INFORMATION TO USERS
This manuscript has been reproduced firom the microfilm master. UMI films the text directly firom the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be firom any type of computer printer.
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.
Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand comer and continuing firom left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Each original is also photographed in one exposure and is included in reduced form at the back of the book.
Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6" x 9" black and white photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order.
UMI University Microfilms international A Bell & Howell Information Company 300 Nortti Zeeb Road. Ann Arbor, fVII 48106-1346 USA 313/761-4700 800/521-0600
Order Number 9219038
“Aeneid” VI 724-899: The myth of the Aeterna regna
Toptsi, Urania Molyviati, Ph.D.
The Ohio State University, 1992
UMI 300 N. Zeeb Rd. Ann Arbor, MI 48106
AENEID V I724-899: THE MYTH OF THE AETERNA REGNA
DISSERTATION
Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of the Ohio State University By Urania Molyviati-Toptsi, B.A., M.A.
*****
The Ohio State University
1992
Dissertation Committee: Approved by Stephen V. Tracy Frank T Coulson Nancy E. Andrews Adviser Department of Classics To My Parents, Apostolos and Olga Molyviatis
To my Husband, Anestis
1 1 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I would like to express my deep gratitude to my adviser professor Stephen V.
Tracy who devoted many hours to read and correct my dissertation. His sensitive reading, his numerous comments and suggestions not only helped me to understand
Virgil better but also to improve the ideas of the present dissertation. Yet, I would like to extend my thanks not only to the scholarly pzirt of his contribution but also to his fatherly guidance and advice in creating a professional classicist out of me.
Thanks also go to Professor Nancy A. Andrews for discussing several ideas of this dissertation with me and enhancing them with her own background. Also I would like to thank Professor Prank T. Coulson for his suggestions and bibliographical information. Moreover, I would like to express my sincere thanks to Professors June W. Allison and Charles Babkock who were serving as graduate advisers during the writing of this dissertation for being willing to hear my problems and worries and offering me helpful advice. Finally my thanks go to the entire faculty of the department of classics for the things they taught me during my Ph.D. studies and the financiail support without which I would not be able to complete my studies.
Thanks also go to Mary Cole, graduate secretary, for letting me use the computer facilities of the department of Classics at after hours, as well as to Terri the expert in the use of the word processing Nota Bene for her technical advice and help. Also, thanks go the librarian Reinhardt for helping me to trace down any book I wanted and letting me use the non-circulating material of the library in the convenience of my house.
i i i I would also like to express my deep gratitude to my mental friend professor Gerald M. Browne from the University of Illinois at Urbana for believing in me and encouraging me during my Ph.D. studies. Thanks also go to my good friends
Dr. Stavros Frangoulides and John Tzifopoulos who shared with me all my worries and frustrations during my Ph.D. studies and reading chapters of this dissertation offering their suggestions. I thank them for making life at Colombus more pleasant. Finally, I would like to express my sincere thzinks to my husband, Anestis, for having the patience to live without his wife for five years waiting me to finish my studies. I thank him for being there in all the difficulties I had to cope with, for understanding me and offering his advice and encouragement and, frequently, his technical support with the computer. I deeply thank him for his unshakable faith in me.
IV VITA
March 1, 1959 ...... Bom - Thessaloniki, Greece
1982 ...... B.A., University of loannina,
loannina, Greece
1984-85 ...... M.A., MacMaster University,
Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
1985-87 ...... Dept, of Classics,
University of Illinois at Urbana
1987-91 ...... The Ohio State University,
Colombus, Ohio
September 1991 ...... Course Director, Dept, of Classics,
York University, Atkinson College,
North York, Ontario, Canada
PUBLICATIONS
“A Death Certificate from the Berkeley Collection”, ZPE 77 (1989) 281-82
FIELDS OF STUDY
Major Field: Classics
Studies in Greek Literature: David Sansone
Stephen‘V. Tracy Gerald M. Browne
Roger Dawe
Bruce Heiden
Miroslav Markovich.
Studies in Latin Literature: J.K. Newman
Howard Jacobson
Miroslav Markovich
Hans P eter S tah l
Carl Shiam
William Batstone
June W. Allison
Jane M. Snyder
Frank T. Coulson
VI Table of Contents
DEDICATION ...... i i
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...... i i i
VITA ...... V
INTRODUCTION ...... 1
CHAPTER PAGE
I . ANCHISES PROPHET AND POET ...... 8
I I . THE PURGATORY ...... 33
III. THE PARADE OF ROMAN LEADERS ...... 61
EPILOGUE ...... 104
BIBLIOGRAPHY ...... 108
V l l INTRODUCTION
Aeneas’ journey to the underworld reaches its end, when Anchises accompanies his son and the Sibyl to the twin gates of Sleep and sends them out from the ivory gate of the “deceiving visions” (falsa insomnia [6.893-98]):
Sunt geminae Somni poTtae, quaram altera fertur
cornea, qua ueris facilis datur exitus umbris,
altera candenti perfecta nitens elephanto,
sed falsa ad caelum mittunt insomnia Manes,
his ibi turn natum Anchises unaque Sibyllam
prosequitur dictis poriaque emittit ebuma,
FVom the time of Heyne onwards these final lines have baffled attempts at precise explication. ^ Some critics have interpreted the phrase/oka insomnia as an allusion to the time at which Aeneas departs from the underworld; or to the status of Aenezis himself, i.e. that he is not a real shadow. E. Norden, for instance, suggested that
Aeneas departed from the ivory gate because it was not midnight, the time of departure of the true visions. * N. Reed, next, went so far as to advance that
Aeneas was a false umbra, ^ 'See: Heyne, P. Virgilii Maronis Opera Omnia v.2 (London 1819); and Excursus 8 . 'E. Norden, Aeneis Buch VI. repr. Stuttgard 1977. J.V.O., “Somni Portae”, LEG 16 (1948) 386. ^N. Reed, “The Gates of Sleep in Aeneid 6” CQ ns. 23 (1973) 314. B.Ch. Kopff and N. Marinates Kopff, “Aeneas: False Dream or Messenger of the Manes? (Aeneid 6.893ff.)” Philologus 119-120 (1975-76) 249. A second group of scholars sought to explain thefalsa insomnia as the authorial message concerning the importance of the entire catabasis. Thus, B. Otis proposed that Aeneas’ experience of the underworld was itself a dream. ^ Most recently,
R.J. Tarrant has convincingly argued that neither is Aeneas a false shadow nor is the catabasis a dream. ® Nevertheless, he holds that the phrase falsa insomnia,
‘deceiving visions’, is pivotal for the interpretation of the entire catabasis. Thus, he suggests that as the description of Marcellus’ death in Anchises’ speech un derlines the “the limitations imposed by mortality on all individual striving and expectation”, the falsa insomnia reinforce the sense of the “evanescence of mor tal aspirations.” ® And H.C. Gotoff interpreted thefalsa insomnia as the authorial comment on the inability of Aeneas to put into practice what he has learned from his father and in the underworld. ^
All the above critics have taken the content of the catabasis, including An- ‘B. Otis, “Three Problems of Aeneid 6”, H S C P h 90 (1959) 175-76. The pa per includes an extensive summary and refutation of past views with important bibhographical references. Also, P.M. Brignoli, “La Porta d’ Avorio del Libro VI dell’ “Eneide””, G IF 7 (1954) 61-67. He perceives the whole catabasis as mythol ogy. B.C. Verstraete, “The implication of the Epicurean and Lucretian theory of Dreams iov falsa insomnia in Aeneid 6.896, C W 74 (1980-81) 9-10. J.Oberg, “Some Interpretative Notes on Virgil’s Aeneid book 6”, E ranos 85 (1987) 109. ®See: R.J. Tarrant, “Aeneas and the Gates of Sleep” , C P h 77 (1982) 51-55. ®R.J. Tarrant, “Aeneas and the Gates of Sleep”, C P h 77 (1982) 53. He, also, adds that “Virgil seems to have found Plato’s view of the physical world as a mere shadow of a purer world a useful structure of thought by which to express his own sense of the evanescence of mortal aspirations. This awareness, however, coexists with an equally strong feeling that the mission of Aeneas will have a permanent and beneficent influence on human history” (p.54). Also, W. Clausen, “An Inter pretation of the Aeneid!^ H SC P 68 (1964) 146. W.R. Johnson, Darkness Visible. Berkeley 1976, pp. 105-111. For a different interpretation see A. Kirshopp Michels, “The Insomnium of Aeneas”, CQ 31 (1981) 145. ’'H.C. Gotoff, “The Difficulty of the Ascent from Avernus”, C P h 80 (1985) 40. chises’prophecy, as literally true. They have not, however, tahen into consideration the fact that the phrase falsa insomnia occurs in a context which is tightly linked to Anchises and the vision of after-life and of Rome, which was presented to Aeneas
(896-98): »
sed falsa ad caelum mittunt insomnia Manes
his ibi turn natum Anchises unaque Sibyllam
prosequitur dictis portaque emittit ebuma
Virgil clearly states that the Manes send “deceiving visions”; eind Anchises, a Manes, at the end of his speech sends Aeneas to the world of the living men from the ivory gate. The textual order suggests that some connection exists between Anchises’ speech and the visions the Manes send. It will be the concern of this dissertation to argue that the falsa insomnia, ‘deceptive visions’, which Aeneas takes with himself, is Anchises’ vision of the underworld and of Rome.
The term insomnia (896), according to R.J. Getty, at the time of Virgil was employed in the sense of “vision in awakening”. ® It occurs for the first time in ®J.J. O’Hara, most recently, advanced that the falsa insomnia may hint at the quality of Anchises’ presentation of the parade of the Roman heroes: “ with the Gates of Sleep, Vergil brings Anchises’ prophecy more closely in line with the other overly optimistic prophecies. ... some of what Anchises tells Aeneas about his fu ture and Rome’s are unattrdnable hopes. ... the rest of the prophecy must also be a combination of truth (some literal, some poetic) with hope, fantasy and decep tion” . See: J.J. O’Hara, Death and the Optimistic Prophecy in Vergil’s Aeneid, Princeton 1990, pp. 171-72 ®In this sense insomnium is used by Cicero, De Senectute 13.44, and Livy 25.38.5. The sense of ‘dream’ or ‘apparition seen in a trance’ appears later in the works of Seneca (Cons. 7.7.15, Ep. 56.6), Pliny (Nat. 18.118, 20.82, 20.186), Tacitus (Ann. 11.4), Apuleius (Apol. 16) and the grammarians, Servius and Macrobius. See: “/rasomnta in the Lexica”, AJPh 54 (1933) 1-28; TLL, OCD. Getty argues about the false etymology from in and somnium rendering into Latin the Greek book four: Virgil describes Dido’s vision of Aeneas (5) as insomnia (9). He tells us that Dido cannot sleep (nec placidam membris dat cura quietem [5]), because she thinks of Aeneas and his words {haercni injixi peciore uultus / uerbaque [4-5]).
The insomnia, therefore, are phantasies in the shape of living persons such as those that keep Dido awake. Accordingly, the phrase falsa insomnia at the end of book six must refer to a deceptive “wakening vision” which Aeneas experiences in the underworld.
When we turn to lines 261-63 of Book 6 of the Aeneid we read:
‘nunc animis opus, Aenea, nunc peciore Jirmo. ’
tantum effata furens antro se immisit aperto;
ille ducem hand timidis uadentem passibus aequat
Aeneas fully awake follows the Sibyl into the opening of the cave which was believed to be the entrance of the underworld (268-69). There he encounters the shadows of people from his past (337fF., 450ff., 479ff., 494ff.) and the Sibyl guides and informs him about Hades and Tartarus (564-65). But the prophetess is not a manes and enupnion. The original etymology appears to be from the particle in indicating contrast and the term somnium which means “opposite to the dreams”, i.e. “vision in awakening”. Also W. Schetter, “Das Gedicht des Ausonius uber die Traume”, R hM 3.104 (1961) 377-78. loTarrant seems to confuse insomnia, ‘vision in awakening’, with dreams {in somnis [4.466]). For, he cites two contradictory passages: a) Dido imagines the appearance and voice of Aeneas (4.9). Virgil explicitly states that she is not sleeping (nec placidam membris dat cura quietem (4,5). Her vision Virgil calls insomnia (4.9). The second passage cited by Tarrant is that Dido has visions of Aeneas in dreams. Virgil explicitly states that she is dreaming (in somnis 4.465-66). *‘E. Block first acknowledged in passim that Aeneas’ visions of his wife and dead father, Anchises, are waking visions. See: The Effects of Divine Manifestation on the Reader’s Perspective in Vergil’s Aeneid. New York 1981, pp. 120-21. See: ibid. p.12-14. the veracity of her words is guaranteed by the authority of Hecate who instructed her (6.564-65). Therefore, the term faha insomnia cannot refer to the Sibyl’s tour.
On the other hand, in Elysium Anchises, a manes, delivers a long speech about the souls in the underworld pointing out Aeneas’ descendants who are destined, as he reveals, to found the Roman empire (724-883). This vision, as it will be argued, is deceptive.
Frequently Virgil in his own voice or through his characters comments on the quality of the prophecies delivered in the Aeneid. Virgil, for instance, tells us that
Vulcan’s prophecy is true: hand uaium ignarus uentwrique inscius aeui (8.627); or that Anna’s and Dido’s interpretation of Aeneas’ arrival in Carthage is wrong: heu, uatum ignarae mentes! (4.65). Again, the god Tiberinus tells Aeneas that what he prophesies is true: ne uana pûtes haec jingere somnum (8.42). Accordingly, the faha insomnia must be the authorial comment on the deceptive quality of Anchises’ speech within the poetic context. Virgil lets his reader know that what Anchises has told is not the literal truth; or, to put it in a different way, Anchises’ account does not reflect the poet’s knowledge of after-life and Roman history.
Servius first understood Virgil’s comments on the ivory gate as the authorial aside about the deceptive quality of Anchises’ speech. His conclusion is based on a discussion of the symbolism of ‘ivory’ rather than of Anchises’ prophecy it self. Therefore, he cites two explanations on the meaning of the ivory gate: first, according to physiology, it signifies the mouth, which has the power of creating figments: "The same lines of argument are pursued by Macrobius and the Vatican Mythog- rapher III.6. per ebumeam uero portam os significatur a ientihus et scimus quia quae
loquimur faUa esse possunt... secondly, according to the dream interpreters, it signifies the dreams which, like the glowing curved ivory, are excessively ornate and rhetorical and therefore misleading:
eo uero quae supra fortunam sunt et habent nimium omatum uanamque
iaciantiam dicunt falsa esse: unde ehumea, quasi omatior porta, fingitur
falsa.
Although Servius’ comments are not always to be taken seriously, nevertheless, his criticism of Anchises’ monologue, as will be argued in this dissertation, is essentially true.
Next, Macrobius explained that ivory is a symbol of falsehood, because the den sity and opacity of the material blurs the vision and prevents the mind from per ceiving the truth (1.3.19):
cum autem a uero hebetat ac repellit optutum, ebur putatur, cuius corpus
ita natura densetum est ut,..., nullo uisu ad ulteriora tendente peneiretur.
Indeed, Aeneas, because of his ignorance (6.711), is unable to understand what lies behind Anchises’ rhetorical and frequently ambiguous language.
The present dissertation will argue about the deceptive quality of Anchises’ prophecy by examining the imagery and language of the account itself. It will also be suggested that this deceptive prophecy has a double purpose: first, it helps
Aeneas to fulfil his mission; secondly, the poet uses Anchises’ story of the Roman empire to draw the attention of the Romans to the virtues that contribute to the greatness of a state. For, as Macrobius stressed, the “fabulous narrative rests on a solid foundation of truth, which is treated in a fictitious style to draw the reader’s attention to certain kinds of virtue”.
In the first chapter I will suggest that Anchises is not a genuine prophet but a prophet and poet, who blends truth and fiction to instruct and encourage Aeneas to continue his mission. This will be shown by a comparative study of the language and imagery Virgil uses in the delineation of the uates in the Aeneid. The content of the supposedly prophetic account will be discussed in chapters two and three.
In the second chapter it will be suggested that Anchises presents the underworld as a purgatory which purifies the souls from the corporeal emotions and prepares them for their return on earth. The purpose of this account is to change Aeneas’ perception of Elysium as the place of the blessed and show that the deeper causes of criminal conduct and the death of Aeneas’ past are irrational emotions. The discussion will focus on the differences of Anchises’ Tartarus and Elysium from the Sibyl’s and Virgil’s versions, as well as on the discrepancies between Anchises’ and the traditional philosophical theories on reincarnation. In the third chapter it will be argued that Anchises misrepresents Roman history by turning the social evolution of Italy and Rome to a story of the gradual return of the Saturnian age in Rome. This account, as it will be suggested, has a double purpose: within the poetic context it serves to teach Aeneas the virtues which should inform his actions in Italy; on the authorial level, it aims at suggesting to the contemporary audience a way of administering the Roman empire. The deceptive quality of this account ^Macrobius, Commentarii 1. 7-17. 8 will be shown by discussing its verbal ambiguities and inconsistencies with other prophecies of a historical subject as well as with the traditional history. CHAPTER I
Anchises prophet and poet
The catabasis is a liminal point in the bipartite structure of the Aeneid] it makes the transition from the old world of Troy and Aeneas’ wanderings (books 1-6) to the new world of Italy (books 7-12). R. Quiter has convincingly argued that the setting and language of the catabasis evokes the atmosphere of the initiation cere monies, which were performed during the mysteries of Kore and Hecafe. In an intensely magico-religious environment, Aeneas experiences the irrevocable death of his past and his incorporation into the future by means of visual effects and verbal instruction. According to A. van Germep’s anthropological study The Rites
of Passage, initiation rituals are always performed by a priest- magician, who leads the novice to the different stages of initiation, and instructs him in the communal laws by mezins of totem ceremonies or recitation of myths. In Virgil’s catabasis the Sibyl and Anchises fulfill the dual function of the priest-magician. The Sibyl,
Apollo’s and Hecate’s priestess and prophetess, leads Aeneas to the underworld and guides him through the regions of Dis, where he confronts his past. But as soon as they arrive at Elysium, Anchises, Aeneas’ dead father, is substituted for the Sibyl. '*See: R. Quiter Aeneas und die Sibylle, Beitrage zur klassischen Philologie 162, Konigstein 1984 “ See: L.A. Mackay, “Three Levels of Meaning in Aeneid VI”, TA PhA 86 (1955) 180-89. Also, B. Otis, “Three Problems in Aeneid 6, T A PhA 90 (1957) 165-70; and Virgil: A Study in Civilized Poetry, Oxford 1963, 281-307 “ See: The Rites of Passage, transT M.B. Vizedom and G.L. Caffee, Chicago 1960, pp.75-81 9 10
Just as the priestess prepares Aeneas to realize the death of his past, so too his father, from his vantage point in the after -life, prepares Aeneas for his new life in
Italy by the recitation of an eschatology and a history (724-883), which purports to reveal the future.
The central theme of Anchises’ speech is the return of the Saturnian age on earth (6.795) brought about by Aeneas’ descendants, who are currently in the un derworld, waiting for their reincarnation (6.748-51). The content of this speech is reminiscent of the content of Eclogue 4.5-7:
magnus ab intégra saeclorum nascitur ordo.
iam redit et Virgo, redeunt Saturnia regna
iam noua progenies caelo demittitur alto.
But the fourth Eclogue presents the establishment of the Saturnian Age as the fulfilment of an old prophecy proclaimed by the Cumaean Sibyl (1.4): ‘’’On the theme of restoration of the Golden Age see: M. E. Taylor, “Primi tivism in Virgil”, A J P h 76 (1955) 261-78; K. J. Reckford, “Some Appearances of the Golden Age” C J 54 (1958) 79-87; I. S. Ryberg, “Vergil’s Golden Age”, T A P hA 89 (1958) 112-31. An important contribution to the history of the de velopment of the idea of the Golden Age in relation to Saturn is: M. Wifstrand Schiebe,“The Saturn of the Aeneid - Tradition or Innovation?”, V ergilius 32 (1986) 43-60; also, M. Ch. Guittard, “ Saturnia Terra : Mythe et Realite”, Caesar- odunum XV bis (1980) 177-86; E. Manni, “A proposito del culto di Saturno” A thenaeum (1938) 223-32; also, “La leggenda dell’eta dell’oro nella politica dei Cesari”, A and R (1938),108-20; F. E. Brenk, “The twofold gleam. Vergil’s golden age and the beginning of empire”. T hought 55 (1980) 81-97; M. Eli- ade. The Myth of the Eternal Return or Cosmos and History, Princeton Univer sity Press 1954, pp. 49-92. "On the prophetic content of the Eclogue see a recent article by W. Clausen, “Virgil’s Messianic Eclogue” in Poetry and Prophecy, ed. J.L. Kugel, Ithaca and London 1990, pp.65-74. "O n the Sibylline oracles in antiquity see: H. W. Parke, Sibyls and Sibylline Prophecy in Classical Antiquity, Routledge, London and New York 1988, pp.71- 11
UHima Cumaei venii iam carminis aeias
Surprisingly, in Aeneid 6 the advent of the ultima aetas is proclaimed by Anchises, although the Cumaean Sibyl is present during the entire carmen. Why did Virgil make Anchises the mouthpiece of the Sibyl? Is his ‘prophecy’ literally true? The function of Anchises in the underworld has attracted the least attention in ongo ing discussions on the problems of Virgil’s epic; scholars concede that the dead
Anchises has been deified and his prophetic power invigorated. In this chapter, it will be suggested that Anchises is not a genuine prophet who foretells the dis tant future to Aeneas, but a uates., ‘prophet and poet’, in an undifferentiated sense.
Virgil not only deviates from the usual pattern of describing a prophet, when he in troduces Anchises, but also uses imagery and language appropriate to the Augustan concept of poet. Therefore, I begin my discussion with an overview of the concept of uates in Virgil’s epic, since much of what will be presented here will furnish the basis for assessing Anchises’ role as a uates.
In Roman language the term uates was originally used in a religious sense, mean- 215. On the Sibyl see: J. H. Waszink, “Vergil and the Sibyl of Cumae”, M nem osyne ser. 4. 1 (1948) 43-58. Also, R. G. Austin, “Virgil and the Sibyl”, CQ 21-24 (1927/30) 100-105; S. Eitrem, “Le SibyUe de Cumes et Virgile”, SO 24 (1945) 88-120; A. Kurfess, “Vergil und die Sibyllinen”, ZRG G 3 (1951) 253-57; H. Jeanmaire, La Sibylle et la Retour de l’age d’or, Paris, Leroux 1939; R. Merkel- bach, “Aeneas in Cumae”, M H 18 (1961) 83-99. “ See: R.B. Lloyd, “The Character of Anchises in the A e n e ii\ T A P hA 88 (1957) 44-55; D. Gillis, “The Heroism of Anchises” , La P aro la del P assato 218 (1984) 321-41; A.E. Raymond, “W hat was Anchises’ Ghost to Dido? (Virgil Aeneid 4.427)”, P hoenix 6 (1952) 66-68. A. Pagliaro, “Ipse m anu m o rtem inveniam (Verg., Aen. II 645)”, H elikon 1 (1961) 139-47. *‘The most fervent advocates of Anchises’ deification are: R.B. Lloyd, ibid. p.5; D. Gillis, ibid p.5; R.D. Williams, P. Vergili Maronis Aeneidos Liber Quintus, Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1960, p.48. 12 ing ‘soothsayer’, ‘seer’ ( OLD). Cicero in fact records that the Romans regarded as uates the person whose predictions derived from divine inspiration {De Diuinatione
1.1); and, later, in the De Diuinatione he specifies that genuine divination occurs in a state of divine madness or in drezuns {De Diuinatione 1.18):
carent autem arte ei qui, non ratione aut coniectura ohseruatis ac notatis
signis, sed concitatione quadam animi aut soluto liberoque motu, fuiura
praesentiunt, quod et somniantihus saepe contingit et non numquam uatic-
inaniihus per furorem, .... Cuius generis oracula etiam habenda sunt, ...
quae instinctu diuino afflatuque funduntur
In the Aeneid, Virgil seems to afiirm Cicero’s definition in his own delineation of the prophets and specifically in his use of the termuates. Uates is applied to inspired humans or semi-divine creatures, and the gods. Human or semi-divine prophets give short- term prophecies about Aeneas’ future in Italy and reveal as much as the gods disclose; their truthfulness is guaranteed by Apollo and the later course of the poem itself. They are the interprètes, ‘translators’, of Apollo’s words. The term interpres is used by Horace in the Ars Poeiica to designate the poet who mechanically reproduces the words and themes of traditional poetry (133-34): nec uerbo uerbum curabis reddere fidus/ interpres. In a similar way, the uates becomes the mouthpiece of the god. The Harpy Celaeno is the first infelix uates (3.246), who in riddling words spealts about troubles that lie ahead in Italy (3.253-57): 22 Only once is the word uates allied with persons whose foresight fails reality, but suits some ulterior purpose: uatum ignarae mentes (4.65). Another time, a uates is described as an artifex (2.125) within a speech which is deceptive. See: J.K. Newman, “The Concept of Uates in Augustan Poetry”, Collection Latomus 89 (1967) 30-31 13
seà non ante datam cingetis moenihus urhem
quam nos dira fames nosiraeque iniuria caedis
ambesas svhigat malis absumere mensas
She is the messenger of Apollo, who, as she confesses, has been instructed by Jupiter
{quae Phoebo pater omnipotens, miki Phoebus Apollo/ praedixit [251-52]). Her pre diction is confirmed later by the narrative of books 7-12.
Further insight into the future comes from Helenus, Apollo’s sacerdos (3.373) and uates (3.358,433, 463, 712), who foretells the signs from which the Trojans will recognize the site of their future city (3.388-93). His prophecy is repeated later by the god Tiberinus (8.43-46), who emphasizes that he sings the truth (hand incerta cano [8.49]), and almost immediately his prophecy is fulfilled (8.81-83). Helenus, we are told, is in a state of mental excitement, when possessed by Apollo {animum si ueris implei Apollo [434]), and sings with a divine mouth (3.371-72):
ipse manu multo suspensum numine ducit,
atque haec deinde canit diuino ex ore sacerdos
Aeneas in fact addresses him as interpres diuum (3.359), ‘translator of the will of the god’. And Helenus makes clear that from the many things (e multis (fatisj)
[3.377]) the gods have in store, he is allowed to reveal few (pauca ... expediam dictis [3.377-79]); the Parcae prevent him from knowing more and Juno forbids him talking (3.379-80):
prohibent nam cetera Parcae “ The use of uates in a religious sense continues in book 7.68-70 where the seers interpret the omens appearing in the palace of Latinus (7.64-67; 72-76) and sing Lavinia’s fate {fatisque canebant [79-80]). See also 11.774. 14
3cire Selenum farique ueiat Saturnia luno
Knowledge of the remote future is attributed to the gods. Virgil adds dignity to the concept of uates by applying it, first, to Apollo {Delius ... uates [6.12]) and, then, to Vulcan {haud ignarus uatum [8.627]). They derive their knowledge from Jupiter and function more as his interprétés. Apollo, we are told in book three, reveals to Celaeno what Jupiter has predicted to him {quae Phoeho pater omnipotens
(praedixit) [3.251]); and in book eight Vulcan grants Venus’ request to prepare the armor of Aeneas, because, as he implies, Jupiter does not object (8.397-98):
tum quoque fas nobis Teucros armare fuisset:
nec pater omnipotens Troiam nec fata ueiabant
stare decemque alios Priamum superesse per annos
Apollo first foretells the domination of the earth by Aeneas’ descendants {hie domus
Aeneae cunctis dominabitur oris [3.97]); Vulcan, next, gives a long-term prophecy, in the form of a picture. Vulcan depicts historical events from Rome covering the period from the time of Romulus and Remus to Augustus’ reign (8.630-728). The poet in the form of an aside asserts the verity of the engraved images by stressing their chronologically ordered arrangement and the artist’s unfailing knowledge of the distant future (8.627-29):
haud uatum ignarus ueniurique inscius aeui
fecerat ignipotens, illic genus omne futurae
stirpis ab Ascanio pugnataque in ordine bella *‘See: Ph. Hardie, Virgil’s “Aeneid”: Cosmos and Imperium, Oxford 1986. 15
Unlimited knowledge of the future is attributed only to Jupiter. In book one he delivers a long-term prophecy concerning Aeneas and his descendants (1.261-
96). However, he is not called nates, although his function there cannot fail to remind us of the concept of nates, since he appears to be a sort of interpres of the uncheingeable course of the fates manent immota tnomm / fata (1.257). But
Jupiter has also the power to move the fata (... et noluens fatomra arcana moueho
[1.262]). Later, Helenus clarifies that Jupiter ‘allots’ or ‘hands down’ {sortitnr) the fata (3.375-76): sic fata deum rex/ sortitnr uoluiique uices. Jupiter, therefore, rises to a level beyond that of a mere nates', he is the distributor of the fata. Virgil stresses the accuracy of Jupiter’s prophecy by presenting the human or divine nates, as we have seen above, to unfold gradually and in chronological order details of the future, that Jupiter has revealed.
The only humans whose foreknowledge seems to extend to the distant future Jupiter’s account has been described as optimistic, because he omits those in famous and sad events of Roman history. See for a detailed analysis: J.J. O’Hara Death and Optimistic Prophecy in Vergil’s Aeneid. Princeton 1990. But the expression fabor longins, ‘I will tell you the facts at some length’, implies that Jupiter will only give an outline of the distant future, not an extensive and detailed account. See for editorial problems on the phrase fabor longins in R.G. Austin, Aeneidos Liber Primus. Oxford 1971, p. 101 v.262. 3'C. Bailey, followed by B. Otis and P. Boyance, perceives the fata as the will of the gods and, ultimately, as divine providence, finding its fulfilment in the growth of the Roman empire; see: C. Bmley, Religion in Virgil, Oxford University Press 1935, pp.220-34; P. Boyance, La Religion de Virgile, Paris 1963, pp.39-57; B. Otis, Virgil; A Study in Civilized Poetry, Clarendon Press Oxford, 1963, pp.220-22. On the other hand, R.F. Lebrun, “La Notion de Fatum dans 1’ Oeuvre de Virgile”, LEG 44 (1976) 35-44 distinguishes between the singular Faium and the plural fata as indicating the Supreme being himself (“1’ Etre Supreme lui-meme”) and the decisions and interventions of the sovereign power (“decisions et interventions de cette puissance souveraine”) respectively. Finally, C.H. Wilson suggests that the fata signify the inevitable “process of history”, while the fata of Jupiter signify his “interim understanding of history”. 16
(3.444) are nates such as Cassandra, the Tuscan longaeuus haruspex (8.499), the nymph Carmentis and the Sibyl, the priestess of Apollo and Triuia (6.35). Their extensive knowledge of the future is indicated by expressions such as fata ... aperit
OT fata canit. Cassandra, for instance, is the first uates (3.187), who reveals the /atm
(tune etiam fatis aperit Cassandra futuris [2.246]). She announces that Italy will be the new home of the 'Lrojans long before the fall of Troy (sola miki talis casus
Cassandra canehat./ .../ et saepe Hesperiam, saepe Itala regna uocare [183-85]); her inspiration derives from Apollo. Servius in fact states: et bene Cassandrae inseruit testimonium, quae diuinationem ab Apolline aceeperai (3.183). Next, the nymph
Carmentis is a uates fatidica who first sang the arrival of Aeneas in Pallanteum
(8.340-41). She also derived her knowledge from Apollo (et deus auctor Apollo
[8.336]). Again, the Tuscan haruspex sang the fata foretelling the alliance of Aeneas with the Etruscans, when Mezentius was the king of Etruria (8.498-503).
The most important uates, for the purpose of the present discussion, who knows the distant future (fata) is the Cumaean Sibyl. As will be shown, her function as prophet and teacher of Aeneas anticipates Anchises’ similar function. We are told that Apollo inspires and reveals the future (Delius inspirai uates aperitque futura
[6.12]) to the Sibyl. Under the god’s influence, she is an insana uates (3.443); ^ the signs of divine madness appear on her face (suhito non uultus, non color unus,
[6.47]), her hair (non comptae mansere comae [6.48]), her voice (nec mortale sonans, adfiata est numine quando/ iam propiore dei [6.50]), which assumes an immortal On the distinction between false and true prophets see: H. Bacht S. J., “Wahres und Ealsches Prophetentum”, Biblica 32 (1951) 237-62. 2®See Cicero, Be Diuinatione 1.18. This idea ultimately derives from Plato, Phae- drus 244c-d. 17 tenor. The Sibyl sings the fata, writes notas and nomina on the leaves, which she places in order (3.444-47):
fata canit foliisque notas et nomina mandat,
quaecumque in foliis descripsii carmina uirgo
digerit in numerum aique aniro seclusa relinquii:
We axe told that she is the person who will inform Aeneas about the Italians, the wars to come and how to overcome them, and will take Aeneas on ‘a pleasant journey’ (3.458-59):
ilia tibi Italiae populos uenturaque hella
et quo quemque modo fugiasque ferasque lahorem
expediet, cursusque dabit uenerata secundos
Indeed, when Aeneas meets her at Cumae, the Sibyl enigmatically {ambages [6.99]) predicts the Latin war as well as the support which the Trojans will receive from a Greek city (6.83-97); the prophecy comes true later, when the god Tiberinus identifies this city with Pallanteum and advises Aeneas to seek its alliance (8.51-
56). On the other hand, Anchises’ apparition in Aeneid 5 explains that the secundi cursus will be Aeneas’ journey to the underworld, conducted by the Sibyl; there he will learn about his descendants and the city to be founded on Italian ground (Aen.
5.735-737):
... hue casta Sibylla
nigrarum multo pecudum te sanguine ducet.
tum genus omne tuum et quae dentur moenia dis ces. 18
The identity of the prophet/teaeher is not disclosed, but the leuiguage -genus, moenia- reminds us of the Sibyl’s prophetic power to foretell the fata and nom ma (3. 447). Virgil creates the expectation that the Sibyl will be the prophet/ teacher. Indeed, not only does she guide Aeneas through the demos Ditis uacuas et tnania regna (6.269), but also provides explanations concerning the different re gions of Dis (6.322-24, 539-43), the groups of souls that dwell in them (6.325-30), or the sins and punishments in Tartarus (6.562-627). Virgil stresses the role of the Sibyl as a teacher by the use of such verbs as admoneat; admonuit (6.293, 538), fata est, adfata est, loqui (6.321, 538, 562). Therefore, the correspondence between the content of lines 5.735-37 and the Sibyl’s actions suggest that she will be the prophet.
Surprisingly, after Virgil has created this expectation, in Elysium Anchises as sumes the role of prophet/ teacher. He gives Aeneas a tour through the sites of this region, sic tota passim regione uagantur (6.886), as well as a mental tour through
Tartarus and Elysium (6.739-51). Most importantly, like the Sibyl, he divulges the names and fortunes of Aeneas’ descendants (6.756-883). Finally, in the very words that earlier set forth the function of the Sibyl (3.458-60), Anchises, we are told, recounts Aeneas’ personal, short-term fata (te tua fata docebo [6.759]) (6.890-92):
exim hella uiro memorai quae deinde gerenda,
Laurentisque docet populos urbemque Latini,
et quo quemque modo fugiatque feratque laborem. ’»0n the instruction of Aeneas in the secrets of Tartarus see: J.E.G. Zetzel, "Ro mane Memento: Justice and Judgment in Aeneid 6” T A P hA 119 (1989) 263-84, with bibliography. 19
It is evident in the above outline that Virgil wishes to present Anchises as a uates, the substitute of the Sibyl. However, external and internal evidence will show that
Anchises rises above the level of uates- interpres and acts as a kind of alter ego for
Jupiter. Jupiter moves {et uoluens fatorum arcana moueho [1.262]) and distributes
{sortitur [3.376]) the fata. The trustworthiness of their distribution is guareinteed by his authority as pater omnipotens. On the other hand, Anchises literally reorders the fata and allots them to specific persons (6.756-883). But, as will be shown, his distribution differs from that of Jupiter. He has, therefore, some role in shaping the fata] he is a ‘maker’, poeta. Therefore, he is not a uates in the religious sense of
‘prophet’, but in the secular sense of ‘prophet and poet’. First, Virgil uses imagery different from that which he used, as we noted above, to describe both human and divine nates. Anchises does not derive his prophetic power from Apollo, nor does he speak with a divinely guided mouth, as Helenus {diuino ex ore [3.373]) or the Sibyl
{nec mortale sonans [6.50]) did. Virgil, however, reports that Anchises knows all his progeny and their future, when he depicts him reviewing their fata (6.681-83):
...... omnemque suorum
forte recensehat numerum, carosque nepoies
fataque fortunasque uirum moresque manusque
The reader is led to assume that Anchises speeiks with the authority of the dead ancestor who, according to the Roman popular belief, was endowed with mantic powers, or with the knowledge he has acquired from his experience in the under- ^“Thus, the ghosts of Hector (2.289-95) and Creusa (2.777-89) disclose the hidden future to Aeneas, but their knowledge is limited and appears to be directed by the gods. On the oracular power of the dead see: Macrobius, Commentarii 1.3.17; 20 world.
Secondly, he delivers a long-term prophecy, which in the Aeneid, as we have seen above, is indicated by the term faia and is associated with certain uates, or is put in the mouth of the gods, who know (Apollo, Vulcan) or move the fata (Jupiter).
In contrast to human or divine uates, Virgil does not say that Anchises reveals or sings the fata. In fact, the language the poet employs to introduce Anchises’ account blends prophetic and poetic/ didactic diction. Usually a prophecy in the
Aeneid is introduced by the verbs cano, or more rarely praedico and poHendo
(7.80); the prediction itself is called responsa, carmina, oracula or prodigium. ^
Thus, as has been noted above, the Harpy Celaeno (3.366) and Helenus (3.373)
‘sing’ {canit) what Phoebus tells them; the Sibyl canit (3.444) and writes carmina
(3.445). Again, in book seven the uates canebant (7.79) the fata of Lavinia. By contrast, Anchises announces the prospective prophecy with the words (716-17): E.R. Dodds, The Greeks and the Irrational, pp. 102-34; A. H. M. Kessels, “Ancient Systems of Dream - Classification”, M nem osyne 22 (1969) 389-424. 31 The only indication of divine intervention is in book 5, where the facies of Anchises appears to Aeneas at Jupiter’s order: imperio louis hue uenio (5.726). There is no information that Jupiter has or has not revealed anything to him about the future. Besides, it is uncertain whether the facies is Anchises him self or the personified will of Jupiter. See on this problem: Hans Rudolf Steiner, Per TVaum in der Aeneis. Noctes Romanae 5 (1952) 55-58, who argues that An chises represents actually the will of Zeus, as frequently happens in Homeric dreams. Also, J. Hundt, Per Traumglaube bei Homer; R. D. Williams, o.c.; E. R. Dodds, The Greeks and the Irrational. University of Ccdifornia Press, Berkeley, Los An geles, London (1951) chapter 4. Macrobius, Commentarii 1.3.7; Artemidorus Dal- dianus, Onirocritica 1.1.14ff.. #See: Elizabeth Henry, The Vigour of Prophecy , pp. 66-70. She argues that the verb cano and its correlatives are used to signify divine knowledge. Also the verb praedicam £ind the substantive praedicta signifies prophecy: 3.252, 436, 713, 4.464. 33See for responsa as prophecy: 5.706, 6.82, 44, 7.86, 92, 102, 9.134; for prodigium 3.366, 5.639, 6.379, 8.295 21
has equidem memorare tibi atque osiendere coram
iampridem, hanc pvoltm cupio enumtrare meorum
He wishes to ‘recollect’ and ‘remind of’ (memorare) as well as ‘make manifest’
(osiendere) the souls which, as it was earlier mentioned (6.713-15), are destined to be reincarnated. The verb osiendo, according to Cicero, in the language of prophecy means “make manifest” (N.D. 2.3.7): ^
Praediciiones uero et praesensiones rerum fuiurarum quid aliud declarant
nisi hominibus ea quae futura sint ostendi monstrari portendi praedici? ex
quo ilia ostenta monstra portenta prodigia dicuntur in the Roman vernacular ostendo means ‘to point out’ ( TLL). Accordingly, Anchises promises to reveal the future by means of verbal and visual instruction. Virgil reinforces the revelatory aspect of Anchises’ account by the use of the verb pandit
(6.723), ‘disclose’, which precedes the actual speech: suscipit Anchises atque ordine
singula pandit. The verb pando, ‘reveal’, reappears in the prophecy of Celaeno:
uobis Furiarum ego maxima pando (3.252), as well as in Virgil’s foreword of the
catabasis (6.267) which purports to be revelatory, and in his invocation to the
Muses in 10.163 to reveal the Tuscan forces. Thus, Anchises as a prophet purports
to‘makes manifest’ how the universe works or by what process the souls come to be
reincarnated (724-51), and to ‘show’ the glory of the Dardanian progeny (756-59):
Nunc age, Dardaniam prolem quae deinde sequatur See also De Diuinatione 1.42.93 The verb ostendo seems to correspond to the Greek verb semaino, ‘indicate’ which signifies prophetic speech. See: G.Nagy, “Greek Poetry, Prophecy and Theory”, pp. 62-63, in Poetry and Prophecy, ed. J.L. Kugel, Ithaca 1990. 22
gloria, qui maneant Itala de gente nepotes
expediam dictis, et te tua faia docebo.
The speech is coloured by deictic pronouns {ille [760, 767, 808], hanc [788], hie [789,
791, 819], illae [826]) and verbs {uides [760], uiden [779], flecte acies [789], aspice
[789] uidere [818], cemis [826]) which contribute to the visual representation of what is ‘made manifest’.
On the other hand, the second part of the pair of verbs used by Anchises (6.716), the verb memoro, derives from memor, ‘mindful’, and means dicere, ‘to tell’, or commemorare ‘to recall and mahe mindful’. “ In the Aeneid, the verb memoro occurs in contexts of a programmatic character or of story-telling to stress either a
‘made up’ narrative or the didactic function of a story, or both. Virgil, for instance, in the programmatic statement of his poem suggests that he will recount the wrath of Juno {memorem [1.4]); and in 1.8 the poet asks the Muse to remind him of the causes of Aeneas’ wanderings {Musa, mihi causas memora, ...). In book 2 Aeneas uses the form memoret (75) to qualify Sinon’s story as the speaker’s recreation of an old theme, the story of Palamedes. Sinon’s story is described later as ars Pelasga
(2.106) stressing its ‘made up’ quality. And in 4.109 Venus uses the form memoras to suggest Juno’s own recreation {factum, ‘made up’) of the faia (93-104). Again in 7.645 Virgil asks the Muses to furnish the poet with information concerning the people and kings who will participate in the Latin war{et meministis enim, diuae, et memorare potestis)\ and in 9.447 memoro is associated with poetry, whose 35 See: E. Remy, “Le Mouvement Dramatique dans les vers 752-886 du Livre VI de r Eneide”, LEC 1 (1932) 103-16. 3® See: TLL 23 material derives from past deeds and aims at imparting wisdom to the reader.
Rrom these instances memoro seems to be used in the sense of ‘to recreate’ ^ and
‘to make mindful’ in the future.
Accordin^y, the occurence of memorare in Anchises’ statement is a key word for both his compositional technique and his purpose. Anchises wishes to ‘mzike’
Aeneas ‘mindful’ in the future by means of a speech which ‘recreates’ the fata he was earlier reviewing (681-83):
...... omnemque suorum
forte recensehat numerum, carosque negates
fataque fortunasque uirum moresque manusque
He also ‘recreates’ the underworld, which Virgil and the Sibyl had revealed to Aeneas and the reader. Tartarus, for instance, according to the Sibyl, is the place of punishment for the morally impure souls {at laeua malorum/ exercei poenas ei ad impia Tartara mittit [6.542-43]). The veracity of the account is guaranteed by
Hecate who instructed the Sibyl, when she was placed in charge of Avemus (6.564-
65):
sed me cum lucis Hecate praefecit Auernis, 3'See for more instances of this type in 10.791-93, where Virgil preserves the mem ory of Lausus’ valor by his poem whose unstated outcome is wisdom. Also in 12.435-40 where Aeneas instructs Ascanius. He states that the memory of the past preserved through exempta (12.439) is instructive for the future. ^'Isidorus also in the Differentiae (1.152) under the lemma memoro writes: non qui semel dicit, sed qui saepius idem memoriae conseruandae causa facii. Memoro signifies the mental activity of retention and recreation of the stored information {memoriae conseruandae causa facii) rather than of mechanical recitation {dicit). 3»See: E.A. Havelock, The Muse Learns to Write. New Haven and London 1986, p.79ff. B. Gentili, Poetry and its Public in Ancient Greece, trzmsl. A.Th. Cole, Baltimore and London 1988 24
ipsa deum poenas docuit perque omnia duxit.
Achises uses this information {ergo exercentur poenis ueterumque malorum/ suppli cia expendunt [739-40]) and his own inventiveness to make Tartarus a temporary sojourn from which all the souls are allowed to escape after they have paid their dues (6.740-44). Again, Virgil describes Elysium as a pleasant region {locos laetos
[6.638]), where the morally pure souls dwell (6.637-702). The poetic truth of his account is guaranteed by the gods, whose help and permission Virgil evokes, before he discloses the secrets of the underworld (6.264-67):
Di, quibus imperium est animarum, umbraeque silentes
ei Chaos ei Phlegeihon, loca node iaceniia laie
sii mihi fas audita loqui, sit numine uesiro
pandere res alia terra ei caligine mersas
Anchises, out of a recreation of the stored information, presents Elysium as the pleasant abode of a higher purification (6.743-47).
The process of ‘recreation’ continues in the supposed revelation of Aeneas’ long term/ato. Anchises promises to count out in detail {enumerare [6.717]) the descen dants of Aeneas: hanc prolem cupio enumerare meorum (6.717). But in the actual account, he appears to be selective including only few of the numerous people, who were gathered on the banks of the Lethaean river {omnis longo ordine posset/ aduer-
SOS legere ... [6.754-55]). Anchises does not mention to Aeneas that the account is selective, or that his knowledge is limited, misleading him to believe, since he is inscius (6.711), that what he hears is the arcana fatorum (7.123). By contrast, both 25
Jupiter and Helenus state in advance the technical or actual limits of their predic tions. Jupiter, for instance, uses the expressionfabor longius, ‘I will tell you the facts at some length’, to suggest that he will talk about the distzint future, but not extensively or in detail. The adverb longe when it modifies verbs of ‘saying’, signi fies ‘lengthy style’ (OLD). But Jupiter’s account certainly is not ‘lengthy in style’.
Therefore, the comparative longiua must have a temporal force here. In both OLD and TLL it is recorded that longe when it modifies verbs indicating foreknowledge or prognostication, indicates remoteness in time either future or past. It is in this sense that it seems to be used by Jupiter. For the form fabor of the archaic fari has the sense of ‘speak the future’. Varro in the De Lingua Latina explains that a man fatur “who first emits from his mouth an utterance which may convey a meaning”
(6.52); and, he adds, that from this fact the verb comes to indicate also prophetic utterance (52). Therefore, since Jupiter ‘speaks’ those events that were to come, fabor takes the sense of ‘disclose the future’. (TLL). Longius, then, since it is asso ciated with prophetic utterance, has a temporal force, indicating remoteness in the future and not length in style or in details. Helenus, on the other hand, confesses that his knowledge is limited by stressing that the gods prevent him from knowing more or saying more: pauca tibi e multis .../ expediam dictis; prohibent nam cetera
Parcae/ scire Eelenum farique uetat Saturnia luno (3.377-80).
Furthermore, Anchises’ prophecy is chronologically disordered. He places, for instance, the reign of Augustus (6.790-805) immediately after the reign of Romulus
(6.777-83), whereas in both Jupiter’s and Vulcan’s prophecies Augustus appeeirs to ‘“The Loeb Classical Texts, transi. R.G Kent 26 be the last of Aeneas’ or Ascanius’ descendants (1.291-96; 8.678-728). Servius, in fact, observes that the chronology is confused (6.756):
... qui bene considérant, inueniunt omnem Romanam historiam ab Aeneae
aduentu usque ad sua tempera summatim célébrasse Virgilium. Quod ideo
latet, quia confusus est ordo
Finally, at points, Anchises changes the facts that were presented in other accounts.
Romulus, for instance, is presented as being the only son of Ilia (6.777-78), whereas in both the divine accounts he is coupled with his brother Remus (1.273-74; 8.630-
33).
In the composition of his prophecy, Anchises uses principles which were tradition ally associated with the composition of a poem. Horace in fact in the Ars Poetica prescribes that a poem should develop out of a reworking of old material (131-34); it should have an appropriate proem, thematic unity, clarity and coherence (148-52):
41
publica materies priuati iuris erii, si
non circa uilem patulemque moraberis orbem,
nec uerbo uerhum curabis reddere fidus
interpres, nec desilies imitator in artum.
semper ad euenium festinat et in médias res
non secus ac notas auditorem rapit, et quae «See: C.O. Brink, Horace On Poetry The Ars Poetica, Cambridge 1971, pp. 208-24. 27
desperat tractata nitescere posse, relinquii,
atque ita mentitur, sic ueris falsa remiscet,
primo ne medium, medio ne discrepet imum.
Anchises reworks traditional themes {publica materies priuati iuris erit [131]), using his own inventiveness to develop them (Tarteirus, Elysium), or his own chronological order (cf. Augustus’ reign, p. 15 above). Thus his account is bound to differ from those of the Sibyl or Virgil, Jupiter or Vulcan (rebus et ordine dispar [Ep. 1.19.29]).
He is not an interpres (nec uerbo uerbum curabis fidus/ interpres [A.P. 133-34]), as
Helenus was (3.359), of the fata, which Jupiter described as immota (1.257). Instead,
Anchises uses the forms dicam (6.722) and expediam dictis (6.759) to suggest his personal contribution to what is said. Moreover, he introduces each section of his account with an informal or formal proem (quanto rectius hie qui nil moliter inepte
[A.P. 140]). Thus lines 713-15, which introduce the theory of reincarnation, serve as an early introduction to the theme of reincarnation developed in lines 724-51; and lines 756-58 is the formal proem to the parade of Roman heroes (760-883). To achieve thematic unity and clarity, Anchises, as we have seen, uses the principles of inversion (in media res), i.e. transposition of later chronologically events to earlier times (e.g. Augustus’ reign), or selective presentation (semper ad euentum festinat
[A.P. 149]), i.e avoidance of irrelevant details about the underworld or Aeneas’ descendants, but concentration on Tartarus and Elysium (739-47), or the inlustris animas (758). Finally, the account ties together uera and falsa in such a way that the successive incidents of the narrative are consistent and appropriate to each other " I follow here Brink’s interpretation of the in media res as inversion; see above p.l6, n. 28. 28
{primo ne medium, media ne discrepet imum [A.P. 152]). C.O. Brink suggests that in Horace’s Ars Poetica the term falsa indicates “subjects ‘made up’, ‘formed’, by the writer”, separating thus factual truth from poetic fiction. ‘‘‘‘ Anchises, in a similar manner, presents Romulus as the only son of Ilia and Mars whose symbols in the underworld foreshadow the greatness of Rome (777-782).
Anchises’ creative composition opens the road for a new definition, which seeks to ally the term uates with theories on the origin of poetry. Varro in the De Lingua
Latina 7.36 writes:
Antiqui poetas uates appellabant a uersibus uiendis, ut de poematis cum
scribam ostendam
A fuller account of what Varro presented in the De Poematis has been handed down to us by Isidorus:
uates a ui mentis appellatos Varro auctor est, uel a uiendis carminibus
id est Jlectendis, hoc est modulandis, et proinde poetae Latine uates olim
et scripta eorum uaticinia dicebantur, quod ui quadam et quasi uesania
in scribendo commouerentur, uel quod modis uerba connecterentur (Or.
8.7.3)
Poetry, according to Varro, is the result of a particular state of mind (quasi uesania), similar to that of a prophet, and of a special technique(a uiendis carminibus). "See, also, Aristotle,Poetics 1454 a33; C.O. Brink, ibid. 224. "see: ibid. p.223 and 198. "See: H. Dahlmann, “Votes”, Philologus 97 (1948) 337-53; J.K. Newman, “The Concept of Vates in Augustan Poetry”, Collection Latomus 89 (1967) 13ff. E. Bickel, “Vates bei Varro und Vergil”, R h.M . ser.3 94 (1951) 257-14. 29
This definition ultimately derives from Hesiod, who first claimed that his poetic inspiration comes from ‘memory’, which he deified, and the Muses ( Theogony 22,
31), the daughters of Mnemosyne, ‘Memory’(53-54). With the assistance of
Memory and the Muses, Hesiod tells us, the poets “weave in new hymns the fabric of their song” (en nearois hymnois rhapsanies aoiden [frg. 557 Merk.-West]).
Inspiration and technique, therefore, contribute in the making of the uates-poet.
The poems themselves, according to Varro, were regarded by the people as uaticinia,
‘prophecies’. In the archaic mind, then, the concepts of poet and prophet, according to Varro, appear to be undifferentiated.
In the double function of prophet and poet Anchises is a uates. His inspiration derives from the memory of the fata which, as a spirit, he is entitled to know
(6.681-83); but he composes with the skill of the poet, who reworks old themes into new ones, by having some role in shaping the fata. His ‘poem’, a ‘uaticinium’, to use Varro’s term, aims at ‘making’ Aeneas ‘mindful’ {memorare) of the future, i.e. it aims at imparting wisdom. By extension, it becomes a mental monumentum.
Varro in the De Lingua Latina links the term monimentum with the term memoria which is perhaps remotely connected with it, because, as he says, the written or ‘“See: B.Gentili, ibid. p.8 ‘^Philochorus the historian observes that the rhapsodes were so called because they composed and wove the fabric of song {FGrHist 328F 212). ‘“Poetry and prophecy are also mixed in the Theogony of Hesiod who claims for himself the title of poet and prophet, whom “the muses endowed with a sacral voice that enables him to sing the future, the present, and the past” (32). See: G. Nagy, “Hesiod”, in Ancient Writers, ed. T.J. Luce, New York 1982, pp.49-57; also “An cient Greek Poetry, Prophecy and Concepts of Theory” in Poetry and Prophecy, ed. J.L. Kugel, Ithaca and London 1990, pp.56-64. Havelock explmns that Hesiod’s claim of singing ta essomena “refers not to novelty to be prophesied but a tradition which will continue to be predictable” (p.80); see above n. 24 30 architectonic monuments exist to remind the reader of the past and ‘make them mindful’ in the future (6.49).
Anchises’ function as a uates! teacher is reinforced by language and imagery appropriate to the concept of poet- teacher. Virgil, first, foreshadowed the didactic function of the speech in book 5 where the facies of Anchises advised Aeneas to visit the underworld in order to ‘learn’ [disces) about his progeny: tum genus omne tuum et quae dentur moenia disces (5.737). Then, Anchises opens each of the sections of his speech with the verbs dicam (6.722) and docebo (6.759) respectively.
E. Henry has noticed that in the Aeneid the verbs dico, disco, doceo are used to introduce didactic or philosophic speech, but not a prophecy. Secondly, Anchises is delineated in terms that remind us of the Horatian uates. Horace in the Epistula ad Augustum 124-131 defines the uates (133) as one who educates and initiates the young in the civic virtues, preparing them to enter the adult community:
...... (uatesj utilis urbi est,
si das hoc, paruis quoque rebus magna iuuari.
03 tenerum pueri balbumque poeta figurât.
sic monimenta quae in sepulcris, et ideo secundum uiam, quo praetereuntis admoneani et se fuisse et illos esse mortalis. Ab eo cetera quae scripta ac facta memoriae causa monimenta dicta Anchises’ speech is a mental monumentum for Aeneas; but as a part of Virgil’s poem it also becomes the written monumentum of the poet for his reader. Horace in fact views his poetry as a written monimentum in Ode 3.30 where he writes exegi monumentum. And Virgil in the third Géorgie describes his epic poem for Augustus as a temple, an architectonic monument (3.13ff.). ‘“The verbs See: Elizabeth Henry, The Vigour of Prophecy, pp. 66-70. ‘^See: C.O. Brink, Horace on Poetry, Cambridge University Press, 1982, v.2 pp. 155-59; Also, Aristophanes,Progs 1345ff. 31
torquei ab ohscenis iam nunc sermonihus aurem,
max etiam pectus praeceptis format amicis,
asperitatia et inuiiiae corrector et irae;
recie facta referi, orientia tempora notis
instruit exemplis, inopem solatur et aegrum.
Horace tells us that a poet/«a Through them he describes the moral character and spirit of glorious men (249-50): quam per uatis opus mores animique uirorum/ clarorum apparent., becoming, thus, the corrector of the community (129), and the solace {solatur) of the inops and aeger. (131). In a similar manner, Anchises, motivated by amicitia towards his son - we are told that his care for Aeneas never failed {nec me mea cura fefellit [6.691]), compiles an account of praecepta such as parcere subiectis et debellare superbos (6.853), and exempla of the gloria of the Dardanian proles (756-57). The purpose of such an account, we are told, is to inspire Aeneas by the virtues he hears to occupy Italy (6.806-807): et dubitamus adhuc uirtutem extendere factis **See on amicitia in a political sense M. Bonjour, Terre Natale. Collection d ’ Etudes Anciennes, Paris 1975, pp. 59-65. Also, C.O. Brink, Horace On Poetry Epistles book II, Cambridge 1982, pp.163-73 “ C.O. Brink suggests that the words aeger alludes to emotional disturbances, not physical sickness, which “were made to confront reason”; see: Horace on Poetry, Epistles book II, p. 173. 32 aui metus Ausonia prohibet consistere terra ? But also Anchises aims at encouraging his son (722) - dicam equidem nec te su3- pensum, note, ienebo-, ^ who appears to be distressed by his misfortunes on earth (quae lucis miseris tam dira cupido? [721]). The above discussion has shown that the infinitives memorare and ostendere which Anchises uses to express his desire to speak (6.716-17) anticipate and link together two distinct types of utterance, a poetic and a prophetic. Anchises, thus, emerges as both prophet and poet. The close association of poet and prophet is emphasized in the expressionpii uates et Phoebo digna locuti (662). The term uates applies to both poets and prophets, who derive their inspiration from Apollo, the god of prophecy and poetry. Virgil claims for himself the title ofuates (7.38-41): Nunc age, qui reges, Erato, quae tempora, rerum quis Latio antiquo fuerit status, ... expediam, et primae reuocabo exordia pugnae tu uatem, iu, diua, mone. ... He seeks the inspiration of the muse, Erato, in order to recount (reuocabo [7.40]) the kings, their fortunes and the wars in old Latium. And in 6.264-67 the poet seeks divine inspiration and the permission to reveal, as a prophet, to his reader the secrets of the underworld. Zetzel, in fact, suggests that Virgil’s eschatology is a revelation which ‘pertains to the poet himself and to his contemporaries” (p.277); ‘«Servius remarks that the participle suspensum has the sense of ‘uncertain’, ‘trou bled’. “ See: M. Winkler, “Musaeus in book six of the Aeneid”, A JP h 104 (1987) 655-60, esp. 657-58. 33 “it is a revelation for Rome” (p.282). But Virgil is not a uaies, ‘poet and prophet’, in the sense that he predicts the future, but that he possesses the knowledge of a tradition which will continue to he predictable, and therefore useful to the society. 57 “Virgil’s epic”, to use J.K. Newman’s words, “is about history in the sense that what has happened prefigures what will happen”, and therefore could edify contemporary society. In fact Quintilian in the I.O . 1.8.4-6 emphasized that Virgil’s epic guides the spirit of the men through the moral excellences it depicts: non modo quae diserta sed uel magis quae honesta sunt discant (pueri). ideoque optime institutum est ut ab Homero atque Uergilio lectio inciperet ... interim et sublimitate heroici carminis animus assurgat et ex magnitu- dine rerum spiritum ducat et optimis imbuatur. Virgil, therefore, is the paedagogos of Rome, since “his work will provide Roman youth with a new set of paradigms”. Similarly, Anchises is the paedagogos of Aeneas. In fact, Pliny the Younger in Epistle 8.14.6 says that the most trustworthy type of education is provided by the father and his living example. Anchises, while alive, was indeed the living example for Aeneas. He taught Aeneas the virtues of pietas and iustitia through his own example of pietas in book 2 and iustitia in book 3. Aeneas considered him curae casusque leuamen (3.709). Once more, in the underworld, Anchises becomes the leuamen of Aeneas through his prophecy/poem. J.E.G. Zetzel, ^'‘Romane Memento", TA PhA 119 (1989) 263-84. Also, R.G.A.M. Lyne, Further Voices in Vergil’s Aeneid. Oxford 1987, 214-16 *7The term uates seems to translate the Greek theios aoidos as it was defined by Hesiod, Theogony 32. See: E. Havelock, above n. 24, pp.57-58 and 79-80. *®“The Concept of Vates in Augustan Poetry”, Collection Latomus 89 (1967) 35-37, 77-81. 34 The oracular incantations, although valuable for whatever advice, or prognostication they conveyed, were regarded by Aeneas as ambages (6.99), or prodigia (3.366) or horrenda (3.712), giving him little hope or knowledge of the future. In fact, he is frequently called ohlitus fatorum (4.267, 5.703); or we see him forget Helenus’ advice to avoid the land of the Cyclops (book 3), or he attributes part of Celaeno’s sad prediction to his father (7.116-27). On the other hand, Anchises’ prophetic and didactic poem succeeds in filling Aeneas with optimism for the future (6.889): incenditque animum famae uenientis amore Therefore, Anchises and Virgil, as composers and teachers, have traits in common. Initially I raised the question why Virgil has made Anchises the mouthpiece of the Sibyl. The preceding discussion has set forth an important reason: Anchises is not a usual uatesf prophet, who foretells morehorrenda, but a prophet and poet and teacher, who aims at encouraging and instructing Aeneas. In the following second and third chapters I will concentrate on the means of instruction, the ‘prophecy’ itself. In the second chapter I will discuss the eschatological account, its composition and purpose; in chapter three I will discuss the parade of the heroes, its subject- matter and purpose. C H A P T E R n The Purgatory In the first chapter I suggested that Anchises anticipates his prophetic account by employing language appropriate to the concepts of prophet and poet. The infinitives memorare and ostendere (6.716) qualify the following monologue (6.725-883) as a revelation and ‘re-creation’ of the fata, which aims at ‘making’ Aeneas ‘mindful’ in the future. Of what specifically does Anchises make Aeneas ‘mindful’ ? Lines 713- 14 and 717 make it clear: ‘animae, quibus altera fato/ corpora debeniur (713-14), ‘the souls, to which by fate new bodies are due’, and hanc prolem cupio enumerare meorum (717), Aeneas’ progeny. In this chapter I shall discuss the account of the eschatological origins of the world, which is developed in fines 724-751. Modern scholarship, approaching Anchises’ account from the perspective of the reader, has suggested that the eschatology, a blend of Stoic and Platonic ideas, is the manifestation of Virgil’s true beliefs; it suggests that those few {pauci [744]), who have achieved the highest purification (746-47), are rewarded with a life in the sky, escaping the grim cycle of rebirth; and it stresses, as best expressed by R.J. Tarrant, the “evanescence of mortal aspirations”. *®R.J. Tarrant, “Aeneas and the Gates of Sleep”, C P 77 (1982) 53. See also W.R. Johnson, Darkness Visible. A Study of Vergil’s Aeneid. pp. 108-11, Berke ley 1976. W. Clausen, “An Interpretation of the Aenetd”, H SC P 68 (1964) 139-47, p. 146; D C. Feeney, “History and Revelation in Vergil’s Underworld”, PO PS 32 (1986) 1-24. J.J. O’Hara, Death and the Optimistic Prophecy in Vergil’s Aeneid, Princeton 1990, 172. Also, R. Lamacchia, “Ciceros Somnium Scipionis 35 36 Contrary to this commonly held opinion, I will suggest that Anchises is a prophet and poet who aims at making Aeneas ‘mindful’ of the origins and outcome of ‘irra tional’ conduct, and at ‘reminding’ him that the underworld he has just been led through is a place of penitence. As a prophetic utterance, Anchises’ eschatological speech supplements the Sibyl’s tour through the underworld, by providing a philo sophical explanation of the function of Hades and of the death of Aeneas’ past. As a poetic utterance, the underworld is ‘recreated’ as a purgatory, in which there is no place of reward for the morally pure souls, because there is no soul absolutely pure. This thesis will be argued by means of a detailed discussion of the similarities and inconsistencies between Anchises’ description of the places of justice (Tartarus and Elysium [6.736-47]) and the Sibyl’s description of Tartzirus (6.542-627) or Virgil’s description of the underworld. und das sechste Buch der Aeneis”, R hM ser. 3. 107 (1964) 261-78; Lamacchia argues about the influence of Cicero’s Somnium on Anchises’ theory of the soul’s original purity and felicity in the underworld. See, also, L. A. MacKay,“Three Levels of Meaning in Aeneid VI”, T A PhA 86 (1955) 180-89; Ph.R. Hardie, Virgil’s Aeneid Cosmos and Imperium, Cleirendon Press, Oxford 1986, pp.69- 83; E. Henry, The Vigour of Prophecy A Study of Virgil’s Aeneid, Southern Illi nois University Press 1989, pp. 130-47; A. Wlosok,“Et poeticae figmentum et philosophiae veritatem”, Listy Filologicke 106 (1983) 13-19. On philosophic in fluences see: F. J. Miller, ’’The Philosophic Vergil”, V ergilius 37 (1938-40)9-26; Miller suggests that the particular passage draws upon Platonic ideas which fas cinated Virgl, although they rival his general philosophy (p. 24). P. Boyance, “ Le sens cosmique de Virgile”, R EL 32 (1954) 220-49: Boyance believes that Lu cretius, Aratos, Plato, Posidonius have contributed to the formulation of the ideas presented. L. Alfonsi, “Aspetti fllosoflco - religiosi dell’ Eneide: 1’ Eneide, ossia il mistero della storia umana”, Atti del convegno mondiale scientifico di studi su V irgilio, 2 (1981) 188-206: Alfonsi believes that Posidonius influnced the An- chisean speech. Also, P. Grimai, “Le Livre VI de 1’“Eneide” et son actualité en 23 AV. J.-C.”, R E A 56 (1954) 40-60. On verbal influences see: Agnes Kirsopp Michels, “Lucretius and the Sixth Book of the Aeneid ”, A JP h 65 (1944) 147; W. A. Merrill, “Parallels and Coincidences in Lucretius and Virgil”, U niversity of California Publications in Classical Philology 3 (1918) 135-247. 37 Anchises’ speech (6.724-51) focuses on the tense juxtaposition of the optimistic image of the sublimis animas and the pessimistic image of the tarda corpora, which was the core of Aeneas’ question (6.719-21): o pater, anne cliquas ad caelum hinc ire putandum est sublimis animas iterumque ad tarda reuerii corpora? ... Anchises reveals {pandit [6.723]) to Aeneas that emotions, such as fear, desire, sor row and pleasure, arising from the body (6.733) pollute (733-34) the rational princi ple of the souls (730-31), causing their descent to the purgatories of the underworld (6.739-46) to be cleansed (6.746-47) prior to their transmigration into new bodies (6.750-51). Structurally, the speech is divided into two sections: the soul before its corruption (724-31), and the soul after (731-51). In the first section, Anchises, as the substitute for the Cumaean Sibyl, makes swiftly his point about the cosmic ori gins of the earthly world (6.728-29), rind argues that the nature of the human soul in essence and substance is a fragment of the cosmic soul, and, therefore, pure. The content of this section is reminiscent of the content of the Cumaean carmen which Virgil presented in the fourth Eclogue. According to the Cumaean carmen, a new generation will descend to earth from the sky: iam noua progenies caelo demitiiiur alto (4.7); the new generation will inaugurate a new and pure {ab integro) temporal «“Aeneas is impressed by Elysium which is depicted as a locus amoenus- note the emphasis on the topographical details{amoena uirecta/ largior hie campas aether et lumine uesiit/ purpurea, solemque suum, sua sidera norunt [638, 640-41]) or the qualitative phrases locos laetos, fortunatorum nemovum, sedes heatas (638-39) which stress the pleasantness of this region and, symbolically, the blessedness of its inhabitants. 38 order on eairth: magnus ah integro saeclorum nasciiur ordo (Eclogue 4.5). Anchises, in the fashion of the Cumaean Sibyl, states that the earthly world derives its nature from the nature of the cosmos (6.728-29): inde hominum pecudumque genus uitaeque uolantum ei quae marmoreo feri monstra sub aequore pontus The adverb inde, ‘thence’, connects thematically this passage with lines 724-27 which set forth the origins of the universe from the spiritus/ mens, thereby suggest ing that mankind, animals, birds and all other natural kinds derive their life (uitae [728]) from that same cosmic force. Anchises’ claim, by contrast to the Cumaean prophecy, acquires diachronic value by the use of the present tenses alit (6.725), agitai (6,727), miscet (6.727), fert (6.729), which present the process of creation of the corporeal world as a natural law. The primeval purity which, according to the Cumaean carmen (Eclogue 4.5), pertains to the new generation, in Anchises’ speech is initially reflected in the purity of the soul that animates the earthly beings. Anchises emphasizes the pure nature of the soul (uigoT, 6.730), by describing it as a cluster of very fine, fiery atoms (igneus, caelestis origo/ seminibus), similar in nature to the cosmic soul (730-31): 63 «‘According to OLD, the adjective integer means ‘new’ and ‘morally pure’. «*See: Plato Timaeus 30D and the Stoics (Diogenes Laertius, 7.142). Chrysippus held that “our individual natures are parts of the nature of the whole universe” (D.L. 7.87-88, transi. R.D. Hicks). See also M.R. Arundel, “Principio caelum PV S 3 (1962) 27-34, p. 29-30. ««Virgil resorts again to traditional views about the soul. Heraclitus, Anaximenes and Lucretius (3.179-80) held that the soul, the union of vital breath and mind, consists from airy-fiery seeds; while Democritus held that the soul Wcis fiery, and Anaxagoras, airy; see: C. Bailey, Commentary of the De Rerum Natura, Oxford 39 igneus est oîlis uigor et caelestis origo seminibus ... The term uigor occurs twice in Virgil to signify once intellectual alertness (Aen. 9.610-11) and once bodily liveliness (G. 4.417-18). In each case, it is associated either with animus {senectus/ débilitât uiris animi mutatque uigorem [A. 9.610- 11]), or with membra {atque habilis membris uenit uigor [G.4.418]). In the present context, uigor seems to comprise both the mental and the physical aspect of ‘energy’. W hat specifically the ‘intellectual and physical liveliness’ represents is clarified a few lines above by the description of the cosmic force (6.724-27): principio caelum ac terras camposque liquentis lucentemque globum lunae Titaniaque astra spiritus intus alit, toiamque infusa per artus mens agitai molem ei magno se corpore miscet The cosmic force appears to have a dual nature: i.e. physical, ‘vital breath’ {spir itus [6.725]), and ‘mental’ {mens [6.727]). Spiritus, a key-concept of this passage, in the Aeneid is employed in the sense of wind as in 12.365: ac uelut Edoni Boreae cum spiritus alto/ insonat Aegaeo, or the life force which animates the body as in 4.336: ... dum spiritus hos regit artus. Elsewhere, Virgil employs the terms aura aetheria or aether to indicate the airy substance that vitalizes the cosmos. Thus in 1.546-47, Ilioneus uses the conditional clause si uescitur aura/ aetheria to express his concern about Aeneas’ life; again, in 10.898-99, Tyrrhenus is invigorated by the celestial aura: contra Tyrrhenus, ut auras/ suspiciens hausit caelum mentemque (1947) v.2, p.1004. 40 recepit In the fourth Géorgie, the bees receive their lives from the hausius aethe- rios (220-21); and in the second, Aether is the pater omnipotens who nourishes all the offsprings: et om nis/ magnus alit magno commixtua corpore fetus (G. 326-27). Finally, Anchises in 6.747 uses the phrases aetherium sensum and aurai simplicis ignem to indicate the soul. Cicero states that the term ‘ether’ is synonymous with ‘air’ and its substance consists of altissimi ignes, ‘very fine fires’, (2.91). Conse quently, it can be inferred that spiritus, aura, aether signify the same airy and fiery substance. The second aspect of the cosmic force is mens, ‘intellect’ (727). ^ Mens in the Aeneid is primarily identified with rational faculties or qualities congenial to reason. Therefore, the corporeal universe is animated by the cosmic vital breath (spiritus) and is administered by the cosmic mind (mens). The union of spiritus and mens was traditionally considered to be the anima. Lucretius, in fact, states '^This idea was widely acclaimed by the Stoics (Diogenes Laertius 7.139). Posido nius held that the god is a rational spiritus infused through all the matter (frg 100 Kidd): ait enim Posidonius Stoicus: “deus est spiritus rationalis per omnem diffusus materiam” hoc est terram aquam aera caelum See M.R. Arundel (1962) p.29. ^^Mens is employed in the sense of ratio in 4.65, forethought in 7.273, 10.899; soundness or insanity in 12.669; mental defection in 2.54, 4.595, 12.37; sense of life in 10.899; imagination in 4.501; attention in 5.304; memory in 4.649, 10.824; opinion in 4.55, 5.828; will in 1.304, 676, 4.105, 319, 449, 5.56, 9.234, 10.629, 182, 12.481, 554; courage in 9.184, 187, 12.609; sensation in 1.462, 643, 713, 2.316, 407, 5.643, 6.133, 278, 8.163, 9.292, 798, 11.3, 357, 12.160, 468, 599. “®The theory of the ensouled universe recurs throughout Greek philosophy, from the Presocratics, Pythagoras (Diogenes Laertius 8.24) and Anaxagoras, to Plato and the Stoics (D.L. 7.139). Plato in the Timaeus states that the Artificer con structed reason within the soul and soul within the cosmic body (30B) which streches throughout the macrocosm (34B). ®^In the Aeneid anima appears to be used as ‘air’, ‘vital breath’: 1.98, 4.385, 7.351, 8.403, 564, 567, 9.349, 443, 580, 10.348, 601, 908, 11.883; as ‘ego’, i.e. the 41 that mind and vital breath form a single nature (3.136-39): . 68 Nunc animum atque animant iico coniuncta teneri inter se atque unam naturam conficere ex se, sed caput esse quasi et dominari in corpore toto consilium quod nos animum mentemque uocamus. Accordingly, the uigor that animates the terrestrial world, being a fragment of the cosmic force, represents the union of spiritus/ mens, i.e. the anima, ‘soul’. Anchises reinforces the idea of the soul’s purity by describing it as a fiery and airy substance. The materialistic nature of the soul {uigor) is indicated by the terms igneus, caelestis origo (730) and semina (731). Semina, a technical word of Lu cretius (1.58-61), indicates the ‘seeds’, i.e. the atoms, from which the things spring. On the other hand, the term caelestis derives from caelum, which, according to Ci- combination of vital breath and mental/emotional faculties, as in 12.648: sancta ad uos anima atque istius inscia culpae, and in 11.372: nos animae uiles, or in 11.24-25: ite,” ait, “egregias animas, quae sanguine nohisj hanc patriam peperere suo, .... See for a detailed discussion of the meaning of anima in Virgil: E.A. Hahn, “Body and Soul in Vergil”, T A PhA 92 (1961) 198-207. *®St. Augustine quotes Varro for the theory that anima is the source of life, intellect and feelings: Viirro ... ires esse adfirmat animae gradus ... unum qui per omnes partes corporis quae uiuunt transit et non habet sensum... secundum gradum animae in quo sensus est ... tertium gradum esse animae summum quod uocatur animus, in quo intellegentia praeminet. *®The theory that the soul of the terrestrial beings is a fragment of the cosmic force is also evoked in the fourth Géorgie, where the bees appear to have a portion of the divine mind and the etherial vital force within their body (220-21): esse apibus partem diuinae mentis et haustus aeiherios dixere .... This idea ultimately derives from the Platonic and Stoic traditions. See D.L. 7.143; Plato Timaeus 34C. Posidonius also maintains: And the universe is empsuchon, ensouled, as is clear from our human soul being a fragment from that source, (frg. 99a, transi. I.G. Kidd) 42 cero, is synonymous with the Greek aether, a fiery substance: ™ hoc quod memoro nostri caelum, Graii perhibent aethera {De Naiura Deorum 2.91). Such a description anticipates the second section of Anchises’ revelation, which sets forth the theory of the soul’s physical contamination by corporeal elements, which represent emotions contrary to reason (6.731-35). In the second section of his speech Anchises presents the process of the soul’s decline from its rational purity (6.731-38) and its restoration to it by means of purifi cation in the underworld (6.740-47). In lines 731-738 Anchises as a prophet appears to supplement the Sibyl’s account of the actions that are morally contemptible and cause the punishment of the dead in Tartarus (6.582-615, 621-24) by providing the causes which impel criminal actions. Earlier the Sibyl used the terms malum {mal- O T u m ... p o e n a s [6.542-43]) and scelus {scelerum form as [6.626]) to designate the criminal actions which cause the condemnation of certain souls to Tartarus. She left, however, her account of crimes incomplete by the astonishing words: n e q u a e r e d o c e r i ... quae form a uiros fortunaue mersit (6.614-615). S. Scheinberg Kristol has interpreted the termf o r t u n a in the above context as ‘malevolent external force’. Anchises identifies this external malevolent agent { fo r t u n a ) with the m a l u m (6.736) and s c e lu s (6.742) of passions which alienate the rational nature of the soul (6.733- 34). Anchises states that the human soul maintains its fiery purity and rational ac tivity to the extent that the body does not impede it (731-33): ^®See above p. 5 "See: Labor and Fortuna in Virgil’s Aeneid. New York 1990, pp.173-80. 43 ... quantum non noxia corpora tardant terrenique hebetant artus moribundaque membra hinc metuunt cupiuntque, dolent gaudentque ... First, the verbs tardant, ‘slow down’, and hebetant, ‘blunt’, describe in physical terms the dilatory influence of the body upon the soul: the physical liveliness ‘slows down’ (tardant) and the ability to reason is ‘blocked’ (hebetant). Secondly, the verbs metuunt, cupiunt, dolent, gaudent set forth the soul’s reaction by developing such emotions as fear, desire, sorrow and pleasure (733), which are against its rational nature (neque auras/ dispiciunt [733-34]). The distortive effect of the body is reinforced by such collocations as corporeae pestes (737), concreta inolescere (738) or concretam labem (746), on the one hand, and the words malum (736, 739) and scelus (742), on the other, which describe the psychic contamination in materialistic and moral terms. Plato, originally, indicated the growing process of the corporeal element within the soul by the words soma- toeides and sumphues (Phaedo 81c, Republic 609A). Cicero, in his translation of the Plato in Timaeus explains the retardation of the soul’s activity in terms of physics (43). He considers the motions produced within the body by its own and other ele ments (air, earth, water, fire), entering the body from outside, as “sensations” (43c) that impede the energy of the soul (43d). Servius also claims that the animalia dis play different dispositions according to the quality of their body (730). He explains, however, the decline of the soul in physiological terms. In a weak and sick body the intellectual power of the soul decreases: in sano enim corpore alia est uiuacitas mentis, in aegro pigrior, in satis inualido etiam ratione carens, ut in phreneticis cernimus (724). ” R. Tarrant considers the body as “the source of illusion and deception: “Aeneas and the Gates of Sleep” C P h 77 (1982) 54. He interprets the emotions as illusive and deceptive, suggesting that the world of Aeneas is less real than that of the blessed souls. But even the blessed souls appear to have emotions (6.690-94; 653- 55). In Anchises’ presentation the emotions appear to be the opposite of themens and therefore source of irrationality. 44 Timaeus (8), renders into Latin the term somaioeides as: omne quod erai concretum atque corporeum. The occurrence of the terms concreta, ‘congealed’, ‘hardened’ zmd corporeae pestes, ‘corporeal sickness’, as well as the infinitive inolescere in Anchises’ speech not only suggest Platonic infiuence, but also pictorially represent the soul, an atomic cluster (731), to be contaminated by particles foreign to its nature {multa concreta [738]), which grow inside it {inolescere [738]), thereby foreshadowing the section on the soul’s purgation in Hades (6.739-47). Anchises, thus, reveals the inner motives, which cause criminal conduct, thereby reminding {memorare [6.716]) Aeneas that violent acts are the physical manifestation of the soul’s blight. And yet, Anchises qualifies the extent of the negative operation of emotions upon the rational principle of the soul by the quantum non clause (731) which suggests that some souls are more infected than others. Such unstated classification foreshadows, as will be shown, Anchises’ division of the underworld into two different purgatories, which contain souls of different degrees of impurity. Having outlined by what process the soul becomes impure, Anchises describes to Aeneas the process of the soul’s purification in the underworld. The purgation :*See R.G.Austin (1977) on line 738 who says: “a strangely haunting line”. Servius 6.738. "That “the body and its desires are the only cause of wars and seditions and battles” was originally acclaimed by Plato {Phaedo 66c, transl.H.N. Fowler). "Heyne takes quantum as qualitative explaining the difference in mores among the men, according to the degree of change and separation of the anima from the body (731-32). Austin observes in this line “a compression of thought” and, fol lowing Conington, suggests that the souls cannot function properly, because of the weakness of the body. Virgil seems to allude here to the traditional theory of sepa ration of the soul from the body, according to which, the wise man’s soul as much as possible abstains from pleasures and desires, distress and fear; whereas the souls which are overwhelmed by corporeal pleasures or pains are incapable of exercising reason See: Plato, Phaedo 83B; 66 c-d; Timaeus 86b-c. 45 of the soul is rendered necessary, because its physical pollution is not eliminated by its physical separation from the body (quin et supremo cum lumine uita reliquitf non tamen ... omnes/ corporeae excedunt pestes .. [735-37]). ^ Relying on his memory as a spirit (memorare [6.716]), in lines 739-47, Anchises composes an ac count of the underworld regions, which blends elements from Virgil’s description of the underworld and the Sibyl’s presentation of Tartarus with fictitious elements, in order to make the underworld a purgatory. Specifically, he divides the underworld into a Tartarus-hke place of penitence, from where the souls can escape after paying their due punishment (6.739-43), zmd Elysium, a milder purgatory, where the souls attain the highest degree of purification and restoration to their original, rational purity (6.743-47). In the description of the place of penitence (6.739-42) Anchises, as I will show, as a poet recreates Virgil’s underworld and the Sibyl’s Tartarus to make it a temporary sojourn of the more impure souls. Virgil, first, in his own voice explained that the underworld is divided into different regions such as Orcus (6.295-330) or Styx (6.417- 78), Tartarus (6.543, 548-627) and Elysium (6.542, 637-709); the Styx itself contains different sections such as the vestibule of the infants (6.426-29), the sedes of those unjustly condemned (430), the loca of those having committed suicide (434-36), the Lugentes campi (441) and the arua of the warriors (477-78). Moreover, Virgil in Servius compares the soul to a pearl which stained from mud needs cleaning to regain its lustre (6.724); ut si speciem candidam missam in lutum polluas et earn statim auferas, non idcirco sordihus caret, sed ablutionem requirit, ut in prisiinum nitorem possit redire: sic anima ex eo quod datur corpori inquinata, etiam si corpus deponat, necesse habet purgari." 46 the form of an aside explains that the places alloted to the souls in the Styx Eire by divine judgement: nec uero hae sine sorte datae, sine indice, sedes (431). Nowhere does Virgil state that the souls dwelling in these regions exercentur poenis but in Tartarus. The poetic truth of Virgil’s underworld is guEu-anteed by the gods, whose permission he requested to proceed to this revelation (6.264-67). The Sibyl presents Tartarus as the place of punishment of the morally impure souls: at laeua m alom m / exercet poenas ... (6.542-43). Traditionally, the under ground places of punishment or purgation{ypo ges dikaioteria elihousat) were called Tartarus (to tes tiseos te kai dikes desmoterion, o de Tartaron kalousin [Plato, Phae- drus 249A]). Aenesis sees (Respicit Aeneas ... 6.548) Tartarus as a region surrounded by walls and the river Phlegethon {moenia lata uidet iriplici circumdata muro, / quae rapidus fiammis amhit torrentibus am nis,/ Tartareus Phlegethon [6.549-51]). The Sibyl explains that among those confined in this area are mythological sinners such as the Titans, who occupy the very bottom of Tartarus (6.580-81), the Aloidae, Salmoneas, Tityus, Ixion, Pirithous (580-607), who seem to abide there for years and perhaps forever; they were there, when Hecate revealed to the Sibyl the facts about TEirtarus (6.564-65). Again, Theseus, we are told, will remain in Tartarus forever {aetemumque sedehit [617-18]). Besides, there are people guilty of fraternal strife {inuisi fratres), fraud (frans innexa clienti), parent abuse (pulsatusve parens), civil war [arma secuti impia), adultery {adnlterium caesi) (608-13), incest {thala- mrnn inuasit natae uetitosque hymenaeos), betrayal [uendidit hie auro patriam) and ’’"See: J.E.G. Zetzel, ^'’Romane Memento'. Justice and Judgement in Aeneid 6”, TA PA 119 (1989) 263-84; J. Sheehan, “Catholic ideas of Death as Found in Aeneid 6” C F 16 (1962) 89-109; M.R. Arundel, “Principio caelum”, PV S 3 (1963-64) 27-34 47 bribery (fixit leges preiio) (621-23). They all await their punishment in Tartarus (614). The Sibyl does not explicitly state whether these common mortals will be there forever. ^ However, the language and imagery employed have a specifically Platonic color: Plato, first, stated that those of the common sinners who commit ted many and great crimes {dia ta megethe ton amartematon, e ieTosulias pollas kai megalas) are incurable {aniatos echein) and, therefore, condemned forever to Tartarus (^othen oupote ekbainousin [Phaedo llSe]). The occurrence of the temporal clause dum uita manebat (6.608), or the pair of verbs fixit, refixitque, as well as the phrase ausi omnes immane nefas ausoque potiti in the Sibyl’s account suggest that these souls have spent their life committing many and grave crimes; they resemble the incurables of Plato and, therefore, it may be assumed, they will remain in Tar tarus forever. Earlier, she emphasized that the souls cannot transgress the limits of their allotted places: she reminded Palinurus, for instance, that he cannot cross the waters of Styx without the gods’ permission (6.373-76): ‘unde haec, o Palinure, tibi tarn dira cupido? tu Stygias inhumatus aquas amnemque seuerum Eumenidum aspicies, ripamue iniussus adibis? desine fata deum flecii sperare precando, The veracity of the Sibyl’s words is guaranteed by the authority of Hecate, the goddess who instructed the Sibyl (564-65): sed me lucis Hecate praefecit Auernis ipsa deum poenas docuit perque omnia duxit "See also E.A. Hahn, ibid. p.216. 48 Just as the Sibyl described Tartarus as the place of punishment (6.542-43), so too Anchises, the substitute for the Sibyl, describes the underworld in terms that recall Tartarus (6.739-40): ergo exercentur •poenis ueterumque malorum supplicia expendunt: ... The sinful souls in the underworld are punished; the punitive cheiracter of the place is reinforced by the introduction of a list of punishments such as ventilation, or washing, or burning of the evil (740-42), which appear to supplement the Sibyl’s incomplete list: non, mihi si linguae centum sint .../ omnia poenarum percurrere nomina possim (6.625-27). By contrast to the Sibyl’s account of Tartarus and Virgil’s depiction of the under world, Anchises, first, refrains firom calling the place of justice 'Tartarus’, thereby implying that the whole underworld is a purgatory; and, secondly, he depicts it as a temporary sojourn, from which all the souls are eligible to depart, after paying their dues (exinde per amplum mittimur Elysium [743-44]). First, Anchises suggests that cdl the impure souls which descend to Hades for punishment or purgation are miserae (6.736). In this sense, the adjective miserae (6.736) parallels the expression tristes umbrae which in book 5 (734) was employed by the facies of Anchises to denote the inhabitants of Tartarus. The implication of such a parallelism is that all "’Arundel, (1962) pp. 33-34, suggests that these lines could be interpreted allegor ically reflecting the different lives of the souls (an Empedoclean proposition). But the theme of punishment is alluded in the choice of poenis and supplicia. A similar phrase is employed by Diomedes to convey the idea of the punishment the Greeks suffered for their scelera committed against Troy: ... infanda per orbem/ supplicia et scelerum poenas expendim'us omnes (11.257-58). "See: E.A. Hahn, “Aeneid 6.739-751”, C W 20.27 (1927) 216. 4G the souls which are miserae dwell in a ‘Tartarus’. Anchises ‘reminds’ (716) Aeneas that the maesii (6.333, 340, 434, 445) or miseri (6.370, 426-27) or those merged in evil {eripe me his ... malis [6.365], or his mersere malis [6.511]), as well as the tristis domos and loea turhiia (6.534), which he saw during his trip through the under world, are all part of the purgatory. Hence the entire underworld except Elysium is a Tartarus-like region. Secondly, Anchises suggests that all the souls from ‘Tartarus’ are transferred to Elysium (extrade per amplum mittimur Elysium [6.743-44]). This idea is first implied in the clause quisque suos paiimur manes, ‘each one of us ‘suffers’ his own manes' (6.743), which concludes the short account of the underworld purgatory (6.739-42). The grammatical person of the verb paiimur suggests that Anchises includes himself among the impure souls who ‘suffer’. If the verb paiimur has a negative nuance, i.e. it is invested with the sense of exercentur and expendunt, “ then it is expected that Anchises has also some negative experience in the under world similar to that of the souls in ‘Tartarus’. Why then did not he include himself among those which exercentur poenis (6.739)? The answer must be that he did not receive any of the punishments described above (740-42). On the contrary, in book “^The idea of curable sinners originated with Plato, who, in Gorgias places among curables people like Thersites (525A-26D), or people who committed crimes such as betraying and reducing their country to slavery (Republic 615b), or have done some act of violence against their parents, or have slain other people (Phaedo 113e) but have spent the rest of their life repenting it (Phaedo 114a). These Eire allowed to escape after paying in Tartarus for their crimes for a thousand years (Republic 615a- b). However, Plato distinguishes these curables from the legendary sinners, such as Tantalus, Sisyphus, Tityus, or great common criminals, who, as it was mentioned above, are incurables confined forever to Tartarus (Gorgias 525c). ®^See: R.G. Austin, 6.743, who takes paiimur meaning panduntur... exuritur (740- 42). 50 5, the fades of Anchises had revealed to Aeneas that he dwells not in Tartarus but in Elysium among the pii (734-35). The casti, the Sibyl explains, are excluded from Tartarus: nvlli fas casto sceleratum insistere limen (563). Therefore Anchises as a pitu is excluded from ‘Teirtarus’. In fact, he dwells in the laeia arua (6.744) of Elysium along with the pii and casti (6.661-62). The adjective laeta stresses the pleasantness of this region in contrast to the misery of the place of torture. There fore he does not ‘suffer’ (patiiur)^ since he lives in a pleasant region. The souls in Elysium do not actively participate in the purification process, since the agent that performs the purgation is the element of time[donee longa dies .../ concretam exemii labem [6.745-46]). The verb patimur, then, is rather passive in its experi ence, indicating simply the ‘continuation’ of life (OLD). Just as Anchises continues his life in Elysium, similarly all the souls from the underworld places of justice are transferred [mittimur [6.744]) along with Anchises to Elysium and continue their life there. The conception of ‘Tartarus’ as a temporary sojourn is reinforced by an isolated incident in the catabasis. When Aeneas encounters Palinurus by the banks of Co- cytus, the latter states in ambiguous language that he wishes to be transferred to certain sedes placidae to find tranquility: da dexiram misera et tecum me tolle per undas,/ sedibus ut saltern placidis in morte quiescam (6.370-71). Where are these sedes placidael According to the Sibyl, the souls who remain unburied cannot enter Dis proper, before they are granted a proper burial: nec ripas datur korrendas et rauca fluenta/ transportare prius quam sedibus ossa quieruni (6.327-28); she char acterizes Cocytus, the borderline between Orcus and Dis proper, as stagna exoptata 51 (6.330). In the light of the Sibyl’s words, it may be assumed that the sedes placidae, where Palinurus wishes to go, is Dis proper. But, according to Anchises’ account, Palinurus is cdready in purgatory, since all the regions which are inhabited by mis erae souls, as has been shown above (p.l2), belong to 'Tartarus’. Elysium, on the other hand, appears to be the place of tranquility. Anchises describes it as laeia arua (6.744); Virgil emphasizes by his subjective style that Aeneas perceives {uidet [6.703]) the grove by the Lethaean river as domus placidae (6.705). In the light of Anchises’ account, the placidae sedes to which Palinurus wishes to go is Elysium. By extension, all the miserae souls from ‘Tartarus’ are transferred to Elysium, as the exinde ... mittimur ... clause suggests (6.743-44). Accordingly, Anchises taking up the role of the poet ‘recreates’{memorare [6.716]) the imderworld as a purgatory. But his words are sanctioned neither by the authority of Jupiter who allots the fata (1.262), nor by Hecate, the goddess of the underworld. Therefore the account is distorted. The redefinition of the underworld continues in the account of Elysium (6.743- 47), which is described as a second purgatory for the souls who have passed through a first purgation and for those originally less polluted (731). ... exinde per amplum mittimur Elysium, et pauci laeta arua tenemua, donee longa dies perfecto temporis orbe concretam exemit labem, purumque relinquit aetherium sensum atque aurai simplicis ignem. 52 Again, here, Anchises uses Virgil’s poetic truth about Elysium and his own inven tiveness in order to make Elysium a milder purgatory of less impure souls. Virgil, initially, classified the souls in Elysium in two groups: those casti (6.661) or pii (6.662) who remain there forever, and the pii like Anchises who are destined to be reincarnated (6.679-80). In his own voice, the poet depicts Elysium (6.542) as an ampler, pleasant region (6.638), which is divided into three different sections: the heatae sedes (639), the nitentes campi (677) and the domus placidae of the Lethaean valley (705), the abode of the souls about to return to the upper world (6.713-15). 84 The sedes heatae (637-38) is the home of those consecrated to the gods (648-49, 660-64) who appear to be permanent residents of this area. They have their temples wreathed with white fillets to stress their divine affiliation (665). Virgil classifies **0n the Elysium and the classification of the souls see: C. Murley, “The Classifi cation of Souls in the Sixth Aeneid”, Vergilius 37 (1938-40) 17-27: he claims that Anchises is among the eternally blessed (p.23). F. Solmsen, “Greek ideas of the Hereafter in Virgil’s Roman Epic”, PA PhS 112 (1968) 8-14; G. Stegen, “Virgile et la Metempsychose (Aen. VI, 724-51)”, AC 36 (1967) 144-158: He suggests that Anchises is found by the river of Lethe (p.l56). R. J. Clark, “The “Wheel” and Vergil’s Eschatology in Aeneid 6”, SO 50 (1975) 121-41: Clark distinguishes be tween Elysium and Lethe and suggests that Elysium is Anchises’ permanent home. Also, E. Norden, P. Vergilius Marc Aeneis Buch VI. E.G. Teubner, Stuttgart, 6th edition 1976; J. Sheehan, “Catholic Ideas of Death as Found in Aeneid VI”, Classical Folia 15-16 (1961-62) 87 109; R. D. Williams, “The Sixth Book of the Aeneid” G and R n.s. 11 (1964) 48-63; B. Otis, “Three Problems of Aeneid 6”, H S C P h 90 (1959) 165-79; P. F. Burke, Jr., “Roman Rites for the dead and Aeneid 6” C J 74 (1978-79) 220-28. ®*Conington -Nettleship in the commentary on the Aeneid 6.665 observe that the white fillets are ”a mark of consecration, being worn by the gods and by persons and things dedicated to them”. They cite as an example the Georgies 3.487 in which a victim ready to be sacrificed to the gods is wreathed with white fillets. R. G. Austin in his commentary on the Aeneid 6.665 cites more sources such as Val. Flaccus 1.840 and Statius Achilleis 1.11; in these cases the fillets are worn by priests and poets respectively marking their holy office. 53 these souls in six major groups: a) the Trojan forefathers, b) people killed in battle fields for their country c) priests, d) poets and prophets, e) people who benefited humanity through their arts, and f ) those who are remembered, because of their merit (Aen. 6.648-649, 660-664). The poet employs the term heros to qualify such souls as the race of Teucer {magnanimi heroes [649]) or the poet Musaeus (heros [672]). In frg. 129 (Bowra) Pindar states that: “those reborn as kings, athletes or wise men, when dead they will be called heroes by the men”. Kirkwood suggests that the heroes correspond to the souls of the island of the eternally blessed, who have escaped the cycle of rebirth (Pindar, O. 2.68-75), and present similarities with Empedocles frg. 146 (DK): when the prophets and the singers and the physicians(ietroi) and the '«This category added to the divine souls derives from Lucretius’ account in book 3 of the military leaders worthy of immortality but not immortal according to the Epicurean doctrine: Scipiadas, belli fulmen, Carthaginis horror, ossa dedit terrae proinde ac famul infimus esset (3.1034-1035) Virgil has made them divine and placed under the category of those sacrificing their lives for their country’s advantage. '^This category reflects Lucretius’ repertores doctrinarum atque leporum (3.1036). See: T. Lucreti Cari De Rerum Natura. ed. by W. E. Leonard and S. B. Smith, The University of Winsconsin Press 1942. including also Plato’s philosophers: “And of these, all who have duly purified themselves by philosophy live henceforth alto gether without bodies, and pass to still more beautiful abodes ...” (Phaedo 114 B-C). "Cicero in the Somnium Scipionis identified the souls of the ultimately blessed with the rulers who have practised justice and pietas (13) on earth. This group seems to be included in Virgil’s general category of memores. "Probably, the Empedoclean doctrines were well known in the first century B.C.; Lucretius, for instance, refers and pays special tribute to Empedocles in book 1.715ff.. Virgil, on the other hand, had read and was influenced by Lucretius. Since he was a student of the Epicurean and Stoic schools, it was part of his training to become familiar with the known philosophical creeds. 54 political and military leaders die, they become divine and honoured like the gods. (F t. Gull. Aug. MuUach, Frag. Phil. Gr., p. xix n.lO) From the verbal and imagistic similarities between Virgil’s account and the above cited texts it may be inferred that Virgil also perceived the souls abiding in the sedc3 heatae as the deified or semi- divine, permanent residents of Elysium. ^ The second section of Elysium is the nitentes campi (6.677-78). They are sepa rated from the blessed fields by a hill (676-78). This area is depicted as an enclosed valley {conualle 679), which is populated by those destined to be reborn (679-680): inclusas animas superumque ad lumen ituras. Virgil, by the substantive conualle and the participleinclusas, seems to emphasize intentionally the isolation of this valley, because the souls here, as Servius pinpoints, are different and separate from the multitude at the banks of the Lethaean river {non re vera inclusas, sed a mul- titudine separatas [6.680]), who are about to be reborn. Anchises maintains Virgil’s depiction of Elysium as a pleasant region in the phrase laeta arua (6.744). But, first, as I shall argue, he presents all the souls there ““Musaeus and Orpheus were regarded as demigods (Plato, The Apology 41 A); Musaeus, according to Plato, had composed a song on the rewards of the righteous people in the underworld; in the song Musaeus and his son conducted these people to the underworld and prepared a symposium for them ( The Republic 363 C-D). Virgil apparently was familiar with this tradition and thus presents the Sibyl to ask for guidance from Musaeus. See also: M. Desport, L’Incantation Virgilienne Virgile et Ôrphee, Bordeaux 1952, pp.156-59; also, L. Herrmann, “Musee et 1’ Eneide” in Hommages a W. Deonna, Coll. Latomus 28 (1957) 263-68. "Note that these campi with regard to their location seem to correspond to the Platonic “bright abodes” {katharan oikesin Phaedo 114 C), located on earth and in a lower level than the abode of the philosophers. "The description of this area seems to correspond to the Pindaric abode of the esloi. In Olympia 2.62-67 the esloi are those destined to be reincarnated, and they live in the underworld in an area shining with sun. 55 as impure; secondly, he transforms Elysium to a purgatory (6.743-47); and thirdly, he suggests that all the souls are destined to be reincarnated (749-51). ^ First, as I have already argued (pp. 13-14), the clause quisque suos paiimur manis (743), which anticipates the account of Elysium, may be rendered “each one of us continues his own manes”. ^ What is the nuance attached to the term manes? Heyne takes manes as referring to the genius or daemon assigned to each one of the souls, when they are about to be bom, and who functions as the guard and minister of purgation in after-life. Conington regards it as the corporeal element, the passion which the soul suffers until its purification is completed. H. Rose suggests that manes is the ghost-land, the place allotted to each soul in the underworld. E. Marbach, on the *®See: R. J. Clark “The “Wheel” and Vergil’s Eschatology in Aeneid Book 6”, SO 50 (1975) 133-34; also, R.D. Williams, “the Sixth Book of the Aeneid”, G and R n.s. 11 (1964) 51. Arundel attempts to reconcile the two accounts by pointing out that Virgil still uses the traditional Elysium, Lethe and the god who guides the souls, in the new context of Anchises’ afterlife: M.R. Arundel, “Principio caelum”, PV S 3 (1963-64) 34. A. Thornton The Living Universe Gods and Men in Virgil’s Aeneid, M nem osyne suppl. 46 (1976) 69, believes that “Virgil’s description of the Underworld is a poetic myth which in a veiled and rid dling form points to the truth made explicit by Anchises”. Austin argues that Virgil questions and even rejects the whole conception of the traditional underworld, while in Anchises’ speech he expresses “his inmost beliefs” ; see: P. Vergili Maronis Aenei- dos Liber Sextus, (Oxford 1977) p.221. Austin cites more bibliography concerning the relationship of this passage to the rest of the book. ^*Manes has been translated by W. Fowler as ‘ghosthood’: see R.G. Austin 743. A. Hahn, “Aeneid 6.739-51” C W 20.27 (1927) 216, suggests that paiimur manis, “whatever it may means, befall all the dead alike”. And she continues that the dead are not all in equal need of purgation for the quantum implies that there Eire various degrees of imperfection and, thus, the degree to which the souls may be termed miseri varies. “Quisque suos patimur manes” H T h R 37 (1944) 46. A. Setaioli follows Servius’ and Rose’s suggestions in “Quisque suos patimur manes (Verg. Aen. VI, 743)”, A e t R 12 (1967) 169-72. He also supplies a detailed bibliography. Macrobius interprets line 743 allegorically as implying the torture and death of the soul when it descends to the human body (Comm. 1.10.17). Bailey also seems to accept this view: “we all suffer our life in the body” : Religion in Virgil p. 278. 56 other hemd, argues that it is the deiimon of the individuel!, i.e. the character of the individual which is following the soul in the underworld. And W. Nestle supports this idea by citing a passage from Plato’s Republic 617D-E in which it appears that the individual chooses his own daimon and is responsible for the consequences of his choice. I suggest that the term manes signifies the visible manifestation of the impure soul. First, in the Aeneid, manes seems to signify either the underground region of Hades, Orcus, where the souls go (Aen. 3.565, 4.387, 10.820), or the spirits that dwell in the underworld (8.246, 10.534, 4.34, 10.524, 4.490, 11.181, 6.506, 5.99, 12.884, 3.303, 4.427), as well as the deified spirits (12.646, 10.34). Yet, Virgil employs the words uita or anima to indicate the soul that joins the manes. Thus in Aeneid 10.820 the uita of Pallas leaves the body and descends to the manes. Similarly, the anima of Dido will join the manes (4.387). Uita or anima and manes seem to describe a different form of the live spirit of the dead. When Aeneas enters the vestibule of the Orcus, he sees the Centaurs, Scylla, Briareus, the Lemean beast, the Gorgons and Harpies which Eire described eis tenuis sine corpore uitas (6.292). “Manes in der Eschatologie der Aeneis”, PW 12 (1929) 365 ” “Zu Virgil, Aeneis VI 743”, P W 4 (1930) 126 9*At the end of book six the poet states that the Manes from the underworld send false dreams (897). In this statement, it has been frequently acknowledged, Virgil imitates the well- known Homeric passage from Odyssey 19.562-67. In that passage, however, there is no mention of “spirits” sending the dreams. This makes me think that Virgil probably uses a second source. According to Diogenes Laertius Pythagoras believed that the whole air is full of souls which are called daemones or heroes; these souls send the dreams to men and divination etc. (8.31). The Stoics also believed in daimons and heroes that watched over the human affairs and were the souls of the righteous that had survived their body (Diogenes Laertius, 7.151). Perhaps, the Manes with capital M are the souls which Virgil has placed in Elysium. 57 Similarly, the animae in Anchises’speech are also completeuHae, since they are alive and preserve their earthly character (736-38). Thus Anchises, one of the animae, in the underworld experiences emotions of pleasure and pain: he cries at the sight of Aeneas (686), or confesses his fears and cares about his son (690-94). The heroes of the ‘golden age’ (649) appear to derive gratia from their chariots or armor and have a cura for the feeding of their horses, the same as when they were alive (653- 55). These emotions, however, according to Anchises’ theory, are the evidence of the corporeae pestes, which remain in the soul after its departure from the body (735ff.). Therefore, all these souls are meant to be perceived as impure. As was mentioned above (p. 8), the impurity of the soul is indicated by the phrase corporeae pestes (736) and the term concreta (738), which render into Latin the Platonic term somatoeides. Plato in the Phaedo suggests that the souls who participate in thesomatoeides maintain some visibility in the form of ghosts (eidolon psyches [81D]). The souls in the Virgilian catabasis appear also to maintain some visibility in the form of ghosts, which now, according to Anchises’ theory and in the light of Plato’s explanation, can be understood as the result of the corporeal element growing inside them. In the vestibule of Orcus, for instance, the monsters that Aeneas sees have some sort of incorporeal form which is called umbra (6.292- 94): et ni docta vOrrtes tenuis sine corpore uitas admoneat uolitare caua sub imagine formae inruai et frustra ferro diuerheret umbras Cicero Timaeus 8; see above p. 8 58 In his journey through the underworld, Aeneas encounters Deiphobus whose mu tilated (494-97) figure, umbra, (6.510) is described as ‘body’ (corpore toto [494]). Anchises, again, is described as an imago: imago/ par leuihus uentis uolucrique simillima somno (701-2). Umbra, imago and corpus, then, seem to indicate the outer visible frame of the souls. Anchises is an anima ‘enclosed’ in his umbra. To describe himself, Anchises uses the term manes (743), which seems to be the union of the anima and the umbra. Indeed, Virgil employs the word manes in this sense in 4.427 where Dido declares that she has not disturbed the ashes and manes of Anchises; nec patris Anchisae cinerem manisue reuelli. Aeneas, again, offers libations to the ashes and the anima/umhra of Anchises: nequiquam cineres animaeque umbraeque patemae. And Andromache pours libations to the ashes and manes of Hector (3.303-04): libabat cineri Andromache manisque uocabat Hectoreum ad tumulum. The context of these citations suggests that manes and the collocation animae/ umbrae indicate the same ghostly appearance of the soul. Therefore, manes are the impure souls which partake in the corporeal element. Among the manes, impure ghosts, Anchises includes the majority of the souls which have undergone a first purgation, and himself, as is suggested by the plurals patimur (6.743) and mittimur (6.744). But as we mentioned above (pp. 13-14), Anchises is one of the pii (5.735) who have bypassed the first purgation (6.563). However, since he is impure (manes), the term pius comes to signify the less impure souls. Such a distinction between less and more contaminated souls had also been “ “See also 4.34, 10.828 “ ‘See also E.A. Hahn, “Body and Soul in Vergil”, TA PhA 92 (1961) 207 59 suggested by the quantum non clause (730-31). Among the less corrupted souls are also the fauci of Elysium, as the grammatical person of the verb ienemus (et pauci laeta arua tenemus [6.744]) suggests. These pauci represent the pii and casti (6.661-62) of Elysium, who, like the more impure, partake in the corporecd element, since they also experience emotions (6.653-55). Thus the majority of those who inhabit Elysium have passed through a first purgation, and a minority have bypassed it. Secondly, Anchises portrays the laeta arua as a milder purgatory. The term arua renders probably into Latin the Greek leimon. Traditionally, leimon was the place of the blessed, as in the Frogs 326 of Aristophanes, or in Pindar (frg. 114 i"See E. Norden, P. Vergilius Maro Aeneis Buch VI, 6th edition (Stuttgart 1976) pp.16-20, suggested that the pauci are the souls who will be transported to the stars after their purification has been completed; also. The Sixth Book of the Aeneid, ed. H.E. Butler, (Oxford 1920) w . 733-51, pp. 228-31. Other scholars claim that the pauci will be reborn but at a much later time than the majority. See: P. Virgilii Maronis Opera Omnia, ed. Heyne, v.2 (London 1819) p. 886ff. Also see: E.A. Hahn, “Aeneid 6.739-51” C W 20.27 (1927) 217. A. Thornton The Living Universe, Mnemosyne suppl. 46 (1976) p. 68. R. D. Williams, “The Sixth Book of the Aeneid” G and R n s.ll (1964) 48-63. Conington-Nettleship suggest that the few remain in Elysium forever. Austin also accepts this view. J.Pearson, “Virgil’s “Divine Vision” (Aeneid 4.238-44, 6.724-51)”, C P h 56 (1961) 33-38 who believes that all the souls are reincarnated later or earlier. R. J. Clark, “The “Wheel” and Vergil’s Eschatology in Aeneid book 6”, SO 50 (1975) 121-41, argues that few souls go to Elysium for a higher purification, while most go to a neutral region to be reborn. Most recently Th. Habinek has revived the view that “few souls, including Anchises, become long term residents of Elysium, where they undergo further purification until they are reduced to ether, or something like it. The rest after a thousand years of turning the wheel (Habinek wonders which wheel) are called to Lethe”. See: “Science and Tradition in Aeneid 6”, H S C P h 92 (1989) 223-54. "'Heyne suggests that the many pass through punishment but the few not. Plato also argues that the souls according to their life go to two different abodes: some go to punishment under the earth, and others (released from punishment) go to a better place in heaven leading a life similar to that when alive (Phaedo 249B). 60 Bowra); ultimately, it described the Orphic pleasant fields {kalos leimon [O, frg. 222, Proclus]). It is used by Plato, however, in a new way to indicate the place of judgement (Gorgitu 524a2), or the meadow in which the souls from Tartarus and heaven were gathered prior to reincarnation {Republic 614e2, transi. P. Shorey). Anchises, in the present context, reestablishes Elysium as the place of judgement {arua), where the element of time acts upon and purifies the souls leaving no trace of harmful emotions (745-47): donee longa dies perfecto temporis orhe concretam exemit labem, purumque relinquit aetherium sensum atque aurai simplicis ignem Thirdly, Anchises, by contrast to Virgil’s classification of the souls in Elysium between the eternally blessed and those destined to be reincarnated, declares that all the purified souls in Elysium will be reborn. To present this point, Anchises shifts once more to the impersonal mode of narrative. The reason for the change of the grammatical person, I assume, is that Anchises has made the point he wanted about himself and explained his presence in Elysium; thus he now resumes the didactic, impersonal style. Anchises states that all the souls, “after they have revolved the wheel for a thousand years” (748), the god calls to the banks of the Lethaean river (749) to receive new bodies and revisit the upper world, oblivious of their earlier life (748-51): has omnis, ubi mille roiam uoluere per annos Lethaeum ad fluuium deus euocat agmine magno. 61 scilicet immemoTts supera ut conuexa reuiaant r u r s u s et incipiant in corpora uelle reuerti. Who are the has omnis? Norden suggests that they are the souls on the banks of the Lethaean river that Aeneas witnessed earlier (706). In the present passage, has omnis (6.749) must refer to the groups of souls that inhabit Anchises’ Elysium, i.e. both the many from Tartarus and the pauci, who are destined to be reborn. Has omnis seems to be a styhstic device Virgil uses when he wants to sum up the categories of persons he has previously presented. Thus the classification of the heroes in the sedes heatae follows the generalizing phrase omnibus his (665). Again, the list of the souls which are gathered at the banks of Cocytus (6.305-308), the Sibyl sums up with the phrase haec omnis (6.325). Similarly, Anchises uses this stylistic device to sum up the categories of the souls which inhabit Elysium. Moreover the temporal clause ubi mille rotam uoluere per annos (748) seems to repeat in concrete terms the idea expressed vaguely in line 745. For the rota parallels the phraseorbe temporis and the mille per annos paredlels the vague phrase longa dies. It appears to be a pattern of Anchises’ speech that a vague idea is repeated in concrete terms. Thus the idea of the body functioning as an impediment to the activity of the soul, is set forth again through the particular reference to the irrational emotions and inability of the soul to reflect on its rational nature (the idea conveyed through tardant is elaborated by the verbs metuunt cupiunt, dolent, gaudent] and the hebetant is repeated in the neque auras dispiciunt [731-34]). ‘“‘So does Austin suggest: 6.748. io»see: Conington 6.748 62 Anchises’ theory of transmigration contradicts not only Virgil’s classification of the souls, whose poetic truth was guaranteed by the authority of the gods (6.264- 67), but also Anchises’ earlier response that some of the souls by fate transmigrate into new bodies (^animae, quibus ... fato [713-14]). This idea seems to be reinforced by the phrase anne aliquaa ... (6.719-20) which Aeneas used later to repeat and question Anchises’ statement. Servius in his commentary on 6.719, remarks that Virgil here blends philosophic truth and poetic fiction. According to Anchises, all the souls from the underworld return to earth; but according to philosophers only the impure souls transmigrate into new bodies: ... miscet philosophiae figmenia poetica et ostendit iam quod est uulgare, quam quod continet ueritas et ratio naturalis. nam secundum poetas hoc dicit: credendum est animas ah inferis reuerti posse ad corpora? ... secun dum philosophas uero hoc dicit: credendum est animas corporis contagione pollutes ad caelum reverti? In no case do the souls go to the sky, because Virgil does not say this and he could, if he wanted to, as he does in the Géorgie 4.225-27. The theory of transmigration reinforces Anchises’ delineation as prophet and poet who manipulates thefata to fit his own purpose. What is the purpose of Anchises poetic synthesis of thefata that pertain to the underworld? By the eschatology, Anchises, as I mentioned in the first chapter, gives Aeneas a mental tour of the entire underworld. By reminding him of the miserable souls that fill the tristes domus (6.534) of Dis, Anchises aims at making Aeneas realize (memorare [716]) that the death of his past, represented by Dido 63 and Deiphobus who recounts the sack of Troy, as well as the descent of the souls to the underworld is due to those passions that incite irrational conduct. Thus Dido is dead, because of her excessive dolor for Aeneas’ departure from Carthage (6.464); Deiphobus and Troy have been destroyed, because of the faba gaudia (6.513), which misled them to believe that the Greeks departed. Finally, the felices animae (669) of Elysium appear to be also miserae, since they have their share in the corporeal feelings (quae gratia currum armorumque quae cura .. pascere equos [6.6553- 55]). On the other hand, Anchises ‘reminds’ Aeneas that the return of the soul to the body is the next natural step, because the cosmic soul itself is portrayed as sumphues with the enormous body (magno se corpore miscet [6.727]) of the universe (spiritus intus alit [726]). The earthly beings which are part of the macrocosm (728-29) should also share a portion of the cosmic soul. This portion is reflected in the pure souls (746-47) that will return to the body (750-51). He thus prepares Aeneas to encounter his future with renewed hope. The above analysis has shown that Anchises in his eschatological account com bines prophetic truth and poetic fiction. As a prophet, he reveals to Aeneas the origins of the human soul and by what process it comes to be reincarnated. As a poet, however, he represents the underworld as the purgatory, in order to make Aeneas mindful of the deeper causes of crime and punishment as well as of the causes that brought the end of the Trojan culture. Yet the eschatological account woHahn also argues that the soul before it was burdened with corporeal corruption was absolutely clean. In the underworld it regains its original purity, and therefore is ready to return to a body: above p. 55, n. 102, p. 217 64 preludes the peurade of Roman heroes. In the parade (756-886), which will be the subject of the next chapter, Anchises shows to Aeneas that real felices will be the reborn souls, his descendants (784), who will renew the Satumian age on earth (795-96). lo^Note the difference with Cicero’s Somnium Scipionis in which he presents the leaders of the state to descend jfrom the sky (the milky way) and return to the sky (... harum redores et conseruatores hinc profecti hue revertuntur. (13). i“ Habinek suggests that the Roman heroes are those unfortunate who have been “cast out of Elysium” pp.225-26. CHAPTER III The Parade of Roman Leaders A. Introduction In the first chapter I noted that Anchises’ long-term prophecy is reminiscent of the oracular words of the Cumaean carmen, which pronounce the return of the Satumian age on earth, facilitated by a new and pure (inteyer) temporal order and generation of men {Eclogue [4.4-7]): Ultima Cumaei uenit iam carminis aetas; magnus ab intégra saeclorum nascitur ordo. iam redit et Virgo, redeuni Satumia regna iam noua progenies caelo demittitur alto In the preceding chapter, it was observed that Anchises, blending prophetic truth and poetic fiction, declares in the fashion of the Cumaeein Sibyl that a new gener ation of men, reincarnations of the souls (6.749-51) which have been purged from irrational emotions (6.731-47), will rise in Italy from the underworld. Anchises then proclaims the foundation of a new Satumiein age on earth under the rule of Aeneas’ progeny, the reincarnated souls (6.756-883). In this chapter it will be shown that the content of lines 6.756-883 is both prophetic and poetic. As a uates/interpres, Anchises declares to Aeneas the jata of the Dardanian descendants, which were first announced by Jupiter to Venus in book one (257-96). However, Anchises’ version 65 66 is inconsistent with Jupiter’s prophecy, as well as with the prophetic images of Vul can in book eight (8.630-728), which appear to supplement the emlier prophecy by providing details concerning the battles that the Romans fought (8.629). Anchises, as a poet, creates an aural and visual ‘monument’ {mtmorare [6.716]) of the fata, in order to encourage Aeneas to fulfill his mission and instruct him in the virtues that must pertain to his life in Italy. B. Prophetic truth and distortion Before discussing the evidence that shows the poetic aspect of Anchises’ carmen, I will begin with a discussion of the similarities and inconsistences of Anchises’ prophetic speech with those of Jupiter and Vulcan. I will argue that Anchises is a prophet, declarer of Jupiter’s will, but also a ‘maker’ of the fata. The nomina mid fata of Aeneas’ descendants are announced for the first time by Jupiter {Jabot ... longius [261-62]), who summarizes in 37 lines the course of history from the time of Aeneas up to the time of Augustus (1.259-96). He begins with the deification of Aeneas (.,. sublimem feres ad aidera caeli/ magnanimum Aenean [1.259-60]), the foundation of Alba Longa by Ascanius (at puer Ascanius ... Longam multa ui muniet Albam [1.267-71]), and its domination by the Albans (hie iam ter centum totos regnabitur annos/ gente sub Hectorea [1.272-73]). Then, he proceeds to the announcement of the birth of Remus and Romulus and the foundation of the Roman nation (1.273-77): Binder has noted the association of Romu lus’ wall-building with the universal Roman empire; see: Aeneas und Augustus: Interpretationen zum 8. Buch der Aeneis, Beitrag. zur klass. philol. 38, (1971). p. 154. Also, Ph. R. Hardie, Virgil’s Aeneid: Cosmos and Imperium, Clarendon Press, Oxford 1986, p.364. 67 ... donee regina sacerios Marte grauis geminam partu dabit Ilia prolem. Romvîua excipiei gentem et Mauortia condet moenia Romanesque suo de nomine dicet. Interrupting the flow of the main narrative, Jupiter in the form of an aside empha sizes that the transformation of Rome to an eternal empire has been predetermined and sanctioned by himself (1.278-79): his ego nec metas rerum nec tempora pane: imperium sine fine dedi. ... Jupiter demonstrates the fulfillment of his prophetic words in the graduzd expansion of the Roman imperium to Greece {ueniet lustris lahentibus aetas / cum domus Assaraci Pthiam clarasque Mycenas seruitio premet ac uictis dominabitur Argis [1.284-85]), and to the Ocean by Julius Caesar (286-90). The Roman imperium reaches its climax in the establishment of a peaceful and ordered reign (1.291-96), an “ “Lines 286-90 are problematic, because it is not clear wether the Ceiesar is Julius or Augustus, who continued the policy of his relative and predecessor. Servius takes lines 1.286-90 to refer to Julius Caesar and 291-96 to Augustus. Modern scholarship is divided: some believe that the Caesar is lulius and others Augustus; see Austin for arguments on both sides. I believe with Austin that Virgil is deliberately obscure, because he wishes his audience to understand both Julius Caesar and Augustus the successor of Caesar who followed the same policy with his ancestor. Perhaps it helps us here to be reminded of the context of Eclogue 5, in which Julius Caesar is honored behind the name of Daplinis. He is described in terms recalling both the deification of Caesar in Aeneid 1.288 and the description of Bacchus in 6.803-804, as conqueror and tamer of Africa and Asia (5.27-30) as well as a devs (5.43-44, 56-80). Moreover the reference to the puer Mopsus, who succeeds Daphnis in song and magisterial voice among the shepherds (pastores [5.41]) may be an allegorical allusion to Augustus. If this is so, then Virgil’s allusion is that, as Mopsus is an alter Daphnis (fortunate puer, tu nunc eris alter ab illo [5.49]) Augustus also will be an alter Julius Caesar. 68 allusion to Augustus’ age, which resembles the Satumian age of the fourth Eclogue (8-17). In the underworld Anchises appears to know the fata of Jupiter, since he is depicted reviewing all the number of his nepotes their fata, mores and manus (6.681- 83): ... omnemque suoram forte recensebat numerum, carosque nepotes fataque fortunasque uirum moresque manusque. As a uates/ interpres, "declarer”of the fata, Anchises, in the fashion of the Cumaean Sibyl, in lines 756-883 discloses and points out (ostendere [6.716]) to Aeneas the nomina, mores and manus of his nepotes. In the process of formalizing the fata as an, oral account, Virgil presents Anchises glossing Jupiter’s prophecy by adding the names of individuals, or clarifying obscure words and condensed accounts of events, although Virgil does not suggest that Anchises knows the content of the earlier prophecy. The purpose of such a presentation, it seems to me, is to suggest to the reader that Anchises functions as an alter Jupiter who uses prophetic truth and his own inventiveness to present to Aeneas an optimistic picture of the future. The similarities and discrepancies existing between the two accounts, which I shall discuss next, bring forth Anchises’ function as an alter Jupiter. Anchises supplies the names of Alban rulers such as Silvius (6.763), Proca (6.767), Capys, Numitor and Silvius Aeneas (6.768-69), who in Jupiter’s account were only mentioned as Hectorea gens (1.273). Then, in terms recalling Jupiter’s prophecy (1.274-77), Anchises states that Romulus is the son of Mars, as his patronymic 69 Mauortius suggests (777), and Hia, who is connected genealogically with the family of Assaracus (778), thereby stressing Aeneas’ blood connections to this descendant (quin e t... Mauortius ... /Romulus Assaraci quern sanguinis Ilia mater/ educet. Moreover, he clarifies that Romulus was chosen by Jupiter to lay the foundations of Rome by the words: pater ipse suo superum iam signât honore?f en huius, nate, auspiciis ilia incluta Roma [6.780-81]). In the earlier account, this sense was only implicitly suggested by the fact that Jupiter is the one who moves the secrets of the fates: ... et uoluens fatorum arcana mouebo (1.262). In Anchises’ account the distinction conferred by Jupiter upon Romulus is conveyed by the syntactical unit pater superum and the term honos. In the Aeneid honos is used in the sense of ‘sacrifice to a divinity’ or ‘treatment as an immortal’, and ‘the honor of becoming an immortal’ (12.140), but also as ‘glory’, because of the indication of distinction given by Jupiter to a mortal (5.534). Acestes, for instance, according to Aeneas, has been selected by Jupiter to carry the honor of victor, although he was excluded by lot from competing in the contest (5.533-34): sume, pater, nam te uoluit rex magnus Olympi “ ‘The structure of this section follows the conventions of the encomiastic genre. See: Menander, p.371.3; Quintilian suggests that in a man’s encomium one should mention events that confirm the king’s future glory: ilia quoque interim ex eo, quod ante ipsum fuit, tempore trakentur, quae responsis uel auguriis futuram claritatem promiserint... (I.O. 3.7.11) “‘Later, Helenus also explained that Jupiter ‘allots’ (sortitur) the fata (3.375-76). “‘1.49, 632, 736, 3.118, 178, 264, 406, 547, 4.207, 458, 5.58, 94, 652, 6.333, 8.76, 102,189, 11.52, 61, 76, 12.778, 840 “‘1.335,6.589 “‘For this sense of exsortem see: R.D. Williams, The Aeneid of Virgil. Books 1-6, St. Martin’s Press (1973) 5.533-34. 70 taîibus auspiciis exsortem ducere honores. Similarly the sense of line 6.780 seems to be that Jupiter has alloted to Romulus the distinction of being the father of the Roman nation (^Mauortia condet/ moenia Romanosque suo de nomine dicet [1.276]) and, by extension, of the Roman empire (6.782). The term honos seems to be used in the sense of ‘glory because of a distinction’, since it is syntactically connected with the phrase pater superum which, as will be shown next, is an alternative for the expression pater diuum. In the Aeneid the word pater is used to qualify several divinities such as Aeo lus (1.60), Apollo (3.89, 11.789), Neptune (5.14), Pluto (7.327), Inachus (7.792), Mercury (8.138), Vulcan (8.198, 394, 454), Janus (8.357), Tiberinus (8.540, 10.421), Mars (11.374, 410, 12.180) and Jupiter. When pater refers to a god other than Jupiter, it is usucJly followed or preceded by the name of the divinity invoked. When, however, Jupiter is evoked, pater is modified by the adjective omnipotens or the genitive diuum. On the other hand, the word superum appears two more times in the Aeneid'. once as a substantive in the genitive case meanings ‘gods’ md modifying an ablative: ui superum (1.4), ‘by the force of the gods’; and once as a ii»It may also be assumed that the honos is an allusion to Romulus’ deification, which is not explicitly stated. For, the phrase suo honore (6.780) modifies the pater superum; and the honor of the ‘father of the gods’ is his immortality and his worship by the mortals. The honor that Romulus will receive from the father of the gods could be that of immortality. In the Aeneid this possibility seems to be supported by the prophecy of the Penates who foretold the deification of Aeneas’ descendants: ... uenturos tollemus in astra nepotes (3.158). Line 158 recalls Jupiter’s language announcing the deification of Aeneas: sublimemque feres ad sidera caeli/ magnanimum Aenean (1.259-60). R.G. Austin following Servius believes that the implied honor is the deification of Romulus. “n.65, 2.617, 648, 3.251, 4.25, 372, 6.592, 7.141, 558, 770, 8.398, 9.495, 10.2, 18, 6 2100, , 743, 875, 12.178. 71 neuter adjective meaning ‘upper’ in the phreise superumque ad lumen (6.680), ‘to the upper world’. In most instances it is used as a noun in the plural, superi, to signify the gods. Therefore, it seems to me, the phrase pater... superum in line 780 should be interpreted as ‘father of the gods’. Anchises announces the expansion of the Roman imperium to Greece in terms that recall Jupiter’s two-line summation of the event (1.284-85) cum domus Assaraci Pthiam clarasque Mycenas seruitio premet ac uictis dominabitur Argis providing, however, the details and participants of the Roman invasion and stressing the avenging character of the conquest (6.836-40): ille triumphata Capitolia ad alta Corintho uictor aget currum caesis insignis Achiuis. cruet ille Argos Agamemnoniasque Mycenas ipsumque Aeaciden, genus armipotentis Achilli, ultus auos Troiae iempla et temeraia Mineruae. He identifies Jupiter’s vague domus Assaraci (1.284) with specific individuals that the demonstrative pronouns ille (6.836), ille (6.838) suggest. Anchises pictorially represents the enslavement of Greece {Pthiam clarasque Mycenas/ seruitio premet ac uictis dominahitur Argis [1.284-85]), by the phrases triumphata Capitolia, uictor aget and the defeat of Achilles’ descendant (eruet ... ipumque Aeaciden). Finally, by the phrases caesis Achiuis and ultus auos he stresses the avenging character of the Roman invasion. 72 Again, Anchises suggests the transformation of Rome to an eternal and endless empire in terms that recall Jupiter’s words (1.278-79): his ego nec metas rerum nec tempora pono: imperium sine fine dedi. ... By describing the earth, a Romana iellus, as extending beyond the sidera and the paths of the sun and the year (795-96) ... iacei extra sidera iellus, extra anni solisque uias, ... Virgil makes Andiises language to suggest the idea of eternity conveyed by Jupiter’s statement nec tempora pono (1.278). Sidera, according to Macrobius, is a number of stars which forms a constellation, a sign: sidera uero quae in aliquod signum stellarum plurium compositione for- mantur, ut Aries, Taurus, ut Andromeda, Perseus uel Corona et quae- cumque uariarum genera formarum in caelum recepta creduntur. (Comm, ad Somn. Scip. 1.14.21) Servius reports that the 12 signs {sidera) form the Zodiac, whose cycle is the path of the sun. The earth, therefore, by extending beyond the zodiac, escapes Servius 6.795, R.G. Austin, 6.795, R.D. Williams, 6.795 Macrobius, again, records that the sun travels from the tropical sign of Cancer to the tropical sign of Capricorn and from Capricorn back to Cancer completing thus a year’s course: constat autem solem neque sursum ultra Cancrum neque ultra Capricor- num deorsum meare, sed, cum ad tropicorum confinia peruenerit, mox reuerti: unde et solstitia uocantur. ... idea cum sol ad ipsum finem (Can crum) uenerit, facit nobis aestiuos calores, ... . Rursus cum ad F signum, id est ad Capricornum, uenerit, facit nobis hiemem (Comm, ad Somn. 73 the limits of time, as Jupiter foretold (nec tempora pono [1.278]). Secondly, Anchises declares the endless expansion of the Roman empire(imperium sine fine dedi [1.279]) by the description of the earth extending in space to Ethiopia, the place where the caelifer Atlas lives (796-97): ... ubi caelifer Atlas axem umero torquet stellis ardentibus aptum The land of Atlas, in book 4.480-84 is identified with the mythicéJ Ethiopia: Oceani finem iuxta solemque cadentem ultimus Aethiopum locus est, ubi maximus Atlas axem umero torquet stellis ardentibus aptum Ethiopia in these lines appears to be located by the end of the Ocean and the setting sun. Servius states that the end of the Ocean was unknown (finem Oceani nullus nouit [4.480]). Anchises, thus, by presenting the earth as extending to the Ocean, Scip. 2.7.10-11, ed.L. Scarpa, Padova 1981) “•Macrobius in his commentary of the Somnium Scipionis explains that “the Milky way girdles the Zodiac, meeting it obliquely so that it crosses it at the two tropiced signs, Capricorn and Cancer” (1.12.1, transi. W.H. Stahl, Columbia U. Press 1952). The Milky way is identified by Cicero with the caelestis globus which surrounds the other eight planets and constellations including the earth (Somnium 17). The earth therefore reaches the limits of the caelestis globus. This sphere is the place of the im m ortal souls and of the summus deus (Cicero, Somnium 13.13, 17.17). ““The adjective caelifer seems to correspond to the celestial globe which encom passes the zodiac. Lucan in the Bellum Civile describes Ethiopia as lying beyond the Zodiac (3.253- 54): Aethiopum solum, quod non premeretur ab ulla signiferi regione poli, ... “•The phrase solem cadentem suggests that it lies in the tropical sign of Cancer 74 declares the limitless imperium of Rome, which Jupiter first prophesied{imperium Oceano [1.287]). Finally, Anchises identifies the peak of Rome’s prosperity, which in Jupiter’s account coincided with the establishment of law and order in the great Roman empire (1.291-96), with the reign of Augustus Caesar, which he qualifies as aurea saecula (6.789-805). In the light of the above evidence, it becomes apparent that Anchises functions as an alter Jupiter, declarer of the fata. However, in Anchises’ account are included in dividuals, such as TuUus, the Tarquins (6.812-15, 817), or the saeuics securi Torqua- tus (6.824-25) and Cato (6.841), who did not appear in Jupiter’s prophecy, but are depicted on the shield of Vulcan. Vulcan, the divine uates (8.627), depicts Rome as rising out of a warfare between the Romans and the Sabines (8.635-41); next he portrays Tullus Hostilius’ punishment of the Alban Mettius (8.642-45), as well as the expelled Tarquin in alliance with the Etruscan Porsenna marching against Rome (8.646-47). In his pictures Vulcan includes Codes and Cloelia resisting Porsenna (8.649-51), Catilina in Tartarus (8.666-69) and Cato in the fields of the pii (8.670), and concludes with Augustus’ naval battle in Actium against Antony (8.678-728). Anchises’ presentation of thefata of these individuals, when compared with the cor responding images that Vulcan has carved on the shield, appears to be incomplete or inaccurate. Tullus, for instance, in Anchises’ prophecy is simply waging triumphal wars (6.812-15), and the Tarquins receive only a nominal mention. Accordingly, where, as I have argued above, the sun returns after completing a year’s course. i23The theme of Rome as ‘mistress of the world’ at the Augustan age is treated by Cl. Nicolet in the forthcoming book Space, Geography and Politics in the Early Roman Empire, Michigan University Press, 1991. Virgil refutes in this way Ci cero’s claim in the Somnium that everything below the moon is mortal (17). 75 Anchises has some role in shaping his prophecy, he is a ‘maker’, apoeta. In the following pages I will furnish evidence that Anchises’ prophecy is more poetic than historically true, and is aimed at instructing Aeneas. As was noted in the first chapter, Anchises does not canii or fatur the fata, as usually happens with the prophets and Jupiter; instead, to introduce his account, he uses vocabulary ap propriate to poetic/ didactic diction, such as the wordmemoro (6.716), ‘recollect’, ‘recreate’, or the phrase expediam diciis and the verb docebo (6.759). Moreover, the narrative of the fata of Aeneas’ descendants appears to be chronologically dis ordered and selective, and to distort the words of Jupiter. Servius has noticed that Virgil celebrates the whole of Roman history in a disorderly form (6.756): nam qui bene considérant, inveniunt omnem Romanam historiam ab Ae- neae adventu usque ad sua tempora summaiim célébrasse Vergilium quod idea latet, quia confusus est ordo Indeed, Anchises appears to reorder thefata of Jupiter according to his own will. Initially, in annalistic fashion he mentions the starting point of his narrative (primus ad auras/ aetherias ... surget Silvius [761-62]) and so makes a pretense of presenting the facts of Alban/Roman history in temporal order. The idea of chronological order is reinforced by the adjective proximus (6.767), which introduces another descendant of Aeneas, Procas, who appears to succeed Silvius on the throne of Italy. Soon, however, Anchises deviates from Jupiter’s pattern and presents Rome’s i2‘See chapter one pp. 20-29. 1“According to A.J. Woodman, it was a mannerism of historiography to mention the starting point of the narrative. See: “Virgil the Historian” CPhS suppl. 15 (1989) 133-34. 76 growth to an endless imperium (1.278-79) being fulfilled immediately in the reign of Augustus (6.789-807), which he places right after Rnmulus’ (6.777-83). Yet in both Jupiter’s and Vulcan’s prophecies Augustus is the last in order of Aeneas’ genua. Again, Anchises presents the civil war between Caesar and Pompey (6.826-35) before the conquest of Greece (6.836-40), whereas in Jupiter’s account the conquest of Greece (1.284-85) antedates the birth and death of Julius Caesar (1.286-90). Anchises’ arrangement of the events is unparallelled by the historical traditions. He wanders from Alban history (760-70) and the foundation of Rome in the eighth century (6.781) to the late first century, the time of Augustus’ reign (789-95), and back to the legendary or historical past represented by Numa, Tullus, Ancus, the Tarquins (808-17) and Brutus, who establishes the tea publica of Rome in the sixth century (817-23). Then, he moves forward to the fourth and third century with the consulships of the Decii (824) and to the second eind first century with the consulships of the Drusi (824) and backwards to the fourth century with Torquatus and Camillus (824-25). The same pattern of temporal inconsistency continues in the rest of the pageant (826-886). Prom the first century, the time of the civil war assume that the beginning of the Alban history is placed in the eleventh century, because Jupiter prophesies that three hundred years will elapse until the foundation of Rome which was traditionally placed in mid eighth century: hie iam ter centum totoa regnpMtur annos gente aub Hectorea, ... (1.272-73) In Jupiter’s account the beginning of the Alban history is placed at the time of Ascanius and the foundation of Alba Longa (1.267-71). Contrary to Anchises’ prophecy, the beginning of Roman history proper in the same account is placed at the time of Romulus (1.277); the same view is held by Vulcan who engraves on the shield the Roman triumphs (8.626), and the race that descends from futurae atirpia ab Aacanio (8. 628-29), i.e. from the Albans (see Servius 8.628). He starts his picture from the point that Romulus and Remus are born (630-34). 77 between Caesar and Pompey (826-35), Anchises turns back to the second century B.C., the conquest of Greece and, then, to the early first zind fifth centuries with Cato and Cossus respectively (841); then, back to the third with Gracchus and the Scipiones (842, 843-44), the fifth with Fabricius and Serranus (844-45), the second with the Fahia gens and Maximus Cunctator (845-46) and the third century with the elder Marcellus (855-59), concluding his account with the death of the younger Marcellus in 23 B.C. (869). Anchises’ chronological arrangement of the fata is bound to be invalid, since it is diflerent from that of Jupiter. For in book one Jupiter emphasized thatthe fata of the Dardanians remain immovable {manent immota tuorum fata [257-58]), assigning to himself the power of sorting them out (et uoluens fatorum arcana mouebo [1.262]). Secondly, Virgil hints at the selective presentation of Alban and Roman history by creating a tension between what Aeneas knows and what Anchises tells him. In book 5 Aeneas was told by the facies of Anchises that in the underworld he will learn about his entire progeny and its accomplishments: tum genus omne tuum et quae dentur moenia disces (5.737). When he meets his father, the latter promises to “count out in detail” (enumerare) the descendants of his son {hanc prolem cu- pio enumerare meorum 6.717). It is expected, then, that Anchises will fulfil the prophecy of the facies, since he is aware, eis Virgil reports, of all the number of his nepotes (omnem suorum/ ... numerum [6.681-82]) and their/ata. However, in the preface of the parade Anchises states that his subject will be the gloria (6.757) "'In 146B.C. L. Mummius conquered Corinth, in 148 B.C. Q. Metellus and Mum- mius conquered Argos and Mycenae and 168 B.C. Aemilius Paulus defeated Perseus of Macedon in Pydna and completed the conquest of Greece. 78 of the famous descendants {inlusiris animas [6.758]) from the long order of souls that are gathered on the banks of the Lethaean river: omnis lango ordine posset/ adversos legere et uenientum discere uultus (6. 754-55). By implication, Anchises excludes from the subject matter of his narrative events and persons who do not contribute to the glory of the new generation. As a matter of fact, when Aeneas inquires about the younger Marcellus, Anchises discourages his son’s enquiries with the words: ingentem luctum ne quaere tuorum (6.867), ‘don’t inquire about the immense sorrow of your race’. This statement seen in the light of the programmatic lines of the preface of the parade (6.756-59) acquires, also, programmatic value: Anchises omits the luctus of the Roman nation reciting only their gloria (6.757). Finally, Anchises appears, on the one hand, to distort the historic events which were revealed by Jupiter and, on the other, to omit details, which are supplied by Vulcan’s prophetic pictures. The first inconsistency comes forth in what Anchises relates about the life of Aeneas. Jupiter in book 1 revealed that Aeneas will rule Latium for three years after his arrival there (265-66); then, he will be transferred to the stars (259-60): tertia dum Latio regnaniem uiderit aesias iernaque transierint Ruiulis hiberna subactis. ... sublimemque feres ad sidera caeli magnanimum Aenean; ... The language of these lines suggests that Aeneas was transferred alive to the stars {sublimemque feres ad sidera)^ since his death is never mentioned. Servius in fact 79 explains that Aeneas’ body was never found (1.259): ut uero Ouidius referi in caelum raptus est, cuius corpus cum uictis a se Rutulis et Mezentio Ascanius requisitum non inuenisset, in deorum numerum credidit relatum Anchises, by contrast, states that Silvius will be the posiuma proles (763) of the longaeuus Aeneas: quern iibi longaeuo serum Lauinia coniunx (764). Both the ad jective longaeuus and the adjective posiuma are ambiguous terms. By the term longaeuus, ‘long-lived’, Anchises seems to convey the concept of Aeneas’ contin uation of life in the sky. Ennius used the periphrases aeuum ducere to indicate Romulus’ continuation of life in the sky: Romulus in coelo cum Diis genitalibus aeuum ducit. Yet, the adjective longaeuus, ‘long-lived’ in the Aeneid is used in the sense of “advanced in years”, “old” The adjective posiuma, on the other hand, which modifies prolem (6.763) means both ‘last’ and ‘posthumous’. That Silvius was the posthumous child of Aeneas is recorded by Dionysius of Halicarnas sus. Accordingly, Anchises’ statement seems to have a double meaning: in the light of Jupiter’s prophecy, it means that Aeneas will be a god, when Silvius will be bom; on its face-value, it suggests that Silvius will be the last son of the ‘long-lived’ Aeneas. Aeneas ignorant of Jupiter’s message is misled into believing that he will i“ See: Ovid, Metamorphoses 14.607. 12*1 borrowed this quote from Heyne’s commentary on 6.764. Servius suggests that longaeuus means immortal, and alludes to the deification of Aeneas, not to his actual age. See also. J.J. O’Hara. Death and the Optimistic Prophecy in Vergil’s Aeneid. Princeton 1990, 91-94, who also argues that Anchises here tampers with the words of Jupiter. 1**2.525, 3.169, 5.256, 535, 620, 6.321, 628, 715, 7.166, 8.498, 9.650, 12. 44, 420. 1*1 See: Ernout- Meillet o.c. under the lemma post. 1**1. 70.1; Livy, 1. 3.6. 80 be old, when he will beget Silvius. A further discrepancy exists between what Jupiter heis prophesied about Romulus and Anchises’ account (6.777-78). Jupiter reveals that Hia will give birth to twins, which will be nursed by a she-wolf (1.273-75): ... donee regina sacerdos Marte grauis geminam partu dabit Ilia prolem inde lupae fuluo nutricis tegmine ... Vulcan commemorates on the shield the same event (8.630-34): fecerat et uiridi fetam Mauortis in antro procuhuisse lupam, geminos huic ubtra circum ludere pendentis pueros et lambere matrem impauidos, illam tereti ceruice reflexa mulcere alternos et corpora fingere lingua. By contrast, Anchises suggests that Romulus will be raised by his mother Ilia (... quem... Hia m ater/ educet [6.778-79]); Anchises mentions neither Remus, Romulus’ brother, nor the she-wolf which nursed the twins. To Romulus’ twin brother, Remus, allude the geminae crisiae that crown Romulus’ head (6.779). The word geminae recalls the geminam prolem, ‘the twin offsprings’, of Jupiter’s account (1.274), as well as the geminos pueros (8.631-32), which Vulcan engraves on the shield. Aeneas being inscius of Jupiter’s prophecy does not understand the implications of his descendant’s symbols. Moreover, he does not know the tragic connotations >33See: D.H. 1.87.1-3. Servius argues that the twin helmets allude to the twin brothers who shared everything (6.780). 81 contained in Anchises’ description of Romulus as auo comiiem (6.777), ‘follower of his grandfather’, or the importance of the auspicia (6.781) under which Rome was founded. Both of these phrases allude to the fratricidal war that, according to the tradition, broke out between Remus and Romulus for the throne of Rome. Livy employs the phrase avHum malum to present the conflict of Romulus zmd Remus for the throne as a hereditary evil: “Romulus and Remus followed the course of their grandfathers (Numitor and Amulius); they, like their grandsires, became victims of greed for kingly power” (1. 6.4.2-3). On the other hand, the term auspiciis (6.781) reminds the reader of the circumstances that brought about the death of Remus and the foundation of Rome. Next, Anchises presents Tullus’ reign as being dominated by wars and triumphs (814-15). However, Tullus’ military expeditions, according to Livy, were primarily targeted against the Albans (1. 28.9). Dionysus of Halicarnassus records that Tullus Hostilius was the first to violate the sacred bonds that bound together a colony, Rome, to its metropolis. Alba Longa (3.7.5). Vulcan, also, portrays on the shield the gruesome punishment of the Alban Mettius Fufetius by Tullus: the latter is depicted as murdering Mettius in a cruel way: raptabaique uiri mendacis uiscera ««Williams suggests that the grandfather implied is Numitor; but then he cannot explain the comiiem auo and states: “But Romulus ‘joimng his grandfather’ now stands very much on his own.” See: R. D. Williams, “The Pageant of Roman Heroes- Aeneid 6. 756-853”, in Cicero and Virgil Amsterdam 1972, pp.207-17. ««Numitor next is a name among the Albans (768). But his presence in the parade reminds the contemporary audience of the feud that broke out between Numitor and his brother Amulius for the throne of Alba Longa. See: Livy l.S.llff; D.H. 1.71.4-5; Tzetzes, comm, on Lycoph. Alex, v.1232 ««See: D.C. Feeney, (1987) p. 3. Feeney takes line 781 as an allusion to the story of the foundation of Rome and the omens of Romulus and Remus which caused the ascent of Romulus to the throne of Rome and the death of Remus. 82 Tullus/per siluam, et sparsi rorabant sanguine uepres (8.644-45) Livy considers this punishment as the most disgraceful for the Romans: All eyes were turned away from so dreadful a sight. Such was the first and last punishment among the Romans of a kind that disregards the laws of humanity (1. 28.10). Again, in Anchises’ account the reign of the Tarquins appears to be uneventful (817). But the last Tarquin expelled {eiectus) from Rome and in alliance with Pors enna figures on the shield of Vulcan marching against Rome (8.646-48). Virgil hints at the theme of cruelty and civil strife which was a dominant feature of Tarquinius Superbus’ reign by the collocations Tarquinios reges and animam superbam {uis et Tarquinios reges animamque superbamj ultoris Bruti ... [817-18]). The reader is meant to understand in these phrases an allusion to the circumstances that brought about the overthrowing of monarchy in Rome, in which Brutus was the protagonist, as is suggested by the phrase ultoris Bruti (818). The violent change of Rome’s political system, being one of the luctus of Aeneas’ descendants, Anchises again omits mentioning except very indirectly. Distortion of the historic tradition cam be also detected in the account of the conquest of Greece (6.736-40). Jupiter earlier announced that the domus Assaraci will conquer Greece (1.284-85): cum domus Assaraci Pthiam clarasque Mycenas seruitio premet ac uictis dominabitur Argis "'See: Livy 1.49ff.; D.C. Feeney detects in the ultor an allusion to Brutus the assassin of Caesar (p.6); see above p. 76, n. 136 83 Anchises appears to connect this event with Caesar and Pompey, the participants of the civil war described in lines 826-35. Hie, Anchises says, triumphant will subjugate Corinth {ille triumphata Capitolia ad alia Corintho/ uictor aget [836- 37]) ille will conquer Argos and Mycenae and will defeat the descendant of Achilles {eruet Hie Argos Agamemnoniasque Mycenas/ ipsumque Aeaciden, ... [838- 40]). The demonstrative pronouns ille ... ille of lines 836 and 838, seen from the perspective of the inscius Aeneas, seem to pick up the Hlae of line 826. In line 835 one of the participants of the civil war was presented as Anchises’sanguis and therefore a descendant of Assaracus. In line 840 the Dardanian who will defeat Argos Mycenae and Achilles’ descendant is called ultus avos Troiae, avenger of his Trojan ancestors (840). The choice of words in these lines seems to promote the false association of the avenger of Troy with Anchises’ descendant, who appears to fulfil Jupiter’s prophecy turning Greece into a servant of Rome. Aeneas unaware of the historical events is meant to sense that the socer and gener, who were preparing for a civil war (826-35), in concordia turn their forces against their ancestral enemy, Greece (836-40). Finally, in Anchises’ speech Egypt, alluded to by the name of its river Nile, rep resents one of the barbaric nations which are terrified by the oracles announcing Augustus’ reign (800). But in Vulcan’s shield the war of Augustus against Egypt is presented in ambivalent terms, as both a defensive war and as a civil war. For in “®To the Roman audience Corinth was an example of superhia. For, according to Livy, when the Roman envoys visited Corinth, the capital of the Achaean League, they were mistreated by the general Critolaus, the Greek representative (per. 51,52). i39Hyginus, misunderstanding Virgil’s intentions, censured him for confusing the participants and the time of war in Greece: see Austin 6.839 84 the battle of Actium (671-88), the culmination of Augustus’ and Antony’s conflict, Vulcan not only portrays Antony in arms (8.685) with his Aegypiia coniunx (8.688), but also among the presiding divinities of the naval battle there are Discordia, the irUtes Dirac (8.701-02) and Bellona (8.703). All of them are deities that symbolize civil strife. Discordia demens is sitting on the vestibule of Orcus in the underworld among the evil abstractions (6.280). The Dirae are the pestilence and evil of war (12.845-52). As avenging spirits, they appear sitting on the threshold of Agamem non’s house, where Orestes killed his mother (4.473). Juno calls upon Bellona to visit the marital ceremony of Lavinia and Aeneas, igniting, thus, the war among the Itojans and the Rutulians (7.318-19). Anchises hides from the inscius Aeneas the negative connotations of Augustus’ wars against Egypt. Distortion of the truth is detected also in isolated details of the account. An chises, for instance, in the preface to his parade (6.756), has promised to enumerate the Dardaniam prolem. But, among his nepotes he includes Numa and the Tarquins. Both Livy and Servius comment on the Sabine origin of Numa (1.18.1-19.1), as well as on the Greek and Etruscan origins of the Tarquins (Livy 1.34). Servius in fact expresses his concern about the inaccuracy of Anchises’ account concerning Numa with the words: Mira autem utitur phantasia, ut quasi ostendat, se non agnoscere eum qui de gente Romana non fuerat (6.808). Again, the elder Marcellus is presented dedicating the spolia opima to the temple of Quirinus. However, the historical accounts record that Marcellus dedicated the “ “See also: D. H. 2. 58.1-3; Dio l.frg.6,2-6,6. 85 spolia to Jupiter Feretrius, not to Quirinus (859). According to Ogilvie, Jupiter derived the title Feretrius from ferre, which was connected with the bringing of weapons for dedication, and he was presiding over war (p.70). On the other hand Quirinus, as lanus Quirinus and Mars Quirinus, was presiding over the beginning of peace. Later, the name Quirinus attached to Romulus the pater urbis was connected with the peaceful activities of the host; and the god’s function was to watch over the whole ordered community at peace. Virgil stresses this function of Romulus in Jupiter’s prophecy, where Quirinus and his brother Remus dispense justice (1.292-93), after the end of wars (291), and the beginning of a long period of peace: aspera turn positis mitescent saecula hellis: cana Fides et Vesta, Remo cum fratre Quirinus iura dabunt; ... The dedication, then, of the arma of Marcellus to this deity signifies on a symbolic "'Prop. 4.10.39f.; Plutarch, Marcell. 7. Scholars have concluded that Virgil appar ently misunderstood the historical evidence; yet R.G. Austin rejects this conclusion, and suggests that Virgil “obliquely alludes to the traditional place of dedication” (Jupiter Feretrius) by “honouring the builder of the temple of Jupiter Feretrius,..., who had laid down that future winners of the spolia opima should follow his example and dedicate them there.” See: R.G. Austin’s commentary for a fuller discussion of the problem and bibliography. '«Possibly the cult of this god was from the beginning military, for the temple had no other statue than the silex and a scepter (p.70). The silex was used in the ceremonies of the ius fetiale which prescribed the proper declaration and conclusion of wars and the scepter was symbolic of military success (p.70). '«Ogilvie, ibid. p.84. Iriarchaic prayers Quirinus appears as the god of the host at peace (p.l32). The most acceptable etymology of the name is co-uiri-no ‘the god of the assembly of men’ and links it with the Sabine religion (p.84). '«See Ogilvie’s commentary on Livy 1-5, p.84. Servius suggests that Quirinus was Mars who as a god of peace had his temple in the city; but as the god of war, he was worshipped outside the city (6.859). 86 level the return of a long-term peace and the resumption of constitutional proce dures. Anchises distorts the historical evidence, as he does in the rest of the narrative, to stress the ideal of peace. The above discussion has shown that Anchises tampers with the prophetic and historical truth in his attempt to suppress the conflicts that disturbed the Roman empire from its very beginning to the Augustan age. His words to Aeneas ‘o gnaie, ingentem luctum ne quaere tuorum’ (868) acquire now their full sense: Anchises’ account is an optimistic story but not a history. As such, it differs in order and events narrated from the long-term prophecies of the gods {rebus et ordine dispar [Horace, J5p.l.19.29]). It is not an ‘accurate declaration’ of the divine fata, which he knew as Virgil suggests in 6.681-83, but a recreation {memorare [6.717]) of them. Recreation of previously told themes, according to Horace, is the basis of poetic composition {publica materies priuaii iuris erit, s i/ ... / nec uerbo uerbum curabis reddere fidus/ interpres ... [Ars Poetica, 132-34). Moreover, Horace states that the recreation of old material is achieved by the use of such technical principles as conciseness in the selection of the material, inversion in the order of events, omission of events and tampering with the words {semper ad euentum festinat et in médias res/ ... sic ueris falsa remiscet [Ars Poetica 148, 151]). Yet, these virtues, according to Horace, are not enough to make a poem; the basic law of poetry is thematic unity and convincing arrangement of the events {atque ita mentitur, .../ primo ne medium, medio ne discrepet imum. [Ars Poetica 151-52]). The structure and content of Anchises’ narrative not only displays the technical characteristics of ‘‘‘See Servius 6. 860 87 poetry, but also has thematic unity and coherence. C. The Golden Age Anchises formulates the fata of Aeneas’ progeny as the narrative of the return of the Satumian age. He presents Aeneas’ descendants, guided by reason and interest in their country, as gradually emerging from a primitive society to civic life, which culminates in the creation of the Roman empire and the golden Age (6.760-812). Yet, he coimter-wams that the Golden Age could decline to an iron age by domestic and civic violence when the leaders are motivated by self-promoting emotions (6.812- 35). This pattern of succession of ages looks forward to and presents similarities with the pattern of evolution of the Satumian age narrated by Evander. Evander in book eight describes the age of Saturn as the cultural evolution from a primitive way of life to the ordered life of the city, where people enjoyed peace (8. 314-25). But the Satumian age was gradually corrupted by the vices of war and greed and replaced by the iron age {decolor aetaa) (8.326-27). In a similar fashion, Anchises presents the descendants of Aeneas repeating the pattem of evolution of the Satumian age, but also surpassing that age in both divine protection and military power. Anchises depicts the first descendants leading a primitive life (6.760- 65). Just as the Italian tribes in the pre-satumian age were scattered in the forests without permanent settlement and civic values: Hate nemora indigenae Fauni Nymphaeque tenebant gensque uirum iruncis et duro rohore nata, quia neque moa neque cultua erat... (8 . 314-17) 88 similarly, Silvius begins his reign in a primitive Italy. His nzime - ‘Silvius’ derives from ailva, “tree”, “forest” - and upbringing - he grows up in the forests {Lauinia educet ailuis regem ...) (6.765) - are the symbols of unsettled, nomadic life. Yet the difference from the past is Silvius’ equipment, a pura haaia (760). The spear, according to Alfoldi, was the symbol of royal power in Rome, just like the scepter. In the present context, the spear seems to foreshadow the military character of the new age, which becomes manifest in the reign of Romulus and his successors. The second stage of development towards the Golden Age appears in the urban ization of Italy. Just as Saturn in the past had gathered the wild tribes of Italy into cities (8.321-22): ia genua indocile ac diaperaum montibua aliia compoauH... similarly, Silvius’ successors, Procas, Capys, Numitor (765), and Silvius Ae- “®The forests and caves, according to Lucretius, were the shelters of the nature’s savages. De Rerum Nature 5.925-987, and especially 955. *‘^See: A. Alfoldi, “Hasta-Summa Imperii. The spear as embodiment of Sovereignty in Rome”, A JA 63 (1959) 1-25 ‘«Several accounts exist of the origins and culture of the first inhabitants in Italy have been recorded by Dionysius of Halicarnassus at Roman Antiquities 1. 10; also see: Sallust, Catilina 6.1. And Lucretius describes the transition from the age of nature to the age of culture as the time that the people began to build and fortify their cities: condere coeperuni urbis arcemque locare/ praesidium reges ... (5.1108). ‘«It is interesting that Virgil in the three accounts of Roman history he presents (Jupiter’s 1.257-96; Anchises’ 6.756-886; Vulcan’s 8.630-728) progressively narrows the limits of Roman history to include initially Aeneas and Ascanius, then the Albans and, finally, just the Romans. ‘50In the extant historical writings of this period nothing survives concerning Pro- cas. A case, however, seems to be made by Dio, who places the beginnings of the Roman history proper at the time of Procas the great-grandfather of Romulus and Remus. In fact, Tzetzes writes: 89 neas (769) inaugurate the civic life (773-76), by building such cities as Nomen- tum, Gabii, Fidena, CoUatia, Pometii, Castrum Inui, Bola, Cora (773-74, 776): hi Ubi Nomentum et Gahios urhemque Fidenam, hi Collaiinas imponeni montibua arcea haec tum nomina erunt, nunc aunt aine nomine terrae The transformation of uninhabited places into cities is suggested by the terms mon tibua (774) and aine nomine terrae (776), urbem (773) and arcea (774). The employ ment of the words urbem (773) or arcea (774) in the Virgilian passage enforces the idea of permanent settlement as opposed to the nomadic life implied in theailvia (765). Cicero describes the urba as a location with fortifications, houses, shrines and markets: ... aedem primum certo loco domiciliorum cauaa ...; quam cum locia manuque aaepiaaent, eiua modi coniunciionem tectorum oppidum uel urbem So much regarding Alba and the Albans; the story of Rome now begins. Aventinus begat Numitor and Amulius, - or Procas, according to some; and this man’s sons, they say, were the aforesaid Numitor and Amulius. (Lycophr. Alex. v. 1232, in Dio’s Roman History 1. p.l2 Loeb ed.) Consequently, Vir^l seems to pay tribute to the forefather of the Roman nation whose descendants will be the Troianae gloria geniia (767) An attem pt has been made by R. M. Ogilvie, A Commentary on Livy. Books 1-5, to interpret the name in terms of its etymology: the name is connected with procerea and Proculus and the meaning will be ,‘elder, leader, prince’ or with Prochyte, Aeneas’ relative (see p.45-46). ‘*‘N. Horsfall concludes that the Albans mentioned here were selected randomly; see: “The Structure and Purpose of Vergil’s Parade of Heroes”, Ancient Society 12 (1982) 12-18. It seems to me, however, that the particular names either support the theory of reincarnation (Capys recalls the ancestor of Aeneas, Siluius Aeneas recalls in piety and valor both Aeneas and Siluius) developed in lines 724-51, or pay tribute to the forefathers of the Roman nation (Proca, Numitor) and support the idea of the Italian descent of these kings {Itala de gente nepotea [6.757]). 90 appellaueruni deluhris disiinciam spatiisque comminibus (De Re Publico, 1.26) The climax of the stage of urbanization is the foundation of Rome, the empire to be (782), which rises under the divine auspices of Romulus (780-81). Similarly in the past Saturn founded Latium (8.322). Latium, however, did not enjoy divine protection, because it was the refuge of Saturn expelled from Olympus {primus ah aetherio uenit Satumus Olympo/ arma louis fugiens et regnis exsul adempiis. [8.319-20]). Its very name was the token of divine envy, because Latium, as Evander explains, means ‘hiding’ {Laiiumque uocari/ maluit, his quoniam latuisset tutus in oris. [8.322-23]). By contrast, Rome commemorates by its name the founder Romulus who builds it under the auspices of the father of the gods (780-81). For Rome and the Roman imperium were planned by the fata and Jupiter {moenia Romanesque suo de nomine dicet./ his ego nec metas rerum nec tempora pono [1.277-78]). Unlike Saturn’s reign which was confined to Latium, Rome extends its influence and rule initially over Italy [septemque una sibi muro circumdahit arces, “within its walls (Rome) will embrace the seven citadels” ,[783]) and, then, over the world {su per et Garamantas et Indos/ proferet imperium [6.794-95]) under Augustus’ reign, who builds the aurea saecula (6.792-93) that once Latium experienced at the time of Saturn {aurea quae perhibent illo sub rege fuere/ saecula: sic placida pop ulos in pace regebat [8.324-25]). Evander explains that Golden was the age in “*P. Grimai has suggested that lines 794-95 are an elaboration of Jupiter’s prophetic words that lulius Caesar will extend the imperium to the Ocean (1.287); see: C P hS suppl. 15 (1989) Iff. issNorden considers the whole passage a digression on Augustus in the form of 91 which the people were enjoying peace (8.324-25): aurea guae perhibent illo sub rege fuere saecula: sic placida populos in pace regebat Then, in an age before war, peace was the result of civic life and legislation {composuit legesque dedit) (8.322). The new age, Anchises clearly indicates, requires more than legislation to preserve peace. Rome will have to confront hostile nations, such as the kingdoms of Caspia, the Maeote land, the land of Nile, which will be terrified by the oracles announcing Augustus’ arrival (798-800). Warfare, as an important factor in the process of establishing peace is never mentioned, but it is included in the sense of imperium and is stressed by the comparison of Augustus to other great civilizers of humanity, Hercules and Dionysus (801-05). Aeneas is invited to sense his descendant’s tactics in pacifying the world in the imagery of Hercules ranging over the earth (nec uero Alcides tantum telluris obiuit [801]), or bringing peace to the Erymanthian forests (Erymanthi /pacarit nemora [802]), or killing the ... ceruam and terrifying the Lernezin beast with his bow {Lernam tremefecerit arcu [802-803]). Augustus the war uictor is reflected in the image of Dionysus, the victor, who drives his chariot with the tigers from the heights of Nysa (804-805). Nysa by the time of Virgil had almost become a symbol of the world-wide range of Dionysus’ influence. For Nysa is placed now in Egypt (Horn. Hym. 1.9), now in Ethiopia (Hdt. 2.146), or in Arabia (Diodorus, 3.59.2), India (Pliny, N.H. 6.79) and Asia (Apollod. Bibl. 3.4.3). Furthermore, the tigers, as Austin has suggested. Panegyric. He argues convincingly that the speech follows the conventions of the genre. See: E. Norden, “Ein Panegyricus auf Augustus in Vergils Aeneis”, R h M P h 54 (1899) 466-82. 92 symbolize Dionysus’ power to tame and civilize. Similarly, Augustus’ power to civilize and tame the entire world is reflected in such actions as the extension of the imperium to distant, strange lands (India, Garamantes) (794-95). Augustus as a divine offspring {diui genua [6.792]) preserves the peace in the great empire without written legislation. His human counterpart, Numa from the poor Curae (811), preserves the aurea aaecula by constitutional means [primam qui legibua urbem / fundabit [810]), just like Saturn in the past (legesque dedit [8.322]). Anchises qualifies Numa’s reign as otia (6.813), thereby stressing its peaceful and orderly aspect. By implication, the Romans become a gens togata, as Jupiter prophesied(Romanos, ... gentemque togatam [1.282]). Traditionally the toga was the symbol of the constitutional and peaceful procedures followed in the administration of the imperium and the settlement of the problems. However, the Golden Age, just like the Satumian age (deterior donee paulatim ac decolor aetas/... successit ... [8.326-27), appears to be threatened by a new decolor aetas, Evander says that the causes of decline of Saturn’s Golden reign were the vices of war and greed (et belli rabies et am or ... habendi [8.327]). Similarly, An chises presents the Roman empire as threatened by excessiveness in war represented by Tullus’ war policy (residesque mouebit/ Tullus in arma uiros et iam desueta tri- umphis/ agmina [6.813-15]) or excessive indulgence in popularity represented by Ancus’ reign (nimium gaudens popularibus auris [6.815-16]). '“ See R.G. Austin 6. 805 '“ T. P. Wiseman observes that Virgil’s pageant is a genealogy which begins with diui and continues with humans: “ Legendary Genealogies in Late Republican Rome”, G and R 21 (1974) 153-64. issSee: Cl. Nicolet, “Consul Togatus” R EL 38 (1960) 236-63. is^Both Livy and Dionysius of Halicarnassus consider Ancus’ regime favorable to the 93 The destructive potential of excessive indulgence in popularity (6.816) becomes manifest in the immensa cupido laudum (6.823) of Brutus which motivates him to use his cruel axes {aaeuasque securis [6.819]) against his own sons, when they moved in war against their own country (... natosque pater noua bella mouentis/ ad poenam ... uocabit [6.820-21]). But, unlike Saturn’s age, Anchises shows that during the crisis of the empire the amor patriae (6.823) is also strong, thereby preventing the absolute domination of the vices of war and cupido laudum. The amor patriae is manifested in Brutus’ action against his sons, which aims at preserving Rome’s liberty (natosque pater .../ ad poenam pulchra pro libertate uocabit [6.821]). The pattern of immensa cupido laudum vs. amor patriae continues in the consul ships of the Decii and the Drusi, Torquatus and Camillus (6.824-25). Torquatus com m on sand Latins with regard to land distributions, praise of the husbandmen, and enlargment of the patrician class with people from the commons or foreigners, such as Tarquinius (D.H. 36.4-41.4; Livy 1.34.6, 32-33). Livy’s description of Rome at the time of Ancus is: Roma est ad id potissima visa: in nouo populo, ubi omnis repentina atque ex virtute nobilitas sit, (1. 34. 6) Feeney following Ogilvie suggests that Ancus Marcius was a king with plebeian connections, as the cognomen Marcius indicates. Thus he interprètes the king’s indulgence in popularity. See: “History and Revelation in Vergil’s underworld”, P C P h S (1986-87) 1-24. Although this observation does not fully explain the spe cial interest of Virgil in such a king, his name, however, with its special plebeian associations certainly helps to prepare and facilitate the transition from monarchy to democracy. ^’^Nouum helium Virgil describe the unusual character of a war which does not involve enemies but kinsmen. In book 8.637-38 the war between Romulus cind Tatius, his father-in-law, is a nouum helium. "«Livy 2.1.6; D.H. 5.2.1-2. Sallust, considers the transition to democracy as a different face of the regium imperium, whose new properties are theinmutato more annua imperia and the binosque imperatores (6. 24-25). See also Cicero, De Re Publica 2.32 "«In the instances of Decii and Drusi the reader is meant to sense pairs of fathers and sons in which the fathers serve the common cause while the sons act out of personal interest. Decius Publius Mus, the father, as consul, in the battle against 94 is described as saeuus securi recalling the description of Brutus’ axes as saeuae secures (... saeuasque securis / accipiet [6.819-20]). The verbal parallels stress the similarity of the two consuls in action and, by implication, in motives. On the other hand, Camillus recovers Rome’s liberty by recovering its standards {et referentem signa Camillum [6.825]). This deed recalls Brutus’ feat of liberating Rome {pulchra pro libertate [6.821]). The similarity of the situation suggests that Camillus was also motivated by amor patriae. The culmination of the decolor aetas and anticlimax to the Saturnian age is the inuninent danger of civil war breaking out between kinsmen. With the words illae animae, Anchises introduces the two Romans who carry shining armor and are concordes in the underworld (826-27), but will turn against one another (6.828), although kinsmen, socer and gener (830-31), when consuls in Rome (6.828-29). The the Latins in 340 B.C., obeying a prophetic dream, devoted himself to the manes (Livy 8.9.4-14) serving his country. The son, P. Decius, followed his father’s exam ple, when he was fighting against the Gauls and the Samnites in 295 B.C., but for a different reason: according to Livy he was self-immolated to avoid the disgrace of the defeat that his premature actions caused to his army; Livy explains that the motives of Decius’ actions were his desire to surpass in glory his colleague, duplicem illorum gloriam fore si ah laeuo cornu et ah equite uictoria incipiat (10.28.7). M. Livius Drusus, the father, as consul in 147 defeated the Scordisci, a Thracian tribe, defending Rome (V. Paterculus 2.13-14, Florus 1.39). M. Livius Drusus, the son, tribune in 91 B.C., stirred up the plehs against the senate. Livy describes the event as motivated by Drusus’desire for power: qui ut uires adquireret perniciosa spe lar- gitionum plehem concitauit (Per. 70). He also attempted to combine the senatorial and the class of équités {Leges Liviae) (per. 70); finally, he was assassinated as promoter of the rebellion of the Italians (per. 71). i»‘The descriptive adjective saeuus hints at the murder of Torquatus’ son by his own father (Livy 8.7.13ff.). The ferocity of that action, in Livy’s account, is conveyed through its impression on the soldiers: exanimaii atroci imperio (8.7.20); they were dumbfounded by the atrocious execution of the consular power. His disapproval of the event Livy expresses in its designation as a triste exemplum for the generations to come: Manliana imperia non in praeseniia modo horrenda sed exempli etiam tristis in posterum essent (8.7.22) 95 soctT will march &om the North and the gener from the East (830-31) involving in their conflict the ualidas uiris of Rome (832-33). The situation parallels that of Brutus and his sons, suggesting that the immensa cupido laudum is the predominant motive. Anchises interrupts the flow of his narrative to address the combatants themselves. Pueri, he calls them drawing attention to their kinship, “don’t turn your vigour and valour upon your country’s very vitals” (832). Then, he turns to the one whom he identifies as a divine offspring {genus qui ducis Olympo [834]) and his own descendant {sanguis meus [835]) to spare his country from the danger of civil war, iu parce ... (834-35). “Drop the arms” {proice tela [835]) he advises in the half- line that concludes this section. When Anchises resumes the narrative, it appears that, by contrast to the Sat umian reign, the danger of the decolor aetas has been overcome. The conquest of Greece (6.836-40) marks the reinstatement of Rome to the Golden Age (... pacique imponere morem [6.852]). In the next lines 841-46 the imperium emerges stronger by a parade of military leaders, protagonists of wars against national enemies. In dividuals from humble origins or prominent families, such as Cato, Cossus, the genus Gracchi^ Fabricius, Serranus, Fabius Maximus Cunctator, or the elder Marcellus (6.855-59), and whole gentes, such as the Scipiadae or the gens Fabia^ defend their pairia {unus qui nobis cuctando restituis rem [6.846]) against external enemies (841-46), such as the Carthaginians (6.843, 858) or the rebellious Gauls {Gallumque rebellem [6.858]) and reestablish peace {tertiaque arma patri suspendet Anchises portrays Serranus as sowing the seed in his field (844) and Fabricius as powerful in his poverty (843). In the Georgies Virgil praises the agricolae for their simple values (2. 458-74). 96 capta Quirino [6.859]). D. Admonishment The above discussion of the theme of Anchises’ narrative has shown that it is set forth in a coherent and unified form which recreates the theme of the Golden Age of the fourth Eclogue and anticipates that of Evander’s narrative of the Satumian age (8.314-32). The story of Eveinder is, according to Virgil, an aural monimentum: Aeneas, ... auditque uirum monimenta priorum (8.312). Varro in the De Lingua Latina writes that “the monimenta which are inscribed on the tombs ... may ad monish the passer-by that they themselves were mortal and that the readers are too. Prom this the other things that are written or done to preserve the memory are called monuments” (6.49). Just as Evander’s story aims at preserving the mem ory of the past, so too Anchises stresses that his narrative preserves the memory of the future (memorare [6.716]). Therefore, it is a verbal and visual monimentum, since he also points to Aeneas his descendants {ostendere [6.716]). That Virgil re garded poetry as a monimentum is reflected in the allegorical description of his epic as a temple in honor of Augustus: et uiridi in campo templum de marmore ponam propter aquam {Géorgie, 3.13-14). In the center of the temple Virgil promises to have Caesar: in medio mihi Caesar erit templumque ienebit (3.16); on the doors he >63The belief that Rome will be eternal through eternal victory over its enemies it was part of the imperial ideology; see: M. McCormick, Eternal Victory, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1986, pp.1-35. 164 sic monimenta quae in sepulcris, et ideo secundum uiam, quo praetereuntis admoneant et se fuisse et illos esse mortalis. Ab eo cetera quae scripta ac facta memoriae causa monimenta dicta. The translation of this quote is by R.G. Kent, Cambridge Massachusetts 1938. 97 will carve the battles of Caesar and all the descendants of Assaxacns (26-36): in forihus pugnam ex auro solidoque elephanio Gangaridum faciam uictorisqure arma Quirini, atque hie undantem bello magnumque fiuentem Nilum ac nauali surgentis aere columnas. addam urbes Aaiae domitas pubumque Niphaten fidentemque fuga Parthum uersisque sagittis; siabunt et Parii lapides, spiraniia signa, Assaraci proles demissaeque ab loue gentis nomina, Trosque parens et Troiae Cynihius auctor. Anchises in a similar fashion composes by the Lethaean river (... in ualle reducta/ seclusum nemus et uirgulta sonantia siluae, / Lethaeumque domos placidas qui prae- natat amnem [6.703-705]) an oral monimentum, which recalls the structure of Vir gil’s temple in the third Georgia. In the center of the narrative Anchises places Augustus and the Satumian age (791-807), which are preceded by 34 lines (756-90) and followed by 38 lines (808-846) that set forth the nomina, deeds and wars of the proles Assaraci. As we mentioned above (p.32), Varro claims that the monimentum aims at ad monishing the reader or the spectators (6.49). Similarly, Virgil makes clear that Anchises narrative has a didactic purpose: disces, ‘you will learn”, (5.737), says the facies of Anchises to Aeneas in book five; and Anchises in the underworld says docebo, ‘I will teach you’ (6.759). In the narrative itself, Anchises turns to the Ro man descendants themselves and urges them to remember {memento [6.851]) their 98 duty to their motherland [iu regere imperio populos. Romane, memento [6.851]). Again, by the end of the speech Virgil stresses the didactic function of the account by the verb memoro: Anchises wishes to make Aeneas mindful of the wars that await him in Italy [exim bella uiro memorai ... [6.890]), and how to cope with the demands of his new life (et quo quemque modo fugiatque feratque laborem [892]). In the first chapter, it was noted that the Sibyl gave Aeneas practical advice on how to survive the wars in Italy (6.96-97). Anchises, as a prophet and poet, supplements that advice with ethical admonitions. He makes clear that his speech aims at urg ing Aeneas to implement the uiriuies he hears with facta, and, thus, occupy Italy (806-807): et dubitamus adhuc uirtutem extendere factis, aut metus Ausonia prohibet consistere terra? What are the virtues that Anchises’ poem teaches to Aeneas? They are the principles and values which are necessary for the foundation of the aurea saecula. The aurea saecula, as Evander explains, is the establishment of domestic peace (sic placida populos in pace regebat [8.325]). Anchises adds to this the ideal of uni versal peace, which is established by the extension of the Roman imperium over barbaric [et Garamantas et Indos/ proferet imperium [6.794-95]) and dangerous na tions (... et Caspia regna/ ... horrent et Maeotia tellus,/ et septemgemini turbant trépida ostia Nili [6.798-800]). Domestic and international peace, Anchises suggests, is established by defensive war and leniency to the subjects of the Roman empire [pacique imponere morem,/ parcere subjectis et debellare superbos [6.852-53]). Ex ponents of this dual policy are leaders who promote, according to the circumstances. a militaristic or a constitutional solution to the problems. It appears to be a pattern of the entire speech that the weapons or accoutrements of the Albans zmd Romans in the underworld symbobze the leader’s actions. Rome establishes international peace by waging righteous, defensive war against its enemies inside and outside the state (820-21, 836-858). The righteous war is first alluded to in the hasta pura that Silvius carries in the underworld (760). According to Servius, the pura hasta in a technical sense is the headless spear {sine ferro) that was given as reward to him who was the first to defeat an enemy in battle. T. Donatus suggests that it Wcis a nuntia scilicet non belli sed pads. Cato, on the other hand, cites the pura hasta as symbol of triumphal war: tua sic ... pura triumphantis hasta sequatur equos (Orationes 21). And Tacitus in the Annales presents the hasta as symbol of both war and peace: hasta et caducem, signa duo belli aut pads (14.37). It appears then that the pura hasta is zin ambiguous symbol representing peace which is achieved by means of war. Augustus, a divine offspring, establishes peace {aurea saecula, 6. 792-93) by defending and expanding the Roman empire over wild and exotic nations (6.794-95, 798-800). Brutus protects the liberty of Rome from domestic enemies (820-21). Mummius, Metellus and Aemilius Paulus conquer Greece (836-40); the Scipiones are the duo fulmina belli, destroyers of Carthage (842-43); Marcellus surpasses in glory all the men as a uictor over the Carthaginians and the Gauls (855-58). In >“See lines 772, 808-809, 819. "=See: R.G. Austin 6.760. ^®’'In the late Republic the phrase amor patriae had political connotations desig nating the love of the commonwealth by serving its interests. It included the sense of amidtia and caritas which were the source of justice. See: M. Bonjour, Terre Natale. Paris 1975, pp.63- 65. 100 pictorial language the younger Marcellus is extolled as the ultimate executor of the Roman’s duty to fight aggressors and dominate the world (878-81): ... non illi se quisquam impune tulissei obuius armato, seu cum pedes iret in hostem seu spumaniis equi foderet calcaribus armas. Numa, on the other hand, administers the Roman imperium by means of legislation, thereby promoting the constitutional solution of the problems (6.810). Anchises suggests that the actions of these leaders are the manifestation of the rational virtues, such as amor patriae (6.821), concord (6.772), humility (paruoque poieniem [6.843]), severity (magne Cato [6.841]), pietas (6.878) and obedience to the ancestral laws (prisca fides [6.878]), that inspire them. Silvius and the Albans, for instance, are examples of rational and responsible conduct. Anchises seems to lead his audience to sense the ‘rational principle’ that pertains to the character of the Albans (purus sensus [6.746-47]) in their name, Albanum nomen (6.763), and their emblem {civilis quercus [6.772]). The name Albanus is etymologically connected with Alba Longa (766). Alba, according to the god Tiberinus, commemorated by its name the omen of the white {alba ... albi [8.45]) pigs, which were seen at the location that the future city was to be found: litoreis ingens inuenia sub ilicibus sus alba solo recubans, albi circum ubera nati ex quo ter denis urbem redeuniibus annia “ 'O n the form and style of the passage see: F. E. Brenk, S. J., “Auorum spes et purpurei flores: the Eulogy for Marcellus in Aeneid VI”, A JP 107 (1986) 218-28 101 Ascanius clari condet cognominis Albam. (Aen. 8.43, 45, 47-48) In the speech of Evander in book 8 it becomes clear that one of the nuances of (^albus) was “pure, clean”. For, he makes the old name of the river Thybris, Albula, significative of its clear water (... amisit uerum uetus Albula nomen [332]), whereas its new name deriving firom the asper Thybris, who dominated Latium, is significant of unjust war, as the adjective asper suggests. Virgil uses the term asper to signify unrighteous actions and conduct, such as Juno’s (1.279) or Carthage’s (1.14), or the wars that disturbed the Roman empire (1.291). Since the root alba-, ‘white’, is found in the proper name Albanus, the name on a figurative level suggests the ‘purity’ of their character. The rational principle that pertains to the character of the Albans is manifested by the wreath of civilis quercus that crowns their temples (772), a symbol of concord. For, the ciuilis quercus was traditionally awarded to the Roman who saved the life of a citizen in battle. Such an action stresses the ideal of “partnership for the common good” which, as Cicero states, was the fountain stone of the ‘city’: Est igitur, ..., res publica res populi, populus autem non omnis hominum coetus quoquo modo congregaius, sed coetus multitudinis iuris consensu et utilitatis communione sociatus. {De Re Publica 1.25) Again the rational virtues that contribute to the rise of the Golden Age (6.792- 93) are alluded to in the character of the Romans. Anchises says that their ‘spirits will be equal to that of Olympus {animas aequabit Olympo [782]), suggesting, as I "'See R. G. Austin, line 772. 102 will show next, that the Romans in their cheuracter and conduct reflect the mind and will of Jupiter and the Olympians. First, Olympus (782) stands either for caelum (1.374, 7.218, 8.280), or more specifically for the ‘house’ of Jupiter {iomus om- nipoientis Olympi [10.1]) and, by extension, for Jupiter himself who is the regnator Olympi [2.779]), since he rules over the gods and assigns their duties. On the other hand, in the Aeneid, animus is an alternative for mens signifying rational faculties and emotions congenial to reason. As was noted in the second chapter, the cosmic mens was represented as the pure rational principle, free from harm ful emotions, which administers the imiverse (6.724-28). Moreover, the mens of the i™In the Aeneid all the gods appear to obey to Jupiter and execute his orders or act Eiccording to his will. Juno, only, ‘plays the devil’, but her actions have a temporary effect. Animus, a term of the philosophical vocabuleiry, was perceived to contain either the rational faculties or the rational and the emotional faculties of a man. Varro, for instance, writes: in reliquo corpore ah hoc fonte diffusast anima, hinc animus ad intelligeniiam tributus (Men. 32). Cicero in the Tusc. Disp. 5.38 claims that: humanus ... animus decerptus ex mente diuina. And in the Republic he suggests that mens is part of the animus: quae latet in animis hominum quaeque pars animi mens uocatur (2.67). Again, in the Tusc. Disp. Cicero cites Pythagoras and Plato as the philosophers who held that theanimus is divided into two parts the rational and the emotional (4.5.10). Finally Sallust in the Cat. 1.2 defines animus as moral character in a general sense: nostra omnis uis in animo et corpore sita est: animi imperio, corporis servitio magis uiimur Lucretius equates animus with mens and interprets it as the capacity to reasoning: primum animum dico, ‘mentem’ quam saepe uocamus, in quo consilium uiiae regimenque locatum est, (94-95) ‘«Intelligence (1.582, 2.659, 741, 3.34, 4.15, 630, 5.304, 9.189, 10.104, 10.388), mental effort (12.26,11.35), forethought (3.434), will (2.586, 7.216), consilium (3.60, 4.639), intellect (1.515, 2.120, 5.404, 8.530, 9.121, 5.529), anger (1.57, 1.149, 2.155, 5.202, 8.228), moral character in general (11.417), courage and audacity (1.202 with reuocate, 3.260 with cecidere, 1.579, 3.611, 2.61, 12.788 with arma, also with uires 2.617, 9.714, 611, 761, 5.191, 10.356, 6.261, 10.895, 11.641), and arrogance (4.414, 11.366). See TLL 103 gods represented by the will of Jupiter (1.279) and transmitted to Aeneas by Apollo (3.97-98) and the Penates (3.159) is to make Rome an tmperium terris. Since the ‘spirit’ (animus) of the Romans is equal to the divine, by implication, it is free from those emotions, which Anchises in lines 731-34 presented as disturbing the rational principle of the soul. The implication of the equation of themens of the Romans with the mens of Jupiter is that the Romans will be motivated by such virtues that will make possible the fulfillment of the fata, i.e. the mziking of the eternal Roman empire. Indeed, Brutus motivated by amor patriae (6.823) saves the com monwealth (6.821); the elder Marcellus motivated by the ancestral advice parcere subiectis et debellare superbos (6.853) pronounced by Anchises protects the res pub lica {hie rem Romanam magno turbante tumultu/ sistet ... [6.857-58]); the socer and gener (6.830-31), again, motivated by Anchises’ advice to spare their country from the civil war (6.832-35), appear to turn their forces against foreign nations, hostile to Rome, such as Greece (6.836-40); Marcellus the younger motivated by pietas and jides to his country wages wars against aggressors. The content of Anchises’ narrative suggests that the exponents of rationality, concord and defensive war may shift from kings (6.760-817) to democrats (6.817- 883), but one thing remains constant: they promote the Roman imperium {tu regere imperio populos, Romane [6.851]). And the promoters of imperium are equally found among nobles by birth and among people from humble origins. Numa from the pure Curae {Curibus paruis et paupere terra [811]), Cato, example of severity (841), Fabricius and Serranus, examples of poverty and agricultural values (843-44), provide a clear indication that the Roman imperium results from the rule of the 104 best citizens, whose excellence is judged by their personal merit, not their origin. Under these conditions, monarchy (760-817) or democracy (817-883) yield to a more substantial system, aristocracy, the rule of the best citizens. However, the Roman state, Anchises suggests, can decline, when the leaders motivated by irrational emotions (6.816, 823) and facilitated by their power (812, 819) become tyrants (817) showing no mercy to their subjects and natural friends (819, 826-35). The idea that great power promotes unjustifiable actions, which are motivated by irrational desires, seems to be suggested by the presence of Thllus (6.812-15) and Ancus (6.815-16) in the parade soon after the establishment of Rome as a magnum imperium (812). Tullus rushes to wars without any justification U3 Cairns believes that Virgil in the parade of Roman heroes overtly pronounces his preference for kingship. In fact, he claims that Virgil “saw the rule of one man as a permanent necessity; that man was a god to be, if not a god on earth, as well as a king.” But Cænis does not explain Virgil’s presentation of kingship changing into democracy and staying this way. Yet, in no way could imperium be interpreted as kingship. It is rather the process of expansion achieved through military power. See: F. Calms, Virgil’s Augustan Epic, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1989, pp. 1-28. This idea reflects [Plato’s] view of the ideal state: One man calls it democracy, another man ... gives it some other name; but it is in very truth an aristocracy ...kings we always have; but these are at one time hereditary, at another selected by vote... and no man is debarred by his weakness or poverty or by obscurity of his parentage, or promoted because of the opposite qualities ,... on the contrary, the one principle of selection is this: the man that is deemed to be wise or good rules and governs. And the cause of this, our polity, lies in our equality of birth. (Menexenus 238C-E.1) "^Note that the vain aspirations which the Roman imperium plants in the souls of people, in the second Géorgie^ are contrasted with the ataraxia of the farmer (493-498): fortunatua et ille deos qui nouit agresiis ... / ilium non populi fasces, non purpura regum Jlexit ... non res Romanae perituraque regna; ... 105 (6.812-15). In the second Book of the Aeneid, Aeneas admits the irrationality of rushing to arms (2.314): arma amena capio; nec sat raiionia in armia. In the second Georgia Virgil cites cunong other signs of the inaanum forum (502) the rush to war (juuntque/ in ferrum [503]). The irrationality inherent in unjustified war is reinforced by the irrationality of excessive indulgence in praise. The key-phrase nimium gaudena points to Ancus’ weakness. Gaudia is cited among the corporeal pestilences that bring morzd degeneracy (732-34). In the second Georgia fame zind popularity, another feature of the inaanum forum, cause corruption: hia atupet aiionitua roatria, huna plauaua hiantem per auneoa geminatua enim plebisque patrumque aorripuit; ... (508-10) In the presentation of Marcellus’death as an action of divine providence aiming at protecting Rome from excessive power (870-71), Anchises implies that power smooths the path of unrighteous conduct: ... nimium uobia Romana propago uiaa poiena, auperi, propria haea ai dona fuiaaeni The phrase nimium potena, ‘enormously powerful’, recalls the concept of excess suggested by the phrases nimium gaudena (816) or immenaa cupido (823), thereby stressing the connection between extreme power and superfluous feelings. ^”Lines 870-71 cannot be used as evidence of divine jealousy, because Anchises has argued in the philosophical section of his speech that the gods embodied in the 106 The consequences of the combination of nimium poiens and immensa laudum cupido, Anchises suggests, are actions that endanger the progress of the common wealth. Brutus, for instance, motivated by immensa cupido laudum (823) uses his consular power (consulis imperium [6.819]) to commit an act of superbia (^anima superha [817]), i.e. to violate the principle of leniency and domestic pietas by cruelly punishing his own sons (6.819-21). The cognomen “superbus” was traditionally attached to the second Tarquinius, because of his tyrannical conduct: he killed and left unburied his father in law, Servius Tullius, and put to death the leading sena tors (Livy, 1. 49). In the present context the “qualities” of Tarquin are transferred to Brutus. His superbia is externalized by the description of the secures, the means of administering his imperium, as saeuae (819). Saeuus, “cruel”, suggests the op- spiritus are pure reason, free from emotions that bring about the fall of the soul from its divine status. On the contrary, Virgil here seems to allude to the Platonic doctrine that ‘punishment’ is remedial when inflicted by the gods {Republic 380 B). I agree with B. Otis, Virgil A Study in Civilized Poetry, Oxford 1963, pp. 303- 04, who suggests that the passage on Marcellus is a “lesson of moderation”. For a different view see: S. V. Tracy, “The Marcellus Passage {Aeneid 6. 860-886) and Aeneid 9-12”, C J 70 (1975) 37-42; W. Clausen “ An Interpretation of the Aeneid, H S C P h 68 (1964) 139-47. 178W. P. Basson suggests that the phrase immensa cupido laudum implies that Brutus’patriotism guarantees his fame. See: W. P. Basson, Pivotal Catalogues in the Aeneid. Amsterdam 1975, p. 74. But Virgil presents Brutus’ love of his country and his excessive desire for fame as equally contributing to the death- sentence of his sons. Yet cupido as desire has been condemned in Anchises’ philo sophical lecture as a corrosive emotion that blinds the soul and causes its decline from the divine state it is. 177Williams describes the characterization of Brutus as animam superbam “a strange paradox”. W. F. J. Knight has sensed that the superbus is a hint to a darker aspect of Brutus’ practice of consulship; see: “Animamque Superbam”, CR 46 (1932) 55-57. H. W. Litchfield, in a very important paper “National Exempla Virtutis in Roman Literature”, H S C P h 25 (1914) 1-71, has argued that Brutus’ action presents a “conflict of duties” and cites examples of ancient authors that censor Brutus’ action against his sons (pp.27-45). Feeney, also, senses in Brutus’ superbia an allusion to a “clash of two kinds of pietas, patriotism vs. humanity (p. 11). 107 posite of “lenient”, which as a principle, “leniency”, Anchises preaches, must guide the life of Romans (parcere subiectis [853]). He himself displayed leniency to the Greek Achaemenides, whose participation in the war against Troy (... pairiis ad Troiam missus in armis [3.595]) was presented as a scelus (3.604); Anchises forgave his scelus eind pledged friendship with him (... dextram Anchises .../ dot iuueni atque animum praesenti pignore firmat [3.610-11]). Brutus, on the other hand, in the action he takes against his own sons (6.820-21) violates the principle of leniency. 178 Just as Brutus uses his power to commit an act of impietas, similarly Caesar and Pompey, alluded to by the terms socer (6.830) and gener (6.831) use their military power, suggested by their armor {fulgere ... in armis [6.826]), to move in war against each other [quantum inter se helium [6.828]), hence violating both the familial and the civic pietas and endangering the very existence of the patria Plato, in the Republic, warns the guardians against turning themselves from benign assistants of the citizens to savage masters, because they are the stronger in the city (416 B). He even expelled from the consulship his colleague Collatinus who disagreed with him concerning the death of his sons (D.H. 5. 9.2-11.3). Dionysus of Halicarnassus describes this act in the following words: I am afraid that the subsequent noble and astonishing behavior of Brutus, one of the consuls, which I am now to relate and in which the Romans take the greatest pride, may appear cruel and incredible to the Greeks... (5. 8.1) :7»N. HorsfaJl suggests that the unifying theme between Camillus and the following Caesar and Pompey is concord; Camillus built a shrine of concord in 367 B.C., but in 49 B.C. concord failed to prevent Caesar and Pompey from marching against each other. Basson, also, considers the insertion of Caesar and Pompey problematic; and he tries to justify it in thematic terms: Caesar was involved in Gallic wars just like the other members of the list preceding him (p.52). But what about Pompey? Certainly this explanation leaves out Pompey. 108 (6.832-33). Anchises, at the crucial point of revealing the civil war between Pompey and Caesar, stops abruptly presenting the conflict as an impious intention (835). During the description of the preparations for the civil war, he stresses the bonds of kinship that bind together the Romans and the earth that brought them forth; he adresses those involved as pueri (832) reminding them of their common origin and their obligation to take care of their country (832-33): ne, pueri, ne tanta animis adsuescite hella neu patriae ualidas in uiscera uertite uiris W ith his choice of adsuescite, Anchises advises them not to “take civil weir as a mat ter of course”. By condemning civil war or familial strife Anchises stresses the importance of concord for the prosperity of a nation. Similarly, Virgil, throughout the Aeneid, preaches concord by insisting on the impiety of civil strife: those that have taken up impia arma are condemned to Tartarus, the Sibyl reveals to Aeneas (6.613); impius is Pygmalion who killed Sychaeus, the husband of his sister Dido (1.349); zind impia are the arma that Latinus takes up against Aeneas (12.31). To summarize: Anchises by placing the Augustan Golden Age in the middle I:"Cicero emphasizes the importance ofpietas-in the Somnium Scipionis: iustitiam cole et pietatem, quae cum magna in parentibus et propinquis, turn in patria maxima est (16.16). leiSee: R.G. Austin, Aeneid 6.832. Servius in the verb adsuescite reads an allusion to the civil wars that troubled the Roman nation for years after the war between Caesar and Pompey: ah ipsis enim quasi comsuetudinem fecit populus Romanus hellorum civil- iumsepties enim g esta sunt: ter a Caesare, ... mortuo Caesare ah Augusto contra Gassium et Brutum in Philippis, civitate Thessaliae; Lucium Anto- nium in Perusia, .../ Sextum Pompeium in Sicilia; Antonium et Cleopatra in Epiro. 109 of the parade shows to Aeneas that the establishment of a peaceful and righteous empire is accomplished by the policy of domestic concord and defensive war, but can be destroyed by civil strife. The quintessence of lois instruction is the exhorta tion parcere subiectis et debellare superbos (6.853). Anchises by this address to his Roman descendants reminds them and by extension Aeneas of their duty to pro mote the Roman imperium (6.851) whose character is primarily civilizing {pacique imponere morem [6.852]). Hae tibi erunt artes (852), Anchises says, identifying ars with the art of statesmanship (852-53). Virgil, as W.R. Johnson has keenly observed, lets his audience, the Roman descendants, realize in this line a recusatio. While Anchises rejects artes such as sculpture (847-48), or oratory (849), or even astronomy (849-50), he delivers the artes of the Romans through a work of ars, a poem. By extension Anchises’ poem is the poem of Virgil, who in char acter (as Anchises) becomes an exponent of law. The voice of Anchises and Virgil blend in the apostrophe to the Roman descendants as pueri or Romane and the imperatives adsuescite (6.832), uertite (6.833), memento (6.851). Thus, Anchises’ speech acquires value for both Aeneas’present and future and Virgil’s contemporeiry audience, the descendants of Aeneas. 182 J. Griifin perceives the lines on Rome’s duty to rule over the world as a “cruel” duty, because Romans must sacrifice the cultivation of fine arts for dominion; see: J. Griffin, “The Fourth Géorgie, Virgil and Rome”, G and R n.s. 26 (1979) 61-80, especially pp. 65-66. "zfiee: Darkness Visible, Berkeley 1976, 108 18*Austin suggests that the lines on the alii are intended for Greece (comment on 847-53); Norden and Conington also believe that the lines refer to Greece, the traditional enemy of Rome; it seems to me, however, that the explanation offered by Servius is more accurate: Virgil refers to Corinthians experts in bronze works, to Parians experts in marble, to Athenians experts in the art of speech and to the Egyptians and Chaldeems experts in astronomy (6.849). 188R.0.A.M. Lyne, Further Voices in Vergil’s .4eneid. Oxford 1987, 214-16. 110 The above analysis has shown that Anchises blends in his account prophetic truth, which is indicated by similarities in language and imagery with Jupiter’s prophecy, and fiction, which is indicated, on the one hand, by the inconsistencies existing between Anchises’ version of the fata and the accounts of Jupiter and Vul can, and on the other, by the compositional technique which follows the pattern of Evander’s story of the Satumian age. The purpose of Anchises’poem, as I have argued, is to make Aeneas memor of the future and the principles that should per tain to his life in Italy. The poem of Rome, eternal mistress of the world guided by rational principles, succeeds in making Aeneas share in the feelings of his fa ther: quo magia Italia mecum laetere reperta (718). The love for the future glory kindles Aeneas’ spirit {incenditque animum famae uenientis amove [889]), replacing his originally pessimistic outlook of life {diva cupido [721]). In book 7 Aeneas is portrayed happy to approach the river Tiber (35-36). And he willingly recognizes Italy as the domua and patria about which Anchises talked revealing, as he believes, the arcana fatorum (7. 122-23): hie domua, haec patria eat. genitor mihi talia namque (nunc repeto) Anchiaea fatorum arcana reliquit: E P IL O G U E Falsa insomnia In the introduction of the present dissertation I suggested that the narrator’s statement sei faba ad caelum mittunt insomnia Manes (6.896), is an authorial comment on the quality of Anchises’ speech within the dramatic context of the Aeneid. Virgil informs his reader that Anchises’ prophecy misrepresents the future in order to encourage and inspire Aeneas. This misrepresentation has been argued by a detailed discussion of the language Virgil uses in the delineation of Anchises in the underworld, as well as by a discussion of the content of his prophetic account (6.724-883). In the first chapter I have considered the portrayal of Anchises in the underworld. Anchises displays the characteristics of both the prophet and poet. His prophetic aspect emerges in his functional similarity with the other prophets of theAeneid and specifically the Sibyl. As the Sibyl knows the faia and nomina of the future generations (3.444), Anchises knows the fata and nomina of Aeneas’ descendants (6.681-83). Again, as the Sibyl guides Aeneas through the underworld and talks about the function of Tartarus, Anchises takes Aeneas on a mental tour through the regions of the underworld and of the future. On the other hand, the poetic side of Anchises emerges in the language he uses to introduce his account, which is appropriate to poetic/ didactic speech. I have argued that the verb memorare (6.716) signifies both the act of recollection of past information and recreation of 111 112 that information according to Anchises’ own will. Thus, I have shown, that the account of the underworld places of justice (6.739-47) is a recreation of the the Sibyl’s Tartarus (6.542-625) and Virgil’s poetic underworld (6.268-539, 628-709); or the account of the fata of Aeneas’ descendants is a recreation of the fata announced by Jupiter (1.257-96) and depicted by Vulcan on the shield (8.630-728). I have argued that Anchises follows poetic principles in his recreation of thefata, such as selection of the material to be presented, inversion in the order and distortion of the events narrated, which are set forth in Horace’s Ars Poetica 131-52. The aim of this poetic recreation is didactic and is indicated by the use of such verbs as expediam dictis or docebo (6.759). Thus Anchises has traits in common with Virgil and, therefore, is a prophet and poet in an undifferentiated sense. In the second chapter I considered the first section of Anchises’ speech which deals with the eschatological origins of the world (6.724-51). Anchises eis was noted blends prophetic truth and poetic fiction to describe the underworld as a place of penitence and purgation of the souls prior to their transmigration into new bodies (6.739-47). As a prophetic utterance the speech explains that the human soul derives from the rational cosmic soul (6.724-31), but by its contact with the body develops harmful emotions, such as fear, desire, sorrow and joy (6.733), which restrain the activity of its rational principle (6.733-34), and cause the descent of the soul to the underworld (6.735-38). As a poet, however, Anchises recreates the underworld as a purgatory divided into two regons: the place of justice, where the more impure souls undergo a first purgation by means of ventilation, washing and burning of the impure elements (6.739-43); and Elysium (6.744), in which are gathered both 113 the souls from the place of justice and the less impure souls (6.743-44). There, time purges any impure element remaining within the souls and they regain their original purity (6.745-47). This account concludes with the theory of reincarnation of the pure souls to new bodies (6.749-51). Finally, I have shown that the mm of the distorted presentation of the underworld is to remind Aeneas that irrational emotions brought about the death of his past, and are the causes of criminal actions, but also to represent the underworld as a place of misery. In the third chapter I discussed Anchises’ presentation of thefata of Aeneas’ descendants (6.756-883). I have shown by means of language and imagery that Anchises is, on the one hand, the prophet and declarer of Jupiter’sfata (1.2257-96). He declares to Aeneas the gradual evolution of the Roman nation to an imperialistic nation which dominates the earth (6.794-95), by means of expanding and analyzing Jupiter’s prophecy. He supplies, for instance, the names of the Alban kings (6.760- 76), which in Jupiter’s account were mentioned as gens Heciorea (1.273). Again, Anchises illustrated Jupiter’s will to make Rome an eternal empire (1.278-79) in the hyperbolic description of the earth as expanding beyond the Zodiac (6.795-96) and reaching the Ocean, whose spatial limits were unknown (6.796-97). On the other hand, Anchises’ account, as I have shown, is disordered, selective and distorts the events. The reign of Augustus, for instance, is placed after Romulus’ reign (6.777-800). Again, he mentions only the gloria of the new generation (6.756-58), and hides the luctus of the Roman nation (6.868). These compositional elements of Anchises’ narrative indicate that Anchises recreates the fata by the same process that a poet creates a poem out of old material (Horace, Ars Poetica 131-34). As a 114 poem has unity and coherence, similarly Anchises’ narrative is unified and coherent. By using the myth of the Golden Age as is narrated by Evander (8.314-32), Anchises represents the historical process of evolution of the Roman nation to a great empire at the time of Augustus as the gradual return of the Golden Age (6.760-794). He, thus, as I have argued, creates a mental monimentum of the virtues and vices that can build and destroy a nation, in order to instruct Aeneas in quo quemque modo fugiatque feratque laborem in Italy (6.892). Anchises thus becomes the exponent of a policy for Aeneas. And yet, his voice blends with Virgil’s voice, when he addresses the Romans and gives advice. By extension, then, Virgil becomes the exponent of a policy for the Roman empire. As Anchises blends prophetic truth and poetic fiction to instruct Aeneas, so too Virgl uses his poetry to instruct his contemporary audience in the civic virtues and suggest a way of administering the Roman empire. BIBLIOGRAPHY A rticles 1. A. Alfoldi, “Hasta-Summa Imperii: The spear as Embodiment of Sovereignty in Rome”, A JA 63 (1959) 1-25 2. M. von Albrecht, “Vergils Geschichtsauffassung in der ”Heldenschau”, W S 80-81 (1967-68) 156-82 3. A. Amory, “The Gates of Horn and Ivory”, Y CS 20 (1966) 3-57 4. R.G. Austin, “Virgil and the Sibyl”, CQ 21-24 (1927-1930) 100-105 5. R.P. Bond, “Aeneas and the Cardinal Virtues”, Prudentia 6 (1974) 67-91 6. P.F. Burke, Jr., “Roman Rites for the Dead and Aeneid 6”, C J 74 (1978-79) 220-28 7. F.E. Brenk, “The twofold gleam. Vergil’s golden age and the beginning of empire”. T hought 55 (1980) 81-97 8 . ------, “Auorum Spes et Purpurei Flores: The Eulogy of Marcellus in Aeneid VI”, A JP 107 (1986) 218-28 9. F.M. Brignoli, “La Porta d’ Avorio del Libro VI dell’ ’’Eneide””, G IF 7 (1954) 61-67 10. R.A. Brooks, “Discolor Aura. Reflections on the Golden Bough”, A JP 74 (1953) 260-80 11. W. Clausen, “An Interpretation of the Aeneid”, H S C P h 68 (1964) 139-47 12. F. Coarelli, “II Pantheon, 1’ apoteosi di Augusto e 1’ apoteosi di Romolo”, A R ID suppl. 10 (1983) 41-46 13. D. Del Corno, “I sognie la loro interpretazione nell’ eta dell’ impero”, A N RW II.16.2 pp.1605-18 115 116 14. S.L. Dyson, “The Distribution of Roman Republican Family Names in the Iberian Peninsula”, A nc.Soc. 12 (1981) 257-99 15. E. Doblhofer, “Zum Augustusbild des Horaz”, R hM ser.3 107 (1964) 325-39 16. R.J. Edgeworth, “The Ivory Gate and the Threshold of Apollo”, C&M 37 (1986) 145-60 17. S. Eitrem, “Le Sibylle de eûmes et Virgile”, 8 0 24 (1945) 88-120 18. D.C. Feeney, “History and Revelation in Vergil’s Underworld”, P C P S (1986) 1-24 19. E. Eïaenkel, “Additional Notes on the Prose of Ennius”, Eranos 49 (1951) 50-56 20. H. Gabelmann, “Zur Schlussszene auf dem Schild des Aeneas”, MDAX (R.A.) 93 (1986) 281-300 21. R.J. Getty, ^‘‘Insomnia in the Lexica”, A JP h 54 (1933) 1-28 22 . ------, “Romulus, Roma and Augustus in the sixth book of the Aeneid”, CP 45 (1950) 1-12 23. D. Gillis, “The Heroism of Anchises”, P P 218 (1984) 321-41 24. H.C. GotofF, “The Difficulty of the Ascent from Avernus”, C P 80 (1985) 35-40 25. J. Griffin, “The Fourth Géorgie, Virgil, and Rome,” G & R n.s.26 (1979) 61-80 26. M.Ch. Guittard, “Saturnia Terra: Mythe et Realite”, Caesarodunum 15 bis (1980) 177-86 27. D.E. Hahm, “Posidonius’ Theory of Historical Causation”, ANRW II.36.3 28. P.R. Hardie, “Cosmological Patterns in the Aeneid”, P a p e rs of th e Liver pool L atin S em inar 5 (1985) 85-97 29. P. Holt, “Who understands Vergil’s prophesies?”, C J 77 (1981-82) 303-14 117 30. N.M. Horsfall, “Virgil’s Roman Chronography: a reconsideration”, CQ n.s. 24 (1974) 111-15 31 . ------, “Virgil, History and the Roman Itadition”, P ru d e n tia 8 (1976) 73-90 32 . ------, “Virgil and the Conquest of Chaos”, Antichthon 15 (1981) 141-50 33. J. Himdt, “Der Traumglaube bei Homer”, GBLS 9 (1935) 34. R. Raster, “Macrobius and Servius: Verecundia and the Grammarian’s Rmc- tion” H S C P h 84 (1980) 219-62 35. A.H.M. Kessels, “Ancient Systems of Dream-Classification”, M nem osyne 22 (1969) 389-424 36. A. Kirsopp Michels, “The Insomnium of Aeneas”, CQ 31 (1981) 140-46 37. G.N. Knauer, “Die Aeneis und Homer”, H ypom nem ata 7 (1964) 38 . ------, “Vergil and Homer”, A N R W II.31.1 (1982) 870-90 39. W.F.J. Knight, “Animamque superbam”, C R 46 (1932) 55-57 40. E.G. KopfF & N. Marinates Kopff, “Aeneas: false dream of Messenger of the Manes (Aeneid 6.893ff.)”, Philologus 119-120 (1975-1976) 246-50 41. A. Kurfess, “Vergil und die Sibyllinen”, ZRG G 3 (1951) 253-57 42. R. Lamacchia, “Ciceros Somnium Scipionis und das sechste Buch der Aeneis”, R hM ser.3 107 (1964) 261-78 43. E. Laughton, “The Prose of Ennius”, Eranos 49 (1951) 35-49 44. H.W. Litchfield, “National Exempla Virtutis in Roman Literature”, H S C P h 25 (1914) 1-71 45. R.B. Lloyd, “The Character of Anchises in the A e n e ii\ T A PhA 88 (1957) 44-55 118 46. L.A. Madsay, “Three Levels of Meaning in Aeneid VI”, T A P hA 86 (1955) 180-89 47. E. Manni, “A proposito del culto di Saturne”, A thenaeum (1938) 223-32 48 . ------, “La leggenda dell’ eta dell’ ore nella polotica del Cesari”, A e R (1938) 108-20 49. R. Merkelbach, “Aeneas in Cumae”, M H 18 (1961) 83-99 50. D.H. Mills, “’’Sacred Space” in Vergil’s Aeneid”, V ergilius 29 (1983) 34-46 51. E. Norden, “Ein Panegyricus auf Augustus in Vergils Aeneis”, R hM 54 (1899) 466-82 52. J.K. Newman, “The Concept of nates in Augustan Poetry”, Collection Lato- m us 89 (1967) 53. J. Oberg, “Some Interpretative Notes on Virgil’s Aeneid, book VI”, Eranos 85 (1987) 105-109 54. B. Otis, “Three Problems of the Aeneid 6”, H S C P h 90 (1959) 165-79 55. A. Pagliaro, “/pse manu mortem inueniam (Verg. Aen. II 645)”, H elikon 1 (1961) 139-47 56. V. Poschl, “Virgil und Augustus”, ANRW II.31.2 (1981)709-27 57. A.E. Raymond, “What was Anchises’ Ghost to Dido? (Virgil Aeneid 4.427)”, P hoenix 6 (1952) 66-68 58. K.J. Reckford, “Some Appearances of the Golden Age” , T A P hA 89 (1958) 112-31 59. N. Reed, “The Gates of Sleep in Aeneid 6”, CQ n.s.23 (1973) 311-15 60. E. Remy, “Le Mouvement Dramatique dans les vers 752-886 du Livre VI de 1’ Eneide”, LEC 1 (1932) 103-16 61. I.S. Ryberg, “Vergil’s Golden Age”, TA PhA 89 (1958) 112-31 119 62. W. Schetter, “Das Gedicht des Ausonius uber die Traume”, RhM ser.3 104 (1961) 366-78 63. M.W. Schiebe, “The Satum of the Aeneid- "Tradition or Innovation?” V ergilius 32 (1986) 43-60 64. E. Skard, “Zur Sprachlichen Entwicklung des Sallust”, SO 39 (1964) 13-37 65 . , “Die Heldenschau in Vergils Aeneis”, SO 40 (1965) 53-65 66. F. Solmsen, “The World of the Dead in book 6 of the Aeneid”, C P 67 (1972) 31-41 67. R.J. Tarrant, “Aeneas and the Gates of Sleep” , C P 77 (1982) 51-55 68. M.E. Taylor, “Primitivism in Virgil”, A J P h 76 (1955) 261-78 69. S.V. Tracy, “The Marcellus Passage (Aeneid 6.860-886) and Aeneid 9-12”, C J 70 (1974) 37-42 70. J.H. Waszink, “Vergil and the Sibyl of Cumae”, M nem osyne set. 4.1 (1948) 43-58 71. R.D. Williams, “The Pageant of Roman Heroes- Aeneid 6.756-853”, in Cicero and Virgil, pp.207-17 72. T.P. Wiseman, “Legendary Genealogies in Late Republican Rome”, G&R 21 (1974) 73. A. Wlosok, “Et poeticae figmentum et philosophiae veritatem”, LF 106 (1983) 13-19 74. ------, “Gemina Doctrina: On Allegorical Interpretation”, Papers of the L iverpool L atin S em inar 5 (1985) 75-84 Books and Commentaries 1. J. Adam, The Republic of Plato vol.II, Cambridge 1963 2. R.D. Archer-Hind, The Timaeus of Plato. New York 1973 3. Artemidorus Dalmatianus, Onirocriticon Libri V. R.Hercher, Leipzig 1864 120 4. St. Augustine, De Ciuitate Dei. Loeb Classical Library 5. R.G. Austin, Aeneidos Liber VI with commentary, Oxford 1977 6. G. Binder, Aeneas und Augustus, Meisenheim, Hain 1971 7. E. Block, The Effects of Divine Manifestation on the Reader’s Perspective in Vergil’s Aeneid. New York 1981 8. H.E. Butler, The Sixth Book of the Aeneid. Oxford 1920 9. Calcidius, Plato Latinus Timaeus. ed. J.H.Waszink, London & Leiden 1975 10. L. Campbell, Sophistes and Politicus of Plato. Oxford 1867 11. W.A. Camps, An Introduction to Virgil’s Aeneid, Oxford 1965 12. J. Carcopino, Virgile et le Mystère de la IV Eglogue, Paris 1930 13. Cato, Les Origines, Paris 1986 (Bude) 14. J. Conington& H. Nettleship, The Works of Vergil, with a commentary, Hildesheim 1963 15. Diodorus Siculus, The Library of History, Loeb Classical Library 16. Dionysius of Halicarnassus, The Roman Antiquities, Loeb Classical Library 17. Dio Cassio Cocceianus, Historiarum Romanorum Quae Supersunt, ed.U.Ph. Boissevair, Berlin 1955 18. G. Dumézil, Jupiter, Mars, Quirinus, Gallimard 1941 19. ------, Horace et les Curiaces. Gallimard 1942 20. P. Dubois, History, Rhetorical Description and the Epic, New Jersey 1982 21. D. Earl, The Moral and Political Tradition of Rome. Ithaca 1967 22. M. Eliade, The Myth of the Eternal Return, or Cosmos and History, trnsl. from French W.R.Trask, Princeton U. Press 1954 121 23 . ------, Patterns in Comparative Religion, tmsl. R.Sheed, London, New York 1958 24. Eustathius, Commentarii ad Homeri Odysseam, Hildesheim 1960 25. Florus, Epitome of Roman History, Loeb Classical Library, Cambridge, Mas sachusetts 1931 26. P.P. Fulgentius, Expositio Virgilianae Continentiae. ed. R.Helm, Stuttgart 1970 27. G.K. Galinsky, Aeneas, Sicily and Rome. Princeton 1969 28. A. van Gennep, The Rites of Passage, transi. M.B. Vizedom and G.L. CafFee, Chicago 1960 29. Graecorum De Re Onirocritica Scriptorum Reliquiae, ed. D.Del Como, Mi lan 1969 30. P.R. Hardie, Virgil’s Aeneid. Cosmos and Imperium, Oxford 1986 31. R. Heinze, Virgils Epische Technik. Leipzig 1903 32. C.G. Heyne, P. Virgilii Maronis Opera Omnia. London 1819 33. Homerus, Opera, ed. T.W.Allen Oxford 1908 34. J. Hubaux, Les Grands Mythes de Rome. Paris 1945 35. ------, Rome et Veies. Paris 1958 36. H. Jeanmaire, La Sibylle et la Retour de 1’ age d’ or. Paris, Leroux 1939 37. W.R. Johnson, Darkness Visible. Berkeley, Los Angeles, London 1976 38. F. Klingner, Virgil, Zurich & Stuttgard 1967 39. Livy, Ab Urbe Condita. Loeb Classical Library, Cambridge, Massachusetts 1912 40. S. Mack, Patterns of Time in Vergil, Connecticut 1978 122 41. Macrobius. Commentariorum in Somnium Scipionis Libri duo, ed. L. Scarpa, Padova 1981 42. M. McCormick, Eternal Victory, Cambridge 1986 43. E. Norden, P. Vergilius Maro Aeneis Buch VI. repr. Stuttgard 1976 44 . ------, Agnostos Theos. Leipzig, Berlin 1923 45 . ------, Die Antike Kunstprosa, Leipzig, Berlin 1923 46. R.M. Ogilvie, A commentary on Livy books 1-5. Oxford 1965 47. J. J. O’Hara, Death and the Optimistic Prophecy in % argil’s Aeneid, Prince ton 1990 48. B.Otis, Virgil, a study in civilized poetry, Oxford 1963 49. Ovid, Metamorphoses, Loeb Classical Library, Cambridge, Massachusetts 1984 50. T.E. Page, P. Vergili Maronis Bucolica et Georgica, London 1974 51. H.W. Parke, Sibyls and Sibylline Prophecy in Classical Antiquity, London and New York 1988 52. Poetry and Prophecy, ed. J.L. Kugel, Ithaca and London 1990 53. J.-L. Pomathios, Le Pouvoir Politique et sa Representation dans 1’ Eneide de Virgile, Latomus 199, Bruxelles 1978 54. V.Poschl, The Art of Vergil, transi, by G.Seligson, Ann Arbor 1962 55. M.C.J.Putnam, The poetry of the Aeneid. Cambridge Mass. 1965 56. R.J. Quiter, Aeneas und die Sibylle, B eitrage z u r K lassischen Philologie 162, 1984 57. H.J. Rose, The Eclogues of Vergil, Berkeley and Los Angeles 1942 58. R.D. Schlunk, The Homeric Scholia and the Aeneid. Ann Arbor 1974 123 59. Scholia Graeca in Homeri Odysseam, v.2, ed. G.Dindorf, Oxford 1855 60. Scriptores Rerum Mythicarum Latini Ties Romae Nuper Reperti, ed. G.H.Bode, Hildesheim 1968 61. Servius, Servii Grammatici qui feruntur in Vergilium carmina commentarii. ed. G. Thilo-H.Hagen, hildesheim 1961 62. J.B. Solodow, The World of Ovid’s ’’Metamorphoses”, Chapel Hill 1988 63. A. Thornton, The Living Universe. M nem osyne Suppl. 46, 1976 64. M. Terentius Varro, Antiquitatum Rerum Diuinarum Libri I XIV XV XVI. ed. R.Agaiid, Leipzig 1898 65. P. Vergili Maronis Opera, ed. R.A.B.Mynors, Oxford 1969 66. Virgile Eneide tom.II Livres V-VIII. Paris 1978 67. R.D. Williams, The Aeneid of Virgil: Books 1-6. Macmillan, London 1972 68. ------, P. Vergili Maronis Aeneidos Liber Quintus Oxford, Clarendon Press 1960 69. S. Ford Wiltshine, Public and Private in Vergil’s Aeneid. Amherst 1989