http://www.jstor.orgA Curiosity in SenecaAuthor(s): J. D. P. BoltonSource: The Classical Quarterly, New Series, Vol. 6, No. 3/4, (Jul. - Oct., 1956), pp. 238-242Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical AssociationStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/636920Accessed: 21/05/2008 06:41Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available athttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unlessyou have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and youmay use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained athttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup.Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printedpage of such transmission.JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We enable thescholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform thatpromotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.ACURIOSITYINSENECA Vel, si videtur, sit (sc. Ira) qualis aput vates nostros [est] sanguineum quatiens dextra Bellona flagellum, aut scissa gaudens vadit Discordia palla, aut si qua magis dira facies excogitari diri adfectus potest. (Ad Novatumde ira 2. 35. 6) THUSthe passage is printed intheTeubner edition of Seneca's Dialoguesby E. Hermes, who, onthe strength of Aen. 8. 702 f. ('et scissa gaudens vadit Discordia palla, quam cum sanguineo sequitur Bellona flagello'), adds a note onthe quotation 'versus sunt Vergilii aSeneca licenter mutati'. Now the imputation to Seneca of such gross alteration of Virgil can only be supported if we disregard or eject the evidence to the contrary. As only the last five words are actually Virgilian; as Seneca himself says 'aput vates nostros'; as aut at the beginning of the second line may introduce a second quotation (so Rossbach); and as est, which Gertz secluded, has a part to play if the lines are by different poets, it is safer to take a step backwardsand dispose the passage thus: sit qualis aput vates nostros est sanguineum quatiens dextra Bellona flagellum aut scissa gaudens vadit Discordia palla, aut si qua magis etc.' This is simply to take Seneca's text at its face value; and what objection is there to so doing? Itis surely afeat of extraordinaryperversity to holdthat vatesnostrimeans one poet-Virgil; to delete, without any manuscriptauthority, an inoffensive and perfectly intelligible word; and then, because the first line of the resultant couplet is not Virgilian, to accuse Seneca of tampering with, or misremembering, the text of Virgil. Can we discern the author of the first line? At 7. 568 of Lucan's BellumCivile are the words: sanguineum veluti quatiens Bellona flagellum.2 Chronological considerations make itunthinkable thatthis could have been Seneca's source, for Lucan could not have been more than twelve at the most whenthede ira was written. IsLucan thentobe convicted, onthis unique occasion, of a brazen literary theft, whether the line was concocted by his uncle Seneca (which is most unlikely) or is the work of some unknown poet? Plagia- rism onthis scale is notatallinthe manner of the proud and independent Lucan. His reminiscencesof Virgil are many, it is true, and he echoes as much as ahalf-line occasionally (such wascommon enough practice among Latin poets); but his borrowing of a line entire, with only the alteration of the least significant word, is unparalleled elsewhere intheB.C. Virgil'spractice of I Baehrens, who assigned theselinestonoticed byKortte; itisalsoremarked by 'auctores incerti', did recognize this (F.P.R.,Bourgery and by JacquesAymard,Quelques p. 359). s.riesde comparaisons chez Lucain, p.29. All 2 The similarity withLucan'slinewastake the viewthatSenecais adaptingVirgil. J. D.P.BOLTON 239 borrowing linesofearlier poets hasno counterpart inhim.Ishe likely tohave paid someunknown poet a compliment whichhe withheldfrom Virgil himself? Thereisanother possibility. Lucan could, with perfectpropriety andwith self-respectunimpaired,plagiarizehimself, andSeneca may herebe quoting froman early workofhis nephew alinewhichthelatterused again inhis magnum opus. This early work might havebeenthe Iliaca,' whichhadasits subject thedeathand ransoming of Hector, a subject whichwe maysuppose wasinSeneca'smindwhenhewrotetheselines:for justpreviously(inchapter 33.5) hehadsketchedthesceneatthe ransoming. ItwasLucan'sfirst poem; andStatius speaks asifitwere composed in boyhood(Silv. 2. 7.54-56: 'ac primum tenerisadhucinannisludesHectora Thessalosque curruset supplex Priami potentisaurum'). His precocity ismentionedintheLives ascribedto Suetoniusand Vacca, and symbolizedby Statiusintheconceitthatevenhis birth-wailwasmelodious (ibid.36 f.'natum protinusatque humum per ipsam2 primo murmuredulce vagientem'). Asuitablecontextfor thelineintheIliaca is nothardto imagine. ThatAen. 8. 703 wastheimmediate inspiration foritcan hardly bedoubted.3Nowthis occursinthe description of the shieldof Aeneas, andit wouldbe natural enough forLucantoincludeinhisthemea description oftheshieldof Achilles, with themodelsoftheIliadandtheAeneid beforehim (II. i8. 535-8 underliesAen. 8. 700-3). Littleremainsofthe Iliaca, butthe longestfragment recursinan adapted formintheBellum Civile: haudaliter raptum transversolimitecaeli flammatiPhaethonta poli videre deique, cumvicemutatatotisinmontibusardens terradeditlucemcaelo naturaque versa.4 (II. fr.2 Hosius) I Thereisa slight doubtabouttheexact title. Many modernscholars preferIliacon, the form used by the twoancientauthorities whomentionthework by name.Butin Vacca'slist of titles genitives and nominatives are mixed (e.g.'epistolarum ex Campania'); andLactantius may be making thesame mistakeas thescholiast onPers.I. 121, who callsNero'sTroica 'Troicon'. A singular in suchacase seems unparalleled-unless itbe by Lucan's own Catachthonion (itself a gen. pl. ? Q hasKATAXONION: misplaced erudi- tion?ButnoteLact.adTheb. 9. 424; 'Lucanusin catachthonio'.). 2 TheRoman practice of delivering a childonthe ground is wellattested:cf. Silv. I.2. 09 f.;5.5. 68 ff.; Lucr. 5. 222 ff.; Macrob.Sat.I.12.20:'vox (of whichthe primus vagitus wouldbethe symptom) nas- centihominiterraecontactudatur'.Other passages are quotedby H. Wagenvoort, Roman Dynamism,p.I8, n. 3. 3 Thetrain of Seneca's thoughtmay have runthus:hismentionofthe ransoming of Hectorremindedhimof his nephew's recent recitationonthattheme. Then, whenin chapter35 hemeditateda poetic similefor Anger he thought of this line from the poem; butthis recalledits modelandthe preceding linefromtheAeneid. Sowouldcomethe 'coincidence'thatBellonais conjoined with DiscordiainSenecaas she is in Virgil. 4 The inspiration for this simile came from Ovid's description of Phaethon'sdrive (Met. 2. 1-332).Scaliger's emendation offlammati (1. 2) to flammatum,thoughreceiving some support from Cat. 64. 29(flammatiPhaethontis) -cf.Ov.Met. 2. 39 ff.-isnot necessary: it can qualify caeli (cf. succenditaetherain the cor- responding passage of the B.C.), oreven poli (though thisisless likely: the polesnearly catchfireinOvid (295 'fumat uterque polus'), butthis is becausetheterrestrialcon- flagration threatensto ignite themandso bring downthemachina mundi). Totis in mon- tibus ardensterra: cf.Met.2.216-26forthe thought; forthe diction, Man.2. 420 ('nudusque incollibus orbis'). Itwillbe noticed that, though Lucan repeats the words transversolimite inthesecond passage, there thelimes is oblique inaverticaldirectionto the sun's proper course (pronum-Duff(Loeb ACURIOSITYINSENECA cumque diem pronum transversolimiteducens succenditPhaethon flagrantibus aethera loris, gurgitibusraptispenitus tellure perusta. (B.C. 2. 412f.) Sothereis evidencethatLucaninlaterlife hadnot forgotten his earliesteffort. If mysuggestion is correct, Senecahereis indulging inalittlemildhumour whenheclasses the youngnephew of Novatusandhimselfwith Virgil. The joke wouldbe appreciatedby the family, whowouldknowwhothesecond'bard' was.Seneca'shumorousintentionisindicated by hisuseoftheword vates; elsewherehe applies it seriously and appropriately to Virgil in quoting oneof hisoracular pronouncements,' butitis high-flown when introducingmerely descriptive verseasinthe passage underconsideration. Any versifierofthe Silver Age wouldaffectandwelcomethetitle vates, withitsconnotationof divine inspiration, butasamere equivalent of poeta itisa grandiose wordin prose(compareAper's littlesneer in Tacitus' Dialogus (9.2):'egregiumpoetam vel, sihochonorificentius est,praeclarissimumvatem').2 WhileI amconvincedthattheselinesare by different authors,mysuggestion thatoneoftheseauthorswasLucanwouldlosewhatattractivenessit may possess werethesecondbookofthede ira tobedatedbeforeSeneca'sreturn fromexile.Itwouldofcoursebe perfectlypossible for SenecawhileinCorsica tobesenta copy ofhis nephew'swork, but my thesis presupposes thatSeneca wasawarethathis brotherknewthis worktoo:a conditionthatwouldbemost easily met by supposing thatLucan gave a family recitalof theIliaca whenboth SenecaandNovatuswere present.Also,precociousthough Lucan was, Ifind ithardtostomachsuch precocity inachildmuchunderten.Butthis may be mere prejudice. Thedateof thede ira canbefixedbetweentwoevents:thedeathof Caligula andthe adoption ofNovatus by IuniusGallio.The year A.D. 49 hasfoundat leasttwo advocates,3 butmorescholarshave preferred41(Schanz-Hosius, ii. 686-7). This preferenceappears tobe grounded onthree4 supports:(a) In 3. ed.) is right, Haskinsand Bourgery wrong: cf.Met.2.206 ff.); hereitisina lateral, in thedirectionofthe pole (hence poli videre). I Dial.0. 9. 2:'clamateccemaximus vatesetvelutdivino ore, instinctusalutare carmencanit: optimaquaeque diesmiseris mortalibusaevi primafugit'. Seneca quotes theselines again(Ep. io8. 26) withthe pre- amble'inhaereatistudanimoet tanquam missum oraculo placeat'. 2 Apposite, asK. J. Doverhas pointed outto me, isthe deliberatelyhigh-flown passage in Pliny(Ep. 8. 4.5):'proinde iure vatuminvocatisdisetinterdeos ipso, cuius res,opera, consiliadicturus es, immitte rudentibus,pande vela ac, si quandoalias, toto ingenio vehere!curenimnon egoquo- quepoetice cum poeta?' 3 The later, L. Hermann, in his article on the chronology ofSeneca's prose works (Latomus, i (I937), pp. 94 ff.), sums up his discussion of thedateof thede ira withthese words (p.96): 'Nonseulementilfautdater letroisiemelivre d'apres l'exil, maisencore il fautadmettre que tout l'ouvrage a etC ecrit vers 49ap. J.-C.' 4 Nothing canbebuiltona comparison of de ira I. 4. I withSuet.Claud. 38. i.There Seneca distinguishes betweenira ('anger') and iracundia ('irritability', a character of the temperament); Suetonius says thatClaudius 'irae atque iracundiaeconscius sibi, utram- que excusavitedicto distinxitque,pollicitus alteram quidem brevem et innoxiam, alteram noniniustamfore'.Anedictofthisnature might wellhavebeenmade by Claudiusat the beginning ofhis principate ontheana- logy ofthe praetorian edictum perpetuum; but it was notbased on a knowledge of the de ira, as somewouldhaveit (Schanz-Hosius, loc. cit.).Apart fromthefactthatthe particular distinction given aboveis notSeneca'sown invention (cf. Cic.T.D. 4.27), itwas by nomeans always observed (evenby Seneca himself in this very work-e.g. 2. 14. i), and obviously Claudius is using a different one- 240 ACURIOSITYINSENECA I8. 3 thewordmodo ('quidantiquaperscrutor? modoC.Caesar' etc.). Butin Livy 6. 40.17 and22. 14. 13 thewordis usedofeventsover twentyyears old.' (b) Thereisnomentioninthede ira ofSeneca's exile, butifhewere writing afterhisreturninthelifetimeofthe emperor whohadbanishedhimSeneca might wellhavefeltthatthe topic wasbetterleft alone. Indeed, inhis onemen- tionofexilium inthisworkonecould just as welldiscerntactful handling ofa delicate subject:among theenormitieswhich Angerperpetrates the exiling of itsvictimsisnot enumerated; ratheran ill-judged word spoken underthe influenceof Anger hasoften brought exile upon the speaker.2(c) The age of the rhetoricianGalliowhenhe adopted Novatus.Allweknowat present isthat this adoption hadtaken placeby A.D. 52. TheelderGallio'sassociationwith MessallaCorvinus (Sen. Suas. 3.6) makesitdifficultto place hisbirth-date laterthan 30 B.C.3 Thiswouldmakehimatleast eighty whenhe adopted Novatus, ifthisdidnotoccuruntilA.D. 50 or 5 IIfthe adoption were by adro- gatio inthenormal way itis unlikely thatitwouldhavebeenso longdelayed. Butwedonotknowthatit was performed inthis manner, inGallio'slifetime: it may havebeen per testamentum, inwhichcaseGallio's age would present no difficulty. Onewould expect an ordinaryadoption tobeeffectedwhenthe adopter wasnotmucholderthan sixty. ButNovatushad certainly notbeen adoptedby A.D. 40,by whichtimeGallio mnust havebeenatleast seventy: so probabilitypoints toa testamentaryadoption. The questionmay be asked, wouldSenecahaveinvolvedthe great nameof Virgil insuchbanter?Thereareseveralreasons why Ithinkit possible.First, though Seneca's respect for Virgil was great, it stopped shortofawe:the tone, for instance, ofhisdefenceof Virgil's'shortcomings' (Epp. 86. 15 f.; fr.II 3 Haase) seems patronizing rather than reverent. Anyway, his purpose here would notbeto mock Virgil butto flatterand please his youngnephew, whohecould besurewouldreadtheworkaddressedtohisotheruncle (Seneca's successin thisaim may bereflectedinLucan'sdecisionto preserve the great lineinhis magnumopus). Second, itis muchinSeneca'smannertobe light-hearted inhis referencestothe great menofthe past; itisforthe great menofthe present thathis unswerving deferenceis reserved. Lastly, thiswasa jokeprivate tothe family: Senecawouldnothave expected a boy oftenorelevento publish his worktothe world; norinfactdidLucanever publish ithimself.4 between deeply felt anger, whichwouldbe merited, andmereoutburstsofbad temper (iracundia), whichwouldbeshort-livedand innocuous.Brevis wouldbea strangeadjec- tiveto apply toa natural propensity. IDr.G.E.F.Chilverhasdrawn my at- tentiontoSen.Dial.10.I8. 5-modo modo referring to Caligula inaworkdatedbe- tween 48 and 50. Thisisbetterthanthe Livian examples. 2 2. I4. 3-4:'saepeitaque ratio patien- tiam suadet, ira vindictam, et quiprimis defungi malis potuimus, inmaioradevol- vimur. quosdam unius verbi contumelianon aequo animolatainexilium proiecit', etc. 3 P.-W.2x. I035 favoursc. 33 B.C. 4 Lucan'sfirst published workwasthe Laudes Neronis, recitedattheNeroneiaof A.D.60 ('prima ingenii experimenta in Neronis laudibusdedit quinquennali certamine' Suetonian Life). Thiswasfollowed by the extemporaryOrpheus andthreebooks ofthe Bellum Civile ('dein civilebellum recitavit', Suet.;'quippe et certamine pentaeterico ... laudibus recitatis in Neronemfuerat corona- tus et ex tempore Orphea scriptum in experi- mentumadversum conplures ediderat poetas ettres libros,quales videmus. quare inimi- cum sibi fecit imperatorem',Vacca; cf. Stat. Silv. 2.7. 58 f.). The jealousy of the emperor nowforbadefurther publication('interdi- ctum est ei poetica',Vacca). Itake thedis- tinctionmade by Vaccabetweentheafore- mentioned poems and the rest of the works- theremainderoftheBellum Civile andthe workslistedafterthe introductory 'extant eius conplures et alii, ut Iliacon', etc.-to indicatethatthesewerenot publishedby 24I 4599.2R I am well aware that, short of the rediscovery of the Iliaca, Ican adduce no compelling support for my speculation. But the astonishing fact remains that the original of the only known line-long plagiarism in the BellumCivile happens to have been miraculously preserved, from an anonymous author, by Lucan's uncle Seneca. The Queen'sCollege, Oxford Lucanhimself.Thiswas presumably done afterNero'sdeath by Lucan'swidow Polla, the only memberofthe family,apart from Acilia, tosurvivethefailureofthePisonian conspiracy andits aftermath.But wecannot be sure thatall was then given to the world: thewholeoftheBellum Civile wasundoubt- edly availabletothe public inthe early Flavian era, for ValeriusFlaccus has obvious reminiscences of the later as well as the earlier books; butitwouldberashtoassumetoo readily thattheworkslistedattheendof Vacca's Life were equally accessibleatthat time (Iliaca, Catachthonia( ?)-another work of earlyyouth: Stat.Silv.2. 7.54-57-Silvae, Medea, salticaefabulae-no doubttobedated to the period of Lucan's intimacy with Nero, inviewofthe emperor's accomplishment as aballet dancer-epigrammata(?), inOctavium Sagittam et pro eo orationes-probably com- posed in 58, fromthe topicality ofthesub- ject;clearly academic controversiae, inwhich Lucanexcelled ('declamavit et graece et latinecum magna admirationeaudientium', J. D.P.BOLTON Vacca)-de incendio urbis,epistulae). The Vaccan Life shows signs of deriving froma sourceneartoLucanintimeandkin.Sta- tius, whois acquainted withthecontentsof someofthese works, wasafriendofPolla andcouldhavehadaccess tothem through her; thesamecanbesaidof Martial, who quotes a pentameter ofLucanina poem addressedtothewidow (Io.64). Itis note- worthy thatotherwisethe only mentionor quotation of any of these works is to be found inLactantiusthecommentatoronStatius' Thebaid (apart from a Lucanian epigram(?) givenby Vincentof Beauvais). We may sup- pose that the carmenfamosum in Neronem, men- tioned by Suetoniusbutnot byVacca, was given somesort of currencyby Lucanhim- self; the same couldbe supposed of the prose de incendio urbis, in which Lucan accused Nero of firing Rome (Stat. Silv. 2. 7. 6o f.; cf. Tac. Ann. I5.38), ifitwasa politicalpamphlet; butitwouldstill beina somewhatdifferent class fromtheother published works. J. D.P.BOLTON 242