Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T22:33:55.920Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

‘Great and Lesser Bear’ (OVID, Tristia 4. 3)*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 September 2012

R. G. M. Nisbet
R. G. M. Nisbet
Affiliation:
Corpus Christi College, Oxford
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

When Ovid was relegated in A.D. 8, he left a notorious problem for scholarship. Some attribute his downfall to the Ars Amatoria, whose second edition appeared about 1 B.C., but that raises questions about the time-lag as well as about the misunderstanding of literature. Others emphasize the disgrace of Augustus' grand-daughter Julia, banished for adultery in the same year as Ovid, but doubts remain about the degree of complicity needed to explain the poet's punishment. Again it has been supposed that the domestic scandal masks a political plot, a possibility that has also been canvassed over the disgrace of the elder Julia in 2 B.C. Unfortunately the evidence for the various theories is so scattered that it may distract attention from the tone of particular poems, yet in this psychological drama over-all impressions ought to count as well as fragments of fact. Here I shall try to interpret a single elegy, Tristia 4. 3, looking at it in sections as it comes; though the debate about the exile will not be repeated in detail, a view will emerge at the end about what happened.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Roman Studies , Volume 72 , November 1982 , pp. 49 - 56
Copyright
Copyright © R. G. M. Nisbet 1982. Exclusive Licence to Publish: The Society for the Promotion of Roman Studies

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 For the date see below, n. 73.

2 At Soph. Track. 94 ff. the sun is asked the whereabouts of Heracles (as Mr. G. O. Hutchinson reminds me); cf. also Eur. Med. 1251 ff.; Enn. Seen. 284 ff. V.

3 RE 9A. 1034ff.; Roscher, Lex. d. Myth. 6. 873 ff.; Bömer on Ov. Fast. 3. 107.

4 Arat. Phaen. 36 ff.; Pease on Cic. Nat. Deor. 2. 106.

5 Note also the grandiloquent Graias (instead of the prosaic Graecas).

6 Trist. 2. 190 (with Owen's note); RE 9A. 1042.

7 Il. 18. 489 = Od. 5. 275; Pease on Cic. Nat. Deor. 2. 105; Bömer on Ov. Met. 2. 171.

8 Trist. I. 2. 29, 4. 9. 18; Manil. I. 610; Sen. Med. 404 f.

9 RE 9A. 1044; Gundel, G., De stellarum appellatione et religione Romana (1907), 78 fGoogle Scholar.

10 Meleager, A.P. 5. 191. 1; Frag. Grenf. 11 (p. 177 Powell) ἄστρα φιλα καὶ πότνια Νὺξ συνερῶσά μοι. Contrast Catull. 7. 7 f.

11 cf. Prop. 1. 11. 5 ‘nostri cura subit memores a ducere noctes? ’; Hor. Carm. 3. 27. 14. For memory as a theme in the poems of exile cf. Nagle, B. R., The Poetics of Exile (Collection Latomus 170, 1980), 92 ffGoogle Scholar.

12 At Pont. 1. 5. 74 ‘aspicit hirsutos comminus Ursa Getas’the epithet appropriate to the bear is applied to the inhabitants of the North.

13 It is hardly relevant in this context that Romulus excluded the Capitoline from his walls (Tac. Ann. 12. 24. 2; RE 21. 2. 1872).

14 M. P. Nilsson, HTR 33 (1940), 1 ff. = Opuscula Selecta 3 (1950), 31 ff. (with 255 ff.); E. Fraenkel, CQ 36 (1942), 10 ff. = Kleine Beiträge 2 (1964), 37 ff.; Weinstock, S., Divus Julius (1971), 371 fGoogle Scholar.

15 Dig. 1. 8. II ‘si quis violaverit muros, capite punitur … nam et Romuli frater Remus occisus traditur quod murum transcendere voluerit’; Pease on Cic., Nat. Deor. 3. 94; Bömer on Ov. Fast. 4. 809; Ogilvie on Liv. 1. 6. 3–7. 3.

16 Contrast Trist. I. 5. 69 f. ‘sed quae de septem totum circumspicit orbem montibus imperii Roma deumque locus’.

17 Epod. 7. 17 ff. ‘sic est: acerba fata Romanos agunt scelusque fraternae necis, ut immerentis fluxit in terrain Remi sacer nepotibus cruor’; Tert. Nat. 2. 9; Min. Fel. 25. 2; Aug. C.D. 3. 6; Wagenvoort, H., Studies in Roman Literature, Culture and Religion (1956), 169 ff.Google Scholar; Fuchs, H., Der geistige Widerstand gegen Rom (1964), 86 fGoogle Scholar. Ovid tactfully reserves any criticism for Remus, but for somebody of his temperament it must have been Romulus' conduct that raised doubts.

18 cf. Her. 9. 42, 13. 124, 17. 178 ‘labant’.

19 fixae flammae is an oxymoron, as flames normally flicker (Virg. Ecl. 8. 105 ‘tremulis … flammis’), but the point is purely verbal: the noun has no implication of uncertainty.

20 I 737 ff. ‘ex adyto tamquam cordis responsa dedere sanctius et multo certa ratione magis quam Pythia quae tripode a Phoebi lauroque profatur’; Ov. Trist. I. 9. 51; Housman, , Last Poems 25. 6Google Scholar ‘the heart within, that tells the truth and tells it twice as plain’.

22 See Tarrant on Sen. Ag. 132 ff.

23 One is tempted to suggest that Tomis was chosen for Ovid's banishment because it was where Medea chopped up her brother (cf. Trist. 3. 9); sadistic merriment is the prerogative of autocrats. Perhaps the elder Julia was sent to Rhegium because her promiscuity and unfilial behaviour recalled Scylla (for whom see Lyne on Ciris 67 ff.), and Cassius Severus to Crete (Tac. Ann. 4. 21. 3) because his gibes were regarded as lies.

24 Stroh, W., Die römische Liebeselegie als werbende Dichtung (1971), 250 ff.Google Scholar; Nagle, op. cit. (n. 11), 43.

25 cf. Her. 10. 53 ‘et tua, quae possum, pro te vestigia tango’.

26 cf. Met. II. 472; Plaut. Amph. 513 ‘prius abis quam lectus ubi cubuisti concaluit locus’.

27 Lyne, R. O. A. M., The Latin Love Poets (1980), 18Google Scholar ‘for ladies tradition prescribed knitting’.

27 Virg. Aen. I. 722 ‘iam pridem resides animos desuetaque corda’. See also Prop. 2. 6. 32 (which surely reflects the attitudes of marriage) ‘orgia sub tacita condita laetitia’ (where orgia is Ruhnken's conjecture for iurgia).

28 There is a close reminiscence of Am. I. 2. 3 f. ‘et vacuus somno noctem, quam longa, peregi lassaque versati corporis ossa dolent’. See further Nisbet-Hubbard on Hor. Carm. I. 25. 7.

29 As Mrs. S. Hockley has emphasized to me.

30 For Andromache's participation in Hector's sufferings cf. Hom. Il. 22. 463 ff., 477 ff.; Enn. Seen.

31 For such exempla in the poetry of exile cf. Nagle, op. cit. (n. 11), 76 f.

32 W. Stroh, op. cit. (n. 23), 32, n. 72.

33 TLL 5. 2. 244. 7 ff. See also Juv. 5. 159 ‘per lacrimas effundere biiem’.

34 For a summary of the issues see D. W. Lucas's commentary on the Poetics, Appendix II.

35 For exile as a form of living death cf. Nagle, op. cit. (n. 11), 23 ff.

36 Trist. 3. 3. 29 ff.; Prop. I. 17. 19 ff., 2. 13. 17 ff.; Tib. I. 3; Nagle, op. cit. 46 ff.

37 See Luck ad loc, citing especially Dieterich, A., Nekyia2 (1913), 106 fGoogle Scholar.

38 One may again compare Ovid's love-romances (Her. 10. 120 ‘nee mea qui digitis lumina condat erit ?’)

39 For this motif see Pease on Virg. Aen. 4. 692.

40 I owe this point to Mr. D. P. Fowler.

41 I owe this point to Mrs. S. Hockley.

42 Suet. Ner. 6. 1; Aug. C.D. 4. 11; Dieterich, A., Mutter Erde1 (1913), 6 ff.Google Scholar; RAC 9. 116.

43 57 dote (also used of accomplishments at A.A. I. 596) may have a witty ambiguity in this context.

44 For the shameful word exul cf. also Trist. 5. 11. 2; Cic. Mur. 61, Dom. 72.

45 cf. Syme, R., History in Ovid (1978), 219 fGoogle Scholar.

46 Trist. 2. 103, 3. 5. 49 f., 3. 6. 28; Thibault, J. C., The Mystery of Ovid's Exile (1964), 27 ffGoogle Scholar.

47 Tac. Ann. 4. 71. 4; Syme, op. cit. (n. 45), 37 f., 207 f.

48 Trist. 4. 4. 39, cf. Pont. 2. 2. 17.

49 See especially Syme, op. cit (n. 45), 214, for the suspicious atmosphere of the period.

50 cf. Trist. 5. 3. 29 f. ‘illo nec levius cecidi quem magna locutum reppulit a Thebis Iuppiter igne suo’ (suo points a contrast with the fire that Capaneus carried).

51 For ignes of love-poetry cf. Trist. 4. 10. 45 ‘saepe suos solitus recitare Propertius ignes’. compescere suits alike checking a fire (Plin. Epist. 10. 33. 2) and curbing licentiousness.

52 For the burning of bad poetry cf. Nisbet-Hubbard on Hor. Carm. I. 16. 3.

53 Trist. 3. 3. 74 ‘ingenio perii Naso poeta meo’, Pont. 2. 7. 48.

54 If anybody had predicted that Ovid would be sent to the Black Sea, he would have told him to drink hellebore (Pont. 4. 3. 51 ff.).

55 Trist. I. 1. 72, 1. 3. 11 f. etc. (see de Jonge on our passage).

56 For Augustus' ira cf. Syme, op. cit (n. 45), 223 ff.

58 Pohlenz, M., Hermes 48 (1913), 10Google Scholar ff.

58 For such a transference of motifs from the lovepoetry cf. Trist. I. 6, 5. 14 (with n. 31 above).

59 TLL 7. 636. 34 ff.; OLD s.v. 6.

60 cf. also Trist. 5. 5. 49 ff. (with further exempla), 5. 14. 23 f.; Sen. Prov. 4. 4 ‘gaudeant, inquam, magni viri aliquando rebus adversis, non aliter quam fortes milites bello’; Luc. 8. 74 ff.; Arr. Epict. I. 24. I αἱ περιστάσεις εἰσὶν αἱ τοὺς ἄνδρας δεικνύουσαι; Bonhöffer, A., Die Ethik des strikers Epiktet (1894), 24Google Scholar.

61 For troubles as a subject for song cf. Horn. Il. 6. 357 f., Od. 8. 579 f.; Eur. Tro. 1240 ff.

62 Pease on Cic. Div. I. 24.

63 cf. A.A. I. 25; ‘non ego, Phoebe, datas a te mihi mentiar artes’ (with a pun on the title of his work), Trist. 3. 3. 10 ‘Apollinea … arte’; cf. Hor. Carm. 4. 6. 29.

64 cf. Trist. 5. 1. 28 ‘materia est propriis ingeniosa malis’.

65 For the collocation cf. Cic. Post Red. in Sen. 13; Luc. 3. 690.

66 She was a dependant of Marcia, the cousin of Augustus and wife of Paullus Fabius Maximus, cos. II B.C. and patron of poets (Hor. Carm. 4. 1. 10 f.; Syme, op. cit. (n. 45), 135 ff.).

67 The word yields another pun at Trist. 5. 14. 23 ‘area de nostra nunc est tibi facta ruina’, which confirms Ehwald's facta est in our passage (the MSS read ficta est or freta es).

68 See for instance Plut. De Tranq. An. 467 a–e.

69 Tac. Ann. 3. 24. 4 ‘se quoque laetari quod … e peregrinatione longinqua revertisset’; Syme, op. cit. (n. 45), 207. Silanus' political importance would not have saved him if Augustus had been mainly concerned about the younger Julia.

70 Sen. Ben. 6. 32. 1 (from Augustus' own report) ‘forum ipsum ac rostra, ex quibus pater legem de adulteriis tulerat, filiae in stupra placuisse’.

71 Suet. Aug. 65. 2 ‘abstinuitque congressu hominum diu prae pudore’; Dio 55. 10. 14.

72 Sen. Brev. Vit. 4. 6 ‘iterum timenda cum Antonio mulier’; Syme, op. cit. (n. 45), 194 (with bibliography). Against a plot see Ferrill, A. in Studies in Latin Literature and Roman History (ed. Deroux, C.), 2 (Collection Latomus 168, 1980), 332 ffGoogle Scholar.

73 A.A. 1. 171–228 (which can be dated to about I B.C.) seem to be a later insertion (R. Syme, op. cit. (n. 45), 13 ff.), and were presumably added with the independent third book (cf. ibid. 19). If the first edition of the first two books is put back a few years, then Ovid's works are spaced more plausibly (cf. ibid. 18).

74 Tiberius, who must have resented Julia's behaviour as a slight on himself, was equally unforgiving.

75 Trist. 3. 3. 23 ‘nuntiet hue aliquis dominam venisse, resurgam’.

76 cf. Pont. 3. 1. 31 ff., 3. 7. 12 ‘quam proba tam timida est experiensque parum’.

77 Trist. 5. 14. 43 ff.; Isoc. 9. 78–9; Nisbet-Hubbard, , Horace, Odes II, pp. 3 fGoogle Scholar.

78 Pont. 3. 1. 73 ff. ‘exigit hoc socialis amor foedusque maritum …’.