RATHER THAN ATTEMPTING A precise definition of the category of the set of “epics,” a process in which it would be easy to lose one's way, I shall take the more practical path of referring to the tradition of European epics, taken together, as a system. Systems theory accepts the open-ended, dynamic nature of the interrelationships among the elements of a system. As new elements are introduced, the status, function, and value of all the elements are subtly but decisively transformed. For example, even though the Aeneid comes as a successor to the Iliad and the Odyssey, its presence will henceforth shape the interpretation of the those preceding works. And so it continues down the line. Dante's portrayal of Vergil in the Divine Comedy interprets that poet, his work, and his place in literary history, sometimes explicitly, more often implicitly. The allegorizing of the Divine Comedy, which set in almost immediately, did not affect only that work: it also extended the reach of allegorizing back over Homer and Vergil and forward to Tasso, Milton, and Goethe. The increasing complexity of the system imposed ever greater obligations on succeeding generations of poets — Milton had to reckon with Tasso and Dante and Vergil and Homer, as well as the Bible and the English epic masters, Chaucer and Spenser. But complexity also offers increasing numbers of options, so that later poets have a greater degree of freedom for expressing themselves by choosing which antecedent element to emphasize more forcefully, and when.