Locus Communis, Laus Legum and Laus Locorum: Rhetorical Exercises As a Model for Propertius, Book Iii I

■ 72-4676

UNDERWOOD, Jr., John Thornton, 1945- LOCUS COMMUNIS, LAUS LEGUM AND LAUS LOCORUM: RHETORICAL EXERCISES AS A MODEL FOR PROPERTIUS, BOOK III I

The Ohio State University, Ph.D., 1971 Language and Literature, classical

University Microfilms, A XEROX Company, Ann Arbor, Michigan1

John Thornton Underwood, Jr.

1971

-c

THIS DISSERTATION HAS BEEN MICROFILMED EXACTLY AS RECEIVED X,0CfJ5 COMUNIS, LAUS LEGUH AND LAUS LCCORUMs

RHETORICAL EXERCISES AS A MODEL

FOR PROPERTIUS

BOOK III

DISSERTATION

Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Pnilosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University

John Thornton Underwood, Jr*, B*A., M»A* ******

The Ohio State University 1971

Approved by PLEASE NOTE:

Some Pages have indistinct print. Filmed as received.

UNIVERSITY MICROFILMS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I wish to thank my advisors, Professors John Davis, Mark Morford and Charles Babcock, for their advice and suggestions offered during the preparation of this dissertation, and my friends for their encouragement and good wishes.

ii VITA

April 9, 19^5 Born - Brooklyn, New York

1967 . . . . B.A« (Honors), Lehigh University Bethlehem, Pennsylvania

1967-1971 University Fellow, Department of Classics, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio

1968 M.A*, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio

FIELDS OF STUDY

Major Field: Latin Poetry

Latin Literature: Professors Kenneth M. Abbott, John T, Davis, Mark P. 0* Morford, Carl C. Schlara and John B. Titchener

Greek Literature: Professors Bernard C. Earmann, Clarence A. Forbes, David E. Hahm, Robert J. Lenardon. and John W. Shumaker

Philological Studies: Professors Kenneth M. Abbott, Clarence A. Forbes, Mark P« 0* Morford and John B. Titchener

iii TABLE OF CONTENTS

page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS...... '...... ii

VITA ...... ill

INTRODUCTION ...... 1

Chapter

I. THE LOCUS COMMUNISi RHETORICAL BACKGROUND.... 11

II.' THE LOCUS COMMUNIS IN PROSE AUTHORS ...... 23

III. THE ELEGIES MODELLED ON RHETORICAL EXERCISES . . 37

CONCLUSION * ...... 89

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY...... 93 INTRODUCTION

Selected for examination here are five elegies from Book III of Propertius' elegies• Ify purpose in this study is to show the connections between these five elegies and the rhetorical exercises of the schools, particularly the locus communis in vitia dorectus with regard to elegies 3*11, 3*13 &nd 3*19, the laus legum with regard to elegy 3,1b and the panegyric, especially the laus locorum. with regard to elegy 3*22. The locus communis is cited as an exer cise in the Controversiao of the elder Seneca, and Quintilian lists all three of these forms.^ I hope to demonstrate that Propertius, seeking new forms for the composition of elegy, chose to model the five poems on those exercises which he had probably studied as a boy.

Book III differs greatly from the first two books of elegies, and indeed from the Latin elegy as a whole, in that Propertius intro duces a variety of new subjects for his poems. Propertius still asserts his claim to be a poet of love (see, for example, 3*2*2,

3*3*^7-52, 3*9*i*'3“^) » yQt the book contains poems on literary theory

(3*1, 3*2, 3*3, 3*9), poems on patriotic themes (3«^» 3*11, 3*22), narrative olegy (3*15 and 3*17), two enicedeia (3*7 and 3*18), in all of which the erotic associations are minimized. W. A. Camps, whose notes on Propertius1 third book have inspired much of this

^See Chapter I for discussion of the locus communis. Chapter III for the laus legum and laus locorum. study, has remarked, "Hence it is clear that in this Book the

author is no lover in search of a means of expression, but a poet 2 in search of subjects."

In Books I and II Propertius is concerned with exploring the

qualities of the various experiences he has had with Cynthia; the

great majority of these poems are connected with Propertius' personal

involvement in some sort of erotic relationship, and the poet offers

us his personal reflections and emotional responses. Only a few of

these poems deal with themes outside of the conventionally erotic

subject matter of the Latin elegy. In Book I the last two elegies depart from these conventions; elegy 21 is an epitaph for a man who

died in the Perusine war, and elegy 22 is Propertius' sphraflis poem

for the Monoblblos. In'Book II elegies 1, 10 and 3^ deal with the

relationships between elegy and the other literary genres, elegy 12

is a highly conventionalized description of Cupid, and in elegy 31

Propertius describes the dedication of the Portico of Apollo on the

Palatine. Those historical and descriptive elegies foreshadow the developments in Books III and IV which include more poems on similar

topics. Of the twenty-five elegies in Book III, less than half deal with erotic situations typical of the Latin love elegy. Propertius hints at his desiro to writo on subjects more serious than those of

elegy in 3»5»22ff., where he claims to wish to write on philosophical

and scientific questions, and in 2.10, perhaps half-jokingly, he promises that one day he will try epic. Book III marks a definite

2 Propertius, BieRiest Book III, ed. by V/. A. Camps (Cambridge; Cambridge University Press, l§6& )» p. 2. 3 break with the tradition, and it serves as a bridge to Book IV, where

Propertius begins on a new note, promising to write on Roman themes

(4.1.69-70)*^ 'The chief differences separating Book IV from the remainder are the new themes and the increasingly objective character of the poems. The five elegies chosen for analysis lie somewhere between the traditional love elegy and the Innovative poems of Book IV in that the poet has done away with the conventional erotic themes and situations but has not entirely adopted the purely objective stance of the aetiological poems. I have isolated these five elegies on the basis of their having been modelled on known rhetorical exercises and conforming in large part to the examples preserved in prose authors as well as to the rules established by the Latin rhetoricians. Elegies

3.11, 3*13» 3*1^ and 3-19 bear some relationship to the erotic elegies of Books I and II in that Propertius introduces his subject with a motif drawn from the stock of elegiac commonplaces, but in developing his subject he turns to wider Issues and concerns. Thus, while elegy

3*11 begins with the theme of servitium amoris. Propertius includes exemola of figures whose servitium is of different kindsi Hercules, who was not only servus amoris but also a literal servus; the nation of Bactria, which Semiramis compelled into servitium; and Rome, whose fate would have paralleled Bactria1s had they not found leadership under Augustus. A number of other elegies in Book III show a similar departure from the subject matter of conventional elegy; the erotic treatment of subject matter is absent or minimized in the first four

^Seo F. Solmsen, "Propertius and Horace," CFh 43 (19^8) 105-109 for a discussion of the development of Propertius* literary theory. elegies on literary topics, the dirge for Paetus (3*7), Propertius* recusatio (3.9), and the dirge for Marcellus (3*18). It is apparent that the poet is moving in new directions, perhaps in the knowledge that he has exhausted the possibilities of the conventional themes and motifs of the erotic elegy.

ELegies 3.11, 3»13» 3»1^» 3*19 and 3*22 are highly influenced by rhetorical practice. A. A. Day, commenting on rhetoric in Latin elegy, says, "The relation between rhetoric and poetry constitutes a difficult problem which may be thus expressed: poetry began as the instructress of rhetoric and came to be the disciple. The question however is further complicated in that we cannot trace the victory of rhetoric from, for example, Gorgias to Quintilian, since in every age rhetoric and poetry were reciprocally indebted."^ VJhile the locus communis, the model for three of those elegies, flourished in Roman oratory, it can be traced back to methods of oratory prac tised by the Sophists, but it is difficult, if not impossible, to demonstrate that it was inspired by poetry. Likewise, the exercises laus legum and laus locorum can be traced back at least to Hellenistic times,^ but again it is impossible to ascertain poetic influence in their development. The rhetorical associations surrounding the five elegies chosen for study are based partly on this confused tradition of reciprocal influences involving rhetoric and poetry, but are due also to Propertius' choice of a rhetorical exercise as a model, as

^A. A. Day, The Origins of the Latin Love-elegy (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1938), P* 6 9.

^Quintilian will be demonstrated in the third chapter below.

I have designated the subjects of the elegies as follows!

3*11, potentia feminarum: 3*13* avaritia; 3»1^» laus legis Soartanae. a poem in praise of the practice of Spartan girls competing in athletic contests in the nude, thus eliminating cause for shame or deception in erotic situations; 3.19* libido feminarum: 3*22, laus Italiae.

The subject of 3*1^ stems naturally from the traditional erotic themes. Elegy 3*22 exhibits a certain amount of patriotic pride, as does the latter half of 3*H» describing the Roman victory over

Cleopatra, but the subject dominating 3*11* as well as the subject matter of 3*13 and 3*19* owes much to popular philosophy and moralizing literature

There are certain resemblances between the locus communis in vitia derectus and the Hellenistic diatribe involving first and fore most common subject matter, but also methods of composition and rhetor ical influences. Oltramaro suggests that the tradition of diatribe n is clearly traceable in Lucilius, Varro and Horace, but he remarks that in the elegists such influence is not necessarily direct, stemming rather from a gradual infiltration of themes and techniques of the diatribe into Roman literature, beginning with the comic playwrights, thus making it possible for writers, especially poets, to Incorporate material from popular philosophy into their own works without turning

^See Jean-Paul Boucher, I&udes sur Prooerce (Paris! Editions E. de Boccard, 19^5)> pp* 128ff., A. Oltramare, Lcs Orlpiines de la Diatribe romaino (Lausanne: Librairie Payot et Cie., 1926), p. 202,

^Oltramare, Les Orlglnes, pp* 91ff*» 97ff*, and I38ff* o directly to tho original sources. The themos of elegies 3*11, 3*13 and 3.19 are above all commonplace and quite unremarkable. Propertius treats them in a conventional way, but this use of a rhetorical con vention is new to the elegiac tradition.

These elegies are remarkable in that Propertius chose to dis regard the traditional erotic themes and motifs in favor of a fresh approach, borrowing from a new source. Rhetorical and literary con ventions abound in Latin elegy as a whole; likewise the means of expression derives in large part from the rhetorical tradition.

ELegies 3*11, 3*13, 3»i^» 3-19 and 3*22 not depart from tho elegiac tradition in terms of basic method of composition, vocabulary and use of conventional material. The building block effect of the end-stopped couplet, employment of transitional particles to indicate the begin ning of a new section, e.g. quare, the use of simile, metaphor and exemplum, are all used with similar purpose in these five elegies.

Likewise, these elegies exhibit syntactical patterns, verse symmetries, the use of cola, internal rhyme, assonance and. alliteration, all basic elegiac techniques.9 It is the subject matter atri treatment of it which are new and innovative. Three of the elegies are sharp denunci ations of vices, two are expressions of praise, one for an admirable cus tom, the other for Italy. All five elegies go beyond the erotic common places of the Latin elegy towards discussion of larger issues. Elegies

®01tramaro, Les Origines. pp. 199ff*» and p. 6 7*

^For a more complete discussion of the elegiac couplet, see L. P. Wilkinson, Ovid Recalled (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1955), pp. 27-^3. and 3.19, which deal with themes often associated with conven tional Latin elegiac composition,*'® concentrate on less specifically erotic aspects of each theme: 3«i^ on the athletic prowess of the

Spartan girls together with general comments on the decline in Roman morality, 3*19 on the consequences of libido, including punishment.

Propertius deals with questions of a moral nature in other elegies, as do Tibullus and Ovid. But in these cases the poet's com ments are related closely to the dramatic situation of the poem, to the addressee in particular, or to the erotic conventions of the genre.

A broad, generalized comment may be expressed in the form of a sententia. but it is never developed into a complete poem, as in Propertius

3*11 or 3.I3. Thus in elegy 1.2, where Propertius attacks feminine luxuria. he may say,

naturae decus mercato perdere cultu, nec sinere in propriis membra nitere bonis? crede mihi, non ulla tua est medicina figurae; nudus Amor formae non amat artificera. (lines 5-8 ) but the remarks, though generalized, refer specifically to Cynthia, and the tone of the elegy is light-hearted and only half-serious.

Similarly, elegy 2.16 deals with avaritia in a serious fashion; the poem would resemble elegy 3*13 were it not for the constant reference to Propertius' relationship with Cynthia. This poem makes use of generalized comments and exemola to establish the topic, and concludes on a universal note (lines ^7-5^), illustrating Jupiter's wrath at faithless women, but the poem lacks the wider application of elegy 3*13

^Compare Propertius 3*1^ with 2.15.11ff., and Ovid Amores l*5»9ff*5 Propertius 3*19 with 3*8 and Ovid Amores 1.7 and 3»?» The case is similar with Tibullus. His elegies are concerned with specific instances and individuals, and although there is a tendency to establish facts or draw parallels by reference to univer- sals and citation of exomula. the poems remain more specific than

Propertius 3»11» 3-13 and 3»19» Tibullus 1.10 comes close to being a locus communis on the evils of warfare. The poem begins on a note similar to those elegies of Propertius denouncing vice: quls fuit, horrendos primus qul protullt enses? The evils of warfare are described, and after line 27 Tibullus presents a picture of life without war, culminating in a hymn to Pax. The poem concludes with a description of tho only permissible type of warfare, the bellum Veneris. The poem bears resemblances to Propertius 3*13 in its use of descriptive passages serving as exempla. the general and universal nature of the subject, here Tibullus' hatred of war, and in the adoption of indignatio as the governing emotion, but in tho end Tibullus' poem dwells too much on his own situation to stand as a parallel to Propertius' impersonal elegies. Propertius used motifs from the stock of erotic commonplaces to establish a point of departure, but Tibullus works in reverse fashion, condemning warfare so as to provide opportunity for erotic relationships, thus making the erotic commonplaces at the close of the poem the important aspect of the elegy as a whole.

It appears that Propertius' three elegies, 3«Hj 3*13 and 3*19, are the first to depart from the personal involvement of the poet in denunciation of vice in a general and universal fashion; the form in which this is done is identifiable with contemporary rhetorical theory and practice, the locus communis in vitia derectus.being the model. The elegies are without addressee, and they do not deal with isolated Instances* The elegies are directed against the vice itself and all of those guilty of committing it. These features, plus the fact that the poet devotes an entire poem, rather than part, to the subject, constitute the innovative nature of elegies 3*11 f 3*13 and

3*19* The two laudes, elegies 3*1^ and 3*22, have no counterparts in prior Latin elegy, and these are similarly innovative in their departure from elegiac convention. In elegy 3*1^ the poet does not refer to Cynthia or any other mistress in his discussion of circum stances at Rome, and.the issue at hand extends beyond the specific relationship between lover and mistress to a consideration of national morality. In elegy 3*22.7-3^ Propertius ignores the addressee, Tullus, in his praise of Italy, making his points instead by comparison and contrast of Italy with the rest of the world.

In identifying the former group of elegies as loci communes I use the term to indicate a particular form of composition, as defined in the first chapter below. I do not use the term to indicate "common place" thought, theme, image, etc., but rather a specific structural form. Elegy is a highly conventional genre, and there are many ele ments which are commonplace, e.g. tho metaphors of the lover as a soldier or slave, the dramatic situations of the paraclausithyron and poems of rejection, and the themes of carne diem and the rota amoris these and others occur frequently throughout the elegies of Propertius,

Tibullus and Ovid. The elegiac locus communis, laus logum and laus locorum are not conventional forms; the subject matter and . treatment differ markedly from the usual erotic elegy, and the choice of model, 10 the rhetorical exercises of the schools, appears to be unprecedented*

All are innovations in the tradition of the Latin elegy, indicative of Propertius* desire to find new forms for incorporation into the genre• CHAPTER I

THE LOCUS COMimiS i RHETORICAL BACKGROUND

The locus communis was employed widely in ancient oratory, and

the practice of introducing this independently composed piece into

speeches seems to date back as far as the Sophistic orators* Corax and Tisias, living in the fifth century B. C., were tho first to establish a set of rules governing rhetorical practice,* and this

system differed from that of the Sophists which relied on the exem

plar speech and the locus communis * Referring to Aristotle, Cicero notes that the Sophists Protagoras and Gorgias composed passages

similar to the locus communis as defined by the Roman rhetoricians of tho first century B. C.i

itaque ait Aristoteles . . • scriptasauo fuisse et paratas a Protagora rerum inlustrium disputa tions s, qui nunc communes appellantur loci; quod idem fecisse Gorgiam, euem singularum rerum laudes vituperationesque conscripsisso, quod iudicaret hoc oratoris esse maxime proprium, rem augere posse laudando vituperandoque rursus affli- gore; huic Antiphontem Rhamnusium similia quaedam habuisse conscripta .... Brutus 12.^6-^7

The Sophists did not practise according to a systematized and uniform set of rhetorical principles, but the technique of inserting loci communes was apparently.not uncommon. The rhetorical studies of Aristotle and Cicero and passages in Isocrates distinguish two

*Aristotle apud Cicero Brutus 12,*k5;

11 12 types of rhetorical education, one method based on theoretical con cepts, where rules were given the student to aid him in composition, the other based on the principle of providing exemplar speeches to be memorized and used as needed.

Aristotle speaks disapprovingly of those teachers who provide exemplar speeches:

kci yap xiLv nept xoOs epioxixoOs Adyous lua- dapvodvxmv oyoia x ls ?iv n ncufieuats xij Topyi'ou rtpayyaxetTot* Adyous yap01 y£v pnTopixoOs ot 6£ epaJTiyriKoOs e6i6ocrav ExyavSdveiv, els obs tcAelo- tcJmls eyninxELV exaxcpoi xobs aAAtfAwv Adyous• Sophistical Refutations I83b36ff.

So, too, Isocrates:

xb y&p u

Gorgias, along with teachers following similar methods, is contrasted with the theoretical rhetoricians, Tisias, Thrasymachus, Theodorus and others (Aristotle Sophistical Refutations I83b32ff•)• Cicero also distinguishes the two traditions, grouping together Protagoras,

Gorgias and Antiphon as writers of exemplar speeches and loci communes, and Corax, Tisias, Theodorus and Lysias as theoretical rhetoricians

(Brutus 12.1+7-48).2

Tho locus communis was a basic element in the composition of

O A number of exemplar speeches have survived, and among those that might be mentioned are the three tetralogies of Antiphon, Gorgias' Encomium of Helen and Defense of Palamedes; see also George Kennedy, The Art of Persuasion in Greece (Princeton: Princeton University Press, W i T T u r ------a speech, and there apparently existed collections of loci communes which were applicable to all parts of a speech. The corpus of Anti phon contains three fragments from a collection of prooemia and epilogues, and a collection of prooemia suitable for political oratory is found in the corpus of Demosthenes. These passages were written out, to be used by orators as an aid in the composition of speeches, or, conceivably, to be borrowed verbatim.

Passages in three speeches of Antiphon, Prosecution of the Step mother for Poisoning 12ff., On the Murder of Herodes and On the Choreutes 27ff.» deal with the question of whether certain actions of the speaker, such as his identification of witnesses, surrender of slaves fbr examination, acceptance or refusal of some other challenge, should or should not have had a bearing on his guilt. While not repeated verbatim in each account, the passages are so similar that one can assume that this was a standard plea made by the speaker in defence of his innocence.

In two other pairs of passages, however, the wording is more closely matched. On the Murder of Herodes 87-89 is concerned with the responsibilities binding on both parties in a suit, and this passage is repeated in On the Choreutes 3-6• Similarly, On the Murder of Herodos 14, concerned with tho praise of laws pertinent to that case, is repeated in On the Choreutes 2. Because of the extremely close similarities in theme and language, it seems probable that these passages were composed independently of the speech and inserted where appropriate.

The vrord locus was used in two distinct senses in Latin rhetor- leal theory. On the one hand it referred to the places where a cer

tain line of argumentation might best be applied; these were the loci

argumentorum or sedes argumentorum.^ Locus was also used to denote locus communis, a passago not associated solely with the case in question, but rather of a more general nature. Two kinds of locus communis may be distinguished, one of which was closely related to

the thesis, a kind of exercise involving a question of broad and general nature, such as an providentia mundus regatur.(Quintilian

3*5.6), quemadmodum in oaupertate vivendum (Cicero Part, orat.

18.6 3) and rusticane vita an urbana potior (Quintilian 2.4.24),

Such an exercise became a suasoria with the introduction of a charac ter about whom the argument turned, e.g. Deliberat Alexander, an

Oceanum naviget (Seneca Suasorjae l). The other type of locus com munis was a disquisition in praise or condemnation of certain virtues or vices, or about some quality or abstract concept, such as peace or slavery, which most orators would handle in similar fashion.

The author of the Rhetorics ad Horennlum deals largely with the first type of locus, the locus argumentorum« In his discussion of approbatio he says!

ea habet locos proprios atquo communes .... communes sunt qui alia in causa ab reo, alia ab accusatoro tractantur .... communes loci

-^See Quintilian 10,201 where the distinctions between "places11 and "commonplaces" are made clear; "excutiamus nunc argumentorum locos; quanquam quibusdam hi quoque, de quibus supra dixi, videntur. locos appollo non, ut vulgo nunc intelliguntur, in luxuriam et adulterium ot similia; sed sedes argumentorum, in quibus latent, ex quibus sunt petenda." sunt cum accusatoris turn defensoris; abs testibus, contra testes; abs quaestionibus, contra quaestiones; ab argumentis, contra argumenta; ab rumoribus, contra rumores. Rhatorica ad Herennium 2,6.9

Later in the same book he enumerates the loci communes appropriate to amolificatlo{

amplificatio est res quae per locum eommunem instigationis auditorum causa sumitur. loci communes ex decern praeceptis commodissime sumentur adaugendi criminis causa. ibid. 2.30.47

Then follows the list of the ten oraecepta (2*30.48-49)• Of these* the first deals with the interest which the various forces and figures of authority take in a case;

primus locus sumitur ab auctoritate, cum commemoramus quantae curae ea res fuerit dis immortalibus aut maioribus nostris, regibus, civitatibus, nationibus, hominibus sapientis- simis, senatui; item maxime quo modo da his rebus legibus sanctum sit.

The eighth deals with the enormity of the crimes

octavus locus est quo ostendimus non vulgare, sed singular© esse maleficium, spurcum, nefarium, inusitatum; quo maturius et atrocius vindicandum est.

The ninth compares the act in question with crimes recognized every where as crimes i

nonus locus est qui constat ex peccatorum con- paratione, quasi cum dicemus maius esse male ficium stupraro ingenuum quam sacrum legare, quod alterum propter egestatem, alterum propter intemperantem superbiam fiat.

These three praecepta have an application beyond any particular case or trial, and arguments developed along these lines are transferable to other cases. The second praecentum, however, deals with how the 16 particular act then under discussion or judgment affects others; like wise the third pracceptum. dealing with the question of how it would be if all men acted in the same way as the man charged, is applicable only to the case at hand,, and the locus cannot be made to fit the circumstances of another case without changing the contents. The same can be sho>m 'with regard to the fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh and tenth oraecepta. The definition of locus communis in the Rhetorica ad Herennium 2.6.9 is difficult to reconcile with the list of ten loci communes which the author of the treatise says should be used in amplificatio.

Cicero improves upon the Rhetorica ad Herennium in discussing indlgnatio in Do inventione 1.53»100“5^*105» where the ton praeceota of the Rhetorica ad Herennium are repeated, but as the basis for loci of an undefined type * The difficulty in the Rhetorica ad Herennium

2.30.48-49 is now made more clear by permitting one to read locus communis in connection with oraecepta 1 , 8 and 9» but locus proprius in connection with the remainder. The problems of relating the cir cumstances of the second praeceotum in the Rhetorica ad Herennium to a locus communis employed in two distinct and separate speeches are great, for the locus would have to be largely rewritten, which ought not to be tho case for a genuine locus communis. Cicero*s restatement in the Do inventions eliminates- this confusion.

In another passage in the De inventions Cicero discusses the three types of locus. From this passage it is clear both that the locus communis was transferable from speech to speech and that the locus communis as Cicero understood it dealt with themes of a 17 general naturet

orani autem in causa pars argumentorum est adiuncta ei causae solum, quae dicitur, et ex ipsa ita ducta, ut ab ea separatim in omnes eiusdem generis causas transferri non satis commode possit; pars autem est pervagatior et aut in omnes eiusdem generis aut in plerasque causas adcommodata. haec ergo argumenta, quae transferri in multas causas possunt, locos communes nominamus. nam locus communis aut certae rei quandam continet amplificationem, ut si quis hoc velit ostondere, eum, qui parentem necarit, maximo supplicio esse dignum; quo loco nisi perorata et probata causa non est utendum; aut dubiae, quae ex contrario quoque habeat probabiles rationes argumentandi, ut suspicionibus credi oportere, et contra, suspicionibus credi non oportere. 2.14.47-15.48

The first clause (omni • . . commode possit) deals with the locus ' proprius. and then Cicero shifts to the two kinds of locus communis; this distinction is repeated, perhaps more clearly, in the De oratore t

consequentur etiam illi loci, qui quamquam proprli causarum et inhaerentes in earum nervis osse debent, tamcn quia de universa re tractari solent, communes a veteribus nominati sunt; quorum partim habent vitiorum et peccatorum acrem quamdam cum amplifi- catione incusationem aut querelam, contra quam dici nihil solet nec potest, ut in depeculatorem, in proditorem, in parricidam; quibus uti confirmatis criminibus oportet, aliter enim ieiuni sunt atque inanes; alii autem habent deprecationem aut misera- tionein; alii vero ancipitis disputationes, in quibus de universe genere in utramque partem disseri copi- ose licet. 3.27.106-107

The ancipitis disputationes in the above passage admit discussion from a number of different points of view, and seem to be very closoly related to the rhetorical thesis, described above. It is tho former typo of locus, de universa re, contra quam dici nihil solot nec potest, which will be explored more fully in the following 18 chapters, with examples drawn from Cicero and the early declaimers, since it is this type of locus communis which I believe influenced the composition of several elegies of Propertius' third book.

The elder Seneca provides testimony to the fact that the locus communis was an independently composed piece used frequently as an exercise. In the preface to the first book of Controversiao he refers to Latro's method of composition*

solebat autem et hoc genere exercitationis uti, ut aliquo die nihil praeter epiphonemata scriberet, aliquo die nihil praeter enthymemata, aliquo die nihil praeter has translaticias quas proprie sententias dlcimus, quae nihil habent cum ipsa controversia impliedturn, sed satis apte et alio trans- feruntur, tamquam quae de fortune, de crudelitate, de saeculo, de divitiis dicuntur; hoc genus sententiarum supellectilem vocabat. Controversiao I, praefatlo 23

In this passage Seneca uses the term sententias where one would expect locos communes. The word sententia has the meaning of a thought expressed in words, and In the early Empire it came to mean a short, densely composed and epigrammatic sentence. The word sen tentia also has the meanings of aphorism, maxim or philosophical proposition, as demonstrated by the examples Seneca gives in the above passage, via. de fortuna. de crudelitate. de saeculo, de divi tiis. It is in this sense that Seneca interchanges the words sententia and locus communis.

Seneca is also a valuable witness to the practice of orna menting the locus communis with oxemola drawn from history and mythology as a means of bolstering tho argument. Tho technical term seems to have been imolere locum, a phrase used by Seneca to describe 19 the speeches of Mbucius.^ Seneca does not tell us any more about the practice in the passage cited, but in Controversiae 1.8.10 he quotes part of a locus de invidla by Blandus, and at one point he refers to Blandus * use of exemola in this locus communis with the words hie exempla.

Quintilian also provides testimony to the nature of the locus communisJ

communes loci (de iis loquor, quibus citra personas in ipsa vitia moris est perorare, ut in adulterium, aleatorem, petulantem) ex mediis sunt iudiciis et, si reum adiicias, accusationes; quanquam hi quoque ab illo generali tractatu ad quasdam deduci species solent, ut si ponatur adulter caecus, aleator pauper, petulans senex. habent autem nonnunquam etiam defensionem. nam et pro luxuria et pro araore dicimus, et leno interim parasitusque defenditur sic, ut non homini patrocinemur, sed crimini. Z A .22-23 li'i mentions the orators who like to have a store of passages ready to adorn their extemporaneous speeches *

. . . scriptos eos memoriaeque diligentissime man- datos in promptu habuerint, ut quotiens esset occasio, oxtomporales eorum dictiones his velut emblematis exornarentur. 2 A . 2 ?

The composition of loci communes was also regarded as a worthy exercise for improving one's eloquence:

an ignoramus antiquis hoc fuisse ad augendam eloquentiam genus exercitationis, ut theses dicerent et communes locos et cetera citra complexum rorum porsonarumquo, quibus verae fictaeque controversiae continentur 7

Seneca Controversiae 7 praefatio 3» see also Stanley F. Bonner, Roman Declamation (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 19^9) , p • 6l. 20

On their importance to the orator, the fact that they were prepared ahead of time and used as appropriate, and that Cicero was interested in composition cf the non-disjunctive locus, he remarkst

non communes loci, sivo qui sunt in vitia dorectl, quales legimus a Cicerone compositos, seu quibus quaestiones generaliter tractantur, quales sunt editi a Quinto quoque Hortensiot ut, "Sitne parvis argumentis credendum," et pro testibus et in testes, in mediis litium medullis versantur? Arma sunt haec auodammodo praeparanda semper, ut iis,"5um res poscet, utare. 2 .1,11-12

Finally, when he warns against the insertion of irrelevant loci, he assumes that the passages to bo inserted are completed ahead of time.

Indeed, it is the fact that they are worked out beforehand that encourages inept orators to overuse them. His criticism is sharpi

. . . cum eo quidem quod vix ullus est tarn communis locus, qui possit cohaerere cum causa nisi aliquo propriae quaestionis vinculo copulatus; appareat alicqui non tarn insortum quam adplicitum, vel quod dissimilis est ceteris vel quod plerumquo adsumi etiam parum apte solet, non quia desideratur sed qui?, paratus est: ut quidam sententiarum gratia verbosissimos locos arcessunt, cum ex loci's debeat nasci sententia► ita sunt autem speciosu haec et uti'Lia, si oriuntur ex causa; ceterum qtiamlibefc pulchra elocutio, nisi ad victoriam tendit, utique supervaoua, sed interim etiam centravia ost. 2.^.30-32

One final piece of testimony remains to be considered. In the

Deolamntiones minoras ascribed to Quintilian we are occasionally given the instructions of the teacher under the heading sermo. The teacher outlined tho theme, and gave the students some hints on how best to deal with tho subject. In declamation #316, Flens luxuriosi pater, the sormo contains the following remarks:

nolo quisquam me reprehendat tamquam vobis locos non dem* si ampliare declamationem voletis et ingenium exercere, dicetis quod ad causam huius nullo modo, ad delectationem aurium fortasse pertineant*

It is clear from the passage that the composition of looi communes formed an essential part of rhetorical education. The passage also offers evidence of the growing irrelevance of the previously composed locus communis to the speech as a whole. Above all, it shows that relevance might well be sacrificed to delectatio aurium.

Much of the important evidence regarding the various rhetorical exercises, including the locus communis, postdates Propertius. If indeed Propertius chose to model five elegies in Book III on the exercises of the rhetorical schools, it is necessary to determine whether the information in Quintilian on the various exercises, com posed toward the close of the first century A. D», is applicable to the locus communis and other exercises as practised in the schools in the last years of the Republic. Evidence from the elder Seneca indicates that these exercises were current with the declaimers whose speeches are excerpted, and some of these men were contemporary with

Propertius. Quintilian discusses the antiquity of the exercises in

Book lit

his fere veteres facultatem dicendi exercuerunt assumpta tamen a dialccticis argumontandi ratione. nam fictas ad imitationem fori consiliorumque materias apud Graecos dicere circa Demetrium Fhalerea institutum fere constat. 2 AM

Thus, with a date of c. 300 B. C. as a rough estimate for the origin of these exercises, it is perhaps not too much to assume that the schools of the Republic, owing much to Greek training, employed 22 exercises similar to those described by Quintilian at the close of the first century A. D. Quintilian cites Cicero for examples of passages of various types, and as there are several parallels between the Ciceronian loci communes and the elegies of Propertius selected, it appears that the information in Quintilian on these topics applies to the schools of the Republic despite the considerable time lapse*

The above references to the major Latin rhetorical treatises illustrate clearly enough that the locus communis was a passage com posed on a topic of general interest and wide application. It was usually written independently of the speech, but in order to avoid the charge of irrelevance, the locus was supposed to depend at least tan- gentially on the case in question. The passage was, at any rate, capable of being inserted in any number of speeches on the same theme.

The techniques of composition were those pertaining to oratory as a whole, but a special feature of the locus communis was the use of exempla. The locus communis was used as an exercise in the education of an orator, and diligent men continued the practice beyond their early years. Quintilian’s warning (2,iK30-32) and the examples of loci in the following chapter show that the use of the locus was a favorite technique among the declaimers of the early Empire, and with tho decline in oratory, the locus communis tended to become more and more loosely connected to the subject of the speech and to have been written more for display and less as an essential part of an argument or proof. CHAPTER IX

THE LOCUS COMMUNIS IN PROSE AUTHORS

Two types of locus communis have been identified, and from the testimony of Cicero it is clear that both were regularly employed in the oratory of the first century B. C. The first type was related to the rhetorical thesis, in which a general question was argued from points of view both pro and contra.^ The second type was non-disjunc tive, and concerned itself, in Cicero’s words, de universa re. contra 2 quam dici nihil solet neo potest*

A number of examples of loci communes selected from various prose authors will be examined in this chapter. Because the locus communis was specifically rhetorical in development, I have taken my examples from such rhetorically studied works as the speeches of

Cicero, the declamations preserved in the Controversiao and Suasoriae of tho elder Seneca, and the declamations ascribed to Quintilian.

The non-disjunctive loci communes combined a number of common elements. Not all of the examples chosen exhibit every one of the identifiable characteristics of the locus communis. Two passages in

Cicero, Pro Caelio 17*39—1 3 and Pro Roscio Amsrino 22.63-26.72, are representative of the fully developed locus communis. and each employs the significant characteristics h these will be discussed

^Cicero Do inventione 2.lh-.^7-15*^8.

^Cicero De oratore 3.2?.l06, 23 21f

at the close of the chapter as complete examples. Both of these •

passages are quite long, but some loci were very brief; a passage on

the instability of fortune, Controversiae 1*1*3» is a mere four sen

tences long, and passages on the same subject in Controversiae

1.1.5 and 1.2.8 are equally short, although it must be mentioned

that Seneca may not have quoted the entire locus. Other loci in

the Controversiae run to two or three hundred words, but no examples match the length of the two Ciceronian passages I have selected for

complete analysis.

The locus communis deals with a subject of broad scope and general interest. Whether it is concerned with an abstract concept

such as pax or ius civile, a negative quality or attribute such as crudelltas. or the desire of men for public praise, the orator seeks to discuss his subject in the most general terms, proving his point by reference to precedents in history, legend and mythology. Quin

tilian’s remarks on the connection between the subject matter of the locus communis and the topic of the speech in which it is contained have been quoted at the close of the first chapter. The core of his argument is presented as follows J

ut quidam (oratores) sententiarum gratia verbosissimos locos arcessunt, cum ex locis debeat nasci santentia. ita sunt autem speciosa haec et utilia, si oriuntur ex causa. 2.4-.31-32

As the locus communis de universa re became a more frequent adornment in oratory, the question of relevance became increasingly important. According to the testimony of the Latin rhetoricians noted in Chapter I the locus communis was regularly composed beforehand, and therefore it was readily available for insertion in a variety of speeches. This advance preparation loft ample time for the composition of an elaborate locus, and unless the orator was careful the locus might surpass the speech itself in skillfullness of composition. The well-trained orator would be careful to insure a smooth transition to a locus communis on a topic directly associated with the subject of the speech itself. In the speech of a less pro ficient orator a previously composed locus ran the risk of outshining the surrounding portions of the speech, and the locus might have little or nothing to do with the central point which the orator tried to make. Prior composition of the locus communis must have been an asset to the orator in direct proportion to his overall skill and competence.

The topics of the loci communes in Cicero are closely linked to the subject matter of the oration itself. The locus de parricida in the speech Pro.ftoscio Amerino 22.63-26.72 is a general disquisition on the actual charge filed against Roscius, and the discussion of peace and slavery in the second Philippic **4.113-114 is appropriate to

Cicero's point of view. Quintilian's warning suggests that there were flagrant abuses, and that the locus communis was often regarded as a purpureus pannus. There were sufficient numbers of badly trained instructors available that Quintilian can blame them for the decline in oratory*

eo quidem res ista culpa docentium roccidit, ut inter praecipuas quae corrumperent oloquon- tiam causas licentia atque inscitia declaman- tium fuerit* 2 .10.3 26

-The following section illustrates the methods of these inept speakers,

pointing out the loose interrelationship of the parts of the speech,

and the problems of Independent composition of sententiae and loci*

nonnulli certa sibi initia, priusquam sonsum invenerint, destinant, quibus aliquid diserti subiungendum sit, eaque diu secum ipsi clareque meditati desperate conectendi facilitate deserunt et ad. alia deinceps atque inde alia non minus communia ac nota devertunt. qui plurimum videntur habere rationis, non in causas tamen laborem suum sed in locos intendunt, atque in iis non corpori prospiciunt sed abrupta quaedam, ut forte ad manum venere, iaculantur. unde fit, ut disso- luta et ex diversis congesta oratio cohaerere non possit similisque sit commentariis puerorum, in quos ea, quae aliis declamantibus laudata sunt, regerunt. 2.11.5-?

In the Controversiae it is occasionally difficult to establish

connections between some passages and the subject of the controversia.

While it need not mean that the excerpt was used as an irrelevant

embellishment to the complete oration as originally delivered, a

passage may be cited from the fourth controversia of Book 10 in which

the declaimer, T. Labienus, inserts a tirade against the rich into

a speech concerned with beggars*

mirum est vacare homines huic cogitationi, ut curent quid homo mendicus inter mendicos agat. principes (inquit) viri contra naturam divitlas suas exercenti . . . 10.^.17

The passage is not necessary to the development of tho argument, and

it merely provides Labienus with an opportunity for display. Other

examples may bo cited from the Suasoriae as well. Tho first suasoria.

Deliberat Alexander an Oceanum naviget. contains what must have been

fantastic digressions involving sea monsters and the Cyclops, and the 27

contemporary judgment of Dorion's digression was corruntissimnm rem

omnium quae umquam dictae sunt.^ In each case the speaker usos a

thread from the line of argument to provide a tenuous connection with a passage of little or no interest or relevance to the central issue.

The locus communis often begins with a remark of a very general

nature, asking a rhetorical question as a means of approaching the

subject, or offering a gnomic or axiomatic thought on the subject of the locus. In the Pro Archia Cicero begins a locus communis on

the desire for praise with an incontrovertible statement: neque enlm

est hoc dissimulandum quod obscurari non potest, sed erne nobis feren- dum: trahimur omnes studio laudis, ot ontlmus ouisque maxima gloria ducitur (11.26). He opens a passage in the second Philippic along

similar lines t et nomen pads dulce est et ipsa res salutaris, sed inter eacem et servitutem plurimun interest (44.113). In Controversia

I.6 .5Bassus begins a locus communis on rich women thus! omnos uxores divites servitutem exi.gunt. And a locus communis de lacrimis begins quis miratur flere hominem? (ps*-Quintilian Declamationes minores 316)•

In all of these instances there is an attempt to shift from the

specific nature of the case being tried to the general remarks

appropriate for the locus communis. A common technique is to make use of sweeping generalizations, as in Cicero, trahimur omnes • •

sed . . . olurimum interest, and Bassus, omnes uxores .... The

^Suasoriae 1.12; for further discussion see Henri Eornecque, Les Declamations et les Ddclaimteurs (Lillet au siege de 1 'universite, 1902), pp. 97ff. 28

rhetorical question in pseudo-Quintilian does the same thing without

using omnis or a similar word or phrase, for tho unstated answer to

the question is "no one at all," thus indicating a similar general

category of great magnitude*

This last passage, quis miratur flere hominem?, makes use of

another technique for introducing a locus communis* in which an

imaginary opponent is conjectured, who makes a comment which the

speaker will refute in the locus. This technique allows for consid

erable drainatic effect in the passage if used skillfully. The orator

places a statement, which is purposely wrong or at least of dubious

merit, in the mouth of another person. It is particularly effective

as an opening remark in the locus communis in that the orator has been

able to set up the conditions necessary for his generalizing statement

in reply. Cicero uses this approach in a locus communis de jure

civlllt nam oui ius civile contemnendum putat, is vincula revollit non modo iudiciorum sed etiam utilitatis vitaeque communis * • * (Pro

Caecina 25«70)»

Imperatives and addresses in the second person were commonly

employed to lend vigor and thrust to the passages. Rhetorical ques

tions not only provided a common means of beginning the locus communis* tj. but were also used effectively in central and concluding sections.

However, these features must be regarded as essential ingredients of

rhetoric as a whole rather than specific properties of the locus communis.

^See Seneca Controversiae 2.1.11 and pseudo-Quintilian Declamntiones minoros' 316'. 29

In most cases the locus communis makes use of exempla as the means of proof of the premise, and the locus is built around tho exempla in the following wayi a general statement is made at the opening of the locus, and this is expanded into a general argument; exempla are cited, and then these are applied in some way to the general premise as a means of conclusion. The application might involve a direct comparison between a person or institution and the legendary or historical predecessors, to show how in this past example the situation was met or challenged. Exempla were drawn from current and past history, legend and iqythology, as Quintilian attests*

in primis vero abundare debet orator exemplo- rum copia cum veterum, turn etiam novorum, adeo ut non ea modo, quae conscripta sunt historiis aut sermonibus velut per manus tradita, quae- que cotidie aguntur, debeat nosse, verum ne ea quidem, quae sunt a clarioribus poetis ficta, negligere. 12.4.1

Although exempla form the usual basis of proof in the locus communis, and are most often included in the central portion of the passage, loci could be composed without them, as the passages in the Declama- tiones minores demonstrate, but the arguments are less forceful.

locus de studio laud is in the Fro Archia opens with the thought that all men desire praise, and that important men are most especially motivated by this desire. This is followed by an even more special case* the philosophers who condemn glory in their writings are eager to bo noticed for having written thus. Then Cicero intro duces his exempla. Decimus Brutus,and Fulvius, great generals who were unashamed of public praise. These precedents are brought to 30 bear on the present, by way of conclusion: one ought not to be ashamed of public praise under present circumstances since the heroes of the past did not seek to avoid commendation#

The passage in the second Philippic (U4.113-114) exhibits a similar construction. The first statement, proverbial in tone, et nomen pacis dulce est et ipsa res salutaris, sed inter pacem et servitutem plurimum interest, is followed by a definition of the terms pax and servitus. and of the importance they hold for the present now that Caesar has been assassinated. The exempla again take the central position in the locus communis, and the figures chosen from history include regicides and men who have tried to assume royal stature, concluding with the assassins of Caesar. The concluding por tion of the locus expands upon the effects of the assassins* deed.

It is difficult to know if the entire locus communis has been reproduced when examining passages in the Controversiae. Seneca preserves a locus de humilitate by Julius Bassus in Controversiae

1.6.3-4, and it, too, exhibits a form similar to that of the Ciceronian passages. The introduction sets up the question by mentioning that noble men have disgraced their heritage try thoir flagitia. but that men of humble birth have often bestowed great honor on their family's future fortunes. Then follows the thought that heritage means nothing in the final analysis when compared against tho individual's deeds during his lifetime. The exempla are once again at the heart of the passage: Marius, Pompey, who owed the name Magnus not to his family tree but to his achievements, Servius and Cincinnatus. The locus concludes with the reminder that Rome, for all her greatness, rose from humble origins, and that this transformation ought to be a source of pride.

The tendency to begin the locus with a word encompassing sweeping proportions, such as oirnis. multus and plurimus, or with a rhetorical question addressed to the general audience or to a partic ular imagined interlocutor has already been noted* Several other turns of phrase are employed in the loci communes» The speaker often used the phrase crede mihi, or a close equivalent, to underline the truth of his statement, or perhaps to emphasize the universality of the statement for his seemingly unbelieving audience: mihi credits* maior hereditas unicuiauQ nostrum venit in isdem bonis a jure et a_ leglbus quam ab eis a. quibus ilia iusa nobis relicta sunt (Cicero

Fro Caecina 26*7*0$also, omnes uxores divites servitutem exigunt. crede mihi t volet in suis regnaro divitiis (Seneca Controversiae

1.6*5)*^ The verb mlrari or mirum est is used occasionally, espe cially in loci communes in vitia derecti, and it serves a purpose analogous to that of crede mihi, underscoring tho truth or univer sality of tho accompanying remark, or to deflate the astonishment of the listener by showing that a particular thought is indeed unremark able and commonplace: mirum ost vacare homines huic cogitationi. ut curent quid homo mandicus inter mendicos agat (Seneca Controversiae 10,*f*17).6

Two elaborate examples of the locus communis can be found in

5 Compare also Seneca Controversiae 1*1*3 and 1*8*5* 6 Compare Seneca Controversiae 2.1.13 and pseudo-Quintilian Declamationes minores 252 and '}!(■>, " Cicero. The first is a locus de indulgentla in the Pro Caelio

17.39-18.^3* the second, a locus de parrlcida in the Pro Rosoio

Amorino 22.63-26.72.

Because of the length of these passages, brief outlines are necessary. The locus do indulgentia takes the following form:

section 39* Dicet aliquis t 11 • . . haec studia defend eres ?" The topic of the locus, stated by means of a rhetorical question in the mouth of a critic, section 39* Ego, si quis. iudlces . . . orna- tum puto. Cicero's attempt to meet the argu ments of the critic, and his definition of a truly good man. section 39 * ex hoc genera . . . tanta fecerunt. Exempla representing Cicero's ideal man. section ^0-4-2: verum haec genera . . . iratis putabunt. Abandonment of this ideal, by both the Romans, men of action, and tho Greeks, men of profound learning. Brief analysis of philosophical teaching concerning ploasure and beauty. section h 2 ; ergo haec deserta via . . . contemp- sisse videatur. Plea for allowing youth to have license within certain reasonable limits, and when satisfied, to assume more mature rules and duties, section ^3* conclusion— many great men have lived a full and responsible life after a carefree, often reckless youth.

The locus de indulgentia begins with a rhetorical question posed by a hypothetical opponent: dicet aliouis * "haec est igitur tua disclpllnn 7 sic tu instituis adnlescentes? • • •" The transi tion from the discussion of tho particular case to the general is thus accomplished. The rhetorical question, as well as tho opponent, is a device used to set the stage for the ensuing locus, and to define the topic with which it is concerned. Cicero counters the question by supposing that a nan so virtuous and self-controlled as to be above mental and physical distraction must be divinis auibusdam bonis instructum. His exemnla follow: ex hoc genera illos fuisse arbitror Camillos, Fabricios. Curios omnesnue eos, oui haec ex minimis tanta fecerunt. Cicero then turns to the present, to attempt to explain why this kind of man no longer exists, and to secure a pardon for Caelius' conduct. This is done by examining the views of the philosophical schools on pleasure, and demonstrating that a man unable to appreciate beauty is to be scorned rather than praised.

He concludes the piece by asserting that many prominent Romans led notorious lives as young men, but that they acted in accordance with propriety in maturity.

T*10 locus communis aims at establishing the broadest possible definition of the virtuous man:

si quis • . • hoc robore animi atque hac indole virtutis ac continentiae fuit ut respueret omnis voluptates ornnemoue vitae suae cursum in labore corporis atque in animi contentions conficeret, quem non auies, non remissio, non aequalium studia, non ludi, non convivium delectaret, nihil in vita expetendum putaret nisi quod esset cum laude et cum dignitate coniunctum . . . 17.39

The repetition of the words omnis and non emphasizes the point that this is no ordinary taan, and Cicero concludes the thought by comparing the man with something divine. The writers of loci communes employed illustrative arguments which were heavily weighted with exclusive modifiers, as in the passage above, using the repetitive omnis . . . omnem, non . . . non . . . nihil. While this locus de indulgentia deals with a commonplace, and while the locus could be used in connection with any number of people

besides Caelius, it is smoothly integrated into the body of the speech,

meeting Quintilian's criterion, ita sunt speciosa haec et utilia, si

oriuntur ex causa (2 ,^.32).

The locus de parricida. Pro Roscio Amerino 22.63-^6*72, is

organized as follows!

section 6 3s Introduction of the topic, and the enormity of the crime, section 6^-^5 * First exemplum, the man from Torracina. section 66: Second and third exempla, Orestes and Alcmaeon: description of the mytho logical Furies, section 6 7: Demonstration of how the guilty con science takes the place of the Furies in tho modern world, section 68: Since the exempla indicate the enormity of the crime, the crime must be proven beyond the slightest doubt, and then punished even more sevorely. section 69-70• Description of the ancient laws on parricide, section 71-72: Punishment of the parricide.

The locus opens with a sententia, magna est enlm vis human!tatis t

multum valet communio sanguinis. This, plus the words magna and multum, takes the passage from the specific into the general. The

thought contained in the opening phrase is expanded to show the utter

savagery of the crime of parricide. This is followed by the exempla:

first, the account of a recent trial in which two brothers were

acquitted of the charge of parricide, and, second, a brief reference

to Alcmaeon and Orestes, both of whom were pursued by the Furies.

The exempla drawn from mythology are used to show that the parricide's

conscience will hound him forever, as- if a Fury itself. In a sense the locus concludes here, but the passage continues,

detailing the enormity of the crime (24.68) and the necessity for

severe punishment. Cicero then proceeds to praise the wisdom of

the ancients regarding punishment of parricides, and the passage

appears to be related closely to the laus legum, cited as a rhetor

ical exercise in Quintilian 2.4.33 and an area within the orator's

practical experience. In place of exempla. Cicero traces the history

of the law which required that the parricide be sewn into a sack and

drowned. The locus concludes with a vivid description of a parri

cide's death by drowning, and the entire locus de parricida is

joined to the body of the speech by a string of rhetorical questions directed at Erucius, the prosecutor, designed to show his Inability

to prove the charge. This transitional passage underscores the

seriousness of the circumstances surrounding the case, concluding with a carefully phrased generalization on the need for incontrovertible

proof! agitur de parricidio. ouod sine multis causis suscjpj non potest!

apud homines autem prudentissimos agitur. oui intellegunt neminem ne

minimum quidem maloficium sine causa admittere (26.73)* The locus

de parricida is integrated into the speech with the same degree of

appropriateness as was the locus de indulgentia in the Pro Caelio,

but the locus do parricida is equally capable of employment in another

speech on the same charge.

In sum, the locus communis dealt with a general topic in the

broadest possible terms. The longer passages proceed by a carefully

reasoned argument supported by historical, legendary and mythological

exempla as proof or precedent. The shorter passages are developed with proverbial or gnomic statements, likewise supported by a few

exempla« There was an attempt made, in certain cases, to create the

impression of dialogue or controversy by making reference to a hypo

thetical bystander or opponent, whose question or comment would be

refuted by the speaker. The locus communis appears to have a simple

structure, involving the exposition of the subject through rhetorical

question or proverbial remark, expansion of this statement, citation

of exemnla, and application of the exempla to the case in point.

The locus also appears to have adapted to its purpose the use of

certain words and phrases, e.g. omnis.. multus. plurimus'. crede mihi, mirari and mirum est. designed to uphold the truth of the central

proposition; these phrases were applied in connection with the audi

ence or the hypothetical opponent, and the effect is very often to

indicate that popular belief is either correct or entirely wrong.

The orator makes use of these generalizing phrases in a way which

emphasizes particular points of his argument, and a certain dramatic

effect is introduced, especially with credo mihi and mirari in second

person inflections which bring the audience or imaginary opponent into

consideration. In the following chapter these guidelines for tho

composition of the locus communis will be applied to elegies 3»llt 3*13

and 3*19 of Propertius which show evidence of the influence of the

techniques of the locus communis in their composition. CHAPTER III

THE ELS3IES MODELLED ON RHETORICAL EXERCISES

Three elegies modelled on the locus communis as defined

above deal with commonplace.topics in non-specific fashion, being

addressed to a general audience and examining the topic, whether greed, power or passion, in the broadest possible terms* All three

topics occur in the subjective-erotic elegies, but here the personal

and erotic associations are minimized to the point where they become merely a jumping off point for the discussion of a larger issue in universal dimensions. In this chapter the relationship between the prose locus communis and those elegies composed in denunciation of vice will be examined according to the procedure adopted in Chapter II.

ELegies 3.14 and will also be considered, but these differ in

that they were modelled not on the locus communis but rather on two additional rhetorical exercises, the laus leaum and laus locorum.

They are likewiso non-erotic poems with subject matter alien to con ventional elegy.

Propertius’ elegy 3*11 wight well be called a locus communis do potontia feminarum, or do sorvitio amoris. The elegy opens with

Propertius1 restatement of a question posed by an unnamed individualt

quid miraro, moam si versat femina vitam et trahit addictum sub sua iura virum, criminaque ignavi capitis mihi turpis fingis, quod nequoam fracto rumpere vincla iugo? (lines 1-4) This, together with the next four lines in which Propertius offers two sententiae by way of an answer, as well as an admonition to the unnamed addressee, might provide a suitable opening for any number of conventional love poems on the usual themes. The poet is cast in the role of servus, and what follows could well have been a typical elegy employing the figure of sarvitium amoris, very common in the -1 Latin elegy and in Propertius in particular. Propertius, however, chose to write what is essentially a non-erotic poem; the initial statement of the poet doubtless refers to an erotic relationship with the femina who has reduced him to servitium. but the poet concentrates in a general way on the sheer power which women have been known to exert over men. All of the women singled out as exempla possessed some sort of erotic dominance over their various lovers, as is quite clear from the traditional stories surrounding these figures, but

Propertius concentrates not on this relationship but rather on details which illustrate the ability of those women to play dominant roles outside of, as well as within, the erotic relationship.

The structure of elegy 3*11 is similar to that of the prose examples, and it may be outlined as followsJ

1-8 general remarks on the servitium of the lover

9-26 exemola on the power of women over individual men

27-56 exemolum of Cleopatra; the possibility of her potontia being exerted over an entire nation'

27-38 Cleopatra's potentia

^ Frank 0. Copley, uServitium amoris in the Homan Elegists," TAPA 78 (19^7) 297. 39-46 boldness of Cleopatra

^7-50 exhortation to Rome to become bold under Augustus* leadership

51-56 Cleopatra’s defeat— loss of potentia

57-72 past instances of Roman boldness in the face of danger; Augustus* successful encounter with a contemporary threat.

The poem begins and concludes with two shorter sections, lines 1-8 and 57-72, which surround two longer passages containing the exempla.

As in the prose locus, the opening section sets forth the topic and expands upon it in general terms. The proof of the premise is pro vided by the series of exempla. lines 9-56, divided into two sections, four minor exemola drawn from mythology and legend, and one major exemolum. drawn from very recent history. This technique of citing minor and major exemola can be paralleled in Cicero, Pro Roscio Amerino

64-66, and Horace Odes 3«5* Tho closing section doe3 not return directly to the erotic situation of the introduction. It grows out of the exemplum of Cleopatra, demonstrating that in dire emergency

Romo was able to face the challenge offered and triumph. There is a verbal connection between tho two passagos in the word navita. In line

5 the navita was the subject of an exemolum designed to teach the interlocutor to fear the potentia of women, but in line 71 the navita is apostrophized and told to be mindful of the peace secured by

Augustus* resistance to the potentia of a woman. There is perhaps a balance between this closing passage and the introduction in that whereas Cleopatra’s potentia was a political threat, something that could be challenged by readily determined and conventional means, 40

Propertius, as servus amoris sub potentia feminae. faces something intangible and irrational, and the effect of the balance between the passages is to indicate the sheer power of love, which, though one might like to break away from its spell, eliminates all capa bility of resistance.

As already Indicated, the elegy opens with a question posed by the poet in response to a comment made by an unnamed bystander. Ely comparing this with the methods of introducing loci communes in the prose authors, it is evident that Propertius here has chosen to combine several of the introductory characteristics. First, the introduction is put in the form of a question, which is a common rhetorical device employed for the purpose of making it easy for the speaker to answer quickly with his own views• The question most often contains information favorable to the opposing side in the debate or controversy, and the speaker thus sets up an opportunity for exposing his own personal position. Here Propertius allows the bystander to express amazement at the fact that a man could allow himself to live under the domination of a woman. The poet counters the thought with two illustrations, the navita of line 5 and the miles of line 6, which show that the man experienced in a career knows best the dangers inherent in it, thus implying that ho, the experienced lover, knows that such a relationship inevitably involves submission on the part of the male to the will of the female*

venturam melius praesagit navita mortem vulneribus didicit miles habere metum. ista ego praeterita iactavi verba iuventa* tu nunc exemplo disce timere moo. (lines 5-8) 41

Implicit in line 8 is the thought that the bystander's view is non sense. The verb iactare indicates a certain arrogance, and, as we see in line 8, such arrogance was to no purpose; a woman’s potentia is strong enough to become an object of fear, and the bystander will come to an unfortunate end unless he follows the instructions of the poet, the man of experience in this kind of relationship.

The second feature of the introductory lines also common to certain of the prose loci is the use of the hypothetical or fictitious bystander. In addition to serving as a sounding board for the views of the opposition, the bystander allows for dramatic effect. The poem is not just a first or third person statement of the poet's personal views; the imaginary bystander allows the reader to sense a definite conversation as a prelude to the elegy itself, and the reader becomes an eavesdropper of sorts. In 3 'the dramatic effect is minimal, certainly not as strong as that created in the poems of

Book I where specific individxials are addressed by name and maintained O as a dramatic presence throughout the poem. To have addressed elegy

3*11, or any of the other elegiac loci, to a particular individual would have altered the nature of the poem. Were the poem addressed to someone by name, the advice of the poet regarding servitium might * be taken to refer to the particular situation of that person alone, or at most to those in similar circumstances; by having the addressee remain as vague as possible, the poet can imply that his advice is true always and everywhere, and that it applies to all lovers, indeed

^Walther Abel, de Anrednformon boi den rMmischen Elegikorn (Diss. Berlin, 1930), p, 8. to all men, whoever they are, rather than to some specific individual

In contrast to the vagueness of the identity of the bystander, Proper

tius asserts that he himself is qualified to speak on the subject*

tu nunc exempto disce timers meo. This use of the unnamed bystander

underscores the general nature of tho material to follow, as well as

the universal application of that advice.

A third point relating to tho introduction is the use of the verb mirari. In the discussion of the prose locus communis I have shown that this verb often is used to indicate to the addressee, audience or reader that their views on a particular subject are incor

rect; their astonishment at the speaker's point of view serves to

indicate that they are ignorant of the commonplace nature of the point in question, in this case the lover's servitium to the mistress

By using the phrase quid mirare, Propertius indicates, in effect, that if the bystander had given any thought to the matter at all, he would see that servitium on the part of the male is the inevitable

consequence of a romantic attachment.

The introduction closes with two highly compressed, sententious remarks designed to show that Prooertius is confident of the truth of his assertions, relating the truths in these sententiae to his own experience. From Cicero and the Controversiae we have seen that axiomatic, gnomic and proverbial statements abounded in the loci, and the appearance of this type of remark, one that is general and universal in character by definition, in elegy 3 » H is natural.

Lines 5-6 answer tho question of lines 1-4 by offering two general instances of types of men aware of the dangers involved in their fields of expertise; the sailor faces death by drowning, the soldier risks wounds. implication, Propertius suggests that the lover risks servitium, and as neither the sailornor soldier can eliminate the risks they face, the parallel holds true for the lover: servitium is a possible consequence of amor and is irreversible, as is death for the soldier and sailor. The final hortatory couplet, lines 7-8* demonstrates the invalidity of the opponent*s position, as explained above, and serves also as a transition to the following division of the poem, the series of exempla.

The exempla furnish supportive argument for the main question, the potentia of women. These are divided into two distinct sections, lines 9-26 and 27-56. The former section involves four separate individuals: Medea, Penthesilea, Omphale and Semiramis. All of those women are fictional or legendary, and all of the stories are set in the distant past.3 The second exemolum concerns one figure only,

Cleopatra. She was quite real, and contemporary with the poet. The exemolum of Cleopatra is far more elaborate than the preceding exempla. and it has a structure of its own; there are four sections, as indi cated in the outline above, the first two of which emphasize the potentia of Cleopatra, the second two her loss of ootontia. or, the assertion of Rome’s potentia.

The division of the total number of exempla into sections of

^Semiramis has been connected with Sammu-ramat, queen of Babylon in the ninth century B. C.; see Cambridge Ancient History. 1925, HI* 2 7. Propertius was doubtless familiar with Semiramis through such legendary accounts as tho Kinus Romance and stories of the type pre served in Diodorus Siculus 2.^4—20; Semiramis may well have been an his torical figure, but she is known through essentially legendary accounts. major and minor proportions reflects a studied concern for balance, placement of emphasis on the important issue and rhythmical variation.

The first three exempla are short, four lines each, and the fourth extends to six lines. The fifth exemplum. Cleopatra, involves approxi mately twice the number of lines as the first four exempla taken together. The mythical and legendary exempla are not at all worthless as supporting arguments for Propertius* premise, but because they are fictional and set in a time far removed from the present, they are given less prominence than the exemplum of Cleopatra, of which his readers or their families had vivid memories. The exemplum of Cleo patra makes Propertius* point perfectly plaint through some disaster, he and his contemporaries might well have been- living under the rule of

Cleopatra, and so the exemolum is one which serves as Proportius* chief means of argumentation and proof, thus deserving of its extraordinary length and complexity. Tho exemola of the locus de parricida (Cicero

Pro Roscio Amerino 6^-66) offer a clear parallel: the long, important exemplum deals with an event in recent history, the death of a man in

Terracina, while the minor exempla. Orestes and Alcmaeon, are very brief and drawn from ancient legend.

Throughout the series of exemola the emphasis is on the power of women, chiefly their poi*er outside of the sexual. Cleopatra is the comprehensive symbol of this power, and we are to believe that ordinary men are more or less helpless in the face of such power.

Only the extraordinary man, Augustus Caesar, could withstand it. The closing couplets reflect the total absence of female potentia. and, as at the beginning, an unnamed individual is addressed, but this i±5

time to be mindful of the calm now secured in the Ionian Sea, which

wo may take as representative of the entire Roman world, for it was

there that the battle of Actium was fought, thus freeing the world

from a woman's tyranny. The antithesis with the introductory

passage is complete; Propertius is unable to escape the servltium

imposed by his mistress* potentia. whereas Augustus is able to rescue

an entire nation from the sorvitium threatened by the potentia of a

foreign queen. The unnamed addressee at the opening of the poem is

reminded that sorvitium is inescapable at the hands of a mistress,

but the addressee in the closing couplet, the navita. is reminded

that the absence of servitium. or potentia roginae, is the natural

result of the extraordinary qualities of Caesar.

Th0 exemola are well chosen illustrations of potentia femtnae.

although the idea of male servitium is not clearly developed in the

cases of Medea and Semiramis. There is a natural progression from women who exert potentia of a specific and narrowly defined type to

Cleopatra, who had within her grasp the domination of the entire

Mediterranean world. The first exemplum. Medea, emphasizes hor

magical powers, and the romantic attraction to Jason is ignored;

Colchis flagrantis adamantina sub iuga tauros egit et armigera proelia sevit humo, custodisque feros clausit serpentis hiatus, iret ut Aesonias aurea lana domos. (lines 9-12 )

Medea's potentia represents the lowest level on the scale presented

in the course of the poem; her magical power is not even necessarily

a function of her own character, as it derives from a supernatural

source. Propertius deals with Penthesilea from two points of view. •She was a capable and dangerous warrior, able to hold her ground with ease against men until she met the extraordinary man, Achilles. But she was also able to conquer by her exceptional beauty, and thus the erotic and non-erotic are blended in this exemplumI

ausa ferox ab equo quondam oppugnare sagittis Maeotis Danaum Penthesilea ratisj aurea cui postquam nudavit cassida frontem, vicit victorem Candida forma virum* (lines 13-16)

The degree of Penthesilea*s potentia marks an advance over Medea*s; it is a function of her personality, and it manifests itself in two ways, through bodily strength and prowess, and through her beauty.

But like Medea, and like the femina of the introductory couplet to the elegy, her potentia is exerted over a single individual.

Omphale was a queen of Lydia, and thus exerted potentia of an even larger degreo than the previously named women, but Propertius chooses to discuss her potentia only with reference to Hercules:

Omphale in tantum formae processit honorem, Lydia Gygaeo tincta puella lacu, ut, qui pacato statuisset in orbo columnas, tam dura traheret mollia pensa manu. (lines 17-20)

The story has details suitable for erotic treatment, namely Hercules* love for Omphale and her own physical beauty, but the series of exempla is organized not as a progression of erotic tales, but as a series of illustrations of potentia of greater and groater degree, and of increasingly wide scope. While Omphale was queen of a nation, the figure subject to her potentia is still one man, but he is of considerable stature, one qui pacato stntuissot in orbe columnas. **7 and, according to mythology, her literal slave.

With the exemolum of Semiramis, queen of Babylon, the descrip tion of potentia feminae reaches sweeping proportions 1

Persarum statuit Babylona Semiramis urbom, ut solidum cocto tollerot aggere opus, et duo in adversum mitti per moenia currus nec possent tacto stringere ab axe latus; duxit et Euphraten medium, quam condidit, arcis, iussit et imperio subdero Bactra caput. (lines 21-2 6)

The exemplum ignores entirely any erotic description, though the ancient reader might well have been familiar with the tradition pre served in Diodorus Sicululus 2.13.^ where it is told that Semiramis chose not to marry, and instead had a series of lovers who were executed after taking their pleasure with the queen. In the previous exempla the women were associated each with one man, while Semiramis, according to the legend, had a series of lovers, as did Cleopatra.

Propertius ignores the erotic details in favor of describing her achievements in managing her city and in foreign relations. Semiramis possesses potentia which exceeds by far that of Medea, Penthesilea and Omphale; she is capable of overseeing monumental architectural projects and of conquering a foreign power instead of exerting her potentia over a single individual.

Cleopatra represents potentia of an ultimate form. . The erotic details surrounding her are distasteful: she is fnmulos inter femina trita suos, a partner in a coniuglum obscenum. and a moretrix regina.

More important is the fact that her potentia. deriving from her position as queen of a large and important area, enabled her to chal lenge Rome, the greatest power, and there was the danger that she might have been successful. But her potentia is flawed in the end by her cowardice: fugisti tamen in timidi vaga flumina Nili (line 51 )•

Nor was she able to cope with the greater courage and superiority of the Roman nation and of Augustus in particular. The differences between the potentia of Cleopatra and that of Medea and Penthesilea are great. Cleopatra possessed enormous power, but her corruption and depravity prevented her from exercising her potentia in any suc cessful fashion; instead there was grave danger not for one man, or for a lesser nation such as Bactria (line 26 in the exemplum of

Semiramis), but for the leading power of the Mediterranean world. The exemplum of Cleopatra stands at the most emotional and emphatic posi tion in the series of exemola. representing the culmination of a carefully ordered and chosen series progressing from figures exercising potentia of relatively minor scopo to a queen whose potentia could make her ruler of the Mediterranean, and from figures whose potentia held relatively minor consequences for a single individual to one who represented the gravest threat to an entire nation.

Whereas the exempla of Medea, Penthesilea, Omphale and Semiramis are introduced as evidence in support of the general argument, Proper tius takes the exemolum of Cleopatra beyond this simple level, using the material as a means to offer praise to Augustus for his success at Actium. The description of Cleopatra's potentia emphasizes her . activity in the political sphere, although reference is made to her coniugium obscenum with Antony. Details touching on the theme of servitium amoris are introduced in the exempla of Penthesilea and

Omphale, but only in the exemplum of Cleopatra does servitium amoris take on obviously disgraceful characteristics. Likewise the

political potentia of Omphale, a queen, is ignored, and that of

Semiramis is described in impartial terms, while Cleopatra,s is made to be tyrannical and extremely dangerous. She combines in her own person characteristics of the mythological women in lines 9-2 6, but these characteristics are twisted in Cleopatra to produce a depraved and thoroughly objectionable whole. Propertius* mention of

Antony's seduction try such a woman is a resounding condemnation and heightens the contrast between him and Augustus. The story existed that Cleopatra tried to seduce Augustus, then Octavian, as a last resort, but she was rebuffed; in addition to the contrast with

Antony, Augustus is thereby a figure larger than Hercules, who, in

the exemolum of Omphale, is described as one nui pacato statuisset in orbe columnas (line 19), and yet became a servus amoris. The climax of the exemplum comes in lines **7-50 in an apostrophe to Roma to

seize the opportunity for triumph under the leadership of Augustus, and the section concludes with Cleopatra's defeat and death. Recog nition of the achievement of Augustus is put into Cleopatra’s own mouth! 'non hoc, Roma, fui tanto tibi civo verendaI * The contrast between the achievement of Augustus and the moral dissolution of his opponent is clear, for after Cleopatra's remark he adds, dixit et assiduo lingua seoulta moro (lino 56). The exemolum distinguishes

sharply between the moral depravity of Cleopatra, and thus Antony, and the integrity of Augustus in his rosistance to the seductions of

^L. Annaeus FLorus Enitome die Tito Livio 2.21.9, Cassius Dio 51.12; also W. W. Tarn, "The Rattle of Actium," JRS 21 (1931) 196-197. Cleopatra as well as his ability in the political and military spheres in being able to crush this grave challenge to the Roman state and its ethical and moral well-being.

Potentia belonged properly to the male in Propertius * view, and he introduces a smaller series of exempla at line 6 7. The war with

Cleopatra is intended to seem like a near disaster but for the capable leadership of Augustus* A list of historical and legendary figures--

Scipio Africanus, Camillus, Curtius, Decius, Horatius Codes and

Valerius Corvinus— is included as a reminder that Roman' men wore capa ble of meeting emergendies. The reading of lines 57“58 as a question implies that Rome has lost some of its ability to provide men of stature in times of crisis, thus making all the more special the recog nition of Augustus* courage.^

The elegy contains a number of standard rhetorical embellish ments often used in the prose locus. Rhetorical questions are employed at the opening of the elegy, and at lines 27, ^7 and possibly 57 as indicated above, all places marking the beginning of new divisions in the poem. The first, quid mirare, meam si versat femina vitam » • . draws attention to the topic of the elegy, and establishes the exis tence of the imaginary bystander, to whom the elegy is initially addressed. Line 27 begins a new section of the poem, the exemolum of Cleopatra, and the introductory lines call attention to the importance of what follows I

nam quid ego heroas, quid raptem in crimina divos? Iuppiter infamat seque suamque domum.

■^See Butler and Barber, Oxford 1933* ad loc. 51

quid, modo quae nostris opprobria vexerit armis, et famulos inter femina trita suos? (lines 27-3 0)

Line 27 is an example of praeteritio, and it serves to diminish the importance of the allusion, namely further illustrations of potentia

V connected with legendary and iqythological figures; what follows, the exemolum of Cleopatra, is thus pushed into a position of prominence.

The rhetorical question at lines ^7ff*»

quid nunc Tarquinii fractas iuvat esse securis, nomine quern simili vita superba notat, si mulier patienda fuit? • . . plays on the emotions of the audience. This section, lines 4?-50* is the central portion of the elegy as a whole. By coupling the rhetorical question with an apostrophe to Rome, and by allowing line

*4-9 to fall into two clauses on either side of the caesura, an excited and earnest effect is created. The reading of lines 57“58 as a question,

septem urbs alta iugis, toto quae praesidot orbi, femineo timuit territa Karte minas? adds to the effect of the accompanying structural division. By admon ishing Rome in 57-58» and by calling attention to past glories in lines 67-60, also stated as questions, tho oxemola in lines 61-6*4-, which are stated positively and directly, are given greater importance, and the emotion builds steadily to lines 65-66 t

haec di condiderant, haec di quoquo moenia servant: vix timeat salvo Caesare Roma lovem.

Apostrophe is used with similar effect. In lino 36 Propertius'

^The line numboring of Barber's Oxford Text, i960, is followed here. appeals to Rome to remember the death of Pompey in Egypt, and in line

^9 he asks her to seize the opportunity for victoryt cape, Roma. triumphum ...» Attention is diverted away from the threat of

Cleopatra,s possible success, and the apostrophe to Roma makes more vivid the exhortation to strive for victory. The apostrophe at line

68, aut modo Pompeia, Bospore, caota manu, referring to the capture of Mithradates' standards (sigrn, from line 6 7) and by implication to Fompey's triumph, is far less significant, and does not create the special emotional effect of the previous examples. The final instance, navita in line 71, balances the unnamed individual of line 1, and it reflects the image of the navita cited as an exemolum in line 5* The calm on the Ionian Sea is the result of Augustus' successful resistance of Cleopatra's potentia; had he failed, the Roman world would have been enslaved, as is the lover to his mistress (line 4). Gut Augustus did not fail, and the sailor lives free of fear of feminine potentia.

The poet makes his point by means of argument based on exempla, a technique well documented by the Auctor ad Herennium ^.1.2, Cicero

Da inventione 1.30*^9 and Quintilian 5*ll*lff*» and having many parallels in the prose loci examined in Chapter II.

Elegy 3*11 exhibits many of the characteristics of the prose loci communes of Cicero and others. A commonplace motif from the elegiac tradition is used as a means for discussing a' topic of general interest, namely the potentia exerted by women over men, and the implication that it is harsh, even evil, but yet virtually inesca pable unless the male possesses extraordinary qualities as did Octavian

The general topic is introduced by an- imaginary, unnamed individual, whom Propertius answers in the form of a question. The general and

universal nature of what is to follow is suggested by the use of the

verb mirari in line 1 and by the gnomic statements of lines 7 and 8.

tfythical, legendary and historical exempla. carefully chosen to indi

cate the forms which potentia feminaa may take, and divided propor

tionally to secure proper emphasis, take up the bulk of the poem.

Given the knowledge that women can and do exercise potentia. Propertius uses the exemolum of Cleopatra to show how Rome, when faced with the

possibility of domination tiy a woman, rose to the occasion, chiefly

through the efforts of Augustus, a contemporary figure in a long lino of Roman heroes (lines 67-6*0, just as his foe, Cleopatra, was preceded by a series of women who exercised potentia of varying kinds (lines

9-26). The exemplum of Cleopatra goes further than merely supplying yet one more exemplum of potentia feminao in that it builds steadily towards praise of Augustus as savior of the Roman world. The poem appears to be modelled on the locus communis de universa re. and specifically on those loci in vitla derecti, but within the framework of a locus communis de potentia feminae Propertius takes the opportunity to develop one of the exempla into a basis for a short panegyric on

Augustus* success at Actium, a feature shared by none of the prose

examples•

Elegy 3.13, a locus communis de avaritia. exhibits most of the characteristics of Jtll• In this poem Propertius develops a theme which was very popular with ancient writers, both poets and prose authors. The subject of the poem is avaritia, chiefly of women, and 54 the consequent collapse of all moral and ethical considerations. The poet takes his material from various sources, but, as in elegy 3«H» the basic premise is associated with a commonplace in the elegiac tradition, the femina avaraP Again, this connection with an erotic situation is used merely as a method of introduction for a general treatment of avaritia and its dire consequences.

The structural outline of this poem conforms to that of the prose locus communis, except that the exempla are more artistically and elaborately arranged, as in 3*11• ^h® plan of the elegy is as follows t

1-4 statement of the subject, avaritia

5-*l4 illustrations of luxuria and the inevitably resultant avaritia among women

15-24 devotion of Indian women to their husbands, even to the point of self-sacrifice in death

25-50 comparisons between the simple life of primitive society and contemporary Rome; absence of feminine emphasis

51-58 exempla of particularly avaricious individuals, with continued lack of feminine emphasis

59-86 vain hope that Rome will abandon its pursuit of luxuria and its attendant avaritia.

The elegy is arranged chiastically. The exposition of the theme of avaritia in lines 1-4 Is balanced by a summary of the circumstances in contemporary Rome (lines 59-66). The self-assurance of the former, certa quidom tantis causa et manifests ruinis (line 3)» is maintained up until the vary end I

^See Tibullus 1.5 end 2.4 for examples of the figure of the femina avara. proloquaratque utinam patriae sin varus haruspext — frangitur ipsa suis Roma suporba bonis, certa loquor, sed nulla fides . . . (lines 59-61)

The conclusion is pessimistic, reflecting the decline of society from the ideal of the past. Two sots of minor illustrations form frames for the central and major pair of illustrations* In lines 5-1^

Propertius enumerates a number of precious goods sought after by feminae avarae. and he includes a brief sketch of the femina:

matrona incedit census induta nepotum et spolia opprobrii nostra per ora trahit. (lines 11-12)

All of this is summed up by the gnomic expression

nulla ost poscendi, nulla est reverentia dandi, aut si qua est, pretio tollitur ipsa mora. (lines 13-1*0

The balancing section lists three figures from history, legend and mythology, Brennus, Polydorus and Eriphyla, and alludes to the conse quences of avaritia in each. Propertius varies the list of figures by including the victim of an avarus in the center exemolum: Polydorus, son of Priam, is apostrophized, while in the first and third he deals directly with the guilty figure. The earlier set of illustrations deal with essentially feminine avaritia. while tho latter set contains only one female figure. Propertius disapproves strongly in both sec tions, first of the need for items of luxury among Roman women, then of the horrible crimes committed for the sake of greed. There is a difference in time, for the illustrations in lines 5-1** ara contemporary, whereas those in lines 51-56 are set in the past.

The central sections aro also composed in contrasting fashion. In lines 15-^4 Propertius praises the fidelity and devotion of Indian wives, culminating in their own sacrificial suicide at the death of

their husbands. The passage is written in affirmative terms, in

sharp contrast to the censorious tone of the preceding sections. The description is introduced by the word felix. as is the passage extend

ing from lines 25-50. It concludes with a short, biting comment on

the parallel state of affairs in Italy!

hoc genus infidum nuptarum, hie nulla puella nec fida Evadne nec pia Penelope. (lines 23-2*0

This description of Indian marital custom is written in the present tense, and, presumably, we are to take it as contemporary information.

It is also written with primary emphasis on the female, as are the first two sections of the poem.

The second of the central portions of the elegy is also intro duced by the adjective felix. While lines 15-21* dealt with marital customs and feminine selflessness in an exotic, contemporary society, of which Propertius appears to approve, the passage in lines 25-50 deals with the simplicity and innocence of life in the very early

stages of his own society. Like the passage on Indian women, Proper tius emphasizes here the devotion of the peasants to the institutions and personal and religious relationships basic to the society. He describes the conditions and rewards of such a life, and the favor of the gods towards the countrymen. At the close of the passage he returns to contemporary Rome, as lines 23-21* serve to counter the entire passage in lines 15-22. Modern Rome is without respect for religious and social institutions (lines **7-50 )♦ Lines 23-24 and Jj-7-50 both serve to deflate the preceding descriptions of situations which Propertius considers far better than the prevailing situations in Rome. A parallel is found in Tibullus 1.5*25ff*» where the poet returns to the harshness of his present relationship with Delia after summoning forth an exquisite daydream of how life could bo Improved if the lovers would leave for the country. Propertius’ description of the simple, uncomplicated pastoral existence is set in the past, and, although erotic, does not refer to exclusively female figures and situations*

Thus the elegy divides at line 25 into two large sections, each containing three smaller sections; lines 1-4-, 5-1^ and 15-2** deal with contemporary times, and the dominant emphasis is on the avaritia of Roman women contrasted with the selflessness of Indian women, while linos 25-50, 51“58 and 59-66 are set in the past and future, and dwell on material which goes beyond specifically feminine refer ence to a general indictment of contemporary Roman society by implicit contrast with what life was like before*

The poem opens with the verb quaeritis* this time indicating the presence of a group of imaginary, unnamed bystanders!

quaeritis, unde avidis nox sit pretiosa puellis, et Venere exhaustao damna querantur opes.

Propertius again establishes the dramatic setting for the elegy by- suggesting to the reader that he is listening in on a conversation already in progress. As in elegy the bystanders are anonymous in order to secure a general, non-specific atmosphere for the promise and accompanying proof. The bystanders have asked a question, here rephrased by Propertius, and the stage is set for the exposition of

the author’s own view*

corta quidem tantis causa et manifesto ruinis luxuriae nimium libera facta via est. (lines 3-4)

Propertius' comment is so resolutely and tersely expressed

that it almost commands acceptance. This certainly applies to the

erotic motif of the poor lover trying to please and satisfy his

mistress, but it is also an answer which will serve to explain the

greed of the sailor, mex-chant, soldier, and, in fact, anyone.

Propertius be^ns the elegy with a commonplace erotic theme, but he

so generalizes his reply to the bystanders that he is free to discuss

avaritia in any circumstance. A typical elegiac poem on the subject would Include reference to the demands of the mistress for gifts

(cf. Tibullus 2.4.21), difficulty in gaining entrance (Tibullus 1.2,

Propertius 1.6 and 4.5), and the problems to be encountered with

the lena (Tibullus 1.5 and Propertius 4.5 )• Propertius disregards details of this sort, and makes use of the orotic motif as merely

one kind of avaritia to be exposed. The central part of the poem

continues the orotic motif established at the outset, but in such a way as to suggest that Propertius is describing an ethical and moral pattern appropriate for the guidance of human life in general rather

than the specific relationship between lover and mistress. The implication is that a return to the simple and unassuming life style of a more primitive society benefits all, and would ensure respect for religious institutions (lines 41ff.), as well as the social

and political, by implication from linos 49-50* where these institutions are in disrespect because of the prevalence of avaritia and luxuria«

The exempla and illustrations are again well chosen. In elegy

3*11 Propertius made use only of exemola referring to a specific individual, and while he introduces this type of exemolum in lines

51-58 of elegy 3-13* there are also included descriptions of the objects of luxuria (lines 5-8), social institutions (lines 15-2*0 and an entire stage of civilization (lines 25-46) which serve an analogous purpose. The exemplum is a means of proof; a precedent, favorable or unfavorable, can be established by the mention of an individual drawn from iqythological, legendary or historical accounts, and the descriptions of general categories, such as the luxury goods listed in 3*13*5-8 or the characteristics of life in primitive society in 3.13.25-46, do exactly the same thing.

In lines 5-8 Propertius enumerates several items which must be counted as luxuries* gold, pearls (concha Erycina. line 6), Tyrian dyes and Arabian cinnamon. It was a commonplace idea among the Romans to associate luxuria and exotic products with the East; first, because most of the things counted as luxuries came from the East, but also because Eastern civilization carried with it the taint of decadence.

The large courts surrounding despotic rulers, the tremendous wealth of the ruling classes in comparison with the poverty of the pegsants, and the exotic products available were distasteful to the practical and more austere Roman. The Roman historians dated the declino in public and private moral and ethical standards from contact with the East: Sallust from the destruction of Carthago in 146 B. C.;

Livy from the return of Manlius Vulso from a war against Antiochus III in 187 B. C,; Polybius from the battle of Fydna in 168 B. C,® That

Propertius accepts this general and oversimplified account of Roman affairs is clear from the enumeration of Eastern luxuries and the decline of Roman conduct at lines *f7-50. But this is blended closely with the description of the decline of civilization from the Golden

Age as represented in the tradition of Hesiod, Aratus, Vergil, and, later, Ovid: the peace, tranquillity and abundance of the innocent past is gradually tainted and corrupted by the worst qualities inherent in human nature until the primitive, but pleasant, situation of the

Golden Age is supplanted by a grossly materialistic, avaricious and venal society.

Propertius treats this commonplace idea in an equally common place way. The description of primitive society (3*13.25-^) is modelled on the Hesiodic tradition as expressed in these passages from

Hesiod, Vergil and Tibullus: ia%\a icdvxa toicuv e n v Hapnov6 ’ eqiEpEV Cei'fitupos apoupa auTOudxn noAAdv te «at atpdovov*01 6* eOeAriMol naux

at tibi prima, puer, nullo munuscula cultu errantes hederas passim cum bacare tellus mixtaque ridenti colocasia fundot acantho. ipsae lacte domum referent distenta capellae ubera . . • molli paulatim flavescet campus arista, incultisque rubens pendabit sentibus uva et durae quercus sudnbunt roscida mella. . . . omnis feret omnia tellus. non rastros patietur humus, non vinea falcem. Vergil Sclogae ^.18-22, 28-30 and 39-^0

85allust Helium Catllinae 10.3; Livy 39-6.7; Polybius 31*25.3ff, 61

ante Iovem nulli subigebant arva colon!t • * • ipsaque tellus omnia liberius nullo poscente ferebat. mellaque decussit foliis ignemquo removit et passim rivi currentia vina repressit . . . Vergil Georgica 1.125, 127-128 and 131-132

quam bene Saturno vivebant rege, priusquam tellus in longas est patefacta viasl nondum caeruleas pinus contempserat undas, effusum ventis praebueratque sinum, nec vagus ignotis repetens compendia terris presserat externa navita merco ratem. illo non validus subiit iuga tempore taurus, non domito frenos ore monordit equus, non domus ulla fores habuit, non fixus in agris qui regerot certis finibus arva, lapis* ipsae mella dabant quercus, ultroque ferebant obvia securis ubera lactis oves* Tibullus 1.3.35-46

Propertius imitates this tradition in 3»13»25-iJ2:

felix agrestum quondam pacata iuventus, divitiae quorum messis et arbor erantl illis munus erant decussa Cydonia ramo, et dare puniceis plena canistra rubis . . . corniger Idael vacuam pastores in aulam dux aries saturas ipse reduxit ovis; dique deaeque omnes, quibus est tutola per agros, praebebant vestri verba benigna foci . . . 3,13.25-28, 39-42

As in the hexameter poets and Tibullus this passage portrays a lifo of rich abundance and little or no effort required to reap this wealth. To characterize the society in such a way as to emphasize its differences with Rome as Propertius observes them, he includes details on the easy and carefree relationships of lovers (lines 33-38)» where flowers and fruit are amply sufficient gifts from lover to mistress, and on the religious devotion of the peasants, inferred from tho divine favor thoy receive (lines 41-46),

The proofs offered in lines 5-50 are designed to indicate, by direct association and by contrast, the prevalence of avaritia and luxuria in contemporary Rome. The universal corruption of the Roman world is indicated in line 6 0i frangitur insa suis Roma superba bonis.

The first set of exemola (lines 5-1^) isolates the source of this moral decay. The second exemplum establishes that women can still be devoted to their husbands, implying that Roman women might well look to the customs of India for guidance; although there is no urging them to imitate the practice of suttee itself, the devotion and self lessness of Indian women is held up as the ideal. It is ironic that the model of wifely behavior is set in the East, the very source of the corruption at Rome: Inda cavis aurum mittit formica metallis

(line 5). The third exemplum. the primitive society in the Mediter ranean world, that connected with Roman experience, underlines how far contemporary society has fallen from the simple virtues of personal and religious devotion, content with basic necessities and love affairs uncomplicated by materialistic trappings.

In lines ^7-50 Propertius turns from the past to the situation in contemporary Romo* The wealth of the primitive society was its abundance of agricultural products, flowers and animals:

felix agrestum quondam pacata iuvontus, divitiao quorum messis et arbor erantl illis munus erant decussa Cydonia ramo .... (lines 25-27)

Throughout the passage there is no reference to any object which might be considered luxuriosns by Romans of Propertius1 day, nor is there any similar reference in the passages from Hesiod, Vergil and

Tibullus quoted above. The common view of life in the Golden Age is that it is free of avaritia and luxuria. and indeed Tibullus states that trade had not yet developed:

nec vagus ignotis repetens compendia terris presserat externa navita merce ratem* (1.3-39-40)

Above all, there is no reference to gold in any of these passages*

Lines 47-50 of elegy 3*13 dwell heavily on the corruption caused by possession of gold*

at nunc desertis cessant sacraria lucis: aurum omnos victa iam pletate colunt. auro pulsa fides, auro venalia iura, aurum lex sequitur, mox sine lege pudor.

There is no gold in the Golden Age, but in the contemporary world, comparable with Hesiod*s Iron Age, gold is both the symbol and means of corruption and moral decay. As the lack of fidos among Roman women served to mark an emphatic contrast with the complete devotion of Indian women (lines 23-24), so here the prevalence of gold and the corruptive influence it has on the modern individual serves to underline the differences between Rome of Propertius’ m m time and the idyllic past. The two central exemola. lines 15-24 on the

Indian women and 25-50 on primitive society; are thus turned to a moral purpose, whereby Propertius expresses his indignatio concerning the corruption and decadence of his society.

A fourth set of exempla remains, and with this group Propertius wishes to illustrate the consequences of avaritia. again linking gold with his subject:

torrida sacrilegum tostantur llmina Brennum, dum petit intonsi Pythis rogna dei: at mono laurigero concussus vertice diras Gallica Parnasus sparsit in arma nives. te scelus accepto Thracis Polymestoris auro nutrit in hospitio non, Polydore, pio. tu quoque ut auratos gereres, Eriphyla, lacertos, delapsis nusquam est, Araphiaraus equis. (lines 51-58)

In the first of the three exemola Propertius refers to the attempt made by an ariqy of Celts led by Brennus to sack the temple of

Apollo at Delphi in 278 B. C. The attack was repelled, according to the legend, by natural phenomena which Propertius interprets as the sending of omens by the god himself. While unstated, the object of the raid would have been the temple treasure. The second and third exemola deal in a straightforward manner with their respective tradi tions, and they demonstrate that avaritia can lead one to murder, in the case of Polymestor, and death for an innocent victim, Polydorus.

Eriphyla’s greed drives her husband to disregard the knowledge that he will die if he goes to Thebes. In both instances gold lay at the heart of the incidents; Polydorus brought with him to Polymestor's court much of the t r e a s u r e entrusted to him by his father, Priam, and Eriphyla was bribed to persuade Amphiaraus to go to Thebes with the promise of golden bracelets. With these last three exempla

Propertius demonstrates that avaritia. particularly for gold, leads to severe consequences, namely divine wrath, sin and death for the innocent.

ELogy 3*13 is far less emotionally charged than was elogy

Whereas the oxomolum of Cleopatra described a grave and dangerous threat which touched the lives of many Romans yet alive, thus enabling

Propertius to use rhetorical figures and usages designed to increase the emotional level of the poem at their best advantage, the topic of 65

elegy 3»13» avaritia. is more impersonal and less susceptible to such

treatment. Only a hint of the rhetorical question remains, in ouae-

ritis, line 1, whore a flat statement replaces the question. The

second person verb indicates that the bystanders are present, but,

unlike Propertius' treatment of the bystander in 3*11 and 3»19» he

ignores the bystanders immediately in this instance. The pretense of dialogue is given up for a one-sided denunciation of avaritia made ty

the poet himself. Apostrophe is employed three times in the elegy,

in linos 10, 56 and 57» tut in each case all that is done with the

figure is the plain and simple statement of the name of the individual

to whom the line refers. There is none of the dramatic tension created by the apostrophes to Rome in the exemolum of Cleopatra of elegy 3*lt*

Propertius does make use of an elaborate system of balanced exempla«

ant?, as was mentioned abovo, the exemola take on a number of forms.

Without the emotional subject matter to work with, Propertius has

enriched the poem instead by these longer descriptions in which he

pays closer attention to detail than he does in the shorter exemola of

3.11.9-26. Although the obvious rhetorical characteristics of elegy

3*11 are less in evidence in 3»13» the poem nevertheless duplicates

the structural approach, the employment of generalized comments with

exemola on a theme of universal interest and the same type of intro ductory approach to the subject, thus indicating direct parallels with

the prose locus communis .

ELegy 3*19 may ho classified as a locus communis de libidine

feminae. It is the most straightforward of the three elegies modelled on the locus communis because it lacks the more elaborate detail of the other two. It is quite short; elegies 3*11 and 3*13 both run to some length, 72 and 66 lines respectively, while elegy 3*19 is only 28 lines long. Extended examples of loci communes have boen noted in the Pro Caelio 16.39-18.4-3 and Pro Roscio Amerino 22.63-

26.72, and in these passages Cicero used a fairly complicated method of proof, balancing longer exemola with shorter ones, and, in the case of the Pro Roscio Amerino. an appended laus legum Graecorum de parricida. Propertius 3*11 contains the longer and shorter exempla similar to those employed in the Pro Caelio. and 3*13 varies the method of proof by introducing as exetnola two passages, lines 15-24- and 25-46, expressing praise for the selflessness of Indian women and the simplicity of primitive society, comparable to the close of the Pro Roscio Amerino. Elegy 3*19 is much more brief, and it pro ceeds to its conclusion by an unrelieved string of exempla. The method is simple and direct, comparable to the shorter loci of the

ControvGrsiao and declamations ascribed to Quintilian.

The structure of elegy 3*19 is quite simple and may be diagrammed as follows t

I-4- statement of the premise that women's passions are greater than men's

5-10 adynata--impossibility of controlling female passion

II-24- testes (exempla)

11-12 Paslphae 13-14- Tyro 13-16 Ifyrrha 17-18 Medea 19-20 Clytemnestra 21-2^ Scylla

25-28 application of the exemplum of Scylla to the general question* Scylla's punishment to serve as a warning for modern women; praise of Minos1 fairness

There is a chiastic relationship between the parts. The intro duction contains the premise that women's passion is excessive and leads to mad frenzy (lines 3-^)» The introduction is addressed to a vague vos. In the conclusion Propertius comments on the consequences of the frenzy which this excess of passion produces, namely death for

Scylla, without relating the passage directly to the relative passions of men and women as in the introduction. Also included is a warning, again to a vague vos. advising women to temper their passions. The edition of Butler and Barber, as well as Barber's Oxford Classical

Text (i960), places lines 25-26 at the end of the poem, but in view of the position of vos in line 3» the chiastic balance is preserved try taking the last four lines in their manuscript order, as Camps does in his edition. Also, the placement of lines 27-28 at the close of the poem lets Propertius use Minos as a positive example of male self- control and reason, balancing his attempt to speak well in behalf of the male sex in lines 1-2. The internal sections are both simple lists, somewhat mochanical enumerations of arguments in support of the poet's contention stated in lines 1-4. The former list of adynata is balanced by a longer list of exempla. These interrelationships are quito superficial, and there is no attempt to bind up the parts with intricate cross-reference and repetition of similar themes throughout the parts. What the structure represents is a simply organized and 68 methodical attempt to prove that women's passion greatly exceeds that

of the male*

Once again Propertius opens the poem by replying to an Imaginary

bystander, who has proposed that a man's lust is greater than a

woman's *

obicitur totiens a te mihi nostra libido: crede mihi, vobis imperat ista magis. (lines 1-2)

The character is unnamed, as before, but it is surely a woman* There

is, however, nothing to suggest that it is Cynthia, nor, in light of

what follows, is there any reason to suspect that it might be. The

poem is an invective directed against the passions of women in general,

as suggested by plural pronouns and verbs in lines 2-4 (vobis * . •

vos * * . ruoistis . * . nescitis) and line 25 (vos * . . urite). In

line 2 Propertius sets forth his own view on the matter t crede mihi. vobis imperat ista magis. He is sure of his position, and uses crede

mihi. like certa in 3*13*3 and 6l, both to secure general application-,

for his remarks and to emphasise the basic error on the part of his

adversary. In addition, he immediately changes the pronoun from te

to vobis. thus drawing into his circle all women. He flings the woman's

taunt back at her in lines 3"^!

vos, ubi contempt! rupistis frona pudoris, nescitis captae mentis habere modum.

A more genuine dramatic tension is achieved in these four lines than

in the introductory passages of 3*11 and 3*13 where the imaginary

bystander was introduced without the feeling of emotionally charged

argument. The woman of elegy 3*19 is thus a more tangible dramatic figure than those of 3*11 and 3*13» tut she too is quickly dropped as an addressee in favor of Propertius* wish to give his own views and accompanying proofs*

Instead of amplifying the statement of the premise with bits of gnomic wisdom, Propertius turns to the technique of citing adynata in support of his charge* The adynaton represents an absolute impossibility designed to corroborate the absolute impossibility of a second action or idea. The first adynaton. flamma per incensas citius sedetur aristas, serves a twofold purposei it is both adynaton and metaphor, illustrative of passion. The next three adynata. simi larly through metaphorical suggestion, underline the idea that it is impossible to control passion.

The exempla relate to crimes stemming from passion. All are deviations from the accepted patterns of sexual behavior, some are more shocking than others, but all show excess. The exempla are not extraordinary in their relationship to the poem as a whole; certainly they match the dramatic and emotional pitch which the exemolum of

Cleopatra lends to elegy 3*H» but they do not contain the attention to detail found in those exempla examined in connection with 3 » H and,

3.13. The exempla of 3*19 are arranged in an order of increasing seriousness, from personal lust affecting only the individual in the cases of Pasiphae, Tyro and Ityrrha, to lust which destroys families, the children in the case of Medea and husband in the case of Clytem- nestra, to the climax of the series, lust which destroys the state in the case of Scylla. The first and last oxemnla are bound together by their relationship with Minos. Pasiphae was his wife, and Scylla was 70 the daughter of Nisus, king of Megara, with whom Minos was at war. No punishment is mentioned for Pasiphae, but Scylla's betrayal of her father and her city out of love for Minos resulted in her death.

Minos* sense of justice overrode any personal feelings in the face of

Scylla*s treason, and she was punished accordingly. Propertius is complimentary in assessing Minos* actions,

non tamen immerito Minos sedet arbiter Orci: victor erat quamvis, aequus in host© fuit. (lines 27-28) and the exemolum of Scylla is thus used to point up the extremely serious nature of treason, or, more positively, the importance of amor patriae.

The exempla are introduced by the word testis, equivalent to exemnlum itself. Propertius does this also at 2.13.52, 2.26B.^7 and

3.15.11. A remarkable parallel is found in Cicero, De imnerio Cn.

Pompei 11.30-31, whore the list of testes numbers seven:

testis est Italia quam ille ipse victor L. Sulla huius virtute et subsidio confessus est liboratam; testis Sicilia, , . • testis Africa • . . testis Gallia . • • testis Hispania * . • testis iterum ot saepius Italia . . . testes nunc vero iam omnes orae atquo omnes terras gentes nationos, rnria denique omnia cum universe turn in singulis oris omnes sinus atque portus.

The rhetorical nature of 3*19 is in some ways moi'e clear than that of 3*11 and 3*13* The locus communis de libidlne is stripped of adornments and complicated exemola. and there is a step by stop progression, from premise, assertion of tho impossibility of its being otherwise, proofs of the promise, and concluding warning to the audience to beware of the consequences. The pattern is straight forward, tho elegy is quite brief, and the points are made quickly and tersely. Address and apostrophe are used effectively, creating a high emotional level which is increased by the citation of exemola.

The taunt flung at Propertius try the female adversary is hurled back at women in general in the second couplet, and Propertius is lavish g in his use of harsh-sounding consonants Jr

vos_, ubi contempt! ruoistis frena pudoris nescitis captao mentis, habero modum.

Special fo$pe is gained by the use of a present tense verb (tondes) in the first couplet in the exemplum of Scylla, lines 21-22. This vividness, plus final position in the series, calls special attention to her crime, and the dramatic effect of the direct address makes

Propertius* accusation all the more damning. Rhetorical questions are introduced in lines 17-20 S

nam quid Medeae referam, quo tempore matris iram natorum caede piavit amor? quidvo Claytemnestrao, propter quam tota Mycenis infamis stupro stat Pelopea domus?

The introductory particles, nam quid . . . quid, are the samo as those used in tho first lines of the exemolum of Cleopatra. Here they serve to supply additional references in support of Propertius* argument, but they also call attention to what follows, the exemplum of Scylla, where the crime was not against children or husband, but against parent and nation and therefore most hotrible of all. The universal aspects of the poem are derived in part from the use of the words totlons and credo mihi. where tho poet suggests that all

^Seo Quintilian 1.JK37 on the letter "s" and 12.10.29 and JZ on "fr" and "s'*" women boliove as does the imaginary opponent, but that men, partic

ularly the poet, think quite the opposite and that this is the proper

view. Tho beginning lines create the impression of previous dialogue,

thus giving the poem an appearance of being an extempore oration,

albeit on a small scale.

The remaining elegies, 3*14 and 3*22, are poems in which the

themes are discussed in rhetorical fashion similar to the treatment

of 3*H» 3*13 and 3*19» but the locus communis in vitia derectus is

not the model. Instead, 3*14 appears to be based loosely on the laus

legum, and 3*22 on the laus locorum. a species of panegyric. Both

exhibit elements of coraoaratio.

The laus lapsum is discussed in Quintilian 2.4.33-40* and elegy

3,14 seems to be modelled on this exercise. That it is an exercise

is clear from the following passage!

legum laus ac vituperatio iam maiores ac prope summis operibus suffecturas vires desidorant; quae quidem suasoriis an controvorsiis magis accommodata sit exercltatio. consuetudine et iui'e civitatium differt. 2.4.33

He continues!

apud Graecos enim lator earum ad iudicom vocabatur, Romanis pro contione suadere ac dissuadero moris fuit. 2.4.33

Elegy 3*14 contains no genuine addressee. Propertius is urging

the adoption of a lex Spartan,?, to a general, unidentified audience

in carefully argued fashion. With the apostrophe to Roma in the

closing line it is possible to see a parallel with the Roman 73 practice in genuine situations indicated in the preceding passage- from Quintilian: Propertius places his audience in the position of the Roman contio.

Of the various topics which are included in a speech in praise of a law, Propertius disregards detailed argument in favor of a description of the lex Spartana, its natural consequences at Sparta, and a comparison of the situation at Rome, where such a law, or custom, is not in effect. The conclusion is that Rome would bo better off by adopting a similar lex.

The usual laus legls contained questions of a constitutional nature, and a discussion of whether or not the law was capable of enforcement,^ A separate set of questions surrounded laws of tempo rary duration, such as the lox Manilla*Eut the question most commonly introduced is one which Propertius considers: maxima vero commune est auaerere, an sit N ) honest a, an utilis (2.U-.3 7),

The subject of elegy 3*1^ is the practice among Spartan girls of exercising in the nude, taking part in the same exercises as the boys (inter luctantis viros, line *0 the element of embarrassment and shame in nudity was banished (non infamis, line 3)*' the relation ships betwoen lovers wore therefore natural, devoid of extravagant trappings which at Rome led to infidelity, artificiality and deception.

Propertius presents his case in tho form of a laudatio on the Spartan practice, illustrating it with scenes from the palaestra, similes

^Quintilian 2.4.35ff*» and 39,

^Quintilian 2.^1.35-40. 7^ involving mythical women unashamed of their nudity, and a description of the lovers* relationship.

The elegy is an example of laus IorIs in only a general way.

As noted, it does not embody all of the characteristics which would have been used in a genuine example presented in court. The lex

Snartana itself reads vetat secedere amantis. et licet in trivils ad latus esse suae (lines 21-22). But tho practice of nudity conforms rather to the iura palaestrae, line 1, and the illustrative material is applied to this fact. Lox and ius are not properly the same thing: lex was an individual law or bill, while ius encompassed the entire body of law, as ius civile, or here, the collection of rules which apply to physical exercise. Further, the point of the elegy is that nudity leads to honesty and freedom from disguise and deception in love affairs, and Propertius describes this as a general custom among Spartans, properly mos. There was a lex which applied to the regulation of exercise among Spartan women, and which compelled them 12 to walk in the festival processions with the men, all of them naked.

Whether Propertius had this in mind when composing this elegy is indeterminable. The elegy is written in praise of the sum total of

Spartan practices regarding nudity, exercise and erotic attachment, and Propertius uses a generalized form of tho school exercise laus legis to praise the leges, iura and mores surrounding this entire experience.

Propertius * argument for adoption of tho practices of Spartan

^See Plutarch Lyenrgns l4ff. for Lycurgus* rhetra regarding exercise and public nudity for Spartan women. 75 women is strengthened by illustrating the frustrating and artificial attitudes then current in Rome pertaining to erotic associations, ending with a plea' for the adoption of the lex* Tho poem is divided into two large sections, the first illustrating Spartan practice, the second comparing this practice with the Roman. In diagrammatic form the poem appears as follows!

1-4- statement of the theme; Propertius' admiration

5-12 the various exercises in which the girls participate

13-20 similes involving women from mythology

21-32 love.at Sparta compared with love at Rome

33-34- plea for adoption of the lex Snartana

The poem is introduced by moans of an apostrophe to Sparta, indicating admiration for the prevailing custom!

multa tuae, Sparte, miramur iura palaestrae sed mage virginei tot bona gymnasii, quod non infainis excrcet corporo ludos inter luctantis nuda puella viros, * • • (lines 1-4)

The themo is established, and it is clear that the elegy will be a laudatio as opposed to vituperatio» Unlike the loci* 3*11, 3*13 and 3*19, there is no attempt to create the impression of dialogue with a fictitious bystander; the dramatic situation is secured through tho apostrophe* Howevor, the opening line contains two vrords common to the introductory techniques of the locus* ntulta and miramur*

Multa is used in quite tho same way as it might be in the locus* to indicate an indefinite or infinite quantity serving to isolate a class of objects for praise or condemnation. Here Propertius Isolates tho iura palaestrae* and holds thorn up for praise. The verb miramur serves a purpose different from that in the locus. Instead of attempting to assert the generality of a proposition or to correct an opponent’s view of that proposition, the verb here expresses the poet’s excited approval of the custom described, without attempting to account for the views of others.

The laus legis required argumentation and proof to secure the desired result. In elegy J A b Propertius seeks to accentuate the positive aspects of the Spartan custom first by offering a long list of specific examples of the girls* physical prowess and similes com paring them to ii^ythological figures, and second by comparison of the prevailing attitudes towards love at Sparta and Rome. This latter section, lines 21-32, is a comoaratio. an exercise cited in

Quintilian as the next step undertaken after simple panegyric!

hinc ilia quoque oxercitatio subit compara- tionis, uter melior uterve deterior. 2.4.21

Spartan practices are described by a series of negatives which, in effect, describe the situation at Rome!

lex igitur Spartana vetat secedore amantis et licet in triviis ad latus osso suae, nec timor aut ulla est clausae tutela puellae, nec gravis austori poena cavenda viri. nullo praemisso de rebus tute loquaris ipse tuis: longae nulla repulsa morae. nec Torino vestes errantia lumina fallunt, est nequo odoratae cura molesta comae. (lines 21-28)

In tho comparatio Propertius must make clear that the Spartan practice is superior to tho Roman, and ho achieves this goal through the rehearsal of tho unpleasant, distasteful and deceptive practices at

Romo in lines 23-28, This underscores by implication tho honest and 77 open behavior of lovers at Sparta, the very thing Propertius wants to achieve at Rome. The description of Roman practice is put in direct terms, continuing the condemnation of the state of affairs at home, and demonstrating that the lex Spartnna is molior and that the absence of a similar lex Romana is deterior; this is supported by the final pleat

quod si iura fores pugnasque imitata Laconum, cartoi* hoc esses tu mihi, Roma, bono.

A point by point comparison of this elegy with the laus legum as described by Quintilian is not possible. Rather than composing a dry, methodical prose argument, Propertius is writing poetry, and he chooses those aspects of his model which best suit his purpose.

The exposition of the lex, citations of its benefits, and a comparatio on practices in Sparta and at Rome are sufficient. The object is acceptance of the lex at Rome, and with the elements chosen Propertius has sufficient material to argue that Spartan practice is melior and

Roman practice is deterior. The argument is dosigned to show that the lex is utilis. expedient in the sense of being useful for securing 13 a desired result. This result is a carefree and sincere relationship between lovers, and, as Spartan practice proves, female nudity in exercise is a factor in securing this result, but not the only factor.

Their society is unencumbered by luxuria (lines 27-28); this is not true of Rome, and there luxuria leads to deceptions, jealousy and a perversion of the simplicity which ought to characterize the lovers * relationship.

^Compare Quintilian 2 ,k0y?, 78

In sum, the elegy exhibits several characteristics of the laus

legum as described in Quintilian, and this rhetorical exercise serves

as a model for the poem*

Elegy 3*22 differs from 3*11* 13* 1^ and 19 in that it is

addressed to a specific individual, Tullus, whereas the others had

as addressees vague, unnamed figures. The purpose of 3*22 is to

urge Tullus to return to Italy after spending many years abroad, but

this exhortation is confined to the opening and closing lines of the

poem (1-^, 39-^2). The bulk of the poem, lines 7-38, is a long argu

ment designed to convince Tullus of the superiority of Italy over the

rest of the world, and this section is thus comparable to tho laudes

locorum found in various ancient authors. This laus Italiao in

3*2 2*7-38 may be compared with passages on an identical theme in

Horace Odes 1.7*1-1^, Vergil Georgian 2.I36-I76, Livy 5 • • (°n

the site of Rome), and with the laus Siciliae in Cicero In Verrem

2.2.2-11. Dionysius of Halicarnassus has a similar passage in praise

of Rome, Eook 1', sections 36-37*

Ihe laus locorum is identified as a species of panegyric in

Quintilian 3*7*27* Panegyric was one of the exercises undertaken by

the student in the rhetorical schools!

inde paulatim ad maiora tenders incipiet, . laudare claros viros et vituperare improbos* 2 .^.20

The subject matter appropriate for panegyric was quite extensive I

quae materia praecipue quidem in deos et homines cudit, est tamen ct aliorum anima- lium, otiam carentium anima. 3*7*6

/ I

laudantur autem urbes similiter atque homines* 3*7*26

est laus et operum, in quibus honor, utilitas, pulchritudo, auctor spectari solet. honor ut in templis, utilitas ut in muris, pulchritudo vel auctor utrobique. est et locorum, qualis Biciliae apud Ciceronem, in quibus similiter speciem et utilitatom intuemur; speciem in maritimis, planis, amoenis; utilitatem in salubribus, fertilibus. erit et dictorum honostorum factorumque laus generalis, erit et rerum omnis modi, nam et somni et mortis scrip- tae laudes et quorundam a medicis ciborum. 3*7*27

Quintilian analyzes the form which the speech might take in sections 3*7*7-9 (on the gods), 3*7.10-18 (on men) and 3*7.26 (on cities). Briefly, the orator would, in the laus hominis* deal with tho historical events at the time of the man's birth, then his birth and the circumstances (omens, humble origin, etc.) surrounding it, his character and physical features, and finally events after the man's death including the achievements of his offspring. The laus urbium. as Quintilian notes, follows similar outlines with appropriate substitutions, e.g. the founder of the city equated with the parent.

Finally, the laus locorum includes material first on the beauty of the country, then on the usefulness of the land. However Cicero, in

^he laus Sicillae. combines these elements with those of the laus hominum, including information on the history, past and present, of the island, and a section of praise for tho inhabitants*

Tho laus Siciliao corresponds fairly closely to the form pre scribed for panegyric in Quintilian,..given the fact that it. combines the elements of tho laus hominum with those of the laus locorum. It opens with a discussion of tho antiquity of the friendship between t

Sicily and Romo, and tho nobility of the island's culture (2-*0. •

This is followed ty comments on the great economic benefit which Rome

derives from Sicily, that is the island's utilitas. Rraise of the

natives of the island comes next (7-9)* and tho passage closes with

a description of the conditions in Sicily under Verres, adding that

this admirable country deserves full justice (9-11)• The panegyric

dwells largely on those aspects of Sicily which Quintilian calls

utilitas, but Cicero includes something of the island's species in

his description of works of art and monuments* In addition to

praise of the island's species and utilitas* the opening and closing

sections seek to put the subject in proper historical perspective, an

element presumably borrowed from the laus hominum, where the man's

birth was related to contemporary history, and tho events following

his death were set forth. Here Cicero establishes the ancient

relationship between Sicily and Rome in sections 2-4*, and in 9-11

he clarifies the present injustices perpetrated against the Sicilians.

Vergil's laus Italiae. Georgica 2.I36-I76, shows some similarity

to Cicero's laus Siciliae. Whereas the prose passage detailed tho

praiseworthy aspects of Sicily with the purpose of demonstrating that

it was deserving of assistance in a time of trouble, mainly on tho

basis of historical and economic importance to Rome, Vergil's laus

Italiae is far less factual, with the intent of painting an idealized

word picture extolling the natural beauty of the country.

The passage opens with a list of places which cannot compare in

excellence with Italy, despite the positive characteristics of each.

Tho passage continues by showing that Italy is a peaceful land, free 81 of monsters and warlike men, again making negative comparisons (lines

1^0-14-8). The praises of the countryside and various accomplishments of man, cities, walls, harbors, extend from lines 1^9-166. A list of distinguished citizens follows, linos 167-172» and the passage closes with an apostrophe to Saturnia tellus and Vergil's promise to continue to sing the praises of Italy*

Vergil's laus Italiae contains the same elements as tho laus

Siciliae, merely rearranged. The historical data is saved for the end, in the list of tribes and men who were distinguished for their braveryi the present is represented by Caesar, the past by the native tribes and early Roman heroes. This passage corresponds also to

Cicero's praise of the citizens of Sicily. The bulk of the laus

Italiae is concerned with the praise of the countryside, both its species and utilitas. species in the mention of cities-, rivers and lakes, utilitas in the description of the tremendous fertility of the land and tho herds.

A shorter and less elaborate kind of laus locorum is found in

Horace Odes 1.7*1-1^. It is concerned with praise for the natural beauty of Italy, particularly the area about Tibur, and this description is compressed into three lines (12-l^). It can hardly be compared to the laudes of Cicero and Vergil, but it makes use of the technique of contrasting other places with Italy to demonstrate the superiority of Italy over thoso other places, at least from the point of view of the poet. Lines 1-9 form a long prelude to the main thought expressed in lines 12-lij-: the cities and islands of Greece are indeed beautiful, and many will praise these, but for Horace, me nec tarn patiens Lacedaemon nec tarn Larisae percussit campus opimae, quam domus Albuneae resonantis et praecops Anio ac Tiburni lucus et uda mobilibus pomaria rivis• (lines 10-14)

Italy is singled out as deserving of greater praise than the older, distinguished cities and islands of Greece, and this method is used by Propertius in the laus Italiae of 3*22*

As mentioned at the outset, elegy 3*22 has.an addressee in the strict sense of the term and thus differs from 3*11» 13* 14 and 19*

In this regard the poem reflects the hortatory nature of the elegies in Book I. The ultimate goal of the poet is to induce the addressee,

Tullus, to return home from his years abroad in order to secure a career and familyt

haec tibi, Tulle, parens, haec est pulcherrima sedes, hie tibi pro aliqua gente petendus honos, hie tibi ad eloquium cives, hie ampla nepotum spes et venturae coniugis aptus amor. (lines 39-42)

The initial appeal, lines 1-6, establishes the poet*s feeling that

Italy is a more beautiful country than is the area around Cyzicus, where Tullus has spent much time. The final appeal concentrates instead on moral and ethical considerations. Italy is a place where

Tullus can properly fulfill his responsibilities as a Roman gentleman, both in public and private life. The laus Italiae, lines 7-38* points up the unpleasant as well as pleasant aspects of life abroad, partic ularly in the description of the moral depravity of the figures from

Greek legend in lines 29-38* Italy is free of moral decadence, and is thus a proper climate for Tullus1 expected achievements. The laus Italiae offers praise of Italy as a country superior to other parts of the world, and this praise is directed toward establishing the superior moral climate of Italy. 14 The structural outline of tho poem is as follows:

1-6 appeal to Tullus to return home, suggesting the physical beauty of Italy

7-38 the laus Italiae, designed to convince Tullus of the superiority of Italy

7-16 sights abroad surpassed by those of Italy

17-26 praise of Roman virtue and physical beauty of Italy

27-3S monstra from which Italy is free

39-42 appeal to Tullus, stressing the superior moral climate of Italy

The introductory and concluding sections frame the argument, the laus

Italiae. The introduction appeals to Tullus on the basis of his apparent delight with the physical beauty of Cyzicus and the surround ing areas, reflecting Propertius' desire to convince Tullus of the greater beauty of Italy. The concluding section concentrates on the benefits to be derived from coming home to Italy, tho pulcherrima sedes; honos and the opportunity to make use of his great elo quence in a public career, offspring and a devoted wife. The appeal to Tullus is made from the two basic elements of the laus locorum, species and utilitas, and thus tho specific nature of tho hortatory part of the poem and the general nature of tho laus are given mutual

14 This outline corresponds to the suggestion of Camps in his introductory note ad loc., except that I have taken lines 17-13 with lines 19-26. 811-

relevance •

The laus Italiae has a structure of its own, centered on the

praise of Roman virtue and beauty of Italy in lines 17-22. It begins with a list of places in the western and eastern Mediterranean which

are in themselves wonders. The geographical expanse is wide, ranging

from the garden of the Hesperides, beyond the entrance to the Mediter

ranean in the far west,to Colchis at the extreme eastern end of the

Black Sea, including thereby virtually all of the known world between

these bounds. The exemola in lines 7-10 are concerned with references

to the labors of Hercules and Perseus, emphasizing the places in which

these occurred, as is the case in lines 11-16, where Propertius is

concerned with identifying places to the east by associating their

names with a distinctive story or landmark. In this list there is a

tendency toward enumeration of figures who are monstruosus and poten

tially sinister, e.g. the giants Atlas, Geryon and Antaeus, and the

severed head of Medusa; even in the story of the Argo Propertius

alludes to the crushing of tho dove between the Symplegades. While

Propertius is not obviously critical in his description of these wonders,

and possibly intends to convey the sense of laudabunt alii in Horace

Odes 1.7»1, there is nevertheless an underlying suggestion that these

places are in part evil, foreshadowing the list of monstra in lines

27-38.

The monstra, except for the first exemplum. are figures drawn

from Greek mythology. The first concerns the absence of poisonous

snakes in Italian watersj and follows upon tho description of these waters as objects of great beauty in lines 23-26. All of the monstra are described by means of Propertius* assertion that they are not to be found in Italy, establishing the contrast between the Greek world and the Roman. The remainder of the monstra deal with crimes commit ted by individuals or punishments suffered undeservingly. Propertius thus comments on the character of the Italian citizens by illustrating that they do not behave as Greeks do, that they are free of cruelty, savagely and trickery, indicated by the exempla of Andromeda, Atreus,

Meleager and Althea, Pentheus, Iphigenia, Io and Sinis, all involved in some way with the moral dissolution of Greece thus implied. In this list of exemola describing Greek morality, or tho lack of it, Propertius is harshly critical, unlike his attitude in the initial series of exora- pln in lines 7“i6 where he allowed personal taste to be the guiding criterion. While the cities and physical landmarks of tho rest of the world may be pleasant, the moral characteristics are damnable.

The central section of the argument sums up the preceding and following lists of exemola by expressing a distinct preference for

Italy t

omnia Romanae cedent miracula terrao: natura hie posuit, quidquid ubique fuit. armis apta magis tellus quam commoda noxae: Famam, Roma, tuae non pudet historiae. nam quantum ferro tantum pietate potentos stamus! vietrices temperat ira manus. (lines 17-22)

The physical wonders of the rest of tho world were listed in lines

7-16» and this information is balanced by a description of the beauty and healthfulness of Italian rivers and lakes in lines 23-26, whore there is no suggestion that these wondors are in any.way sinister.

Propertius' praiso for Italy is implied throughout the latter section 86 of exempla In view of his adoption of the method of negative comparison in lines 27-38, but this praise is stated explicitly and positively in the central passage, lines 17-18, where Propertius stresses

Italy's beauty, diverse geography and climate, incorporating into one place features similar to, yet also superior to, those in far-flung places.

In lines 19-22 Propertius describes Roman virtue, and this praise of national characteristics is in sharp contrast to the con demnation of Greek morality and ethics, lines 29-38. The exemola of Greek mythological figures describe crimes stemming from jealousy, greed and infidelity, all grave defects, and, since they are set in the past, they form the basis of a tradition of which the Greeks cannot be proud. The Romans, however, have a heritage quite the opposite! Famam. Roma, tuao non pudet hlstoriae (line 20). And although they engage in war, pietap and dementia are their distinc tive hallmarks i

nam quantum ferro tanturn piotate potantes stamus: victrices temperat ira manus. (lines 21-22 ) * In praising Roman character Propertius is hardly fair to the Greeks, for he selects individual instances of tho worst behavior as repre sentative of the whole, but, as this is an example of comparatio. he must distinguish between the melior and deterior in such a way as to make the differences entirely obvious. The comparatio in elegy 3*1^ on the lex Snartana contained equally loaded examples in characterizing

Romans as excessively avaricious and deceitful in their romantic affairs. The intent of this praise of Roman characteristics and the physical beauty of Italy is to induce Tullus to return home from • abroad, and Italy must be described to its best advantage; the laus

Italiae aims at establishing the morally superior climate of Italy, but it remains a literary device, for both poet and addressee could cite numerous examples of Greek virtue and natural beauty.

Lines 7-38 constitute a laus Italiae very much similar in form and content to Cicero's laus Sioiliae. There is not much of an attempt to distinguish between species and utilitas; the parts of elegy 3*22 dealing with places at home or abroad are concerned more with species. save for the epithet salubris attached to the lacus Iuturna (line 2 6).

The definition of Italy’s physical beauty is put forward directly in lines 23-38, and summed up in the central passage, lines 17-18. The wondrous sights found elsewhere have counterparts surpassing them in

Italy; omnia Romanae cedent miracula terrae (line 17)• But of equal interest to Propertius is the desire to praise Rome's national charac teristics, much as Cicero did for the Sicilians, In Verrem 2,2.7-9.

His positive statements are again put forviard in the central section, lines 19-22, and this is in direct contrast with the oxemnla of the latter half of the poem illustrating depravity in Greece. Cicero praised the ancient relationship between Sicily and Rome, citing the long tradition of mutual respect and service, and Propertius introduces a brief note on Rome's antiquity in line 20, Famam. Roma, tuae non pudet historiao. perhaps in fulfillment of the requirement that a laudatlo make somo connection between the subject and its past, a3 noted in Quintilian 3*7*10 end 26.

In large part the passage meets tho requirements for the com- 88

position of the laus locorum. The physical beauty of Italy is estab

lished, both in terms of its species and its utilitas. As in Cicero,

Propertius includes praise for Roman character, adding a passage of

condemnation of Greek morality, designed to enhance the moral superi

ority of Italy as the proper place for Tullus to gain his deserved

honos. There is not much history included in the passago, and Proper

tius seems to be paying lip service to this aspect of the laus in line 20. The superiority of Italy is established by the argument

presented. Above all the entire passage does not appear to be thought lessly composed and attached carelessly to the appeal to Tullus. The laus locorum deals with the soecles and utilitas of its subject, and

it is on these characteristics of Italy that Propertius bases his

appeal to Tullus in lines 1-^ and 39-^2. CONCLUSION

ELegies 3-H* 3*13, 3»liS 3*19 and J.22 have been isolated as examples of Propertius* desire to create a new form for elegiac com position by modelling these five poems on exercises employed in the rhetorical schools* Elegies 3*11» 3*13 and 3*19 bear strong resem blances to the loci communes in vitia derecti. Elegies 3*1^ and

3*22 are modelled respectively on the laus legum and laus locorum*

These exercises were employed in the schools of the rhetori cians. Quintilian provides information on all three exercises in

Book II of the Institutio oratoria. specifically devoted to tho edu cation of the student in the rhetorical school. Tho elder Seneca 1 also discusses the locus communis as an exercise in Controversiae I, praefatio 2 3. While both of these sources postdate Propertius,

Quintilian assarts that the exercises had been used by rhetoricians for some four hundred years, dating their origins to the time of

Demetrius of Fhalerura, c. 300 B. C. The similarities between the characteristics of the locus communis as discussed by Quintilian and those pieces found in the speeches of Cicero suggest that Quintilian’s information applies to the rhetorical education current in Propertius’ youth.

The elegies modelled on the locus communis deal with themes of broad and general interest, and they are cast in the form of denunci ations of vices, avaritia. potent.la femlnarum and libido feminarum.

89 By use of certain techniques the poem is turned into a general and non-specific attack directed against a large number of people. There is no specific addressee, but rather an unnamed bystander who, by his questions or comments, presents the views of the multitude which are always incorrect. Words of sweeping proportions are employed with the purpose of Incorporating the largest group possible into the attack, such as totiens and magis In 3»i9»l and 2. Propertius offers gnomic comments to sum up his own views, tho gnomic statement being general and universal by definition. These features are paralleled in the extant examples of prose loci. Structural parallels between the elegiac and prose loci communes are also evident, as is tho ten dency to prove the thesis by means of exemrjla. Finally both the prose and elegiac locus communis are embellished by various rhetorical figures, among them the rhetorical question and liberal use of apos trophe to heighten the dramatic effectiveness of the passage. Elegies

3»JA and 3*22 are less strictly modelled on their respective sources, but they contain the most significant aspects of each exercise, elimi nating the attention to detail and close proof which one would normally expect to find in a lengthy prose piece.

Jfy aim has been to establish tho dependence of the five elegies on the rhetorical exercises prevalent in the schools of Propertius* day. The poet appears deliberately to have chosen the exercises as models for these poems which depart markedly from the conventional material of the Latin love elegy. Tho elegies of Book III reveal new and experimental themes and methods of treatment, and the inclusion of these five elegies in tho book underscores the dissatisfaction of the poet for the stock of erotic commonplaces which form the basis for many of the elegies of Books I and II. Propertius handles these commonplace materials in exciting ways, lending vivid sensual percep tion and description to the themes and motifs. In Book III the fre quency of subjective-erotic poems diminishes, and more elegies are written on subjects of a diverse nature. The trend is away from relation of personal experience towards objective treatment of the material. The elegies modelled on the locus communis have a somewhat didactic air; the poet*s indignation at servitium. avaritia and libido puts him in the position of suggesting how things ought to be, as is true also of elegy 3*1^ on the lex Spartana and corresponding lack of morality at Romo. The personal circumstances of the poet are not important to the dramatic situation of these five poems; Propertius expresses his views, but he does this in the posture of a bystander and critic rather than as a participant, a posture which is rare in the earlier books.

The introductory elegies of Book III show that Propertius was interested in literary questions, and in the book as a whole wo see him trying to find new modes of expression in a genre grown rigidly conventional and devoted almost exclusively to amatory subjects. His experimentation with poems on literary themes, dirges, hymns, narrative elegy and elegiac treatment of tho rhetorical exercise broke new ground for the elegy at Rome. Propertius himself turned to aetiological, narrative and descriptive elegies in Book IV where objectivity is the controlling factor. Ovid too departed from the conventional forms of the subjective-erotic elegy in the Tristia. Eplstulae ex Ponto and Heroides. and in the Ars amatorla. Remedia amoris and

Medtcamina he assumes the conventional role of praeceptor amoris on a grand scale. Finally, in the Fasti Ovid composed a lengthy poem having virtually nothing to do with erotic elegy. Other elegies departing from the subjective-erotic type are found in the Corpus

Tlbullianum and Appendix Vergiliana. The diversification of subject matter in Propertius III appears to have established a trend or at least to have been symptomatic of a general dissatisfaction with subjective-erotic elegy. Ovid's Amores contain clear examples of parody, possible only when a form is readily known and definable, else the point is lost. The five elegies in Propertius modelled on rhetor ical exercises are but one of the ways in which Propertius chose to vary the approach to elegy as a whole; the third book of elegies marks

Propertius' departure from the conventional elegiac forms, and perhaps the way was thus prepared for further experimentation in other authors. SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Texts:

Cicero. De inventione. Edited by E. Stroebel. Leipzig: B. G. Teubner, 1915*

. Orationes. Edited by Albert C. Clarke. Oxford: The Clarendon Press of the Oxford University Press, 1908.

. Rhetorica. Edited by A* 5. Wilkins. Oxford: The Clarendon Press of the Oxford University Press, 1902.

[CicerqJ • M C. Hercnniun de ratione dicendl. Edited by Harry Caplan. The Loeb Classical Library. London: William Heinemann Ltd. and Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 195^*

Propertius. Carmina. Edited by E. A. Barber. 2nd edition. Oxford: The Clarendon Press of the Oxford University Press, i960.

. The Elegies of Propertius. Edited by H. E. Butler and E. A. Barber. Oxford: The Clarendon Press of the Oxford University Press, 1933*

______. Elegies i Book III. Edited by VI. A. Camps. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 19^6.

______. Elegien. Edited by M. Rothstein. 2nd edition. Berlin: Weidmannsche Buchhandlung, 1920.

Quintilian. The Institutio Oratoria. Edited by H. E. Butler. The Loeb Classical Library. London: William Heinemann Ltd. and Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1920.

Seneca. Controverses et Suasolres. Edited by Henri Bornecque. Paris: Garnier frSres, 1902.

Modern Works:

Abel, Walther. Die Anredoformen bei den rBmlschen Elegikern. Dissertation, Friedriclwlilhelms-UniversitHt. Eerlin, 1930*

Bonner, Stanley F. Roman Declamation. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 19^9*

Bornecque, Honri. Lee Declamations et les Declamtours d*apres Seneque lo Pore. Lille: au siege de 1 funiversite, 1902. 93 \

Boucher, Jean-Paul. Etudes sur Properce. Paris* Editions E. de Boccard, 19^5• ■ ■

Clarke, M, L. Rhetoric at Rome, A Historical Survey* Nevr York I Barnes and Noble, Inc., 1963*

Day, A. A* The Origins of the Latin Love-olegy. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1938.

Kennedy, George, The Art of Persuasion in Greece. Princeton* Princeton University Press, 19^3*

Leeman, A. D. Oratlonis Ratio. Amsterdam: Adolph M. Hakkert, 19&3*

Marx, R. E. "Sextus Propertius (2)." Volume 2 3,1 , Real-EncyclonKdie dor classischon Altortumswissenschaft♦ Edited by Panly-VJissowa et al. Stuttgart: .Alfred Druckenmllller Verlag, 1957*

Oltramaro, A. . Les Orifrinos de la Diatribe romaine. Lausanne: Librairie Payot et Cie., 1926.

Solmsen, F. "Propertius and Horace." Classical Philology, XLIII (19^8), 105-109.