Printer Friendly

HORACE'S PINDARIC APOLLO (ODES 3.4.60-4).

Descende caelo, Horace's ode 3.4, challenges the reader with an elaborate Pindaric architecture embracing seemingly disparate elements. After an opening invocation (1-8), the poet discourses at length on how the Muses protect him (9-36), then abruptly notes that those goddesses also nourished Octavian after his recent military campaign (37-42). This breaks off into a composite Titanomachy/Gigantomachy (42-64), followed by a set of maxims (65-8) which the poet further illustrates with other mythical exempla (69-80). This paper contends that the relationship among these various parts comes into clearest focus in the five-line description of the god Apollo that closes the Gigantomachy (60-4). This passage lies at the heart of the entire poem's major interpretive issues--poetics, panegyric, allusion, and structure-but its pivotal role in the ode deserves fuller acknowledgement.

First the passage itself:
   numquam umeris positurus arcum,
   qui rore puro Castaliae lavit
   crinis solutos, qui Lyciae tenet
   dumeta natalemque silvam,
   Delius et Patareus Apollo.


[In the ranks of the Olympian warriors facing the Giants stood Apollo,] who will never put down the bow from his shoulders, he who washes his flowing hair in the pure water of Castalia (at his sacred Delphi), who holds sway in the thickets of Lycia and the grove of his birth-island, Apollo of Delos and of Patara.

After the brief mention of Pallas (57), Vulcan (58-9), and Juno (59), the expansive treatment afforded Apollo has a climactic force in Horace's version of the Gigantomachy. The final verse (64), crammed with nomenclature--Delius et Patareus Apollo--brings the register of the two opposed cohorts (Horace names five from each side) and the whole section on the Gigantomachy to a ringing close. Even more powerful closural force derives from the balanced structure in which Apollo distinctly corresponds to Jupiter at the movement's start (42ff.). Only to these two figures in the Gigantomachy does Horace devote more than a full stanza. Both times the reference to the god's signature weapon in a stanza's fourth verse (44 fulmine; 60 arcum) gives way to a complete stanza that hymns the deity in timeless present tense. We find in both sections the repeated relative pronouns (45 qui ... qui; cf. 61-2) and a survey of the deity's spheres of influence common in hymns and prayers;(1) the pairing of objects in the hymnic stanza on Jupiter is picked up as well, with chiasmus, in the second relative clause on Apollo.(2) What is more, these two deities, traditionally associated with one another in numerous ways, here both illustrate the concept of vis temperata or vis et consilium, which the poet recommends in his gnomic statements following the movement. When immediately before the Gigantomachic exemplum the Muses bestowed lene consilium upon Octavian (41), Horace seems to have been referring to clementia after the great civil conflict concluded at Actium.(3) In the maxim following the Gigantomachy (65), consilium has a broader application, `good sense' or `reason' or even `wisdom'. Jupiter reflects the desired combination of vis and consilium by on the one hand crushing the hostile warriors 44 fulmine sustulerit caduco--and on the other his righteous government of the universe--48 imperio regit unus aequo.(4) Apollo's bow, traditionally wielded against malefactors like Tityos and the Niobids, matches Jupiter's thunderbolt as an emblem of force, while the aesthetic and religious accents of Horace's description evocatively cast Phoebus as a civilizing figure. What most suggests `tempered force', however, is the fact that Apollo does not brandish his terrifying bow but wears it on his shoulders, keeping it always ready to punish fresh impieties. With his weapon Jupiter destroyed the foe in the now concluded warfare; with his, Apollo looks to the future.(5) The close of Horace's Gigantomachy moves smoothly to the following gnomic formulations since Apollo is depicted as a distillation of the ideal of vis temperata.(6)

Horace develops this complex poem in a Pindaric manner and even alludes to specific Pindaric odes.(7) Our verses play a crucial role in the imitation. The ode's general Pindaric mode is clear enough, with, for example, its mythical paradigm, gnomic declarations, the sudden shift in the middle of verse 42, and the relatively small space given to the mortal laudandus. More particularly, Horace echoes the opening triad of Pythian 8, a hymn to the goddess Hesychia, Tranquillity, in which Pindar uses the myth of the Gigantomachy (paired with Zeus' conquest of Typhoeus) to illustrate similar maxims. Verse 15 [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] is not unlike Horace's opening gnome, vis consili expers mole ruit sua (65). The following Horatian maxims likewise resemble Pythian 8.8ff., where the goddess Tranquillity sinks the hybris of the ruthless. Pindar pictures Apollo fighting in the Gigantomachy, an idea with parallels in art(8) but attested elsewhere in ancient literature only in Apollodorus and in Horace, Odes 3.4. Even if the surviving literary sources preserve an imperfect idea of Apollo's role in this myth, both Pindar and Horace give the god a prominence in the Gigantomachy found nowhere else. In Apollodorus (1.6.1-2) Apollo shares with Heracles dispatch of the monster Ephialtes; in Pindar Phoebus overcomes the very king of the Giants, Porphyrion, usually the victim of Zeus.(9) Horace gives special weight to Apollo in a different way, through expansive treatment and climactic positioning. Note that Pindar pairs Apollo's conquest with that of Zeus (17-18 [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]--the thunderbolt must belong to Zeus--although their combats are parallel rather than conflated as in Horace's account. This Pindaric parallelism gives added point to Horace's correlation of Apollo and Jupiter in his Gigantomachy, where the same two weapons are singled out. It seems clear, then, that Apollo in Horace's Gigantomachy alludes to Pythian 8. We productively recall the larger Pindaric context as well, namely the praise of civil tranquillity (with reference to Aegina), when we assess Horace's mythic reflection on Octavian's victory and its aftermath.

Even more important is Horace's imitation of Pindar's first Pythian ode, related in many ways to Pythian 8,(10) and which most scholars now agree served as a template for the whole of Odes 3.4. Pythian 1 opens with a hymn to the lyre, whose harmonious effect the poet associates with the cosmic order brought by Zeus in his conquest of Typhoeus (13-28) and, on a national level, by the tyrant Hieron and his family in their military victories (71-80). Just so does Horace juxtapose the Olympian gods' victory over Giants, Titans, and other monsters (including Typhoeus, 53) with Octavian's recent military campaign and with (in place of music's tremendous power) the protection afforded by the Muses. In all that has been written on this question no one seems to have noted that Horace's thorough imitation of Pythian 1 only comes to the surface (as it were) relatively late in the poem, when one reaches the verses on Apollo.(11) Only here do we encounter verbal echoes of Pindar's text, which have the effect of crystallizing the vaguer evocations of Pythian 1 earlier. The invocation reveals no specifically Pindaric associations at first reading--Calliope's status as `queen' seems to allude to Hesiod's Theogony, where she is `foremost' among the Muses by virtue of her attendance upon `respected kings' (79-80 [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII];(12) the ensuing poetic autobiography suggests any number of literary antecedents,(13) The Muses' support of Caesar recalls their alleged help to rulers in the Theogony (80-93; with Horace's lene consilium [41] cf. 84 [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]; 90 [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]). The `political' application of the Gigantomachy has a long pedigree,(14) and Horace's particular formulation, as we just noted, looks to another Pindaric text. The stanza devoted to Apollo, however, refers unmistakably to Pythian 1.39: [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (`O Lycian Phoebus, lord of Delos, you who love the Castalian spring of Parnassus'). Horace's triple appellation selects the same places--Lycia,(15) Delos, and Castalia. He reverses the order(16) by putting the god's sacred spring first, followed by the paired Lycia and Delos, and embellishes the Pindaric phrasing by sketching Lycian and Delian topography and by spinning an Apolline scene out of the god's simply stated love for Castalia. The scene enhances Apollo's symbolic role in Horace's Gigantomachy: the god's long hair accents his grace and beauty; to wash his locks in Castalia's pure waters signifies his own sacred purity, in opposition to figures like the inpios Titanas (42-3)---Apollo's attendants in fact washed in Castalia before entering the holy precinct at Delphi.(17) In this Gigantomachic context Horace also adds Apollo's protective bow to the picture, alluding to Pythian 8 in an elegant conflation of two Pindaric models.

On the other hand, if Horace varies the passage from Pythian 1 for new emphases, his allusion calls upon the intertext to strengthen his own poem's train of thought. Pindar's address to Apollo ends the ode's second triad; to summon up that context gives Horace's lines even more climactic punch at the close of the Gigantomachy. The hymnic style of Horace's stanza is likewise validated in the allusion to Pindar's actual prayer to Apollo,(18) a prayer that the city Aetna will enjoy glory from Hieron's chariot victory at Delphi (40 [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]). This petition to Apollo parallels one to Zeus earlier in the same triad (29 [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] ...), an arrangement that Horace follows by devoting corresponding hymnic stanzas to Jupiter and to Apollo.

In both odes Pindar associates Apollo with victory, which hardly surprises in poems celebrating success at the god's Pythian Games. Pythian 8 extends the concept by imagining Apollo welcoming the victorious athlete home from Delphi (18-20). Horace's verses, too, surely allude to a contemporary victory, even if more obliquely, namely to the conquest of Antony and Cleopatra by a leader who associated himself with Apollo. Recently Gurval(19) has questioned the traditional view that as early as the 20s Octavian linked Apollo with his pivotal victory. Octavian's Apolline commemorations at the site of Actium--the shrine to Apollo there, the games, and so forth--had, according to Gurval, no immediate impact in the capital city; the Palatine Temple of Apollo (dedicated in 28) did not celebrate the battle of Actium. Although explicit contemporary testimony is lacking, it is difficult to believe that the spectacular temple which Octavian dedicated to Apollo in the wake of Actium--built adjacent to his own house, whose ornamented portals themselves symbolized his triumphs--was not understood as an ex voto for that victory. Countless Roman generals memorialized their military accomplishments with temples or other structures. Octavian followed this tradition by vowing the temple to Apollo after defeating Sextus Pompey in 36 (victor ... promisit, Vell. 2.81.3). Later, amid the atmosphere of the triple triumph of 29, the temple will have become associated with Actium, as were other architectural projects already underway.(20) Virgil's picture of Apollo's archery turning the tide of battle (Aeneid 8.704-6; cf. Prop. 4.6.55-7) and Propertius' designation of the Palatine temple's occupant as Navali ... Phoebo (4.1.3) are not exceptional retrospective developments but cohere with the ethos of 28 B.C. The panels on the shrine that featured Apollo warding the Gauls away from Delphi in 278 B.C. and Apollo punishing the Niobids (Prop. 2.31.13-14) to some extent invited an allegorical reading in the light of the alleged salvation and vengeance achieved at Actium by the shrine's dedicant three years before its inauguration.(21) Long before Actium, Apollo had triumphal associations in Rome,(22) which Octavian no doubt evoked by erecting his new temple in the vicinity of Victoria's temple on the Palatine.(23)

Our Horatian text actually supports the plausibility of connecting Apollo in the 20s B.C. with Octavian's victory over Antony. Modern interpreters now strongly agree that the militia and labores of Caesar and his soldiers (37-9) refer to the civil wars ended at Actium,(24) and that the ensuing myth of Olympians fighting Titans and Giants is designed to parallel that historical conflict.(25) Jupiter's victory and subsequent cosmic imperium at the start most directly correspond to the situation of the newly emergent ruler of the Roman empire. At the close of the mythical exemplum, as we have seen, Apollo mirrors the victorious Jupiter, so Octavianic meaning in the figure of Apollo would fill out the parallel. One might object that Horace imagines Apollo in exclusively Greek contexts--Castalia, Delos, Patara--and that the section on the Gigantomachy hardly resembles a battle any more at the close. Juno's epithet matrona, however, reminds us that Horace's Gigantomachy has Roman meaning immediately before Apollo is so prominently introduced. And Apollo's bow in the present context certainly evokes combat, even if the emphasis has shifted to potential future combats (60 numquam umeris positurus arcum). The futurity in this reference, in fact, aids the evocation of Octavian at this point in the ode. Apollo keeps his bow ready for subsequent Gigantomachic disturbances, like the one recently quelled by Caesar. When Virgil pictures Apollo's decisive bowshot in his grand description of the battle of Actium in Aeneid 8, which is itself full of Gigantomachic associations, he may have been partly inspired by this piece of contemporary poetry. Virgil went on to depict Octavian anachronistically watching the captives in his triple triumph from the vantage point of Apollo's Palatine Temple (8.720-1 ipse sedens niveo candentis limine Phoebil dona recognoscit populorum ...). Horace analogously makes Apollo a figure of ordered calm after victory--he wears the protective bow and governs (62 tenet) his cult centres, but also washes his hair in the pure waters of Castalia. At his Palatine Temple Apollo was figured as both the avenging bowman against the Niobids and (in the central cult statue) the peaceful god of music, Apollo citharoedus.(26) Horace's myth-making telescopes similar Apolline associations and thereby adds to the ode's epinician force.

The description has yet another important dimension: after Horace's lengthy disquisition on the Muses earlier in the ode--indeed, in a poem whose first half constitutes a hymn to the Muses--the emphatic mention of Apollo must also recall his role as Mousagetes, as god of music and poetry.(27) The descriptive touches in Horace's sketch of Apollo's sacred sites--rore puro, dumeta, silvam--may call to mind the Muses' haunts in nature outlined earlier--5 ff. the pios lucos with their amoenae aquae et aurae; 25 vestris fontibus; 40 Pierio antro. More certain is that in Roman authors, beginning with Virgil, Castalia becomes a font of poetic inspiration.(28) Moreover, in this poem's first stanza, Apollo is mentioned as god of music in connection with the Muse whom the poet invokes:
   Descende caelo et dic age tibia
   regina longum Calliope melos,
   seu voce nunc mavis acuta,
   seu fidibus citharave Phoebi.


Descend from heaven, queen Calliope, and come now, play a long song on your flute, or if you prefer, sing now a song with your clear voice or to the accompaniment of the strings of Phoebus' cithara.

As later in the Gigantomachy, this god's mention has a clinching effect at the end of the period. Horace proceeds to detail the divine protection that he has enjoyed, especially from the Muses (21 vester, Camenae, vester ...), the goddesses who can play such Apolline music. Along the way he includes among the instruments of that protection sacra lauro (18-19), where the epithet reinforces the laurel's status as attribute of Apollo. When the Muses next refresh the victorious Caesar, they give him consilium (41), as would the usual divine bestower of oracular advice, Apollo himself.(29) Then the poet suggestively compares with Octavian's triumph that of the Olympian gods over Titans and Giants, in which conflict he prominently situates Apollo among the victors. The ode's central ideas, therefore--Muses' guardianship of the poet, victory, and order on heaven and earth--all coalesce in the figure of Apollo featured at the end of the Gigantomachy.

When Horace's elevated description of Apollo reminds us of Phoebus citharoedus at the poem's beginning, it does so while for the first time explicitly acknowledging the whole poem's heavy debt to Pindar's first Pythian ode. One effect of this double reference is to deepen our understanding of Horace's imitation by taking our minds back to the start of Pindar's ode. There the poet sings the praises of the `Golden lyre, rightful possession of Apollo and the violet-haired Muses' ([GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]). This address, we now recognize, Horace matches with his opening invocation to the Muse, which likewise features Apollo and the lyre. In Pythian 1 Pindar returns to the Apolline connections of the [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] at the end of the first antistrophe (12), and then, as we have seen, at the conclusion of the second epode prays to Apollo for the victor's glory and the prosperity of the victor's city. Once again, the Pindaric intertext serves to validate Horace's idea. We appreciate simultaneously the Pindaric and Horatian linkage of Apolline music with Apolline victory.(30)

(1) Gordon Williams, The Third Book of Horace's Odes (Oxford, 1969), p. 52: `This section reaches a climax with a hymnic invocation of Apollo (61-64), parallel to that of Jupiter (45-8).'

(2) The neat parallelism of Delos and Patara here may be a remnant of the tradition that Apollo spends half the year in each of these sacred locales (Servius on Aeneid4.143).

(3) The poem seems to date from 29 or 28 B.C. (see E. Doblhofer, Die Augustuspanegyrik des Horaz in formalhistorischer Sicht [Heidelberg, 1966], p. 152; E. Fraenkel, Horace [Oxford, 1957], p. 273, n. 3, argues for 27), but critics differ on the extent to which Horace's words reflect settled times for Romans. L. A. MacKay argues that `lines 41-80 must imply a much more serious criticism of Augustus' policy, or what Horace feared might be Augustus' policy' (`Horace, Odes, III.4: date and interpretation', CR 46 [1932], 243-5, at p. 244). L. P. Wilkinson agrees that Horace here `pleads' for a real amnesty against the Antonian remnant (Horace and his Lyric Poetry [Cambridge, 1951], pp. 69-72). On the other hand, Horace notes that the Muses not only advise clemency but rejoice that they have given this advice (41-2 vos lene consilium et datis et dato/ gaudetis). The latter phrase must refer to the fact that Caesar has accepted their advice and at least begun a policy of rapprochement with the vanquished. See P. H. Peerlkamp, Q Horatii Flacci Carmina (Amsterdam, 1862), ad loc.: `Gaudent dato, quia Augustus accipit, et res bonos eventus habet' (cf. Williams In. 1], p. 51). That the advice to be merciful comes from the poet's divine patrons resonates clearly, but a celebratory spirit predominates.

(4) Cf. also 45 temperat and 66 vim temperatam.

(5) Some commentators see Apollo here fighting in the battle (e.g. Peerlkamp, Wickham). The grammar yields the idea that he `stood' in the line or company of the Olympian warriors, but Apollo's posture does not suggest an active combatant. In battle he would be wielding the bow, not wearing it on his shoulders. Muller ad loc. and H. P. Syndikus, Die Lyrik des Horaz. Eine Interpretation der Oden (Darmstadt, 1973), p. 2.67, claim that the epithets of Vulcan and Juno, too, do not refer to the immediate situation of the battle; Kiessling-Heinze agree in the latter case. But avidus presumably = avidus pugnae or, if the ancient commentators are correct, suggests a quality of fire (in the Gigantomachy depicted on the north frieze from the Siphnian Treasury at Delphi, Hephaestus appears with bellows heating coals to throw at the Giants). The epithet matrona hardly styles Juno a warrior but it makes sense in the contest against inpios Titanas (42-3). The train of thought leads us to believe that Apollo took part in the battle and presumably did so as a bowman--but in verse 60 the battle has suddenly ended.

(6) H. T. Pliiss, Horazstudien (Leipzig, 1882), pp. 240-1 would go further to connect the verses on Apollo with the following gnomai. He suggests that the poet, a priest of the Muses (cf. 3.1.3), speaks the gnomic utterances as if moved by the spirit of Apolline wisdom and revelation; the sententiae (3.4.70) are akin to priestly declarations or instructions. Kiessling-Heinze (p. 271) similarly characterize the speaker of the whole poem as `der irdische Hypophet der Musen, der den Rat spende'.

(7) On the Pindaric manner of the poem in general, see Wilkinson (n. 3), p. 72; N. T. Kennedy, `Pindar and Horace', Acta Classica 18 (1975), 9-24, at p. 24; F. Klingner, Romische Geisteswelt (Munich, 1965), pp. 376-94; I. Borzsfik, `Descende caelo ...', Acta Antiqua 8 (1960), 369-86, at pp. 380-6. On the specific imitations, see especially Fraenkel (n. 3), pp. 276-85 (essential reading for the debt of the Horatian ode's whole plan to Pythian 1); G. Pasquali, Orazio lirico (Florence 1920, repr. 1964), pp. 696-700 (important especially on Odes 3.4 and Pythian 8); W. Thieler, `Das Musengedicht des Horaz', in Untersuchungen zur antiken Literatur (Berlin, 1970), pp. 394-429; V. Cremona, La poesia civile di Orazio (Milan, 1982), 222-38, esp. p. 232 (a good overview of previous work on the subject); and most recently R. O. A. M. Lyne, Horace: Behind the Public Poetry (New Haven/London, 1995), pp. 49-55.

(8) LIMC vol. 2, no. 1054--65 S.V. `Apollon'; F. Vian, La guerre des Geantes. Le mythe avant l'Epoque hellenistique (Pads, 1952), pp. 79-82, 158-9, 203-5. One need not misrepresent the extent of the motif in art to highlight Horace's distinctive treatment, as do J. Aymard, `La politique d'Auguste et l'ode III,4 de Horace', Latomus 15 (1956), 26-36, at p. 35; and S. Commager, The Odes of Horace (New Haven-London, 1962), p. 200.

(9) Aristoph. Av. 1249-51 suggests single combat between Zeus and Porphyrion. Apollod. 1.6.2 has Zeus smite the giant with a thunderbolt and Heracles follow with a bowshot, a procedure found elsewhere in this account which highlights Heracles' role: [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]

(10) See, for example, B. L. Gildersleeve's discussion, Pindar:. The Olympian and Pythtan Odes (New York, 1885), p. 325.

(11) Fraenkel started his argument that Horace patterned the whole poem after Pythian 1 from the general acknowledgement that verses 61-4 derive from Pythian 1.39-40.

(12) D. O. Ross has argued that the collocation of Calliope and Phoebus here evokes Callimachean poetics, given their pairing in poetic contexts in Virgil's Eclogues and Propertius (cf. their role in Call. Aitia 1), and in view of the `recusatio' closing the previous ode (3.3.69-72 non hoc iocosae conveniet lyrae./ quo, Musa, tendis? desine pervicax/ referre sermones deorum et/magna modis tenuare parvis): Backgrounds to Augustan Poetry: Gallus, Elegy and Rome (Cambridge, 1975), p. 143. On the poem's Hesiodic background, see A. H. F. Thornton, `Horace's ode to Calliope (III,4)', AUMLA 23 (1965), 96-102 and W. Marg, `Zum Musengedicht des Horaz (Carm. 3,4)', in Monumentum Chiloniense. Studien zur augusteischen Zeit. Festschrift fur E. Burck (Amsterdam, 1975), pp. 385-99.

(13) Cf. the miraculous stories about the childhood of Aeschylus (Paus. 1.21.2), Stesichorus (Pliny, NH 10.82), and Pindar (Paus. 9.23.2).

(14) See P. Hardie, Virgil's Aeneid: Cosmos and Imperium (Oxford, 1986), pp. 85-90 with bibliography.

(15) The referee has drawn attention to Horace's more specific reference to the Lycian cult centre at Patara, in light of the fact that Patara (as opposed to Lycia) is seldom mentioned in Greek poetry in connection with Apollo, and that Brutus waged a war against Xanthus and Patara in 42 B.C. (for details, see G. Radke, RE 18.4 [1949], s.v. `Patara', 2557-9): Horace might have been there.

(16) Compare the same procedure in Horace's imitation of Pindar's 01. 2.1-2[GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]; at Odes 1.12.1-3 Quem virum aut heroa lyra vel acril tibia sumis celebrare, Clio?/ quem deum?

(17) Eur. Ion 94-7; Phoen. 222-5.

(18) Statius' version of Horace's stanza (Thebaid 1.696-8) reverts to Pindar's second-person address: Phoebe parens, seu Lyciae Patarea nivosis/ exercent dumeta iugis, seu rore pudico/Castaliae flavos amor est tibi mergere crines). The verses in fact conflate Horace with Horace's model. With Castaliae ... amor est tibi in Statius compare Pindar's [GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII].

(19) R. Gurval, Actium and Augustus: The Politics and Emotions of Civil War (Michigan, 1995), esp. pp. 87-136.

(20) For example, the Aedes Divi Iulii, before which were set up rostra captured from Actium (Dio 51.19.2), and the Curia Julia, with its figures of Victoria (Dio 51.22.1), both opened in 29 B.C. On the whole subject, see T. Holscher, `Denkmaler der Schlacht von Actium. Propaganda und Resonanz', Klio 67 (1985), 81-102.

(21) See K. Galinsky, Augustan Culture (Princeton, 1996), p. 219, who provides an excellent overview of the temple and its meaning; further P. Zanker, `Der Apollotempel auf dem Palatin. Ausstattung und politische Sinnbezuge nach der Schlacht von Actium', Analecta Romana Instituti Danici, Suppl. 10 (1983), 21-40, and the admittedly speculative reading of E. Lefevre, Das Bildprogram des Apollo-Tempels auf dem Palatin (Konstanz, 1989).

(22) Triumphal processions started near or perhaps at the old Temple of Apollo in the Campus Martius, where the senate sometimes deliberated on the granting of triumphs (Livy 3.68.7-8, 37.58.3, 39.4.2ff., 41.17.3-4); the ludi Apollinares were established victoriae, non valetudinis ergo, ut plerique rentur (Livy 25.12.15). See E. Simon in LIMC 2.363-64 s.v. `Apollon/Apollo'; J. Gage, Apollon romain (Paris, 1955), pp. 283, 413-18; Galinsky (n. 21), p. 216.

(23) A relief now in the Villa Albani in Rome depicting Victoria's reception of Apollo, Diana, and Leto almost certainly represents Apollo's monumental arrival on the Palatine. See M. J. Strazzulla, Il principato di Apollo. Mito e propaganda nelle lastre `Campana" dal tempio di Apollo Palatino (Rome, 1990), pp. 111-25; Galinsky (n. 21), p. 216 and figure 122.

(24) The ancient commentators thought that Horace was referring to the general practice of moving troops in the winter from camps to towns, but the reference is surely more precise: Octavian's massive settlement of veterans after the defeat of Antony (see Kiessling-Heinze ad loc.).

(25) Parallels between Augustus' victories and the Olympians' conquest of the Giants are drawn obliquely by Horace (Odes 1.12, 2.12.6-12) and Propertius (2.1.17-34, 3.9.47-56), and more closely by Ovid (Tristia 2.67-76, 333-6). Cf. similar comparisons later at Lucan 1.33ff., Stat. Silv. 5.3.196, Martial 8.50.1-6, Sil. Ital. Pun. 17.645-50. See in general S. G. Owen, P. Ovidi Nasonis Tristium Liber Secundus (Oxford, 1924), pp. 74-5; W. S. M. Nicholl, `Chasing Chimaeras', CQ 35 (1985), 134-9.

(26) See Prop. 2.31.15-16; another statue of Apollo citharoedus stood in front of the shrine (Prop. 2.31.5-6). Interpreters from Propertius to P. Zanker have read the cult statue in the Palatine temple as a figure of peace: Prop. 4.6.69-70 citharam iam poscit Apollo/victor et ad placidos exuit arma choros (following immediately upon a reference to the monumenta of Actian Apollo); The Power of Images in the Age of Augustus (Ann Arbor, 1988), p. 85.

(27) Several critics have pointed this out (e.g. R. Hornsby, `Horace on art and politics (Ode 3.4)', CJ 58 [1962], 97-104, at p. 103; Thornton [n. 12], p. 100) but no one has explained exactly how the connection emerges from the text.

(28) First in Virgil, Georgics 3.293 iuvat ire iugis, qua nulla priorum Castaliam molli devertitur orbita clivo. Cf. later Lygd. 1.16 per vos [the Muses], auctores huius mihi carminis, oro, Castaliamque umbram Pieriosque lacus; Ov. Am. 1.15.35-6 Apollo/ pocula Castalia plena ministret aqua. By the time of Martial the Muses themselves could be spoken of as Castalidum sororum (4.14.1). There is no earlier Greek parallel, though the beginnings of the idea may be reflected at Theocritus 7.148.

(29) Kiessling-Heinze on 3.4.41: `consilium oft von erbetenem Orakel'. Examples: Enn. scaen. frr. 141-43 V., Val. Max. 1.8.10, Lucan 9.552.

(30) For useful critical comment on earlier versions of this paper I am very grateful to William Race, Jenny Clay, the anonymous referee, and the Editor, S. J. Heyworth.

JOHN F. MILLER

jfm4j@virginia.edu University of Virginia
COPYRIGHT 1998 Cambridge University Press
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 1998 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Author:MILLER, JOHN F.
Publication:The Classical Quarterly
Geographic Code:1U3IN
Date:Jul 1, 1998
Words:4721
Previous Article:PROPERTIUS AND TIBULLUS: EARLY EXCHANGES(1).
Next Article:EURIPIDES, TROADES 1050: WAS HELEN OVERWEIGHT?
Topics:

Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2019 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters