SOURCE: "The Scope of Lucan's Historical Epic," Classical Philology, Vol. XLV, No. 4, October, 1950, pp. 217-35.

[In the following essay, Bruère discusses Lucan's possible intentions concerning the design of his unfinished Bellum civile.]

In this paper it is proposed to assemble and discuss evidence bearing upon the scope contemplated by Lucan for his historical poem. Although formal appreciation of an incomplete epic is hardly possible ir the absence of a hypothesis concerning its scope—to determine the extent to which a poet would have achieved his purpose one must take into consideration what this purpose was—no agreement on this question has been reached, and for many years there has been little awareness of its importance.

That Lucan's poem is incomplete, breaking off as it does in the midst of a sentence with Caesar in mortal peril on the Alexandria mole, is too evident to require proof; that if it is to attain a tolerable conclusion the narrative should be carried beyond the Bellum Alexandrinum, hardly less so.¹ There is no reason to suppose that the ancients possessed more of the poem than we do, and strong indications that they did not.² None of the statements concerning Lucan found in ancient writers has to do with what the poem, had it been completed, would have contained; with the exception of what may be inferred from some verses of Statius,³ there has survived no allusion to its unfinished condition.⁴

The question of the scope of the poem was first raised by Sulpitius, the best of the renaissance commentators on Lucan,⁵ who believed, basing his conclusion upon internal evidence, that Lucan planned to continue his poem to the re-establishment of peace after Actium.⁶ In the seventeenth century the English poet Thomas May composed a Continuation of Lucan's poem to the death of Caesar, which he subsequently recast in Latin hexameters; the title Continuation makes it probable that May originally chose the death of Caesar merely as a convenient stopping point; however he soon became convinced that he was thus fulfilling the intentions of his predecessor.⁷ Brébeuf, who not only translated Lucan with independence and felicity, but added a pleasing romantic episode to the sixth book,⁸ thought that Lucan did not attain the halfway mark.⁹ Weber in his Prolusio¹⁰ argues that Lucan meant to end with the defeat of Brutus and Cassius at Philippi, a view he later modified, when having come to believe that BC¹¹ i. 1-7 formed a later ezordium and i. 8-66 an earlier one, he surmised that when Lucan composed the first introduction he had intended to continue to the definitive peace which followed Actium, but as his feud with Nero exacerbated his republican bias, he resolved to go no farther than Philippi, which marked the end of organized republican resistance, although by no means that of internal warfare, and with this in mind wrote the second introduction.¹² Since Weber's second article no consequential effort has been made to come to grips with the problem. On the basis of five passages of the poem W. E. Heitland opts for the assassination of Caesar as terminal point;¹³ F. Plessis accepts Weber's hypothesis of two exordia, but does not, it would seem, believe that the second one was designed for a poem ending with Philippi. He thinks it likely that Lucan set out to recount the entire series of civil conflicts that continued, with occasional respite, for a period of over twenty years.¹⁴ In an appendix to the monograph in which he establishes that Livy was the chief if not the sole historical source employed by Lucan, R. Pichon guesses that Lucan planned to end with the quadruple triumph celebrated by Caesar after his Africancampaign of 46 B.C. This he endeavors to justify by assuming that since the sixth book of the BC corresponds to the sixth Aeneid (both have to do with the lower world), the BC, like the Aeneid, would in its complete form have contained twelve books. Judging from the Livian Periochae, Pichon continues, the full text of Livy provided, for the period between the point at which Lucan stops and this triumph, an amount of material that could appropriately be included, perhaps with the omission of some episodes, in the two additional books needed to round out the dozen.¹⁵ Reasoning of this sort would require Silius' Punica to comprise twenty-six books instead of seventeen, for Silius, a devout virgilian, placed his [nekuia] in book thirteen. E. Bignone Speaks tentatively both of Caesar's death and Actium as possible endings,¹⁶ and a similar uncertainty may be inferred from two articles of E. M. Sanford which touch upon the subject.¹⁷ The most recent statement concerning the scope of the poem says no more than: "In all probability Lucan intended to continue the narrative to the death of Caesar, if not further."¹⁸

The acceptance of the "title" as internal evidence has been the cause of much confusion. Since the evidential value of the "title," if any, is wholly external, this matter will be discussed before reviewing external evidence of a more substantial nature; following this review an examination will be made of the internal evidence found in the text of the poem.

Weber's belief that Lucan had entitled his poem Pharsalia played a large part in determining his choice, in the Prolusio, of Philippi as terminal point.¹⁹ In the Commentatio, he conjectures that the designation Bellum civile, which is attested by the manuscripts and the Suetonian and Vaccan Lives, was the title given by the poet to an earlier comprehensive version, corresponding to the "first exordium" (i. 8-66), whereas the later and shorter version, introduced by the "second exordium" (i. 1-7) was entitled Pharsalia.²⁰ It is noteworthy that Julius Caesar Scaliger had taken exception to the title Pharsalia, on the ground that it was not sufficiently inclusive for the poem as it stands.²¹ Plessis is reluctant to discard the term Pharsalia, even if it be imputable to the error of some renaissance humanist. He nevertheless declares that had Lucan realized his design of a great poem covering the entire period of civil strife it would properly have been entitled De bello civili or De bellis civilibus.²² Pichon, taking Pharsalia to be the title of the poem, cites BC ix. 985-86: "Pharsalia nostra/vivet" (a misinterpretation of which gave rise to the fancied title) as an argument against the comprehensive version envisaged by Plessis;²³ the Postgate-Housman explanation of this passage renders Pichon's argument valueless.²⁴ The "title" Bellum civile, which with the alternative De bello civili is generally accepted by philologians today, is a serviceable designation for the poem as it exists (that the ancients so designated it is indicated by the evidence of the manuscripts, of the ancient Lives, and by the phrase belli civilis ingens opus, which Eumolpus employs in Petronius' Satyricon,²⁵ plainly with Lucan's poem in mind), but it is gratuitous to assume that Lucan assigned this title to the books he composed, or planned to use it for the completed poem.²⁶ The value of the designation Bellum civile as external evidence is that it may at one time have been used to describe the poem as Lucan's contemporaries thought it would be upon completion, and it will be seen that Eumolpus' phrase supports this view. However, by the time the Suetonian Life was written, it was used, somewhat loosely, with reference to the poem as it stood or to a portion thereof.²⁷

Modern usage tends to restrict the term "civil war" in this connection to the conflict between Julius Caesar and his senatorial adversaries, whereas the plural commonly comprehends the entire period of internal warfare culminating in Actium, but the plural is also used of Caesar's civil campaigns, and of those of his adopted son, while the singular may designate the two decades of civil dissension which came to an end in 29 B.C.²⁸ In the Middle Ages²⁹ and later antiquity³⁰ this struggle was customarily conceived as one between Caesar and Pompey; the circumstance that Lucan finished no more of his poem than he did certainly contributed a great deal toward the establishment of this concept. More germane to this investigation, however, is the manner in which Lucan's predecessors and contemporaries regarded this subject, for their views may be expected to have conditioned his.

Caesar refers to the warfare of 49-45 b.c., which he understandably thought had come to a definitive end with Munda, by the singular civile bellum.³¹ Cicero repeatedly speaks of the operations of 49-45 as proximum bellum civile, and in the eighth Philippic calls it the fourth of a series of civil wars of which the bellum Mutinense is the fifth.³² It may be doubted that Cicero regarded the bellum Mutinense as distinct from the civil warfare which shortly preceded it. In this speech he sedulously avoids relating the present disturbance to the proximum bellum civile, which was for him a delicate subject. He had transferred much of his antipathy toward Julius Caesar to his magister equitum Antony, and hoped to reverse Munda by making use of Octavian; once this was done, Octavian would pass from the stage,³³ the senatorial party, finally victorious in the civil struggle, would once more take over the government, and Cicero would resume his role of elder statesman. That Caesar's death was merely an incident in an unresolved civil conflict was the opinion of Hirtius, who in the preface of the additional book which he composed to finish the story of Caesar's Gallic campaigns, written in the short interval between the dictator's death and his own, can see no end to the struggle.³⁴ Both Virgil and Horace, in works they wrote prior to Actium, speak of a continuing period of civil war. The note of despair sounded by Hirtius recurs with increased intensity in the seventh and sixteenth Epodes of Horace, which antedate 37 b.c.³⁵ Nearly contemporary with Horace's: "Quo, quo scelesti ruitis, aut cur dexteris/aptantur enses conditi?" (Ep. 7. 1-2) and "Altera iam teritur bellis civilibus aetas" (Ep. 16. 1) are the lines of the first Georgic:

ergo inter sese paribus concurrere telis
Romanas acies iterum videre Philippi;
nec fuit indignum superis bis sanguine nostro
Emathiam et latos Haemi pinguescere campos
[489-92].

Caesar's murder was followed by sinister portents, in accordance with which a second destructive battle took place in northern Greece. Caesar's death serves as connecting link between Pharsalia³⁶ and the battle of Philippi proper. The long succession of civil disasters still continues, as the following verses show:

hune saltem everso iuvenem succurrere saeclo
ne prohibete. satis iam pridem sanguine
 nostro
Laomedonteae luimus periuria Troiae
[500-502].

The extraordinary relief that followed the return of peace after Actium permeates the ninth Epode. Horace, followed in this by Virgil,³⁷ was too tactful to stress the civil nature of the war against Antony and Cleopatra, save for the hint in the comparison of the present joy with that feltupon the rout of Sextus Pompeius (7-9), but although war had been declared on Cleopatra alone, the ensuing campaign was generally considered the final phase of the civil struggle.³⁸ In his life of Atticus, Nepos refers to Caesar's civil warfare as Caesarianum civile bellum (7), and uses the expressions bellum gestum apud Mutinam (9) and proelium Philippiense (11). At the time these chapters were written the conflict was still in progress, and the unity of its successive stages was less apparent than it became later when the entire complex could be viewed in retrospect.³⁹

The first history undertaken when such a perspective had become possible, so far as is known, was that of Asinius Pollio. This work began with the consulship of Metellus and Afranius (60 B.C.), and presumably gave in considerable detail the background of the warfare which broke out in 49 B.C.⁴⁰ It is probable that Pollio described or intended to describe all the phases of the conflict, including its final resolution.⁴¹ This is confirmed by indications of the scope of Pollio's history (strictly, of Horace's belief on the matter) in the first poem of the second book of the Odes.⁴² The verses:

                       gravisque
principum amicitias et arma

nondum expiatis uncta cruoribus,
periculosae plenum opus aleae,
tractas, et incedis per ignis
suppositos cineri doloso
[3-8]

point toward a history of comprehensive scope, and Porphyrio's comment is in accord with this.⁴³ A history of the whole period of dissension would constitute a task far more delicate than one ending with the bellum civile Caesarianum or the dictator's death; the figure of the embers under the ashes loses its appositeness if it is not taken to include events too recent to be touched upon without wariness. Some verses near the end of the ode, furthermore, suggest the naval warfare with Sextus Pompeius and the great engagement off Actium:

qui gurges aut quae flumina lugubris
ignara belli? quod mare Dauniae
 non decoloravere caedes?
   quae caret ora cruore nostro?
[33-36]

The interrelation of the civil campaigns of Caesar and of his adopted son is emphasized in the concluding lines of the Metamorphoses. Ovid writes:

hic sua complevit, pro quo, Cytherea, laboras,
tempora, perfectis, quos terrae debuit, annis.
ut deus accedat caelo templisque colatur,
tu facies natusque suus, qui nominis heres
inpositum feret unus onus caesique parentis
nos in bella suos fortissimus ultor habebit.
illius auspiciis obsessae moenia pacem
victa petent Mutinae, Pharsalia sentiet illum,
Emathiique iterum madefient caede Philippi,
et magnum Siculis nomen superabitur undis,
Romanique ducis coniunx Aegyptia taedae
non bene fisa cadet, frustraque erit illa
 minata,
servitura suo Capitolia nostra Canopo
[xv. 816-28].

That Octavian as Caesar's avenger (821) pursued the conflict in a manner similar to that of his predecessor is the import of the coupling of Pharsalia (823) with the Virgilian iterum madefient caede Philippi in the following verse. The adjective magnum (825) is used in such a way as to suggest the parallelism between the conflict of the elder Pompey and the first Caesar on the one hand and of Octavian and Sextus Pompeius on the other. In calling Antony dux Romanus (cf. 826) the poet brings out the civil aspect of the war against Antony and Cleopatra, which Horace and Virgil had been at pains to dissemble. In the Ex Ponto Ovid alludes to the symbolization of the end of civil conflict by the closing of the gates of the temple of Janus in 29 B.C.:

qui [Augustus] vicit semper, victis ut parcere
   posset,
  clausit et aetema civica bella sera
[i. 2. 125-26].

That Augustus himself, at least in his later years, regarded the overthrow of Antony and Cleopatra as marking the end of the civil warfare in which he had engaged is apparent from the Res gestae, in which he situates the end of bella civilia in or shortly before 28 B.C.⁴⁴

In view of Lucan's dependence upon Livy for his historical material,⁴⁵ how the historian defined the period of civil strife is of particular significance, since it is probable that the poet would conceive the conflict, at least in its grand outlines, as did the historian he chose for his guide. The most direct evidence for Livy's treatment of the twenty-odd years from the outbreak of civil warfare to the ultimate peace is furnished by the Periochae of Books cix-cxvi. Before the first eight of these summaries the headings "qui est civilis belli primus (secundus, etc.)" are found. It is sufficiently probable that these eight books of the unabridged Livy were at one time so designated,⁴⁶ and it has been thought that this designation stems from Livy himself. It need not be questioned that the historian considered the four years of the bellum civile Caesarianum (cix-cxv) a unified and coherent part of the struggle, but that he would here include the eleven months of peace from Munda to Caesar's assassination (cxvi is entirely concerned with this period) is unlikely; furthermore it would be hazardous to infer from these titles alone even if their Livian origin were certain that Livy regarded the bellum Caesarianum the bellum civile [kat' exokhen] and the years of warfare that followed Caesar's death as a distinct phase of secondary importance. As will shortly be seen, the text of the Periochae provides cogent evidence that such were not Livy's views, while there can be no doubt that the titles themselves were interpolated into his history long after the death of the author.

In later antiquity it was a common practice to introduce chapter-headings and other "titles" intohistorical works. This is well illustrated by the case of Florus, who drew upon Livy to such an extent that his history was once believed to be an epitome of the earlier work, and is so labelled in some manuscripts. The text of Florus has been split into a great number of chapters, for the most part entitled bellum this or that. One chapter bears the title "Bellum civile Caesaris et Pompei." This chapter begins with the commencement of hostilities and ends with Caesar's assassination. The chapter-headings in Florus are considerably later than the text;⁴⁷ this one is not consistent with the statement in the chapter that Caesar's civil warfare lasted four years and ended climactically with Munda.⁴⁸ As between text and heading there can be no doubt as to which reflects the Livian tradition. Here the editor or scribe used the designation current in his day, without thought of consistency or chronological precision. It would seem that whoever gave the title bellum civile, or perhaps, as the analogy of the heading in Florus suggests, bellum civile Caesaris et Pompei, to Livy cix-cxvi proceeded in just the same manner, and that this took place between the date Florus used Livy and that when the Livian Periochae were compiled. In any event, the titles appearing before Periochae cix-cxvi have no value as evidence for Livy's view of the Roman civil conflict. The text of the Periochae, on the other hand, represents the Livian tradition as faithfully as its extreme compression permits. Unlike Florus, the Periochae derive exclusively from Livy. That the essential unity of the civil struggle was well realized by the historian is made explicit by the following passage from Periocha cxxxiii: "Caesar Alexandria in potestatem redacta, Cleopatra, ne in arbitrium victoris veniret, voluntaria morte defuncta, in urbem reversus tres triumphos egit … inposito fine civilibus bellis altero et vicesimo anno."⁴⁹

Velleius Paterculus states that the agitation of the tribune Curio (as Caesar's agent at Rome in 50 B.C., the year of his tribunate) precipitated the conflict and thereby initiated a series of civil disasters that lasted for twenty years,⁵⁰ and eulogizes the peace that followed this period of civil strife.⁵¹ He thus regards the entire complex as an entity; he recognizes that the campaigns of Julius Caesar constitute a coherent phase of the longer struggle but does not assign disproportionate importance to them.⁵²

Valerius Maximus refers to the warfare resulting from the falling-out of Caesar and Pompey in a manner which suggests a series of clashes more prolonged than the bellum civil Caesarianum.⁵³ The writings of the elder Seneca contain little of relevance to the present subject. He cites a tirade of the great declaimer Latro in which Antony is excoriated as the personification of civil war;⁵⁴ subsequently, in explaining his failure to see Cicero, he observes: "nec Ciceronem quidem aetas mihi eripuerat, sed bellorum civilium furor, qui tunc totum orbem pervagabatur, intra coloniam meam me continuit."⁵⁵ Seneca here conceives of civil warfare continuing from 49 B.C. to Cicero's death in 43 B.C. (and doubtless beyond). There is likewise little evidence as to the views of the younger Seneca on this matter. On one occasion he stresses the increasingly "civil" character of Octavian's internal warfare: "cum civibus primum, deinde cum collegis, novissime cum adfinibus coactus armis decernere mari terraque sanguinem fudit. per Macedoniam, Siciliam, Aegyptum, Syriam Asiamque et omnis prope oras bello circuactus Romana caede lassos exercitus ad externa bella convertit."⁵⁶ Again, his use of the phrase medio civili bello with reference to the occasion in October 45 B.C. (half a year after Munda) when Caesar forced the aging Laberius to appear upon the stage,⁵⁷ unless it be an instance of what Postgate called "the Annaean inaccuracy,"⁵⁸ implies that the philosopher attached no great importance to the interval of peace that followed Caesar's Spanish victory.

Tacitus, whose testimony may conveniently be considered at this point, before concluding this survey by examining passages from Manilius and the Octavia, agrees with Livy and Velleius in characterizing the period 49-29 B.C. as one of unbroken discord.⁵⁹ In the Histories he sets forth the opinion of all classes of citizens in terms which make it plain that at the time with which he is concerned (A.D. 69) the battles of the civil struggle before and after Caesar's assassination were felt to be parts of the same complex.⁶⁰

The unitarian attitude toward the conflict appears clearly in the following lines of Manilius, which exhibit striking similarities with Lucan i. 38-45, if indeed the later poet is not directly inspired by them:

civilis etiam motus cognataque bella [ignes]
significant. nec plura alias incendia mundus
sustinuit, quam cum ducibus iurata cruentis
arma Philippeos implerunt agmine campos,
vixque etiam sicca miles Romanus harena
ossa virum lacerosque prius super astitit artus,
imperiumque suis conflixit viribus ipsum,
perque patris pater Augustus vestigia vicit.
necdum finis erat: restabant Actia bella
dotali commissa acie, repetitaque rerum
alea et in ponto quaesitus rector Olympi,
femineum sortita iugum cum Roma pependit
atque ipsa Isiaco certarunt fulmina sistro;
restabant profugo servilia milite bella,
cum patrios armis imitatus filius hostis
aequora Pompeius cepit defensa parenti
[i. 906-21].

The verses alluding to Julius Caesar's assassination:

ille etiam caelo genitus caeloque receptus,
cum bene compositis victor civilibus armis
iura togae regeret, totiens praedicta cavere
vulnera non potuit:
[iv. 57-60]

refer, as was the case in Velleius ii. 59. 4,⁶¹ to the apparent ending of the conflict with the bellum civile Caesarianum.

In the Octavia Nero rejects a suggestion on the part of Seneca that he imitate the mansuetude of Augustus by declaring that it is folly to tolerate enemies of the regime when they may so easily be put to death; he illustrates the peril of sentimentality in this respect by the murder of Julius Caesar:

             Brutus in caedem ducis
a quo salutem tulerat, armavit manus:
invictus acie, gentium domitor, lovi
aequatus altos ipse per honorum gradus
Caesar nefando civium scelere occidit.
quantum cruoris Roma tum vidit sui,
lacerata totiens! ille qui meruit pia
virtute caelum, divus Augustus, viros
quot interemit nobiles, iuvenes senes
sparsos per orbem, cum suos mortis metu
fugerent penates et trium ferrum ducum,
tabula notante deditos tristi neci!
exposita rostris capita caesorum patres
videre maesti, flere nec licuit suos,
non gemere dira tabe polluto foro,
stillante sanie per putres vultus gravi.
nec finis hic cruoris aut caedis stetit:
pavere volucres et feras saevas diu
tristes Philippi, … hausit et Siculum mare
classes virosque … saepe cedentes suos.
concussus orbis⁶² viribus magnis ducum:
superatus acie puppibus Nilum petit
fugae paratis, ipse periturus brevi:
hausit cruorem incesta Romani ducis
Aegyptus iterum; nunc leves umbras tegit.
illic sepultum est impie gestum diu
civile bellum, condidit tandem suos
iam fessus enses victor hebetatos feris
vulneribus, et continuit imperium metus
[498-526].

Although Nero is here chiefly concerned with the civil warfare following Caesar's assassination, he has in mind all the years of dissension between the Rubicon and the final peace; the bellum civile (the singular is significant) impie gestum diu (523) ended at last in Egypt with the death of a second Roman commander (521-22; Pompey had been the first), and fear held the state together. Since Julius Caesar failed to inspire fear similar to that in which Nero alleges Octavian was held, he was unable to bring the civil conflict to an enduring conclusion and himself fell a victim of it.

From this survey it may be concluded that Lucan's contemporaries and Julio-Claudian predecessors and specifically his historical source, Livy, thought of the civil warfare which broke out in 49 B.C. as continuing until the final victory of Octavian. The bellum civile Caesarianum, although considered a coherent episode in the greater struggle, by no means occupied the predominant or exclusive position it attained in later antiquity and the Middle Ages, and which it still holds in the minds of many. It is therefore a priori probable that in selecting the plus quam civilia bella which followed Caesar's crossing of the Rubicon as his theme, Lucan proposed to continue the subject untilcivil warfare came to a definitive end some twenty years later.

External evidence of a more direct nature may be found in Petronius' Satyricon (118-24). Here Petronius has the engagingly uninhibited itinerant man of letters, Eumolpus, give a lecture, as he and his companions walk along the highroad into Croton, on the general subject of poetry, which is succeeded by specific observations on the theme belli civilis ingens opus (118). Contrary to the custom of critics, Eumolpus supports his remarks by reciting two hundred and sixty hexameters on this subject, which exemplify the principles he has just enunciated. It is obvious and undisputed that these verses stand in close relation to Lucan's poem, but whether they are intended as model, parody, or pastiche has given rise to much speculation.⁶³ What is of present concern to us, however, is the meaning of belli civilis ingens opus, since it is clear that this phrase designates the subject upon which Lucan was believed to have been engaged as well as that of the verses Eumolpus declaims.⁶⁴

In the first place, the adjective ingens points toward a poem of comprehensive scope. In the poem proper, Eumolpus, after describing the corrupt condition of the Roman world, has pater Ditis call upon Fortuna to end the long era of peace which had obtained since the time of Sulla. Fortuna signifies her willingness to do this, declaring:

                     et mihi cordi
quippe cremare viros et sanguine pascere
   luxum
[109-10].

Then, in a succession of visions, she enumerates the phases of the conflict she is soon to unleash:

cerno equidem gemina iam stratos morte
   Philippos
Thessaliaeque rogos et funera gentis Hiberae.
iam fragor armorum trepidantes personat
   aures.
et Libyae cerno tua, Nile, gementia claustra⁶⁵
Actiacosque sinus et Apollinis anna, timentes
[111-15].

These visions foreshadow with considerable precision Pharsalia, the bellum Alexandrinum, and Caesar's Spanish campaigns, then Philippi and the bellum Actiacum. There is no indication that Munda or the death of Caesar is to mark the end of a distinct struggle; the two decades of warfare are envisaged as a whole. Fortuna goes on to anticipate that the shades of those killed will swarm in such hordes into the lower world that Charon's skiff will not suffice for their transport; an entire fleet will be needed (117-19). Her prophecy concludes: "ad Stygios manes laceratus ducitur orbis" (121). The phrase laceratus orbis, to which several parallels have been observed,' ⁶⁶ emphasizes the comprehensiveness of this series of civil catastrophes. Prodigies follow (122-40), then Caesar, with Lucanian abruptness, enters upon the scene.⁶⁷ The next hundred lines describe Caesar's march across the Alps, and the reaction at Rome to the report of his actions brought by Fama (144-244). The finalverses of the poem are once more on the divine plane (245-95): Pax, followed by Fides, lustitia, and Concordia, leaves the upper world for the domain of Dis (249-53), while the contrasting divinities Erinys, Bellona, Megaera, Letum, Insidiae and Mors emerge to take their places, with Furor bringing up the rear (255-60). Finally Discordia comes forth with a blast of trumpets and calls the world to arms, and Eumolpus ends: "factum est in terris quicquid Discordia iussit" (295).

Civil warfare, as adumbrated in these verses, extends from 49 to 29 B.C. A poem which commences with the expulsion of Pax by Discordia and her band must remain incomplete until Discordia in turn is supplanted by Pax. This did not take place until Antony and Cleopatra had been defeated; the return of Pax was then symbolized by the closing of the gates of the temple of Janus. Whatever the author of the Satyricon meant to convey with respect to the Lucanian technique of historical epic, there can be no uncertainty as to the limits he, Eumolpus, and the contemporary literate public considered natural and fitting for an epic dealing with belli civilis ingens opus, and by this token those contemplated by Lucan for the poem he was composing on this subject.

There remains the internal evidence of Lucan's poem itself. If the hypothesis put forward by Weber in the Commentatio⁶⁸ that the text shows traces of two recensions, the first representing a projected comprehensive poem to end with the triumph of Octavian and introduced by i. 8-66, and the second, for which i. 1-7 were composed as exordium, a shorter and violently libertarian version, terminating with the overthrow of Brutus and Cassius at Philippi were sound, the evaluation of the internal evidence would be a task of disheartening complexity. Happily, this hypothesis will not hold water. Weber's sole substantial argument, viz., that i. 1-7 and i. 8-66 are inconsistent, has been shown false.⁶⁹ Weber's interpretation of the curious statement of the Vita in the Leidensis Vossianus Secundus, Lat. xix. f. 63: "Seneca autem, qui fuit avunculus eius, quia ex abrupto inchoabat, hos vii versus addidit: 'bella per Emathios' usque 'et pila minantia pilis'" as reflecting a tradition that these verses, written by Lucan, were added by Lucan's father after his son's death, in accordance with the latter's instructions, to replace the "first exordium," hardly merits refutation.⁷⁰ It may be remarked, however, that the motive found in this Vita has nothing to do with the one imagined by Weber. Equally worthless is his supposition that the "title" Bellum civile was assigned by the poet to the longer version, while Pharsalia was to designate the shorter.⁷¹ Nevertheless it is interesting to note that Weber came to consider it impossible to interpret such passages as the "first exordium" save by admitting that they were written to form part of a poem comprising the entire period of civil strife.⁷²

Lucan begins by setting forth his theme in general terms:

Bella per Emathios plus quam civilia campos
iusque datum sceleri canimus, populumque
   potentem
in sua victrici conversum viscera dextra
cognatasque acies, et rupto foedere regni
certatum totis concussi viribus orbis
in commune nefas, infestisque obvia signis
signa, pares aquilas et pila minantia pilis
[i. 1-7].

This theme is civil warfare. Nothing here restricts the subject to the bellum civile Caesarianum; Emathios is at least as appropriate to Philippi as to Pharsalia. If it is thought that the expression plus quam civilia bella implies that the protagonists were related, it should be remembered that Antony and Octavian were connected through marriage, as well as Pompey and Caesar. The words rupto foedere regni are no less applicable to the second triumvirate than they are to the first.⁷³ Actium was, to the Roman of the first century after Christ, an engagement at least as world-shaking as Pharsalia. That Lucan considered the later phases of the struggle even more unhallowed (nefas) than the earlier ones is made plain by the exclamation which terminates his seventh book:

Hesperiae clades et flebilis unda Pachyni
et Mutina et Leucas puros fecere Philippos
[871-72].

It is the practice of epic poets first to state their theme in general terms and then to describe and define it more specifically. The opening words of the Aeneid sufficiently indicate Virgil's theme; this is then amplified and defined by the succeeding six and a half lines; dum conderet urbem/ inferretque deos Latio (5-6) looks forward to the conclusion of the poem. Similarly the first thirteen words of Silius' Punica declare the subject, which verses 12-16 reiterate in a fuller and more precise manner. This usage is well exemplified by the initial lines of Corippus' Iohannis, a work of markedly Lucanian character:⁷⁴

Signa, duces gentesque feras Martisque ruinas
insidias stragesque virum durosque labores,
et Libycas clades et fractos viribus hostes,
indictamque famem populis laticesque
  negatos,
utraque letifero turbantes castra tumultu,

turbatos stratosque cano populosque subactos,
ductorem et magno signantem facta triumpho.
Aeneadas rursus cupiunt resonare Camenae
[i. 1-8].

The subject is introduced in the first line and described with increasing precision in the next six verses; the resolution of the chaos and alarums of warfare by victory and the ensuing triumph is forshadowed by verse seven; the poet has by now made clear both the nature and the scope of his subject.

After the general statement in the first seven lines, Lucan inveighs against the folly of Romans fighting one another while external foes remain, then (24-32) pictures the desolation of Italy, which he represents as continuing to his day (nunc, 24). This ruin has been caused by the civil warfare the poet is to recount, and is to be understood as the result of the entire complex of civil conflicts rather than of any part thereof. If all the disasters of civil warfare, Lucan continues (33-38), were a prerequisite to the accession, there would be no reason for complaint: scelera ipsa nefasquel hac mercede placent (37-38). These instances of scelus and nefas (the expressions ius datum sceleri [2] and in commune nefas [6] are here echoes) the poet proceeds to specify:

                     diros Pharsalia campos
inpleat et Poeni saturentur sanguine manes,
ultima funesta concurrant proelia Munda,
his, Caesar, Perusina fames Mutinaeque labores
accedant fatis et quas premit aspera classes
Leucas et ardenti servilia bella sub Aetna,
multum Roma tamen debet civilibus armis
quod tibi res acta est
[i. 38-45].

The term civilia arma comprises the struggle from its outbreak through Actium. Ultima proelia may conceivably, as Weise thought, refer to the remote position of Munda, but the more probable temporal interpretation need occasion no perplexity, since Lucan forthwith makes explicit that there was nothing enduring about Caesar's victory in southern Spain; it did no more than mark the end of a phase of the larger conflict.⁷⁵

The magnitude of the theme is stressed in the lines:

fert animus causas tantarum expromere rerum,
inmensumque aperitur opus, quid in arma furentem
inpulerit populum, quid pacem excusserit orbi
[i. 67-69].

Inmensum opus corresponds to the Petronian ingens Opus.⁷⁶ As has been observed apropos of Eumolpus' lines,⁷⁷ a poem that begins with the banishment of peace should end with its return; the temple of Janus remained open after Munda, and its gates were not shut until 29 B.C.

The double sententia:

nulla fides regni sociis, omnisque potestas
inpatiens consortis erit
[i. 92-93]

is of equal relevance to either triumvirate.

At the close of the first book are three prophecies having to do with the incipient warfare. The forebodings of the haruspex Arruns (631-37) are sinister but vague; the prophecies of Figulus (642-72) and of the "frenzied matron" (678-94) give, on the other hand, precious indications concerning Lucan's conception of the scope of the conflict he had chosen for his subject. After resuming the astrological phenomena that motivate his fears, Figulus proclaims:

"inminet armorum rabies, ferrique potestas
confundet ius omne manu, scelerique nefando
nomen erit virtus, multosque exibit in annos
hic furor. et superos quid prodest poscere
    finem?
cum domino pax ista venit. duc, Roma, malorum
continuam seriem clademque in tempora
  multa
extrahe civili tantum iam libera bello"
[i. 666-72].

Marked verbal similarities exist between this passage and the early lines of the book; the furor of civil strife foreseen by Figulus is that of i. 8; "many years" is better taken to refer to 49-29 B.C. than to the four years of the bellum civile Caesarianum. The prediction cum domino pax ista venit (670) has been thought to refer to Julius Caesar,⁷⁸ and it is true that Caesar is repeatedly thus stigmatized by Lucan and others, but Figulus is here thinking not of Julius Caesar but of Octavian.⁷⁹ The last and most circumstantial prophecy is that of the "frenzied matron":

"quo feror, o Paean? qua me super aethera
 raptam
constituis terra? video Pangaea nivosis
cana iugis latosque Haemi sub rupe Philippos.
quis furor hic, o Phoebe, doce, quo tela
   manusque
Romanae miscent acies bellumque sine hoste
  est.
quo diversa feror? primos me ducis in ortus,
qua mare Lagei mutatur gurgite Nili:
hunc ego, fluminea deformis truncus harena
qui iacet, agnosco. dubiam super aequora
    Syrtim

arentemque feror Libyen, quo tristis Enyo
transtulit Emathias acies. nunc desuper Alpis
nubiferae colles atque aeriam Pyrenen
abripimur. patriae sedes remeamus in urbis,
inpiaque in medio peraguntur bella senatu.
consurgunt partes iterum, totumque per
   orbem
rursus eo. nova da mihi cernere litora ponti
telluremque novam: vidi iam, Phoebe, Philippos"
[i. 678-94].

Verse 691: "unholy warfare is being brought to an end in the midst of the assembled senate"⁸⁰ must be interpreted in its context. The matron is reporting the successive tableaux of her vision asthey flash before her eyes. At this point she sees the man who set the conflict in motion being stabbed to death, and for an instant assumes that this marks the end of civil strife. But the vision does not stop here; the final verses of her prophecy tell of dark glimpses of Philippi and of Actium, and it may be of the sea fights off Sicily with Sextus Pompeius and the bellum Mutinense.⁸¹

The unequivocal indications of the scope of his poem given by Lucan in verses 38-45 of this book are confirmed, implicitly and explicitly, by the two predictions just discussed. Were no further confirmation found in the remaining books, it could be concluded from this evidence alone that when this book was written Lucan contemplated telling the story of the twenty odd years of civil conflict from beginning to end, and, in the absence of unmistakeable signs in subsequent books of a change of plan, that this remained Lucan's purpose as long as he worked on the poem. Confirmatory evidence does, however, occur. Actium is foreshadowed in the lines:

ductor erat cunctis audax Antonius armis
iam tum civili meditatus Leucada bello
[v. 478-79],

of which a scholiast observed, "id est, qui disceret gerere bella civilia."⁸² The verses create the impression that Actium is to occupy a climactic position in the poem. The closing lines of book seven represent the events which culminate in Actium (871-72) as more formidable than the first great engagement in Thessaly:⁸³

                 nuda atque ignota iaceres,
si non prima nefas belli sed sola tulisses.
o superi, liceat terras odisse nocentis.
quid totum premitis, quid totum absolvitis
   orbem?
Hesperiae clades et flebilis unda Pachyni
et Mutina et Leucas puros fecere Philippos
[vii. 867-72].

The abuse Lucan heaps upon Cleopatra when she firsappears and the manner in which he speaks of her future exploits make it probable that a role both sinister and significant is being reserved for her:

dedecus Aegypti, Latii feralis Erinys,
Romano non casta malo. quantum inpulit
 Argos
Iliacasque domos facie Spartana nocenti,
Hesperios auxit tantum Cleopatra furores,
terruit illa suo, si fas, Capitolia sistro
et Romana petit inbelli signa Canopo
Caesare captivo Pharios ductura triumphos;
Leucadioque fuit dubius sub gurgite casus,
an mundum ne nostra quidem matrona
 teneret.
hoc animi nox illa dedit quae prima cubili
miscuit incestam ducibus Ptolemaida nostris.
quis tibi vaesani veniam non donet amoris,
Antoni, durum cum Caesaris hauserit ignis
pectus?
[x. 59-72]

Hesperios furores (62) point to the conflict of 32-30 B.C. rather than to the bellum Alexandrinum, as the context shows, but allude to Cleopatra's responsibility for Caesar's fighting at Alexandria as well. In verses 66-67 Actium and the potential consequences of this battle loom up portentously. To the association of the meretrix regina with Julius Caesar the poet ascribes the genesis of the haughty enterprise that all but effected the overthrow of Octavian, and the adjective prima (68) implies the later liaison with Antony, which precipitated the final cataclysm of the civil struggle.

If Lucan designed to carry his narrative to the peace which followed the victory of Octavian over Antony and his royal wife, it follows that the significant episodes and incidents of civil conflict between the interruption of the poem in the tenth book and the ultimate peace fall within the scope of the epic, and consequently separate discussion of references to these events, the most important of which are found in passages already cited, has not appeared necessary. An exception has been made, however, in the case of Sextus Pompeius; were there no explicit evidence that the defeat of Antony and Cleopatra concluded the poem, the incorporation of the warfare between Sextus and Octavian would point in this direction, since it is improbable that Lucan would have brought his story to a halt with the elimination of a personage of such ambiguous character and relatively secondary importance as Pompey's younger son. The direct evidence that has been presented does not stand in need of such roundabout confirmation. Nevertheless, since Lucan's treatment of Sextus and the allusions to his later career furnish clues as to the manner in which the incompleted portion of the poem might have been worked out, some profit may result from an examination of the passages concerning him.

Lucan purposely disregards historical accuracy in placing Sextus in Thessaly just before Pharsalia.⁸⁴ He no doubt thought it incongruous that neither of Pompey's sons, who subsequently are adjured to continue the Pompeian tradition by opposing all Caesars,⁸⁵ was on hand at the time of their father's most decisive battle. It is unlikely that he contemplated making much use of Gnaeus Pompeius the Younger, who at this stage of the conflict held a naval command in the Adriatic, for Gnaeus did not fight in the bellum Africum and survived Munda by only a few days, whereas after Caesar's death Sextus defied his successor for many years; he would of necessity occupy a position of some prominence in the section of the epic dealing with this period, and in anticipation of this is here brought to the fore. The verses with which Lucan introduces him foreshadow, somewhat invidiously, his future activities as corsair in Sicilian waters:

              turbae sed mixtus inerti
Sextus erat, Magno proles indigna parente,
eui mox Scyllaeis exul grassatus in undis
polluit aequoreos Siculus pirata triumphos
[vi. 419-22]

and the part he is made to play in the gruesome necromancy scene which follows betokens little sympathy on the part of Lucan, yet in the course of his prophecy the cadaver declares that Sextus ultimately will join his father and brother in the bright part of the nether world:

              refer haec solacia tecum,
oiuvenis, placido manes patremque domumque
expectare sinu regnique in parte serena
Pompeis servare locum
[vi. 802-5]

and shortly thereafter foretells that the shade of his father will manifest itself to him in Sicily, and inform him more exactly of his doom:

tu fatum ne quaere tuum: cognoscere Parcae
me reticente dabunt; tibi certior omnia vates
ipse canet Siculis genitor Pompeius in arvis,
ille quoque incertus quo te vocet, unde repellat,
quas iubeat vitare plagas, quae sidera mundi⁸⁶
[vi. 812-16].

There is every indication that the entire necromancy scene is Lucan's invention. The analogy with the passage late in the fifth Aeneid where Aeneas is tempted to settle in Sicily but is enheartened by the shade of Anchises to pursue his voyage (724-39)⁸⁷ suggests the literary rather than the "historical" character of this epiphany of the elder Pompey.⁸⁸ The poet emphasizes the role of Sextus to a degree quite unjustified by his actions at this time; the violence done in this episode to historical fact, together with the allusions, fictional and otherwise, to Sextus' later career, can only be explained by the assumption that the civil warfare waged by Sextus after the death of his father and elder brother was to form an integral part of the poem. This is supported by the words of Comelia to her stepson a short time after Pompey had been murdered as he approached the Egyptian shore:

tu pete bellorum casus et signa per orbem,
Sexte, paterna move; namque haec mandata
   reliquit
Pompeius vobis in nostra condita cura:
"me cum fatalis leto damnaverit hora,
excipite, o nati, bellum civile, nec
 umquam,
dum terris aliquis nostra de stirpe manebit,
Caesaribus regnare vacet …"
[ix. 84-90].

These instructions of Pompey to his sons also have their origin in the poet's imagination. There is no reason to suppose that Pompey ever made such a statement; that he had foreseen his death at this point and left a message for Cornelia to transmit, should misfortune befall him, is fantastically improbable. Sextus accompanied his father on the voyage to Egypt; there was ample opportunity to communicate with him directly. The plural Caesaribus (90) brackets Octavian with Julius Caesar and looks ahead not only to the campaign of Munda but to the years of warfare waged by Sextus against Octavian after the dictator's death.

Several passages may appear inconsistent with the comprehensive design which, it has been maintained, Lucan had in mind. In the seventh book the consequences of Pharsalia are described in terms so wild and hyperbolic that it might seem that with the aftermath of this engagement Lucan must consider his theme exhausted. After imputing the contemporary desolation of Italy to the losses of this battle, the poet says that it brought about a collapse of national prestige and marked the departure of libertas from the civilized world:

                      hac luce cruenta
effectum, ut Latios non horreat India fasces,
[427-28] …

quod fugiens⁸⁹ civile nefas redituraque numquam
libertas ultra Tigrim Rhenumque recessit
ac, totiens nobis iugulo quaesita, vagatur
Germanum Scythicumque bonum, nec respicit
   ultra
Ausoniam, vellem populis incognita nostris
[432-36].

Later in the same book reverting to the subject of the effects of the battle, he cries no less extravagantly:

maius ab hac acie quam quod sua saecula ferrent
volnus habent populi; plus est quam vita salusque
quod perit: in totum mundi prosternimur
   aevum.
vincitur his gladiis omnis quae serviet aetas.
proxima quid suboles aut quid meruere
  nepotes
in regnum nasci? pavide num gessimus arma
teximus aut iugulos? alieni poena timoris
in nostra cervice sedet. post proelia natis
si dominum, Fortuna, dabas, et bella dedisses
[638-46].

Both passages are more reminiscent of the Eumolpian furentis animi vaticinatio than of the deprecated religiosae orationis sub testibus fides;⁹⁰ in striving for bravura effect Lucan forgets logic, precision and restraint. In the first passage, no distinction is made between the direct and the ultimate consequences of the battle. The second exaggerates the effect of Pharsalia no less grotesquely, but in disclaiming the responsibility of those born after the end of civil warfare (post proelia [645]) for a régime that they had had no opportunity to oppose in battle, the poet shows that despite the sound and fury of his tirade he preserved some awareness of the later phases of the struggle.⁹¹ In any event, the futility of attempting to draw any inference from these verses as to the scope of the poem is made plain by the circumstance that Lucan did not bring his narrative to a close with the aftermath of Pharsalia. On the contrary, after the death of Pompey the story continues with renewed vigor; the end is nowhere in sight.

As Pompey leaves the field of Pharsalia, Lucan exclaims that the remainder of the battle, together with the Alexandrian, African and Spanish wars will be between libertas and Caesar (vii. 691-97), with the parenthesis (695) par quod semper habemus. Until this parenthesis Lucan, as the mention of the later campaigns of the bellum Caesarianum shows, was thinking of Julius Caesar; the parenthesis expands the term Caesar to include Caesareae domus series, with particular reference to its contemporary representative Nero. Lucan here imagines a duel between libertas and Caesarianism, beginning with Pompey's exit and in progress as he writes. This is irreconcilable with the flight of libertas to barbarian lands after Pharsalia, which took place several hundred verses earlier.⁹² Fortunately, confusion of this nature has no bearing on the scope of the poem, inasmuch as Lucan was composing a historical epic on civilia bella, Roman civil warfare, not an account of an ideological conflict about which his ideas were nebulous and contradictory. Verse 695 unquestionably contains a barb at Nero, and may well show that in the interval since the composition of the laus Neronis (i. 33-66) in the so-called "first exordium"⁹³ the poet had come to hate his imperial rival, but that this sentiment impelled him radically to curtail the scope of his poem is an inference this probability in no way justifies.⁹⁴

The fancied ending of civilia bella with the death of Caesar in the Senate (i. 641) has been discussed.⁹⁵ A somewhat analogous statement is found in the final book, where Pothinus urges that Caesar be assassinated as he dallies with Cleopatra, "plenum epulis madidumque mero Venerique paratum" (x. 396). Pothinus anticipates that if this is accomplished "nox haec peraget civilia bella" (x. 391). This shows that Pothinus (and possibly Lucan) thought that killing Caesar at this time would put an end to civil war; it does not imply that the poet believed that civil warfare was in fact ended by the stabbing of Caesar by the conspirators.

Evidence has been given to establish the a priori probability that Lucan interpreted plus quam civilia bella as the decades of civil warfare between 49 and 29 B.C. It has been further shown that this was the belief of his contemporaries concerning the scope of the poem he was writing. The internal evidence of the work as it stands makes the conclusion inescapable that the poet designed to comprise the entire period of civil strife. The hypothesis that this scope was abridged in the course of composition rests upon no valid grounds, external or internal.

The precise manner in which the later parts of the poem would have been worked out will never be known; probably Lucan had neither solved nor anticipated many of the problems that would havearisen. The contradictory characterizations of Sextus Pompeius⁹⁶ indicate that Lucan's attitude toward Sextus and his opponent Octavian in the conflict between this pair had not crystallized. It appears certain, on the other hand, that he would have excoriated Antony and Cleopatra without mercy; whether or not he would ultimately have adopted an attitude of disabused tolerance toward the second Caesar is problematic; just as Lucan's "Pompeianism" went beyond that of the distinguished Pompeian who provided the historical framework about which he was building his poem, so it is unlikely that even his hatred for Antony and Cleopatra could have brought him to feel much enthusiasm for the founder of the principate, or to greet his triumph with any emotion beyond relief at its marking the end of a long and disastrous period of civil war.

Notes

¹ In Quaestiones in Lucani Pharsaliam, Part I (Goeben, 1824), p. 20, E. Kaestner maintained that the poem was complete or nearly so as it stands, arguing that the arrival of Caesar at a position of supremacy constituted a fit ending, and that with Caesar's escape this would in effect be achieved. This view was attacked by C. F. Weber, the then reigning German Lucanian, who observed that it did not take into account the difficult campaigns of Thapsus and Munda (Prolusio in Lucani Pharsaliam [Siza, 1825], p. 6, reprinted in identical form, save for differences in the numbering of the footnotes and one or two variants in Latinity, in Weber's edition of Cortius' Lucan, II [Leipzig, 1829], 569-90); when Kaestner subsequently reaffirmed his opinion as to Lucan's intention, he became studiously vague with regard to the interval between Caesar's escape and his attainment of supremacy. Cf. ibid., Part IV (Bielefeld, 1829), p. 20: "qui mox rebus suis accedebat cumulum."

² All ancient quotations from the poem appear in our text; that it consisted of ten books in antiquity as well as today is attested by the Vita attributed to Vacca.

³Silv. ii. 7. 100-104.

⁴ The remarks at the close of the Vaccan biography defend the seven "posthumous" books from an anticipated charge of lack of polish (a charge Vacca considers unfounded); there is no implication that the poem is incomplete.

⁵ Cf. A. E. Housman's Lucan² (Oxford, 1927), p. xxx.

⁶ See Sulpitius' note to i. 1. This commentary was first printed in 1493.

⁷ For the relation of these versions see R. T. Bruère, "The Latin and English Versions of Thomas May's Supplementum Lucani," CP, XLIV (1949), 145-63. May had hardly finished work on the Continuation when he affirmed that Lucan meant to end the poem with Caesar's death. This is shown by the words of Calliope to Lucan's ghost in "The Mind of the Picture, or Frontispice," which is found after the "Epistle Dedicatory" in some copies of the Continuation: "End it not untill/ The Senates Swords the life of Caesar spill;/ That he whose conquests gave dire Nero Reign,/ May as a sacrifice to thee be slain."

⁸ R. Harmand, Essai sur la Vie et les Oeuvres de Georges de Brébeuf (Paris, 1897), pp. 157-65 (Brébeuf's method of translation) and 175-78 (the episode of Burrhus and Octavie).

⁹La Pharsale de Lucain, en vers françois (Paris, 1654), Avertissement to book ten. Cf. Weber, Prolusio, n. 23.

¹⁰ P. 8.

¹¹Bellum civile, or De bello civili, the convenient designation of the MSS, is less misleading than the traditional term Pharsalia.

¹²Commentatio de duplici Pharsaliae Lucaneae exordio (Marburg, 1860), p. 18.

¹³ Introduction to C. E. Haskins' Lucan (London, 1887), p. xxxiv and n. 1.

¹⁴La Poésie latine (Paris, 1909), pp. 559-60: "Lucain eût, semble-t-il, prolongé son récit jusqu'à Philippes au moins, et probablement jusqu'à Actium. C'eût été le tableau complet des guerres civiles, tout le drame qui eut pour dénouement la constitution de l'Empire." Shortly thereafter he adds: "… Lucain, à coup sûr, n'a pas entrepris son oeuvre sans se demander où il allait: mais il a bien pu varier dans ses intentions à mesure qu'il composait et au cours des événements qui se passaient sous ses yeux." The contingency suggested in the last statement, despite a certain plausibility, would entail great difficulties, psychological and technical.

¹⁵Lee Sources de Lucain (Paris, 1912), pp. 269-71; a similar opinion had been expressed by A. Genthe in De Marci Annaei Lucani vita et acriptis (Berlin, 1859), p. 70, where the death of Cato is selected as the probable ending of the poem.

¹⁶Il Libro della letteratura latina (Florence, 1946), p. 331:"… e forse doveva [l'epopea storica] nell' intenzione del poeta, giungere sino alla morte di Cessare, se non sino ad Azio."

¹⁷ This uncertainty is illustrated by the imprecise manner in which the expressions "the civil war" and "the civil wars" are employed. Cf. "Lucan and his Roman Critics," CP, XXVI (1931), 254: "It can hardly be questioned, however, that Lucan's own purpose was to compose an epic of the civil wars, using the technique that seemed to him best suited to the subject …" and ibid., p. 233: "The dispute raised on the publication of Lucan's long hexameter account of the civil wars has not been settled" with p. 246: "Did the innovations in Lucan's work make it incorrect to classify the author as a poet, or was he really a historian employing a metrical form for his account of the Civil War?" and p. 247: "Obviously the modern criticism that such recent events as the second Civil War did not form a suitable theme for epic treatment cannot be seriously considered." It would thus appear that "the civil wars," "the second Civil War," and "the Civil War" are used interchangeably to designate the conflict of 49-45 B.C. But in the second article, "Lucan and Civil War," CP, XXVIII (1933), 121, we read: "Giraud ["Un poète républicain," Revue des deux mondes, 3^me période, X (1875), 425] points out that a literary tradition had been formed about the civil wars, which became rooted in Augustan and Julio-Claudian culture." The natural interpretation here is that the years of strife between 49 and 29 B.C. are meant, and this is confirmed by the context of Giraud's essay (in particular see p. 424: "… la république n'avait pu finir tout d'un coup; les longues convulsions de son agonie, depuis lesquerelles de Marius et de Sylla jusqu'à la bataille d'Actium, avaient ébranlé tout le monde romain et profondément troublé les imaginations.") On page 122 of "Lucan and Civil War" the author, apropos of Hor. Carm. i. 2. 21-24, (for which a date of composition late in 30 B.C. is accepted), remarks: "A stanza composed shortly after the civil war came to an end," and three pages later states: "He [Lucan] wrote nearly ninety years after the end of the civil wars, when the pax Augusta had made the world safe for Roman imperialism."

¹⁸ W. B. Anderson in Oxford Classical Dictionary (Oxford, 1949), p. 514.

¹⁹ Pp. 8-9: "… usque ad pugnam Philippicam, quam Lucanus procul dubio descripturus ibique finem carmini fuit impositurus. Quam rem primum inscriptio Pharsalia probat, hoc posito atque concesso optime quadrans. Utraque enim pugna, et Pompeii contra Caesarem, et Bruti contra triumviros, in campis Thessalicis [sic] pugnata est, ita ut Lucanus utramque eodem nomine insigniret." (i. 680, 694; vi. 582; ix. 271).

²⁰ p. 18, n. 7.

²¹Poetices Libri Septem (Lyon, 1561), iii. 123 (p. 434 in the second edition [Santandreana] of 1581): "Neque enim recte fecit Lucanus: cui Pharsalise titulus adeo placuit. Nam neque ibi omnia gesta: neque maior pars, neque propter illam: quippe rerum gestarum Pharsalia neutro modo finis fuit."

²²Op. cit., pp. 553, 560.

²³ Pichon, op. cit., p. 269.

²⁴ J. P. Postgate, Lucan viii (Cambridge, 1917), p. xc: "Pharsalia nostra here [ix. 985] does not mean 'my tale of Pharsalia shall live.' It means 'the memory of Pharsalia in which you and I, Caesar, have a share, shall never die."' Housman (apparatus ad loc.) expresses this in more specific terms: "Pharsalia nostra: proelium a te [Caesare] gestum, a me scriptum."

²⁵ 118. For this phrase see p. 224.

²⁶ Cf. the judicious conclusion of L. Daly to his study "The Entitulature of Pre-Ciceronian Writings," Classical Studies in honor of William Abbott Oldfather (Urbana, 1943), p. 32: "The title was not then a matter of great concern to writers of this period and, unless there is a unanimous tradition represented by a fair number of witnesses, it is idle to inquire as to the 'authentic' entitulature of a work. Even when the transmission of a title seems beyond reproach, if it is one of the conventional generic titles or is descriptive rather than distinctive, there can be no certainty that it was assigned by the author himself. In the absence of clear evidence to the contrary such titles should be regarded as purely conventional and traditional, and no particular importance need be attached to them." It is probable that this conclusion is no less valid for works of the early Empire.

²⁷ Suet. Vita: "dein … civile bellum, quod a Pompeio et Caesare gestum est, recitavit."

²⁸ Cf. n. 17 above; Drumann-Groebe, Geschichte Roms, IV (Leipzig, 1908), 291 and 297 (of Octavian after Actium): "Der Zweck seiner Anstrengungen war tiberall erreicht, der Bürgerkrieg hörte auf, …" and "… doch pflanzte man ebenfalls nach einer Verfügung des Senats am Eingange seines Hauses Lorbeerbäume, und ein Kranz von Eichenlaub am Giebel erinnerte an sein Verdienst, das er die Bürgerkriege beendigt … hatte"; R. Syme, The Roman Revolution (Oxford, 1939), uses both the singular (p. 136,1. 16; 137,1. 34) and the plural (p. 100, 1. 6; 104, 1. 3) for the struggle between Julius Caesar and the Senate; the plural also occurs in the comprehensive sense (p. 315, 1. 2). The ambiguous manner in which the expressions "civil war" and "the civil war" are employed is apparent in a recent edition of Lucan's first book (R. J. Getty [Cambridge, 1940]). See the note to vs. 672 on p. 123: "civili tantum iam libera bello: 'free only as long as civil war lasts,' i.e., until Actium and the final triumph of Octavian" and the note to vs. 691 on p. 125: "Cortius rightly explains this line as referring to the end of the civil war upon the death of Caesar in the Senate House. Pothinus, in planning Caesar's murder, recognized that this would happen, if he were successful, in the words (10. 391) nox haec peraget civilia bella." For the lack of relevance of Pothinus' statement to Caesar's assassination in the meeting of the Senate see p. 230.

²⁹ Cf. Sanford, "Lucan and Civil War," p. 123: "Mediaeval commentators … explain the substance or materia of the epic as 'the civil war and whatever arose therefrom,' or as totus cesar et totus pompeius, interpreted by the civil strife between them."

³⁰ Cf. n. 27 above.

³¹BC ii. 29. 3: civile bellum; iii. 1. 4: initio civilis belli. The expressions bello perfecto (iii. 18. 5) and confecto bello (iii. 57. 5) may mean "after Munda," but more probably refer to the end of the campaign with which the author is immediately concerned.

³²Phil. viii. 7: "de proximo bello civili non libet dicere: ignoro causam, detestor exitum. hoc bellum [Mutinense] quintum civile geritur." Cicero cites the clashes between Sulla and Sulpicius, Octavius and Cinna, and of Marius and Carbo against Sulla as the first three.

³³ Cf. Fam. xii. 25. 4 and xi. 20. 1: "'laudandum adulescentem, ornandum, tollendum."'

³⁴ "Caesaris nostri commentarios … confeci usque ad exitum non quidem civilis dissensionis, cuius finem nullum videmus, sed vitae Caesaris."

³⁵ W. Wili, Horaz und die Augusteische Kultur (Basle, 1948), pp. 45-46.

³⁶ For the propriety of thus designating the battle see my note "Palaepharsalus, Pharsalus, Pharsalia" to appear in CP in the near future.

³⁷Aen. viii. 675-700.

³⁸ Cf. Suet. Aug. 9: "bella civilia quinque gessit: Mutinense, Philippense, Perusinum, Siculum, Actiacum."

³⁹ Cf. 19: "haec hactenus Attico vivo edita a nobis sunt." (Atticus died in 32 B.C. The additional chapters contain nothing here relevant.

⁴⁰ Porphyrio to Hor. Carm. ii. 1. 1. Porphyrio does not say at what point Pollio's history ended. Pseudo-Acro states that he wrote "belli civilis historiam inter Pompeium et Caesarem," but there is no reason to think that Pseudo-Acro knew more about this than his source Porphyrio. Suidas, … whom he describes as a sophist and philosopher from Tralles living at Rome in Pompey's day, declares that this Pollio wrote a history of the civil war between Caesar and Pompey. It is conceivable that Pollio of Tralles wrote such an account, but more probable that we have here a garbled reference to the Historiae of the Roman Pollio. Nothing can be inferred from Suidas' statement as to the scope of the latter work.… Suidas says that Pollio the Roman wrote a Roman history in seventeen books. The number seventeen, which it is unlikely Suidas made up out of the whole cloth, does not suggest a history of limited scope. Furthermore Priscian (viii. 19) quotes a passage from Pollio which almost certainly refers to Agrippa's passage of the Rhine in 38 B.C. and to his campaign in Dalmatia four years later: "cuius experta virtus bello Germaniae traducta ad custodiam Illyriae est." As E. Wölfflin pointed out ("C. Asinius Pollio de bello Africo," Sitz. der phil. und histor. Klass. der K. bayer. Akad. der Wiss., III [1889], 324) there is stylistic evidence indicating this passage is from Pollio's history rather than from an oration. It is hard to understand in what connection Pollio could have introduced a factual statement of this sort unless he included the Dalmatian war that began in 34 B.C., nor is it likely, once he had carried his narrative thus far, that he would have stopped before the defeat and death of Antony and his wife. Finally it appears probable that a historian meticulous enough to commence his account more than ten years prior to open hostilities would continue until the definitive restoration of civil peace. J. André, in la Vie et l'Oeuvre d'Asinius Pollion (Paris, 1949), which has reached me as this article is in proof, argues implausibly that Pollio concluded his history with the republican defeat at Philippi. He attempts to dispose of the quotation in Priscian cited above by denying that it is from the Historiae. It cannot, he says, refer to Agrippa's campaigns of 38 and 34 B.C. (or to later ones of Tiberius) since these events are not within the chronological limits of the work (p. 61). Since we do not know at what point Pollio ended his history, this is circular reasoning.

⁴¹ That Pollio ended with Caesar's death, which L. R. Palmer (OCD, p. 710) considers possible, will not square with the statement of the elder Seneca that Pollio as historian was most hostile to Cicero's memory, which implies that Pollio recounted Cicero's last days in 43 B.C. (Suas. 6).

⁴² The date suggested by Nauck years ago still appears the most probable (28 B.C.). Certain ideas contained in the poem may have germinated in Horace's mind much earlier; cf. C. W. Mendell, "The Epic of Asinius Pollio," Yale Classical Studies, I (1928), 203: "The tone of the ode which has none of Horace's optimistic faith in the regime of Augustus would argue a date early rather than late in this period [39-23 B.C.]."

⁴³ Cf. to 4-5: "et arma nondum expiatis, id est: de quibus nondum expiati cruores sunt, ergo intellegi vult, paene adhuc in manibus esse arma civilia."

⁴⁴ "in consulatu sexto et septimo, p[ostquam bella civil]ia extinxeram …" [34]. Thus in H. Malcovati's Caesaris Augusti Operum Fragmenta³ (Turin, 1948). Octavian was consul for the sixthtime in 28 B.C.

⁴⁵ Cf p. 218 above.

⁴⁶ That Books cix-cxvi of the complete Livy were thus designated would seem to result from the Livian quotation found in the Commenta Bernensia to Lucan (ed. H. Usener [Leipzig, 1869]) iii. 182, which is introduced thus: "Livius in primo libro belli civilis ait …" The two references to the fourth book of Livy's Bellum civile which are printed in Endt's Adnotationes under x. 471 and 521, since they are not direct quotations, could stem from an epitome. All three are independent of the material in the Periochae.

⁴⁷ Florus Epitomae, (ed. 0. Rossbach [Leipzig, 1896]), pp. xxvi-xxvii. Rossbach assigns these headings to the fourth century.

⁴⁸ ii. 13. 90.

⁴⁹ Cf. Florus ii. 21: "hic [after the death of Antony and Cleopatra] finis armorum civilium, reliqua adversus exteras gentes."

⁵⁰ ii. 48. 3: "bello autem civili, et tot quae deinde per continuos XX annos consecuta sunt, malis non alius maiorem flagrantioremque quam C. Curio tribunus pl. subiecit facem." Velleius goes on to characterize Curio in terms similar to those used by Lucan (iv. 793-854).

⁵¹ ii. 89. 3: "finita vicesimo anno bella civilia, sepulta externa, revocata pax, sopitus ubique armorum furor, restituta vis legibus, iudiciis auctoritas, senatui maiestas, imperium magistratuum ad pristinum redactum modum"; cf. ibid., 87. 1: "… persecutus reginam Antoniumque Alexandriam, ultimam bellis inposuit manum"; and 90. 1: "sepultis … bellis civilibus coalescentibusque rei publicae membris, etiam coaluere quae tam longa armorum series laceraverat."

⁵² In ii. 59. 4: "et patratis bellis civilibus ad erudiendam liberalibus disciplinis singularis indolem iuvenis Apolloniam eum in studia miserat," Velleius adopts Caesar's point of view; the latter thought the civil conflict had come to an end with Munda.

⁵³ iv. 6. 4 (of Julia's fatal miscarriage): "… magn o quidem cum totius terrarum orbis detrimento, cuius tranquillitas tot civilium bellorum truculentissimo furore perturbata non esset, si Caesaris et Pompei concordia … mansisset."

⁵⁴Suas. 6: "iniusta bella albo Pharsalica, ac Mundensis Mutinensisque ruina vincitur … videbis illum non hominis sed belli civilis vultum." Latro mentions Munda and Mutina in the same breath, as parts of the same conflict.

⁵⁵Contr. i. Proem.

⁵⁶De brev. vit. 4. 5. This contrasts sharply with the notion that the destruction of the republican opposition at Philippi marked the end of civil warfare in the proper sense of the term.

⁵⁷De ira ii. 11. 3.

⁵⁸Lucan viii, p. xxii and n. 3.

⁵⁹Ann. iii. 28: "exim continua per viginti annos discordia, non mos, non ius; deterrima quaeque impune ac multa honesta exitio fuere. sexto demum consulatu Caesar Augustus, potentiae securus, quae triumviratu iusserat abolevit deditque iura quis pace et principe uteremur."

⁶⁰ i. 50. 1-3: "… non senatus modo et eques, quis aliqua pars et cura rei publicae, sed volgus quoque palam maerere. nec iam recentia saevae pacis exempla, sed repetita bellorum civilium memoria captam totiens suis exercitibus urbem, vastitatem Italiae, direptiones provinciarum, Pharsaliam Philippos et Perusiam ac Mutinam, nota publicarum cladium nomina, loquebantur. prope eversum orbem etiam cum de principatu inter bonos certaretur, sed mansisse C. Iulio, mansisse Caesare Augusto victore imperium." The expression "prope eversum orbem" is significantly reminiscent of Lucan's "Certatum totis concussi viribus orbis" (i. 5); Tacitus echoes this verse even more closely earlier in this book, where Galba says: "ne tamen territus fueris, si duae legiones in hoc concussi orbis motu nondum quiescunt" (16. 3).

⁶¹ Cf. n. 52 above.

⁶² Cf. n. 60 above.

⁶³ Cf. U. Knoche, Die römische Satire (Berlin, 1949), p. 72: "Einen grossen Ruhepunkt der Handlung stellt die Dichtung des Eumolpus über den Bürgerkrieg dar, ein ernsthaft gemeintes Gegenstück zum Epos Lucans in klassisch-form vollendeten Hexametern, von parodistischer Wirkung nur durch den Rahmen"; cf. the radically different interpretation advanced by F. Martins in "A crisa do maravilhoso na epopeia latina," Humanitas, I (Coimbra, 1947), 25-76, who argues that in Eumolpus' theories Petronius is satirizing those of Nero (p. 67) and that Eumolpus' doctrine together with the illustrative verses must be interpreted à rebours, with the consequence that Petronius is in fact the champion of the Lucanian technique of epic poetry: "É sobretudo a interpretação ao invés da doutrina poética de Eumolpo, devido ao seu nitido aspecto de sátira e de ironia, que nos faz chegar à conclusão não só de que Petrónio concorda com a inovação de Lucano, mas até de que pode representar em relação a ela, na história literária, o papel de teorizador" (p. 69). For a résumé of the views of many scholars on this question see E. Paratore, II Satyricon di Petronie, II (Florence, 1933), 385-87; Paratore's own position (p. 385) is: "Siamo dinanzi ad una parodia che P. ha, voluto fare di tutta la poesia contemporanea, in tutte le sue suddivisioni." Mention should also be made of Sanford's conclusion ("Lucan and his Roman Critics," p. 255): "The inherent parody, it seems to me, is of Eumolpus and his ilk, rather than of Lucan" and that of F. T. Baldwin, who after discussing the matter in her dissertation The Bellum Civile of Petronius (New York, 1911), concurs (p. 26 and n. 2) with W. E. Heitland (op. cit., p. vi) that "It [Eumolpus' poem] reads like a fair copy written to show Lucan how to do it."

⁶⁴ The objection that whatever inferences may be drawn from this episode concerning the scope envisaged by Lucan is of limited value since Petronius knew only the initial three books of the poem rests upon a number of assumptions, some of which are gratuitous and none of which are certain. Itis not demonstrably true that the author of the Satyricon is the Petronius whose death in A.D. 65 Tacitus describes; that Lucan published only three books of his poem rests upon the dubious authority of the Vaccan Life, and Vacca does not specify which three. Even if the hardy assumption is made that Eumolpus knew merely the first three books of Lucan's epic, it does not follow, unless a radical change of design is indicated by the internal evidence of the remaining books, that his conception of the proper scope of a poem treating belli civilis ingens opus was not that held by Lucan as long as he worked upon his poem. It is probable, in view of the verbal and ideological similarities between Eumolpus' verses and passages in all the seven later books of the poem as well as the first three (Paratore, pp. 391-99, and Baldwin, pp. 71-88), that "Petronius" knew the poem in its present form.

⁶⁵ The more precise claustra (the reading preferred by Buecheler), which refers to the fighting on Pharos and the Heptastadium (cf. BC x. 509: "claustrum pelagi … Pharon") is better than the variant casira (Baldwin), which would allude to the battle of the Nile. Mention of this easy victory would not be appropriate in this context.

⁶⁶ See nn. 60 and 62 above.

⁶⁷ Cf. BC i. 183.

⁶⁸ See above, p. 217.

⁶⁹ Getty, op. cit., pp. xxi-xxiv.

⁷⁰Comm. p. 24; cf. Getty, p. xxiii.

⁷¹Comm. p. 18 and n. 7. See also p. 218 above.

⁷² Cf. his earlier embarrassment in the Prolusie (pp. 9-10), where he has recourse to the argument that since Lucan does not describe the civil conflicts of Marius and Sulla, although he mentions them, the passages foreshadowing the warfare against Sextus Pompeius and the battle of Actium do not indicate that the poet intended to proceed beyond Philippi.

⁷³ It is unlikely that Lucan would have attached any weight to the circumstance that the second triumvirate had lapsed before the final clash between Octivian and Antony.

⁷⁴ Cf. R. Amann, De Corippo priorum poetarum latinorum imitature (Oldenburg, 1885), pp. 25-28.

⁷⁵ In like fashion the apparent end of civil strife with the death of Caesar in the Senate (i. 691) is directly followed by further visions depicting subsequent clashes.

⁷⁶Sat. 118; opus in Lucan here refers to tantae res, not causae tantarum rerum.

⁷⁷ See p. 224 above.

⁷⁸ Cf. Getty to vs. 670: "domino: Caesar."

⁷⁹ To deny this is to ascribe singular forgetfulness to the great astrologer, or ignorance hardly less remarkable to the poet himself. Suetonius (Aug. 94) stresses the wide currency of the anecdote according to which Figulus, upon learning that a son had been born to Octavius, and after ascertaining the hour of the birth had declared, doubtless after casting a horoscope, that the infant would one day be dominus of the world: "nota ac vulgata res est P. Nigidium comperta morae causa, ut horam quoque partus acceperit, affirmasse dominum terrarum orbi natum." Dio (xiv. 1. 3-5) also tells this tale.

⁸⁰ Cortius, Housman, and Getty so interpret peraguntur in this verse.

⁸¹ Cf. Getty to vs. 693: "ponti … The glance is probably at the coasts of Sicily and the campaign against Sextus Pompeius, as well as at Actium … while the tellurem novam of the next line may be Cisalpine Gaul.…"

⁸² Endt, Adnotationes, to v. 479.

⁸³ If strict log ic is to be observed, "Philippi" must here stand metonymically for Pharsalia alone, since Mutina is represented as coming later.

⁸⁴ Cf. M. Hadas, Sextus Pompey (New York, 1930), pp. 22-24.

⁸⁵ ix. 89-90.

⁸⁶ The comment of B. M. Marti on these lines ("The Meaning of the 'Pharsalia,"' AJP, LXVI [1945], 375): "Pompey's ghost, which was to appear to his son in Sicily (VI, 813) may have prophesied Caesar's murder and railed at his successors," although correctly interpreting them as foreshadowing a scene to take place later in the poem, is unfortunate, since Sextus did not arrive in Sicily before the latter part of 43 B.C. Cf. Hadas, op. cit., pp. 58, 66-67, 72; App. BC iv. 84; Dio xlviii, 17. 4.

⁸⁷ Also noteworthy is the verbal similarity of BC vi. 814 (cited above) to Aen. v. 701-2: [Aeneas] "nunc huc ingentis, nunc illuc pectore curas/mutabat versans, Siculisne resideret arvis."

⁸⁸ Cf. Weise (ed. to vi. 813): "Dubio procul haec respiciunt aliquam in secuturis partem Lucanei operis, non absoluti, quam sibi proposuerat poeta faciendam, morte praeventus non absolvit." Francken (ed. [Leyden, 1896] to vi. 813) cites a scholium from Weber's collection ad loc.: "hic enim in Sicilia somniaturus est, patrem suum Pompeium ad se venientem, et suadentem sibi ut fugiat" as evidence that may indicate a "historical" basis for this vision. This scholium, however, merely paraphrases the poet, making the notion of flight, implicit in Lucan, explicit, and has no independent value.

⁸⁹ Logically it might be thought that with the departure of "libertas" from the civilized world the struggle would be at an end, but it is idle to expect such consistency of Lucan. Several hundred verses later (696) he speaks of the struggle continuing after the elimination of Pompey as onebetween "Caesar" and "libertas"; cf. also ix. 29-30.

⁹⁰Sat. 118.

⁹¹proelia (645) includes the entire series of battles prior to the restoration of peace in 29 B.C.; proxima … suboles (642) is the generation that grew up after the end of civil warfare.

⁹² Cf. n. 89 above.

⁹³ i. 8-66.

⁹⁴ Similar comment may be made on the phrase "Caesareae domus series" in the passage which sums up the poet's characterization of Curio:

ius licet in iugulos nostros sibi fecerit ensis
Sulla potens Mariusque ferox et Cinna
cruentus
Caesareaeque domus series, cui tanta potestas
concessa est?
[iv. 821-24].

⁹⁵ See p. 227 above and n. 80.

⁹⁶ Cf. vi. 419-22 and 589 with vi. 802-5 and ix. 88-90.