Obrazy na stronie

Beluis nec te, metuende certa
Phoebe sagitta.

Dicam et Alciden puerosque Ledae,
Hunc equis, illum superare pugnis
Nobilem; quorum simul alba nautis
Stella refulsit

Defluit saxis agitatus humor,
Concidunt venti fugiuntque nubes,
Et minax, quod sic voluere, ponto
Unda recumbit.

Romulum post hos prius an quietum
Pompili regnum memorem an superbos
Tarquini fasces dubito, an Catonis

Nobile letum.

Regulum et Scauros animaeque magnae
Prodigum Paullum superante Poeno
Gratus insigni referam Camena


Hunc et incomptis Curium capillis
Utilem bello tulit et Camillum

21. Proeliis audax] It will be readily seen that Horace confounds the Latin divinity Liber with the Greek Dionysus or Bacchus, whose Indian wars and contest with the giants (C. ii. 19. 21) are here alluded to. Bentley puts a stop after these words and applies them to Pallas. [Ritter also.]

26. Hunc equis-] S. ii. 1. 26.

[ocr errors]

29. Defluit saxis agitatus humor] The waters that in their fury covered the rocks flow back to their bed. Torrentius comparing Epp. i. 2. 42, Rusticus expectat dum defluat amnis," renders 'defluit' 'ceases to flow down the rocks.' Theocritus describes a calm produced by the influence of the Twins (xxii. 17). [See also Seneca, Nat. Qu. i. 1, ‘in magna tempestate apparent quasi stellae velo insidentes.' Adjuvari se tunc periclitantes existimant Pollucis et Castoris numine. Ritter.]

34. superbos Tarquini fasces] It has been disputed whether this refers to Tarquinius Priscus or Superbus. But for the epithet applied to 'fasces' there could be no doubt. The Scholiasts suppose Priscus to be the person alluded to, and more editors hold that opinion than the other. Those who contend for Superbus quote Cicero, Phil. iii. 4, where comparing this king with M. Antonius he makes him out





to be better than history draws him. But Cicero spoke for a purpose, and his statements are chiefly negative. On another occasion he wrote differently, saying, "Quis est qui-Tarquinium Superbum-non oderit ?" (De Am. 8). It may be admitted, however, that the propriety of all the names in this catalogue of worthies is not obvious. Why, for instance, among so small a number the Scauri should appear, of whom the best, M. Aemilius, who was consul A.U.c. 639, and who had good qualities mixed up with many that were bad, was not worthy of so great a distinction, nobody has attempted to explain. It is certainly only necessary to suppose M. Aemilius Scaurus alluded to here as in Juvenal, xi. 90, where he is introduced in similar company, and in the plural number:

"Cum tremerent autem Fabios, durumque Catonem,

Et Scauros, et Fabricios." The place in which Cato's name is mentioned is also an offence to some, and Bentley wishes to sweep him out altogether, and substitute Curtius, reading anne Curti' for 'an Catonis.' But as he has made no converts, and does not adopt his own conjecture, it is not necessary to meddle with his argument.

[blocks in formation]

[43. Saeva paupertas] Poverty is a severe discipline.-Rure ager cum aedificio fundus dicitur,' Dig. 50. 16. 211.]

45. Crescit occullo velut arbor aevo] Horace may have remembered the words of Pindar (Nem. viii. 40): abgetaι d'apeтà χλωραῖς ἐέρσαις ὡς ὅτε δένδρεον ᾄσσει. 'Occulto aevo' means by an imperceptible growth, as Ovid, Met. x, 519: "Labitur occulte fallitque volatilis_aetas." As the name of Marcellus (whom I understand with Orelli to be the Marcellus who took Syracuse) stands for all his family, and particularly the young Marcellus (see Introduction), so the star of C. Julius Caesar and the lesser lights of that family are meant by what follows. Those who suppose Marcellus to be the Julium Sidus,' relying upon Ovid (Tr. ii. 167) calling Drusus and Germanicus Sidus juvenile,' and Fabius Fabiae sidus gentis" (ex Ponto, iii. 3. 2),

[ocr errors]
[blocks in formation]

forget that he never was adopted into the Julian family. By it is meant Caesar himself, at whose death a comet is reported to have appeared, which was supposed to be his spirit translated to the skies. (See Suet. Caesar, c. 88; Ovid, Met. xv. 749.) Addison (Dialogues on Medals, 2) mentions a medal struck in honour of Augustus in the reign of Tiberius, in which he is represented with Caesar's star resting on his head, according to that description of Virgil (Aen. viii. 680):

[blocks in formation]


The same remark applies to this ode as to many others, that those who believe it to have reference to real persons, and the jealousy to be any thing but a poetical jealousy, have mistaken the character of Horace's writings. It would be difficult to imagine the man who wrote these verses really jealous while he was writing them, or much acquainted with that passion. The ode is too slight for us to judge whether it was taken from a Greek original; but the expression in v. 16 shows that Greek ideas were running in the writer's head, which may be said, I feel satisfied, of almost every one of his amatory compositions.


Lydia, while thou art praising Telephus' neck, Telephus' arms, oh! my heart is ready to burst. My mind tosses about, my colour comes and goes; and the tear stealing down my cheek tells of the slow fire that burns within. It galls me when his rough hands hurt thy shoulders, or his teeth leave their mark on thy lips: think not he will be constant who could hurt that nectared mouth. How happy they whom love binds fast to the day of their death!


CUм tu, Lydia, Telephi

Cervicem roseam, cerea Telephi
Laudas brachia, vae meum
Fervens difficili bile tumet jecur.

Tum nec mens mihi nec color
Certa sede manet, humor et in genas

Furtim labitur arguens

Quam lentis penitus macerer ignibus.

Uror, seu tibi candidos

Turparunt humeros immodicae mero
Rixae sive puer furens

Impressit memorem dente labris notam.
Non, si me satis audias,
Speres perpetuum dulcia barbare


2. cerea Telephi] For 'cerea,' Bentley the authority of Flavius Caper, one of the old grammarians who misquotes this passage, substitutes lactea.' He is very well answered by Cunningham. That reading however shows the sense in which Caper quoting from memory understood 'cerea,' white as wax,' not [as it ought to be understood] 'soft,' 'pliant.' 6. manet] The MSS. between this and manent.' Ven., 1483, has 'manet.' So also has the oldest Berne MS. of Orelli, and many others. Cruquius' Blandinian MSS. had all manent.' There is more probability of 'manent' having been substituted on account of the metre for 'manet,' than 'manet' for 'manent;' but the lengthening of a short syllable in such positions is not uncommon. Šo C. ii. 13. 16:



"Caeca timet aliunde fata." Bentley lays down the rule, and Zumpt approves it, that two substantives in the singular number coupled by nec' and 'nec' have the verb in the singular, which he says usage and reason demand. I do not see the reason in the case of disjunctive any more than of conjunctive particles, and to assume the usage is to beg the question. [Madvig quotes Cicero, de Fin. iii. 21, nec justitia nec amicitia esse omnino potuerunt nisi ipsae per se expetantur.' Ritter: but the reason of the plural being used here is explained by ipsae... expetantur.'] That the singular verb is admissible no one will deny, and I have admitted it on good authority. [Ritter has 'manent.']

[ocr errors]

13. Non-Speres] This more emphatic negative (Key's L. G. 1402) is used

Laedentem oscula, quae Venus
Quinta parte sui nectaris imbuit.
Felices ter et amplius

Quos irrupta tenet copula, nec malis
Divolsus querimoniis

Suprema citius solvet amor die.

not uncommonly, in prohibitive sentences, instead of ne, as “non-sileas,” S. ii. 5. 91; “non ulceret,” Epp. i. 18. 72; “ non sit qui tollere curet," A. P. 460.

16. Quinta parte sui nectaris imbuit] The Schol. on Pind. Pyth. 8. 116 (81 Boeckh), quoted by Jani, says, τὸ μέλι τῆς ἀθανασίας δέκατον μέρος ᾠήθησαν εἶναι: and Ibycus (30 Bergk), according to Athenaeus (ii. p. 39): φησὶ τὴν ἀμβροσίαν τοῦ μέλιτος κατ' ἐπίτασιν ἐννεαπλασίαν ἔχειν γλυκύτητα,



τὸ μέλι λέγων ἔνατον εἶναι μέρος τῆς ἀμβροσίας κατὰ τὴν ἡδονήν. All that we can gather from these quotations, is that some of the Greek poets had notions about the relative sweetness of nectar and honey which Horace has here imitated.

18. irrupta] Not found elsewhere. 20. Suprema cilius] This construction for citius quam suprema' only occurs once again in Horace, in plus vice simplici (C iv. 14. 13).


Before A.U.C. 724.

ἀσυνέτημι τῶν ἀνέμων στάσιν·
τὸ μὲν γὰρ ἔνθεν κῦμα κυλίνδεται
τὸ δ ̓ ἔνθεν· ἄμμες δ' ἂν τὸ μέσσον
να φορήμεθα σὺν μελαίνᾳ,
χειμῶνι μοχθέντες μεγάλῳ μάλα·
πὲρ μὲν γὰρ ἄντλος ἱστοπέδαν ἔχει,
λαῖφος δὲ πᾶν ζάδηλον ἤδη

καὶ λακίδες μεγάλαι κατ' αὐτό.
χόλαισι δ ̓ ἄγκυραι.

This fragment (18 Bergk) of one of Alcaeus' odes (the first verse of which is manifestly imperfect) is thus introduced by Heraclides, the Alexandrian grammarian: ἐν ἱκανοῖς δὲ καὶ τὸν Μιτυληναῖον μελοποιὸν εὑρήσομεν ἀλληγοροῦντα. τὰς γὰρ τυραννικὰς ἐξουσίας χειμερίῳ προσεικάζει καταστήματι θαλάσσης ἀσυνέτην καὶ τῶν ἀνέμων στάσιν.—Τίς οὐκ ἂν εὐθὺς ἐκ τῆς προτρεχούσης περὶ τὸν πόντον εἰκασίας ἀνδρῶν πλωϊζομένων θαλάττιον εἶναι νομίσειε φόβον; ἀλλ ̓ οὐχ ̓ οὕτως ἔχει· Μύρσιλος γὰρ ὁ δηλούμενός ἐστι καὶ τυραννικὴ κατὰ Μιτυληναίων ἐγειρομένη σύστασις. There can be no doubt that this ode of Alcaeus was in Horace's mind when he wrote, and that it is an allegorical description of the political troubles of Mytilene; it is therefore surprising to find Graevius supporting Muretus' opinion, that no political allegory is meant by Horace, but only an address to the ship which had brought him from Philippi, and was returning with his friends on board, whom he wished to persuade to remain at Rome. That Bentley and Dacier were of that opinion, I confess is less surprising to me. Quintilian (Inst. Orat. viii. 6. 44) illustrates the term 'allegory' by the figures employed in this ode, saying, "Navem pro re publica, fluctuum tempestates pro bellis civilibus, portum pro pace atque concordia dicit." It is not easy to determine what was the particular period when the aspect of public affairs drew forth this ode. The Scholiasts are at variance. Porphy

rion, whom Lambinus follows, supposes Horace is addressing himself to the fears of Brutus, and dissuading him from renewing the battle at Philippi, after the death of Cassius-a strange time for writing verses after the manner of Alcaeus, and an unusual way for a military tribune to offer counsel to his commander-in-chief. Acron supposes Horace to be alluding to the designs of the republican party, under Sextus Pompeius. This opinion is supported at some length by Buttmann, Mythol. i. 343 sq., who argues that the ship does not signify the commonwealth, for that Horace speaks as if he were separated from the subject of the allegory: that to advise the citizens to abstain from civil wars (represented by the sea), because they were in a crippled condition, would be to imply that they might engage in them if they were not in that condition; also that there would be no propriety in representing the state as a dismasted ship in the time of Augustus. He therefore considers that all this refers to the efforts of the broken but restless party to which Horace had been lately attached to repair their fortunes under the leading of Sext. Pompeius. Nudum remigio latus,' he says, refers to the number of their best men cut off at and since Philippi (he might have added the desertion of Menas). The 'desiderium,' spoken of in v. 18, means the lingering affection and anxiety Horace had for the party he had first cast in his fortunes with, and 'taedium' the vexation he had suffered in common with Brutus and all his best officers at the state of the republican forces at Philippi. Pontica pinus' he considers a very masterly allusion to Pompey the Great, as the conqueror of Mithridates, which is Acron's opinion. I give this theory in deference to the author, who has few equals in critical sagacity, and who in the essay in which these views are put forward has done good service to the interpretation of Horace on the principles of common sense. I should mention however that the theory has but few supporters, of whom Gesner certainly is one, and his was no mean judgment. Passow is another. Franke cannot sufficiently express his astonishment at Buttmann's strange doctrine. Having made up his mind that none of the odes in these three books were written before Actium, A.U.c. 723, he adopts the opinion of Torrentius, Masson, Sanadon, and others, that Horace wrote this ode at the time when Augustus was thinking of retiring from the head of affairs (A.U.C. 725), and when he was dissuaded by Maecenas in a speech in which he likened the state to a vessel tost upon the waters without a pilot (Dion Cass. 52. 16). It does not seem to have occurred to Franke, that supposing the historian to have related the actual words of Maecenas, which is somewhat improbable, it is as likely he got his image from Horace as Horace from Maecenas. But the image was common and always will be, and it is as plain as possible that Horace got his notion not from Maecenas but from Alcaeus. Besides, the cautions contained in this ode are plainly addressed, not to Augustus, but to the citizens, and so far from requiring such cautions, they were importunate in requesting him to remain as he was.

Kirchner, who speaks of Buttmann's opinion as 'infelicissima,' has no hesitation in referring the ode, with Epod. vii., to the year before the battle of Actium, when the flames of war were kindling again between Augustus and Antonius. Jani, Mitsch., Doering are of the same opinion, and Dillenbr. rather prefers it. Orelli is silent.

Having now stated all the opinions that I have seen upon this much-disputed ode, I must leave the reader to judge for himself. That there was many an hour when Horace sighed for peace between the day he found himself established in his scribe's office to that which brought Augustus home in triumph is certain, and that he felt as a man of weak nerves might feel in a storm during the troubles of that long period may well be supposed. I think it is very hard to say at what precise juncture in those stirring times the notion entered his head of sitting down to write an ode in close imitation of Alcaeus, though we may safely affirm, that the idea would only be natural while Rome was disturbed, and therefore that the ode was written before the death of M. Antonius in A.U.C. 724. Of the theories above given I prefer Acron's.

« PoprzedniaDalej »