SOURCE: "Martial: Knight, Publisher, and Poet," The Classical Journal, Vol. 65, No. 8, May, 1970, pp. 345-57.

[In the following essay, Allen and a group of his students challenge the image of Martial as a desperately poor poet who regarded his verses as ephemeral or insignificant. Citing a variety of evidence to support their claim that Martial was financially secure and enjoyed a respectable social position, they argue that he was deeply involved in the publication of his books and believed strongly in the merit of his epigrams.]

Martial, like Tibullus and Ovid before him,¹ was a Roman knight. That simple fact colors our acceptance of what the poet says about himself and his patrons. While a literal interpretation of Martial's conventional epigrammatic treatment of literary patronage could produce a picture of Martial as the shabby, starving poet of the third-floor garret, our author has deliberately included in his epigrams autobiographical material that he must have intended as a correction to such a false impression. Martial desired patronage and tangible rewards, of course, but it is the view of the modern reader, and not the view of Martial, that such gifts are demeaning for the poet who requests and accepts them. He is careful to inform his contemporary reader that such patronage was not required as a means of rescuing him from the ranks of the proletariat.

We refer in particular to three significant honors conferred upon Martial in the course of his life at Rome, honors the poet himself emphasizes a number of times when he is speaking about historical facts.² He was granted the ius trium liberorum by two emperors, presumably Titus and Domitian (2.92, 3.95.5 f., 9.97.5 f.); he held a tribunate (3.95.9); and he was a knight (5.13.2, 9.49.4, 12.29.2). We must keep in mind, however, that the poet did not necessarily receive these honors in the order in which he mentions them nor in the order of the present discussion.

It is significant that Martial gained the ius trium liberorum at his own request when he was definitely childless (2.91.5)³ and perhaps, at least when it was granted, not even married (2.92.3). Suetonius, by contrast, gained the same favor only through Pliny's urgent intercession with Trajan (Ep. 10.94, 95). Pliny himself acquired the ius trium liberorum through the influence of his friend Julius Servianus (Ep. 10.2.1). The granting of the ius trium liberorum conferred the privileges of exemption from the duties of guardian and iudex, and priority of claim to magistracies.⁴ It is easy, then, to understand the poet's pride in this enhancement of his social position by his own successful request of the emperor.

Martial expressly states that he was a tribunus, but without further specification (3.95.9: vidit me Roma tribunum). It is possible that he was a tribunus supra numerum, a title instituted by the emperor Claudius.⁵ Conceivably, the poet may have held a tribunatus semestris (sexmestris), which Juvenal seems to refer to when he writes of the pantomime Paris encircling the poets' fingers with the "six-month ring" (7.89); he also speaks of that pantomime producing tribunes and prefects (7.92).⁶ According to Marquardt,⁷ these tribuni semestres probably served nominally for one year, but in actual fact only for six months, although their pay of 25,000 sesterces was a full year's salary.⁸

Closely related to his tribunate is Martial's status as a knight. We learn explicitly of his title of eques initially in 5.13.2,⁹ and he often makes mention in this book of the knights' seats in the theater (e.g., 8, 14, 23, 27). He was probably an eques equo publico, since this appears to have been the standard type of knight under the Empire. He exhibits, moreover, a certain preoccupation with the equus of a knight (e.g., 5.23.8, 38.4).

The fact of Martial's knighthood, at any rate, implies that he must have possessed at least the requisite equestrian census of 400,000 sesterces. Although not a large sum by the standards of his day, it might, nonetheless, have allowed the poet to live in better circumstances than he often leads us to infer.

There remains the problem of whether Martial became an eques as a result of his tribunate, as Horace did,¹⁰ or whether he was a knight before then. Mayor¹¹ feels that the legionary tribune "became as a matter of course an eques." He says that the office of tribunatus semestris was conferred by the emperor on those who did not intend to pursue a military career but "retired as equites into private life." Against this theory we have the opinions of Mattingly, Hirschfeld, and Kromayer-Veith¹² that army officers (tribunes and prefects) were appointed from among the knights. Helm and Friedlander¹³ both think that Martial became a knight by virtue of his tribunate which, Friedlander suggests, might have been granted by Titus. The problem is by no means settled, but it is perhaps enough for us that we can couple the rank of eques and the office of tribunus.

It is generally believed, as has been mentioned already, that Martial received the ius trium liberorum from Titus and that it was subsequently confirmed by Domitian.¹⁴ Attempts to date the reception of his tribunate and knighthood, however, can be far less successful since the poet himself gives no clear indication of when they were granted. This very vagueness allows us to propose a new suggestion, based on the fact that the tribunate was appropriate for a young man, while the ius trium liberorum was not.

Martial could have been content, indeed well-advised, merely to mention his tribunate and knighthood, without indicating their source, if he had received these honors from Nero. He would, moreover, have been, in the early 60's A.D., just about the right age to receive a tribunate, especially if he did see some active duty, however token it may have been. This theory is reinforced by the fact that he stresses, and expresses gratitude for, the ius trium liberorum, apparently a Flavian gift, while simply stating his possession of the other two titles without comment.

If the foregoing theory be correct, then we might suggest that Martial perhaps came to Rome a few years before the commonly accepted date of A.D. 64, pursued an equestrian career, with the help of the Senecas and Piso, fell from favor as a consequence of the Pisonian conspiracy, and then turned to poetry. The bestowal of the ius trium liberorum in A.D. 79 or 80 (when Martial was about forty years old) would mark a return to imperial favor which continued under Domitian. Martial was gratified by the ius trium liberorum, and could scarcely have expected anything more in the way of a renewed official career.

Another indication of Martial's good social position can be seen in some of the people with whom he was intimate, especially those patrons whom he shared with Statius—viz., Claudius Etruscus, L. Arruntius Stella, Novius Vindex, Atedius Melior, and Lucan's widow, Polla Argentaria. Statius has been called the "Poet Laureate" of Domitian's court¹⁵ and Howard¹⁶ thought that he "lived on terms of intimate friendship … with many rich and cultured Romans." Yet Martial, who belonged to the same circles as Statius, is usually looked upon as the grovelling pauper who survived on sportulae. We might conclude with J. W. Duff¹⁷ that Statius and Martial did indeed belong to the "same social grade" and that both enjoyed the imperial favor, if not largess.

There are substantial indications of Martial's influence at court. We find, for example, that, in addition to winning favors for himself, he was instrumental in gaining citizenship for others (3.95.11). The poet also claims that he was read by the emperor and other important men "of the city and law courts" (6.64.8-15). It is doubtful that he would have been so insolent as to make such a claim if it were not true.

The fact that Pliny the Younger supplied Martial with money for his journey back to Spain has been generally taken as conclusive proof that Martial was indigent and left Rome penniless. Pliny, however, indicates in a letter (3.21) that the sum of money was presented in gratitude for Martial's complimentary poetic address (10.20), and Pliny gives no suggestion that his monetary gift was a necessary act of charity.¹⁸ The supposition that Martial could not have returned to Spain without this viaticum from Pliny is not substantiated by Pliny's own statement on the matter.

Martial is of course our only source for his biography except for this letter of Pliny (3.21). While his information must always be viewed in the light of his careful observance of the tradition of his genre, some of his poetical statements about himself are capable of yielding more signs of modest affluence than the three honors that we have found capable of further interpretation with regard to Martial's finances and his early life at Rome.¹⁹

No later than A.D. 63 or 64 Martial came to Rome, where he stayed for thirty-four years (10.103.7, 104.10; 12.18.16, of which the last seems to be an approximation). Although he was not in Rome continuously for the thirty-four years, he seems to have considered it his residence, and he specifically states that he did not return to Bilbilis during this time (10.103.7 f., 104.9 f.).

Virtually nothing is known of Martial's life from his arrival in Rome until the publication of the Liber spectaculorum in A.D. 80. He does, however, seem to have made the acquaintance of the influential personages of the day, and he was apparently well received in the capital.

From his frequent references to speaking and pleading in the courts, Martial appears to have at least an intimate dislike of that profession. He tells Titus that he would sooner be a farmer than a lawyer (1.17). When Gaius advises him to be a lawyer and grow rich, Martial does not mind letting him know that the advice was not appreciated (2.30). He informs Quintilian as to what he thinks of the law when he describes the ideal life and emphatically states that one of the requirements for happiness is the lack of lawsuits (2.90). In addition, he complains (seriously?) to Sextus for not paying his bill for pleading a case (8.17). All these references, many of which are in the early part of the corpus, suggest that he knew the profession and had probably practiced it. He does tell us, somewhat bitterly, that his parents had procured a rhetorical education for him (9.37.7-10).

More significant, perhaps, is the fact that Martial, to our knowledge, did not publish poetry regularly until the advent of the Flavians. If we recall that Horace turned to poetry to mend his shattered fortunes (Ep. 2.2.51 f.), we should have to conclude that Martial's was not a similar case despite his pleas for patronage. Martial was, by contrast, about forty years old when his first book appeared and, if our previous suggestions are acceptable, he was already a knight and of some means. A Maecenas is always desirable, of course, and it was a Maecenas that Martial wanted, not a niggardly patron (1.107, 8.55 [561]).

Martial's housing situation in Rome is also relevant, but hard to interpret. In the first book he says that his cenacula look out on the Vipsanian laurels (1.108.3), and adds that he has become a senex in hac regione (1.108.4). He says that he lives up tribus scalis (1.117.7)²⁰ and that it is an effort to get to his dwelling. From these comments it would seem necessary to place him near the Porticus Vipsania and the Campus Agrippae²¹ in the vicinity of the Campus Martius. Martial complains about his neighbor who lives so close that Martial could touch him by reaching his hand out of the window, but who creates a rather unpleasant situation because he does not visit or dine with Martial (1.86).

The next fact that we have on Martial's life is that he was in Gual at the time of the publication of book 3 in 87-88. There naturally follows the question of what became of the original home of which he wrote in book 1. It appears that he gave up his apartment and, on his return, bought a domus. He no longer uses the Vipsanian laurels or the Porticus Vipsania to locate his house, as he had done previously, but rather the Temple of Flora (5.22.4, 6.27.1) and the Old Temple of Jove (5.22.4), both of which were on the Quirinal.²² He also begins to invite guests for dinner (5.44, 78; 9.35.11), and he even states that he has a cook and a kitchen (5.50.7 f.), both of which would have been unusual in an insula.

A further evidence of Martial's holdings in urban real estate is in 9.18, where he asks to hook on to the city water supply, namely the Aqua Marcia. The opening lines, Est mihi—sitque precor longum te praeside, Caesar—/rus minimum, parvi sunt et in urbe lares, are usually taken to refer to his country estate and to his domus in Rome. On the basis of the arguments, however, that the country estate has no real purpose in the poem, and that Martial elsewhere uses the phrase rus in urbe (12.57.21) to describe the domus of a wealthy man, it seems to us that he is here referring to the grounds or gardens that surround his house in the city, rather than to his country estate. The Marcia, moreover, would be the appropriate aqueduct to supply the Quirinal, and, according to Grimal,²³ its water was then used for gardens.

The fact that Martial again refers to the Aqua Marcia in a later book (11.96) suggests that he is then still in the same region. It seems plausible to suggest also that the horti and rus mentioned in 9.18 are the same as the gardens which he states that he bought in 5.62. They seem to have been complete with dwelling and furniture, although not in good repair. The request for a connection with the Aqua Marcia shows an effort on Martial's part to improve his property.

Aside from the domus in the city, Martial often speaks of his Nomentan Farm, even in some of his very early poems (13.119; 2.38; 6.43.3; 7.31.6-8, 49, 93; 9.60). Although he does offer some wine from his farm as a gift (13.119), he indicates that the farm really produces nothing to speak of (7.31.8, 49; 9.60). The farm is therefore not a commercial enterprise, but rather a pleasurable retreat where he can withdraw from the people he does not like (2.38) and the excitement of fashionable resorts (6.43). Another advantage of the farm is that his dear friend Quintus Ovidius is his neighbor (7.93.5 f.). The farm was apparently not very far from the city, since in one poem he claims that he prefers it to resorts and adds (6.43.9): nunc urbis vicina iuvant facilesque recessus. In 7.49 he sends suburbani munuscula horti, and in 8.61.6 he calls it sub urbe rus … aestivum.

Although Martial is often complaining of worn out togas (as in 9.49), he would appear to have been financially secure. When he tells Quintilian (2.90.3) that he is poor but happy, or boasts that he has fame and popularity even though he is poor, or complains that poetry does not bring in enough money, it is probably realistic not to take him too seriously. A man who owns a country estate, a town house with grounds, the proper amount of money to qualify him to be a knight, and the means to ask a friend to purchase a place for him in Spain (10.104.14), could hardly be considered poor, and indeed his total resources could have exceeded the minimum requirement for the census of a Roman knight.

Not only did Martial take these pains to clarify his own social position for his readers; he also indicated that he was the publisher of his own poetry. We are using the term "publish" in its modern meaning, with the understanding that the ancient bibliopola of Martial's day combined the modern functions of print shop and retail store. Earlier poets had set a precedent, notably Ovid with his two editions of the Amores, but Martial presents us with some novelties that reward further study. We accept the dating of most of Martial's individual books from internal evidence, the work of the last half of the nineteenth century that achieved definitive formulation in the work of L. Friedlander. W. M. Lindsay has also put us in his debt by his superb discussion of the significance of the three arche-types of our tradition.²⁴

Yet the poems, as printed in a modern edition, are likely to present a deceptive appearance to the reader, for the fragmentary Liber spectaculorum survives in only one manuscript tradition, the florilegia of A'. All three manuscript traditions are quite explicit about dividing the remaining fourteen books into the Epigrammaton libri XII and the Xenia and Apophoreta. The numbering of the last two as books 13 and 14 is a modern innovation.²⁵

The most interesting and important problems concern the twelve Epigrammaton libri. The dating of the Liber spectaculorum and the Xenia and Apophoreta was examined and settled as adequately as possible by Friedländer.²⁶ Internal evidence impels us to the conclusion that the fourteen complete books that we possess were issued originally and individually as papyrus volumina.²⁷ How, when, and by whom they were united into the present collection, we do not know.

With Martial, there is no need to consider the possible discrepancies between the datable poems and the dates of the publishing of the books. He ostentatiously and repeatedly numbers his books (2.93; 5.2,15; 6.85; 7.17; 8. praef., 3; 10.2; 12.5).²⁸ The erratic location of the numbering within the roll precludes any merely technical explanation of the poet's frequent mention of the books' numbers. He also takes care to let us know the date, when he wishes us to know it (4.11; 5.3; 6.3, 13; 7.5-8; 8.2 [Domitian returned in January]; 9.23, 24, 84; 10.6, 7). When he does not tell us, we have to make do with the principle of a book a year (10.70.1). We shall try to suggest how these facts ought to affect our attitude towards the evidence.

In 3.1 Martial suggests a contrast between book 3, written at Forum Corneli in Gallia Togata, and an earlier work, liber prior, written at Rome (verna liber). This must be a reference to book 2, wherein the last poem (93) is a conversation between Martial and his patron Regulus:

"Primus ubi est," inquis, "cum sit liber iste
   secundus?"
  Quid faciam si plus ille pudoris habet?
tu tamen hunc fieri si mavis, Regule, primum,
  unum de titulo tollere iota potes.

Now whatever the ambiguous second verse may mean, the last two seem to say, "If you erase one of the two iotas of the titulus, for all practical purposes this will be the first book, liber primus." This translation helps to clear up any difficulty in verse 2. Pudor does not refer to the book as less lascivus. Instead, since it has not yet been published, it is described as being shy.

By the time that book 5 is published, the problem of numbering has disappeared, for 5.2.5 f. tell the wanton reader: lascivos lege quattuor libellos,/quintus cum domino liber iocatur. Book 5 is datable, appearing after the embassy of Degis (5.3), possibly in the fall of 89. Book 3 probably preceded the revolt of Saturninus (88) mentioned in 4.11, and is plausibly dated to 87 or early 88. Within these two dates either a book 1 is written, or book 2 is expanded to the size of two books.²⁹

If we now examine the circumstances surrounding the two editions of book 10, the first edition is dated by Friedländer to the Saturnalia of 95. Yet, after the publication of book 11 (probably in late 96), Martial goes to the trouble not only of reworking and reissuing book 10 in a revised and expanded form, but also of informing us of the fact in a prominent place in the volume (10.2).³⁰

It is difficult to find a satisfactory explanation for the revision. Although one immediately thinks of a now (mid-98) unwise obsequiousness to Domitian, it is difficult to imagine greater flattery than had appeared in book 8. Furthermore, the letters of Pliny preserve evidence that the social atmosphere of the circles in which Martial moved was not greatly influenced by the death of the last Flavian.³¹ Finally, and this is especially striking, it is not easy to understand why a new edition of book 10 would cause the suppression of an embarrassing earlier edition.

We are thus faced with a significant problem. Why does Martial go out of his way to tell us that book 1 was published later than books 2 and 3, and that the present book 10 is a revision of an earlier edition? The most adequate solution to this question seems to have been suggested, in passing, by Th. Birt.³² He cited an interesting sentence in the praefatio to book 8: Hic, tamen, qui operis nostri octavus inscribitur, occasione pietatis frequentius fruitur; and he suggested that Martial was attempting to write a coherent corpus of poetry, publishing each volume as it was finished. Columella's publication of De re rustica was cited as a parallel.

With these considerations in mind, it becomes remarkable that the number of books is twelve, a number reminiscent of epic completeness and not without influence on writers in other genres. Martial's veneration for Vergil is a case in point here, as well as the concern for serious poetry that his oft-remarked distaste for Statius implies.³³

To find some order in the above facts, we must posit in Martial a poet who looked upon the epigram as significant poetry when it reports or reflects the life and spirit of the contemporary world.³⁴ He attempted to write a body of poetry that would be true to his standards. He places emphasis on the correct numbering of his books and makes clear (2.93, 3.1) that his numbering is not just an indication of chronological order.³⁵ He tells us dates only when they are of importance to his artistic purpose, e.g., the chronicling of Domitian's rise to supreme glory, reflected in books 4-9. When he for some reason modifies his design by a revision of book 10, Martial still insists that the book is to be numbered tenth.

We turn now to the curious fact that Martial, at about the halfway point in his production of twelve books, brought out an edition that should be a landmark in the history of publication and of text criticism. The studies of modern scholars can be used to substantiate the accuracy of what Martial says at the beginning of book 1 (1.2.3 f.): hos eme, quos artat brevibus membrana tabellis:/scrinia da magnis, me manus una capit. The word membrana at first surprises the reader who re-calls that the papyrus roll is thought to have been the usual form of the book until the parchment codex supplanted it nearly three centuries after Martial's time.³⁶ We cannot, however, ignore the facts that Martial expressly calls his book membrana, and firmly rejects the scrinia, or book boxes for papyrus rolls, in a poem that seems to serve as an introduction to a collection of books.³⁷

Martial, further, gives his name, his fame, and the title of his book in 1.1.1-3:

Hic est quem legis ille, quem requiris,
toto notus in orbe Martialis
argutis epigrammaton libellis.

He thereby uses this poem in lieu of a title page, a matter of some importance in confirming that the form of his book was a codex. The papyrus rolls almost always bore their titles at the end of the roll, and on the outside or on a tag, but rarely at the beginning of the roll.³⁸

The indisputable evidence given by Martial in 1.1 and 1.2, and elsewhere,³⁹ that parchment codices did in fact exist in the first century A.D. is overlooked by Kenyon, who cites only the poems in book 14 (183-195) as relevant, and claims that most of these passages could easily refer to ordinary rolls of papyrus. The rest of these poems in book 14, he submits, describe gifts of an unusual nature by the very words in membranis and can therefore not be used as evidence that parchment codices were in common circulation.⁴⁰ R. P. Oliver, moreover, cited above in connection with the titulature of papyri, overlooks 1.1. in his claim that "the exiguous fragments of earlier [earlier than the great vellum codices in rustic capitals after the second century a.d.] texts do not include … a single example of a title or subscription."⁴¹ In support of the claim that parchment codices were definitely in existence in the first century A.D. is the discovery at Oxyrhynchus of a fragment of parchment written on both sides, first published in 1898, and discussed in a later article by Jean Mallon.⁴² This ten-line historical fragment, now entitled De bellis Macedonicis, was originally ascribed to the third century A.D. because of the forms of certain letters, and particularly because it was a codex and made out of parchment. Mallon, however, fixes the date of this fragment at about A.D. 100, but fails to mention that Martial's codex edition of collected epigrams, prefaced by 1.1 and 1.2, probably antedated De bellis Macedonicis. Before Mallon's study of this fragment, no codex had been found to date before the fourth century A.D.

Mallon, who reconciles the forms of the letters in question to the classical system of writing in the first century A.D., bases his evidence for the early appearance of the codex almost entirely on Martial. Martial, he says, not only gives us clear evidence that parchment codices were in existence but also provides a terminus a quo, since Martial, in addition to listing in one of his "advertisement poems" the great advantages of the codices over the volumina (compactness and portability),⁴³ tells us that codices were just then being manufactured for the first time.⁴⁴ We can therefore set the earliest date for the appearance of the codex at about A.D. 88 from the date of Martial's collection of the first four (or first seven) books, although Mallon's fragment is from the first extant codex and dates from the end of the first century, circa A.D. 100.

Besides accounting for the fact of the apparent existence of the codex in as early a period as the first century A.D., we must also deal with another troublesome word, charta. The appearance of this word in 2.1.4, and the mention of the use of Roman numerals for numbering in 2.93.3 f., which certainly indicates a papyrus roll, make it necessary for us to postulate that in this period of flux between parchment and papyrus Martial must have regularly published his individual books separately on papyrus, but then published some of his books in a collection on parchment,⁴⁵ for which 1.1 and 1.2 serve as prefatory poems.

A poet so concerned about his own rank and about the publication of his books can naturally be expected to display equal concern about his verses, even though his genre is not so noble as epic. In Martial's statements about his own art and his own place as a poet, we are faced with two sets of apparent contradictions. On the one hand, we can see numerous traditional elements in his poetry that had been used frequently as the epigram was developed by the Greeks and Romans.⁴⁶ Yet, throughout the epigrams, we find indications that Martial felt somewhat bound to justify himself in regard to certain new techniques or subjects. Another paradox can be seen in Martial's dismissal of his poems as mere trifles, alongside of his repeated claims to fame both present and future.

Reitzenstein, in his article on "Epigramm" in Pauly-Wissowa,⁴⁷ shows that, by the time of Martial, the epigram had developed to the point where it not only encompassed poems of an inscriptional nature, but also versified expressions on practically every conceivable subject in a variety of meters (elegiacs, hendecasyllabics, various lyric meters). It is, however, evident from statements in Martial's epigrams that tradition had established certain limits and conventions upon the genre.

In the first place, there must have been some normal length for the epigram. Otherwise Martial would not have anticipated the criticism of 6.65 where Tucca complains of the length of the preceding epigram.⁴⁸ In addition to this suggestion that epigrams were most often brief distichs, the second inference can be drawn from this poem that the hexameter was not a usual meter for the epigram.⁴⁹ The third general area in which Martial appears to be very conscious of traditions is in the limitation of his audience according to the type of poem. He calls his poems lascivi (3.86; 4.14.12; 5.2; 7.17.4, 51, 68; 11.16.3, 20) and nequitias (6.82.5; 11.15.4, 16.7). Apparently, a slightly caustic tone with an element of obscenity was a requisite for epigrams; he speaks of the necessary sal and fel (7.25.3),⁵⁰ and he reminds Cornelius (1.35.10 f.):⁵¹lex haec carminibus data est iocosis,/ne possint, nisi pruriant, iuvare. In 3.68 he explicitly tells us that henceforth the poems in this book are not for the matrona;⁵² elsewhere he dedicates poems to a modest audience (5.2.1 f.): Matronae puerique virginesque,/vobis pagina nostra dedicatur. In the preface to book 8 the poet informs us that his poems are less licentious than is usual for the genre: ego tamen illis non permisi tam lascive loqui quam solent.

In addition to warning his readers when to expect certain types of poems, Martial is careful to point out both his personal morality and his lack of personal vindictiveness. He makes the claim common to writers of erotic poetry (1.4.8; cf. 11.15.13):⁵³lasciva est nobis pagina, vita proba, and we can see traces of Roman satire in such disavowals of personal rancor as (5.15.2):⁵⁴et queritur laesus carmine nemo meo. His poems, like satire, speak of vices, not of individuals (10.33.10): parcere personis, dicere de vitiis.

Throughout these poems that define his genre and what is expected of him, we find indications that Martial was not the first to make slight departures from the norm. He frequently refers to such predecessors and models as Catullus, Marsus, Pedo, Gaetulicus (1.praef.; 2.71, 77; 8.55 [56].24; 10.78.16). Unfortunately, with the exception of Catullus, we cannot make comparisons with Martial, but it is likely that in the period between Catullus and Martial the epigram, strongly influenced by Roman satire and rhetoric,⁵⁵ began to develop along the lines indicated by Martial's arguments and justifications.

In the light of Martial's acute awareness of his art, it is natural that we are puzzled by his frequent dismissals of his poems as nugae, ludi, or ioci,⁵⁶ as well as apinae and tricae.⁵⁷ Horace of course had referred to his artistic and carefully composed Odes as nugae.⁵⁸ Catullus also, in his first poem, seemed to pass his poems off lightly by calling them nugas. A. L. Wheeler pointed out how common was the use of the word nugae in reference to short, light poems and suggested that in Catullus it was to be applied to one small book dedicated to Nepos, not to the entire collection as we have it.⁵⁹ Later, in 14b, Catullus' poems are called ineptiae.⁶⁰ Martial himself limits the importance we should attach to the terminology when he states that his poems are more than mere trifles (4.49.1 f.): Nescit, crede mihi, quid sint epigrammata, Flacce,/qui tantum lusus illa iocosque vocat. In 10.2.3 he clearly indicates his habit of revision and the use of the lima.

On the other hand, we have evidence for the use of the same terms for seemingly more extemporaneous endeavors. Pliny (Ep. 4.14.1) refers to the poems that he is offering to Paternus as lusus, and the letter goes on to indicate the usual themes expressed in such poems as well as the customary places for their composition:

… hendecasyllabos nostros, quibus nos in vehiculo in balineo inter cenam oblectamus otium temporis. His iocamur ludimus amamus dolemus querimur irascimur.…

We might also note that the composition of epigrams was not confined to a few persons of chiefly literary repute, for Suetonius⁶¹ records that the Emperor Augustus composed epigrams tempore balinei, and Martial suggests in 9.26.9 f. that Nero dabbled in the lascivum opus.

Perhaps the most convincing argument for not taking nugae, ioci, etc., too literally is the frequent claim that Martial makes to fame both in his own time and for the future. He often repeats the theme of (1.1.2):⁶²toto notus in orbe Martialis; while we learn that such important persons as Domitian read and praised his poems.⁶³ In life Martial has been given what few men gain even by death (5.13.4): quodque cinis paucis hoc mihi vita dedit. The notion that Martial regarded his poems as transitory and inconsequential again collapses when one reads that Martial expected the occurrence of someone's name in his poetry to bring everlasting fame to that person.⁶⁴ Here again we can see just how close to tradition he was, for both Horace and Catullus expected or hoped for everlasting fame⁶⁵ from their nugae.

In search of support for Martial's assertion that he is to be taken seriously as a poet, we shall examine a part of just one aspect of his work that shows him operating within the tradition of rhetoric. It is not surprising to find him making copious use of mythological references, but it is valuable to consider how conventionally and continually he does this. In the study of his entire corpus, we find that his use of mythology can best be described as the extension and development of a few basic rhetorical tropes.

Martial found in myth, exactly as he found in contemporary and historical reality,⁶⁶ a source of material to decorate, clarify, illustrate or emphasize his chosen subjects, material that he used in rhetorical ways. Quintilian's discussion of two tropes, metonymy and antonomasia, is enough to demonstrate how closely Martial follows the rules that Quintilian lays down for both orator and poet (Inst. orat. 8.6). We shall use his definitions and exempla as a guide, although we, with Quintilian, are well aware that boundary lines among tropes are indistinct.

Quintilian thus defines metonymy (8.6.23 f.):

… metonymia, quae est nominis pro nomine positio.… Haec inventas ab inventore et subiectas res ab obtinentibus significat, ut 'Cererem corruptam undis'.… Refert autem, in quantum hic tropus oratorem sequatur. Nam ut 'Vulcanum' pro igne volgo audimus et 'vario Marte pugnatum' eruditus est sermo, et 'Venerem' quam coitum dixisse magis decet, ita 'Liberum et Cererem' pro vino et pane licentius, quam ut fori severitas ferat.

Martial's use of metonymy is in accord with Quintilian's injunctions.⁶⁷ He uses all the conventional substitutions: "Venus" for "passion,"⁶⁸ "Mars" for "war,"⁶⁹ "Lares" or "Penates" for "house" or "household,"⁷⁰ "Bacchus" for "wine,"⁷¹ "Pallas" for "olive tree,"⁷² but he also stretches the trope to even its poetical limits. "Libitina" thus stands for "pyre" (10.97.1), "Thetis" not only for "the sea" (10.30.11) but also for "a salt-water bath" (10.14[13].4), "Bacchus" for "wine" and also for the comissatio after a meal,⁷³ while anything Athenian is "Cecropian.⁷⁴

Antonomasia is so closely allied to metonymy that it is sometimes hard to distinguish. Quintilian says (8.6.29): Antonomasia, quae aliquid pro nomine ponit, poetis utroque modo frequentissima.… He mentions two basic types: (1) the name may be replaced by an epithet ("Tydides" for "Diomedes" is his example), or (2) by the most striking characteristics or actions of the person:

Oratoribus etiam si rarus eius rei, nonnullus tamen usus est. Nam ut 'Tydiden' … non dixerint, ita dixerint 'impios et parricidas'; … 'Romanae eloquentiae principem' pro Cicerone potuisse non dubitem (8.6.29 f.).

Although Martial is at home with the substitution of an epithet for a personal name,⁷⁵ his most frequent use of antonomasia is for identification of places, topographical or geographical, in the following format: "Agenoris puella" or "ubi Sidonio taurus amore calet" means "the portico of Europa in the Campus Martius,"⁷⁶ "limina Inachidos" stands for "the temple of Isis" (11.47.4), Marcellus in the far North is said to be "prope Promethei rupes" (9.45.3 f.), etc.⁷⁷ The latitude Martial allows himself in this trope is neatly illustrated in the phrase "Hersiliae civis et Egeriae," which means simply "a Roman" (10.68.6).

These samples should be enough to show, moreover, that it is true that Martial made wide use of standard rhetorical tropes, but they should also demonstrate that his use of the tropes is enlivened and expanded both by the greater license allowed poets and by his own most original wit.

Notes

¹ Regrettably we can only note the title of a paper by Prof. L. R. Taylor, "Republican and Augustan writers enrolled in the equestrian centuries," on the APA program in Toronto for Dec. 28, 1968, and announced while we were writing our article.

² We are using throughout the text and the numbering of the poems in W. M. Lindsay's OCT edition.

³ This poem, of course, refers to Martial's request of Domitian for a renewal of the ius granted by Titus. We have no knowledge of the procedure by which the ius was originally obtained from Titus.

⁴ Apparently, the possession of the ius trium liberorum entitled the holder to receive legacies, which would be denied in whole or in part to a person who was technically caelebs: Steinwenter, s. v. "Ius liberorum," RE 10 (1919) 1281; Plin. Ep. 10.94.

⁵ Suet. Claud. 25:… stipendiaque instituit et imaginariae militiae genus, quod vocatur supra numerum, quo absentes et titulo tenus fungerentur.

⁶ See also Plin. Ep. 4.4; Lengle, s.v. "Tribunus," RE 6A² (1937), p. 2448.

⁷ J. Marquardt, Romische Staatsverwaltung³ (completed by H. Dessau and A. v. Domaszewski) vol. 2 (Darmstadt 1957; reprint of second ed. of 1881), p. 368, n. 2.

⁸ For the view that the tribunus semestris received only half the year's pay of tribunus legionis: J. Kromayer-G. Veith, Heerwesen und Kriegführung der Griechen und Römer (Munich 1928), p. 511, n. 12.

⁹ Martial hints at his knighthood as early as 3.95.10, where he says: et sedeo qua te suscitat Oceanus.

¹⁰ L. R. Taylor, "Horace's equestrian career," AJP 46 (1925) 161-170.

¹¹Thirteen satires of Juvenal (London 1889) 1.290 f. R. E. Colton holds essentially this same view: "Juvenal and Martial on the equestrian order," CJ 61 (1965-66) 158.

¹² H. Mattingly, "Equester ordo," OCD 336; 0. Hirschfeld, Die kaiserlichen Verwaltungsbeamten bis auf Diocletian² (Berlin 1905), p. 226; Kromayer-Veith (above n. 8), p. 511. For the same view, see also Lengle (above, n. 6), p. 2445; F. F. Abbott, Roman political institutions³ (Boston 1911), p. 393 f.

¹³ R. Helm, "M. Valerius Martialis," RE 8A¹ (1955), p. 56 f.; L. Friedlander, M Valerii Martialis epigrammaton libri (Amsterdam 1961; reprint of Leipzig ed. of 1886) 1.6.

¹⁴ See especially 2.91, 92; 3.95.5 f.

¹⁵ D. A. Slater, The Silvae of Statius (Oxford 1908), p. 17.

¹⁶ J. H. Howard, Selected Silvae of P. Papinius Statius (University of South Dakota 1911), p. 3; cf. Teuffel's history of Roman literature, revised by L. Schwabe, translated by G. C. Warr (London 1900), 2.116 f.

¹⁷A literary history of Rome in the Silver Age,³ ed. by A. M. Duff (New York 1964), p. 376. For a discussion of the parallels in the lives of the two poets: G. Boissier, Tacitus and other Roman studies, translated by W. G. Hutchison (London 1906), p. 254 f.

¹⁸ Pliny writes:

Prosecutus eram viatico secedentem; dederam hoc amicitiae, dederam etiam versiculis, quos de me composuit. Fuit moris antiqui eos, qui vel singulorum laudes vel urbium scripserant, aut honoribus aut pecunia ornare.… Quaeris qui sint versiculi quibus gratiam rettuli?

L. Friedländer also feels that Pliny's gratuity was given from a sense of obligation in return for the poet's praise: Roman life and manners under the early empire⁷ (New York 1965, reprint) 3.50.

¹⁹ In a highly interesting article that touches upon some of our points in a different way, U. Scamuzzi also believes that it is wrong to consider Martial indigent: "Contributo ad una obiettiva conoscenza della vita e dell'opera di Marco Valerio Marziale," Rivista di studi classici 14 (1966) 149-207.

²⁰ In the only other verse in which Martial uses scalae (7.20.20: per ducentas … scalas) it is usually taken to mean "steps" instead of "staircases." If one were to read "steps" in our passage, it might suggest that Martial was living in a ground floor apartment, or possibly that he was living in his own domus instead of in an insula. A. Wotschitzky has discussed the problem of the ducentae scalae, and he seems to interpret the word to mean "steps" (200 Stufen): "Hochhauser im antiken Rom," Natalicium Carolo Jax … oblatum (Innsbrucker Beitrage zur Kulturwissenschaft 3, 1955) 151-158.

²¹ The laurels were probably in the gardens of the Porticus Vipsania (Portico of Europa?), which was in part of the Campus Agrippae: M. Reinhold, Marcus Agrippa: a biography (Geneva, N. Y., 1933), p. 136, n. 57; P. Grimal, Les jardins romains à la fin de la république et aux deux premiers siècles de Vempire (Bibliothèeque des Écoles françaises d'Athénes et de Rome, fasc. 155, Paris 1943), p. 192.

²² The evidence, largely literary, is adequately reviewed by S. B. Platner, The topography and monuments of ancient Rome² (Boston and Ne w York 1911), p. 486 f., 489.

²³ Frontin, Les aqueducs de la ville de Rome, ed. P. Grimal (Paris 1944), p. 31, n. on chapter 67.

²⁴ Friedlander (above, n. 13), Einleitung, p. 50-67, and passim in commentary; Friedländer (above, n. 18) 4.298-304; W. M. Lindsay, Ancient editions of Martial (Oxford 1903); also Lindsay's OCT edition. For other references cf. Schanz-Hosius, Geschichte der romischen Literatur (Munich 1935) 2.548-552; Helm (above, n. 13) 79-83.

²⁵ Lindsay, Ancient editions (above, n. 24), p. 11, n. "r," and the appendices. There is also a good discussion in the praefatio to his OCT edition, where he remarks on an unnumbered page: Sic, i. e. Xenia et Apophoreta, appellantur in omnibus tribus archetypis duo ultimi libri Martialis, non 'lib. XIII' et 'lib. XIV.'

²⁶ Friedlander (above, n. 13) 1.51 f.

²⁷ The significant poems are cited by O. Immisch, "Zu Martial," Hermes 46 (1911) 482 f.

²⁸ Of the five books not numbered internally, I is mentioned in 2.93, and 3 and 4 are implied in 5.2 and mentioned in 8.3.

²⁹ Friedländer (above, n. 13) 1.54 f. (on book 3), 1.56 (on book 5); E. T. Sage, "The publication of Martial's poems," TAPhA 50 (1919) 174 f.

³⁰ Friedländer (above, n. 13) 1.62-65; Lindsay, Ancient editions (above, n. 24), p. 14.

³¹ Especially Pliny's letters on Regulus: 1.5, 2.20, 4.2, 4.7, 6.2; Veiento dining with Nerva (4.22); and elsewhere.

³²Kritik und Hermeneutik, nebst Abriss des antiken Buchwesens (Munich 1913), p. 350.

³³ There is a brief listing of literary works in twelve books in E. Wölfflin, "Die hexadische Composition des Tacitus," Hermes 21 (1888) 158. For Vergil: Martial 12.67, where Vergil's birthday is regarded as a sort of holy day; J. W. Spaeth, Jr., "Martial and Vergil," TAPhA 61 (1930) 19-28. For Statius: see our n. 34; and Friedlander (above, n. 13) 1.8 f., 21, and commentary under 4.49; R. B. Steele, "Interrelation of the Latin poets under Domitian," CP 25 (1930) 328-342.

³⁴ Especially 4.49; 8.3.19-22; 9.50; 10.4; 10.21.5 f.

³⁵ The numbering is not used to distinguish among editions issued by the varying bibliopolae mentioned by Martial, which is a matter discussed by Sage (above, n. 29) 168-176. Tryphon, mentioned in 13.3, appears in 4.72. Three other bibliopolae are named, all in book 1, whose wares are quite distinct: 1.2, codices; 1.113, juvenilia; 1.117, a five-denarius volumen.

³⁶ Cf. H. A. Sanders, "The beginnings of the modern book: the codex of the classical era," University of Michigan quarterly review 44 (1938) 95-111, esp. 106; C. H. Roberts, "The codex," Proceedings of the British Academy 40 (1954) 169-204. Both scholars provide thorough accounts of the history of the codex, but they fail to acknowledge the evidence for a very early codex in Martial 1.1, 2.

³⁷ Immisch (above, n. 27) 481-517; Friedländer (above, n. 18) 4.299 f. Both authorities recognized that Martial 1.1, 2 indicated a parchment codex. Immisch postulated that Martial 1.1,2 served as introductory poems to a collected edition of books 1-7 (on the basis of 7.17.6). His observation that 1.1,2 refer to a collection in the format of a parchment codex is well taken, although it seems more probable to the authors of this article that, on the basis of 4.89; 5.2, 15, the collection contained books 1-4 and not books 1-7. Book I was not published first, but appeared later, sometime between books 3 and 5 (cf. 5.2). Cf. also on the matter of publication in codex form, Helm (above, n. 13), p. 79, 83.

³⁸ R. P. Oliver, "The first Medicean manuscript of Tacitus and the titulature of ancient books," TAPhA 82 (1951) 243. Cf. also Verg. Georg. 4.559-66, Hor. Epist. 1.20.19-28, both of which take the place of the names of the author and the work normally expected at the end of the roll.

³⁹ It is convenient to cite at this point the major occurrences of the two words, charta and membrana. Membrana appears much less frequently: 1.2.3; 14.7.1 (and title); 14.184, title; 14.186.1 (and title); 14.188.1 (and title); 14.190, title; 14.192, title. This word occurs also in 1.66.11, used in connection with a papyrus roll and meaning the purple outer wrapping. Charta occurs in: 1.66.7; 4.82.7; 4.86.11; 5.6.7; 10.93.6; 13.1.7; 14.84.2. In addition to these passages, in which charta seems definitely to refer to papyrus, the word appears in other epigrams in which it denotes writings in general, sheets of paper, letters, or official dispatches: 1.25.7; 1.44.2; 2.1.4; 2.8.1; 5.18.2; 6.61(60).9; 6.64.23; 7.6.5; 7.51.8; 8.24.2; 9.35.5; 9.99.2; 10.2.11; 11.3.7; 12.3(4).4; 14.10.2 (and title); 14.11.2 (and title); 14.196.2; and elsewhere. Finally, several passages describe a papyrus roll without actually mentioning the word charta: 1.66.6, 10 f.; 1.117.16; 3.2.7-11; 4.10.1 f.; 6.85.9; 8.61.4; 8.72.1 f.; 11.1.2, 4, 13.

⁴⁰ F. G. Kenyon, Books and readers in ancient Greece and Rome² (Oxford 1951), p. 94 f.

⁴¹ Oliver (above, n. 38) 241.

⁴² "Quel est le plus ancien example connu d'un manuscrit latin en forme de codex?" Emerita 17 (1949) 1-8; idem, Paléographie romaine (Madrid 1952), p. 77-89, 177 f. (plate X.2).

⁴³ 1.2; 14.184, 186, 188, 190.

⁴⁴ Mallon does not cite an exact reference for this fact, and there is no one epigram that clearly states that codices were just then being manufactured for the first time. There are, however, certain epigrams that imply the novelty of the codex form: 14.7, 184, 186, 190, 192.

⁴⁵ We have already noted that Martial makes a special effort to number each book, usually near the beginning, and that he indicates that the books were published separately at first and in individual volumina. We have no way of knowing whether this parchment codex of four (or seven) books appeared after just those books had been published or after all twelve books had been published. The former possibility appears the more likely, since it hardly seems possible that Martial, after his return to Spain, would have seen to the issue of a collection of fewer books than he had already published.

⁴⁶ Note the frequent similarities between Martial's epigrams and those of the Palatine anthology: e.g., 1.57 and Anth. 5.42; 5.53 and Anth. 11.214; 6.19 and Anth. 11.141; 6.53 and Anth. 11.257; 9.29.11 f. and Anth. 11.226; 12.17.10 and Anth. 11.403; 12.23 and Anth. 11.310; 12.74 and Anth. 11.39. These more apparent similarities, and others, are fully discussed by P. Laurens, "Martial et l'épigramme grecque du 1^er siècle après J.-C.," REL 43 (1965) 315-341. Laurens also points out that many of these Greek epigrams are by Martial's contemporaries.

⁴⁷ R. Reitzenstein, "Epigramm," RE 6 (1909), p. 105-111.

⁴⁸ See also 2.77, 8.29, 9.50.2, 10.59, 11.108.

⁴⁹ For Martial's adherence to strict metrical traditions, see 9.11.11-17, 10.9.1.

⁵⁰ The epigrammaton linguam of the praef of book 1. For sal and fel, see also 8.3.19.

⁵¹ Plin. Ep. 3.21.1 also gives some of the characteristics of the genre and the poet: homo ingeniosus, acutus, acer, et qui plurimum in scribendo et salis haberet et fellis nec candoris minus.

⁵² See also 11.2 and 11.15.

⁵³ G. R. Throop, "The lives and verse of Roman erotic writers," Washington University studies (St. Louis 1920) 1.160-183.

⁵⁴ See also 7.72.

⁵⁵ C. W. Mendell, "Martial and the satiric epigram," CP 17 (1922) 1-20. The similarities between the two genres can be further seen in their common claim of hominem pagina nostra sapit (10.4.10; cf. 8.3.19 f.).

⁵⁶ 1.35.13; 1.113.6; 4.10.4, 8; 5.15.1; 6.64.7 f.; 6.82.5; 6.85.9 f.; 7.11.4; 7.12.2; 7.26.7; 7.28.8; 7.51.1; 9.praef. 5; 10.64.2; 11.6.3; 11.16.7; 13.1.7; 13.2.4.

⁵⁷ 1.113.2, 14.1.7.

⁵⁸Ep. 1.19.42.

⁵⁹Catullus and the traditions of ancient poetry (Berkeley 1934), p. 20 f. P. 50-58 of this book discuss nugae, and other words such as ludi, ineptiae, etc., as they are used by other writers (including Martial).

⁶⁰ Cf. Martial 11.1.14.

⁶¹Aug. 85.2; cf. Martial 12.61 for an improper locale suitable for epigrams of inferior quality.

⁶² 5.13.3; 5.16.3; 6.60(61); 6.82.6; 7.17.10; 8.3.4; 8.61.3; 9.81.1; 9.97; 10.9.3 f.; 10.103.3; 11.3.4; 11.24.5-9; 12.3.17 f.; 12.11.8.

⁶³ 4.27.1; 6.64.9; 7.26; 8.praef,; 8.82.1; 12.3.15 f.; 12.11.6.

⁶⁴ 5.15.3 f.; 5.60.3 f.; 9.76.10; 10.26.7. See also Plin. Ep. 3.21.6, in reference to Martial's poems: At non erunt aetema quae scripsit: non erunt fortasse, ille tamen scripsit tamquam essent futura.

⁶⁵ Hor. Carm. 3.30; Catull. 1.10.

⁶⁶ For an excellent survey of Martial's use of historical personages, A. Nordh, "Historical exempla in Martial," Eranos 52 (1954) 224-238, who remarks on p. 229: "The rhetorical exemplum means a kind of synecdoche of the general conception of a personality, an isolation of a quality, an action or a situation, conceived as characteristic of the man. The name is used as a formula or symbol, the individual becomes a type."

⁶⁷ Metonymy in Martial is only briefly touched on by M. Platnauer, "Spicilegia Valeriana," Greece and Rome 17/18 (1948/49) 12-17.

⁶⁸ 2.34.4; 2.53.7; 3.75.6; 6.45.2; 11.60.1; 12.43.5, etc.

⁶⁹ 6.25.7; 6.32.3; 7.6.6, etc. For battle in the arena, Spect. 24.5; 2.75.9; 5.24.1, 14. "Diana" for venationes in the arena: Spect. 12.1.

⁷⁰ 1.70.11; 3.5.6; 3.31.2; 4.64.29; 8.1.1; 9.18.7; 11.82.2; 12.57.2, etc.

⁷¹ 13.22.1; 13.23.1; 13.114.1.

⁷² 7.28.3, a rare but not original use: see Ovid, Am. 2.16.8.

⁷³ 4.82.6; 5.78.18.

⁷⁴ 1.25.3; 1.39.3; 1.53.10; 4.23.6; 6.34.4; 7.32.2; 7.69.2, etc. For other novel metonymy: 10.21.3; 10.26.3; 11.18.19.

⁷⁵ 2.14.6; 4.32.1; 7.15.3; 11.43.5-8; 14.178.2; Spect. 16B.2.

⁷⁶ 11.1.11; 7.32.12. Other such references to the same spot: 2.14.3, 5; 3.20.12.

⁷⁷ 2.43.7; 4.25.2-6; 5.1.1 f., 5; 5.22.4; 6.47.3 f.; 7.44.5; 7.73.1, 3 f.; 8.33.21; 10.48.1; 14.114.2, etc.