and the determined, but overwhelmed, M assiliotes. Lucan portrays here the pain and suffering, the wounding and the dying that are the essence of combat

cruor altus in undis spumat et obducti concrete sanguine fluctus.

572-573

semianimes a lii uastum subiere profundum hauseruntque suo permixtum sanguine pontum.

576-577

stant gemini fratres fecundae gloria matris, quos eadem uariis genuerunt uiscera fatis. discreuit mors saeua uiros, unumque relicturn agnorunt miseri sublato errore parentes, aetem is causara lacrimis: tenet ille dolorem semper et amissum fratrem lugentibus offert.

6 0 3 -6 0 8 ferrea dura puppi rapides raanus inserit uncos adfixit Lycidara. raersus foret ille profundo, sed prohibent socii suspensaque crura retentant, scinditur auolsus: nec sicut uolnere sanguis emicuit lentus: ruptis cadit undique uenis: diseursusque aniraae diuersa in membra raeantis interceptas aquis.

63S-6W

The Homeric pictures of the heroics and (Z /O e /'^ of combat are replaced by scenes of frustration

h ie ( s c . Telo) L a tia e r o s tr o compagem r u p e r a t a ln i : pila sed in medium uenere trementia pectus, auertitque ratem raorientis dextra m agistri.

597-S99

The scenes of physical destruction, the siege and fall of the city to Caesar’s army serve a different function in Lucan's poem. The victory that Caesar gains by combat is offset by that gained by

Massilia—and M assilia's victory is, for Lucan, by far the more important. Throughout the entire episode, Massilia has retained a hold on the principles of political stability, beginning with the attempts at negotiations with Caesar, the delgate’s emphasis on the city's desire to stay apart from this war which is one of internal strife pitting Roman citizen against Roman citizen. Secondly, the city's adherence to the principle of fides is the quality that

sets this city apart from Rome and the other cities and gives it

a special place in Lucan's narrative. Despite the physical destruction

of the city, its principles remain to give it a moral victory over 123

Caesar and his tyranny. Although Caesar is able to disregard the city's invocation of the principles of political morality and force his will upon the populace, the victory of principle over brute force will remain the foundation of civilized existence.

Rowland has emphasized the very close connection between

Rome and Massilia in Lucan's poetic vision.”*^ He notes the final emphasis given by the poet to this relationship in the concluding description of the end of the battle and the reversed order of th in g s

G raiae p ars maxima c la s s is mergitur: ast aliae mutato reraige puppes uictores uexere suos;

7S3-75S

coniunx saepe sui confusis uoltibus unda credidit ora u iri Romanum amplexa cadauer.

7^8-739

The same reversal of the right order of things is descending upon

Rome as Caesar drives relentlessly forward to stop ultimately at

The City of the civilized world—Rome itself. C. Larisa; 7. 712-727

In this scene and in the one following at Mytilene, Lucan pro v id es th e c o u n te rp a rt f o r th e scenes a t Arminuin and M a ss ilia .

At Larisa and Mytilene he shows us the aftermath of the battle of

Pharsalia. There is also a shift of emphasis from that in the two earlier scenes. In Ariminum and Massilia, the reader sees Caesar the relentless aggressor translating his political philosophy into action; in Larisa and Mytilene our attention is directed, not at Caesar, but at the defeated Pompey and the effects of that defeat upon Pompey himself and through him upon those with whom he comes into contact, as he pursues his fated course to its climax on the shores of Egypt,

According to Lucan, Larisa is the first stop Pompey makes after leaving the battlefield. However, in Caesar’s narrative of the events of the day after the battle in B.C. 3» 96. 3-U, he

emphasizes Pompey's hasty flight from the scene. Caesar asserts

t h a t Pompey approached L a ris a b u t d id n o t pause th e r e . In ste a d ,

according to Caesar, he kept going at speed until he reached the sea

and there boarded a grain ship, accompanied by other fugitives

from the battle. Caesar's interest is in the hasty flight and the

utter defeat of Pompey.

Valerius Maximus included the incident under the heading

De Verecundia (it.^.S) where his emphasis is on Pompey's modestia

12U 125 in the midst of disaster. Caesar was the only opponent worthy of

Pompey. Although Pompey*s d ig n ita s was s trip p e d away in d e fe a t, he exhibited an admirable verecundia when greeted by the populace of Larisa: these he tells to transfer their loyalty to the winner

(et istud officium praestate victori).

Lucan adapts Valerius’ version of the incident to emphasize the loyalty (fides) of the population of Larisa to Pompey; and, at the same time, to contrast Pompey's nobility with Caesar's bloodthirsty cruelty^^

tu, Caesar, in alto caedis adhuc cumulo patriae per uiscera uadis: at tibi iam populos donat gener.

721-723

The outpouring o f a ff e c tio n and honor th a t Pompey rec e iv es from the populace, fit more for the winner of the battle (ceu laeto,

715 ) than fo r the loser, is similar to what he vm.ll experience

during his pause at Mytilene. The gates of the city are throim

open to receive him and the resources of the city are put at his

disposal: personnel, money, supplies

. . . praeraittunt munera flentes: pandunt templa domosj socios se cladibus optant.

715-716

This is in contrast to Caesar's surreptitious forced entry into

Ariminum while the town slept; and the bloody battle by means of

which he forced his way into M assilia, as well as the forced entry

into the Treasury in the Temple of Saturn at 3. 111:-168. 126

But the support of the citizenry—undoubtedly sincere—is but a shadow. The political reality of the situation is told by Lucan—

scilicet immense superest ex nomine multura; teque minor solo, cunctas impellere gentes rursus in arma potes, rursusque in fata redire

7 1 7 -7 1 9

—and understood by Pompey

. . . quid opus uicto populis aut urbibus? inquit: uictori praestate fidem.

720-721

The word fides, used twice in this short passage (721,

726), provides a link with the scene at Massilia, whose fides was the boast of the Massiliot delegation in the face of Caesar's

imminent attack. The fides of the populace of Larisa, too, is

recognized by Pompey— and emphasized by Lucan—even though Pompey

advises them to transfer it to the conqueror

nunc tibi uera fides quaesiti, Magne, fauoris contigit ac fructus. felix se nescit amari.

7 2 6-727

Frederick Ahl suggests an interpretation of Lucan's portrayal

of Pompey i n t h is l a s t rem ark

. . . (Lucan) p re se n ts Pompey in p u rely human term s without mythic coloration. Pompey's goals are admiration and respect—which are to him the same as love ...... I f we were to view Pompey as an a ll e g o r i c a l figure . . . we would see him as the epitome of human frailty, vanity, and beauty, crushed in a conflict of absolutes. His actions bear the mark neither of 127

the virtus or pietas of the dedicated nor the demonic furor of the destructive and the depraved . , . V/hat we see in Pompey i s amor, a love th a t at its most sublime approaches pietas, and at its lowest comes close to furor. He is neither totally good nor totally evil; his conduct hovers between altruism and self-seeking.^7

The last half line, however, is troublesome. J. D, Duff’s

Loeb translation renders felix se nescit amari as if it were a proverb: "The prosperous are never sure that they are loved for themselves" (p. U23)* This translation reflects the ancient interpretation of the verse.A hl rejects this interpretation of the line but suggests a much more difficult one:

Given the common meaning of felix as fruitful and productive, it is hard to imagnie that anyone would have coined such an odd apophthegm, much less that it would have become proverbial. Surely this is a paradox, authored by Lucan himself: "Happy man, he does n o t know t h a t he i s lo v ed ." To know t h a t th e people love him would be more than Pompey could endure at this point . . . He is happy in his ignorance of the affection of Larisa: for there is nothing he could do to respond to it.

This strained interpretation contradicts the scene as

presented by Lucan. Pompey must surely be able to see the

affection of the populace for him. The poet merely makes an

observation on the human condition, here admirably exampled in

Pompey*s experience, in a "terminal sententia," that when a man is

prosperous and successful, he w ill inevitably find many "friends"

to share in his prosperity and success. It is only when a man is in

d e fe a t th a t he can know w ith c e r ta in ty th a t th o se who su pport and

encourage him are indeed his friends. 128

This strange atmosphere in which Lucan's characters now move suggests the general confusion of the world consequent upon

Caesar's disruption of world-order. The people of Larisa extend to

Pompey their resources and their affection—the former, which would be insufficient for any kind of counter-attack against Caesar,

Pompey cannot u se; th e l a t t e r , what Pompey r e a l ly re q u ir e s , he cannot accept.

The o ffe rin g o f th e tow n's reso u rc e s to th e b eaten Pompey

is as empty a gesture as were the rush to arms oh the part of the

people of Ariminum and the attempts at negotiations by the

Massiliotes in the face of Caesar's aggression. What is important,

what does have substance and meaning for Lucan and is the essence

of this brief encounter between Pompey and the people of Larisa—and

in the next scene with the Mytilenaeans—is the adherence of the

people and their city to their pledged word—their fides—though

faced with Caesar's victory, and in despite of Pompey's own

words: uictori praestate fidem, 721. p. Mytilene; 8 . 109-1 $8

In t h is scene, th e a tte n tio n now focused upon Pompey i s shared with Cornelia. Caesar's ominous presence, however, looms in the background;

omnia uictoris possunt sperare fauorem; 11?

ccipe: ne Caesar rapiat, tu ui

. . . saeui cum Caesaris iram iam scirera meritam seruata coniuge Lesbon. 13U-13S

The scene discussed here follows immediately upon the arrival of Pompey on Lesbos to retrieve Cornelia, left there for safety before the battle, and the meeting and dialogue between the

The poet again uses the device of impersonal portrayal of the Mytilenaeans, as he did in the scenes of Ariminum and

Massilia, by referring to the populace in the most general terms;

. . . Mytilenaeum . . . uolgus (109). The populace of Mytilene serve a number of dramatic purposes. They act as a kind of Chorus to the scene played out between Pompey and Cornelia—a sounding boad to their tragedy and a purveyor of advice. The grief the

Mytilenaeans exhibit over the fate Cornelia shares with her husband and the affection they manifest for her

. . . ast illam, quam toto tempore belli ut ciuem uidere suam, discedere cemens ingemuit populus

151- 1^3 130 reflects the grief Cornelia feels seeing her husband in his darkest hour. Lucan's description of the relationship between Coinelia and the Lesbians during her stay on the island heightens the pathos of the meeting between husband and wife

quam u ix , s i c a s tr a m a r iti uictoris peteret, siccis dimittere matres iam poterant oculis: tanto deuinxit amore hos pudor hos probitas castique modestia uoltus, quod submissa nimis nulli grauis hospita turbae stantis adhuc fati uixit quasi coniuge uicto.

1S3-1S8

Finally, throughout the entire scene the reader hears again and again the devotion of the Lesbians to political morality and order

turn Mytilenaeum pleno iam lito re uolgus a d fa tu r Magnum; s i maxima g l o r i a n o b is semper erit tanti pignus seruasse m ariti, tu quoque deuotos sacro tib i foedere muros, oramus, sociosque lares dignare uel una n o c te tu a ...... quern ueniens hospes Romanus adoret.

109-115

ne nostram uideare fidem felixque secutus et damnasse miser, tali pietate uirorum laetus in aduersis, et mundi nomina gaudens esse fidem . . .

126-129

heu nimium felix aetemo nomine Lesbos, s iu e doces populos regesque a d m itte re Magnum, seu praestas mi'ni sola fidem.

139-lW 131

The Mytilenaeans suggest that their city be a ha:ven for

Pompey now that the battle is over, and a refuge from Caesar—a reflection of a suggestion made by the people of Larisa, as well as a contrast to the suggestion made to Caesar by the Massiliot d e le g a tio n

accipe teraplorum cultus aurumque deorum; accipe, si terris, si puppibus ista iuuentus aptior est: tota, quantum ualet, utere Lesbo.

8. 121-123

sit locus exceptus sceleri Magnoque tibique tutus . . .

3.333-33L

The value that the Mytilenaeans place on their fidelity to

Pompey's cause is stated in terms similar to Caesar's declaration of his principles

s i maxima g lo r ia nobis semper erit tanti pignus seruasse m ariti, tu quoque deuotos sacro tib i foedere muros, oramus, sociosque lares dignora uel una n o cte tu a ;

8 . 110- 11U

hoc solum crimen meritae bene detrahe terrae, ne nostram uideare fidem felixque secutus et damnasse miser.

12S-127

The intent of this city to stand firm and maintain its adherence to its moral principles is in contrast to Caesar's strategy as well as to the behavior of Rome.^^ The speech of the Mytilenaeans is both a for Pompey's fate and a hymn to political consitency, order and morality—the Roman civic virtues. CONCLUSION

The basis of these four episodes is the conept of fides, displayed most forcefully and clearly in Massilia, Larisa, and

Mytilene. Massilia adheres to its concept of fides by facing

Caesar and offering him armed resistance. Larisa and Mytilene exhibit a similar adherence to their pledged fides to Pompey after his defeat at Pharsalia. The Massiliotes knew what they could expect from Caesar and his three heavily armed legions, but preferred their principles (causas, 303) and what they deemed to be the hallmark of their city; illustrât quos sola fides (3U2). Larisa and % 'tilene are both prepared to sacrifice their substsance for

Pompey— and a Pompey in d e fe a t.

Ariminum is a special case. That city does not have time to think about or to display fides—it is seized and occupied by

Caesar's forces while it sleeps. However, the Ariminum episode serves to throw into relief both the staunch adherence to principle of Massilia, Larisa, and Mytilene, and the total disregard of all principle by Caesar and his conquering armies. The reputation of

Ariminum does not suffer by comparison with the other three cities—it has been victimized in the past, and it is victimized once again.

It is Caesar and his early dawn attack that deserve the reproach.

132 133

1. Lucan alludes to Parthia and the Parthians twenty-six times in the course of the poem.

2. The same dramatic device of Keeping Caesar as the unseen but ever-present force behind what goes on is employed again at 5 . 381- 1402.

3. The XIII, according to Caesar’s own account of this incident at B, C. 1.8. This operation is reported quite impersonally by Caesar, too, and he quickly passes over it in favor of more significant events.

U. The contrast with Rome is striking;

non erat is populus quem pax tranquilla iuuaret, quern sua libertas immotis pasceret armis.

1 . 171-172

5. Cf. Pompey’s dream at 7. 7-Ui.

6. Of the past wars that the citizens recall at this hour of Caesar’s invasion (25U-2^6)—with the Senones in 390 B.C., with Hannibal in the Second Punic War in 218 B.C., the last mentioned—that with the Cimbri and the Teutones—took place in 101 B.C.

7. Cf. detailed notes for this section in Paul lejay, M. Annaei Lucani De bello civili; liber primus (Paris, I 89Û), pp. 30-32.

8. ”It was Lucan’s sense of irony as much as of history that made him endow Caesar with the effrontery of invoking the religious heritage which, along with the lives of her citizens and her w a lls and b u ild in g s C icero had p ic tu re d th e p a tr i a communis as entrusting to the conscript fathers of the threatened republic.” (Getty, "Lucan and Caesar’s Crossing," p. 7U).

9. Lucan, with the poet’s understanding of universal truths as opposed to the historian’s analysis of particular events (r

melancholy Parisians, the camera focuses upon one unidentified man, his face contorted in grief and weeping as he watches the spit-and-polish SS troops march into his city. The text for that silent newsfilm could be Lucan's account of Ariminum.

10. Cf. Wilhelm H etg er, "Kampf und Tod in Lucans P h a r s a lia ," in W. Rutz (ed.) Lucan (VJege der Forschung, 235), Darmstadt, 1970, pp. i;23-U3oj and I-l. Fuhrmann, "Die Punktion grausiger und ekelhafter Motive in der lateinischen Dichtung," Poetik und Hermeneutik III; Der nicht mehr schonen Kunste Grenzphtunomene des Aesthet,ischen (ed. ) H, R. Jauss (Munich, 'l9ooj, pp. 52-57. Massilia is also discussed in Ilona Opelt, "Die Seeschlacht vor M assilia bei Lucan," Hermes 85 (1957): Ii35-lw5î and in Robert J. Rowland, "The Significance of M assilia in Lucan," Hermes 97 (1969): 201-208. Opelt says in the conclusion to her article, at p. hhSi

Lucan wollte Massilia wegen seiner fides, virtus und gravitas ein Denkmal setzen, weil die Stadt es gewagt hatte, sich dem Lauf des Schicksals entgegenzustellen, und ihr das Recht ' mehr gait als schicksalstrachtige Macht ..."

Rowland agrees with Opelt's statement and proposes a further dimension to her analysis of the scene in his article, a t p . 20h:

"... the entire episode is integraHsLy linked to the major theme of Lucan's epic . . . Massilia is, in fact, paradigmatic of Rome, and . . . M assilia's sufferings and fate are analagous of Rome's."

He includes the follo:fing verbal parallels between Lucan's description of Rome and the Massilia episode to establish the connection between the two:

1 . 186 —— 3» 298 1 . 1 8 3 3» 299 3 . 3 0 1 3 . 172

This dissertsEfcion suggests that the paradigmatic nature of the M assilia episode extends beyond this one episode and links the e n ti r e group of episodes which are here collected for study.

11. causas = "principles," Haskins, Pharsalia, note to line 303» P» 92. 135

12. "That the Massilians are termed Phocians served to Identify them with the Rom;ms because their ancestors too were exiles from their original home, having transported exustae Phocidos arces and having safely founded a new city on a foriegn shore—to which fides alone gives glory ( 3 . 339- 3li2)." (Getty, "Lucan and Caesar's Grossing," p. 205).

13. Oliver C. Phillips, "Lucan's Grove," GPh 63 ( I 969): 299-300. See also VJemer Rutz, "Studien zur Kompositionskunst und zur epischen Technik Lucans," (Ph.D. dissertation, Kiel, 1950), p . 175.

111. Cf. 1. 114t-lU5:

sed nescia uirtus stare loco.

2. 656-657:

sed Caesar in omnia praeceps, n il actum credens cum quid superesset agendum.

5 . Ii09-Ul0;

turpe duci uisum rapiendi tempora belli in segnes exisse moras . , .

Note too the contrast between Caesar and Pompey in the similes o f Book One:

1 . 135-11:3: Pompey lik e n e d to th e a n c ie n t oak. 1 . 151 - 157 : Caesar likened to the lightning. 1. 205-212; Caesar likened to a lion. 1 . 229- 230: Caesar's course likened to that of a bullet and an arrow . 1. 293-295: Caesar likened to a racehorse.

Cf. Ahl, Lucan, p. 199.

15 . Getty, "Lucan and Caesar's Crossing," p. 205.

16. Of. Morford, "Aspects of Lucan’s Rhetoric," p. 55-56.

17. Ahl, Lucan, p. 173, p. 183. 136

18. Commenta B em en sia, p . 2U9:

quoniam iuxta felices aclulatio est, iuxta miseros ainor.

19. Ahl, Lucan, pp. 17W7S.

20. "This line is probably spurious and is omitted in many MSS. and the earlier editions." (H askins, P h a r sa lia , n o te to l in e 121;, p . 275).

21. Lucan has altered historical fact for the sake of poetic drama,

"It is part of Lucan's customary technique of telescoping events in such a way as to secure the greatest possible draiaatic effect. For example, when Pompey fled from Larisa after the battle of Pharsalia, he called first at Amphipolis, then at Lesbos, where Cornelia had taken refuge. Rubicon like Lesbos, offered scope for rhetorical poetry; Ravenna, like Amphipolis, did not," (0, A, W, Dilke, "Lucan's Political Views and the Caesars," in Greek and Latin Studies, Classical Literature I, . D, R, Dudley (ed,), London, n,d,, p, 65).

22. Of, 1, 160-182; 5, 381-392. THE CATALOGUE OF FORGES

A. CAESARIAN: 1. 392-1^6$

B. POMPEIAIÎ; 2. 63^-6k9 3. 169-297 8.. 202-2li3

These four passages are treated as a unit and are included in the scope of this discussion of civil life even though the events described do not occur within the setting of some specified city involved in the conflict between Pompey and Caesar, nor do they seem, at first, to be more than a description of m ilitary logistics and troop movementsJ

The picture that Lucan paints for us is, on the one hand, that of Caesar, a citizen completely uncontrolled by the constitution, assembling what is in reality his ovm personal army of Roman c it i z e n s , to march a g a in s t Rome.- On th e o th e r hand,

Pompey, a citizen controlled by the constitution (as shown in the

scene at Epirus, at 5» 1ii-l5 and Wt-i:9), assembles an army of foreign client-states that owe loyalty to him. The variety of peoples that make up Pompey’s allies illustrates again the widespread

effects of Rome's civil upheaval—this struggle involves the world.

The aspect of personal loyalty, which makes the armies of each

"Caesar’s men" and "Pompey’s men," destructive of political order.

137 1# is implied in these scenes but will be made clear in the two mutiny scenes treated below.

In the episode of the Caesarian mutiny, Caesar's retort to the demands of his restless men, at 5* 319-361;, is based on the theory that his soldiers are breaking faith with him. The dis­ pirited Pompeians, under the command of Cato after Pompey's death, give as their reasons for withdrawal

nos . . . Pompeii duxit in arma non belli ciuilis amor, partesque fauore feciraus. ille iacet quem paci praetulit orbis, causaque nostra perit.

9 . 227-230

Some basic sim ilarities and differences between these two

scenes must be noted at the outset. Each is a part of the tradition

of epic composition, reaching back to Homeric poetry, that demands

that a catalogue of some sort be included.^ lucan presents his

reader with two such catalogues, intended to balance each other,

and containing several significant verbal echoes of each other to

indicate that the poet intends his reader to compare and contrast

th e two.

The Caesarian passage retails the places in Europe from

which Caesar recalls his men to join his ranks for the imminent

march to war. The major Pompeian passage (3. 169-297) lists those

cities of Europe and Asia Minor that are allied to Pompey*s cause

and are to be rallied to his support. The two complementary Pompeian 139 passages detail Pompey's reliance on foreign nations to help him in prosecuting the war with Caesar. In the first of these (2, 63I -

6ii9), Pompey, having abandoned Italy and retired to Brundisium, instructs his son Gnaeus to make a circuit of the East and stir up his dependents and clients to join the struggle. In the second

(8. 202-2ii3)j Pompey, now after the defeat at Pharsalia, instructs his client-king Deiotarus to make a similar circuit of the East and try to arouse some interest in aiding in recovery after the d e fe a t. Pompey h ere makes th e d e v a sta tin g su g g estio n th a t th e

Parthians be asked for assistance in this crisis.

The in itial and significant difference between the

Caesarian and Pompeian narratives is to be noticed immediately:

Caesar is recalling his men, Roman soldiers, already in service to him from Europe; Pompey i s r e c r u itin g peoples a ll i e d to him

through client-patron relationships. The difference may be subtle, but it is important dramatically. Caesar, the general officer,

commands h is men and they obey him. Pompey’ s a ll i e d fo rc e s r e s t

on the uneasy basis of client-patron relationship. Caesar seems

to have the advantage from the outset; and he,is presented dramatically

as the evil force about to turn his conquerors of the world into

conquerors of Rome.

The political atmosphere of the Pompeian passage is easily

perceived: Pompey's recruiting of allies is not a matter of re­

assigning legions from one garrison station to another, but a matter

o f p o l i t i c s —b oth between Pompey and h is c li e n ts , and ( in th e case of lUo

8. 200-2i|3) between Pompey and his colleagues and fellow officers.

The Caesarian passage follows imraediately upon the episode designated Caesar Politicus (1. 292-391), and ostensibly

shows Caesar gathering his armies together for the push against

Rome. In addition to the military description of Caesar's army,

Lucan has given an additional, and here more important, facet to

this passage. In each instance where Lucan denotes the station

of one of Caesar's contingents that w ill now be recalled from

garrison duty, the poet emphasizes that this is really a liberating

of those communities held under the watchful eye of the Roman

army,^ Now as the legions leave to join Caesar, the communities

of Europe are freed from the Roman yoke. They are free to

pursue their ovm political existence without the oppressive hand

of the Roman legions to interfere and restrict their freedom.

The peoples of Europe stand in contrast to what has happened at

Ariminum and M assilia, and what w ill eventually happen at Rome

(1 . 70-222, U66-522). We may compare

o male uicinis haec moenia condita Gallis, o tristi damnata loco, pax alta per omnes et tranquilla quies populos; nos praeda furentum primaque castra sumus. Melius, Fortune, dedisses orbe sub Eoo sedem gelidaque sub Arcto e rra n tis q u e domos L a tii quam c la u s tr a t u e r i .

1 . 2 h 8 -2 B 3 1W

uos quoque, qui fortes animas belloque perernptas laudibus in longum uates d ir a ittitis aeuom, pluriraa securi fudistis carinina, Bardi, 1. and K it h

et uos barbaricos ritus moremque sinistrum sacrorum, Druidae, positis repetistis ab armis. 1. aso-isi The yoke that barbarian nations wore has been removed from their necks now to descend upon Roman n ecks.

The Pompeian Catalogue of Forces is a listing of cities, beginning with those of Greece, then Asia Minor, and finally the

Near East, that join with Pompey against Caesar. This contrast between the two lists is dramatically significant: Caesar with­ draws his armies from the barbarian sectors of Europe—leaving them free of the Roman legions and the conqueror-tyrant whom they, serve— while Pompey gathe.s allies from cities of Greece and Asia Minor whose names represent a long-established tradition of civilization, wealth, power, and influence in the Mediterranean area. Lucan says that Pompey mouerat urbes (3. 170). The variety and widely scattered locations of the nations who follow Pompey is in great contrast to

Caesar's single source of personnel—his own army 1^2

non cum Mennoniis deducens a grain a reg n is Cyrus, et effusis numerato milite telis descendit Perses, fraternique ultor araoris aequora cum tantis percussit classibus, unuin tot reges habuere ducemj coiere nec umquam tarn uariae cultu gentes tarn dissona uolgi

3. 281-290

Note that, despite Lucan's evoking the images of Cyrus and

Agamemnon—both victorious generals—the atmosphere of dread and impending doom is underscored by

interea totum Magni fortuna per orbem secum casuras in proelia mouerat urbes.

169-170

acciperet felix ne non semel omnia Caesar uincendum pariter Pharsalia praestitit orbem.

296-297

In order to establish a relatively tight connection between these two passages and to impress that connection upon his reader's attention, Lucan has fashioned several verbal links between them.

In the Caesarian passage, the poet describes Caesar as summoning th e leg io n s under h is command from Europe

. . . ne quo languore moretur fortunam . . .

1 . 393-39U

As Pompey begins to p u t h is fo rc e s to g e th e r, a s im ila r re fe re n c e to fo rtu n e i s made

interea totum Magni fortune per orbem 3. 169 The contrast between the kinds of reinforcements being called together echo each other

. . . sparsas per Gallica rura cohortes euocat . . .

1. 39L-39S

secum casuras in proelia mouerat urbes 3. 170

Caesar, forceful, energetic, and totally in command of his own d e s tin y , "summons f o rth " h is le g io n s . Pompey, i r o n ic a lly , " in s p ire s " his followers—not to seize destiny and overcome it, but casuras in p r o e l i a .

Further emotional emphasis is laid upon the differences in Caesar's fortuna and the fate of Pompey and of the world in the ring-compositional construction of the two passages.^

At the beginning and at the end of the Caesarian passage,

Caesar's intentions are made clear by the poet

. . . et Roraam motis petit undique signis. 1. 395

, . . petitis Roraam Rhenique feroces deseritis ripas . . .

1 .

In the Pompeian passage, the play upon urbs and orbis, noticed

earlier in the first Roman episode of Book One, suggests the intimate

relationshio between (a) Rome and the world; and, (b) Rome and

Pompey in th e fac e o f C a esar's ag g ressio n

in te r e a totum Î-Iagni fo rtu n a per orbem secum casuras in proelia mouerat urbes.

3 . 1 6 9-170 Iliil

accip eret f e l i x ne non semel crania Caesar uincendura p a riter Pharsalia p r a e s titit orbem.

3. 296-297

The echo of the concluding lines of the two passages is also noteworthy

. .. et aperturn gentibus orbera 1.

uincendura pariter Pharsalia praestitit orbera 3. 297

These passages, then, serve not only as an imitation of the catalogue motif established as part of epic technique by Homer, but also dramatic and narrative purposes.

The first essential narrative purpose is to show the

"unyoking" of the cities and communities of Europe by Caesar's withdrawal of his legions; and the "yoking" of Rome by his use of

those legions to plunge Rome into civil war and impose his tyranny.

Second, Lucan places emphasis on Pompey's allies in Greece

and A sia M inor. Pompey seems, a t f i r s t g lan ce, to have u n lim ited

resources available to him. However, there is irony in Lucan's

picture of Pompey. He intends the reader to recall the symbol

he chose for Pompey at the beginning of the poem, at 1. 135-1^3.

At th a t p lac e Lucan compares Pompey to an aged—and now im potent—

oak t r e e

stat magni nominis umbra; qualis frugifero quercus sublimis in agro exuuias ueteres populi sacrataque gestans dona ducum. In the oak simile, ma^ni (l. 135) is clearly meant as a pun on

Pompey*s name, as pointed out by 0. S, Due; but here,' at 3* I 69,

the man behind the symbol appears. In both places the verb

cadere appears to establish a further link between the two ]

et quamuis primo nutet casura sub Euro, tot circum siluae firmo se robore tollant.

1. 1U1-1U2

interea totum Magni fortuna per orbem secum casuras in proelia mouerat urbes.

3. 169-170

Although so many v a rie d peoples f in d them selves in Pompey*s

train^—and Lucan* s suggestion is just that: that they find themselii'es

in his train—Pompey no longer has the pwer that he wielded in the

l a t e 60*s B.C. In those days, after an incredible six-month

campaign that destroyed the pirate menace, his victorious sweep

through Asia Minor and the Near East virtually redrew the map of

those areas and secured for Rome a huge new source of revenue.

Pompey, the man of the hour, could enforce his demands in Asia

Minor and in Rome. Now, in li9A 8,. he i s only magni nom inis umbra.

Finally, the play upon urbs and orbis gives added emphasis

to the connection between Rome’s fate and thee fate of the civilized

world that must now witness—and play a part in—Rome* s conflict

and political destruction. 11:6

NOTES

1. The Caesarian catalogue is analyzed in Liselotte Eckardt, "Exkurse und Ekphraseis bei Lucan,” (Ph.D. dissertation, Heidelburg, 1936), pp. 1-U.

2. Cf. Horn. D.. 2. U8I4-877 (The Catalogue of the Ships), 3. 162- 2ïih (Teichoskopia).

3 . At IjOlj. the Ruteni soluuntur because of the Roman legionaries' departure. So, at 1:63 (gau'det), 1:22 (gaudet), 1:1:1 (laetatus), 1(1:9 (securi). ■'•here is joy, happiness, and security because of the departure of Caesar's men.

1(. Of. Eckardt,"Exkurse und Ekphraseis," p. l:ff.

S, A similar variety was shown by Vergil in the description of the East offering homage to Augustus pictured on the shield of Aeneas, Aeneid 8. 731-739. CHAPTER V

A. THE EXPULSION OF THE TRIBUNES: 1. 261-291 ,

B. THE SENATE IN EXILE: 5. 7-6$; 8 . 2$8-ii5$

0. THE MUTINIES: CAESARIAN 5 . 237-380; POMPEIAN 9 . 215-293

This chapter, like Chapters IV and VI, w ill consider a set of scenes included under the term "civic" whose dramatic content is not a specified city and are linked together in several ways.

The mutiny of Caesar's soldiers in Book Five is balanced by th e m utiny among th e rem nants o f Pompey's fo rc e s now under th e command of Cato after Pompey's murder in Egypt, A momentary lull in the campaigning emboldens the men to demand a release from service from Caesar, and Lucan speculates on their motives

. , . manus satiatae sanguine tandem destituere ducera: seu raaesto classica paulum intermissa sono claususque et frigidus ensis expulerat belli furias: seu praemia miles dum maiora p etit daranat causamque ducemque, et scelere imbutos etiam nunc uenditat enses.

5 . 21:3-218

The Pompeians see an end of the war effort not only because of the defeat at Pharsalia, but also, and the decisive factor, because of Pompey's death

fremit interea discordia uolgi: castrorum bellique piget post funera Magni:

9 . 217-218 1ii7 118

Pompeio sc élus est belluin ciuile perempto, quo fuerat uiuente fides.

9 . 2U8-2U9

In the same way, the two scenes devoted to the Senate, now forced to sit in exile, in Books Five and Eight, balance each other.

Just as the Caesarian mutiny takes place before the battle of

Pharsalia and is balanced by the Pompeian mutiny after the battle, so the first Senate in Exile episode shows the reader the conditions among the Pompeians before the battle, and the second episode gives the reader a vivid picture of conditions.after the defeat.

The first scene in this group, the Expulsion, of the Tribunes, is introductory to the other four; for in it Caesar, as he starts his progress toward Rome, begins to draw to himself segments of the

Republican regime—in the person of Curio and the other tribunes who accompany him to Caesar's camp.^ Here the government of Rome begins its course toward disintegration.^

expulit ancipiti discordes urbe tribunes uicto iure minax iactatis curia Gracchis.

1 . 266-267 A. The E?:pulsion o f the T ribunes; 1 . 261-291

Of the two extended passages involving Curio (1. 261f. and

U. ^8Lff)? the greatest critical attention has been paid to Curio's campaign in Africa and his defeat at the hands of Juba in Book

Four.^ Despite the great importance of the African campaign and defeat, and Lucan's clear interest in that episode, the significance of his conversation with Caesar in Book One ought not be overlooked.

Lucan follows the account of Caesar himself^ as he constructs the chronology of Caesar's progress against Rome. He places Caesar's

crossing of the Rubicon at 1. 201&-20S (inde moras soluit belli

tumidumque per atnnem / signa tu lit propere), followed by the invasion

of Ariminum (1. 231-261). It is at this point that the tribunes

are driven from the city by the Senate (266-26?).

Curio takes it upon himself to dispel any hesitancy on

Caesar's part

utque ducem uarias uoluentem pectore curas co n sp ex itj

272-273

and his words work to good effect

. . . et ipsi in bellum prono tantum tamen addidit irae accenditque ducem . . .

291-293

1i»9 Igo

Historically, the Senate’s heated debate over disarmament of Caesar issued in a b ill proposed by Metellus Scipio declaring

Caesar a p u b lic enemy u n less he l a i d do;^n h is arm s. The b i l l was vetoed by j\ntony and the senatus consul turn ultimum was passed on

January 7, h9 B.C. The Senate had already advised Antony and

Quintus Cassius to leave the Senate, and they proceeded to Caesar's

camp situated between Ravenna and Ariminum. Caesar then began his move from Ravenna to Ariminum, crossing the Rubicon on his march,

on January 10 or 11, Lucan's placing of the arrival of the

tribunes and Cui-io after the invasion of Ariminum and the crossing

of the Rubicon gives added emphasis to this picture of Caesar as

the relentless aggressor against Rome and the world. He ignores

the fact that Caesar himself was, in reality, not eager to force

the issue to war.

The proposals of Curio were calculated to vTin senatorial approval of a peaceful compromise, for which the pro­ consul, of course, would gain the credit. But the Pompeians could not afford a reconciliation in which they would be reduced to the second rank. The letters of Cicero in December $0 expose the attitudes of the two sides. Caesar hoped for negotiations and a settlement. Avoidance of war . . . could only have been to his advantage.7

Following the historical sequence of events and allowing Caesar to

hesitate would have diluted the impression of Caesar's aggression

and taken much of the point out of the similes the poet uses to

describe him; the lightning (1. 151-157), the Libyan lion

(1. 205-212), the missile and the arrow (1, 229-230). Further, 151

Lucan develops the character of the Senate at Rome. He tells his rea d e r how Curio and h is a s so c ia te s come to be a t C a e sa r's camp

expulit ancipiti discordes urbe tribunos uicto iure minax iactatis curia Gracchis.

266-267

The allusion to the Gracchan troubles of 133 and 121 B.C.

establishes a link between the Senate of the previous century and

the Senate of Caesar's day; in both instances the Senatorial

authority and prestige was under pressure and the very foundation

of the Republican regime under attack. The victory of the Senate

over the "radical" faction in 133 B.C. and again in .121 B.C. set

in motion forces that ultimately resulted in the troubles of ii9 to li 5

B.C.; and the methods used by the Senatorial party against the elder

Gracchus in 133 and again against his brother in 121 would not,

in li9, serve to maintain the supremacy of the Republican Senate.

Neither Tiberius nor Gaius Gracchus had had an army at his back to

implement his reform legislation: Caesar did. The Gracchi proposed

their legislation and reform bills through duly constituted political

machinery:^ Caesar did not. Lucan's comparison between the Gracchan

era and the Caesarian is carried further in the emphasis placed

on the office of the tribunate. The conflict between the Gracchi

and their Senatorial opposition was fought out with each side using

the tribunate as its weapon—both of the Gracchi held that office,

and the Senate manipulated their fellow tribunes against the brothers,

M. Octavius against Tiberius and M. Livius Drusus against Gaius.^ 152

Lucan ignores Antony and'Quintus Cassius in favor of Curio.

Lacan’s attitude toward Curio and his role in the conflict is abundantly clear

auda:{ u e n a li . . . Curio lin g u a 269 but there is an admixoure of disappointment over a man once imbued with the republican principles of a governraent of political balance and rational control^

uox quondam p o p u li lib e rta tem q u e tu e r i ausus et armatos plebi mixcere potentis.

270-271

Curio's speech to Caesar is an exhortation to hesitate no longer but move his armies swiftly forward, which w ill insure

Caesar’s success. His sentiments are couched in words that exhibit the skills of both the politician and the propagandist

dura uoce tuae potuere iuuari, . . . p a rte s . . . traxiraus imperium turn, cum mihi Rostra tenere ius erat et dubios in te transferre Quirites. sed postquam leges bello siluere coactae, pellimur e patriis laribus patimurque uolentes e x s iliu m .

273-279

The emphasis in this proem, however, is laid on the last line

tua nos faciet uictoria ciues 279

The restoration of Curio’s (and his colleagues') place at Rome,

and the profit he (and they) would derive from a Caesarian conquest

and victory, is termed by Curio a "restoration of citizenship." 153

The reversal of the entire Republican political order is contained in Curio’s short speech and is concentrated in that one line.

Curio rapidly and skillfully conceals his own interest in a Caesarian coup and turns to the advantages to be reaped by

C aesar

bellantern geminis tenuit te Gallia lustris pai's quota terrarum,

283-281 and at the same time carries the motif of the reversal of the right order of things one step farther an beyond the confines of the city o f Rome

facili si proelia pauca gesseris euentu tib i Roma subegerit orbem.

28U-285

partiri non potes orbem; solus habere potes.

290-291

Ironically, Curio will never profit from the advice that he gives to Caesar. Caesar will move forward to his inevitable success, but Curio, ". . . a small man in history and a minor figure in

Lucan's epic . . . a pathetic individual, marked for defeat not v icto ry ,w ill meet his end in Africa.

Such a small and venal man. Curio ironically finds himself in a situation beyond his powers: as Caesar’s legate he is part of the struggle going on between two giants for control of Rome and of iSü

the world; he lands in Africa, home of Rome’s first foreign enemy,

at the site of Scipio's first victory over Hannibal and the site

of a legendary struggle between Hercules and Antaeus. He defeats

Varus and his forces in battle, only to be beaten in turn by

Hannibal's descendant Juba.

The defeat of the Pompeian Varus and of the Caesarian

Curio occur in Book Four—the final book of the first tetrad.

Varus is a foreshadowing of what Pompey's fate w ill be at Pharsalia;

but Cruio represents the fate of many individuals of varying merit

caught up in the struggle. Lucan's final assessment of Curio,

at i;. 799-82U, is both an indictment of Curio and men like him

who hoped to profit from the war at the expense of the State and

the community, and a warning to those who would follow in his

footsteps and imitate his example

Libycas en nobile corpus pascit aues nullo contectus Curio busto. at tibi nos, quando non proderit ista silere a quibus omne aeui senium sua fama repellit, digna damus, iuuenis, meritae praeconia uitae. baud alium tanta ciuem tu lit indole Roma, aut cui plus leges deberent recta sequent!, perdita nunc urbi nocuerunt saecula, postquam ambitus et luxus et opum metuenda facultas transuerso mentem dubiam torrents tulerunt: momentumque f u i t m utatus Curio rerum Gallorum captus spoliis et Caesaris aruo.

h. 809-820 1^5

Although there is some high praise for the better Curio, the book ends with a return to the charge of greed and venality reminiscent of the indictment of Book One, at 158-102, and the final condemnation of Curio, echoing Sallust’s Jugurtha, as the broker who managed th e s a le o f Bome^ ^

ius licet in iugulos nostros sibi fecerit ense Sulla potens Mariusque ferox et Cinna cruentus Caesareaeque domus series: cui tanta potestas concessa est? emere omnes hie uendidit urbem.

821-82L B. The Senate in E x ile ; g. 7-6g; 8.

In these two passages Lucan gives the reader an insight into a segment of the civil conflict that shows up nowhere else.

In 7-65 and 8. the reader sees neither Caesarians nor Pompeians nor Catonians.^^ Neither are the actors here the

Romans o f Book One—-c e rta in ly n o t th o se o f $ . 381-U02. Lucan embodies in these two episodes the genuine spirit of Roman political order in the august body sitting in exile in Book Five, and taking counsel after defeat in Book Eight,

The contrast between this picture of the Senate at the beginning of Book Five (the first book of the second tetrad that contains the fatal and decisive battle of Pharsalia) and the picture of Rome cowering at Caesar's feet later on in the same book is note­ worthy. Lucan intends to show both the existence of sanity and rational order somewhere in the midst of the chaos of the

c i v i l war

peregrina ac sordida sedes Romanos c e p it p ro c e re s: secretaq u e rerum hospes in extemis audiuit curia tectis. nam quis castra uocet tot strictas iure secures tot fasces?

9=13 and, at the same time, to show the tragedy of the demise of that

156 157 rational order as Caesar moves forward

maerentia tecta Caesar habet uacuasque demis legesque silentis clausaque iustitio tristi fora, curia solos ilia uidet Patras plena quos urbe fugauit.

30-33

Lentulus, whose consulship is about to expire, voices the sentiments that Lucan expresses in the proem (9-1 ii)

. . . non qua tellure coacti, quamque procui tectis captae sedeamus ab urbis, cem ite: sed uestrae faciera cognoscite turbae: cunctasque iussuri priraum hoc decernite. Patres, quod regnis populisque liquet, nos esse senatum.

1 6 -22

He adduces an historical exemplum to give substance to his characterization of the Senate’s present status

Tarpeia sede perusta Gallorum facibus Veiosque habitante Caraillo i l l i c Roma f u i t . 15

27-29

His own estimate, plus the force of the exemplum, are summed up

non umquam perdidit ordo mutato sua iura solo.

29-30

In addition to establishing the legality and constitutionality of

the body in exile, there are two other matters set before the Senate.

The f i r s t i s th e confirm ation o f Pompey as th e le a d e r o f th e

Senatorial cause in the conflict with Caesar. Lentulus concludes 153 his address with the proposal to give official backing and support to Ptolemy

nostrum exhausto ius clauditur anno; uos, quorum fienm non est sensura potestas, consulite in medium. Patres, riagnumque iubete esse ducem.

Lh-h?

The mention of Pompey's name is hailed with enthusiasm by the assem bly^^

laeto nomen clamore senatus e x c ip it: e t Magno fatum p a tria e q u e suomque im p o sa it.

h7-h9

An ominous note is sounded in Magno fatum patriaeque suomque imposait that is sounded yet more strongly in the next section of this scene. The second order of business before the Senate is the conferring of rewards upon faithful followers of the Senatorial

cause. A short catalogue of cities and peoples who are recipients

of commendations or of decorations (i;5-6l) concludes with the f a t e f u l

pro tristia fata: et tibi, non fidae gentis dignissime regno, Fortunae, Ptolemaee, pudor crimenque deorum, cingere Pellaeo presses diademate crimes perm issum .

57-61

Lucan concludes his own comments on the Senate's action in three

depair-filled verses that not only insure the reader's sympathy

for the tragedy that has been set in motion by the senatorial 1^9 decree in favor of Ptolemy's claim to the Egyptian throne, but also provides a link for the second senatorial episode in Book Eight

donata est regia Lagi, accessit Magni iugulus: regnumque sorori ereptum est soceroque nefas.

62-61j ■

The assembly disperses and the political and constitutional

character of the Senate is transformed under the stress of the times

into something quite different

iam turba soluto arma petit coetus.

In the second picture of the Senate, following the defeat

o f P h a rsa lia , Lucan shows h is rea d e r th e same body o f men now try in g

to put together what pieces remain after the battle. The poet

maintains the characterization of the Senate of the earlier scene—the

authoritative and rational element in the midst of national.disaster.

In this scene it is really the character of Pompey that suffers.^^

By juxtaposing the essential weakness and fallib ility of the

individual—Pompey—and the essential solidity and firmness of the

Senate, the poet achieves a complex dramatic scene.

Lucan sets the stage by indicating that the Senate—true to

its decision in Book Five—follows after its defeated leader

sequitur pars magna senatus 18 ad profugum collecta ducem.

208-259 160

Pompey, in the background and silent at the meeting of the

Senate in Book Five, here, in Book Sight, is the first to address the assanbly at Syhedra. His speech begins with the empty courage of the defeated

comites bellique fugaeque, atque instar patriae, quamuis in litore nudo, in Cilicum terra, nullis circumdatus armis consultem rebusque nouis exordia quaerara, ingentes praestate animos: non omnis in aruis Emathiis cecidi, nec sic mea fata premuntur

262-267

He conjures up the name of Marius—as an historical exemnlum to

give some substance to his boast^^

an Libyeae Marium potuere ruinae erigere in fasces plenis et reddere fastis: me pressum leuiore manu Fotuna tenebit?

269-271

Lucan has prepared the reader for the invocation of Marius by

Pompey. Although Pompey fastens in his own mind on the superficial

picture of Marius as a once great man brought low only to rise to

success once again despite tremendous odds—which matches Pompey*s

own fortunes at this moment—the name of Marius sounds a much more

sinister note for Pompey*s listeners—and for Lucan * s readers.

The lengthy recollection of the horrors of the Marian era in Book

Two, at 68-232, describes what Pompey is unwittingly suggesting and

immediatley puts him out of sympathy with his hearers. He falls 161 back on past glories—which are empty now after Caesar's stunning v ic to r y —

sed me uel sola tueri fama potest rerum toto quas gessimus orbe, e t nomen quod mundus arnat.

271-276

The main topic of his address follows his own personal

self-encouragement. His purpose is to persuade the Senate to seek

reinforcements for his own decimated forces—which seems to give the

lie to his assertion of massive forces still available and waiting

to be called into service. I'he choices Pompey sees open ofr his

party are; Libya, Parthia, and Egypt (277). He correctly estimates

the character of two of these: Libya and Egypt. H^s argument against

Libya is the relationship—real or supposed—of Juba to Hannibal,

and Juba's open admiration for his ancestor and the letter's vic­

tories over Roman armies in the past. Pompey's estimate of Ptolemy

is as good as, and far more accurate than, that offered by Lentulus

in Book Five. He places no trust in Ptolemy's youth—Pompey

apparently appreciates the political situation in Egypt better than

do his colleagues.

But his final suggestion—that his party appeal to Parthia

for aid—earns him a lengthy and devastating refutation from

Lentulus (331-il53). %e accuracy of his estimate of Juba and Ptolemy

is lost in the ridiculousness of his attempt to persuade the

assembly to enlist the sympathies of Parthia in the Senatorial cause. 162

The combination of Pompey's earlier allusion to Marius and suggesting that his auditors take courage from his example, plus the argument in favor of Parthian aid, both suggest Pompey's own personal disintegration and serve to throw into high relief the stability and rationality of the Senate, in the midst of the crisis that has dramatically worsened because of the defeat.

To suggest an alliance vd.th Parthia and adduce the massacre of Crassus' army in support of his contention is bad enough in Roman eyes . . . But to propose a return to Rome in the style of Marius is even more dreadful. Not only would this rank Pompey with the great criminals of Roman history, it would put him on the opposite side of the political fence, in the number of the nopulares in whose steps Caesar is following . . . I p is surely no accident that his words "Roma, fave coeptis" at 9. 322 are a verbatim echo of what Caesar says to Patria as he crosses the Rubicon in 1. 200 . . . at least Caesar would not subjugate Rome with the troops of Rome's great enemy.

The judgment of the asembly is made clear even before Lentulus* lengthy reply

. . . murmure sentit consilium damnasse uiros.

327-328

Lentulus acts as spokeman and verbalizes what Pompey perceives

quos L en tu lu s omnes uirtutis stimulis et nobilitate dolendi p r a e c e s s it dignasque t u l i t modo consule u o ces.

328-330 163

He diagnoses Pompey's condition at the outset

siccine ïhessalicae mentem fregere ruinae?

...... solos tibi, Magne, reliquit Parthorum Fortuna pedes? quid, transfuge mundi, terrarum notos tractus caelumque perosus, aduersosque polos alienaque sidera quaeris, Chaldaeos culture focos et barbare sacra, Parthorum famulus?

331-339

The picture of Eastern luxury and debauchery that Lentulus evokes serves to place Pompey's suggestion of an alliance not only in the realm of political folly, but of immorality as well. The motif o f E astern im m orality—th a t would in e v ita b ly i n f e c t Romans f a l l in g under their control—is enough in itself to veto Pompey's 23 suggestion.

uicta est sententia Magni. LSS

Lentulus swings the vote toward Egypt

si regna times proiecta sub Austro infidumque lubara, petimus Pharon aruaque Lagi.

Wi2-Wi3

non plura locutus impulit hue animos.

hS3-hBh

However, Lentulus' own appreciation of the political reali­

ties of Alexandria leaves something to be desired. All that Lentulus

sees is (a) a boy-king, inexperienced and, therefore, naive 161; enough to be friendly to foreigners

innocua est aetas; nec iura fidemque respectumque deum ueteris speraueris aulae. nil pudet adsuetos sceptris; mitissijTia sors est regnorum sub rege nouo.

Iig0-li53

(b)a king who owes his present possession of the throne to

Pompey's efforts and who depended upon Pompey for the maintenance of that throne

sceptra puer Ptolemaeus habet tib i débita, Magne, tutelae commissa tuae.

I;li8-hli9

(c) But the most devastating of all—Lentulus judges Ptolemy to be

receptive because he has nothing to fear from Pompey—not because

of Pompey's concern for Ptolemy's welfare—but

q u is nom inis umbram h o rre a t?

Lli9-liS0

Suitably, if brutally, Lentulus has pointed out the vanity of Pompey's dreams of vengeance. He knows that though the idea of seeking aid from Parthia is horrendous, th e man who makes th e p ro p o sa l i s now to o in s i g n if i c a n t to take seriously . . . The initial image of Pompey as the ghost of a great name . . . (1. 13$), is recalled. But to Lentulus, no less than to the Parthian king, the name is no longer even great.2^

What Lentulus does not appreciate is the complicated web

of palace intrigue that surrounds the court of Alexandria. Lucan

gives his reader sufficient insight into the machinations of the 165

court satellites and their relationship to Ptolemy ZIII immediately following the interchange between Pompey and Lentulus (8. Ii72-5ii2)

to prepare the reader for what is to come and to heighten the

sympathy for Pompey who, despite the folly of his foreign policy,

read the Egyptian king aright and possessed a greater appreciation

for Egyptian treachery. Lentulus, unknowingly, has condemned

Pompey to Egypt and to d e a th . Pompey, s u b je c t to S e n a to ria l

authority, does not offer any objections to Lentulus' policy. COHCLUSIOIl

The purpose of these two vignettes of the Senate is to show the preservation of rational order in the midst of civil disorder and the irrationality of civil war.

■^he poet also intends to show the tragedy of the disintegration of that rational order within the context of Caesar’s devastating effect on the political life of Rome and his victory at Pharsalia.

In addition, these two episodes serve to further define the character of Pompey. He is seen indirectly in the first passage, and Lucan demonstrates the control the Senate exercises over him—non Magni partes sed Magnum in partibus esse (S. lU)—which stands in contrast to Caesar's lawlessness and his disregard for the political order of the State (utendum est iudice bello, 1. 227).

In the second passage, after his defeat, Pompey's character begins to crumble, and the weakness of the individual is clearly seen, "^he unwitting "condemnation to Egypt" by Lentulus is the final step of

Pompey's course, his fated end is at hand.

But, as suggested earlier, the cause vri.ll survive Pompey's death in the person of Cato, the ideal of citizenship and lover of the constitution. He will be able to take on the burden of leader­ ship because he does not possess the weaknesses that sometimes cloud

Pompey's vision of himself and of the cause that he was appointed to defend. 166 C. The M utinies;

Caesarian S. 237-380; Pompeian 9« 215-293

These two segments, each portraying a temporary disaffection among the troops of each side in the Civil War, are, like Chapter

IV (The Catalogues) above and Chapter VIII below, vehicles for the poet to portray civic (civilian) concepts and ideals within a m ilitary war-time context. Through comparison and contrast of these two scenes, the reader gains some important insights into the attitude of the poet toward his material. There are sufficient echoes and parallels between the two episodes, in addition to the nearly identical position of each within its own book and within the. tetrad in which it occurs, to suggest that the poet intends his reader to place these two episodes side by side.

The fundamental contrast between the dramatic settings of each scene—the Caesarian mutiny occurs before the battle of Pharsalia, and the Pompeian after the battle has been fought and lost, as well as after Pompey’s murder—provides the poet with an important dramatic opportunity. He is able (a) to sharpen his picture of

Caesar as the relentless aggressor unwilling to allow anything to

impede his progressj and, (b) to show the effect that Caesar and

his schemes have on those who associate themselves with him and

on those whom he leads. The reader can perceive the effects of the

167 168 war and the association with Caesar and his enterprise in the men p ic tu re d h e re . They are d if f e r e n t from th o se shora in Book Tvjo,

at 1)3-63. The indignant condemnation of the civil conflict of that

passage has eroded. By this time they have made a commitment to

Caesar and his goal and have followed him willingly.

There is a sim ilarity between Caesar's rebellious troops

and th e Romans o f Book F ive, 381-1)02. There, as shown above, th e

populace succumbs to Caesar’s force, unwillingly, but nevertheless,

they too are Caesar's creatures, just as the mutinous troops td.ll

be shown to b e.

In the Pompeian episode, Lucan’s interest focuses upon Cato

as the model citizen, soldier-commander, and statesman who takes up

the remnants of the exhausted and dying Republic. The actions of

both men and their effects on their respective follotfers—perverted

in the case of Caesar, the ideal in the case of Cato—are displayed

and defined by the poet in these two similar situations.

An outline of the two episodes here will be useful for the

following discussion:

A. MUTIM OF THE CABSARIAI^S; BOOK FIVS 237-21)2 Transition and Introduction 21)2-260 Lucan’s Commentary i 261- 29$ Speech of the Soldier 295-296 T ra n sitio n 297-299 Lucan’s Commentary i i 299-318 Lucan’ s Coriimentary i i i 319-361) Speech of Caesar^/ 361-373 Conclusion 169

B. MUTI?rr OF THE POMPEIAÎIS; BOOK IIINS 217-221 Transition and Introduction 222- 221» Speech of Cato 22L-226 T ra n sitio n 227-251 Speech of the Soldiers 251-255 T ra n s itio n pg 2 5 ^ # t3 Speech of Cato 283-292 Simile of the Bees 292-293 Conclusion •

The Caesarian episode opens with the retun of Caesar from

Spain. He has been prosecuting the war there since his departure from Hassilia at 3. I»53j where the reader has his last glimpse o f him

interea domitis Caesar remeabat Hiberis uictrices aquilas alium laturus in orbem,

237-238

Lucan introduces a note of suspense by suggesting that Caesar's

successful campaign in the Spanish theater of operations—as well

a s the whole war effort—hangs in the balance as he faces the

temprary disaffection of his troops

cum prope fatorum tantos per prospéra cursus auertere dei. nullo nam Marte subactus intra castrorum timuit tentoria duetor perdere successus scelerum.

239-2U2

Lucan presents two sets of reasons for the troops' mutiny;

those that Lucan himself ascribes to them; and those of.the soldiers

themselves, which he puts in the mouth of an unnamed spokesman from

Caesar's camp. Here again, Lucan lays the groundwork for the 170 reader's reaction to Caesar's men. Unlike the scene in Book Kine

(the Pompeian mutiny), Lucan does not allow the reader to sympathize with the soldiers' complaints

cum paene f id e le s per tot bella menus satiatae sanguine tandem destituere ducern: seu maesta classica paulum intermissa sono claususque et frigidus ensis expulerat belli furias;

seu praemia miles dum maiora p e tit damnat causamque ducemque, et scelere imbutos etiam nunc uenditat enses.

2U2-2ii6, 2li6-2ii8

The poet suggests also that the mutinous legion confronting

Caesar is a warning for him

haud magis expertus discrimine Caesar in ullo est q[uam non e stabili tremulo sed culmine cuncta despiceret, staretque super titubantia fultus. 29

219-291

He has already received a sim ilar warning—which he chose to dis­

regard—from the supernatural world, in the challenge of Roma at

the Rubicon in Book One. Book Five contains yet another warning—

from the natural world—in the storm off the coast of Epirus, at

961- 677. This too, Caesar will disregard. The purpose of this

portion of Lucan's commentary is to emphasize the character of Caesar

in o rd er to show how i t a f f e c ts and i s m irro red in th e men whom he

leads. The kind of lessons Caesar learns from this experience is not

really the one intended—although it is definitely something useful

for him when dealing with his armies in the future

tot raptis truncus manibus gladioque relictus paene suo . . . scit non esse ducis strictos sed m ilitis enses. 292-291; 171

Lucan turns then to the gathering crowd of discontented soldiers as they mill about. He adduces three details that serve to give the reader the dramatic setting for the scene and the dialogue to follow

non pauidum iam murmur erat nec pectore tectb ira latens:

nam quae d u b ias c o n s trin g e re m entes causa solet, dum quisque paust quibus ipse timore est, seque putat solum regnorum iniusta grauari, haud retinet.

2^6-259

quippe ipsa metus exsoluerat audax turba suos.

2^9-260

Lucan's commentary concludes with a sententia of universal v a lid ity ^ ®

quidquid multis peccatur inultum est. 260

Lucan then allows the soldiers to speak for themselves through their unidentified spokesman. His speech is divided into

three general parts: Complaints (261-27U); Demands (27^-28]);

Conclusion (23ii-295).

The following more detailed comparison of the two speeches

shows the parallels. 172

Complaints Justifications 5. 261-276 9. 227-230 Demands Demands 23O—231 277 233 277-279 23h 279-282 23U-235 282-283 235-236

28i;-295 236- 2W , 2 k U 2 h h 2LÜ-252

The Caesarian's opening words at first give the impression

liceat discedere, Caesar, a rabie scelerum.

261-262

But the speaker soon forgets whatever words he may have prepared condemning Caesar's motives on ethical grounds. His "condemnation" of Caesar is based solely on his weariness of being driven from one campaign to another without much profit—or without the profit that he thinks might be available but unshared by Caesar

quaeris terraque marique his ferrum iugulis animasque effundere uiles quolibet hoste paras: partem tibi Gallia nostri eripuit: partem . . . Hispania . . . pars iacet Hesperia: totoque exercitus orbe te uincente périt, terris fudisse cruorem quid iuuat Arctois Rhodano Rhenoque subactis?

quos hominum u e l quos l i c u i t s p o lia re deorum? imus in orane nefas manibus ferroque nocentes, paupertate pii.

262-273 173

He gives vent to his weariness of long service to Caesar's cause

iam respice canos inualidasque manus et inanes cerne lacertos. usus abit uitae; bellis consumpsimus aeuom,

27U-276

The corresponding speech of Tarcondimotus, in reply to

Cato's challenge to the retiring soldiers, is of a much different

tone. He and his fellows have analyzed their present position—after

a severe d e fe a t in th e f i e l d , a f t e r th e death o f Pompey—and

there seems but one logical path to follow

. . . d u x it in arma non belli ciuilis amor, partesque fauore fecimus. ille iacet quern paci praetulit orbis, causaque nostra perit.

9 . 227-230

The a n a ly sis i s v ery s u p e r f ic ia l (b u t would have p leased Pompey

He does not yet know that Pompey's cause—that is, that part of

Pompey th a t recognized th e a u th o r ity o f th e Senate and bowed to

it—now rests on the shoulders of Cato who w ill tranform the

Republican cause and give it part of his own Republican virtus.

hinc super Emathiae campos ...... ac sparsas uolitauit (sc. Pompeii umbra) in aequore c la s s e s, et scelerum uindex in sancti pectore Bruti sedit, et inuicti posuit se mente Catonis. 9. lS-18 17U

To return to the Caesarian mutiny, in the section at

5 . 277- 283, Caesar’s man presents his and his fellows’ demands.

At first glance, it seems to be a soldier’s plea with which one might sympathize

ad mortem dimitte senes. en improba uota: non duro l i c e a t m o rie n tia c a e sp ite membra ponere, non anima glaebam fugiente ferire, atque oculos morti clausuram quaerere dextram, coniugis illabi lacrim is, unique paratum scire rogum, liceat morbis finire senectam; sit praeter gladios aliquod sub Caesare fatum.

277-283

A comparison with the corresponding section of the argument of

Tarcondimotus shows, however, some differences which give more

justification to the disgruntled Pompeians and make the Caesarians

fit more closely into Lucan’s introductory estimate of them.

The Pompeians are war-weary too—and their leader is dead.

Their first thought, however, is not of themselves and of their

personal discomforts; but, rather

patrios perraitte penates desertamque domum dulcesque reuisere natos,

9 . 230-231

penates, domum, and natos, the fundamental elements of domestic

and civil existence. There is, really, no corresponding part in the

Caesarian's speech. The closest he will come is a reference to a

wife—but it is of a piece with the rest of his speech, personal

and s e l f i s h . 33 175

The conclusions of the speeches point to the most significant difference between the two camps. In the case of the Caesarians, the spokesman's words confirm Lucan's in itia l commentary. Ihe soldier shows that he is indeed well aware of the implications of Caesar's schemes

quid uelut ignares ad quae pertenta paremur spe trahis? usque adeo soli ciuilibus armis nescimus cuius sceleris sit maxima m e r c e s ? 3 h

The reader gets an insight into his m ilitary conduct

n il actum est bellis si nondum comperit istas omnia posse manus;

287-288 and the lack of control over the m ilitary forces that are ranged behind Caesar

nec fas nec uincula iuris hoc audere uetant,

288-289 which mirrors Caesar's own words at the Rubicon at 1. 225: . . . hie pacem temerataque iura relinquo. The intimate link between Caesar

and h is men—p a rtn e rs in crim e—i s summed up by th e spokesm an's

own sententia which recalls Lucan's in the introduction

Rheni mihi Caesar in undis dux erat, hie socius. facinus quos inquinat aequat.

289-290

The conclusion to Tarcondimotus' speech is again of a

different tone, and it is the logical conclusion of his earlier 176. analysis of the political realities

non barbara uictos regna m anent: non Armenium m ihi saeua m ijiatur_- aut Scythicum Fortnna ingum: sub iura togati ^ c iu is eo.

9 . 236-239

The last point Tarcondimotus makes sums up the political situation as he views it and recognizes Caesar's preeminent position resulting from his victory. It also hints at Caesar's ovm claim to an attribute that he arrogated to himself—and that he himself w ill mention at 9. 1066-168—dementia

fortuna cuncta tenentur Caesaris: Saathium sparsit uictoria ferrum. clausa fides raiseris, et toto solus in orbe est qui uelit ac possit uictis praestare salutem.^"

The speeches of the two leaders in reply to the rebellion of their troops maintain the contrast established in the soldiers'

speeches. Lucan's Caesar regards his troops' disaffection not so much as an offense against m ilitary discipline and law—although

the ringleaders w ill suffer the punishment of military justice—

but more as a challenge to his own abilities to hold his enterprise

together, something sent him by Fortuna. to test once more his daring

and prove his s k i l l . H e rushes to meet his men and challenge them,

not after they have had time to cool down, but while their anger

is at its peak

quern non i l l e ducern p o tu it t e r r e r e tum ultus? fata sed in praeceps solitus demittere Caesar fortunamque suam per summa pericula gaudens exercera uenit. 5 . 3OO-303 177

The linking of the two words that Caesar used at the Rubicon—fatum and fortuna—again describes the guiding principles of his life and actions.

Caesar turns the tables on his men by asserting that he needs them not at all—-if some leave his camp, there will be better and braver men to fill their place—

Caesaris an cursus uestrae sentire putatis damnum posse fugae? ueluti si cincta minentur fluinina quos mis cent pelago subducere fontes, non magis ablatis umquam descenderet aequor, quam nunc c r e s c it , a q u is,

335-339

The impression that he does them a favor by allowing them in his train is furthered by his exhortation to join Pompey's forces if they must desert his—their use to him is not great and they w ill bring their weakness to Pompey's army

q u isq u is mea sig n a r e l i n q u it , nec Pompeianis tradit sua partibus arma, hic mon quam uolt esse meus, sunt ista profecto curae castra dels, qui me committere tantis non nisi mutate uoluerunt m ilite bellis.

3Ü9-353

The disgust Caesar holds for his men's insurrection is brought to

a climax in his addressing them as Quirites—civilians—

discedite castris, tradite nostra uiris ignaui signa Quirites.

357-358

The essence of Caesar's address hangs on a claim of personal

service and loyalty to the person of Caesar himself. They are in 178 service to his cause, to his fortune and to his success; iam certe m ihi b e lla Reran (357)»

The exhortation of Cato to Tarcondimotus and his followers is far different. The challenge is the same—but it lacks the call to adherence to an individual and a loyalty to a personal cause

ergo pari uoto gessisti bella, iuuentus, tu quoque pro dominis, et Pompeiana fu isti, non Romana manus?

9 . 2S6-2S8

Rather, Cato represents not the individual cause that is Caesar’s— and was, for that matter, Pompey’s too—but the cause of the State,

Cato does not look for a position of pow

nunc patriae iugulos ensesque negatis, cum prope libertas?

26U-265

o famuli turpes, domini post fata prioris itis ad heredem. cum non maiora mereri quam uitam ueniamque l ib e t ?

27 1-276

The aftermath of each leader’s speech is in sharp contrast,

C aesar q u e lls th e m utiny among h is men by means o f th e h arsh

exactions of military justice

tarn diro foederis ictu parta quies poenaque redit poacata iuuentus.

g . 3 7 2 -3 7 3 179

Cato, by his personal discipline and example, as well as the cogency of his words, restores the proper attitude and encourages endurance among h is men

sic uoce Catonis ko inculcata uiris iusti patientia Hartis.

9 . 292-293

Cato’s discipline and uirtus will be further highlighted in the subsequent parts of Book Nine as he makes his way through

the desert with his men. His example will continue to be the

inspiring force that keeps them in line and encourages them to

continue on.

. Caesar exerts no such moral force on his men—the executions

of the ringleaders of the insurrection are what make them fall

into line behind Caesar's leadership.The lack of civil control

of Caesar's men—the personal loyalty that he exacts is in contrast

with the moral authority and the example of civic uirtus that Cato

exerts over the remnants of the dispirited'Republican forces. 180

NOTES

1. For an analysis of the character of Curio see Ahl, Lucan 3 pp. 88- 103, and pp. 112-115; Helga Nehrkorn, "Die Darstellung und Funktion der Nebencharaktere in Lucans Bellum civile," (Ph.D. dissertation, Johns Hopkins Univerisity, 1960)j pp. 109- 120; and Gruen, The Last Generation, pp. k'k9-h91 •

2. The disintegration, of course, began long before .Curio and h is a s so c ia te s made t h e i r way to C a e sa r's cai:ip. But f o r Lucan’s picture of the events of ii9 B.C., this is the first direct contact between the disaffected elements of Rome and Caesar's mobilization against the city. Cf. Gruen, The Last Generation, pp. ^83-490.

3 . He is also mentioned at 3. 59-63, where he goes to Sicily, as Caesar’s legate, to secure the grain supply, and at 5 . 39-iiO, where Lentulus reports his death in the African campaign to the Senate at Epirus.

1|. "Der Feldzug des Curio in Afrika im vierten Buche des Epos 1st von diesen Episoden (i.e. Curio, Vulteius, and Scaeva) die wichtigste und ausgedehnteste." (Nehrkorn, "Nebencharaktere," p. 109). Cf. Ahl, Lucan, pp. 88- 89, and pp. 112-115-

5 . Cf. R. J. Getty, De belle civili, liber I, Introduction, pp. xxix-xxxvii.

6. Gruen, The Last Generation, pp. Ii89-U90, especially p. 1^90 w ith n o te lIiO f o r a n c ie n t so u rces. H. H. Scullard, Gracchi to Hero, p. 126.

7. Gruen, The Last Generation, p. U 87.

8 . H. H. S c u lla rd , G racchi to Nero, pp. 39~hO.

9. Ibid., p. 27, and pp. 36-37.

10. A similar contrast is to be observed in Lucan’s juxtaposition of Metellus, guardian of the Treasury in the Temple of Saturn and the earlier heroic Metellus Creticus, at 3- 112- 163. The charge of venality that is laid against Curio in . t h i s scene and a t U. 82I4. (emere omnes, hie uendidit urbem) is also a part of the Metellus episode. 181

11. Cf. Lucan's echo of these words at 1. 125-126:

nec queraquam iam f e r r e p o te s t Gaesarue priorem Pompeiusue parem.

and Caesar's at 9* 1076-1078:

frustra ciuilibus armis miscuimus gentes, si qua est hoc orbe potestas altera quam Caesar, si tellus ulla duorum est.

12. Ahl, Lucan, p. 93.

13. Ibid., p. 90.

1L. docuit populos uenerabilis ordo non Magni partes sed Magnum in partibus esse.

5 . 13-1 a

15 . These words w ill be echoed by Pompey later at 6. 131-133 during his brief stop at Mytilene:

. . . tenuit nostros hac obside Lesbos a d fe c tu s: h ie sa c ra domus cariq u e p e n a te s, hie mihi Roma fu it.

The significant difference between Lentulus' phrase and its echo from Pompey i s th e key to Lucan’ s c h a ra c te r iz a tio n of Pompey in the last half of the poem. Lentulus is describing one of the fundamental constitutional principles of government; the authority of the executive does not derive from its physical location, but from the grant of imperium by the c o n s titu tio n a l p ro ce ss. Pompey c a lls M ytilene "h is Rome" (hie mihi Roma fu it) because Cornelia resided there. Lucan is c a re f u lly p rep arin g h is rea d e r f o r th e Pompey o f 8 . 258-i).55.

16. Once again th e p lay on th e word nomen i n connection w ith Pompey. Lucan is recalling for the reader the stat magni nominis umbra of the oak simile at 1. 135 - 1^3.

17. "How that his luck is past Pompey is beginning to disintegrate. Although his confidence is restored somewhat after his reunion with Cornelia on Lesbos, it leads only to his most astonishing act of madness in the Pharsalia." (Ahl, Lucan, pp. I 69-I 70), 18. "Es v/aren sechzlg!" (Wolfgang Tasler, Die Reden in Lucans Pharsalia, Bonn, 1972, p. 13U).

19. For a rhetorical analysis of Pompey’s speech see Tasler, Reden, pp. 133-119.

20. Of, Ahl, Lucan, pp. 171-172. Note also the description of the Marian era at 2. 67-233.

21. The word nomen in Pompey’s mouth r e c a l ls th e oak sim ile of Book One.

22. Ahl, Lucan, pp. 171-172.

23. Much of Lentulus’ prejudice against the East and his argument against any contact vath the orient is influenced by Ovid’s t a l e o f Tereus and Philom ela (Met. 6 . lt2U-67ii.) which became a paradigm of the lust and cruelty of the barbarian east. Of. H. T. Bruere, "Lucan’s Cornelia," CPh 1:6 (1951 ): 221-236.

2li. Ahl, Lucan, p. 173.

25. I b id .

26. 9. 19-30. See also 9. 256-283.

27. Rhetorical analysis in Tasler, Reden, pp. l:0-i:5.

28. Ibid., pp. 177-181:.

29. "Never in any crisis did Caesar more surely experience how he looked dovm on all the world from no secure position, but with the height trembling beneath his feet, while he stood supported upon a rocking platform." (H askins, P h a rsa lia , n o te to l in e 21:9, p . 161:),

30. The atmosphere in this introductory to the soldier’s complaints recalls that of Vergil’s siiile at Aeneid 1. 157-163. Lucan, however, concludes with the very reverse of Vergil's calm resolution of his scene. The final sententia is the exact opposite of Vergil’s man of political wisdom and civic virtue, virum gravem pietate et m eritis, able to guide the unruly mob.

31. Cf. the same technique in the Treasury scene and Metellus at 3 . 123-11:0. 183

32. Ahl, Lucan, pp. 170-171.

33. Also suggested by the alternation of the personal pronoun from singular to plural: nostri ( 26ii), mihi (269), cepimus ( 270), consumpsjjims (276), mihi ( 289). The speaker forgets from time to time that he speaks for the group—his own personal complaints remain uppermost in his mind.

3ii. Recall 2J48 ;

et scelere imbutos etiam nunc uenditat enses.

35 . Again the use of iura, which appears also below in his last words :

si publica iura, si semper sequeris patriam, Cato, signa petamus, Romanus quae consul h a b e t.

2L9-2S1

36. Of. 9. 1067: uictis donare salutem.

37. So, too, the storm later in Book Five—and Amyclas’ warnings— are a challenge and a spur to action.

38. The use of fatum and fortuna is even more emphatic in the storm scene. Fatum appears four times in reference to Caesar and fortuna eight times, all illustrative of his complete confidence in his om personal fortuna guiding him to his own personal fatum.

39. Ahl, Lucan, p. 2^5.

1|0, The temerataque iura relinquo of Caesar becomes the iusti . . . M a rti5 o f Cato. hi. In contrast to Caesar’s punishment of his men’s disloyalty is h is tre a tm e n t of Dom itius in Book Two, a t 5 0 9 - 5 1 In b o th these scenes Lucan shows his reader Caesar’s ability to manipulate others. He quells his mutinous soldiers by a swift and forceful counterattack of his own and bullies them back into line by the force of his personality. Caesar perceives that Domitius’ honor demands that he die at the hands of the enemy (scit Caesar poenamque peti ueniamque tim eri, 2. 5ll). So, in a generous display of dementia, Caesar grants Domitius his life, the very thing that will take away his spirit and cause him humiliation. P0MP5Ï POLITICüS: 2. 526-609; 7 . U5-123

These two scenes display the intimate connection between

Pompey and the constitutional authority whom he serves. He contrasts

•vzith Caesar of Chapter"'!'!' above, because Caesar serves no one but himself and is subject to no one but what he views as his own personal Fortuna and Fatum. Pompey is close to the Cato of

Chapter VII below, in his recognition of Senatorial authority and the lim itations of the constitutional order.

The Caesar of the Pharsalia is endowed irith superhuman vigor and energy, but it is an energy used to attain ends dictated by narrow self-interest . . . Vihat gives Caesar his peculiar power in the Pharsalia is that he is fighting for himself; he is both leader and cause, as Pompey and Cato a re not,"*

The contrast is between a "controlled Pompey," subordinate to the higher authority of the Senate,^ and Caesar, whose actions and ambitions are restricted by no other power.^

The picture that Lucan paints here is one of a reversal of the right order of things within a state. The control to which

Pompey is subject is a good thing and necessary for a state’s well- ordered political existence. But the lim itations placed upon Pompey w ill be part of the mechanism that w ill lead him to his final destruction.^ I8ii 18S The freedom of action that Caesar possesses^ is destructive of a vxell-ordered polity, yet it is the thing that guarantees him success and ultimate victory.^

The scene a t 2. 526-609 i s an address by Pompey to h is soldiers on the eve of a planned engagement to encourage his men for the coming struggle

iamque secuturo iussurus classica Phoebo temptandasque ratus moturi m ilitis iras adloquitur tacitas ueneranda uoce cohortes.

528-530

The ominous note in tacitas . . . cohortes will be amplified at the conclusion of the speech

uerba ducis nullo partes clamore sequuntur, nec matura petunt proraissae classica pugnae;

596-597 and Pompey will ultimately put aside his decision for battle and retire from Italy

sensit et ipse metum Magnus; placuitque referri signa nec in tantae discrimina mittere pugnae iam uictum fama non uisi Caesaris agmen.

598-600

The purpose of Pompey's speech to his men is to inspirit

them and encourage them for the coming struggle; and he tries to

elicit from them some evidence of courage; uotis deposcite pugnam

(5 3 3 ) . 18 (

But the speech is much more than an exhortation to courage in battle. Rather, Pompey's words are an outline for his men of the implications of their resistance to Caesar and Pompey's ovm role in the struggle

o scelerum ultores melioraque signa secuti, o u e re Romana manus, quibus arma sen atu s non priuata dedit . . .

S31-S33

iamiam, me praeside, Roma supplicium poenamque petat.

S38-S39

He suggests to his. men that they are part of the judicial arm of the State—scelerum ultores—and have been commissioned by the constitutional authority—uere Romana manus, quibus arma senatus /

. . . dedit—not for personal gain, but for the restoration of peace and public safety (53U-538), Their battle with Caesar is a response to aggression from him

di melius belli tulimus quod damna priores: coeperit inde nefas.

^37-^38

Pompey, their appointed leader (me praeside) to g e th e r >dth h is men represent and do the will of the State

neque enim ista uocari proelia iusta decet patriae sed uindicis iram.

^39“5UO

•‘■his last statement calls to his mind exempla from the past. In all 187

Pompey will adduce nine negative exempla, that is, figures from within the past fifty years of Roman history who are examples of

treachery and perpetrators of criminal actions against the

S ta te

nec magis hoc bellum est quam cum Catilina parauit arsuras in tecta faces sociusque furoris Lentulus exsertique manus uaesana Cethegi.

Pompey here adds three positive exempla, that is, examples of

patriotic service and devotion to the State, in addition to

h im self

o rabies miseranda ducis, cum fata Caraillis^ te, Caesar, magnisque uelint miscere M etellis, ad Ginnas Mariosque uenis? stemere profecto, ut Gatulo iacuit Lepidus, nostrasque secures •passus Sicanio tegitur qui Garbo sepulchro.

The h i s t o r ic a l fig u r e s Pompey chooses h e re a re ones t h a t are

re-echoed from time to time in the course of the narrative. The

allusion to Marius here recalls the long description of the Marian

and Sullan era in the complaint of the elderly at the opening of

Book Two, at 68-232. The linking of Gaesar with Metellus (as a

potential exemplum after whom to pattern his life) will find its

echo at 3. 11 h-1 LO—>/ith a glimpse of a modem M etellus, hardly a

shadow of Rome’s earlier hero, when Gaesar confronts him at the

Treasury. Pompey’s admonition to Gaesar that he imitate the 188 glorious Metellus of the past takes on a jolting irony when the reader is introduced to Metellus in Rome.

Pompey's awareness of his own position, restricted by law and the authority of the State, is indicated at several points throughout the speech

nostraque manus quod Roma furenti o p p o su it.

te quoque si superi titu lis accedere nostris iu ss e ru n t . . .

non p r iu a ta c u p it Romana q u isq u is in urbe Pompeium t r a n s ir e p a r a t. hinc consul u terq u e , hinc acies statura ducum est. Caesame senatus uictor erit?9

Pompey i s commissioned by Rome, he reco g n izes th e high o f fic e

conferred upon him, he acknowledges the presence of the consuls;

the fight is between Caesar and the Senate.

The conclusion of the speech is a rapid retailing

of Pompey's past victories—intended to give his men heart at the

thought of being under the command of a consistently courageious and

successful general. Pompey, at the same time, tries to destroy

whatever impression his hearers have of Caesar's successes—he mentions

three areas where Caesar has campaigned, but, in each case, he

alludes to a defeat or a setback for Caesar: at 566-570 (Gaul);

570 (Germany); 571-572 (Britain). Pompey mentions fourteen places 189 where he has been victorious and has extended Roman influence and power. This is a recollection of his own best days when he imposed Roman mastery of the sea and marched through Asia liinor and the Near East and brought a rich prize back to Rome in the form of territory and wealth. The oak simile of 1. 135-lU3a however, cannot be forgotten. The events that Pompey remembers are all past.

In the scene at 7. l&S-l23, the roles are reversed. Eagerness for the battle carries the soldiers to the point of railing against

Pompey's apparent hesitation to bring on a pitched battle with

Caesar's forces

, . . cum m ixto murmure tu rb a castrorum fremuit, fatisque trahentibus orbem, signa petit pugnae.

. . . segnis pauidusque uocatur ac nimium patiens soceri Pompeius, et orbis indulgens regno, qui tot simul undique gentes iuris habere sui uellet paceraque timeret.

The army finds a spokesman for their complaints in Cicero,

whom Lucan, contrary to historical fact, places in Pompey's camp

Choisir Giceron était donc de 1 'excellente de^ormatior^ historique, av^c déplacement et réduction de la vérité gâiante: les recriraations rejetees auparavant se trouvent resumees sans nom d'auteur, et 1^ pression ^ui finalement déterminera Pompée est attribuée non pas à un . q m ilitaire dont il aurait du se faire obéir, mais à un civil.

Cicero's speech is a harsh one. His opening words, meant by the 190 speaker to be sarcastic, contain a deeper meaning and bitter irony for the reader

hoc pro tot m eritis sol"um te. Magne, precatur uti se Fortuna uelis.

7 » 68—69

Fortuna has been claimed by Caesar and she belongs to him. There is no Fortuna left for Pompey.

Cicero then continues to blame Pompey for his hesitation

in taking the field against Caesar and to remind him that he is

subordinate to the Senate

si duce te iusso, si nobis bella geruntur, sit iuris, quocumque uelint, concurrere campo.

79-80

On a compris, non sans raison, duce iusso comme signifiant "un chef nomm^ légitimement," et nobis comme un datif d’interest .... Le sens des deux vers serait quelque raisonnement comme:yétant dorme que tu diriges par^delegation les operations, étant dorme que les ^opérations restent notre affaire, qu’il soit legal de livrer bataille dans la plaine, là ou l ’armee voudra."^^

Pompey’s reaction to forces around him is clear

ingemuit rector, sensitque deorum esse dolos et fata suae contraria menti.

89-86 191

En somme, l'a rm e e , qui a p p a rtie n t au S én at, ne doit pas d'obéissance absolue à Pompee; article capital pour la defense de sa md’moirel II y a plus, dans la transition entre les deux discours, Lucain m ontre l 'e f f e t p ro d u it su r Pompee . . . Non seulem ent ces v e rs r a p p e lle n t au moment opportun que Ma^us est 1^ victime du destin, mais le titre qui lui est donne marque de la façon la plus claire que, ni dictateur ni général en c&ef, il est une sorte de president de la république aux am ées.'^

The controls and restrictions imposed upon Pompey are the soune of his tragedy

r e s m ihi Romanas d ed eras, F o rtu n a, regendas: accipe maiores et caeco in Marte tuere.

110-111

Lucan, like a tragic chorus, interprets this most

im portant moment in th e e n tir e c o n f lic t and o f th e e n tir e poem

aduenisse diem qui fatum rebus in aeuom conderet humanis, et quaeri Roma quid esset illo Marte, palam est.

131-133

The transition between this scene and the battle itself is

a short catalogue of portents that mark this unique day in Roman—

and world-T-hi story; ^ ^ and which mark for Pompey the beginning of 192

NOTES

1. Ahl, Lucan, p. 191, p. 200.

2. Cf. 5. 13-1ii:

docuit populos uenerabilis ordo non Magni partes sed Magnum in partibus esse.

3. Cf. 3* 108; ornnia Caesar erat.

li. The cause w ill n o t d ie w ith -Pompey, however, as Lucan shows a t 9 . 15-30. Cf. Ahl, Lucan, p. 255.

5. Of. 1. 225-227; 3. 139-lUO.

6. John F. Makowski, "Death and Liberty in Lucan's Pharsalia," (Ph.D. dissertation, Princeton University, 19?i).): p. li|1.

7. Cf. the contrast with Caesar's words to the Msssiliotes at 3. 370-372:

dabitis poenas pro pace petita, et nihil esse meo discetis tutius aeuo quam duce me bellum .

8. Cf. Vergil Aeneid 6. 832. Also Lucan 6. 778-796

9. Cf. 9. 190-21U (Cato's eulogy on Pompey). Cf. Ahl, Lucan, pp. 158 - 159.

10. M ichel Rambaud, " L 'apologie de Pompee p a r Lucain au l i v r e v i i de la Pharsale," RSL 33 (1955): 263-261&.

11. Ibid., p. 265.

12. Ibid., pp. 26Ii-265.

13. It is the tragedy of Rome as well. Lucan has linked this speech with the opening lines of the poem:

quis furor, o ciues, quae tanta licentia ferri, 1. 8

quis furor, o caeci, scelerum? 7. 95 193 lit. Cf. V aleriu s Maximus 1.6.12:

Cn. etiara Pompeim lu p p ite r om nipotens abunde m onuerat ne cum G. Gaesare ultimam belli fortunam experiri contenderet, egresso a Dyrrachio aduersa agmini eius fulmina iaciens, examinibus apium signa obscurando, subita tristitia implicatis militum animis, nocturnis totius exercitus terroribuSj ab ipsis altaribus hostiarum fuga. CHAPTER VII

CATO POLITICUS ST SAPIENS

2. 231^-3255 2. 371-391; 9 . 19-^0; 9 . 1 9 0 - 2 ^ ; 9 . Shh-60k

In the figure of Cato Lucan adds another dimension to the portrayal of the political and social chaos of the Civil War.

Throughout the poem he presents a variety of characters who are shown to be imperfect cives; the People of Rome, those directly and those indirectly responsible for the -onset of civil strife

(for example, the Romans of the Catalogue of Vices at 1. 160-182)j soldiers, in various degrees of awareness of what is happening to

Rome and to the world (for example, the men of the mutinies,

Petreius and Afranius, Scaeva, Vulteius); political officials of varying hues (for example, Caesar—the paradigm of evil^—Metellus

and C o tta a t th e T reasury, C urio, th e vendor o f Rome, Pompey,

appointed leader of the Republican cause but capable of gross

errors of judgment).

Other pictures show victims of the civil upheaval: the

People (for example, the matrons of Rome at 2. 28-U2, the citizens

of Ariminum and of M assilia).

Finally, the repository of the Republican cause and its

ideals—the Senate. The latter, despite its exalted position,

is capable of error—for example, the decision to resort to Egypt

19U 19S a f t e r P h a rsa lia , which, in e f f e c t, condemns Pompey to d e a th .

Cato, like the Senate, is also a repository of the ancient

RgPublican tradition and ideals, but he rises above not only the imperfect cives but also the Senate. Cato represents the purest ideal of Roman republicanism and the perfect pattern for the

civis. He surpasses the perpetrators and profiteers of the war because his devotion is to the State and to the community. He sur­ passes the victims who suffer as a result of the strife because his vision goes beyond the immediate suffering to the true meaning

of libertas.^ He surpasses Pompey because he lacks the weaknesses

to which Pompey is subject and seeks to gain nothing for himself

from participation in the conflict, Cato is the perfect citizen,

soldier-commander, statesman. Lucan sums this up in Book Nine

where he pinpoints the essence of the importance of Cato for his

poem and f o r Roman p o l i t i c a l h is to r y

ecce parens uerus patriae dignissimus aris Roma, t u i s ; per quern numquam iu ra r e p u d e b it, e t quern, s i s t e t e r i s umquam c eru ice s o lu ta , nunc olim factura deum. 9. 601-60L

His position as civic ideal is described by parens uerus patriae;

his near-divine superiority to all the base side of human existence

is contained in a double reference; to Cato's deserving of an altar

a t Rome: dignissim us a r i s / Roma, t u i s , and f a c tu r a deum; and th a t

he is one by whom people may confidently secure an oath: per quern

iurare pudebit. Cato's understanding of the true meaning of libertas. 1 # political and individual^ is alluded to in the poet's mournful si steteris maquam ceruice soluta, / nunc olim ....

The poet addresses all this to Roma, and by doing so, he takes the place of Caesar of Book One (1. 195-203, 22h-227) and contrasts the ideal Cato with the conqueror-tyrant. Caesar's carrying of war and strife to Rome, and beyond Rome to the world, is replaced by Cato's standard of pietas, virtus, and libertas.

Cato, in concert vrith Brutus, w ill assume the mantle of

Republican leadership after Pompey's murder and w ill transform the Pompeian cause

hinc super jünathiae campos et signa cruenti Gaesaris ac sparsas uolitauit (sc. Pompeii umbra) in aequore c la s s e s , et scelerum uindex in sancto pectore Bruti sedit, et inuicti posuit se mente Catonis.

9. 15-13

Although Lucan makes it clear that Brutus is closely associated with Cato and shares the primacy of place with him, the poet has

Brutus acknowledge his own dependence upon Cato for leadership and guidance^

d irig e me, dubiura c e rto t u robore firm a 2. 2li5

dux Bruto Cato solus e rit. 2h7

The quality that draws Brutus to seek guidance and counsel from

Cato is the wisdom that the latter derives from his philosophy—

that makes him the sapiens. This gives Cato the moral superiority 197 over his fellows and allows him to remain untainted by the base m otives t h a t have d riv en some to t h is war

quemque suae rapiunt scélérata in proelia causae: hos p o llu ta doraus legesque pace tim endae; hos ferro fugienda fames mundique ruinae permiscenda fides, nullum furor egit in arma; castra petunt magna uicti mercede: tib i uni per se bella placent? quid tot durasse per annos profuit iramunera corrupti moribus aeui?

2. 2g1-257

The Stoic sapiens, although the contemplative life might be his choice (melius tranquilla sine armis / otia solus ages, 2. 266-

267) and the attainment of an undisturbed ajTQ.pQ-f^^ his goal,^ is forced by the pressure of political troubles to become the politieus as well.

The literature on Cato is large inasmuch as the meaning of the figure of Cato is crucial to the last tetrad of the poem as i t has come down to u s; and, m oreover, c ru c ia l f o r th e remaining books of the poem that Lucan would have composed had he liv e d ,

Prooemium, Exposition und Handlungsverlauf wiesen auf Catos Tod als Hohe- und Schlusspunkt hin . . . Lucans Pharsalia^^ist ein teleologisch angelegtes Epos und s o l l t e , 12 ^ c h e r um fassend, m it dem Tod Catos in Utica schliessen.^

This statement sums up the consensus of scholarly opinion concerning

the vexed question of the Pharsalia*s hero and the terminal point

of the poem,^ Although the reader is much more aware of Caesar and 198

Pompey as c h a ra c te rs o f th e P h a rsa lia , and th e p ro p o rtio n of lin e s devoted to Cato is comparatively small, the evaluation of his importance to the poem must be based on (1) the fact that the poem is incomplete; and, (2) "the moral authority his invisible presence exerts on the themes, characterizations, and . . . on

the whole meaning of the epic."^

In relating the events of the Civil War, Lucan is obviously

uninterested in a merely m ilitary or narrowly political narrative.

What concerns him, as a p o e t, i s th e much d eep er, much more

significant issues that brought about the m ilitary events and the

political maneuverings of the antagonists; the moral basis of a

civilized community, its preservation and its perversion (that is,

its destruction).

Wenn die Konfrontation von Cato und Caesar, wie wir annehmen, den abschluss des Werkes bilden sollte, dann hiesse das, dass diese zwei die Hauptpersonen, die eigentlichen Rivalen waren und^nicht Caesar und Pompeius. Der eigentliche Kampf ware nicht m ilitarischer, sondem moralischer A rt.8

No other individual human being of the period of the Civil Wars

could possibly embody so completely the principles that were the

foundation of the Roman Republic. The aura of Stoic sainthood had

firmly established itself around Cato not only in literary circles,

but in political circles as well, by Lucan’s time.^

After the brief allusion to Cato in the one verse sententia

at 1. 128 : uictrix causa deis placuit sed uicta Catoni, and the two

scenes in Book Two: Brutus’ v isit to Cato (2. 23U-325), the wedding 199

scene (2. 326-391)? Cato does not reappear until Book Nine.

In this way, the poet has clearly separated him from personal in­ volvement in the origins of the political strife and the actual out­ break of the civil war and from partisanship with either of the warring factions.^C ato, thus "function(ing) on a different plane from either Caesar or Pompey,^ rises above the two principals and all the other characters of the poem, just as the

Republic and its political tradition—represented by the Senate—

functions on a different plane and from different motivations

from Caesar's—and from P om pey's.B ut Cato is set apart even

from the Senate. Although the motives of both are pure, the Senate

still is capable of error. Cato, in the austerity and discipline

of his personal life and in the soundness of his philosophy of

public life, is not. Because of his exalted position in relation

to the two main antagonists, the final conflict will resolve itself

to a struggle between the embodiment of political evil—Caesar—and

the embodiment of political good—Cato.

Der Kampf Caesars richtet sich nicht mehr gegen die Ambitionen einer anderen Person, sondern allein gegen den freien Staat. Jetzt wird der E intritt Catos in die Handlung notwendig, denn er ist der einzige, der sich selbstlos fur diesen freien Staat einsetzt. Das bedeutet fur den Aufbau des Epos, dass gerade das Nichthandeln Catos in den vorausgegangenen Buchem als Stutze fur unsere Auffassung einer Caesar-Cato-Problematik als des entscheidenden Grundgedankens des lucanischen Epos gewertet werden kann ...... îîach der sichtbar gewordenen Tendenz muss te die Pharsalia wohl so weiterlaufen, dass sich am Znde Caesar, das Sinnbild des commune nefas (I o), und Cato in d e r R o lle des in commune bonus ( I I 390) a l l e in gegenuberstehen, sie, deren Charaktere eindeutig bose bzw. gut sind, wahrend allés MitteLmassige und Unklare vorher ausgeschieden is t.'^

The scenes selected and grouped for the present study are

chosen on the basis of the implications of the first line of the poem. Up to the point of Pompey*s death at 8. 63?, Lucan's

emphasis has been on the furor of the Roman Civil War and the

disruption that it brought to Rome and to the rest of the world.

The scenes in which Cato appears are suggestive of sanity, sound­ ness, and stability still preserved, even in the midst of civil

confusion, in the austerity and discipline of Cato's life. Lucan

portrayed the same thing when he focused on the exiled Senate

a t 5 . 7-65 and at 8. 258-U55» Cato is the reflection—and the

perfection in the individual—of the Republican tradition embodied

in the Senate.

The scenes here discussed may be arranged as follows;

2. 23^-325: Brutus and Cato (his public life, as leader) 2. 37U-391Î Lucan on Cato (his private life, as Stoic) 9» 19-50 : Lucan on Cato (his public life, as leader) 9. 190-21U; Cato on Pompey (the public life of both men, as citizens) 9. 5Mi-536: Labienus and Cato (his private life, as Stoic) 9. 5 Ô7- 6OU: Lucan on Cato (his public life, as leader)

In each of these episodes Lucan establishes various aspects

of Cato as a participant in the war and gradually builds his character. V/hen he introduces Cato into the narrative in Book iVo,^^ in conversation with Brutus who has come to visit hira, he begins to build his character as the tower of strength amid the turm oil,and prepares the reader for the momentous task that he will have to undertake after Pompey’s death.

Cato is already the leader of the Republican cause in the sense that he possesses the moral strength that the party needs and th a t Pompey cannot provide in f u l l m easure. Brutus i s dravm to Cato for advice and counsel and acknowledges Cato’s leadership, at least as far as Brutus himself is concerned (2, 21:7), and

Cato becomes the paradigm of action and attitude for the rest of the Pompeian faction.

Lucan establishes a number of important aspects of Cato’s c h a ra c te r in h is re p ly to B rutus in Book Tvjo. His f i r s t words state his moral and philosophical position

summum. Brute, nefas ciuilia bella fatemur 2. 286 and suggest the moral dilemma that initially faced him and his resolution of it^^

sed quo fata trahunt uirtus secura sequetur. 28?

The resolution of the dilemma is startling enough, but underscores

crimen erit superis et me fecisse nocentera. 268 202

Cato himself responds to and echoes Brutus' recognition of his position of leadership implicitly in the verse quoted above and throughout the remainder of his reply. He first points out the obvious fact that no citizen is able to disengage himself from the political life of the State, much less the politically and ethically sensitive Stoic sapiens

gentesne furorem Hesperium ignotae Romanaque bella sequentur didactique fretis alio sub sidere reges, otia solus agam? procul hunc arcete furorem, securo me Roma cadat.

292-297

C ato 's words a re a foreshadow ing o f L ucan's comment on the gathering of the Pompeian allied forces (3. 169-1?0).

Pompey's armies are composed of a variety of client-states in Greece,

Asia Minor, and the Near East (gentesque . . . / ignotae; alio sub

sidere reges) and all are involved in the madness (furorem) of the

c i v i l war ( Romanaque b e lla seq u en tu r) . Pompey and h is arm ies w ill

fall before Caesar (secum casuras in proelia mouerat urbes, 3. 170),

but not only Pompey but all of Rome as well, as Cato discerns—and

he cannot separate himself from Rome's fate: procul hunc arcete

furorem / o superi , . . / securo me Roma cadat.

Cato's conception of his relationship to Rome and to

Rome's present political troubles becomes more concrete in the

simile immediately following. He imagines a parent in the midst 203 of the obsequies of his crild and transfers the symbol to himself

non ante reuellar exanimera quam t e com plectar, Roma, tuomque nomen, Libertas, et inanera prosequar umbram.

301-303

Just as the parent cannot let go of the lifeless body of his child, so, too, Cato, confident in his wisdom, sees himself as the parent of his country and cannot abandon the now lifeless remains o f Rome’s c o n s titu tio n a l t r a d i ti o n .

The final formulation of his relationship to Rome and to this war is the most dramatic and the most significant of the monologue. He declares his readiness to serve as a sacrificial offering that, once offered, would both end the civil strife and absolve the nation of its guilt

hie redimat sanguis populos: hac caede luatur quidquid Romani meruerunt pendere mores.

312-313

Cato's devotio—his supreme self-confidence in the firmness of his virtus—w ill, even in the face of the ultimate defeat of the

Republican cause by Caesar, give Cato and his principles a final moral victory that will outlast Caesar's m ilitary one.^^

■‘■he conclusion of his speech adds one more facet to this

initial picture of Cato as leader. He tells Brutus that he will

enlist himself under the banner of Pompey—but there is a 20U substantial qualification in Cato's approval of Pompey as the

Republican champion

quin publica signa ducemque Pompeium sequim ur? nec s i fo rtu n a f a u e b it hunc quoque totius sibi ius promittere mundi non bene compertum est.

319-322

If Cato's self-sacrifice is not to be realized, then he will serve another function

ideo me m ilite uincat ne sibi se uicisse putet.

322-323

Lucan here establishes at the outset that Cato seeks nothing for his own profit from this war. This places him securely above all other participants who see the present troubles as a means of personal gain.

The authoritative role that Cato assumes upon his first appearance in the poem prepares the reader for his later

appearance after Pompey's death. %e self-confidence of Cato is a

sharp contrast to Pompey who must from time to time depend upon

others for a spur to action or for rational thinking.^^

forcefulness and decisiveness of Cato here perhaps supplies the

key to the understanding of Lucan's portrayal of Pompey leaving

Larisa at 7* 723-72?. Cato understands intimately all the

implications of the current political situation—and Pompey does

not. Cato possesses supreme self-awareness and self-confidence— 20S

The scene immediately following the Brutus-Cato meeting shows the return of Marcia, just come from the funeral of

Hortensius, to Cato's house. She requests to be allowed to remarry him and share Rome's fate with hira.^^ Just as Cato is the counter­ part of the evil Caesar and a foil for Pompey, so, too, Marcia is the counterpart and foil for both the women in Caesar's life, namely, his daughter Julia, who functions as a ghostly ally of

C aesar to th re a te n and h a rra s s Pompey w ith d i s a s t e r (3. 8-35),^^ and Cleopatra, whose illic it and adulterous union with Caesar in

Book Ten contrasts with Marcia and Cato's austerity and continence.

Marcia is the counterpart of Pompey's Cornelia, as well. Marcia belongs with Cato and with Rome's fate. Cornelia, too, wishes to share Pompey's fate but is prevented by Pompey's solicitous concern for her safety

quod nolles stare sub ictu F ortunae quo mundus e r a t Romanaque f a t a coniunx sola fuit.

5 . 729-731

Marcia herself is aware of her counterpart and fears lest she

cur tuta in pace relinquar et sit ciuili propior Cornelia bello? 2. 318-319 206

The wedding scene that follows lacks the joy and festivity that are normally associated with such an event. Some critics have suggested that this scene serves to make Cato (and presumably,

Marcia as well) unsympathetic and unlovable.T he funeral garb of Marcia, the mourning dress of Cato and the overall oppressive atmosphere of the entire ceremony preclude any description of tenderness or ramantic feeling between the pair. The times do not allow for tenderness and romance. VJhat is needed is the staunch austerity and self-sacrifice of Cato and Marcia. Their austerity is the manifestation of civic virtue amidst the irrationality of th e c i v i l upheaval.In c o n tra s t to Cato, Pompey experiences romantic tenderness toward Cornelia, and it is destructive, or, at least, detrimental, to the Republican cause

dubium trepidumque ad proelia, Magne, te quoque fecit amor.

S. 726-729

Pompey is capable of being shaken by the disturbances of emotion.

In his case, it is a very honorable, very tender emotion—he is

clearly devoted to Cornelia—in sharp contrast to Caesar's adulterous passion for Cleopatra in Book Ten. But any emotional upheaval is

a threat to Stoic calm and rational control. Cato exhibits the

ideal Stoic aTa/> A ^/q, that raises him above the turmoil of

em otion. The of lo v e , to which Pompey succumbs, cannot 207 disturb Cato and threaten his virtus, and hence Cato retains his discipline and austerity—to be much needed by the Republican cause l a t e r .

Having shown Cato acting the part of the Stoic in the domestic I’elationship with Marcia, Lucan concludes with an encom iastic commentary (3?U-39'1 ) th a t o u tlin e s ten q u a litie s of

Cato’s life that separate him from other men

uni quippe uacat studiisque odiisque carenti humanma lu g ere genus.

2. 377-378

The qualities that Lucan cites here are those that will enable

Cato to lead his men through the desert when he w ill have assumed command of the Republican forces.

Lucan follows the same technique in Book Nine at

In this scene Cato comes upon the Oracle of Zeus Ammon in the Libyan desert. The opportunity of consulting the prophetic shrine is too much to resist for Cato's men, especially for Labienus, who sees in Cato the guarantee of a response from the god

nam cui crediderira superos arcana daturos dicturosque magis quam sancto uera Catoni?

9.

Cato's response to Labienus' importuning again demonstrates his acute understanding of human existence and of man's place in the 208 universe. Kis confidence in the validity of his knowledge makes him a serene figure amidst the turmoil of the war and the hard­ ships of the desert march

sortilegis egeant dubii sernperque futuris casibus ancipites: me non oracula certuja, sed mors certa facit. pauido fortique cadendum est; hoc satis est dixisse louera. ^'7

9 . $8l-g8U

The source of Cato’s inner strength—the foundation that raises him above Labienus and all other men—is contained in this response.

John F. Makowski says, in reference to Vulteius and his company of

Opiterginians,

. . . death,not life, is the absolute and ultimate good for mankind; life has meaning, and human actions have value, only in their relation to death .... 28

The principle followed by Vulteius—perverted in his case because

he fights in service to the perpetrator of the civil war and a

would-be tyrant—finds its perfect exemplum in Cato. He has

aligned himself with the law of the universe, suggested by his

allusion to Jupiter (hoc satis est dixisse louem) and as a

consequence is able to live in harmony with the universe and with

himself. The fears and doubt—bom of ignorance (that is, a lack

of wisdom)—that trouble Labienus and inspire his pressing Cato

to test the Oracle do not, and cannot, disturb Cato.

The approach of Cato and his forces to the Oracle of Zeus

Ammon at Siwah cannot but remind the reader of Alexander the Great’s 209 visit there. Lucan's attitude toward the Macedonian conqueror i s made unm istakably c le a r in Book Ten (20-52; Chapter IX, below) and Cato's encounter with the oracular shrine is intended by the poet as a contrast to Alexander's megalomania and his belief—gen­ uine or propagandistic—in his descent from the god

So kann es keinem Zweifel unterliegen, dass Lucan die Szene der Alexandergeschichte, die im wohl in rhetorischer Formung bekannt war, aufgegriffen, fur Cato umgestaltet und vollig urafunktionalisiert hat. Die Beziehung auf Alexander bedeutet nicht, dass Cato ein zweiter Alexander ware, sondem im Gegenteil, dass er das Gegenbild Alexanders sozusagen die Verkorperung der Gegenidee der Alexanderidee, ist—und eben damit bis in sozusagen metaphysische pg Bereiche hinein der Wider part, die ^egenides zu Caesar.

Cato's words asserting his devotion to libertas (2. 302-391) are here given practical demonstration that establishes the credibility of the character for the reader. Cato is the opposite of Caesar, who is linked with tyranny throughout the poem and will be brought into close association with Alexander in Book Ten (17-19); he is a f o i l f o r Pompey as w e ll, whom he fo llo w s as th e appointed le a d e r

of the Republican cause against Caesar, but w ill transform the

cause that Pompey passes on to him at his death; and he is the

opposite of Alexander in his perception of the nature of the gods and man's relationship to them

In der bewust auf Alexander parallesierten Situation muss in diesem Satz eine klare Absage an das Streben Alexanders gesehen werden, sich als Sohn Gottes bestatigen zu lassen. Das, was Alexander sein wollte, ist Cato in hochsten Sinne; das, was Alexander war, ist dem Sein Catos zu sehr unterlegen, als dass es auch nur vergleichbar w a r e .30 210

Lucan summarizes Cato's character again following the exchange with Labienus ($87-601;). This time, Lucan describes

Cato's actions as he becomes the leader of the Republicans in the desert. The discipline and austerity of Cato's personal life as

a private citizen are now translated into public life as he marshals

them and leads them, first by words—in his lesson in Stoic philosophy

to Labienus—and then by deeds, as he provides the example for

the men to follow and to gain strength from.

In two complementary passages in Book Nine (19-$0, 1$0-211i)

the transformation of the Pompeian cause takes place and Cato is

given the opportunity to assess Pompey's position in the conflict

and, at the same time, to furnish his conception of the good political

Immediately after the apotheosis of Pompey (9. 1-18), Cato

assumes control of the scattered Pompeians. Lucan alludes to

C a to 's i n i t i a l judgment of Pompey

ille , ubi pendebant casus, dubiumque manebat quern mundi dominum f a c e r e n t c i u i l i a b e ll a , o d e ra t e t Magnum ....

9 . 19-21

The motive for despising Caesar and simultaneously distrusting Pompey

is clear from what Lucan says about Cato

nec regnum cupiens gessit ciuilia bella, nec seruire timens. 27-28 211

It is Cato’s complete lack of a selfish interest in the Civil War that separates him from Pompey and from all the other antagonists as well. Cato steps to the fore as the tutor and gives fresh life

to the Pompeian party

patriam tutore carentem excepit, populi trepidantia membra refouit, ignauis manibus proiectos reddidit enses.

The final signal that the transformation has taken place intro­

duces the description of Cato in action—the embodiment of devotion

to the State and to libertas

totae post Magni funera partes libertatis erant,

29-30

There follows a description of Cato’s gathering together the

scattered armies and reimposing sufficient discipline. Caesar,

as many times before, is present, if not actually, then in the

fears of his enemies

praeceps f a c i t omne timendum uictor et in nulla non creditur esse carina.

U7-U8

The desert march w ill represent the supreme test of Cato and of

his men. The desert, filled with extraordinary dangers and terrors,

is the stage upon which Cato’s virtue and his ability to in still that

virtue in others will be tested. 212

The first dispiriting event for Cato and his men in the desert is the news of Pompey's death. The speech by Cato in response (l 90- 21ii)^^ serves a triple function in the narrative.

Dramatically, it is Cato's eulogy over Pompey; but it is also an

analysis of Pompey's characterput in the mouth of Cato who

acts as Lucan's spokesman.

•‘■’he third function of this speech is as a description of

the ideal citizen. The emphasis in Cato's speech is set in the

first line; ciuis obit . . . ,190, which applies both to Pompey

and to the ideal that Cato sets up in the lines following. In a

series of ten attributes applied to Pompey, Cato covers the

four major factors of political life: acquisition of personal

power ( 192- 193, 195- 196, 200, 201-203)J relationship to the

People ( I 93-I 9U); relationship to the constitutional order

(I 9W 95, 197- 198), relationship to the m ilitary (198-199). In

different times this would be high praise for a political man.

But Cato returns to Pompey at the close of the speech and

su g g ests t h a t th e tim es demand a b e tt e r man th an Pompey was— even

though Pompey was . . . in hoc . . . u t i l i s aeuo, 191,

scire mori sors prima uiris sed proxima cogi. et mihi, si fatis aliéna in iura uenimus, da talem, Fortuna, lubara. non deprecor hosti seruari, dum me seruet ceruice recisa.

211-21 a 213

Cato does know how and when to die—as he w ill prove at Utica not many years hence. He w ill not have to submit to Fortuna nor

to Juba. Cato is the man that the times need, who possesses the m oral q u a litie s t h a t Pompey did n o t. 21 a

NOTES

1. Berthe Marti, "The Meaning of the Pharsalia," AJP 66 (I9ii5): 363.

2. "Caesars cupido und spes rechten sich auf die Macht, die fur ihn in der Beherrschung des Staates verkorpert ist. Seine ira entzundet sich an alien Hindemissen, die sich seinem Streben in der V/eg stellen. Catos amor erstreckt sich auf Rom, die alte res publica, die fur ihn gleichbedeutend ist mit libertas, iura und leges." ("Gudrun Vogler, "Das neunte Buch innerhalb der Pharsalia des Lucan und die Frage der Vollendung des Epos," Philologus 112 ( 1968): 259).

3. Ahl, Lucan, p. 235.

It. "Brutus' language in this passage is reminiscent of Lucretius' description of the gods and their abode in ^ Rerum Natura 5 . IL6-I 5 5 . In other words, it is suggestive of Epicurean ataraxia no less than of Stoic apatheia. Lucan cleverly sub­ verts the position of those Stoics who argue against political involvement by stating their view in imagery evocative of Epicurean rather tten of Stoic thought. This weakens the case for disinvolvement even before Cato's rebuttal." (Ahl, Lucan, p. 237).

5 . Vogler, "Das neunte Buch," 265.

6. See Rutz, "Lucan 19W-1963," Lustrum 9 (I 96U): 266-271 for a collection of the various conjectures. ^ee also Vogler, "Das neunte Buch," 222-228. •‘•'he most significant opponent is Berthe Marti. Cf. "La structure de la Pharsale," in Lucain, 1-50.

7. Makowski, "Death and Liberty," pp. 65-66,

8. Vogler, "Das neunte Buch," p. 251.

9. Makowski, "Death and Liberty," pp. U6-50.

10. Ahl, Lucan, pp. 231-232.

11. Ibid., p. 231. 21^

12. Cf. Caesar’s words at the Rubicon at 1. 225-227, at Massilia, at 3. 370-372, and at Alexandria, at 9. 1076-1O78, and Lucan’s description of the relationship between Pompey and the Senate at 5» 13-1 It, Lentulus’ assertion of the Senate's constitutional position at 5. 18-22 and at 5. 27-30.

13. V ogler, "Das neunte Buch," pp. 252, 251;. lit. Cf. Ahl, Lucan, pp. 231-2lt7.

15 . Note, too, that Brutus also is described as calm in the midst of the chaos:

at non magnanimi percussit pectora Bruti terror . . .

2. 231-235

Lucan's portrayal of Brutus is, to seme extent, determined by the great task that awaits him not many years in the future.

16. inuenit (sc. Brutus) insorani uoluentera publica cura fata uirum casusque urbis cunctique timentem securumque sui.

239-2L1

17. Cf. A hl, Lucan, pp. 239-21:2

18. Cf. J. Bayet, "Le suicide mutuel dans la mentalité des romains," L’Année sociologique (ser. 3) 1951, Paris, 1953, 70-88.

19. Cf. the Parthian alliance suggested by Pompey at 8. 222f. and at 8. 289ff. with its rousing rebuke from Lentulus. Cf. Ahl, Lucan, pp. 159-166.

20. Cf. Marti, "The Meaning," pp. 352-376.

21. The social acceptability of Marcia’s marriage to Hortensius, handed over to him by Cato to provide children for Hortensius, and her return to Cato need not detain us here. It is obvious that Lucan considered the situation honorable and expects his reader to do the same. C f. A hl, Lucan, p . 21:7, n o te .

22. Note that Marcia has just returned from the grave—in a different ! from Julia’s, of course. 216

23. For both Cornelia and Marcia, see R. Ï. Bniero, ‘'Lucan’s Cornelia," C ^ 146 (1951): 221-236.

2U. 0, C. Phillips, "The Influence of Ovid on Lucan's Bellum civile,” (Ph.D. dissertation. University of Chicago, I 962), p . 17.

25 . Makowski, "Death and Liberty," p. 57.

26. Cf. Ahl, Lucan, p . 26U.

27. Lucan has already shown his reader one dubius in the character of Appius at 5 . 68- 236. Appius’ lack of wisdom and his ultimate inability to comprehend the god's words stand in sharp contrast to Cato's serenity and inner strength.

28. Makowski, "Death and Liberty," pp. 27-28.

29. Werner Rutz, "Lucan und die Rhetorik," in F. Durry (ed.), Lucain (Fondation Hardt, Entretiens 15), Geneva, 1970, p. 2U7.

30. Ibid., p. 2i;6.

31. Cf. Ahl, Lucan, p . 26U.

32. Cf. Phillips, "^he Influence of Ovid," p. ^0; and M. P. 0. Morford, "The Purpose of Lucan's Uinth Book," Latomus 26 ( 1967): 126- 129.

33. Morford, The Poet Lucan, pp. 5-7.

3U. Cf. Ahl, Lucan, p . 158-159. CHAPTER VIII

A. THE CAl'lPS OPPOSITE: I . 168-259; h. 337-W l

B. THE MASS SUICIDE: 1:. U7U-581

C. SCAEVA: 6 . 138-262

These three episodes, the first the fraternization of the

Caesarians and the Pompeians at Ilerdaj the second the suicide of the Opiterginians off Illyria; and the third the exploits of the

Caesarian centurion Scaeva at Dyrrhachium, are grouped together in this chapter because of certain motifs common to them all.

This was true of the city scenes, treated in Chapter III above, where the linking theme there was the concept of fides.

This chapter treats scenes that are purely m ilitary: siege and battle. In all certain civic virtues and moral concepts that are fundamental to civil existence are transformed by the war—not one against foreign enemies—but one that pits citizen against fellow citizen. It is the deterioration of these civic virtues that Lucan condemned in the opening seven lines of th e poem.

In each of these episodes, there is a central character who occupies the reader's attention and exhibits by his actions and words the effects of the civil war on morality: at Ilerda,

217 218

Petreius and Afraniusj off Illyria, Vulteius; and at Dyrrhachium,

Scaeva. Of these characters, two are Pompeians: Petreius and

Afranius (and they will be seen to contrast with each other) and

two are Caesarians: Vulteius and Scaeva (who complement each other).^

Scaeva and Vulteius . . . are not aristocrats and high- ranking officers but combat soldiers . . . they are totally dedicated to their leader, Caesar, and are highly courageous ...... each . . . demonstrates in his own way something that is wrong with the Roman sp irit and with the world in general, ^'hey exemplify what Lucan means by the underlying seeds of war that have always brought povrerful nations to ruin (1. 158-182) and they are f it company for C u r i o . 2

P e tre iu s and A fran iu s, who sh are th e command of th e Pompeian

camp at Ilerda, exhibit certain paradoxes in their actions and

attitudes toward the war which are highlighted by Lucan. A. The Camps O pposite; Ii.. 168-2^9; U. 337-li01

Book Four opens with a description of the Spanish theater o f o p e ra tio n s. O ther than some i n s i g n if i c a n t s p a rrin g , n o t much actual fighting takes place; the opposing armies are, for the most part, occupied with securing their respective positions

. . . Caesar . . . Martera saeuus agit, non multa caede nocentem.

1=2

prima dies belli cessauit Marte cruento, spectandasque ducum uires numerosaque signa e x p o su it.

2!ir26

The relative inactivity of the armies and the temporary lu ll in the fighting—a stark contrast to the bloody engagement at

Massilia that ends Book Three—is a deceptive prelude to the violence that w ill break out in the Pompeian camp.^

Lucan shows his reader the importance that he attaches to

the events in Spain. At the very beginning of the book he says

of the war there

maxima sed fa ti ducibus momenta daturum 3

and of th e men

piguit sceleris; pudor arma furenturn c o n tin u it; p a traeq u e e t r u p ti s le g ib u s unum donauere diem.

26-28

219 220

Caesar is described as vigorously active in preparing for a confrontation with his enemy. An advance on the second day of the campaign brings the Caesarian forces to a h ill occupied by the Pompeians. Caesar's men must struggle just to keep a foothold on the steep side of the mountain as they move toward the enemy.

After a minor cavalry engagement, they occupy the place and the

Pompeians withdraw. Caesar now finds himself at the mercy of the weather. Heavy rains and flooding disrupt his caiap. The consequent loss of supplies causes a famine in his army. The weather finally b reaks and Caesar i s once more able to move h is tro o p s . The poet describes the return of normal weather in terms of Caesar’s guiding principle—Fortuna

sed parue Fortuna uiri contenta pauore plena redit, solitoque magis fauere secundi et ueniam meruere dei;

121-123 and t h is comment r e c a l ls C a e sa r's own words a t 1. 309-311:

nunc, cum Fortuna secundis mecum rebus agat superique ad summa uocantes temptamur; and to Amyclas at S. 580-583:

sola tibi.causa haec est iusta timeris uectorem non nosse tuom, quern numina numquam destituunt, de quo male turn Fortuna meretur, cum p o st u o ta u e n it.

Caesar successfully moves his forces closer to the Pompeians' position. The proximity of Caesar's array causes the Republican 221 coinmander, Petreius, to seek reinforcements from the native

Spanish tribes

postquam omnia fatis Caesaris ire uidet celsam Petreius Ilerdam deserit; et noti diffisus uiribus orbis, indomitos quaerit populos . . , . . . et tendit in ultima mundi.

The success granted to Caesar is here put in terms of the other guiding principle of his life: Fatum. Lucan’s ascribing the perception of Caesar's fatum to Petreius and his departure from the

Republican camp to gather a native force is an ominous prelude to the events that follow.

■ Caesar orders his men across the Sicoris and after a brief engagement the Pompeians withdraw, making for the safety of the hills. Caesar outruns them and blocks their passage. Both

sides pitch camp and settle down in such close proximity that the men in each camp are able to see and recognize their opponents and

exchange gestures of salute. After a cautious beginning, the men

are soon emboldened to climb over the walls of the camps, and each

camp fills with a mixed crowd of Caesarians and Pompeians.

In describing the friendly association of the men, the

poet implies that their actions are normal and natural—the

artificially imposed strictures of the m ilitary camp give way

b efo re th e power o f n a tu r a l human a ff e c tio n tenuere pariimpsr o ra metu . . . , . , mox ut stiraulis raaioribus ardens r u p it amor le g e s .

172-175

This temporary victory of natural affection throws the discord of civil war into relief

deprensura est ciuile nefas 172

In Lucan’s apostrophe to the men (182-1 89) he suggests that they who follow Caesar have had to make a deliberate act of the will

fletus quid fundis inanes, nec te sponte tua sceleri parere fateris?

183-181

An act of their will has given Caesar the power that he has

usque adeone times quern tu facis ipse timendum

And an act of their will would bring the struggle to a halt

classica dent bellum; saeuos tu neglige cantus: signa ferant; cessa: iamiam ciuilis Erinys concidet et Caesar generum priuatus amabit.

186-188

Lucan, in his description of the men gathering together (175-182,

196- 205 ), selects certain details to create an emotional scene.

The recognition of friend by friend (177), the meeting of

relatives (177), or the chance meeting of friends almost forgotten

( 178), climaxes in tearful embraces and terror at what might have 223 happened on the battlefield had there been an engagement that day

arma rigant lacrim is, singultibus oscula rumpimt; et quamuis nulle maculatus sanguine miles quae potuit fecisse timet.

180-182

The poet concludes this first part of his description with a prayer to Concordia and Amor (189-19^) who are addressed as the unifying forces in the universe

nunc ades aeterno complectens omnia nexu 0 rerum mixtique salus, Concordia, mundi, et sacer orbis amor.

189-191

For a moment these two powers hold sway, but their influence will

be defeated by the force of fatum

pro numine fata sinistro exigua requie tantas augentia clades.

191- 19$

The mention of fatijm recalls Caesar's profession of faith

(credidintus fatis, 1 . 227) and the events that follow w ill show

the return of the horrors of war that Caesar set in motion when he

crossed the Rubicon.

Following the address to Concordia and Amor, Lucan turns

again to the men, describing their fraternization with their

former enemies. The scene is emphasized by the poet and the reader

is made aware of the importance of the temprary victory of the men's

natural feelings of affection 22h

magnum nunc saecula nostra uenturi discrimen habent. periere latebrae tot scelerum: populo uenia est erepta nocenti: agnouere suos.

191-19U

The men settle dovm for the sharing of meals

duro concordes caespite mensas instituunt, et permixto libamina Baccho graraineis fluxere focis: iunctoque cubili extrahit insomnes bellorum fabula noctes; quo primura steterint campo, qua lancea dextra e x i e r i t .

197-202

All the elements of the guest-host relationship are present: shared food, wine, the hearth, conversation.^ Concordia and Amor have, momentarily, transformed the camps into domestic dwellings and the men into hosts and guest-friends. But the seeds of discord and hatred are present and are about to erupt into violence

quod solum fata petebant, est miseris renouata fides, atque omne futurum creuit amore nefas. nam postquam foedera pacis cognita Petreio seque et sua tradita uenum castra uidet, famulas scelerata ad proelia dextras excitât, atque hostes turba stipatus inermes praecipitat castris, iunctosque amplexibus ense separat, et multo disturbat sanguine pacem.

203-210

The repetition here, in the last book of the first tetrad, of

Caesar’s words of the first book—fata, foedera, pacis—also

suggests a ’’reversal of things.” The men’s striking of foedera

pacis—something that Caesar explicitly rejected—and their renewal

of fides—which Caesar im plicitly rejects by his actions—are a 225 return to a civilian condition. The use of fata, however, holds a double iro n y . The tem porary v ic to r y o f Concordia and Amor, resulting in the reconciliation of enemies—something good—is not decreed by fate. Or, rather, fatum decrees this only to again upset it and return the world to the strife of the civil war.

This is the fatum in which Caesar places his belief.

%e chief irony in the passage, however, lies in the fact that it is not Caesar who will be the instrument of a return to the fighting, but rather the Republican general Petreius. •'•'he fraternization is reported to him and he hastily gathers a force of men—not Romans, but, probably, his personal retinue composed of native Spanish troops^—famulas scelerata ad proelia dextras / e x c itâ t ( 207- 208)—and leads his men in a bloody attack on the

Caesarians, driving them out. Thus the civic virtues, shown in the context of the most sacred social convention of antiquity, the guest-host relationship, are rejected by the champions of those virtues,

Lucan’s description and the speech he gives to Petreius seem to be contradictory: the early days of the Spanish campaign provided an opportunity to change the course of history (191-192), the temporary truce could end the entire war (185-188), Amor and

Concordia seem to have the upper hand and to have defeated furor

( 189- 191). Because of all that the return of hostilities is 226 condeianed; . . . omne futuru^-n / c re u it n efas (203-201;)* P e tre iu s famulas scelerata ad proelia dextras / excitât (207-203), and scelcrumque reduxit amor era (236); itur in omne nefas (2li3); the men's response to orders is described: fecit monstra fides (2ii5)j each man's weapon is iusti Rladius dissuasor (2li8), as they fight: uelut occultum pereat scelus, omnia monstra / in facie posuere ducum ( 251 - 252 ), and now the men are re-accustomed to warfare : iuuat esse nocentes (252).

The retur-n to violence is clearly condemned by the poet.

Petreius' speech, however, is intentionally couched in terms of patriotism and dedication to duty, both of which he believes his men to have l o s t

immemor o patriae, signorum oblite tuorum, non potes hoc causae, miles, praestare senatus adsertor uicto redeas ut Caesare? certe ut uincare potes.

212-215

numquam nostra solus pretium mercesque nefandae proditionis erit: non hoc ciuilia bella ut uiuamus agunt.

non sonipes in bella ferox non iret in aequor turrigeras classis pelago sparsura carinas, si bene libertas umquam pro pace daretur.

225-227

Petreius characterizes his cause as the cause of liberty against

a would-be tyrant; and his cause is therefore the righteous one 227

hostes nempe mecs sceleri iurata nefando sacraraenta tenent: at uobis uilior hoc est uestra fides quod pro causa pugnantibus aequa et ueniam sperare licet.

226-231

Lucan puts similar sentiments into the mouth of Cato in Book

Nine, at 256-283. Both speakers condemn the tyranny that Caesar

attempts to impose upon Rome and upon the worldj and both try to

re-awaken devotion to the republican ideal in their troops. The

significant difference between the two men, however, lies in the

circumstances that occasion the speeches. Paradoxically, Petreius

r e c a l ls h is men to war a t a p o in t when th ey had come n e a r to

realizing the horrors of the civil conflict and their natural

inclination to peace and affection had gained the upper hand.

In Book Nine, Cato, the perfect example of leadership and fully

aware of the implications of the conflict, marshals his men back

to the war because he and they represent the last possible point

of r e s is ta n c e , now t h a t Pompey i s dead, to C a e sa r's ty ran n y .

Petreius' speech is effective and the Caesarians and

Pompeians are enemies once a g a in . The Pompeians break camp and

move a distance from Caesar's, but are cut off by his cavalry

and hemmed in. They are caught in a waterless place and Caesar's

lines prevent them from reaching the river. An attempt to break

through is thwarted by Caesar's refusal to engage. The poet

describes the hardships of the republican camp (292-336), locked 228 in by Caesar and faced with an agonizing death from thirst.

When the situation becomes intolerable, the Republicans decide to seek terras. Here the dominant character of this portion of the episode, Afranius, appears and is the moving force behind the decision

iam doraiti cessere duces: pacisque petendae auctor damnatis supplex Afranius armis, semianimes in castra trahens hostilia turmas, uictoris stetit ante pedes.

337-3UO

Afranius' speech to Caesar is a sharp contrast to that of Petreius to his soldiers. Afranius is the "practical man"—much like

Cotta at the Treasury—and simply acknowledges the realities of the

campaign, first to himself, and then to Caesar. There is irony in Lacan's presentation of his approach to Caesar

seruata precanti raaiestas non fracta malis, interque priorem fortunam casus que nouos gerit omnia u icti sed ducis, et ueniam secure pectore poscit.

3UO-3U3

His career up to the point is termed priorem fortunam. Again

Lucan shows us Fortuna abandoning a man in favor of Caesar—just

as i n th e case o f Pompey (1 . 13U-13^: p r io r i . . . fo rtu n a e ) and

of the populace of Ariminum (1. 251-253). The juxtaposition of

the words fortunam and casus at 3h2 shows the reader the

confrontation of Caesar and Afranius. the heroic quality that 229

Lucan seems to give Afranius i s iro n ic in tone too

. . . Afranius is described in heroic terras precisely at the raoment he accepts the ultimate disgrace of Caesar's dementia. It is an intentional irony on Lucan's part that he speaks of Afranius' raaiestas as a preface to the speech in which all integrity and honor are surrendered through f la t t e r y and an ignoble request for pardon.°

Afranius unwittingly echoes Caesar's ovm words from the Rubicon as he describes his present position. He uses the word fata three times; in the very first sentence at the approximate middle of his speech (351)> and in the last sentence

(361).

si me degeneri strauissent fata sub hoste, non deerat fortis rapiendo dextera leto,

3LL-3L5

Fatum has done Afranius at least one good service—namely, provided him a worthy foe

at nunc sola mihi est orandae causa salutis dignum donanda, Caesar, te credere uita.

3U6-3U7

The irony.of Lucan's allusion to his priorem / fortunam (3Ul~

3U2) and Afranius' allusion to his fatum lies in the recollection

of Caesar's te, Fortuna, sequor . . . / credidimus fatis (1. 226-

227). Afranius' surrender is already complete even before he is

finished speaking and before Caesar agrees to it: Fortuna has

abandoned Afranius in favor of Caesar, Caesar now controls Afranius'

fatum . 230

His e x p lan atio n of how he came to be in command of the army and in opposition to Caesar is spiritless and a sharp contrast to Petreius’ fiery oratory

non partis studiis agimur nec sumpsimus arma consiliis inimica tuis. nos denique bellum inuenit ciuile duces.

3L8-350

It was all simply an accident. Then the rector (it) abandons his

caesaeque priori^ dum potuit seruata fides.

3^0-351

Fides, adhered to with such great tenacity by the M assiliotes, the people of Larisa and of % tilene, is simply abandoned by

Afranius because, in his estjjnation, it is no longer possible to adhere to it—and, therefore, not practical. The abandonment of fides makes the irony of his next words even sharper

n i l f a t a moramur 3^1

Fata is here equivalent to Caesarem.

Afranius clearly realizes the implications of the

capitulation of the Republican forces in Spain

tradimus Hesperias gentes aperiraus Eoas, g securumque orbis patimur post terga relicti.

With the handing over of half the world to Caesar, Afranius reaches

the heart of his speech—the plea for forgiveness 231

nec cruor effusus carapis tibi bella peregit nec ferruni lassaeque manus. hoc hostibus unum quod uincas ignosce tuis.

3SL-3S6

These words asking for forgiveness for being conquered are the most ignoble in the speech. How disgraceful they are is clear when we remember that in the Domitius scene Lucan termed such forgiveness from Caesar a fate worse than death: poenarura extremum civi ( 2. 159). The irony of the situation is heightened by the fact that earlier in the campaign Petreius had rebuked his soldiers for seeking life and pardon while fighting for the cause of justice. Significantly, the Spanish campaign ends with Afranius begging for everything which h is CO-commander had vehem ently denounced.^

The following petition is on behalf of himself and his men—a release from service and pardon

otia des fessis, uitam patiaris inermes^^ degere quam t r i b u i s .

357-358

hoc petimus uictos ne tecum uincere cogas, 362

Hjs final reference to fatum completes the irony of the entire speech

turba haec sua fata peregit. 361

The reference to his troops as turba makes clear the total wreckage of the Republican cause placed in Afranius' hands.

Lucan gives Caesar no reply—he is the silent presence in complete control of himself and of the situation as he grants

Afranius' petition

at Caesar facilis uoltuque serenus flectitur atque usum belli poenamque rem ittit.

363-36U 232

Lucan closes this part of the episode with one more irony in his allusion to the formalities of the grant of d e m e n tia

ut primum iustae placuerunt foedera pacis. 36S lustae—here "regular, formal"^"*—reminds the reader of Caesar's temerataque iura of 1 . 225 ; and foedera pacis recalls . . . hie pacem . . . relinquo, Caesar has not abandoned his initial resolution. The foedus concluded here is a furthering of his ambitions, as Afranius pointed out at 352-353* Once the form alities are over, the men rush to the water to slake their thirst. The poet echoes his condemnation of the luxury-loving Romans (1. 158-

182) and demonstrates how little it took to saisfy the thirsty

o p ro d ig a rerum lu x u rie s numquam paruo co n te n ta p a ra tu , et quaesitorum terra pelagoque ciborum abmitiosa fames et lautae gloria mensae, discite, quam paruo liceat producers uitam et quantum natura petat.

373-378

satis est populis fluuiusque Ceresque. 381

The conclusion of the episode is a comparison between the lives of the men released by Caesar and the rest, who continue the war—in favor of Afranius and his men: sic proelia soli / felices n u llo s p e cta n t c i u i l i a uoto (hOO-iiOl ) . They a re r e tu rn in g to 2 # civilian life and the peace and order that means

tunc arma relinquens uictori miles spoliato pectore tutus innocuusque suas curarura liber in urbes s p a r g itu r .

382-335

The emphatic words here are tutus and liber in urbes. Afranius and his men contrast with other groups that have faced Caesar, VJe may compare

non proelia fessos ulla uocant, certos non rumpunt classica somnos.

39U-395 with Lucan’s description of the fall of Ariminum

stridor lituom clangorque tubarum non pia concinuit cum rauco classica comu.

1. 237-238 12 They have regained the essentials of civilian life

iam coniunx natique rudes et sordida tecta et non deductos recipit sua terra colonos.

396-397

That they return to sanity and to morality by means of the

humiliating groveling at the feet of Caesar is part of the chaos

of civil war that Lucan is at pains to point out. That a Roman

. soldier debases himself before another Roman soldier adds to the

paradoxical nature of the situation. B. The Hass Suicide; It. It7h-58l

The events of this episode take place on the eastern front at Salonae. The contrasts with the scene at Ilerda, namely,

east versus west, a Caesarian victory versus a Republican' victory,

are minor elements; even the military aspect of the scene is of

small importance, for Lucan here "focuses on the theme of death

and liberty"^^ and shows how, in the midst of the political chaos,

a man may still be able to rise above the coercion of events and

the tyranny of other men and secure for himself personal liberty.

The scene is a complicated network of sim ilarities and

contrasts to the events at Ilerda; and the dominant figure here,

Vulteius, possesses a complex relationship to the Republican

figures Petreius and Afranius.

Vulteius as a foil for Afranius is obvious; the compromise

of integrity made by Afranius is totally unthinkable for the

fanatical Caesarian. He is close to Petreius in devotion to

duty and to the military principles that govern his life. The irony

and paradox seen in these two figures lie in the fact that Petreius,

champion of the just cause, destroys the temporary reign of peace

and order because of his principles; Vulteius, partisan of Caesar

whose goal is to destroy the constitutional order through civil war

and impose his tyranny, exhibits the virtues of fortitude, wisdom.

23h 23$ and endurance, together with a strong desire for self-sacrifice in the pursuit of Caesar’s success.

Petreius, champion of the Republican constitutional order, inspires his men to turn from peace and order to the strife of civil war; Vulteius, in the service of a tyrant, inspires his men to se iz e th e u ltim a te human freedom —d e a th .

Petreius' fiery speech coneussit mentes scelerumque reduxit amorem (236), th e e f f e c t of V u lte iu s ' words on h is men i s d e scrib ed ;

. . . cunctas sustulit ardor / mobilium mentes iuuenum ($20-$21)^^

. . . for Lucan suicide is such an overwhelming assertion of freedom that it signifies a revolt from the power of fate itself. It enables a man to seize fate with his own hands and to wrench from it the power to determine his life and death. In short, by committing suicide a man assumes mastery of his own destiny.

The story of the Opiterginians' mass suicide is Lucan's most im passioned and eloquent m an ifesto on human freedom, the meaning of death, and man's relation to f a t e . ^5

Pompey's admiral M. Octavius, in control of the coast,

kept an army under the command of Antonius pent up in camp.

Although the Caesarians were in a protected position, the lack of

food threatened famine. Antonius devised a plan of escape by means

of rafts, two of which managed to reach safety, but a third was

caught in a snare built by Pompey's Cilician contingent. The

raft was held fast, and the Pompeian ships bore down on it, but 2 # the attack and the ensuing battle were cut short by darkness.

It is in this setting—men completely trapped, in fear of approaching death, the darkness, the sea—that Vulteius comes forward to inspire his men. One of the major ironies of the scene lies in the fact that the Opiterginians—like the Pompeians at

Ilerda—find themselves hemmed in and unable to escape the enemy's encirclement; and they must choose between surrender

(and safety) and death (with honor). The Pompeians chose badly, th e C aesarians ap p aren tly know how to choose w ise ly .

However, it is important to realize that this episode, which revolves around Vulteius' speech, is not simply a short treatise on Stoic—or Lucanian—philosophy of suicide. The fact that the poet puts the "impassioned and eloquent manifesto on human freedom"^^ in the mouth of the Gaul Vulteius, the fanatical partisan of Caesar, is an important element in Lucan's dramatic structure. The poet's subtelty is partially recognized by

Nehrkom

Eine kleine Truppe von Caesars "vielen Tausenden" (IV 513 ) geht freivTillig in den Tod. Dem Leser kommen fast Zweifel, ob dieser Selbstmord eine "Heldentat" ist oder ein "Verbrechen." Er fragt sich, ob in diesem Tun und Denken ein "Sinn" ist,^ der dieser Handlung eine besondere Bedeutimg fur den Bu'rge^krieg oder vielleicht sogar dai^ber hinaus

But Nehrkom and Makowski both conclude that Vulteius and the 237

Opiterginians are meant by Lucan to be an exemplum of a true understanding of human liberty and heroic models of philosophic wisdom.

In einem letzten schmerzlichen Hinweis auf die gegenv/artige Generation, die diesen Opfermut verloren hat, zeigt der Dichter, dass diese M^ner allein erkannt hatten, wozu jedem freien Mann das Schwert gegeben ist; Freiheit in Tode zu gev/ahren, wenn Lgben Sklaverei bedeutet, ignorant dates, ne quisquam serviat enses (IV 579) und dass der Tod nicht eine Erlosung fur die Feigen "■^bndern d ie ho ch ste Belohnung d er "v i r t u s " se in s o l l t e . »

Ahl has a much better appreciation of Lucan’s subtle portrayal of Vulteius. He correctly links the portraits of

Vulteius and Scaeva (though he does not include those of Petreius and Afranius) and notes that Vulteius’ "principles are more lofty and philosophical than those of Scaeva," but

Vulteius seems to be a paradigm of misdirected virtue. His pietas, his sense of duty, patriotism and proper conduct is, by his ovm admission, m ilitiae pietas (U. h99)t dedication to military duty. This is the loyalty to individual generals (rather than to any ideal or to the state) that lay at the root of so many troubles in the late republic, VJhat adds further to Vulteius’ unconscious irony is that he is fighting and dying f o r C aesar, th e man who w i l l n o t only deprive Rome of the vestiges of liberty, but who has already enslaved Vulteius ’ ov/n native land.^^

The furor that drives Vulteius on to his resolution and that he

u ses to in s p ir e h is men

, , . totusque futurae mortis agor stimulis: furor est,

516-517 238 is born of mistaken virtus and misdirected loyalty—the kind that is destructive of civil and political order. Vulteius is actually a reflection of his leader Caesar—very like Laelius a t 1. 359- 389^°—an( in Vulteius* mouth

nec gloria leti inferior, iuuenes, adraoto occurrere fate,

U79-U8Q

accersas dum fata manu, hQh

nescio quod nos tris i.iagnum et meraorabile fatis exemplum, Fortuna, paras.

Ii96-U97

d en t f a t a r e cessum emittantque licet, uitare instantia nolim.

agnoscere solis permissum est quos iam tangit uicinia fati.

517-SI 8

The echo of Caesar's belief in fatum (credidimus fatis, 1. 227) and his committment to Fortuna (te, Fortuna, sequor) are heard in Vulteius' words. The destructiveness of Caesar's course from the moment of his crossing of the Rubicon (Ariminum, Ifessilia,

Rome) is obviously mirrored in the mutual self-slaughter that

V u lteiu s and h is men work on each o th er

concurrunt alii totumque in partibus unis bellorum fecere nefas.

5ii8-5U9 239

Lucan uses a double simile to introduce his description of the slaughter: Cadmus and the Spartoi at Thebes, and Jason's sowing of the dragon's teeth. Both these images of legendary self­ slaughter have their reference points in the Vulteius episode. The allusion to Cadmus recalls the later troubles at Thebes and the

civil war between Eteokles and Polyneikes^"*

s ic semine Cadmi emicuit Dircaea cohors ceciditque suorma uolneribus, dirum Thebanis fratribus omen,

Jason and the dragon, whom he overcarae with the aid of Medea's magical powers—powers that induced the desire for slaughter in

th ese so>m-men—i s a r e f e r e n t f o r what V u lteiu s i s doing. The

magically persuasive power of his words induces the same effect

in his men. But his powers are misdirected just as his loyalties

are twisted—all the result of a wrong notion of virtus

Although Scaeva and Vulteius display virtus in the face of danger, it is, at best, military courage, laced in Vulteius' case with a somewhat perverse concept of the relationship between death and freedom, We must not confuse this with the more absolute virtus which, as Sallust and Lucan both recognize, demands much m ore.22

It is the irony and paradox of this scene that Vulteius and his men

cannot simply be dismissed as fanatics who glory in the posthumous

praise they expect their acts to earn from Caesar

magna u i r t u te merendum e s t, Caesar ut araissis inter tot milia paucis hoc damnum clademque uocet,

5 1 2-^ 1U c. Scaeva; 6. 138-262

In the portrayal of the events at Dyrrachium, and in the in tro d u c tio n of Scaeva in Book S ix, Lucan uses a much le s s su b tle approach than that used in his presentation of Petreius and

Afranius and of Vulteius. Events are moving more rapidly toward the inevitable and climactic battle at Pharsalia, and Scaeva’s aristeia serves as a prelude to the battle in Book Seven,

The occupation with death—Scaeva’s mortis amor (2U6)^^— contrasts with the major episode of the book, the consultation of

Erichtho by Sextus Pompeius, which occupies nearly one half.

Scaeva rushes to battle prepared to die in Caesar’s cause and, 2< if it were possible, with Caesar himself looking on. Sextus,

in terror of the events to come

qui stimulante me tu fati praenoscere cursus, impatiensque morae uenturisque omnibus aeger,

li. h 2 3 -h 2 h

looks for courage through the necromancy of the Thessalian witch.

Scaeva’s bravery in battle is a foil for Sextus’ timidity and

resort to the black arts. It is Scaeva’s courage in defense of

Caesar’s cause that ranks him with Vulteius and the Opiterginians

and earns him Lucan’s condemnation.

Like Vulteius, Scaeva rallies his men with an impassioned

speech in the face of serious pressure from the Republican forces.

2I4O and manages to turn the force under his command from flight to make a stand behind him. The contrast with Vulteius is sharp in depth of sentiment and purose. The poet is at pains to show his reader that Scaeva is a man who has iforked his way up from the ranks to the officer class

castrorum in plebe merebat ante feras Rhodani gentes: ibi sanguine multo promotus batiam longe gerit ordine uitera.

1 W^-1 lj6

He has been a soldier a long time and has become accustomed to warfare as a way of life. His life as a soldier, however, is not dedicated to an abstract ideal of the State, but to the concrete reality of a single individual—Caesar—and in this quality he mirrors V ulteius.L ucan is much more blunt in portraying Scaeva's devotion to Caesar as the motive force behind his aristeia. He describes Scaeva as pronus ad omne nefas (11:7) and within the first ten lines of his first address to his men the link between

Scaeva and Caesar is made clear

peterem felicior umbras Caesaris in uoltu;

158-1^9 and his speech ends with Caesar

iam longinqua petit puluis sonitusque ruinae secuasque fragor concussit Caesaris aures. uincimus, o socii; ueniet qui uindicet arces dum moriraur. 162-16$ 2L2

In his second speech—as he reveals his ruse and kills the

Pompeian Aulus—he asserts that the only thing that will end this war i s f o r Poinpey to bend th e knee to Caesar^^

soluat, a it, poenas Scaeuam quicumque subactuin sperauit: pacem gladio si quaerit ab isto Magnus adorato s u b m itta t C aesare sig n a .

2W-2L3

The most significant detail in Scaeva's portrait—and the element that is the significant difference between him and

Vulteius—is that Scaeva is not in the same predicament that the

Opiterginians face. The latter are in an entirely hopeless trap, there is no means of escape whatever. Scaeva, although he courts death,' fights and rallies his men to turn and fight in the hope o f victory.His mortis amor is thus not the philosophically grounded (even if perversely so) dedication of Vulteius to suicide as the ultimate demonstration of the exercise of free vri.ll. For the combat soldier death is an everyday companion; and it is better to go down in a blaze of glory (hence the wish to die in Caesar's notice—or, at second best, to earn the praise of the enemy: testem hunc (sc. Caesarem) fortuna negauit: Fompeio laudante cadam. 159-

160) and thus to be remembered. This is the ancient guarantee

of immortality. But the poet has already declared his stri'ving to

be bom of perversity and mistaken in its direction:

. . . et qui (sc. Scaeva) nesciret in armis quam magnum u i r t u s crim en c iu ilib u s e s s e t.

1U7-1Ü8 2h 3

The best discussion of the function of Scaeva in Lucan's narrative is contained in Berthe M arti's "Cassius Scaeva and

Lucan's Inventio," in The Classical Tradition. Marti addresses herself primarily to the rhetorical technique of Lucan's portrait of Scaeva and his aristeia; however^ here Lucan's technique and the substance of his narrative merge to form a poetic description of the paradox of virtue that is vice, single-minded devotion that is blind and perverted fanaticism, martial valor that is treachery. Lucan's rhetoric is a complement to the emotion that

Scaeva feels and displays and serves to enhance the reader's emotional reaction to Scaeva's actions on behalf of Caesar, and in defiance of the old Republican concept of civic and political morality, Marti says :

Out of context this passage might serve as a splendid, if at times somewhat grandiloquent, example of superhuman heroism, of virtus worthy to inspire awe, admiration, and reverence. Indeed these emotions are felt by Scaeva's comrades who, when they raise his fainting body, "worshipped the deity that seemed to dwell in that mutilated breast, and the living semblance of the great goddes. Valor." et uiuam magnae speciem Virtutis adorant). But we have already been told (liidf.) that virtus in such a cause is the greatest of crimes, for Scaeva is fighting in a civil war, on behalf of Caesar, not Rome, and is defending a future tyrant, not freedom. Because of this, he is described as "ready for any wickedness," for his loyalty is misdirected; Pronus ad omne nefas et qui nesciret in armis Quam magnum uirtus crimen ciuilibus esset (li^7f.)

Scaeva's bravery and loyalty, under other circumstances, would be

valuable assets to the State and would be virtus. His selfless 2hh devotion to what he sees as the ordering principle of his life in normal times would be pietas. But the times in which Scaeva lives are not normal times, and Scaeva's seeming virtues are, in reality, vices.

Virtus (is) a keyv/ord in this section of the poem (II48 , 169, 229, 2iiO, 2^ii, 262), and i t i s on the ambiguity of its meaning that the meaning of the whole passage is based. Scaeva, at the start, rebukes his soldiers for their disloyal panic (iSO), though we had been told shortly before, that they had done all that valor could do (132, quod solum ualuit uirtus). VJhen he prevents the capture of the fort single-handed (1W, uictoribus unus / erlpuit uetuitque cani), the soldiers watch "to find out whether valor outnumbered and entrapped could give aught more than death" (I 69, an plus quam mortem uirtus daret). Fortune, says Lucan (191f.), sees a new pair of combatants, a man against war itself. VJhen he has tricked Aulus into coming close to capture him, "his valor kindles" (2^0, incaluit uirtus), and he feels restored only by the slaughter of his foe .... • • • Virtus is here given a precise definition. It is the paradoxical opposite of that highest quality of the Stoics, the virtus which, elsewhere in the poem, is embodied in Cato. Because he is deluded by his ignorance of what is right, Scaeva's valor, ironically, is an evil, the antithesis of what is morally desirable. He exemplifies the paradox that a certain kind of virtus may be the equivalent of magnum crimen. Even so, he had, earlier, reproached his ovm soldiers for their lack of pietas; but the false nature of his oim pietas is demonstrated by the aim toward which he strives. For he himself proclaim s th a t th o se who 'vri.sh to make peace must f i r s t worship Caesar (2U3, adorato summittat Caesare signa), a demand soon followed by his oivn men's worship of himself as the living image of Virtus. Scaeva's insistence on adoration of Caesar, which clearly demonstrates the perversity of his cause, is taken up later on in the poem, when Lucan inveighs against the official worship of the Caesars and also when, in an eloquent exhortation to contemporary Romans, he urges that this false cult be given up and that the true martyr of Freedom, Cato, the only man worthy of worship, be adored instead (9. 6lOff., cf. 9.561if.) 21$

The poet has introduced Scaeva into the narrative to serve a special purpose. Scaeva, if not the most radical of the

characters examined in this chapter (Petreius, Afranius, Vulteius), is the most dangerous. Although Vulteius* and his men's action is draraatic and startling

iam strage cruenta conspicitur cumulata ratis: bustisque remittunt corpora uictores, ducibus mirantibus u lli esse ducera t a n t i .

ii. $70-$73

Lucan suggests that the proper interpretation of their suicide is

lost on mankind

non tamen ignauae post haec exempla uirorum percipient gentes quara sit non ardua uirtus seruitium fugisse manu; sed regna timentur ob ferrum et saeuis libertas uritur armis, ignoratque datos ne quisquam seruiat enses. mors, utinan pauidos uitae subdueere nolles sed uirtus te sola daret.

k . $7$-$8l

Vulteius* and his men's action creates an-emotional scene and the

impact of their suicide is impressive; but it is transitory. They

serve the Republican cause by eleminating themselves from the

fighting forever. Scaeva, on the other hand, is by far more dangeroous

simply because he lives. In him is concentrated the fanatical devotion

to an individual who strives to gain control over his fellow-

citizens and destroy the balance of political life that guarantees

libertas for the State as a whole, and for the individuals who make 2h6 up the State, Scaeva’s courage, self-sacrifice, devotion to his leader, and military skill are all necessary qualities in individual members of a State. But in Scaeva's adherence to Caesar and to

Caesar's goal of tyranny—over Rome and over the rest of the world— these qualities are perverted and become the force that changes

Scaeva into a continually active instrument for the destruction of the State and for the dissolution of the community, which ultimately mean the destruction of libertas. There is irony in that, in a sense, Scaeva himself is already a slave—he un­ thinkingly rushes into battle to serve Caesar without understanding who and what Caesar is—much like Vulteius, who has forgotten that his country has been brought under the heel of Caesar's legions.

The blindness of the characters of this chapter is a sharp contrast to the clear vision of Cato, who accurately assesses the political

situation and can discern the motives of the contenders for power.

It is a contrast with Cato that the perversion and transformation worked by Caesar on Scaeva and on Vulteius is seen most sharply. CONCLUSION

In these three episodes, Lucan has depicted the deteriora­ tion of civic virtue—and, as a consequence, the deterioration of the body politic—first aiaong the Pompeians in the contrasting figures of Petreius and Afranius. Petreius destroys a moment of harmony and peace, when, as Lucan suggests, the men had come to their senses and the war might have come to an end.

Afranius, sensitive to the realities of his situation, submits himself and his men to Caesar’s dementia. His life and the lives of his men are spared and they are removed from participa­ tion in the civil conflict—but at the price of acknowledging

Caesar’s prerogative of dementia, and that Caesar has the power and authority to grant Afranius and his men dispensation from the war. Lucan's sharp irony in portraying Afranius’ mission of suppli­ cation to Caesar casts a dark shadow over Afranius.

•^he two Caesarian partisans, Vulteius and Scaeva, are by far more vigorous and are fanatically dedicated to the cause for which they fight. The are exempla for the reader of the perversion that is part of the civil war. Their pietas and virtus are mis­ begotten and misdirected because they are in service to an individual and not to the State, to a would-be tyrant who will destroy libertas, not enhance it.

2U7 2U8

This whole set of episodes exhibits the irony and paradox inherent in a war to which no honor can attach, A war that pits citizen against fellow-citizen can have no heroes, none can display virtus or pietas whose task is the destruction of the constitutional order and the elimination of the vital human re­

source that makes up the community. 2h9 NOTES

1. Cf. Berthe Marti, "Cassius Scaeva and Lucan's Inventio," The Classical Tradition, L. Wallach, ed., (Ithaca, 1 966): 239- 2^ , especially p. 2 kh and p . See also Rutz, Studien, p. 90.

2. Ahl, Lucan, p. 117.

3 . Cf. the temporary lu ll in the fighting that brings Caesar's troops to mutiny and results in his exacting a severe penalty a t 5 . 237-380 (C hapter V, above).

Ij. Cf. Horn. Od. 8. 2l;6-2$S, especially 2U8-2li9j 3. 31-399; L. 2k~ 67j Vergil Aeneid 1. 695-756.

5 . Haskins, Pharsalia, p. 12U, note to line 207.

6. Makowski, "Death and Liberty," p. 2L'. Note also Makowski's refutation of Metger's theory, pp. 22-2li.

7 . Cf. 9. 227- 23O:

nos . . . Pompeii duxit in arma non belli ciuilis amor, partesque fauore fecimus. ille iacet . . , causaque nostra perit.

8. Cf. 9. 1022- 1026:

accipe regna Phari nullo quaesita cruore: accipe Niliaci ius gurgitis: accipe quidquid pro Magni ceruice daresj dignumque clientem castris crede tuis cui tantum fata licere in generum uolnere tuom.

9. Makowski, "Death and Liberty," p. 22. Note also his discussion of the varying interpretations of these lines, p. 22, note 1.

10. Cf. the complaint of weariness from Caesar's mutinous troops a t 5 . 261-295 and Tarcondimotus' similar complaint to Cato at 9. 233- 236.

11. Haskins, Pharsalia, note to line 365, p. 131.

12. Cf. the mutinous Pompeians to Cato at 9. 230-231. 250

13. Makowski, "Death and Liberty," p. 25.

1)4. nobi.liuni in all MSS. Bentley conjectured mobilium followed by Housnian:

quae uersibus I 47L sq. et 521-5 habentur mobilitatem, non nobilitatem, arguunt. contulit Bentleius Verg. georg. I l l 165 dim faciles animi iuuenura, dum mobilis aetas; adde Quid, ars III 557 stabilis animes annis uiridemque iuuentam . (liousman, Lucanus, p. 107, note to line 521),

15 . Makowski, "Death and Liberty," p. 9, pp. 25-26.

16. Ibid., p. 26. 17. Nehrkom, "Nebencharaktere," pp. 12it-125«

18. Ibid., p. 126. See Makowski, "Death and Liberty," pp. 25-35.

19. Ahl, Lucyi. p. 119. Of. the Caesarian Catalogue of Forces, 1, 392-I465 , Chapter IV above.

20. See Chapter II above.

21. The Theban brothers here also recall the dexription of the tro u b le s betw een Romulus and Remus a t 1 . 93-97 •

22. Ahl, Lucan, p. 120.

23. Cf. Rutz, Studien, p. 88.

2l|. Makowski, "Death and Liberty," pp. 37-iUij W. Rutz, "^ o r mortis b e i Lucan," Hermes 88 (i9 6 0 ): ii 62-ii66, Studien, pp. Ô7-93; Nehrkom, "Nebencharaktere," pp. 127-132.

25 . Scaeva did indeed earn his coveted praise from Caesar in the latter's account of Dyrrhachium at B._C. 3» 53. For discussion of the sources.see Berthe Marti, "Cassius Scaeva and Lucan's Inventio," pp. 239f..> and M. P. 0. Morford, "Some Aspects of Lucan’s Rhetoric," (Ph.D. dissertation. University of London, 1963), pp. 52-56.

26. Cf. Ahl, Lucan, p. 119.

27. "dem Gegner die Proskynese zu erweisen und sich unter ihn zu stellen." (Rutz,"Amor m ortis," p. L6L, with note 5). 2S1

28. Scaeva does indeed survive to be id.th Caesar at a crucial moment in A lexandria a t 10. ^h2-$k6. It is an ironic accident of literary transmission that the poem, as it has come down to us, closes—not with the noble and pure Cato—but with the fanatical line-soldier turned officer, Scaeva.

29. Marti, "Cassius Scaeva," p. 2^h.

30. Ibid., cf. also Ahl, Lucan, pp. 117-118. ALEXANDRIA: A. 8. l60-$76 B. 10. 9-U33

Just as the poet focuses the reader's attention first on

F.oiiie in the early books of the poera, so, after the disaster at

Pharsalia, the reader's interest is directed to another major

city of vital importance to the historical course of the fall of

the Roman Republic—Alexandria.

The first of the two major scenes occurs in Book Eight

(i|60-^78), the final book of the second tetrad, after the battle

has been fought and Pompey d riv en o f f th e f i e l d to begin h is

journey to his fated end on the shore of Egypt. The second occurs

in Book Ten, the whole of which is set in Alexandria. The portion

of interest here, 9,1:33, occupies nearly the whole of the book—the

midpoint of the third tetrad had the poem been completed.

The name Alexandria evokes a triple association: (a) the

city's founder, Alexander the Great; (b) the reigning descendant of

the Ptolemaic Dynasty, Cleopatra; and, (c) the decadence and immoral­

i t y t h a t th e Romans t r a d i ti o n a ll y a s so c ia te d vrith th e E a st.

Lucan develops each of these threads in his narrative of the events

at the Egj'ptian city and its royal court where Pompey is ambushed

252 2 # and assassinated after his defeat, where Caesar falls under the spell of the heiress of Alexander, and Rome seems about to fall into the power of the eastern queen.

In the late Republic Roman democrats had hoped to find in i t s v a s t reso u rces some check on th e power o f Pompey in the East. The annexation of Egypt was part of their programme, and Julius Caesar had not forgotten this when he visited Egypt in l.i8 and hi B.C. But a change came over the situation; instead of Rome annexing Egypt, it began to look as though Egypt, in the person of Cleopatra, might capture the ruler of Rome, and the . fear of Eastern despotism cast a shadow over the city.

The in itial contrast between the two episodes lies in

th e f a c t th a t in th e f i r s t , in Book E ig h t, Pompey i s seen

making his way toward the Egyptian coast and Lucan allows his

reader into the council chamber of the royal palace to hear

his fate discussed by Ptolemy's counselors: Acoreus and

The second episode portrays Caesar and his stay—and

ultimate discomfiture—at the palace.

Both men, in a sense, "fall under the spell" of the

Egyptian court—Pompey is ensnared by Egyptian political intrigue,

Caesar by Cleopatra's wiles. For both, too, Egypt represents a

place of death: for Pompey, because he w ill meet his death there;

for Caesar, who 2$h

. . . p re fe rs th e sp e cta c le of human blood, th e d e so la te site of Troy and the grave of Alexander .... When Caesar arrives at Alexandria at the beginning of Pharsalia 10, he is not attracted by the cultural wealth of the city, though it has much to attest to the ancient strength of Macedonia (10. Ili~19) . . . Instead, he eagerly descends into a cave hollowed out for tombs: "effosimi tumulis cupide descendit in antrum" (10.19). He is not interested in the by-products of Macedonian arms, but only in the grave site of the insane offspring of Philip of Pella, the successful bandit (felix praedo)" (10. 20- 21).3 A. Alexandria; 8. lt60-$76

Pompey's approach from Cyprus to Egypt is observed by an Egyptian sentry and his swift report to the palace causes

c o n ste rn atio n among Ptolem y’ s m in iste rs

iam rapido speculator eques per litora cursu hospitis aduentu pauidam compleuerat aulam. consilii uix tempus erat.

h72-h7h

The Egyptians find themselves in a dilemma; Ptolemy owes his

crown (although p re c a rio u sly balanced) to Pompey. But Pompey

has been d efeated by Caesar and any dependence upon Pompey f o r maintenance of Egyptian autonomy is abrogated by the new set of

political realities. If the defeated Pompey makes for Egypt, it

is certain that the victorious Caesar will as well. The problem

facing the Egyptians is what kind of report are they going to make

to Caesar when he arrives that will not incite him to take strong

measures against Egypt and completely submerge it within the

Roman w orld

iustior in Magnum nobis, Ptolemaee, querelae causa data est. quid sepositam senperque quietam crimine bellorum maculas Pharon, aruaque nostra uictori suspecta facis?

Si 2-^1S

Thus, w hile Pompey makes h is way to th e sh o re, h is f a t e i s being

decided.

2SS 256

The first to speak and offer his opinion is Acoreus

iam placidus senio fractisque modestior annis U?6

consilii uox prima fu it, meritumque fidemque sacraque defuncti iactauit pignora patris.

He is heard out by the others—probably only in deference to his age—but his remarks on mérita, fides, and sacra pignora of

Ptolemy XII are passed over without comment in favor of another

and more vigorous speaker; Pothinus. He contrasts sharply with

the aged Acoreus and his pious sentiments

sed melior suadere malis et nosse tyrannos ausus Porapeius leto damnasse Pothinus.

W 2-h83

If Cotta and Afranius are examples of men of the Republic

sensitive to the new political realities, Pothinus is the

supreme realist

Aegyptum certe la tiis tueamur ab armis. quidquid non fuerit Magni dum bella geruntur, nec uictoris erit.

501-503

feriam tua uiscera, Magne: malueram soceri: rapimur quo cuncta feruntur.

521-522

The language of his speech is that of the politician and statesman;

but his thought shows clearly the effects of Caesar’s activities

and victory at Pharsalia. To the tension of the scene in which 2$7

Pompey's life is signed away by Pothinus (1:83 and $21 above) is added the irony of Lentulus' words to Pompey and the assembled senators of his party, immediately preceding this scene (8, 331-'1|$3), where he first vehemently denounces Pompey's proposed suit to the

Parthians for aid and then moves—with universal consent—to

turn to Egypt. Lentulus, in a sense, unwittingly prepares the way for Pothinus, and ironically assures Pompey's death. If Pompey's

suggestion of a Parthian alliance was foolhardy, Lentulus was

equally unwise in his appreciation of Egyptian court politics

and perfidy.

There is tragedy in the comparison of the short conclusions

to the Pompey-Lentulus debate and the speech of Pothinus;

uicta est sententia Magni, kSS

adsensere omnes s c e l e r i . $36

The burden of Pothinus' speech is to show his colleagues

the necessity of eliminating Pompey in advance of Caesar's

arrival. Whatever ties—legal, diplomatic, or ethical—that once

existed between Ptolemy and Pompey are now a source of danger for

the Egyptians and must simply be abandoned. Pothinus couches this

brutal fact in terms of the pure practicality of the situation.

The speech is a series of short sentences—many of them in the form

of sententiae—but in the association and juxtaposition of words,

Pothinus constructs a kind of counterpoint, the structure of which 2^8 may be o u tlin e d as fo llo w s:

lu s J48 I1. libertas scelerum U9I i u s t a 1;89 saeue 1&92 i u s t i o r Si 2 saeua ii95 reu s 51 0

f a s iiBl; nocentis hBU uiolare 523

f id e s 1;8S, 535 u t i l e 1,81; f id u c ia 50 li, 52 U

r e c te U88 crimine 5li; h o n e s ti k90 crim en 517 p ig n o ra k99

felices 1;87 m iseros 1^87, 535 infelix 525

uirtus U9U regna L 9I, 527, 530 p iu s U9Û sceptrorum uis 1:89 summa p o te s ta s i:9U sceptris 1:98 regnare 500 r e g is 509 re g n i 521:

The introduction to the speech (l:81:-i:95)—a series of general principles of the science of political survival in these times—opens with an ambiguous statement

ius et fas multos faciunt, Ptolemaee, noscentis.

m

But the ambiguity is immediately resolved and the tone is set for the rest of the speech

dat poenas laudata fides, cum sustinet, inquit, quos Fortuna premit.

1:85-1:86 2 #

Pothinus unwittingly echoes Caesar’s words in his next exhortation to Ptolemy^

fatis accede dels que

and the close association of fortuna and fating in ii86 brings

Caesar to the reader's mind and states the cardinal rule of success

for those who find themselves in Ptolemy’s—and Egypt’s position

et cole felices; miseros fuge. L87

His next statement, a simile summarizing his introductory

th o u g h t, rem inds th e rea d e r o f one o f Lucan’ s sim ile s of Book One.

Pothinus says

sidera terra ut distant, ut flamma mari, sic utile recto, sceptrorum uis tota perit, si pendere iusta incipit: euertitque arces respectas honesti,

hQl-h90

Lucan, in describing the unbounded expansion of Rome's wealth

and power, envisions her imminent fall in terms of Stoic

eschatologj^ and says, at 1, 7L-80

antiquom repetent iterum chaos omnia; raixtis sidera sideribus concurrent; ignea pontum astra petenti tellus extenders litora nolet excutietque fretum; fratri contraria Phoebe ib it, et obliquom bigas agitare per orbem indignata diem poscet sibi: totaque discors machina diuolsi turbabit foedera mundi,

Rome abandons recta, iusta, and honesta in the midst of laetae res

(1. 81); Pothinus advises abanding recta in favor of utile. In

Rome’s case, Caesar takes advantage of her weakness amidst prosperity to destroy her freedom; he w ill do the same at Alexandria. The rejection of the ethical principles of a civilized community, understood by the words recta, iusta, honesta, to pursue either wealth or power, must necessarily result in that comra’onity's destruction.

The abandonment of all traditional ethical principles of political life is further emphasized in the closing lines of the introduction

libertas scelerum est quae regna inuisa tuetur, sublatusque modus gladiis facere omnia saeue non impune licet, nisi cum facis.

It91-U93

The juxtaposition of libertas and its objective genitive scelerum, describing the new priniples of political stability

(regna . . . tuetur), again suggests the perversion of Pothinus* policy. The general remarks of the introduction conclude with a triple sententia summing up the advice given there

ex eat a u la qui uolt esse pius. uirtus et summa potestas non coeunt; semper metuet quem saeua pudebunt.

h93-h9^

Virtus, pietas (pius, h9h)j and pudor (pudebunt, h9^) have no place at the center of political power.

The following section of the speech (1|96-521) addresses itself to the specific problem of the Egyptian court, namely,

Pompey*s imminent a r r i v a l . The opening lin e s of t h i s se c tio n are 261 aimed at Ptolemy, to court his sensitivity to his o™ position

non impune tuos Magnus conterapserit annos; qui te nec uictos arcere a litore nostro posse putat,

U96-I i98

But he next darkly hints at a clear and present danger to the kings's position (which w ill, in the event, become a fact)

neu te sceptris priuauerit hospes; pignora sunt propiora tibi; Nilonque Pharonque, si regnare piget, damnatae redde sorori.

lt98-500

The prospect of turning over his uneasy throne to his sister

Cleopatra—or the possibility of her wresting it from him (with the undoubted consequences for Ptolemy)—must surely have made the desired impression on the young king. Once these seeds of fear are planted in Ptolemy's mind, Pothinus proceeds to lay serious charges against Pompey, suggesting that the blame for the defeat at Pharsalia lies squarely on Pompey's shoulders

toto iam pulsus ab orbe, postquam nulla manet rerum fiducia, quaerit, cum qua gente cadat: rapitur ciuilibus umbris. cuius Thessalicas saturat pars magna uolucres: et metuit gentes quas uno in sanguine mixtas deseruit; regesque timet quorum omnia mersit: Thessaliaeque reus nulla tellure receptus s o l l i c i t â t nostrum quem nondum p r o d id it orbem.

S03-S11 262 amd he now brings his disaster and misfortune to plague Egypt

cur sola cadenti haec p la c u it t e l l u s , in quam P h a rs a lic a f a t a conferres poenasque tuas?

S15-$17 and the Egyptians' position—and solution—concludes this second part of the speech

iam crimen haberaus purgandum gladio, quod nobis sceptra senatus te suadente dedit. uotis tua fouimus arma, hoc ferrum, quod fata iubent proferre, paraui non tibi, sed uicto.

517-521

The conclusion of the speech (518-535) presents the specific solution to the Egyptian dilemma in unmistakable terms from the outset

feriam tua uiscera, Magne; malueram soceri: rapimur quo cuncta feruntur. tene mihi dubitas an sit uiolare necesse, cum liceat?

521-52U

The final justification of Pothinus' suggested course of action rounds out the speech; Egypt is too weak to invite a war on

Egyptian soil

metiri sua regna decet uiresque fateri. tu, Ptolemaee, potes Magni fulcire ruinam, sub qua Roma iacet? bustum cineresque moruere Thessalicos audes, bellumque in regna uocare?

5 2 7 -5 3 0 263

Pothinus' showing the folly of taking Pompey's part and offering him support in defeat

ante aciem Emathiam nullis accessimus armis; Pompeii nunc castra placent quae deserit orbis? nunc uictoris opes et cognita fata lacessis?

^31-533

is a stark contrast to the reception of Pompey by the citizens of

Larisa and of Massilia. The contrast is summed up in Pothinus'

final sententia

aduersis non deesse decet, sed laeta secutos. nulla fides umquam miseros elegit amicos.

g3U-g35

All agree upon the course of action proposed by Pothinus (^36);

and his flattery has worked to good effect on Ptolemy

laetatur honore rex puer insueto, quod iam sibi tanta licere permittant famuli.

^36-^38

Pothinus' political philosophy is one of pure expediency (ii87-

1|88), For him the immediate requirements for survival—both

personal and political—outweigh the political and civic virtues

that are a necessary foundation for political existence. In trying

to deal with the two antagonists Pompey and Caesar, Pothinus and 261; the Egyptian court attempt to play one against the other: Pornpey, to whom Ptolemy owes his throne, becomes an embarrassment and is m urdered, Vftiatever t i e s bound Ptolemy to Pompey are wiped away at a stroke. Caesar, victorious over the Republican forces, not susceptible to diplomacy, is a threat to Egyptian autonomy and his murder will be plotted.

•‘•'he irony of the situation lies in the fact that Pothinus will have to face Caesar, whose ovm policy also is one of selfish expediency. The tyranny that Pothinus seeks to avoid will be im­ posed by one who is better able to carry but his personal ambitions.

The remainder of the narrative portion falls into two general sections: 536-560 and 560-576. In this transition be­ tween the council and the murder of Pompey, Lucan echoes Pothinus' choice of words and a similar contrast of terms is observable:

honore 536 nefas 550 infanda 56l

fides 5ii7, 572 perfida 539

iure 558 sceleri 536, 538, 571 scelerata 563

pietas 573 rex 537, 55ii tyrannus 555, 571; r e g ia 572 regna 560, 561;

fata 5W;, 568, 575

fortuna 558 26^

In the first section, the poet condemns Egypt for the decision taken against Pompey. The disparity in rank' of killer and v ictim

non domitor mundi nec ter Capitolia curru inuectus regumque potens uindexque senatus uictorisque gener: Phario satis esse tyranno quod p o te r a t, Romanus e r a t . quid u is c e r a n o s tra scrutaris gladio?

S53-SS7

o su p e r!, rlilu sn e e t b arb ara Memphis et Pelusiaci tarn mossis turba Canopi hos aniraos?

again betrays the Roman prejudice against the Orient—and against

Egypt 'in particular. Lucan's use of the word mollis points to a basic Roman attitude toward the East. The soft, effeminate eunuch of the Egyptian court is in marked contrast to the virile strength of Caesar and of Pompey; and his distorted and cunning policy of expediency to the ancient tradition of Republican idealism. VJhen

Lucan returns to the events in Egpt after Caesar's arrival, in Book

Ten, this theme w ill be developed further.

The second p a rt of th e n a rr a tiv e (560-576) b rin g s Pompey back to the reader's attention. Here Lucan describes him drawing

close to the shore and being met by the delegation and the

assassins. They cover up the reason for their approach to the Roman vessel, saying the anchorage and the harbor facilities are not 266 s u ita b le f o r la r g e fo re ig n sh ip s . The p ic tu r e o f Pompey t h a t

Lucan paints here is one of calm and dignity as he steps, knowingly, into the trap. His company, too, know that Egypt is not going to be a safe refuge for their leader—the lie about the harbor is transparent

non u lli comitum sceleris praesagia deerant. quippe, fides si pura foret, si regna liagno sceptrorum auctori uera pietate pateret, uenturuia tota Pharium cum classe tyrannura.

571-57lt

But the actors in this drama are not able to avoid the fate that i s meant f o r Pompey—Pompey h im self could n o t avoid i t —nor does he choose to try to avoid it. His calm at this point raises him above the weaknesses and shortcomings he exhibited in the past and cloaks him with a dignity that enhances the emotional content of this scene and prepares the reader for the apotheosis at the beginning of Book Wine

quod nisi fatorura leges intentaque iussu ordinis aeterni miserae uicinia mortis damnatum l e t o tra h e re n t ad l i t o r a Ifegnum.

568-$70

sed cedit fatis, classemque relinquere iussus obsequitur, letumque iuuat praeferri timore,

S7S-S76 267

Despite Pompey's personal weaknesses and his errors of judgment in the past, his dignity as he moves toward his fated end throws the unscrupulous and devious conduct of the minions of the Egyptian court into relief. However imperfectly, Pompey represents the old Republican cause and its political idealism born of five hundred years of political experience and wisdom. Pompey, even with his imperfections, does not reach to the depths represented in Pothinus and Achillas whose "political wisdom" comes from considerations only of personal power, self-aggrandizement, and accumulation of wealth. Pompey is conscious of political morality and the demands of a well ordered civil polity based bn firm constitutional priniples. Pothinus and his henchmen derive their

"political morality" from whatever their own personal advancement demands at the moment—and these demands may, and do, change from day to day. The drama o f Pompey moving from th e Roman w orld

into the Oriental world—to meet his death there—symbolizes

the end of Roman civilizing influence and political stability

at the hands of representatives of a new order of immorality,

lack of principle, worship of expediencey and selfishness. As long

as he l iv e s , and b e fo re Cato assumes command, Pompey i s th e stan d ard

of Roman order and civilization. Pothinus, Achillas, the puppet-

king Ptolemy, Cleopatra, and the rest of the Alexandrians of the

ro y a l c o u rt are th e sta n d a rd o f ty ran n y to come f o r Rome, th e u p se t

of political life, the end of libertas A lexandria: B. 10. 9-h33

The final Alexandrian episode, occupying lQ% o f Book

Ten, shows the reader the victorious Caesar who, throughout the poem, ”... exposes himself freely to all the threats that man and nature can hurl against him, firm in the belief that there is nothing that w ill not bow to his command."^ Now, however, he is faced vri.th a challenge different from that of the politics of

Republican Rome and that of the dangers of the battlefield,

Caesar enters the world of Alexander the Great, his heirs the

Ptolemies—and Cleopatra

inde Paraetoniara fertur securus in urbem pignore tarn saeui sceleris sua signa secutus.

9=10

The v isit to Egypt is the second of Caesar’s journeys

to ancient centers of civilization, wealth and power. In Book

Nine, a t 96I- 986, he makes his way to the'site of Troy and

contemplates the remains of the city and the souvenirs of the

T rojan War

Sigeasque petit famae mirator harenas, et Simoentis aquas, et Graio nobile busto Rhoetion, et multum debentis uatibus umbras,

9 . 96 1 -9 6 3

268 26?

The place where Caesar walks is barren and desolate

c ir c u it exustae nomen memorabile T ro iae, magnaque Phoebei quaerit uestigia muri. iam siluae stériles et putres robore trunci Assaraci pressere domos, et templa deorura iam lassa radice tenent, ac tota teguntur Pergarna dumetis: etiam periere ruinae.

9. 96U-969

He does not recognize some of the most important landmarks that have disappeared or changed over the centuries

inscius in sicco serpentern puluere riuora transierat qui Xanthus erat: securus in alto gramine ponebat gressus; Phryx incola manes Hectoreos calcare uetat. discussa iacebant saxa nec ullius faciem seruantia sacri; Herceas, monstrator ait, non respicis aras?

9 . 97I4-979

The poet's emphasis on the barrenness of the place serves a

double function; it serves as a transition between the battle of

Pharsalia and the major scene at Alexandria; and it highlights

Caesar as a man associated vjith destruction and violence—past

and present—which w ill be further underscored by the poet's

association between Caesar and Alexander the Great In Book Ten.

The silent, desolate, and nearly unrecognizable site of Troy

(etiam periere ruinae, 969), is an echo of the slaughter of the

battlefield of Pharsalia (Caesar ut Bmathia satiatus clade recessit,

950). Caesar concludes his inspection with a sacrifice to the dead and to the gods of Troy

ut duels impleuit uisus ueneranda uetustas, erexit subitas congestu caespitis aras, uotaque turicreraos non irrita fudit in ignes; di cinerum, Phrygias colitis quicumque ruinas,

9. 987-990

and he explicitly renews the association of himself and his family with the ancient Trojans

Aeneaeque mei, quos nunc Lauinia sedes seruat et Alba, lares, et quorum lucet in aris ignis adhuc Phrygius.

9 . 991-993

His prayer is an echo of his words to Roma in Book One

gentis lulieae uestris clarissimus aris dat pia tura nepos et uos in sede priori rite uocatj

9.999-997

and he asks the same favor at Troy that he did from Roma

date felloes in cetera cursus. 9. 997

Roma faue coeptis; non te furialibus armis persequor; en adsura uictor terraque marlque Caesar ubique tuus, liceat modo, nunc quoque miles.

1 . 200-203

and he promises to resurrect the ancient Trojan glory in Roman

g u ise

restituara populos: grata uice moenia reddent Ausonidae Phrygibus Romanque Pergarna su rg e n t.

9 . 998-999

From the site of Troy, Caesar makes his way swiftly to Egypt, 271

Caesar's v isit to Egypt—like Pompey's suggestion of a

Parthian alliance—gives Lucan another opportunity for a denunciation of Eastern luxury and iramoralityj and—more important here—of the tyrant Alexander, who has an heir also in Caesar.

Caesar's ultimate victory in the civil wars, then, brings to Rome the trappings of Eastern luxuiy, religion, and monarchy—and very nearly an Egyptian woman to rale it, Pothinus, Achillas, and Ganymede are but forerunners of the mercenaries and eunuchs who were to control the Roman empire, people who, until the time of Caesar, had no p la c e in th e p o l i t i c s o f Rome. To L u can 's contem porary reader, the scenario of Alexandria in Pharsalia 10 must have been something a ll too fam iliar in the Rome of their own day.6

Alexander's tomb, above a ll other cultural and economic attractions of the city, holds a special fascination for Caesar; and the poet emphasizes the relationship between Alexander and

Caesar,^ : th e e a rth

effossum tumulis cupide descendit in antrum. 22

The poet makes a connection between Caesar and the realm of the

Underworld in his description. Unlike the journeys to Hades by

Herakles, Odysseus, and Aeneas, Caesar's vn.ll not be the renewing process that it was for the earlier epic heroes. It is not a part of the process of apotheosis as it was for Herakles, nor the

readying to assume the burdens and responsibilities of domestic

life that it was for Odysseus, not a lesson in pietas as it was

for Aeneas. Caesar descends into the artificially constructed

world of the grave to view the sterile remains of the conqueror 272 and tyrant Alexander

nam s ib i l ib e r ta s umquam s i re d d e re t orben, lu d ib r io s e n ia tu s e r a t, non u t i l e raundo editus exemplurn, terras tot posse sub uno e sse u ir o .

2S-28

Caesar leams nothing from the visit to the tomb—he has nothing

to leam . Rather, Lucan presents. Caesar as a reflection of the

Macedonian

perque Asiae populos fatis urgentibus actus^ humana cuia s tra g e r u i t , gladium que p er omnes exegit gentes:

30-32

percuteret pariter populos, et sidus iniquon g e n tib u s.

3U-36

oceano classes inferre parabat._ exteriore mari, non illi flamma nec undae nec sterilis Libye nec Syrticus obstitit Haramon.

36—38

From the tomb Caesar proceeds to the palace and,

meeting Ptolemy, takes him as hostage for his ovm security

iam Pelusiaco ueniens a gurgite Nili rex puer imbellis populi sedauerat iras, obside quo pacis Pellaea tutus in aula Caesar erat.

S3-S6

From the past, represented by the tomb and the poet's tirade against

Alexander, Caesar passes into the present, represented by the brief 273 allusion to P to le m y (5il), and th e fo llo w in g —and much more significant—confrontation with Cleopatra.

In the meeting between Caesar and Cleopatra, the Roman faces a new and different kind of challenge

cum se parua Cleopatra biremi, corrupto custode Phari laxare catenas, in tu lit Emathiis ignaro Caesare tectis; ■ dedecus Aegypti, Latii feralis iC^inys, Romano non c a sta m alo,

56-60

quern form ae co n fisa suae C leo p atra sin e u l l i s . ^ ^ tristis adit lacrim is, simulatum compta dolorem qua decuit, ueluti laceros dispersa capillos.

82-8U

Faced >/ith weapons other than the ones proper to the maneuverings

of Republican politics or those of the battlefield, Caesar vdll

succumb^ ^

nequiquam duras temptasset Caesaris aures: uoltus adest precibus faciesque incesta perorat,

10h-105

exigit infandam corrupto iudice noctem. 106

Cleopatra's speech to Caesar (85-103) is couched in terms

of a diplomatic appeal to Caesar's power. She represents the

"opposition" to Pothinus, whom Gaeear already encountered—indirectly—

at 9. IOIh-1108, and she tries to use Caesar to neutralize the

influence and power of the court minions. The same appeal to family 27li and to royal lineage opens her address as it did in the delegate’s speech in Book Nino

et sic orsa loqui; si qua est, o maxime Caesar, nobilitas, Pharii proles clarissima Lagi, exsul in aeternum sceptris depulsa patem is, si tua restituât ueteri me dextera fato, complector regina pedes.

8g-89

She appeals to Caesar’s dementia''*^

tu g en tib u s aequom sidus ades nostris.

89-90

nil ipsa patemi iuris inire peto: culpa tantoque pudore solue doraun: remoue funesta satellitis arma et regem regnare iube.

She repeats for Caesar what he was able to discern for himself about Egyptian intentions'*^

quantosne tumores mente gerit famulis Magni ceruice reuplsa? iam tibi, sed procul hoc auertant fata, minatur.

99-101

and matches her words to suit Caesar’s public image and feigned

grief over Pompey’s death

sat fuit indignum, Caesar, mundoque tibique Pompeium fa c in u s meritum que f u is s e P o th in i.

102-103 27$

Caesar is won over by Cleopatra's cunning—and her charms—

exigit infandam corrupto iudice noctem. pax ubi parta duci donisque ingentibus empta est, excepere epulae tantarum gaudia reruja; e x p licuitque suos magno C leopatra tum ultu nondum tr a n s la ta s Romana in saecu la luxus

106-110 and he is on the verge of losing a major engagement.

Only when his sense of purpose is weakened by his affair w ith C leopatra and by h is t a s t e f o r E gyptian luxury," does he begin to assume the dimensions of the rhetorical tyrant figure .... Caesar and Cleopatra use one another sexually as they do politically: to satisfy their amoral lusts. Lucan gives no hint that Cleopatra reciprocates Caesar's passion; she merely succumbs to it for her own political purposes. Thus Caesar very n e a rly passes on to her th e w orld th a t Rome, according to Curio, has conquered for hira.l^

A detailed description of the feast follows with emphasis on the variety of the surroundings—in architecture (111-126), in attendants and servants (127-135)j in Cleopatra's attire (136-

1it3), in the table service and the foods (lUi-l5ii, 155-171 ).

The feast ends land the remaining hours are passed in discussion between Caesar and the priest Acoreus, whom Caesar listens to with more respect and attention than was afforded him by his colleagues in the council-chamber at 8. ij.7li-ii8l. Caesar

opens a discussion on questions of Egyptian ethnology, geography,

and theology 2 #

. . . Caesar wants to leam the secrets of Egypt from Achoreus the sage . . . Yet we should not infer that Caesar's megalomania has lapsed under the influence of the Alexandrian court. It is merely given a different coloring, as Caesar's words to Achoreus show. "Betray the (secrets of) the gods to me; they want to be betrayed (noscique volentes / prode deos)" (10. I 8O-I8I . . . Caesar now claims for hm self philosophical not just m ilitary virtue. He has won his battle with Eudoxus, as well as m th Pompey; his calendar vâll rule the year as he will rule the cities of the world. Surely the honor accorded Plato cannot be denied him, for he has made himself master and regulator of the cosmos. Megalomania could hardly extend further.^7

Once again Lucan presents a scene in which all the elements of the ancient guest-host convention are present: food, wine, conversation.^^ Again in this context of a sacred social tradition the future of Rome is brought into jeopardy.

Acoreus delivers a lengthy discourse concerning the matters suggested by Caesar (19U-331)» VJhile the banquet and the discussion proceed past midnight and the guests and hosts pursue their intellectual pleasures in seeming tranquility (sic uelut in tuta securi pace trahebant / noctis iter mediae, 332-333), the intrigue that is endemic to the Egyptian court continues and now fastens on Caesar as its target. Caesar's victory placed the remnants of Egyptian autonomy on a precarious footing; Pompey's presence was an embarrassment and he had to be eliminated; now

Caesar, captured by Cleopatra, is a serious danger. Pothinus seeks to neutralize the danger—this time without the aid of the Council— and without the rubber-stamp of Ptoleit^r. Pothinus, working desperately 277 to maintain his own tottering position, is described by the poet

as gaining in boldness after the murder of Pompey

sed non uaesana Pothini^^ mens imbuta semel sacrata caede uacabat a scelerum motu. Magno nihil ille perempto iam putat esse nefas: habitant sub pectore manes ultricesque deae dant in noua monstra furorem.

333-337

He secures his comrade in the first crime, Achillas, to aid him

in the assassination of Caesar. His message to Achillas is an

outline of the situation in Alexandria now that Caesar is firmly

entrenched in Cleopatra’s camp

tu mollibus, inquit, nunc incumbe toris et pingues exige soranos: inuasit Cleopatra domum. nec prodita tantum est, sed donata Pharos, cessas accurrere solus ad dominae thalamos? nubit sorer impia fratri: nam Latie iam nupta duci est: interque maritos d isc u rre n s Aegj'pton h ab et Eomamque m eretu r.

3S3-3S9

He tries to impress upon Achillas the precarious nature of both

their situations

cmcibus flammisque luemus si fuerit formosa soror. nil undique restât auxilii: rex hinc coniunx, hinc Caesar adulter: et sumus, ut fatear, tarn saeua iudice sentes, quern non ex nobis credet Cleopatra nocentem a quo casta fuit? per te quod fecimus una perdidimusque nefas, perque ictum sanguine Magni foedus, ades: subito bellum molire tumultu.

365-372

The intended assassination of Caesar broadens in scope to include 278

Cleopatra as well

ir r u e nocturnus: rumparous fu n ere tae d a s, crudelemqiie t o r i s dominam mactemus in ip s i s cura quocurnque u iro .

373-37S

Achillas responds immediately to Pothinus* warning. A company of men is stealthily assembled to carry out the planned attack

non segnis Achillas suadenti parere nefas. baud clara mouendis, ut mos, signa dedit castris, nec prodidit arma ullius clangors tubas; teraere omnia saeui instrumenta rapit belli.

398-102

The majority of the men selected for the attack are described by the poet as Romans: pars maxima turbae/ plebis erat latiae, it02-U03. Extended service in Egypt has taken away any sense of loyalty to their original home—and, as well, any sense of honor—

sed tanta obliuio mentes cepit, in externos corrupto m ilite mores, ut duce sub famulo iussuque satellitis irent, quos erat indignum Phario parere tyranno. nulla fides pietasque uiris qui castra sequuntur; uenalesque manus, ubi fas, ubi maxima merces, aere merent paruoj iugulumque in Caesaris ire non sibi dant. pro fas, ubi non ciuilia bella inuenit imperii fatum miserabile nostri?

Ii03-Ul 1

The prostitution of their military service to a foreign king is

bad enough, b u t th e f a c t t h a t t h e i r commands come, n o t from th e

king (who is rex puer imbellis, puer imbellis, 3^1)» but from

the king's minions makes the immorality of their position worse. 279

The most serious charge Lucan makes against these men, however, is the effect of their mercenary employment in Egypt

nulla fides pietasque uiris qui castra sequuntur; uenalesque manus, ubi fas, ubi maxima merces.

li07-lt0S

The final irony of the situation is—in the poet's vision—that these Roman soldiers turned Egyptian mercenaries are enlisted by Ptolemy's lackeys (who have no respect for PtolemjO to murder

Caesar. In effect, this is another manifestation of the civil war: Roman p i tt e d a g a in s t Roman.

pro fas, ubi non ciuilia bella inuenit imperii fatum roiserabile nostri? Thessaliae subducta acies in litore Nili more furit patrio. quid te plus, Magne, recepto ausa foret Lagea domus? dat scilicet omnis dextera quod debet superis: nullique uacare f a s e s t Romano. Latium s ic sc in d e rs corpus dis placitum: non in soceri generique fauorem discedunt populi: ciuilia bella satelles m ouit e t in partem Romani u e n it A c h illa s , et nisi fata manus a sanguine Caesaris arcent hae uincent partes.

hi 0-121

Lucan's picture of the perverted guest-host relationship of the banquet, together with the bizarre resurgence of the civil war

in Egypt creates an atmosphere of perversion that is of a piece with the poet's conception of political chaos up to this point.

However, the planned assassination does not take place on the night

of the banquet. Once more Caesar is preserved from destruction— adcrat maturus uterquc; et distrieta epulis ad cunctas aula patebat insidias: poteratque cruor per regia fundi pocula Caesareus mensaeque incumbere ceruix. sed metuunt belli trepidos in nocte tumultus, ne caedes confusa manu permissaque fatis te, Ptolemaee, trahat; tanta est fiducia ferri.

121-L27

—and the conspirators rest easy in the seeming simplicity of their ta sk

non rapuere nefas: summi contempta facultas est operis: uisum farrrulis reparabile damnum illam mactandi dimittere Caesaris horam,

128-1:30

The poet creates the same suspense in his closing remarks descriptive of the conspiracy

seruatur poenas in aperta luce daturus. donata est nox una duci uixitque Pothini munere Phoebeos Caesar dilatus in ortus.

1:31-1:33

The reader knows well that Caesar vri.ll not die in Egypt and that he indeed has been spared longer than the coming morning. A chance l e t s l i p av:ay ag ain ,

nox haec peraget ciuilia bella, inferiasque dabit populis, et m ittet ad umbras quod d eb etu r adhuc mundo caput,

391-393 vri.ll allow Caesar to carry on his program of conquest until he gains

his position of supreme pov;er over Rome and over the Roman vrorld.

It is fitting that the final conflict Caesar faces is in the decadent 281

East where his own amorality—and immorality—reaches its clima>:.

He will survive the short-lived discomfiture at Alexandria that will carry both Caesar to the summit of power and the Egyptian

court to its long dreaded absorption into the Roman provincial

system and administration—and Caesar (and his heir Mark Antony, in a few short years) to ultimate destruction. COMCLUSIÜi-I

In the Alexandrian episodes, Lucan portrays for the reader the major city of the Hellenistic East being drawi irrevocably into th e Roman p o l i t i c a l up h eav al. The name o f th e c it y r e c a l ls f o r th e reader the Roman prejudice against Oriental wealth, power, decadence,

and luxury that contrasts with the traditional Roman ideal of

discipline, austerity, and reason.

The proportion of the poem devoted to Alexandria is

approximately equal to that devoted to Rome; for, in the poet's

vision, ^orae is set on a course that tn.ll inevitably lead her to

the same point which Alexandria has already reached. The luxury

of the Egyptian palace and banquet is matched by Rome's taste for

luxury and self-indulgence described in Book One. The tyranny

established by the city's founder Alexander is matched by the

new tyrant Caesar who, fittingly, pays reverence to Alexander's

tomb and becomes enamored of the luxury of the Egyptian court

and its mistress, Cleopatra,

The political upheaval of Rome is matched by the political

intrigue that is the essence of Egyptian court life—the troubles

at Rome pit Pompey against Caesar, at Alexandria political intrigue

takes Pompey's life away—and ensnares Caesar, first in the

clutches of Cleopatra, and then in a temporary m ilitary discomfiture

282 283 at the hands of Egyptian troops, liie corruption, the political in-fighting, and degeneracy of the court is a mirror held up by the poet to Rome. The five hundred year old tradition of Roman constitutional order is set on a path that can end only at the place to uhich Alexandria has come. 28ii

1. M. P. Charlesv7orth, "The Fear of the Orient in the Roman Empire,” Cambridge Historical Journal 2 (1926); 10.

2. Although Lucan, in introducing this part of the scene, says a t h lh -h lS :

consilii uix tempus erat: tamen omnia monstra P e lla e a e co iere domus

the scene revolves around Pothinus. Acoreus fades out of the picture and Ptolemy has not much greater part to play in the proceedings.

3. Ahl, Lucan, p. 223. See also Horford, The Poet Lucan, pp. 13- 19, especially pp. 17-19.

li. 1. 227: credidimus fatis. Cf. 1. 309-311:

nunc, cum Fortuna secundis mecum rebus agat superique ad summa uocantis tem ptam ur.

Ahl, Lucan, p. 229.

6. Ib id .

7. Ibid., pp. 223-22$.

8. Cf. 1. 227, 309-311.

9. Cf. 1. 151-157.

10. Cf. 5. 577-671.

11. Note another aspect of Eastern perfidy. Cf. 9. 1106-1107:

abscondunt gemitus et pectora laeta fronte tegunt, hilaresque nefas spectare cruentum.

■‘Scall Lucan's description of Caesar at 9. 1061-1063:

quod te non passa est misereri, perfide, Magni uiuentis. nec non his fallere uocibus audet, adquiritque fidem simulâti fronte doloris. 2%

12. Ahl, Lucan, p. 227.

13. Cf. Caesar's words at 9. 1066-1089.

Ili. Cleopatra, Lucan's Latii feralis Srlnys (10. 99), ironically calls upon Caesar to be aequom sidus, when Lucan has placed him in the shadow of Alexander the Great—the sidus iniquom gentibus (10. 35 - 30).

15. Cf. 9. 1081-1087.

16. Ahl, Lucan, p. 229.

17. Ibid., pp. 227-228.

18. Cf. i;. 196- 205 .

19. Cf. proles uaesana Philippi, 10. 20; and uaesano . . . regi. 10. X , CONCLUSION

This study has sought to throw a new light on Lucan’s poetic conception of the Roman Civil Wars of h9 to B.C. The method adopted was that of sele cbing out of the narrative a set of thirty- four episodes, each of which portrays an aspect of the poltical and social deterioration consequent upon the civil strife engendered by the ambitions of the three members of the First Triumvirate,

Pompey, Caesar, and Crassus, and the ultimate struggle between the two survivors, Pompey and Caesar, that culminated in the Battle of

P h a r sa lia .

The two large classifications into which these episodes were divided earlier showed: (1) specifically named cities—Rome,

Ariminum, M assilia, Larisa, Mytilene, Alexandria (Chapters 1, II,

IX); (2) political scenes (the term "political," as defined in the

Introduction, embraces the entire spectrum of civic life)—The

Catalogues (Chapter IV), The Camps Opposite, The Mass Suicide

(Chpater VIII a and b); (3) characters—Caesar Politicus (Chapter

II), Pompey Politicus (Chapter VI), Cato Politicus et Sapiens (Chapter

VII), Scaeva (Chapter VIII c).

In the first of these groups, Lucan sets the stage for his

narrative using the formal setting of the geographically defined area

of the urbs—beginning first with Rome in Books One and Two, then

proceeding to those other cities that feel the effects of Rome's

286 2 # civil war in Books One (Ariminum), Three (M assilia), Seven (Larisa), and Eight (Mytilene), ending with the mirror of Rome—what Rome is about to become—Alexandria, in Books Eight and Ten, Within the formal geographical lim its of the urbs, the impact of the civil strife and the influence of its perpetrators is shorn upon the normal s tr u c tu r e of c iv ic l i f e a t Rome. The r e s u l t i s f i r s t enveloping terror and confusion in the face of all the signs that a mighty struggle is about to take place that will rework and alter the familiar structure of civic existence (l. 166-^22; 2. 16- 233).

Terror and confusion give way to dumb submission to Caesar's overwhelming force of arms and the power of his personality ( 3 . 98- 112, 11^ - 11^0 ).

Since Rome is the model of urban civilization, the mighty struggle that affects Rome so deeply cannot help but affect other communities as well. Rome's terror and confusion is mirrored in that of Ariminura, as that city succumbs to Caesar's XIII Legion (l. 231-261). The moral and ethical basis of M assilia's political existence is put to the test in the confrontation with Caesar and his armies in Book

Three, at 298-762. Massilia holds firm to its moral principles

even though it must submit to siege and destruction. The immorality

of Caesar's actions is most clearly demonstrated here. Larisa (?. 712-

727) and Mytilene ( 8 . 109-158) are both examples of adherence to

fides, the ethical basis of civil life, in their explicit offer of

refuge and aid to Pompey—even in defeat. Practicality and

expediency dictate that these small cities immediately submit to the victorious Caesar. Rather than fall in line with the winner, they

choose to obey a higher order of political morality.

All of these scenes not only mirror what has happened to

Rome, they a lso serve as a c o n tr a s t to Rome. The power and p o s itio n

that Rome acquired, and the wealth that resulted, worked a change

upon the city that allowed a Caesar to gain mastery over the city and

over his fellow citizens (1. 70-222). The moral fiber that had been

strengthened in the five hundred years of Rome's growth and that had

been put to the test in Rome's struggle with Carthage has, since

Hannibal's time, decayed and weakened and is now unable to resist

and control the ambitious schemes of one of its own citizens.

Ariminum, M assilia, Larisa, and Mytilene show no such weakness.

They, too, must submit to Caesar's victory, but their moral

awareness remains strong and vital.

The last picture, that of Alexandria, represents a contrast

to these four cities, but is also meant to be a mirror for Rome.

The Egyptian city is the model for what Rome is about to become.

The poet shows his reader the kind of political structure that obtains

there. The city, founded by a tyrant, ruled by despots steeped in

eastern luxury and wealth, is at the mercy of court eunuchs manipulating

an infantile king on the basis of a policy of practicality and

expediency that changes virtually every day—depending upon where

their own personal advantage lies. Pompey is a victim of their

policies—Caesar himself nearly is. The complete reversal of the 2 ^ ethical and moral principles proper to the political life of a civilized community, and the negation of Rome's traditional

Republican ideals that Alexandria represents, is the inevitable end toward which Rome is headed.

Complementary to the city episodes are scenes termed here

"political." This term encompasses all the aspects of civic life; governmental, social, moral, cultural, economic, spiritual.

These elements are present, as well, in those scenes cast outside the dramatic setting of a specific city. It is within the dramatic context of both these settings that Lucan's characters act out their re sp e c tiv e r o le s f o r good o r e v il : Caesar P o litic u s , Pompey

Politicus, Cato Politicus et Sapiens, Curio, Petreius and Afranius,

Vulteius, Scaeva, Cleopatra, Acoreus, Pothinus, Achillas.

Caesar, alternating between soldier-comraander and

statesman-politician, manipulates the constitutional mechanism

of Rome and of other cities for his ovm personal gain. Caesar’s

c o u n te rp a rt, Pompey, p lay s both th ese r o le s as w e ll, b u t vrLth le s s

effectiveness for good than Caesar for evil. Pompey's personal

weaknesses as well as the control to which he is subject—unlike

Caesar—lim it his effectiveness. Lucan sets up an ideal for the

political man—the civis—in the figure of Cato. Although we normally

define an "ideal" as a goal one strives toward, in the certain

knowledge that he will never fully attain it, Lucan's Cato is the

ideal civis in the strict sense, a fully achieved ideal. Cato's life 2ÿO is ordered by a solid foundation of philosophic principles.

It is this solid foundation^ and his ovm personal awareness of its soundness, as demonstrated in the scene with Marcia (2. 325-329) and again at the Oracle of Zeus Ammon (9. 511-586), that make him sapiens. The principles that govem his personal and private life extend farther to embrace his conduct in public life, as demonstrated in his conversation with Brutus (2. 23h-32$). Cato's penetrating evaluation of Rome's present political situation and his analysis of the motives of both contenders for power have brought him to a momentous decision. That decision vn.ll lead him to follow

Pompey, the appointed leader of the Republican cause—quin publica sig n a ducemque / Pompeium sequim ur? (2 . 319-320)— and to tak e upon his own shoulders that cause after Pompey's assassination: totae post Magni funera partes / libertatis erant ( 9. 29-30). Thus Cato becomes the politicus and serves as the focal point of political morality and wisdom amid the chaos created by self-seeking manipulators o f Rome

patriam tutore carentem excepit, populi trepidantia membra refouit, ignauis manibus proiectos reddidit enses: nec regnum cupiens gessit ciuilia bella, nec seruire timens. nil causa fecit in armis ipse sua: totae post Magni funera partes libertatis erant.

9 . 21-30

Cato is thus a foil for Pompey as well as for Caesar. Lucan has striven to surround his Cato with an aura of unassailable calm and 291

selfless courage that separates him from all the other characters

of the poem. Marcia, as a foil for Cornelia, enhances the stem

austerity of Cato by sharing that austerity. This separates her

from Cornelia who, although sensitive to Pompey’s needs and trouble, nevertheless is the source of the romantic love that weakens Pompey

and malces him less effective as the Republican champion. Finally,

Cato and Marcia obviously contrast to the debased immorality of

Caesar’s liason with Cleopatra. It is the rigorous austerity and

seemingly joyless asceticism of Cato’s life—crystalized in the

wedding-scene—that emphasizes the contrast,"* But Lucan has care­

fully constructed his character to provide maximum dramatic contrast

to the other figures and to prepare the reader for the monumental

role that Cato ifill play at the end of the poem, the last we see

of Cato in the poem’s present state is his arrival at Leptis in

Book Nine, at 9U9. The long controversy over the identification of

the hero of Lucan’s poem, and, coupled closely with that question, the

point at which he would have ended the poem had he lived, has been

settled as satisfactorily as is now possible around Cato.^ Cato’s

suicide at Utica, the last great act of defiance to Caesar’s tyranny

over him, provides the fitting and tragic end to the poem. Fitting,

inasmuch as the entire poem is a \ ( o /L /I O S over the violent end

of the ancient Republican institutions or order, political stability,

morality, and communal as well as personal libertas, whose soul

and spirit are embodied as fully as possible in a human being in 292

Cato.^ It is tragic because even though Cato's assertion of personal free vrill, of his prerogative of individual libertas, is grounded and dictated by the principles of his philosophy,

Caesar's is still the victory, Caesar is still the tyrant. Cato's suicide, in contrast to that of Vulteius and his battalion of

Opiterginians, is rooted in sound philosophical principle and springs fron pure motives. But paradox and tragedy lie in the fact that, although Cato's death is an assertion of an individual's control over his fate, it is the simultaneous destruction of the ideal of political morality and individual libertas against which all else is to be measured, and an implicit recognition of the reality of Caesar and the force, in Rome and in the world, that he exerts. Once Cato is removed as a force in Roman political life, there is no one to fill his place—because no other individual

could achieve his degree of perfection. However, once Cato is removed as a standard in Roman political life, there is one to fill his place—Caesar. The substitution of Caesar for Cato, the effects of which can be observed already in the figures of Laelius, Curio,

Vulteius, Scaeva, and in the erosion of principle observable in

M etellus and C o tta, w i l l r e s u l t in th e f o s te rin g , a t Rome, o f men

like Pothinus, Achillas, and Septimius. This is the necessary con­

sequence of the disorder of the civil war.

The civil disorder that Caesar has created is of a special

kind. A conflict that sets citizen against fellow-citizen, where one

citizen strives to achieve supreme and unquestioned mastery over 293 his fellov; citizens by violence, assumes tragic proportions well beyond the evil worked upon a state by a foreign invader

populumque potentem in sua uictrici conuersum uiscera dextra, cognatasque acies, et rupto feedere regni certatum totis coneussi uiribus orbis in commune nefas, infestisque obuia signis signa, pares a.quilas, et pila minantia pilis.

1. 2-7

In a sense, Caesar makes himself a "foreigner" to his country.

He separates himself from the community to do violence to it and

in so doing denies the existence of the bond that holds the community

together. Chaos is the inevitable result. In the atmosphere of civil

chaos, the contagion that Caesar brings with him spreads, and

affects other individuals within the community. Men like Vulteius,

Scaeva, Curio, and Laelius are transformed by Caesar and i-ri.llingly

and deliberately choose to enlist themselves in his cause and

do his bidding. The civic virtues, perfect in Cato, are perverted

in these men and create in them the instruments of the destruction

of the State and the dissolution of the community. For Lucan this

dissolution was a permanent condition from which no recovery was to

be expected—in fact, was not possible ( 7. 387- 392, it26-li36).

For Vergil and Horace, the violence and bloodshed inaugurated by

Caesar, although traumatic and undesirable, were the birth pangs

of a new era of civilization and culture that culminated in

Augustus and the benefits of the Augustan Age, For these two men 29L

Augustus Princeps—the First Citizen—brought fJ.rst peace, and then an era of constitutional law and order. Lucan, on the other hand, saw only th e trag ed y of the human r e s p o n s ib ility fo r the destruction of the old traditional Rome brought about by the un­

controlled ambition of one man willing to plunge his fellow citizens into war to satisfy that atribition. The fear of a tyrant—a rex—never lost to Roman consciousness through five hundred years of Republican

government, and his appearance in the person of Julius Caesar, meant the destruction of libertas, personal as well as communal,

and the disappearance of the Rome that had perfected the concept

of political law and order based on controlled libertas for the

individual ci vis and the comjnunity of cives—the urbs. 29^

1. Cf. R, ï. Bruere, "Lucan's Cornelia," CPh h6 (191)1 ) : 221 ; and Ahl, Lucan, pp. 2ii7-2?2.

2. Cf. the review of opinions by Gudrun Vogler, "Das neunte Buch innerhaJ-b der Pharsalia des Lucan und die Frage dor Vollendung des Epos," Philologus 112 (1968); 222-223, and her analysis of the importance of Lucan's ninth book, 228-268.

3. Cf. Ahl, Lucan, p. 2li9. SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Adcock, F. E. Roman Political Ideas and Practice. Ann Arbor; Ann Arbor P aperbacks, I 96I4..

Afzelius, A. "Die politische Bedeutung des jÜngeren Cato." C&l-I k (19U1): 100.

Ahl, Frederick. "Pharsalus and the Pharsalia." CEl'I 29 (1968): 12i|.

"H ercules and C urio: Some Comments on P h a r s a lia iv. 58l-82i|." Latomus 31 (1972): 997.

. Lucan: An Introduction. Ithaca, 1976.

Albrecht, Michael von. "Der Dichter Lucan und die epische Tradition." In 14. Durry (ed.) Lucain (Fondation Hardt, Entretiens 15), Geneva, 1970: 269.

Alexander, V7. H, "Cato of Utica in the Works of Seneca Philosophas." Transactions of the Royal Society of Canada, 3d Ser. 1|0 ( 19U6) : 59.

Anderson, A. R. "Hercules and His Successors." HSCP 39 (1928): 7.

Arnold, E. Vernon. Roman Stoicism. London, I 9II; reprint ed. London, 1958.

Aymard, J. Quelques scuries de comparaisons chez Lucain. Montpelier, 1951.

Badian, E. "Alexander the Great and the Unity of Mankind." . H is to r ia 7 (1958): h2$.

Basore, J. W. "Direct Speech in Lucan as an Element of Epic T echnique." TAPA 35 (1901).): 9U.

Bayet, J. "Le suicide mutuel dans la mentalité^des romains." L'Annee sociologique (ser. 3), 1951, Paris, 1953: 35.

Bonner, Stanley, F. Roman Declamation. Liverpool, 19U9.

______. "Lucan and the Declamation Schools." AJP 87 ( I 966O; 257.

2 96 297

Born, Lester. "The Perfect Prince According to the Latin Panegyrists." AJP $$ (I93li): 20.

Bourgery, A. "Lncain et la magie." REL 6 (1928): 299.

Brisset, Jacqueline. Los idees politiques de Lucain., Paris, 196U.

Bruere, R. T. "The Scope of Lucan's Epic." CPh (I9i>0); 217.

______. "Lucan's Cornelia." CPh ij6 (1951): 221.

Burck, E. "Drei Grundwerte der rbmischen Lebensordnung (labor, m oderatio, p i e t a s ) ." Gymnasium $8 (1951): l?li.

Canter, H. V. "Fortuna in Latin Poetry." Studies in Philology 19 (1922): 6k.

Castresana, R. Udaeta. Historia y politisa en la Farsalia di Marco Anneo Lucano. Madrid, 1956.

Charlesworth, Martin. "Fear of the Orient in the Roman Empire." Cambridge Historical Journal 2 (1926): 1.

______. "Some O bservations on R uler C u lt, E sp e c ia lly in Rome." HTR 28 (1935): 5.

"The Virtues of a Roman Emperor." Proceedings of the B r itis h Academy 23 (1937): 105.

Gizek, Bugen. L'epoque de Heron et ses controverses ideologioues. Leiden, 1972.

D e f e rr a ri, Roy J . ; Fanning, M aria W alburg; and S u lliv a n , Anne Stanislaus. A Concordance of Lucan. Hildesheim, 1965.

Deratani, Hicolaj F. "Der Kampf fur Freiheit, Patriotismus und Heldentum im Gedicht Lucans Uber dem Burgerkrieg." In W. Rutz (ed,) Lucan (Mege der Forschung 235)* Darmstadt, 1970: 133.

Dick, Bernard F. "The Technique of Prophecy in Lucan." TAPA 9k (1963): 37.

"The Role of the Oracle in Lucan's De bello civile." Hermes 93 (1965): lioO. 290

Dilke, 0. A. w', Lucan, Poet of Freedom. Graharnstov;n, 196l.

Due, 0. 3. "An Fssay on Lucan." CScM 23 (1962) : 68.

D uff, J . D. ed. Lucan. The C iv il V/ar. The Loeb C la s sic a l Library, Caiabridge, 1928.

Dyson, S. "Caepio, Tacitus and Lucan's Sacred Grove." CPh 65 (1970): 36.

Eckardt, L. "Excurse und Ekpraseis bei Lucan." Ph.D. dissertation, Heidelberg, 1936.

Ediaunds, L. "The Religiosity of Alexander." GRBS 12 (1971): 363.

F raen k el, E. Review o f A. E. Housraan, M. Annaei Lucani B e lli civilis. Gnomon 2 (1926): ii97.

Francken, C. PI. ed. M. Annaei Lucani Pharsalia. 2 vols. Leiden, 1896.

Frank, E. "The Structure and Scope of Lucan's De bello civile." CB 1:6 (1970): 59.

F rie d ric h , VI. H. "C ato, Caesar und F ortuna b e i Lucan." Hermes 73 (1938): 391.

Fowler, W. W. "Caesar's Conception of Fortuna." CR 17 (1903): 153.

Getty, R. J. "The Astrology of P. Kigidius Figulus." CQ 35 (19W ): 17.

_. "Neopythagoreansira and Mathematical Symmetry in Lucan, De bello civile." TAPA 91 (I960): 310.

Greene, Thomas. "The Norms of E p ic." Comparative L ite r a tu r e 13 (1961): 193.

Grenade, P. "Le mythe de Pompe^e et les Pompéiens sous les Césars." REA 52 (1950): 28.

Griffin, Miriam T. "Seneca on Cato's Politics: Epistle 11:. 12-13." CQ n.s. 18 (1968): 373.

Grimai, Pierre, "Le poète et l'histoire." In M. Durry (ed.) Lucain (Fondation Hardt, Entretiens 15). Geneva, 1970: 53. 299

Gruen, Erich S. The Last Generation of the Roman Republic. B erkely, 1971;.

Guillemin, A. "L’inspiration virgilienne dans la Pharsale," REL 29 (1951): 211;.

Hadas, M. "Later Latin Epic and Lucan." G/J 29 (1936): 153.

Haskins, 0. E. ed. M. Annaei Lucani Pharsalia. Introduction by W. E. Heitland. London, l88?.

H osius, C. "Lucan und sein e Q uelleni' Rlili i;8 (1893): 380.

M. Annaei Lucani B e lli c i v i l i s l ib r i decern. 3d ed., Leipzig, 1913.

Housman, A. E. M, Annaei Lucani Belli civilis. Oxford, 1927; reprint ed., 1950.

Jal, P. "Les dieux et les guerres civiles dans la Rome de la fin de la Republique." REL 1;0 (1962): 170.

Lacey, W. K, "The Tribunate of Curio." Historia 10 ( 196I ) : 318.

Larson, J. A. 0. "Alexander at the Oracle of Amraon." CP 27 (1932): 70.

Lebek, Wolfgang 3. Lucans Pharsalia: Dichtungsstruktur und Zeitbezug. Gottingen, 1976.

Levi, M.A. "II prologo della Pharsalia." RFC n.s. 27 (19L9): 71.

Lintott, A. W. "Lucan and the History of the Civil War." CQ 21 (1971): U88.

Luck, Georg. "On Petronius’ Bellum civile." AJP 93 (I 972) : 133.

Lutz, Cora. "îlusonius Rufus: The Roman Socrates." ICS 10 (19U7): 3.

McCloskey, P., and Phinney, E. "Ptolemaeus Tyrannus: The Typification of Nero in the Pharsalia." Hermes 96 (1968): 80.

McDonald, A. H. "The S ty le o f L iv y ." JRS hi (1957): 155.

MacKay, L. A. "TTie Vocabulary o f Fear in L a tin P o e try ." TAPA 92 ( 1961): 308. 300

1-îalcovati, E. M. /mneo Lucano. Milan,

______. Lucano. B rescia, 19U7.

Makovjski, Jo’nn F. "Death and Liberty in Lucan's Pharsalia." Ph.D. dissertation, Princeton University, 197U.

Marti, Berthe. "The Meaning of the Pharsalia." AJP 66 3^2.

assius Scaeva and Lucan's Inventio." In L. Wallach (ed.) The Classical Tradition: Literary and Historical Studies in Honor of Harry Caplan. Ithaca, 1966: 239.

"La structure de la Pharsale." In M. Durry (ed.) Lucain (Fondation Hardt, Entretiens 1^), Geneva, 1970: 3.

Mattingly, H. R. "The Roman Virtues." HThR 30 (1937): 103.

Morford, M. P. 0. "Some Aspects of Lucan's Rhetoric." Ph.D. dissertation. University of London, 1963.

^ . "Lucan and the Marian Tradition." Latomus 2$ (1966): 107.

The Poet Lucan: Studies in Rhetorical Epic. Oxford, 1967.

"The Purpose of Lucan's Ninth Book." Latomus 26 0967): 123.

Nehrkorn, Helga. "Die Darstellung und Punktion der Nebencharaktere in Lucans Bellum civile." Ph.D. dissertation, Johns Hopkins University, I960.

Nock, A.D. "The Proem of Lucan." OR hO (1926): 17.

North, Helen F. "Canons and Hierarchies of the Cardinal Virtues in Greek and Latin Literature." In L. VJallach (ed.) The Classical Tradition: Literary and Historical Studies in Honor of Harry Caplan. Ithaca, 1966; 16$.

N u ttin g , H. C. "The Hero o f th e P h a r s a lia ." AJP $3 (1932): ij.1.

Oost, Stewart. "Cato Uticensis and the Annexation of Cyprus." CPh. 50 (1955): 98. 301

Opelt, Ilona. "Die Seeschlacht vor Mas5H ia bei Lucan." Hermes 8$ (191^7): WS.

P a ra to re , E tto r e . Seneca e Lucano. Rorae, 1966.

Pavan, Massimiliano. "Das politische Ideal Lucans." . In iJ. Rutz (e d .) Lucan (Wege der Forschung 239)» D arm stadt, 1970: Ii07.

Pecchiura, Piero. La figura di Catone Uticense nella letteratura latina. 'itirin, 1969.

Phillips, Oliver G. "The Influence of O/id on Lucan's Bellum civile." Ph.D. dissertation. University of Chicago, 1962.

______. "Lucan's Grove." CPh 6] (1968): 296.

Pichon, R. Les sources de Lucain. Paris, 1912.

Pfligersdorffer, G. "Lucan als Dichter des geistigen Widerstandes." Hermes 87 (1999): 3hh.

Rambaud, Michel. "L'apologie de Pompee par Lucain au livre vii de la Pharsale." REL 33 (1999): 298.

Rogers, R. S. "The Saperor's Displeasure—araicitiam renuntiare." TAPA 90 (1999): 22l.

Rowland, R. J. "The Significance of Mass ilia in Lucan." Hemes 97 (1969): 20lt.

Rutz, Werner. "Sbudien zur Kompositionskunst und zur epischen Technik Lucans." Ph.D. dissertation, Kiel, 1990.

______. "Amor mortis bei Lucan." Hermes 88 (i960): it62.

______. "Lucan 19U3-1963." Lustrum 9 (196U); 2ii3.

"Lucan und die Rhetorik." In H. Durry (ed.) Lucain. (fondation Hardt, Entretiens 1 9). Geneva, 1970: 239.

Ryberg, Inez Scott. "Clupeus virtutis." In L. Wallach (ed.) 'i’he Classical Tradition: Literary and Historical Studies in Honor o f Harry Caplan. Ith aca, 1966: 232.

Sandbach, F. H. The S to ic s , London, 1979.

Sanford, E. M. "Lucan and His Roman C r i ti c s ." CPh, 26 (1931): 233. Schonbergery Otto. "Zur Komposition des Lucan." Hormes 85 (1957): 251.

______. "Zu Lucan, Bin Nachtrag." Hermes 86 (1958): 230,

______. "Lin Dichter romischer Freiheit: K, Annaeus Lucanus." In W. Rutz (ed.) Lucan (V/ege der Forschung 235). Darmstadt, 1970: 525. Also in Hermes 85 (1957): 251.

Schrempp, Oskar. Prophezeiung und liuckshau in Lucans Bellum c iv i l e . S w itzerlan d , 196U.

Seitz, K. "Der pathetische Erzahlstil Lucans." Hermes 93 (1965): 201.

Syme, Ronald, The Roman R evolution. Oxfoi-d, 1939.

Syndiku.s, H. P. "Lucans Gedicht vom Burgerkrieg," Ph.D. dissertation Munich, 1958.

Tappan, E. "Julius Caesar and Fortuna." TAPA 58 (1927): 27.

______. "Julius Caesar's Luck." GJ 27 (1931-1932): 3.

Tasler, vJolfgang, Die Re den in Lucans Pharsalia. Bonn, 1972.

Thierfelder, A. "Der Dichter Lucan." Archiv filr Kultergeschichte 25 (1931:): Hi.

Thompson, L. "L ucan's A potheosis o f H ero." CPh 59 (1961;): 11;?.

Thompson, L., and Bruere, R. T. "Lucan's Use of Virgilian Reminiscence." CPh 63 (1968): 1,

"Tlie V irg ilia n Backgrouiid of Lucan's Fourth Book." CPh 65 ( 1970); 152 .

Tucker, R. A. "Sententiae in t)ie Bellum civile of Lucan and Earlier Latin Epics." Ph.D. dissertation, Johns Hopkins University, 1967 .

"Caesar's Escape from the Eg^-ptians. Variant Conclusions to Lucan's Bellum civile." CB l|8 (1972): 65. Ullrnaji, B. "History and Tragedy." TAPA 73 (19L2): 2>.

Usener, H. ed. Coiornenta Bernensia. Leipzig, I069.

"Vogler, G. "Das neunte Buch innerhalb der Pharsalia des Lucan und die Frage der Vollendung des Epos." Philologus 112 (I 96B): 222.

V.’einstock, S. "Victor and Invictus." HThR 50 (I9f>7): 211.

Wirszubski, Chain. Libertas as a Political Idea at Rome During the Late Republic and Early Principate. Cambridge, 19hO.

VJolverton, R, E. "Speculum Caesaris," In Laudatores Temporis Acti: Studies in Memory of Wallace Everett Caldwell. The James Sprunt Studies in H istory and P o lit ic a l Scien ce. V ol. h e . Chapel H ill, 196L: 62.