Statius and the Thebaid

366 Pages·1973·5.348 MB·English

by  David Vessey

STATIUS AND THE THEBAID
PIIS PARENTIBVS
MVNVS PIVM
ST ATIUS AND THE THEBAID
DAVID VESSEY
CAMBRIDGE
AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS
1973
Published by the Syndics of the Cambridge University Press
Bentley House, 200 Euston Road, London NWI 2DB
American Branch: 32 East 57th Street, New York, N.Y. roo22
© Cambridge University Press 1973
Library of Congress Catalogue Card Number: 72-83578
ISBN: 0 pr 200)2 O
Printed in Great Britain
at the University Printing House, Cambridge
(Brooke Crutchley, University Printer)
Contents
Preface page vii
Introduction
I
Virgil and the epic tradition
I
The first century 5
Mannerism and classicism
7
I: The Silvae and Statius' art
Patrons and friends
The locks of Earinus
The prose prefaces
The Thebaid in the Silvae
Predecessors and parentage
II: The Thebaid: basis and form 55
Unity and pathos 55
The proem to the Thebaid 60
Sources and models 67
The seeds of war 71
Jupiter and Fatum: the Stoic universe 82
III: Figures of ira and pietas 92
Polynices' journey to Argos 92
The myth of Linus and Coroebus IOI
The pietas of Maeon I07
Hopleus and Dymas; Menoeceus II6
Argia and Antigone
131
CONTENTS
IV: The defeat of Adrastus page 134
The marriage at Argos 134
The embassy of Tydeus 141
The return of Tydeus 148
The augury at Argos 152
Argia' s plea 159
The final defeat 161
V: The Argives at Nemea
The intervention of Bacchus
Hypsipyle's narrative
The death of Opheltes
The obsequies of Archemorus
VI: Statius and epic convention
The mustering of the Argives
The teichoscopy in hook J
The funeral games in book G
VII: Statius and the supernatural
The ghost of Laius
Necromancy at Thebes
The katabasis of Amphiaraus
VIII: Peacemakers and warmongers
270
Jocasta
270
The death of Tydeus 283
Hippomedon and Parthenopaeus 294
The nocturnal raid
3°3
Theseus and the end of strife
3o7
Appendix: The structure of the Thebaid
Bibliography
Index of passages cited
343
General index
353
Preface
The purpose of this book is to provide a critical analysis and evaluation
of the Thebaid of Statius, by placing it in its historical and literary
context, and by surveying its form, style and content. The justification
for such an endeavour is twofold. I am convinced that t..1-ieep ic is of
intrinsic merit as a work of art. Furthermore, the Thebaid exerted a
powerful influence on many writers in later ages.
Though some valuable contributions to Statian studies have appeared
in recent years, no book exists in English about this important figure in
the literary tradition of Europe. It is hoped that this volume will to
some extent fill this gap, both for classicists and for those whose
interest lies in the medieval and modern period.
Quotations from the Thebaid are generally based on the Oxford
Text of H. W. Garrod (1906, 1965). For the Silvae -which present
many critical problems (cf. my remarks in CP 66.273-4, 286) - I have
relied principally on the editions of A. Klotz (Leipzig, 1902) and A.
Marastoni (Leipzig, 1961). References in the footnotes have been made
in the shortest form compatible with comprehensibility. Full details of
all books and articles cited will be found in the Bibliography.
Material that has appeared in American Journal of Philology 91 (1970)
315-31, Classical Bulletin 46 (1970) 49-64, Classical Philology 66 (1971)
87-96 and 236-43, and Latomus 29 (1970) 426-41 and 30 (1971)
375-82 has been revised and expanded in this book, and extracts have
also been made from my articles in Antiquite Classique 39 (1970),
Bulletin of the Institute of Classical Studies 17 (1970), Classical World 63
(1970), Mnemosyne 25 (1972) and Philologus 114 (1970). I am most
grateful to the Editors of these journals for their permission to make
use of this material.
It should be noted that this book was substantially completed in
July 1971 and that only _minor revisions have been possible between
then and the date of this preface. I particularly regret that Herbert
Juhnke's Homerisches in romischer Epikflavischer Zeit (Munich, 1972)
appeared too late for me to take account of it. I have been able only to
include a few references to this valuable work in my footnotes. (The
Vll
PREFACE
same must be said of R. D. Williams's edition of Thebaid IO (Leyden,
1972).)
Finally, I wish to express my thanks to all those who have over the
years encouraged and assisted me in my labours on the Thebaid, and
especially to Mr E. J. Kenney of Peterhouse, Cambridge, and Dr A. J.
Gossage of King's College, London.
London DAVID VESSEY
April :1972
vm
Introduction
Virgil and the epic tradition
To most people, the Latin epic is synonymous with Virgil. The
Romans themselves would have recognised the justice, indeed the
inevitability, of this view. As soon as it appeared, the Aeneid stood
supreme, its pre-eminence apparently beyond challenge or dispute.
The few ripples of dissent that have from time to time stirred the serene
grandeur of Virgil's reputation have always passed into oblivion or
discredit. The Aeneid is more than the finest flower of Latin literature;
its place is permanently assured among those few unassailable master
pieces that transcend time and historical change, a symbol as much as an
embodiment of Western culture.
The first century of the Christian era produced four substantial epic
poems: Lucan's Bellum civile, Valerius' Argonautica, Statius' Thehaid
and Silius' Punica. None of them can bear comparison with the Aeneid.
Lucan attempted, rashly and unsuccessfully, to break free from the
Virgilian tradition and to create a new style of epic.1 His aim, at least
implicitly, was to contest the primacy of the Aeneid. Fate denied him
the opportunity of completing his task. His early death, brought about
by the jealousy and suspicion of a tyrant who esteemed himself a poet,
deprived the world of seeing in its entirety the epic that lamented the
death of Roman liberty on the basis of a dogmatic Stoicism.2 The other
three poets, writing some twenty years later, recognised the futility of
Lucan's aim; all accepted Virgil as their master and the Aeneid as the
perfect exemplar of their genre, to be imitated and worshipped, but
never equalled. Their realism, which was proved in the event, should
not, however, blind us to the merits of those who willingly accepted a
position in the second rank.
1 For Lucan's anti-Virgilian approach, see, e.g., Due, CM 22.106-20; Guillemin, REL
29.214 ff. Cf. also von Albrecht, in Lucain (Fond. Hardt Entretiens 15) 281-9; Thomp
son and Bruere, CP 65.152 ff. .
2 For Lucan's relations with Nero, the basic material is given by Heitland in his intro
duction to Haskins's edition, xxvi-xxx; cf. Butler, Post-Augustan Poetry, 98-9;
Gresseth, CP 52.24-7; Brisset, Les ldees politiques, 11-15 and Due, loc. cit., 93 ff. On
the Stoic basis of the Bellum civile, cf., esp., Marti, AJP 66.352-76; Due, in Lucain
(Fond. Hardt Entretiens 15) 203-24. For Lucan as a champion of lihertas, cf. Schon
berger, Das Altertum 10.26-40.
I I VST
INTRODUCTION
Lucan has always had his admirers. His epic is worthy of their regard
for its fire and animation, for its rhetorical brilliance and sustained
verbal power.1 Its appeal has also been felt by many who have in
later ages opposed despotism and the worship of power. Statius,
Valerius and Silius are now scarcely known outside the world of
professional scholarship. It was not always so: Statius, like Lucan, for
many centuries held a place of high honour in the consideration of men
of letters.2 The savants of the middle ages found in him much to praise
and to emulate, reading him hardly less than Virgil; in the Renaissance
too he was studied and admired. A poet who inspired the devotion of
Dante, Chaucer and Spenser deserves a fate better than annihilation.3
But more recent times have largely forgotten Statius. In this century, a
few scholars have attempted to redress the balance, bringing to the
notice of a limited audience some of the qualities that made Statius more
than a second-rate or maladroit plagiarist of Virgil. Valerius too, who
did not share Statius' long celebrity, has had his share of advocates.
Silius has rarely found a defender, and most of his readers have been
content to endorse the tepid verdict of Pliny, 'scribebat carmina maiore
cura quam ingenio' (Ep. 3.7.5). The Punica languishes under the burden
of its own length, for, to find the occasional gems, one must endure the
dross.4
In addition to the Thehaid, Statius composed a number of occasional
poems on a variety of themes, which he eventually gathered into four
books of Si!vae; a fifth was added, most probably after the author's
death. Towards the end of his life, he commenced a second epic, the
Achilleid, but survived long enough to write only one complete book
and a fragment of another. The Silvae were virtually unknown in the
middle ages, but the unfinished epic shared the fame of the Thebaid.s
By a curious quirk of fortune, it is now the short poems of Statius that
are most commonly read and most often praised. As we shall see, this
1 Cf. Qgintilian ro.r.90.
2 For Lucan's popularity with later radicals, cf. Tucker, CP 66.6-16; on his influence in
general, cf. Fraenkel, Kl. Beitriige, 243 ff.; Raby, Secular Latin Poetry 1, 34-6; Tillyard,
The English Epic, 98-9.
3 On Statius and Dante, cf. Lehanneur, De Statii Vita, 29-31; Verra!!, Coll. Lit. Essays,
151 ff.; Lewis, Stud. in Med. and Ren. Lit., 94 ff.; Pezard, Bihl. d'human. et ren. 14.10-
28; McKay, CM 26.293-305. His relations with Chaucer have been analysed by Wise,
lnfl. of Statius upon Chauc.; for Spenser, cf. Tillyard, op. cit., 104. 'E.K.' mentions
Statius' epithalamium (Silv. 1.2) in his gloss on the January Aeglogue of The Shepherds'
Calendar (423 in Smith/de Selincourt (Oxford Standard Authors)).
~ Cf. the remarks of Duff, LCL ed., r, xiv-xvi.
5 Cf. Clogan, The Medieval Achilleid, 1-3; Meheust, Achilleide, xxxviii-xxxix.
2