Nothing Ordinary Here: Statius as Creator of Distinction in the Silvae 9781000143683, 1000143686

Citation preview

Nothing Ordinary Here Statius as Creator of Distinction in the Silvae

Noelle K. Zeiner

STUDIES IN CLASSICS

Edited by

Dirk Obbink & Andrew Dyck Oxford University/ The University of California, Los Angeles

A

ROUTLEDGE SERIES

STUDIES IN CLASSICS DIRK

OBBINK

AND

ANDREW

DYCK,

SINGUlAR DEDICATIONS

Foundersand Innovatorsof PrivateCults in ClassicalGreece Andrea Purvis EMPEDOCLES

An Interpretation Simon Trepanier RHETORIC IN CiCERO's PRO BALBO

Kimberly Anne Barber FOR SALVATION'SSAKE

ProvincialLoyalty,PersonalReligion,and EpigraphicProductionin the Roman and Late Antique Near East Jason Moralee AMBITIOSA MoRS

Suicideand the Self in Roman Thoughtand literature Timothy Hill A LINGUISTIC COMMENTARY ON LNIUS ANDRONICUS

Ivy Livingston AR!STOXENUS OF TARENTUM AND THE BIRTH OF MUSICOLOGY

Sophie Gibson HYPERBOREANS

Myth and Historyin Celtic-HellenicContacts Timothy P. Bridgman AUGUSTAN EGYPT

The Creationof a Roman Province Livia Capponi NOTHING ORDINARY HERE

Statius as Creatorof Distinction in the Silvae Noelle K. Zeiner

GeneralEditors

NOTHING ORDINARY HERE Statius as Creator of Distinction in the Silvae

Noelle K. Zeiner

i~~~o~!~~n~~~up New York London

Published in 2005 by Routledge Taylor & Francis Group 711 Third Avenue New York, NY 10017

Published in Great Britain by Routledge Taylor & Francis Group 2 Park Square, Milton Park Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN

© 2005 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business

International Standard Book Number-10: 0-415-97098-9 (Hardcover) International Standard Book Number-13: 978-0-415-97098-3 (Hardcover) Library of Congress Card Number: 2005013493 No part of this book may be reprinted, reproduced, transmitted, or utilized in any form by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying, microfilming, and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without written permission from the publishers. Trademark Notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe.

Library of Congress Cataloging-In-Publication Data

Zeiner, Noelle K., 1974Nothing ordinary here : Statius as creator of distinction in the Silvae / Noelle K. Zeiner. p. cm. -- (Studies in classics) Includes bibliographical references and index ISBN 0-415-97098-9 (alk. paper) I. Statius, P. Papinius (Publius Papinius). Silvae. 2. Rome--History--Domitian, 81-96--Historiography. 3. Occasional verse, Latin--History and criticism. 4. Laudatory poetry, Latin--History and criticism. 5. Social classes in literature. 6. Rome--In literature. 7. Wealth in literature. I. Title. II. Studies in classics (Routledge (Firm)) PA6698.245 2005 871'.01--dc22

llijlinformal Taylor & Francis Group is the Academic Division ofT&F lnforma pie.

2005013493

Visit the Taylor & Francis Web site at http://www.taylorandfrancls.com and the Routledge Web site at http://www.routledge-ny.com

Tomyparents,with love and ToSidney,the amazingFrisbeedog

Contents

Glossary of Terms

lX

Series Editors' Foreword

Xl

Acknowledgments A Note on Translation

Xlll

xv

Introduction From "Slavish Flatterer" to Poet of Distinction

Chapter One

13

The Economics of Wealth

ChapterTwo

45

Statius as Licensed Spokesperson

Chapter Three

75

Material Wealth in the Silvae

ChapterFour

109

Statius' Language of Wealth

ChapterFive

135

Creating Distinction

ChapterSix

227

Achieving Distinction

Vtt

vztz

Contents

Notes

259

Bibliography

305

Index

319

Authors Index

325

Glossary of Terms

balneum I (pl. balnea) A bath-house which consisted of variously tempered baths as well as exercise spaces. These could be large, public complexes, or smaller, privately owned establishments, sometimes attached to a house or villa. carmenI (pl. carmina) A general Latin term for "song" or more often, "poem." consolatioI (pl. consolationes) A literary work in prose or poetry offering consolation on the loss of a loved one.

ecphrasisI (pl. ecphrases) A written description of a work of art or material object. epicedionI (pl. epicedia) A poem commemorating the death of a loved one. encomiumI (pl. encomia) A formal or informal work or passage of praise.

epithalamiumI (pl. epithalamia) A poem (originally a hymn) celebrating a wedding. genethliaconI (pl. genethliaca) A poem commemorating a birthday.

pietas (personified: Pietas) Literally, loyalty. Romans conceived of pietas as a virtue espousing duty to one's gods, homeland, and family (in that order). The abstract form was also personified as a goddess.

X

Glassaryof Terms

propempticonI (pl. prompemptica) A send-off poem commemorating the departure of a friend for a journey or mission abroad.

soteria A poem celebrating a person's recovery from a serious illness.

Series Editors' Foreword

Studiesin Classicsaims to bring high-quality work by emerging scholars to the attention of a wider audience. Emphasizing the study of classical literature and history, these volumes contribute to the theoretical understanding of human culture and society over time. This series offers an array of approaches to the study of Greek and Latin (including medieval and Neolatin), authors and their reception, canons, transmission of texts, ideas, religion, history of scholarship, narrative, and the nature of evidence. While the focus is on Mediterranean cultures of the Greco-Roman era, perspectives from other areas, cultural backgrounds, and eras included as important means to the reconstruction of fragmentary evidence and the exploration of models. The series reflects upon the role classical studies has played in humanistic endeavors from antiquity to the present, and explores select ways in which the discipline can bring both traditional scholarly tools and the experience of modernity to bear on questions and texts of enduring importance.

Dirk Obbink, Oxford University Andrew Dyck, The University of California, Los Angeles

Xt

Acknowledgments

This book had its original impetus as a dissertation written for the department of Classical Studies at Indiana University. From the beginning, Eleanor Winsor Leach, my director and continuing mentor, offered her expertise and insight at every stage, and has made numerous suggestions that helped me make the transition from dissertation to book. The comments on the original dissertation provided by my former committee members, Jim Franklin, Cynthia Bannon, and Betty Rose Nagle, proved to be invaluable in the revision process. Their foresight was most helpful as I began revisions and re-conceptualizing the project. I am grateful to several friends and colleagues, many at the College of Charleston, who have offered their support and suggestions during various points of revision as I prepared the manuscript for publication: Darryl Phillips, Steve Della Lana, Nancy Nenno, and my fellow Bourdieu-sympathizer, Kathryn McDonnell. A special thanks to Andrew Dyck for his thorough reading and many helpful editorial suggestions, as well as my editor at Routledge, Max Novick. On a personal level, many friends and family bore the brunt of my preoccupation with this project. All of them willingly empathized with my various trials and tribulations in the production of a first book. Special thanks are due to Karla Ruopoli, who graciously welcomed me as a newcomer to Charleston, to Heather Melton, whose friendship has been a true gift, and to my long-standing friend, Carolyn Pyle-Duke, a constant cheerleader and supporter. I also want to thank Jennifer Smith Chavez and Rob Chavez, who have always been ready with support, laughter, and wine; to this day their friendship is one of the greatest rewards of my graduate school experience. My sister, Vanessa Zeiner, Latin teacher at Robinson Secondary School in Fairfax, VA, selflessly gave of her time and energy amidst her own busy schedule to proofread much of this manuscript. I will count myself truly fortunate if one day I can teach the Latin students who have passed through her

xiii

Xtv

Acknowledgments

classroom. Finally, to my wonderful parents, I can only say "thank you" from the bottom of my heart for your patience, your acceptance of my career choice, your endless encouragement, and most of all, for your selfless love. Lastly, to Tim, my "unanimus amicus":thank you for your brilliant and painstaking editing. Most of all, thank you for being you.

A Note on Translation

It is my hope that this book will appeal to a broad audience, including not only classicists, but also historians, anthropologists, and even the general reader. With this in mind, I have translated into English prose all Latin for which I have not otherwise provided paraphrases or explanations. In the interest of length, I have not translated Latin that appears in the endnotes. My intent was readability, and therefore I occasionally sacrificed literalness in order to capture the flavor and tone of the original. May my lack of elegance be forgiven by those who are more skilled in the art of translating. Above all, I hope these translations will aid in broadening awareness of the significance of Statius' Silvae as social documents that offer considerable insight into the world ofDomitianic Rome.

xv

Introduction

From "SlavishFlatterer"to Poet of Distinction

"Of Statius' inequality as a poet it is hardly necessary to speak; he suffers from lack of judgement, rising now to the wildest heights of exaggeration and bombast, and now sinking to trivial and absurd details." 1 So wrote Mozley in his introduction to the 1928 Loeb edition of the Silvaeand Thebaid.Mozley's vitriol reflects a sentiment characteristic of early Statian scholarship. Throughout the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, the ancient author suffered criticism based almost exclusively on stylistic features. Other unwarranted assessments, such as Bucler's unforgiving comment characterizing the Silvae as "fulsome to the verge of nausea," further relegated the poet co the bottom rung on the hierarchical ladder of ancient Roman literature, accompanied by other underestimated poets such as Lucan and Silius Italicus. 2 Surprisingly, time did little to improve Scatius' reputation: more than 60 years after Butler's remark, Gossage's appraisal that the poems were nothing more than "empty expressions of flattery" with "little poetical worth" 3 continued the vein of evaluations founded purely on subjective opinion. Statius' neglected status (and especially chat of his Silvae), is further exemplified by the lack of either a complete commentary since Vollmer's 1898 edition and, until recently, a complete English translation since Mozley's 1928 Loeb.4 Despite their literary, sociological, and political interpretive potential, the Silvaerarely find a place in graduate level curricula and even more rarely on undergraduate level syllabi. Too frequently the complexity of Statius' Latin, the unclassifiable nature of the work as a whole, and the absence of a complete modern English commentary and translation have all obscured the Silvae's literary value and utility as a social document. It would be easy to conclude based on the above quotations chat Stacius' unpopularity was persistent throughout history, but this is definitely not the

I

2

Nothing OrdinaryHere

case. In fact, his unpopularity is a relatively modern phenomenon. The later Roman poets of the fourth and fifth centuries, Claudian, Ausonius, and Sidonius Apollinaris, not only read the Silvae, but used Statius as inspiration for their own compositions. Claudian's shorter poems echo the Silvae in theme, style, and tone. Carmen 7 (de quadrigamarmorea)is a short ecphrasis written in dactylic hexameter that expresseswonder at the skill with which the chariot and its horses were carved from one block of marble; its ecphrasisand encomium naturally recall Vindex's statue of Hercules (Silv. 4.6) and other ecphrasesscattered throughout the Silvae. Claudian begins his poem with a question designed to express wonder and marvel ("Who gave numberless expressions from one piece of marble?" Quis dedit innumeros uno de marmore vultus?),which reminds the reader of a similar opening question beginning Silvae 1.1 on Domitian's equestrian statue: "What mass, doubled in size by the colossus atop it, stands filling up the Roman forum?" (Quae superimposito moks geminate col.osso I stat Latium compkxaforum? 1-2). Carmen 25, an epitha/,amiumto Palladius and Celerina, opens almost apologetically, with the poet describing the improvisational nature of the poem ( Carminaper tha/,amum quamvisfestina negareI nee voluigeneraneepotui socero,"I was unable to deny the bridegroom and his father-in-law the song they requested for the marriage, even though it was composed hastily), reminiscent of Statius' own admission of swift composition (c.f., lpraej3: quadam festinandi voluptate). This epitha/,amium,and Claudian's better known Epitha/,amiumde Nuptiis Honorii Augusti (Carmen 9), echo Statius' tendency to intertwine real-life characters with the mythological world of gods and goddesses (e. g., Venus serves as pronuba in both Carmen9 and Silvae 1.2).5 Similarly, the descriptive poem on the phoenix ( Carmen27) recalls Statius' epicedionco Atedius Melior on the death of his parrot. Literary mimesisalso forms an important role in Ausonius' poetry; the descriptions of villas and their idyllic landscapes in his Mosel/,e,for example, are written as seen through the eyes of the author-spectator, an echo of Statius' detailed villa descriptions in the Silvae. Further, as Pavlovskis has rightly pointed out, similarities in vocabulary and mythological topoi between the two authors abound. 6 Sidonius is much more explicit about his poetic mimesis,openly crediting Statius for providing the model for his Carmen22 (22.6). It was Statius' numerous mythological allusions in the Silvae that served as Sidonius' primary influential model; moreover, Sidonius' detailed account of the varied marbles decorating Pontius Leontius' house derives from the familiar marble passages in Silvae 1.5 and 2.2. These few examples adequately illustrate the respect and admiration felt by later Roman authors towards their classical predecessor.

Introduction

3

Following the later Roman period of literary history, the Silvaedisappeared from common circulation during the Middle Ages, but the Thebaidand AchiUeidwere still widely read and Statius himself enjoyed great popularity, albeit as an epic poet.7 Dante (1265-1321 AD), for example, gave Stacius place of priority in his Divine Comedy(Canto 21-23) not only because he (incorrectly) identified Statius as a converted Christian who, situated in Purgatory, provides an intermediary role on the path towards Heaven (notably, a role given to him, not Vergil), and because he regarded Statius as an exceptional, accomplished poet. While noting chat Statius' significance in the Commediadepends primarily on his literary connection co Vergil, Brownlee also shows how Dante assigned Statius an integral thematic role in the work, making him "an inscribed 8 While model who authorizes the new vernacular Christian Dante-poeta." Statius serves a fundamental literary and thematic purpose in the Commedia,his Thebaidalso served as a valuable source of literary inspiration: "For within the Commediaas a whole, the dominant function of the Thebaidas the epic of destructive civil war par excellence is to serve as a metaphoric textual model for Hell itsel£"9 Indeed, Statius' portrayal ofThebes in the Thebaidservedas the inspiration and model for Dante's city of Dis, and other Statian similes and themes play an equally significant role in Dante's work. 10 Similarly, Chaucer was also unaware of Statius' Silvae,but was very familiar with the Thebaidand Achilkid from which he drew heavily for inspiration. 11 In his extensive examination of Statius' influence on Chaucer, Wise concludes, "the nature and extent of his borrowings from the Thebaidshow an intimate acquaintance extending over almost the entire period of his literary activity." 12 Chaucer's debt to Statius explains the elevated position given to the ancient poet in the Houseof Fame(1455-63): These, of which I ginne rede, There saugh I sronden, out of drede: Upon an yren piler strong, That peynced was al endelong, With tygres blode in every place, The Tholosan chat highte Stace, That bar ofThebcs up the fame Upon his shuldres, and the name Also of cruel Achilles.

Chaucer describes rows of pillars supporting statues of famous poets, and places Statius upon an iron pillar distinguished by its tiger blood, symbolizing the city ofThebes. 13 Quite clearly, he defines Statius' fame and excellence according to his skill as an epic poet, particularly with regard to the Thebaid.

4

Nothing OrdinaryHere

Although it is clear that Dante and Chaucer did not know of Statius' Silvae, the work had not been forever lost. In 1417, Poggio Bracciolini rediscovered the Silvae,and his (now lost) manuscript is that from which all modern editions of the text derive. 14 The humanist Angelo Poliziano obtained a copy of Poggio's manuscript and, in addition to a commentary, also composed his own poems entitled Silvae. The Italian Renaissance (Quatrocento and Cinquecento) and its offshoot, the Baroque period (16 th -18 th centuries), led to a kind of renaissance for Statius; the numerous commentaries on the Silvae produced during these periods reflect his popularity and the respect generally directed towards the poems. 15 Moreover, famous Italians such as Lorenzo de' Medici, Bernardo Tasso, Luigi Alamanni and Teofilo Folengo, found inspiration in Statius' Silvaeand produced their own versions in imitation. 16 Statius' popularity, however, was not limited to Italy, but, like other movements (e. g., aesthetic philosophies, humanism, art) spread throughout EuroJJe, including Holland and Spain. Several Spanish authors of the sixteenth century (which involved the so-called Neo-Latin culture 17) produced editions of and commentaries on the Silvae,18 and composed their own poems that directly imitated the Silvae;Martfn lvarra, for example, composed Deferrando Leone,an unequivocal imitation of Silvae 2.5 (Leo Mansuetus),19 while Juan Angel Gonzalez authored De origineet laudibuspoeseossylvain 1520. Yet perhaps the greatest influence of Statius' Silvae was on the poetry of the Spanish humanist and poet, Francisco de Quevedo (1580--1645), who appropriates the genre, theme, style, and even vocabulary of Statius for his own Silvas, a collection of 36 poems covering a variety of subjects and meters. Through careful analysis of Quevedo's poems and his handwritten annotations in the margins of his edition of Statius' Silvae(Aldine text, housed in the Princeton library) H. and C. Kallendorf convincingly illustrate that Statius not only served as a decisive model for Quevedo's own poetry, but also played an extensive role "in the development of the Spanish silva" as a genre of the Baroque period. 20 On the most basic level, many of the titles of Quevedo's silvasindicate the thematic influence of Statius' Silvae:Al troncoy a /,afoente, describing the death of a bird, recalls Silvae2.4 (PsittacusAtedii Melioris),~ Como pudiera ser hechopiadoso,dealing with a cut lock of hair, follows Silvae 3.4 (Capilli Flavi Earinz), Deja l'alma y Losojos, centering on the death of a woman, echoes Silvae 5.1 (Epicedionin Priscillam),and Estede Losdemdssitios Narciso,reminds us of Statius' villa poems (Silvae 1.3 and 2.1). 21 Quevedo nonetheless moves beyond mere thematic parallels; his annotations on his Silvae edition and his very poems reveal a close attention to mythological allusions, topoisuch as the interrelationship between art and nature, Stoic maxims, and a style (including direct verbal echoes), that like Statius, pushes its

Introduction

5

vocabulary to outer limits, employs word play, and is characterized by an elaborate, artful expression. With regard to style, these characteristics are the very ones that identified Statius as "baroque" (see below) and often led to his modern unpopularity. 22 Undoubtedly, Statius' style very much appealed to Quevedo and his contemporaries who, experiencing the Baroque art movement of their cultural context, found similar expression in their poetry. Thus, Statius is a natural and expected subject of interest for the poets of this historical and cultural period. The example of Quevedo, whose "conscious decision to draw on thematic and stylistic strands derived from the Latin poet" which ultimately gave "coherence to (his] collection," illustrates perfectly that Statius, in contrast to modern conceits and biases, was considered one of the most preeminent classical poets during cwo of the most culturally productive and influential periods in Western history. Following the seventeenth century, Statius' popularity waned significantly; presumably the author was swept into the cultural and artistic reaction against che Baroque period, in a deliberate return to restraint and moderation. The slow rate ac which Statius has gained acceptance as a valued poet since the Renaissance and Baroque periods seems in part from early evaluations of the poems chat were often cursory and based on aesthetic appraisals conforming co che now outdated mecallic literary hierarchy; scholars were quick to categorize Statius as a "Silver" author, whose "anificial"--often termed "manneristic" or "baroque"-style was considered offensive to purist sensibilities that upheld Vergil as the stylistic barometer. 23 Statius' tendency towards exaggerated description, repetition, and metaphor were likened, as we have just seen, to the grandiloquent forms and exuberant movements characterizing Baroque sculpture and painting during the 16-18 th centuries. Vessey,employing the more general definition of baroque, attributes Statius' style to his penchant for ecphrasis, those detailed descriptions of physical objects that Vessey believes may have been inspired by real paintings and sculptures. 24 Generally however, the term "manneristic" or "baroque" connotes a negative assessment, meant to criticize Statius' "disease of classicism," chat is, an over-imitation of the classical literary aspects of the Augustan poets. Thus, many scholars have replaced the notion of imitatiowith "slavish dependency," resulting in what some regard as contrived artistry, minutiae of description, repetition, and a fasciiration with gory details. While the exuberance of Statius' poetry may run counter to the traditional classicism of the Augustan poets and even our own biases favoring literary restraint, his style, which is in part a product of his time, is justified in its own right. The change in tastes during the late 18th - 19th centuries to a more restrained aesthetic and a rejection of the Baroque manner coincides with the decline in appreciation of Statius' work.

6

Nothing OrdinaryHere

Just as Statius' penchant for elaborate description has inspired sharp criticism, his frequent use of mythological allusions has also provoked negative assessments of his stylistic tendencies. Nevertheless, the works of Szelest25 and Verstraete26 have offered neutral literary analyses of the integral role that myth plays in the poems, and Coleman's27 more recent study presents an illuminating analysis of the function of mythological figures as spokespersons who help to blur the world of myth with reality. Her analysis reveals that Statius' use of myth is technical and deliberately useful, meeting the demands of the poetic context and establishing credibility for purposes of persuasion. Her examination, along with others, has helped to demonstrate Statius' poetic virtuosity. In addition to style, Statius has long been criticized for the type or genre of poetry in which he composed, and thus his motivation for writing such poems. Vollmer's comment in his 1898 commentary that, "Statius war niche reich," evoked a common (mis)interpretation of the genre of panegyric as slavish sycophancy that expects some kind of return, usually monetary. Statius was thereafter repeatedly denounced as a mere court flatterer, a slave to the whims and desires of his so-called patrons. 28 As Garthwaite 29 put it, "their servile adulation of the emperor, regrettable enough in itself, has been considered to be even more reprehensible because of the tyrannical character of the man at whom such praise was directed." Garthwaite's assessment of Statius' and Martial's professional role as slavish "court poets" is, however, misguided since it relies on the traditional, though incorrect, evaluation of the emperor Domitian as a ruthless tyrant. His and others' unfortunate bias against the emperor, and consequently against Statius, is of course heavily dependent upon the prejudiced senatorial sources (e. g., Tacitus) of the period. Certainly Statius' poems reflect his association with the imperial court and those related, however tenuously, co the court; it is, however, inappropriate to degrade Statius' accomplishment in this way, since the notion of slavish flattery elicits negative connotations that reflect misguided, subjective, a priori appraisals of the poet, rather than an impartial analysis of his poems. Studies that discount the validity of Statius' words by classifying him as a mere flatterer, particularly of the Emperor, obfuscate a true understanding of the poems. By uncritically relying upon the biased senatorial portrait of Domitian recorded by Tacitus and other ancient authors, some have searched the poems for hints of social and political criticism, mistakenly forcing interpretations of "doublespeak" upon the text instead of deriving interpretations from it.30 Readings of this kind flourished in the early 1970s and inspired a following of subsequent doublespeak acolytes, including Frederick Ahl and his most well-known discussion of Silvae 1.1, which argues that Statius'

Introduction

7

poems, written under the hostile literary oppression of Domitian, found ways to insert subversive criticism of the Emperor into lines of encomium. Ahl's interpretation, however, hangs on his tenacious adherence to a text now universally recognized as flawed, in which Sandstroem's emendation of iussus sum (1 praef.19) to ausus sum dramatically alters Ahl's argument. 31 Other doublespeak readings, for example Holtsmark's interpretation of the Baths of Claudius Etruscus (1.5) or Vesseyon Atedius Melior's tree (2.3), over-read the poems, often employing roundabout (and at times ridiculous) criteria to force a negative interpretation upon Statius' encomia. These studies discount any possibility that Statius' praise reflects social truth, and thus they have missed the social significance of the poems. The rehabilitation of Domitian that was begun long ago with Mommsen but only recently widely accepted and endorsed, has occurred concomitantly with Statius' rehabilitation as a serious poet, thereby slowing the impetus for more doublespeak readings. 32 Amidst these doublespeak interpretations Geyssen's informative literary commentary on Silvae 1.1 is a welcome breath of fresh air; his examination of the poem takes into account the genre of panegyric and, with a more neutral approach, avoids condemning Statius' activities as representative of slavish flattery.33 Likewise, other types of literary studies, particularly from the late 1970s and 1980s, have been more restrained in exerting subjective judgment on the poems. For instance, Bright explored the "novelty" of the poems through a study of the intermixture of genres;34 his examination of the title's meaning and genre interplay provided a solid basis for additional literary studies on individual poems. Likewise, Newmyer's close analysis35 of the Silvaewas a necessary forerunner to later Statian scholarship. In outlining the significance of not only the structure of individual poems, but also the arrangement of poems within each book, Newmyer shed new light on Statius' careful attention to detail and regard for audience reception, and further illuminated the important literary connection between meaning and structure. While these studies mark progress in the literary appreciation of Statius, significant work on the social and cultural aspects of the Silvae continue to be neglected. The studies of Bright and Newmyer coincided with a movement of Statian scholarship that focused on literary mimesis; Mozley's study 36 of Statius' imitation ofVergil and Ovid as well as Burgess' broader examination 37 of Statius' use of manifold sources provided initial groundwork for studying the literary echoes of Vergil, Catullus, Horace, and Ovid in the poems. 38 Newer examinations of literary predecessors and their influence on Statius' poetry tend to focus on individual poems or authors, or, conversely, offer only general, limited remarks. 39 Yet, such studies provided the inspiration and

8

Nothing OrdinaryHere

groundwork for further analysis of Stacius' self-conscious and deliberate selffashioning, in which he positions himself as a competitive rival co the Republican and Augustan poets. Other scholars have focused on the interrelationship between Statius and his contemporaries, in particular Martial and Juvenal. 40 Although primarily literary studies, some of these examinations have also briefly considered the social and cultural context in which these authors lived and wrote. For example, White's 41 seminal article on the interrelationship between Martial and Statius not only takes into account issues of patronage and amicitia, but also examines the poets against the general literary backdrop of Domitianic Rome. Literary studies of the Silvaewere not limited to issues of mimesis,but also included the role of rhetorical and literary topoi in the poems. Nearly a century following Vollmer's commentary asserting the formative role of rhetoric in the poems' composition, A. Hardie's major work on the Silvae has helped to identify the Greek rhetorical models for many of the poems. His study draws upon rhetorical handbooks and Greek predecessors for determining Statius' adherence to established genre forms such as the epithalamium or epicedion,but his primary focus on Greek epideixis is narrow and posicivistic.42 While stressing the importance of Statius' Neapolitan origins as a shaping influence on Statius' use of Greek models, Hardie's work overlooks other socio-cultural influences chat contribute to poetic composition. One of the more recent and beneficial contributions co literary studies on the Silvae has been two exemplary commentaries, Van Dam's43 commentary on Book 2, and Coleman's 44 commentary on Book 4. Noe only do these authors clarify many of the more difficult aspects of Statian language and style, but they also lend insight into many of the social and political implications of the poems. With the increasing popularity of Statius' Silvae, these commentaries should serve as excellent texts in the graduate or advanced undergraduate level course. In much of the scholarship to date, scholars have acknowledged the prominent role of wealth and material objects in the Silvae, usually for the purpose of making a comparison co the traditional moralizing discourse levied against wealth that we find throughout the history of Roman literature up to the first century AD. Statius represents a significant break in this moralizing trend because of his exuberant celebration of wealth and its manifestations throughout the poems. Yet, despite the significance of Statius' unique position, wealth and material objects-along with the general socio-cultural implications of the poems-have not received comprehensive attention. Those studies that have examined material wealth have focused almost exclusively on the villa poems (1.3 and 2.2). Pavlovskis' influential artide, 45 for example, interpreted the Silvae as glorifications of man's subjugation of nature.

Introduction

9

Her theory that Statius' primary purpose is to represent Rome's "technological advancement" does broach-though in a limited way-the cultural significance of the poems, but her interpretations are rather contrived and narrow, a point later noted in Oberg's 46 rebuttal. Much more recently, Nauta's seminal work 47 on Martial's epigrams and Statius' Silvae proposes a new ideal of imperial patronage that investigates the role of the patron-poet relationship and the social implications of poetry in Domitianic Rome. His book is already becoming an instrumental force in our understanding of Statius' relationship with his addressees; even more, Nauta provides the first comprehensive study of the Silvae in more than sixteen years, offering prosopographical information (albeit limited) on each of the addressees and interpretations, as well as on the social significance of both the Domitianic poems and some of the nonimperial poems, within their cultural and social context. More recently, Newlands' book 48 has also taken a more social approach to the Silvae by examining the role of material wealth in the poems; although her approach does involve reading the poems as social documents that provide information on material goods and their cultural significance, her particular emphasis centers on Domitian and imperial patronage, and the stylistic relationship between Statius' poems and the architectural, topographical, and archaeological ideology of the Domitianic reign. Her argument seems to have been inspired by Cancik who, in 1965, was the first to note the sociological possibilities of the poems. 49 In detailing the differences between the ancient and modern aesthetic ideals in reference to the Silvae, Cancik-refreshingly--does not pass judgment, and confines himself to detailing the relationship between Statian poetics and Flavian aesthetics. 50 In particular he emphasizes the aesthetic category shared by Statius' poetic ecphrasesand the architecture of Domitian's palace (thereby making the connection between literature and its social context). Despite his early recognition of Statius' contributions to our understanding of Domitianic society, however, Cancik's assessment is rather an anomaly and until recently has gained little ground. Newlands makes a significant contribution to the socio-cultural aspect of the Silvae, but has not completely let go of her ties to earlier double-speak interpretations. She does break away from traditional doublespeak approaches, yet she finds in the poems so-called "faultlines," i. e., inconsistencies and incoherences [sic]"51 that lead her to assert, unpersuasively in my opinion, that certain themes unsettle Statius' encomia and reflect a sense of "anxiety'' correlating to anxieties regarding the Domitianic regime. This recent activity in Statian scholarship suggests that Statius may be re-achieving some of the popularity he enjoyed in antiquity and during the Renaissance and Baroque periods. Anderson's statistical inquiry shows that

JO

Nothing OrdinaryHere

the number of scholarly works on Statius in general hit a high in the midl 970s (when most doublespeak interpretations appear)-a significant improvement from the early twentieth century-but since then interest had declined. 52 While Statius has certainly not arrived at the pillar once assigned to him by Chaucer, he is again being recognized as a poet meriting renewed study. Shackleton-Bailey's new Loeb edition 53 and Nagle's new translation of the Silvae54 illustrate his improving status, which although slow-going has been steady and appears to be gaining momentum. In August 2003 a Conference on Flavian Poetry sponsored by the University of Groningen, The Netherlands, under the organization of Nau ta, included numerous papers on Statius. And in February 2004, a Colloquium at the University of Wisconsin, Madison, hosted by Newlands, was devoted solely to new directions in the study of Statius' Silvae. The colloquium highlighted fresh, exciting, work being done on theSilvae and illustrates the growing interest in the poet. 55 At a time when Statius is enjoying renewed popularity among scholars, and hopefully among the future generation of classicists, this book seeks to contribute to these approaches to the Silvae. Scholarship on the Silvaehas covered a broad range of topics, and while literary studies have elucidated many aspects of the poems, recognition of the sociological value of the Silvae for providing topographical, cultural, and archaeological insight into the so-called Luxuswelt of Domitianic Rome deserves further attention. Until now, no one has (I) fully examined these poems as social documents that reflect the role of both material and non-material wealth in the Silvae, particularly with regard to the individual private addressees, and (2) employed a theoretical framework to facilitate understanding of the poems and their context. This book hopes to remedy both gaps through a multi-disciplinary approach that combines philology, archaeology and social theory. With regard to the latter, I employ the theories of the French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu to broaden the definition of "wealth" and redirect interpretation of the Silvae according to the concept of distinction. That is, how did first-century Romans of different socio-economic and regional groups distinguish themselves from one another? Through villas? Through bath houses? Through statues? Or through non-material assets? Family pedigree? Literary or philosophical pursuits? Answers to these questions involve, in part, examining the evidence for material tastes and fashions of Domitianic Rome as they are represented by both the poems and archaeological remains. The close examination of material objects in the Silvae (Chapter Three) will allow me in turn to ascertain the extent to which material objects (and their associated cultural values) played a role in the formation of personal distinction. My application of Bourdieu's

Introduction

11

social theory in close connection with the philological analysis of several poems (Chapter Five) will reveal that non-material forms of wealth play a more valuable role in the creation and promulgation of personal distinction. The Silvaeare especially suited to this kind of sociological and multi-disciplinary study. Not only do the poems present abundant information about the period, they also cover an extraordinary range of social contexts and individuals. Moreover, the technical virtuosity of Statius' composition and attention to detail lend valuable insight to the interaction between form and meaning. It is my hope that this book will not only make a significant contribution to classical studies, specifically, by elucidating Statius' poetry and the socio-cultural aspects of the first century AD, but that it will also benefit scholars and readers engaged in a multiple of disciplines, including historians, archaeologists, and even sociologists and anthropologists (particularly chose interested in applications of Bourdieu). Ultimately, the chapters that follow intend to contribute to the poet's steady rehabilitation while uncovering the complex social, political, and cultural dynamics of Domitianic Rome as represented by one of the best-and thus far under-appreciated-sources of the period.

Chapter One

The Economicsof Wealth

Throughout the history of ancient civilization, material wealth served as a marker of status and success. Although differences in its materialization and manifestation abound, wealth is powerful, differentiating various groups of individuals from one another. Moreover, wealth, often associated with overabundance, and thus negatively connoted with luxury, is a common subject of ancient moralizing discourse, igniting judgmental assessments on the priority of non-material values over material assets. Such comments appear in a variety of genres including history, epic, and of course frequently satire. Herodotus' anecdote recounting Solon's visit to the wealthy King Croesus (Hist. 1.30-33), for example, illustrates a conscious distinction between material prosperity and a non-material value, in this case "happiness" or perhaps better translated as "good fortune." In response to Croesus' inquiry about who the happiest man is (1 .30.2), Solon elects the Athenian Tell us because his city prospered, his sons were successful, he had enough wealth to be comfortable, and, arguably most importantly, he had a glorious death which the Athenians honored with a public funeral. Salon's second example of Cleo bis and Biton (1.31 ), for whom statues were dedicated in honor of their religious and familial piety, also illustrates the role of immortal fame or glory as the key to good fortune and ultimate happiness. Solon's subsequent discourse (1.32.4-6) acknowledges the value of material wealth, but also emphasizes its fleeting nature. In this same passage the wise Solon deems non-material assets such as good health and children as the most valuable forms of wealth. Similarly, the familiar tale of King Midas and his "golden touch," retold by Ovid in his Metamorphoses (1 l.86-145), offers insight into perspectives regarding greed and the misunderstanding that material wealth is a source of true happiness. At first, Midas cannot believe his good luck (Vix spes ipse suas animo capit aurea fingens lomnia. Gaudenti mensas posuere ministri /exstructas dapibus nee tostae frugis egentes, 119-21). 13

Nothing OrdinaryHere

14

But, Ovid's detailed and visual description of the ecstatic Midas, who watches the table be set, only to be denied the food which immediately turns to gold at his touch, underscores the miserable pains that greed can cause. The moralizing point is made explicit in typical Ovidian irony and word play (127-30): Attonitus novitate mali, divesquemiserque, effugere optat opes et, quae modo voverat, odit. Copia nulla famem relevat; sitis arida guttur urit, et inviso meritus corquetur ab auro ... [Startled by his new dilemma, now both rich and poor, Midas wishes he could escape his wealth, detesting the riches for which he had so recently longed. Plentiful food cannot allay his hunger; his throat, dry with thirst, burns; and he is tortured-deservedly so-by his odious gold.]

Though rich (dives),he is also poor (one translation for miser),and thus ultimately unfortunate. He hates his material wealth (opes)and wants to escape his newly acquired affluence. In both instances, Croesus and Midas define their happiness and good fortune according to economic prosperity, manifested in various ways as symbolic representations of success and privilege. Their desire for wealth, however, hinges not only on their enjoyment of what it can provide, but on the act of displaying this wealth to others with the expectation of achieving external praise or admiration, even jealousy. Yet what happens when material wealth no longer serves this distinguishing function? What happens when its acquisition becomes more stratified, such as when people of all classes in society have equal access to material wealth and its various manifestations? These questions rest at the center of this book. The rank-conscious nature of Roman society lent itself to the exploitation of material wealth as a distinguishing marker of status. Visible manifestations of wealth were part of the Romans' complex system of external evaluation, whereby even clothing distinguished status and economic affluence. Visual symbols served a necessary role in defining and displaying personal distinction, both formulating and enforcing social-class boundaries and asserting appropriate demarcations. While exclusive by nature, such a system maintained social order in that individuals knew "their place" within the society. Consider for a moment the numerous distinctive visual symbols in ancient Roman culture, from clothing to funerary monuments, hairstyles and elaborate villa decorations, to imaginesand the food served at an elaborate cena.Often such visual markers become textualized in Roman literature, giving rise to ecphrasesor verbal descriptions of clothing, dinner parties, houses,

The Economicsof Wealth

15

and other material objects. These descriptions also draw attention to the economic and social status of the individual or literary subject. In some cases, the importance of these verbal descriptions supersede the real visual markers themselves, since writing had the ability to reach a wider audience, whereas a villa or dinner party was to some degree confined by geographical or even temporal limitations. This is due to the natural restrictions inherent in ephemeral activities or immovable objects, experienced or seen by only select visitors or guests. Thus, literature functions as an important instrument in the creation and promulgation of status, serving, as it were, as a replacement for visible signs of affluence. The strong economic and cultural link between affluence and status meant that the visual markers associated with material prosperity for a long time belonged only to the elite, such as patrician senators or upper-ranked equestrians. Yet, as early as the late Republic and well into the early Empire, these demarcations become blurred as accessibility to economic wealth, among a wider range of individuals from different social classes, increased. Visual manifestations of wealth, and the way they were used, subsequently changed in dramatic ways as well. Ownership of an elaborate villa, formerly attributed only to a senator, becomes ambiguous, as the once indelible link between economic affluence and upper class social rank loosens. Consequently, other types of wealth, namely non-material forms, become ever more valuable in distinguishing oneself within society, both among peers and from lower-class individuals. When we speak of wealth, we most often think of economic capital and the process of exchange. Goods (agricultural, for example) are exchanged for money, as money can be exchanged for necessities as well as expensive and superfluous items (i. e., non-necessities) such as decorations or jewelry. This most basic type of conversion is the foundation of a society's economy, but does not necessarily constitute the only method of acquisition, nor does it fully illustrate the extent to which the process contributes to the formation of distinction as a significant social commodity. Statius' Silvaenot only shed light on the types of material goods considered valuable, both economically and culturally, but also illustrate other types of exchange that involve non-material assets and the creation of distinction. Expensive material objects, for example, can undergo exchanges in which they are converted into alternate forms of capital that, in turn, assert non-material values. Thus, we can also speak of wealth in terms of non-material possessions such as education, lineage, and literary composition, which function as important forms of capital and even markers of status. By considering the "economics"-in a broad sense of the word--of Statius' Silvae, we discover that Statius' purpose is not aimed at mere flattery or even simple praise (with the hope of some kind of monetary compensation); instead, his

16

Nothing OrdinaryHere

poetic art is deliberately calculated and consciously driven by a desire to distinguish each addressee according to his or her primary forms of capital. As elaborated in the following chapters, Statius' sense of purpose in singling out people who, despite possessing similar amounts of economic wealth, diverge broadly in rank, status, and other social factors, is so strong that it directly informs the way in which he creates each poem. This book not only maps the social landscape of distinctive individuals of Domitianic Rome, but also illuminates the cultural values associated with different kinds of material and non-material wealth through which such widely disparate Romans sought personal distinction. The notion of exchange and economics to which I am referring is one deeply rooted in sociological theory. Thus, before proceeding further it is necessary to consider Pierre Bourdieu and his theories, which will provide the methodological foundation for my examination and analysis of Statius' Silvae.A full discussion of the life ofBourdieu and the broad range of theoretical influences that shaped his life and work are beyond the scope of this chapter, but several relevant details will highlight the significance of his work and its relevance to anciquity. 1 Bourdieu was born in the Beam region in 1930, and attended school in 2 Although Bourdieu's inParis and later became a teacher at a provincial lycee. terests first led him to philosophy (strongly influenced by the works of Heidegger 3), his attention soon turned to anthropology when, in 1956, he was conscripted to serve in the French army in Algeria. It was there that Bourdieu developed an incense interest in the social sciences. Following the models of Levi-Strauss and Max Weber,4 his examination of various aspects of 5 Although Algerian society led to his 1958 publication, Sociowgiede l'Algerie. Bourdieu incorporated Levi-Strauss' concept of "relations and oppositions" 6 he soon came to realize the limitations of rigid structuralism and turned to a new, more epistemological approach to solve what he considered an illogical dualism presented between subjectivism and objectivism. In Bourdieuian terms, subjectivism views the social world in terms of the daily life experiences of the individual; it takes into account how the world appears to those living within it, and is a form of research that works closely with the human subject. Objectivism, conversely, views the world from a distance; it devises structures to explain practices in the social world, but fails to incorporate the role of the individual within that social world. Objectivism, thus, tends to record empirical data and statistics and apply formal models to a society without a full appreciation of social reality.7 In Bourdieu's opinion, each concept offers a valuable way of studying society, but neither satisfactorily presents a complete picture of the social world. His attempt to solve this binary opposition became a constant theme in his work, which focused largely on the attempt to

The EconomicsofWealth

17

conceive a theory that would overcome the dichotomy. 8 Bourdieu himself speaks of the importance he attached to this goal, describing it as "the most steadfast (and, in my eyes, the most important) intention guiding my work. "9 Most importantly for our purposes, Bourdieu's desire to meld the two approaches into one that would offer a complete picture of social reality ultimately led to his formulations on habitus,field, capital, and symbolic power (discussed below), which are his theoretical concepts most applicable to Statius' Silvae.10 Bourdieu's interest also focused on language, but only in relation to its practical function in society. In other words, he sharply opposed traditional linguistic and semiotic theories that examined language internally, excluding considerations of the socio-cultural context in which language is created and reproduced. His reaction against structuralist linguistic theories, like those of Saussure and Chomsky, led him to regard language as an instrument of symbolic power and social struggle. 11That is, from a linguistic standpoint, "anyone can say anything, but from a sociological view, not anyone can assert anything or else does so at his peril ... he lacks authority and the utterance is no more than words." 12 In short, for Bourdieu, language cannot be examined in a vacuum, separated from the social situation in which it is produced, for "the value of the utrerance depends on the relation of power that is concretely established between the speakers' linguistic competences, understood both as their capacity for production and as their capacity for appropriation and appreciation."13 His theories thus argued that most often there is authoritative and/or national language, which is promulgated by the upper classes and viewed (by them and, notably, scholars) as the official language by which all other (inferior) variants are judged. Language is thus inextricably linked to social class, defining relations of power among groups who differ economically, culturally, and socially. Moreover, language is an important factor in exercising symbolic power, an invisible force exercised by the dominant class over all others that, "contributes to the legitimation of the established order by establishing distinctions (hierarchies) and legitimating these distinctions." 14 His understanding oflanguage as a significant reflection of status, and his recognition of an official, national language further evolved into critical examinations of political ideology, propaganda and slogans. His theories about the symbolic power of language can be readily applied to analyses of Statius, whose poetic, authoritative words reflect the dominant culture of Domitianic Rome and serve as a powerful vehicle in the creation of his addressees' distinction. In this regard, Statius serves as a "legitimate spokesperson," a Bourdieuian concept further discussed in the subsequent chapter.

18

Nothing OrdinaryHere

In addition to language, Bourdieu examined other social practices involving food, social activities, music, and clothing. One of his most wellknown works, Distinction, a collation of many years of research in France, advances a comprehensive theory about taste(s) and social class. Because of its potential significance in opening up new theoretical approaches to ancient literature, the Silvae in particular, I will now turn to those aspects of the work that will prove especially relevant for the subsequent discussions in this book. The theories presented in Distinction illustrate Bourdieu's attempt to reconcile subjectivism and objectivism by combining dose anthropological examination of and sociological interaction with social classes in twentiethcentury France. His goal was to assess the roles of various social factors in the acquisition of specific "tastes," (i. e., "manifested preferences") and co consider the specific distinguishing factors separating varying class groups. In studying "lifestyles" (e. g., furniture, food, education, art, speech) Bourdieu finds that distinction is innately bound to notions of taste that together demarcate and maintain social boundaries between the dominant (e. g., upper classes) and the dominated (lower classes). For Bourdieu, the dominant class includes members of society such as state officials, university professors, writers, and business executives. There are, of course, intraclass distinctions among the dominant class, primarily differentiated according to levels of economic and cultural prosperity. On the opposite end of the spectrum, the dominated class includes lower-class working individuals. Inclusion in the dominant or dominated class (or the broad middle class) is determined by the amount of total capital one possesses, including money and education, among other forms. 15 For Bourdieu, the dominant class is invested with the highest sense of taste and culture, and thus exercises power over the lower (dominated) class by appearing to legitimize forms of taste and culture. 16 In turn, the dominated classes tend to lack affluence and education, and express awkwardness when it comes to matters of taste chat are determined by the dominant class. Bourdieu's model is a hierarchical one, configured top to bottom as a pyramid. Differences in food, clothing, employment, cultural activities, and homes are examples of the visible material manifestations of one's distinction or lack thereof. The finest and most expensive examples of taste reside in the upper portion of this pyramid, belonging to the fewest members of society. The prevalent lower classes rarely possess the tastes of the upper classes, but nonetheless may be aware of what is considered culturally superior. Members of the middle-class may attempt to imitate the tastes of the dominant-also called legitimate---culture but, according to Bourdieu, they will always lack the natural comfort of the latter in matters of refinement and elegance. Bourdieu argues chat specific kinds of lifestyle tastes are deliberately utilized

The EconomicsofWealth

19

and enforced (as "legitimate" or "tasteful") by the dominant culture to maintain continually sharp boundaries between itself and che dominated, thereby consistently forcing members of the latter to compare their lifestyles co the former's values. This kind of"symbolic violence" (also called symbolic power) compels the dominated to acknowledge their inferior position, and in this apparently self-imposed act of acknowledgement, reinforce the dominant culture itself Thus, the dominated class is always measuring itself against what it perceives as the only legitimate examples of taste and refinement. 17 Because of its lower financial income, the dominated class theoretically has less money to spend on superfluous items, such as expensive food and decorations, which often serve as discriminating markers of taste and status. For Bourdieu, taste is measured economically in relation to necessity; chose groups chat have the greatest "distance from necessity"-that is, those who are not constrained by economic needs and can spend freely--display what is deemed to be the highest, legitimate forms of caste, while chose with the least "distance from necessity''-chat is, those who must necessarily worry about day-co-day expenses-have the least ability to pursue taste and culcure.18 By analogy, then, an economically affluent Roman has a greater tendency for visibly advertising his culture or taste than the poor plebeian who labors merely to maintain his meager lifestyle. Moreover, the visible manifestation of taste, or lack thereof, directly correlates to an individual's habitus-a concept that is probably one of Bourdieu's most influential contributions to the social sciences. Habitus comprises the set of certain behaviors and beliefs pertaining to the individual's social, cultural, and educational upbringing that shapes the way the individual behaves alone and with society,19 or more specifically in Bourdieuian language, "the durably installed generative principle of regulated improvisations ... [that produces] practices." 20 The various similarities and differences in behavior (as in food, tastes in art and music, education, language, etc.) result from the different experiences chat mold the individual: "Habitus derives from class-specific experiences of socialization in family and peer groups." 21 These customs of behavior are ingrained in individuals and provide the codes by which they discern their place(s) within stratified social hierarchies. Knowledge and other kinds of acquisitions are not passively acquired, .rather always filtered through the individual's habitus, interacting with and modified by it. However, individuals within a certain class will often share a similar habitusand thus likely similar tastes, since the "disposition of the habitus finds expression in language, nonverbal communication, tastes, values, perceptions, and modes of reasoning." 22 For Bourdieu, these tastes and behavioral forms are not necessarily acquired through language or even consciously, but subconsciously through the observation of everyday situations

20

Nothing OrdinaryHere

and actions, such as the way a person sits, stands, or looks. 23 For our purposes, the concept of habitus can illuminate how similarities of upbringing in Roman society contributed to shared expressions of taste in art and architecture and the appreciation and production of literature. It can also be used to consider the degree to which social behavior and expression interacted with the creation of personal distinction, thereby raising the question: In what ways does Stacius' poetry reflect his habitus,and how does his habitusdirectly influence the creation of distinction both for himself and his addressees? This question concerns not only habitus,but also Bourdieu's theoretical conceptualizations of "fields" and "capital." Those who desire co be distinguished strive for outside attention and recognition through conscious or subconscious competition within various social "fields" (social contexts) where the amount of "capital," or assets, an individual holds determines, in part, his/her place in the stratified social structure. A person's position within any given field, chat is, how well he/she performs in a given social context, depends on the amount of capital he/she possesses relative to that particular field and others participating within the same field.24 Bourdieu's notion of field includes, for example, the economic field, involving struggles for domination with regard to material affluence and manifestations of material wealth, or the intellectual field, involving struggles with regard to knowledge. In the latter, contestation involves two groups, those who "reproduce and transmit legitimate bodies of knowledge versus those who invent new forms of knowledge [i. e. teachers versus researchers]." 25 This means that a field is a place of struggle over attempts to achieve domination or distinction, where individuals compete either to maintain or significantly change the distribution of capital among the participants. Bourdieu's ideas about social struggles are closely linked to his tripartite division of capital into three categories: economic (e. g., money, villas, jewelry), cultural (e. g., rank, status, taste, education, literary or philosophical pursuits), and symbolic (reputation, fame). This division takes into account the various material and non-material means by which individuals are defined and the ways they behave in society.26 In other words, his theory of capital offers a broad approach towards defining "wealth," by recognizing non-material assets as commodities capable of endowing the owner with the same,kind of distinction that material assets traditionally do. Individuals compete, or in Bourdieuian terms, struggle, in an attempt to acquire the most capital within the related field. For example, within the intellectual field individuals compete for the greatest amount of knowledge (or acknowledgement); in the economic field they strive to accrue the greatest amount of money. It is important to note that material objects, in the form of economic capital (e. g., an object

The EconomicsofWealth

21

of art or a piece of jewelry), or non-material assets, in the form of cultural capital (a night at the opera, education), alone possess no natural or intrinsic value. They acquire social value-that is, an ability to confer distinction upon an individual-only when chat object or activity is deemed "tasteful" by the dominant, "legitimate" culture or its spokesperson. 27 In other words, the specific nature of the object or activity is irrelevant so long as it is distinctive in relation to the non-distinctive, or vulgar; only when an object or activity is legitimized by the dominant culture does it come to possess the power to confer distinction upon an individual. As a spokesperson for the dominant culture, Statius' poetic discourse is precisely what endows the various forms of material and non-material wealth in the Silvaewith a deeper social meaning. He decodes for us these various types of wealth, imposing a precise interpretation that enables the reader to understand exactly how the addressee is distinguished from others who possess smaller amounts of capital. The value attached to forms of capital is thus related to social context and involves processes by which one type of capital can be converted into another. Fields are the contextual settings in which such conversion occurs. A relevant modern example from Western society is the acquisition of cultural capital in the form of education which, when converted or exchanged, may result in a lucrative career (especially outside of"academia''). A similar process occurs in Roman society where an expensive villa (indicative of substantial economic capital) may communicate a high amount of cultural capital, such as elegance or literary or philosophical pursuits. Likewise, money (economic capital) may buy an expensive piece of artwork that subsequently is converted into cultural and symbolic capital by advertising the owner's refined taste. Most importantly for our purposes, however, is the acquisition of symbolic capital (i. e., fame, reputation) which is attained when forms of economic and cultural capital are deliberately converted into symbolic capital through the act of display, publication, or some other exchange process. Before we can fully understand the function and implications of such a conversion, I must clarify exactly what the term "distinction" means. Though Bourdieu never explicitly defines the term, a close study of his theories suggests that it can be conceived as the culminationof a processof comparative-op-

positional differentiation, by which visib/,emanifestationsof ''taste," endowed with socialpower, and thus over time regardedas "kgitimate,"serve as the discriminatingmarkers.To put it more simply, because distinction is determined by an act of comparison or a set of comparisons, it implies an imagined outside viewer who can interpret manifestations of taste as distinctive (and thus "legitimate"), thereby endowing the owner with socially acknowledged distinction. Thus, at any given time, individuals who strive for distinction always

22

Nothing OrdinaryHere

imagine an "other"-an external audience-who will acknowledge their distinction through acts of decoding visible displays of (legitimate) taste. For example, a large, extravagant villa, decorated with the highest elegance, endows its owner with distinction only if there is some other, external viewer, imagined or real, who sees the villa and correctly decodes it as being tasteful rather than vulgar. The owner's success in distinguishing himself depends entirely on the "other's" ability to (correctly) interpret the manifest objects of material wealth in the way that the owner symbolically constructs them and intends them to be "read." In this process the viewer subconsciously compares the villa and its symbolic meaning to, say, an ordinary, small, unadorned insu/,a,with all of its (subsequently) negative associative values. In so doing, the viewer conjures up the related cultural values attached to the villa and the inferior apartment dwelling. Moreover, I equate my definition of distinction with Bourdieu's notion of symbolic capital since both require an external viewer to achieve meaning. Bourdieu specifically notes the necessity of external approval for the existence of symbolic capital: "The personal capital of 'fame' and 'popularity' based on the fact of being known and recognized in person . . . and also on the possession of a certain number of specific qualifications which are the condition of the acquisition and conservation of a 'good reputation,' is often the product of the reconversion of the capital of fame accumulated in other domains." 28 To reiterate, symbolic capital depends on the possession of large amounts of capital in other fields (economic, cultural) which, through a process of external recognition, is converted into fame and reputation, i. e., distinction. It is this symbolic capital, then, that I refer to as distinction.In terms of Statius' poetry, it is his poetic stylus that is largely responsible for this successful conversion and, therefore, the creation of distinction for his addressees. Naturally, it would be short-sighted co impose Bourdieu's theoretical examination of twentieth-century French class structure monolithically on Roman society of the first century AD. Certainly modern French society differs significantly in many respects from ancient Roman society, in terms of class structure, the extent of social mobility, and the promulgation of certain tastes. Bourdieu's own cultural habitus influences the construction of his hierarchical model: his theories in part reflect the biases inherent in the intellectually and culturally superior position in which he places himself and approaches his observational subjects. Moreover, Bourdieu's hierarchical scheme is not without its inconsistencies and problems. For example, it presupposes that every lower-class individual strives to imitate and encapsulate the tastes and fashions of the elite; Bourdieu downplays the possibility of regional or even class-specific tastes and fashions, in which lower classes

The Economicsof Wealth

23

could-and do--create their own tastes and fashions specific to their particular group. The significant role of pop culture, for example, is relatively neglected in his theoretical scheme. Thus, Bourdieu's model functions only on a vertical axis and ignores the possibility of a horizontal axis or even intertwined axes.29 His hierarchical scheme does, however, accurately apply to Rome, and, in particular, the imperial court that was largely responsible for the creation and perpetuation of certain tastes and fashions (most notably obvious, hairstyles); nevertheless, there did exist another type of cultural scheme. We cannot ignore the very real scenario that tastes and fashions existed independently from those of the imperial court, both at a class level and a regional one. Despite the limited application of some of Bourdieu's theories in what follows, the eclectic narure of his work--combining linguistic, anthropological, philosophical, epistemological and sociological influences-exhibits a profoundly innovative integration. His unique methodological approach has led to application of his theories in a variety of disciplines. 30 His work on education and pedagogy 31 has found especial favor in the analysis of and application of educational systems. For example, Reay employed Bourdieu's notion of habitus,to consider the influence of parental involvement at home in children's educational success.32 Her examination of the relationship between home and school not only took into account gender differences, but also contemplated the creation of cultural capital (i. e., education) through various other forms of capital (money, time, art, etc.). Her conclusions have revealed, through a theoretical and applied method, the necessity and significance of parental involvement in primary education. 33 Further, Bourdieu's theories on the nature of taste and distinction arise specifically out of French society, but in many respects their fundamental basis correlates to a variety of cultures and societies. D. Robinson, for example, has employed Bourdieu's theories to investigate the interrelationship between French colonialism and Islam in Senegal and Mauritania. 34 His historical-anthropological study considered the role of Muslim Sufi orders on the colonial economy, and incorporated Bourdieu's concept of capital as a structural framework for examining the economic and social dynamics of the region. He followed Bourdieu's tripartite division of capital, identifying food crops, farm land, and animals as forms of economic capital, "networks of relationships and skills" as cultural capital (which he terms "social" capital), and symbolic capital as the "accumulation of prestige." 35 For Robinson, symbolic capital more specifically refers to the "traditional and Islamic aristocracies," but he also applies it to the "French administration to the extent that it developed a reputation for working with Muslim societies ... and the Muslim traders who became emissaries for the compatibility of their faith with European rule." 36 True to Bourdieu,

24

Nothing OrdinaryHere

Robinson incorporates the notion of capital conversion, illustrating the significance of conversions from symbolic to economic, and highlighting the importance of various conversions with regard to the changing societal values of the local communities; he thereby further employs Bourdieu to consider the role of capital conversion with the politics of the region. Regardless of the specifics of time and geography, Bourdieu's theories are applicable, to a wide variety of subject matter, not necessarily as a model to which scholars should ferociously adhere, but, to be used as Robinson and Reay have done, as a theoretical framework that offers a novel way to approach the social dynamics of any given society, at any point in time. Only recently, however, have Bourdieu's theories found their place in classical scholarship. Leach, for example, applied Bourdieu's notion of symbolic capital to examine the role of otium in Pliny the Younger's letters as a valuable form of personal capital and luxuria.37 Her reading of Pliny's letters was inspired in part by Bourdieu's evaluation oflanguage, status, and distinction in French society, theories discussed in both Languageand Symbolic 8 and Distinction.More recently, Corbeill's book on gesture in ancient Power3 Rome incorporates Bourdieu's formulations of habitus (more specifically, bodily hexis) to examine the interrelationship between the individual's upbringing and social environment with movement, and the impact of this interrelationship on social and political practices.39 Corbeill views habitus as comprising particularly useful concepts for studying the political dynamics of ancient Rome, as it offers "access to the beliefs and manners of largely inaccessible members of Roman society." Habitus thus permits an understanding of political competition in ancient Rome not only in terms of speech, but also "bodily movement." 40 In another instance, in his Politicsof Latin Literature, Habinek employs Bourdieu's notion of symbolic capital in a lengthy discussion of the significant role of Greek literature and learning among the cultured Roman elite.41 Habinek's identification of literature as a type of symbolic capital chat "carries with it various sorts of power" also recognizes literature as a valuable type of non-material wealth in Roman society.42 Additionally, Bourdieu's notion of symbolic capital is incorporated in Bowditch's recent work on Horace's Odesand Epistles,which explores issues of gift exchange between Horace and Maecenas. Her use of Bourdieu (and other contemporary theory) redefines traditional conceptions of patronage. 43 However, one of the most well-known examples is, in my opinion, WallaceHadrill's use of Boudieu's theories chat allows him to illustrate the differentiations of space and decoration in Roman houses as markers of distinction and as the "direct product of Roman social relations."44 Specifically, WallaceHadrill uses as a model Bourdieu's study of the Berber house for considering

TheEconomics a/Wealth

25

gender differences within the Roman house as an "axis of differentiation" ;45 his assertion that "Roman domestic architecture is obsessively concerned with distinctions of social rank," exemplifies the strong influence of Bourdieu in his analysis.46 Despite such recent interest in the applicability of Bourdieu's theories to the ancient world, his thinking about taste and distinction have, as yet, not been fully realized. Nonetheless, he has much to offer in the analysis of ancient Roman society, not only in terms of physical structures, like houses, but also in non-material forms of distinction. Bourdieu's model of capital conversion provides a suitable framework for examining the dynamic role of distinction in first century AD Rome and for investigating the multifaceted system of status differentiation and capital acquisition. By employing some of his concepts, I hope to flesh out the more complex interrelationships between the various forms of material and non-material wealth and the formative role of literature in the creation and promulgation of distinction. Bourdieu's theories on distinction, or symbolic capital, are in fact particularly applicable to the rank- and status-driven stratified society of ancient Rome. His paradigm, which in his own analysis centers on the linguistically conservative French, is well-suited to Roman society which displays similar conservative practices; both societies have utilized language as a symbolic instrument in maintaining status distinctions and the hierarchy of culture. Moreover, because of the theoretical emphasis placed on symbolic capital in terms of Roman literature, Bourdieu's model works well for an analysis in which distinction is granted paramount status. The persistent desire of Romans for personal distinction is abundantly attested in literary sources, which confirm a generally assertive attitude towards status acquisition and social competition. Again and again, ancient Roman literature reflects a conscientious-even obsessive-pursuit of acquiring capital within various fields (economic, literary, political) arguably for the purpose of attaining significant symbolic capital. This well-documented desire for distinction presents a social reality in which status is highly dependent upon reputation, or the presence of an external audience that judges, determines, and even advertises an individual's worth. Because distinction consists of one form of capital which results from the conversion of another type of capital, it is the reflection of some asset, material or non-material. In other words, one is distinctive for something(s), just as Cicero acquired exceptional distinction for his oratorical abilities and political success. Moreover, because distinction, in the social capital sense, is essentially equivalent to fame, reputation, and consequently, status, it also varies in its longevity. One might possess a large degree of symbolic capital, but only for a short period, or conversely, one's distinction may be so great that it outlives

26

Nothing OrdinaryHere

the individual. Both notions apply to Statius and his ebbing and flowing reputation as a poet, as discussed above. Ancient Romans aimed for distinction during the course of their lives, when they could enjoy its rewards, buc even more important to them, they hoped for posthumous distinction in which their name would carry on after their death. This desire, of course, is evident in numerous facets of ancient life including funerary monuments and epitaphs, buildings, imagines,and other such physical memorials. Literature, however, was deemed not only one of the surest avenues for creating and promulgating distinction, but the best way to preserve it for posterity. Unlike physical objects which can crumble and disintegrate, literature was lasting, or at least had the potential to last ad infinitum. For example, in a letter co Vescricius Spurinna and Coccia, who have recently lost their son and for whom Pliny has composed a consolatio,the author asserts the primacy of his literary work over a physical memorial for the deceased (Ep. 3.10.6): ... difficile, sed tamen, ut scalptorem, ut picturem, qui filii vestri imaginem faceret, admoneretis, quid exprimere, quid emendare deberet, ita me quoque formate, regite, qui non fragilem et caducam, sed immor-

talem, ut vosputatis, efficiemconorefficere;quae hoe diuturnior erit, qua verior,melior,absolutiorfoerit. [ ... although it is difficult, nonetheless, in the same way you would advise a sculptor or artist, who was fashioning an image of your son, about what to feature and what to change, provide me with similar direction and guidelines; I aspire to create not something ephemeral or perishable, but something you hope will last forever. The more accurate, the more beautiful, the more perfected my consolatio,the longer-lasting it will be.]

Pliny is requesting, essentially, editorial feedback from the parents in order to ensure an accurate representation of their deceased son, particularly because he views his consolatioas one chat, once published, will forever encapsulate the child's image and preserve it for posterity. Literary production, therefore, becomes an essential factor in the creation and preservation of symbolic capital, occurring in two ways: 1) literature can be utilized as the vehicle for advertising other kinds of capital, not only those of the author, but, more usually, those of another individual, whose monetary wealth, philosophical adherences, or even literary expertise are publicly promoted; and 2) literature advertises the author's skill and thus serves as a kind of cultural capital in the form ofliterary expertise that, once published or disseminated, converts into a form of symbolic capital for the author. In the first case, literature can provide a lasting

The Economicsof Wealth

27

monument for an individual's symbolic capital by preserving its existence, even if the individual is himself no longer living. In the second case, one's own literary composition provides an avenue for acquiring and advertising distinction (distinguishing the author for his literary expertise), especially because this creation and acquisition are controlled by the author himself. In other words, the author can create a work with the primary goal of creating and immortalizing his distinction-an objective which supersedes the secondary goal of the literary purpose (e. g., history, satire, etc.). In the opening preface to his Bellum Catilinae,Sallust clearly states the value ofliterature in creating and preserving one's distinction (1.2-4): Sed nostra omnis vis in animo et corpore sita est; animi imperio, corporis servitio magis utimur; alterum nobis cum dis, alterum cum belvis commune est. Quo mihi rectius videtur ingeni quam virium opibus gloriam quaerere et, quoniam vita ipsa qua fruimur brevis est, memoriam nostri quam maxume longam efficere.Nam divitiarum et formae gloria fluxa atque fragilisest, virtus clara aeternaque habetur. [All our strength resides in the mind and body; when it comes to the mind, we rely on discipline, for the body, service.The former we share with the gods, the latter, with beasts. So it seems more reasonable to me to strive for glory by means of intellect rather than physicalstrength; and since the life we live is shore, it makes sense to secure as much as possible a long remembrance for ourselves. For, while the glory of riches and beauty is fleeting and ephemeral, intellectualexcellenceis considered distinctive and eternal.] Sallust's philosophizing introduces the moralizing undercurrent of the work, anticipating Catiline's subsequent desire for the ephemeral possessions of money and power that ulcimately lead to his demise. But Sallust's words also illustrate a conscious understanding of the greater value attached to literature-associated with virtus-rather than physical possessions-associated with divitiae-as a means for creating distinction and preserving one's memory for posterity. Like Herodotus, Sallust has also passed value judgment on the difference between material and non-material wealth, with literature being more lasting and thus assuring a more significant form of distinction (dara aeternaque).Although the Bellum Catilinaefocuses on Catiline, it aptly advertises Sallust's literary skill and other personal aspects, such as his moral uprightness. A significant aspect of literary production in the creation of distinction is self-fashioning, whether in the voice of an "I" or merely indirectly.

Nothing OrdinaryHere

28

Self-fashioning occurs in every literary genre, even those in which the authorial voice seems relatively quiet or absent. Style, literary expertise, and the presentation of ideas and opinions all contribute to the molding of an author's self-presentation. Even letters, which can sometimes appear unconscious or spontaneous depending on the nature of their purpose and form, nevertheless are always to some degree a reflection of the author's self-creation, crafted and molded with an eye to both the immediately intended, and potentially secondary, audience(s). 47 In a similar way, Ovid viewed his literary productions, the Metamorphosesand Ars Amatoria, as important types of cultural capital that ultimately constituted symbolic capital or distinction. The works illustrate the author's innovative literary skill, and Ovid himself recognizes their significance as a vehicle for the acquisition of distinction and immortality. The epilogue of his Metamorphoses (I 5.871-79) confidently asserts that his name and his poem will be immortal: Iamque opus exegi, quod nee Iovis ira nee ignis nee poterit ferrum nee edax abolere vetustas. cum volet, illa dies, quae nil nisi corporis huius ius habet, incerti spatium mihi finiat aevi: parte tamen meliore mei super alta perennis astra ferar, nomenque erit indelebile nostrum, quaque patet domitis Romana potentia terris, ore legar populi, perque omnia saecula fama, siquid habent veri vatum praesagia, vivam. [So now I have finished my work, which neither the wrath of Jupiter, nor fire nor steel, nor destructive time can efface. Whenever it wants, let that day, which has no power except over this body, bring to an end the unpredictable span oflife. Nevertheless, in the better part of my existence, I will be elevated high above the lofty stars, and my name will be indestructible. And wherever Roman dominion extends her power over conquered lands, I will be read by the mouths of men, and-if there is any truth to the prophecies of poets-I will live in fame throughout the ages.]

Ovid's success thus rests in the indelible continuance of his name throughout future generations (nomenqueerit indelebilenostrum);his choice of the adjective indelebilisis deliberately precise, suggesting the indestructible nature of his poetry-and his fame-in comparison to the perishable nature of physical monuments and possessions. Although Augustus ultimately stripped him of his physical possessions at Rome, the Emperor could not completely divest him of his name and distinction. Ovid's immortality rests solely on the fact

The Economicsof Wealth

29

that he will continue ro be read (orekgarpopu!t);and the repetition of the future tense (ferar,erit, legar,vivam) clearly points to his hoped-for longevity. Moreover, the emphatic placement of vivam at the end of the line and as the final word of the entire work underscores the poet's prediction of immortality, one that is further reinforced by being defined as a prophecy from the divinely-inspired vates. Although the Metamorphosesclearly contributed to the author's reputation, it was the Ars Amatoria that seemed to generate special fama for Ovid, making him both famous and infamous. In his Tristiaand Epistulaeex Ponto, for example, the recurring underlying theme of change and references to the Metamorphosesreflect his pride, but he also repeatedly notes the role of his Ars in contributing to his fame, popularity, and unfortunately for him, his exile. Although decrying the ill-repute that the Ars spurred in the eyes of Augustus, Ovid seems somewhat pleased with the enormity of the reaction the work ultimately inspired (Trist.2.5-8, 11-12): carminafecerunt, ut me cognoscere vellet omine nonfoustofemina virque meo: carmina fecerunt, uc me moresque notaret iam demi iussa Caesar ab Arte me ...

hoepretium curaevigilatorumquelaborum cepimus:ingenia estpoena repertameo. [my verses inspired both men and women to want to know me, an unlucky omen; for my verses made Caesar brand me and my ways by ordering my Arsto taken away from me .... this is the reward I received for my toil and painstaking efforts: this is the punishment found for my genius.]

Fully aware of his poetic genius, ic is the one thing that Ovid still possesses; even in exile, it is the one thing that Augustus could not take away from him. 48 Thus, for Ovid, and many other Roman authors, literary production became an important form of distinction through which the world learned their names. Clearly one's own literary production is an important vehicle for acquiring distinction. Some literary works are naturally more autobiographical in nature; authors can freely mold their own persona, carefully crafting their image with an eye to audience reception, shaping a portrait by which to be remembered. Caesar's Bellum Civile,Ovid's Tristia(e. g., 4.1 O)and Epistulaeex Ponto, or even Statius' Silvae5.3 and 5.5 represent the ways in which authors can integrate autobiography within the context of other genres (e. g., history, letters, or poetry, respectively). We have few extant examples of autobiography proper,

30

Nothing OrdinaryHere

and while the ancients did write autobiography, they did not necessarily distinguish this genre in the same way and in the same narrow confines that we do today: "the letters, speeches, commentaries ... and accounts of journeys performed functions which can only be called autobiographical." 49 Moreover, the ancients did recognize inherent problems in the genre. One particularly (in)famous letter from Cicero's corpus exemplifies such issues. The rather unabashed letter to Lucceius (Ad Fam. 5.12), professes great embarrassment-albeit feigned-in requesting the addressee to compose an historical monograph on the orator's life. The precise reason for the request is to gain immortal distinction (5.12.1 ): Ardeo cupiditate incredibili neque, ut ego arbitror, reprehendenda nomen ut nostrum scriptis illustretur et celebretur tuis. Quod etsi mihi saepe ostendisti te esse facturum, tamen ignoscas velim huic festinationi meae. genus enim scriptorum tuorum, etsi erat semper a me vehementer exspectatum, tamen vicit opinionem meam meque ita vel cepit vel incendit ut cuperem quam celerrime res nostras monumentis commendari tuis. neque enim me solum commemoratioposteritatisac spesquaedam im-

mortalitatisrapitsed etiam illa cupiditasut vel auctoritatetestimonitui vel indicio benevolentiaevel suavitateingeni viv peifruamur. [I am enflamed with an unbelievable desire and one not blameworthy (or so I believe), namely that my name be celebrated and extolled in your work. Although you have often mentioned to me your intent to follow through, nonetheless please pardon my impatience. The technique of your work, although I always firmly anticipated it, nonetheless has exceeded my hopes and has so inspired, or rather captivated, me that I want my accomplishments to be committed to your history as quickly as possible. Not only do the approval of future generations and a certain hope for immortality spur on my request, but also the desire that, while still alive, I can enjoy your authoritative account, or the token of your kindness, or the quality of your genius.)

It is impossible to ignore the sense of urgency in the request, communicated not only explicitly, but also by the choice of vocabulary (ardeo,cupiditas,vehementer, quam celerrime).Cicero's demand illustrates a desire commonly shared among nearly all Romans, namely immortality, and his insistence that the request be fulfilled during his lifetime exhibits just how valued distinction was. Cicero attributes his strong request and the immediacy of publication to a desire to witness the publication of Lucceius' literary skill-an obvious captatiobenevolentiae-yet, the real reason has more to do with control. Cicero wants to ensure before he dies his own literary immortality

The Economicsof Wealth

31

through a legitimate, authoritative author and genre: historian and history. Lucceius' history of Cicero's accomplishment is meant to serve as a lasting monument (monumentis) to the orator's success, particularly his crowning achievement, the overthrow of the Catalinarian conspiracy. Literature, particularly the genre of history, is recognized as an appropriate medium for the preservation of accomplishments, but more importantly, self-glorification is avoided when praise comes from another's stylus. In fact, one of Cicero's arguments of persuasion to Lucceius points to the many intrinsic problems of autobiography (5.12.8): ... cogar fortasse facere quod non nulli saepe reprehendunt: scribamipse de me, multorum tamen exemplo et clarorum virorum. sed, quod te non fugit, haec sunt in hoe genere vitia: et verecundius ipsi de sese scribant necesse est si quid est laudandum et praetereant si quid reprehendendum est. accedit etiam uc minor sitfides, minor auctoritas,multi denique reprehendant et dicant verecundiores esse praecones ludorum gymnicorum, qui cum ceteris coronas imposuerint victoribus eorumque nomina magna voce pronuntiarint, cum ipsi ante ludorum missionem corona donentur, alium praeconem adhibeant, ne sua vocc se ipsi victores esse praedicent. [ ... [if you do not comply] I will be forced to do what many people criticize: I will have to write my own autobiography, something done by many illustrious men before me. But you are fully aware there are many disadvantages to this genre; when men write about themselves they must write more reservedly on the things deserving praise and dismiss the things worthy of blame. Further, this type of composition tends to have less credibility and authority; many censure it and claim that the announcers at the games are humbler since, when they have crowned other victors they broadcast their names loudly, but when they themselves are crowned before the games end, they demand another announcer so as to avoid proclaiming themselves victors by their own mouth.]

Writing about oneself (ipse de me) raises questions about the truth (minor sit fides) of the account and undermines its authority (minor auctoritas). Cicero recognizes that an "objective" third-party author like Lucceius will provide auctoritas to his personal history regarding the Catilinarian conspiracy, and that Lucceius' reputation as a great historian will add greater legitimacy to Cicero's accomplishments. Thus, it is important for famous Romans both co write and to be written about. The genre of history constitutes the vehicle by which Cicero's cultural capital (rhetorical, political skills, etc.) is converted into a legitimized form of symbolic. Although the proposed history, composed by

32

Nothing Ordinary Here

Lucceius, would seemingly represent an objective account of Cicero's involvement in the Catilinarian conspiracy, the history, had it been written according to the specific request, would in no way be objective. The letter includes precise "suggestions" for the length, content, tone, and form, even sanctioning exaggerated enthusiasm over truth, to benefit the portrait of Cicero. 50 The request also illustrates the importance given to the acquisition of symbolic capital within a legitimate form (5.12.7): ... atque hoe praestantius mihi fuerit et ad laeticiam animi et ad memoriae dignitatem si in tua scripta pervenero quam si in ceterorum quod non ingenium mihi solum suppeditatum fuerit tuum, sicut 1imoleonti a Timaeo aut ab Herodoto Themistocli, sed etiam auctoritas clarissimi et spectatissimi viri et in rei publicae maximis gravissimisque causis cogniti atque in primis probati [ ... and it will be more advantageous both to my happiness and the honor of my memory ifl find a place in your history rather than that of others, since not only will your genius benefit me (as was the case for 1imeleon by Timaeus or Themistocles by Herodotus), but also the authority of a most renowned and public man, recognized and, especially, esteemed in the most important and influential affairs of the State.]

It is notable that Lucceius will acquire his own symbolic capital with Cicero as the subject of his history: "Moreover, I am not so foolish to request that I be eternally immortalized by an author unless he also achieve fame for his genius in commemorating me," (neque autem egosum ita demens ut me sempiternae gloriae per eum commendari velim qui non ipse quoque in me commendando propriam ingeni gloriam consequatur, 5.12.6). So, following Cicero's logic, Lucceius' distinction will ultimately be enhanced through literary production, and more specifically, with Cicero as the object of interest. The recognition that an objective, third-party author offers greater auctoritas in the creation and preservation of an individual's distinction explains the common request for poems celebrating specific events, poems dedicated to the individual, or even merely a named reference in a poem. Requests for poems or other literary works are not necessarily indicative of the requester's lack of literary expertise, (although this was certainly occasionally the case), but reflect the demand for a legitimate, authoritativeand seemingly more objective-product. The obsessive pursuit of distinction is not only prevalent in the purpose ofliterary production, but in all aspects of ancient Roman life.Distinction and its correlation, fame, were even powerful enough to incite wars, particularly

TheEconomicsofWealth

33

civil wars. Bourdieu ofren refers to struggles that occur between competing individuals within a given field, exactly the kind of competition for power exemplified by the actions of Caesar and Pompey. In defending his position in the BellumCivile,for example, Caesar himself attributes the causes of the civil war to the loss of prestige, or dignitas(I .9.2): ... sibi semper primam fuisse dignitatemvitaque potiorem. Doluisse se, quod populi Romani beneficium sibi per contumeliam ab inimicis extorqueretur ereptoque semenstri imperio in urbem retraheretur, cuius absentis rationem haberi proximis comitiis populus iussisset. [ ... prestige has always been first and foremost in importance to me, even more than life. I am grieved that the honor conferred upon me by the Roman people has been wrenched away concemptuously by my enemies, and that I was dragged back to Rome with the remaining six months of my command taken away-even though the people had approved that I be considered a candidate in absentiain the next election.]

The word dignitasrefers to status and distinction, 51 and Caesar's estimation of the value of dignitasas greater than life itself indicates the weight attached to this abstract non-material asset. So important is dignitas,that not unlike Achilles, Caesar considers it worthy enough to cause the death of his fellow Romans. Moreover, Caesar is consistent in his use of the term, employing it again in a similar context, to explain the cause of the war from Pompey's perspective. In elucidating an explanation for Pompey's decision to break off friendship ties with Caesar, the latter states (1.4.4-5): ipse Pompeius ab inimicis Caesaris incitatus, et quod neminem dignitate secum exaequari volebat, totum se ab eius amicitia averterat et cum communibus inimicis in gratiam redierat, quorum ipse maximam partem illo adfinitatis tempore iniunxerat Caesari. [Provoked by Caesar's enemies and because he wanted no one else to share equally in his prestige, Pompey alienated himself from Caesar and returned to friendly ties with their shared enemies, the greater part of which Caesar had acquired in his former affinity with Pompey.)

The struggle between the two men for domination in dignitas,clearly hinges on a desire for external recognition and reputation-assets which each man feels are precariously threatened by the other. Thus far, examples have come from the Republican and Augustan periods, yet the political changes that came with the onset of the Empire in no way diminished the desire for distinction. In fact, the new form of government

34

Nothing OrdinaryHere

may even have increased the desire for distinction; a rise in social and economic mobility blurred the previously rather solidified boundary markers in rank and status. Such mobility may have provoked a heightened desire to create and promote various types of distinction that would not only differentiate Romans who came from similar social backgrounds from one another (e. g., via occupation, economic affluence, other pursuits), but would also discriminate higher-ranked Romans from lower-ranked Romans or the wealthy from the poor (or for that matter, the very wealthy from the less wealthy). The process of distinction is thus multifaceted and can occur within a rather complex web of social and economic fields. Contemporaries and near contemporaries of Statius testify to the continued importance of symbolic capital as an essential component in the lives of most Romans who, in addition to physical monuments, sought various genres of literature as the avenue for advertising to contemporaries and preserving for posterity their deeds, accomplishments, monetary affluence, and other skills. Pliny's letters and Martial's epigrams, for example, not only display the literary talent of the authors, but also illustrate the various types of capital through which Romans of the first century AD sought distinction. Pliny himself seems highly attuned to the increasing trend of social mobility, and even seems to support and encourage it, at least at Rome; yet he also appears anxious to preserve social and cultural boundaries among the classes. For example, in a letter to Calestrius Tiro, Pliny applauds Tiro's governorship in Baetica, specifically congratulating him for preserving the "distinction and prestige of the orders" (discriminaordinum dignitatumque, 9.5.3). For Pliny, when such demarcations are thrown into disarray and blurred, "nothing is more unequal than equality itself" (nihil est ipsa aequalitateinaequalius).His clever word play makes the point clear, illustrating the importance that Romans placed on distinction, not only in terms of the individual, but also in terms of distinction among social groups and foreigners. Pliny's letters are marked by a driving obsession for the acquisition of symbolic capital. In a letter to Valerius Paulinus (9.3.1), he asserts what is for him the definition of the truly fortunate man, namely immortality (egobeatissimum

existimo,qui bonaemansuraeque famaepraesumptione perfruritur,certusqueposteritatiscumfotura gwria vivit). His Solonian-like ponderings lead him to identifyJama and gwriaas those abstract, intangible assets that are the ultimate ideal of Roman distinction or symbolic capital: a reputation that will outlast the mortal body. For Pliny, this kind of distinction includes various forms, including material wealth, public office, and most importantly, literary production. Indeed, the collection is the result of a carefully composed, and revised set ofletters arranged solely for the purpose of publication (c.£, Ep. 1.1). Thus, all the letters must be read with full consciousness of the author's underlying purpose.

The Economicsof Wealth

35

The letters are, in essence, Pliny's autobiography, compositions that showcase various aspects of his life in the capacity of public servant, friend, author, benefactor, philanthropist, etc. They constitute a high degree of self-fashioning, regardless of the subject, addressee, or context. They highlight the author's literary skill-one form of his cultural capital-but through their publication they convert the various forms of Pliny's cultural (philanthropy, education, oratory) and economic (villas, benefactions, investments) capital into symbolic capital-for him, the most valuable type. The superiority of symbolic capital over other types is illustrated in a letter to Caninius Rufus, whom Pliny urges to publish his works in order to achieve literary immortality (effingealiquid et ex-

cude,quod sit perpetuotuum. Nam reliqua rerum tuarum post te alium atque alium dominum sortientur:hoenumquam tuum desinetesse,si semelcoeperit.Scio, quem animum, quod horteringenium;tu modoenitere,ut tibi ipsesistanti, quanti videberisaliis, si tibi faeris, 1.3.4-5). Pliny's statement implies a greater value placed upon the non-material assets ofliterary composition and its resulting distinction before material assets (reliquarerumtuarum) which are ephemeral and may only offer transient fame. This same idea is reinforced by Martial who, in Epigram 5.13, draws a sharp differentiation between the distinction derived from material wealth and that from literary production: Sum, fateor, semperque fui, Callistrate, pauper, sed non obscurus nee male notus eques, sed toto legor orbe frequens et dicicur 'hie est,' 52 quodque cinis paucis hoe mihi vita dedit. at cua centenis incumbent tecta columnis, et libertinas area flagellat opes, magnaque Niliacae servit tibi gleba Syenes, tonder et innumeros Gallica Parmagreges. hoe ego ruque sumus: sed quod sum, non pores esse: tu quod es, e populo quilibet esse potest. [I admit I'm a poor man, Callisrracus. I always have been. I'm an equestrian, nor unknown or infamous. Rather, I am read all over the world and people say, "That's him." Life has given me what death gives only to a few. Your roof is supported by a hundred columns and your money chest whips up (i. e., increases) freedman wealth, while incalculable acres of the Nile's Syene maintain your wealth and Gallic Parma shears your countless sheep. That's who you are, and I am who I am. Bur what I am you cannot be: what you are, any ordinary person can be.]

Although a non-material asset, Marcial estimates literary production and its resulting distinction as far more valuable, precisely because it allows his fame

Nothing OrdinaryHere

36

to be known throughout the world (toto l.egororbefrequens et dicitur 'hie est). The epigram also attests to the growing economic wealth of freedmen and many Romans in general; and while economic capital is much more accessible to a broad range of individuals (despite social class), literary distinction is afforded to only a select, talented few (tu quo des,epopuw quilibet essepotest). Moreover, like Pliny, Martial also urges his friends and acquaintances to publish their work in order to acquire distinction for their skills (Ep. 1.25): Ede cuos tandem populo, Faustine, libellos et cultum docto pectore profer opus, quod nee Cecropiae damnent Pandionis arces nee sileant nostri praetereantque senes. ante fores stantem dubitas admittere Farnam teque piget curae praemia ferre tuae? post te victurae per re quoque vivere chartae incipiant: cineri gloria sera venit. [Once and for all, publish your little books, Faustinus. Offer up that work of yours, refined by your learned intellect which the Cecropian citadel of Athens would not reject nor would our forefathers pass over or ignore. Why do you hesitate to welcome Fame, who is standing right at the threshold? Why arc you slow to reap the rewards of your efforts? No doubt your pages will outlast you, but let them also begin to come to life through you. Too late does glory come to the grave.] Martial insists that Faustinus' publication will achieve distinction for him while he is alive, and immortal distinction for him after his death. Further, it is likely that Faustinus' reputation is enhanced by his named inclusion in Martial's work. In addition to supporting the promotion of distinction for their addressees, both Martial and Pliny are consciously aware of their own goal for distinction and ultimately immortality. As authors, Pliny and Martial's distinction resides in their literary production, the letters and epigrams respectively. Pliny ponders his path towards literary immortality, which he hopes co achieve not only through the letters and his published speeches, but also through other genres, such as history. In a response letter to Titinius Capito, who has encouraged him to write a history, Pliny exhibits approval of the suggestion, primarily because of the lasting distinction he would receive through this superior genre (5.8.1-3): ... sed quia mihi pulchrum in primis videtur non pati occidere,quibus aeternitas debeatur, aliorumque famarn cum sua extendere. Me autem nihil

The Economicsof Wealth

37

aequeacdiuturnitatisamoret cupido.sollicitat, reshominedignissima,eopraesertim,qui nulliussibi conscius culpaeposteritatismemoriamnon reformidet. ltaquediebusac noctibuscogito,"siqua me qWJquepossimtolkrehumo"id enim votomeosujficit,illudsupravotum "victorque virum volitareper ora."53 [ ... but because in my opinion it is especially honorable not to allow those who merit immortality to fade away, and to prolong the fame of others with our own. There is nothing that inspires me so much as the longing and desire for an eternal name-a most worthy goal, especially for the individual who, conscious of no personal fault, does not shun being remembered by future ages. And so, night and day I think to myself, "if I also should ever be able to rise from the earth," for that would satisfy my prayer; and "to flutter victorious upon the lips of men," would surpass it.]

We can infer, then, that Pliny's driving motivation for many of his activities, in particular, literary production, is the acquisition of a distinction that ensures hoped-for immortality. His statement recalls Cicero's request to Luccieus, and the words of both authors acknowledge the power of the genre of history for its ability to endow distinction upon the subject. Similarly, Marcial is conscious of his own distinction created by his literary skill, explicitly stated in Epigram 1.1: Hie est quern legis ille, quern requiris, toto notus in orbe Marcialis argutis epigrammaton libellis: cui, leccor scudiose, quad dedisci vivenci decus acque sencienci, rari pose cinceres habenc poecae. [Here is the man you read, the man you ask for: Marcial, known throughout the world for his little books of epigrams. The glory you, o diligent reader, have bestowed on him while he is still alive and breaching rarely befalls poets after they're dead and gone.)

The programmatic poem asserts that the author's fame is already established and that this reputation is characterized chiefly by his literary wit and the genre in which he writes. Even more, Martial acknowledges that che distinction he has received with the help of his readers is that which typically only befalls authors posthumously, a quip affirming the exceptional reputation he has acquired even before death. Thus, according to Martial, he has attained the kind of immortal distinction mortal men normally do not witness themselves-a rare (rari) feat indeed. This sentiment is repeated in

Nothing OrdinaryHere

38

Epigram 3.95 (ore legormulto notumqueper oppida nomen I non expectato dat mihifama rogo,7-8), where he also notes that his distinction is further legitimized and rewarded by the imperial court (praemia Laudatotribuit mihi Caesar uterque I natorumque dedit iura paterna trium, 5-6). Elsewhere, Martial asserts his general popularity and distinction through epigrams chastising Fidentinus for trying to pass off Martial's epigrams as his own (e. g., 1.29; 1.38, 1.53). Clearly, both Pliny and Martial sought distinction through their literary production, as did the individuals included in their works. Inclusion in Pliny's published letters or Martial's epigrams was certainly a significant vehicle by which the distinction of these named individuals could be promulgated in a more public manner; association with famous, prominent authors constituted an important element in the creation and enhancement of symbolic capital. Epigram 4.31, for example, illustrates this point perfectly. Here, Martial writes: "That you desire to be mentioned and read in my little books, and that this is some honor, let me never prosper if this is not very pleasing to me; and I do want to include you in my pages" (Quodcupisin nostrisdiciquekgique li-

bellisI et nonnullushonoscredituriste tibi, ne vakam si non resestgratissima nobisI et vow te chartisinseruissemeis, 1-4). The lines, when read with the rest of the poem, are rather sarcastic, but despite the tone, the epigram parallels a social reality in which mention by a famous author was a source of pride and distinction. Pliny's letter to Erucius Clarus (Ep. 1.16.4-5), a kind of recommendation letter, is entirely composed of an encomium on their mutual friend, Pompeius Saturninus, whose oratorical skills in court are just one of the forms of capital worthy of distinction. Pliny compares Saturninus' speeches with the excellence of older orators, and further elaborates upon Saturninus' literary virtuosity by which he possesses the ability to compose history and verses in the style of Catullus. 54 Finally, Pliny urges Erucius (and, of course the wider, public audience) to accept Saturninus into friendship and support his oratorical and literary pursuits. Saturninus would have been exceptionally pleased to be included in the corpus of the famous Roman. 55 The letter is reminiscent of Martial's Epigram1.7 in which the author asserts the superiority of Stella over Catullus by a comparison between Stella's dove and Catullus' sparrow: Stellae delicium mei Columba, Verona licet audience dicam, vicit, Maxime, Passerem Catulli. tanto Stella meus tuo Catullo quanta passere maior est columba.

The Economicsof Wealth

39

[My Stella's pet Dove, Maximus, (I'll say it even though Verona is listening) has outdone Catullus' Sparrow. My Stella is greater than your Catullus as much as a dove surpasses a sparrow.)

The authoritative pronouncement of Stella's superiority seems to place him in the grasp of a literary immortality that will surpass even his predecessor, Catullus. Similarly, in another of Pliny's letters, this time to Pompeius Falco (4.27), Pliny praises the literary skill of Semius Augurinus who recently gave a public recitation of his work. Pliny's letter provides written affirmation of Augurinus' talent, thereby creating distinction for him; even more, Pliny assures the poet greater distinction and success by quoting one of his poems within the letter, securing greater dissemination of Augurinus' talent (4.27. 5). Although literary production was obviously an important asset in attaining symbolic capital, other forms of capital were valued in the hopes of achieving distinction. Martial's Epigramspresent a wide array of the various forms of capital sought and displayed for the purpose of securing symbolic capital. EpigramI. I I I, for example, is a poem celebrating Regulus' wisdom, piety, and genius (sophia,pietasand ingenium),all of which are, according to Martial, already well-renowned but deserving of further acknowledgement through the poem and through the presentation of the book. Social class was also an important form of distinction, although Martial's comments on the overwhelming desire for social class improvement are generally sarcastic in tone. Epigram2.29 describes the person who dons the symbols of senatorial station, but who is in acmality a former slave. The sardonyx gems, purple gown, and crescent-buckled shoes all speak of the individual's economic wealth (since he can afford to purchase these expensive assets), but illustrate a deliberate attempt to advertise his (false) senatorial status. The act suggests that in Martial's day, economic affluence alone was not sufficient for distinction. In another epigram, Martial mocks Candid us' elaborate display of his impressive economic affluence whereby he attempts to distinguish himself through rare forms of manifestation including gold plates, murrine, and special-vintage wine (3.26): Praedia solushabes et solus,Candide, nummos, aurea solushabes, murrina solushabes, Massica solushabes et Opimi Caecuba solus, et cor solushabes, soluset ingenium. omnia solushabes-hoc me puta nolle negare-, uxorem sed habes, Candide, cum populo. [You alone have land, Candidus. You alone have money, you alone have gold, you alone have murrhine, you alone have Massie and Opimius'

Nothing OrdinaryHere

40

Caecuban wine, you alone have intellect, you alone have genius. You have everything-imagine that I don't wish to deny this-but your wife, Candidus, is not yours alone.] Of course, the anaphora of solus(an amazing nine occurrences) is meant to emphasize Candidus' material wealth in the form of expensive, special possessions, and heighten the effect of the concluding line, contrasting with the final word, popuw. Martial's joke, however, rests not only on Candidus' apparently "loose" wife, but on the notion that Candidus believes himself to be especially distinguished because of his extraordinary wealth. The repetition of solus underscores Candidus' pompous, pretentious belief that he alone is wealthy enough to acquire such rare and expensive possessions, when in fact such acquisitions are available to many other Romans who are equally, if not more, wealthy. Similarly, Epigram3.62 mocks Quintus, who purchases expensive material commodities such as special vintage wine, furniture, and silver: Centenis quod emis pueros et saepe ducenis, quod sub rege Numa condita vina bibis, quod constat decies tibi non spatiosa suppellex, libra quod argenci milia quinque rapit, aurea quod fundi pretio carruca paratur, quod pluris mula est quam domus empta tibi: haec animo credis magno te, Quince, parare? falleris:haec animus, Quince, pusillus emit. [You purchase slaves for a hundred thousand sesterceseach, often even two-hundred thousand; you drink wine bottled during Numa's reign; you spend a million on just a few pieces of furniture; a pound of silver sets you back five-thousand;for the price of a gilt carriageyou could have bought a farm, and for your mule, a house. Quincus, do you really think that these possessionssignify a great mind? You'remistaken: it's a mcager mind that bought them.] Martial's exaggerated reckoning of the purchase price of the goods, such as the mule for the price of a house, emphasizes the ridiculous nature of Quintus' exorbitant attempts to achieve distinction. The point is apcly concluded by the final lines that emphasize Quintus' indiscreet and flagrant flaunting of material wealth as his actions display neither discretion nor elegance. In other words, material wealth is one legitimate avenue for attaining distinction, but Quintus' inflated display of economic capital exhibits a lack of modicum characteristic of intelligence even if in pursuit of "legitimate" taste. Not all attempts

The Economicsof Wealth

41

at distinction, however, depend on economic capital. Epigram 3.38 mocks Sextus who has come to Rome precisely for the purpose of acquiring distinction through a variety of non-material methods. Sextus' attempt involves public display, including oratory (causas)and literary production (carmina),and in both cases he hopes to achieve the fame of Cicero or Ovid and Vergil. Martial's response in both cases indicates that Sextus not only is rather overly idealistic in his plans, but that he is not alone in his goals: "You're nuts: all the people you see here in icy cloaks are Nasos and Vergils" (insanis:omnesgelidis quicumque lacernisI sunt ibi, NasonesVergiliosque vides,9-10). Obviously, the pursuit of distinction was shared by many Romans seeking the benefits of its acquisition. Euergetics was another popular way, during imperial times, through which the economically affluent not only spent their money, but acquired distinction in the process. In a letter to his wife's grandfather, Calpurnius Fabatus, Pliny praises the addressee for his generous gift of a public colonnade, dedicated in name of Fabatus and his son. The monument publicizes Fabatus' economic capital, but just as important, as Pliny himself points out, it will offer a lasting memory of Fabatus' generosity (Gaudeoprimum tua gloria,cuiusad meparsali-

qua pro necessitudinenostraredundat;deindequod memoriamsocerimeipulcherrimis operibusvideoproferri, 5.11.2). It is also interesting to note chat Pliny understands that the benefaction enhances his own distinction by his familial relation with Fabatus. Euergetics was, to be sure, on the rise after the time of the Principate, particularly outside the capital city. Benefactors comprised not only the local magistrates ofltalian cities who were fulfilling their duties, but also private citizens, especially senators and their families "who continued to invest in their home cities."56 Pliny clearly belongs to this latter group and proudly writes of his euergetic activity in his letters. In addition to financially sponsoring the library at Comum (Ep. 1.8) and the education and maintenance of native boys and girls (Ep. 4.13, 7.18), he also provided the city with other financial sums (5.7), and a veristic Corinthian bronze statue of an old man for Comum's temple of Jupiter (3.6). With regard to the lasegift, Pliny commissioned for Annius Severus a marble pedestal on which to display the statue; his request exhibits one of the ways in which euergecic activity functioned, since Pliny gives instructions that the pedestal include "my name and public offices," (nomen meum honoresque).The statue publicizes its benefactor; the expensive material gift symbolizes the non-material, publicly beneficial quality of generosity. Benefactions were meant not only to enhance a city, but the benefactor as well. A surviving inscription (CIL 5.5262) further exemplifies this purpose. The fragment, now in Milan, evidently hung over the public baths in Comum which Pliny financially sponsored; the inscription tells of Pliny's other gifts to the city, his public

42

Nothing OrdinaryHere

honores,and the amount of money furnished for the baths, their decoration, and upkeep--again, a dear message meant to communicate wealth and, more importantly, generosity. In addition to benefactions to his native town, Pliny also built a temple at his own expense at Tifernum on Tiber (3.4, 4.1) nearby one of his villas, and furnished it with statues of previous emperors. In a letter to Trajan, Pliny asks the Emperor's permission to add a portrait statue ofTrajan to the collection at Tifernum's temple, a request granted by the Emperor (10.8). Undoubtedly, like the baths and statue at Comum, this temple would also have included an inscription identifying the benefactor, although this time not only would it illustrate Pliny's economic wealth and generosity, but also his loyalty to the Emperor. Clearly, euergetics is not only a way for the economically wealthy to disperse their capital, but a significant method for attaining distinction by displaying generosity and affluence through public gifts. These benefactors were not, as Lomas puts it, "so much looking to enhance their personal status in the tangible legal sense of social promotion to equestrian or senatorial rank," but instead were hoping to "maintain their own status and that of their city within the local hierarchy."57 What has been overlooked, however, is the important interaction between euergetics and literature. The letters which detail Pliny's benefactions are not intended merely to report or inform the addressee about the gift; because, as we know, Pliny's letters were carefully chosen and published himself (with the exception of the posthumous Book 10), we must view some letters as a deliberate attempt to further publicize his philanthropic activity. In other words, Pliny has textualized his benefaction, recreating the physical or monetary gift into a literary record which not only preserves the act of generosity when the structure itself may deteriorate, but it also advertises that act to a broader audience or to those who might otherwise not visit Comum or Tifernum. Nevertheless Epistle1.8, in which Pliny asks Pompeius Saturninus for advice on whether to publish che dedication speech given for his new library at Com um, illustrates some of the concerns Pliny experienced in considering the written publication of his euergetic generosity (1.8.5): quamquam huius cunctationis meae causae non tarn in scriptis quam in ipso materiae genere consistunt; est enim paulo quasi gloriosius et elatius; onerabit hoe modestiam noscram, eciamsi scilus (ipse fuerit pressus demissusque), propterea quod cogimur cum de munificentia parentum nostrorum tum de nostra disputare.

The EconomicsofWealth

43

[The chief reason for my hesitation lies not so much in my written version as in the nature of the subject matter; it could be construed as selfglorifying and boastful; this will encumber my sense of modesty, even if my pen is restrained and subdued, particularly because I must mention my relatives' benefaction as well as my own.]

The main concern, of course, is that the published speech may seem too ostentatious as a panegyric of himself (ita nunc in rationeedendiveremur,neforte

non aliorum utilitatibus, sedpropriaelaudi servissevideamur.Praetereameminimus, quanto maioreanimo honestatisfructus in conscientiaquam in Jama reponatur, 1.8.13-14). How much we can take this self-effacing, modest statement at face-value, is of course, debatable, considering that in the act of publishing the letter, Pliny in essence publishes many of the sentiments included in the original speech, and additionally fashions himself as truly generous and modest. The numerous letters throughout the collection that not only tell of Pliny's euergetic activity, but of his acts of monetary generosity such as gifts to friends (e. g., 1.19; 2.4; 3.21; 5.19; 6.3, 25, 32; 7.11; 8.2) are likewise meant to provide a literary record for posterity of his economic wealth, as well as, more importantly, his generosity and kindness. Publication ofletters of this sort reinforces Pliny's belief that literature is more lasting than physical monuments in the promotion and preservation of one's distinction. The above survey, brief and limited as it is, attempted to illustrate the importance of distinction as a driving motivator in Roman society throughout various periods of history. The examples from Martial and Pliny, who are both roughly the contemporaries of Statius, provide excellent corroborating evidence of the importance of symbolic capital in the first to second century AD. Statius, however, differs from Martial and Pliny not only in the nature of his literary genre, but in the way in which he deliberately formulates nearly every poem with an eye to creating and promulgating distinction for the addressee. He, above all, illustrates the universally recognized power ofliteracure in che formation of distinction for Romans of widely varying backgrounds, but who all hope to be distinguished in some form or another.

Chapter Two

Statius as Licensed Spokesperson

"You are cherished by heaven and its gods, Germanicus, (who can deny it?)." (Escaelo,dis es, Germanice,cordiI (quis neget?),1.4.4-5). 1 It is with chis confident assurance that Scatius addresses che Emperor Domitian. His remark, occurring within the poem dedicated to Rutilius Gallicus, is directed not only to the Emperor, but to a wider audience who is encouraged to accept Scacius'declaration about the Emperor's divine status. No different is the tone with which Scatius composes four poems expressly dedicated co the Emperor (1.1, 4.1, 4.2, 4.3) celebrating Domitian's military and monumental accomplishments. For example, Silvae 1.1, an ecphrasticpoem describing Domitian's equestrian statue, begins with a string of mythological comparisons; the horse is stronger, larger, and higher than the famed Trojan horse ( 11-15) and Mars' Thracian steed (18-21). Such mythological comparisons are typical of Stacian style; the bold statements confidently merge myth with reality, imparting to the Emperor a power over the timelessness of the mythical past, and a divine association with the gods. 2 Stacius' subsequent description of the horse authoritatively presents what may be considered the correct visual reading of the public monument, whereby we can thus comprehend the symbolic message communicated by its domineering physical position and interplay with neighboring temples (66-90). Statius' mythological and ecphrasticapproach drives a specific and deliberate characterization of the Emperor as a gentle yet commanding leader of Rome. The poet's final words, directed co Domitian himself, foretell the statue's physical permanence and thus the Emperor's stable, perpetual rule (91-107). This prophecy is introduced in the poem's opening lines that encourage us to see the equestrian statue as an all-encompassing, divinely-inspired colossus {1-3): "What is this mass, doubled in size by the colossal statue atop it, that stands embracing the Latin Forum? Did it fall from heaven a perfectly completed work?" (Quae superimpositomoks geminata co'-ossoI stat Latium compkxaforum? cae'-one peractumIjlu.xit opus?).The perfected nature

45

46

Nothing OrdinaryHere

of the statue which apparently descends from the heavens, is expressed by repeated questions designed to evoke wonder and amazement, the type of response we as readers are meant to experience. Significantly, it is the poet who predicts the Emperor's encounter with his deified family members. Statius' assurance boldly foretells Domitian's own deification and also indicates Statius' significant-and prophetic-role as the divinely inspired vates.It is no mere accident that such a bold assertion occurs not only in a poem to the Emperor, but in the first poem of the collection. Statius' poetic approach to other addressees is no less self-assured. It is quite striking indeed to find Statius addressing private individuals with the same degree of exuberance and sublimity as he does the Emperor. In the soteria to Rutilius Gallicus, the Prefect of the City and an equestrian of great military distinction and public prominence (1.4), Statius celebrates the addressee's return to health. More importantly, however, Statius aims at distinguishing Gallicus' extraordinary military service. He emphasizes the immensity of Gallicus' civic role in the opening lines by confirming the existence of the gods who sanction Gallicus' recovery: "Wow, you really do exist, gods, and Clotho does not spin out her thread ruthlessly. Kindly Astraea [i. e. Justice] distinguishes the faithful, and, reconciled with Jupiter, has returned; and Gallicus sees the stars he thought he might never look upon again" (Estis, io, superi, nee inexorabileClothoI volvit opus. videt a/ma pios AstraeaIovique I conciliataredit, dubitataque sideracernit I Gallicus,1-4). The phrase echoes Statius' similar address to Domitian quoted earlier that confirms the Emperor's godly nature. Jn both instances the poet displays an authority through which he can speak confidently about divine matters. Even more, Statius provides the "correct" historical interpretation of Gallicus' illness, which, he explains, arose not from disease or old age, but from pure exhaustion, a result of over-zealouspietas to the Emperor (53-56). Gallicus is so vital to the State that his illness necessitates a divine intervention from Asclepius and Apollo (58-114)-a creative and effective solution devised by the poet. In a manner similar to 1.1, in which the poet predicts Domitian's perpetual rule, Statius asserts the continuation of Gallicus' imperial service following his recovery (15-16): "Indeed he is alive and will remain so for a long time yet, gently administering the guardianship of Rome's peace" (quippe manet longumque aevo redeunte manebit I quem penes intrepidae mitis custodia Romae). It is with the same confidence that in the opening passage of Silvae 1.5, a poem describing the balneumof Claudius Etruscus-a man with servile background-Statius ceremonially commands the Muses, Apollo, and Bacchus to depart in favor of water nymphs (l-14); these goddesses offer a more appropriate source of inspiration necessary for the celebration of such a

Statius as LicensedSpokesperson

47

magnificent bath, and, as Statius strongly implies, suitable for Claudius' culrural refinement. It is indeed noteworthy that Statius successfully employs the same literary techniques and confident tone for private citizens of such varying backgrounds as he does for the Emperor, though examples such as these cited above have been largely responsible for assessments characterizing Statius' poetry as excessive in its flattery and conceits. However, if we look more closely at Statius' literary and cultural role in the context of his world, we find that his words are not slavish adulation, but assertive declarations carefully crafted and designed to convey the distinction of his addressees. The confident implicit and explicit appraisals of Oomitian's legitimate rule and cult say much about Statius' self-conscious awareness of his poetic powers-an awareness that carries over into his poetic treatment of private addressees. Statius' voice exudes a firm literary auctoritas,an understanding of his political and cultural surroundings and his place within this context. The voice of the poet-vates speaks loudly and dearly not only for Oomitian, but for other aspirants of distinction in Domitianic Rome. Statius' words are valid, accurate representations of Domitianic society, a point, as already noted in the introduction, first emphasized by Cancik in his study of Statius and the Domi tian "Kaiserkult."3 As an author who both represents and responds to the cultural milieu in which he writes, Statius serves-in Bourdieu's terminology-as a licensed spokesperson for the dominant language and culture headed and perpetuated by the emperor himself. On the most basic level, Statius' poetry reflects the material tastes and fashions of this dominant culture, as Cancik has duly noted. Moving a step beyond Cancik's initial appraisal, I characterize Statius as a tour guide, who escorts the reader through the poem and thereby seeks co control the responses and interpretations of his audience. Statius creates distinction for individuals who, in some poems, at first glance, may not seem particularly distinctive. This creation of distinction is precisely where Statius' poetic abilities lie. He can make the ordinary extraordinary, the indistinct distinguished. The authority of his voice is audible throughout all the poems, ringing loudly and dearly, and it exemplifies a conscious recognition of his social role as a poet of the times. Statius' literary confidence allows him to speak with conviction and credibility across broad social-class parameters. Our understanding and our acceptance of the validity of Statius' words nonetheless depend in large part upon our interpretation of the poet's role and status in the society about which he writes. Statius' literary auctoritas,as reflected in the examples above, implies not only imperial approval, but also a sanctioned legitimacy that endows his words with a power capable of exerting

48

Nothing OrdinaryHere

influence and conveying social meaning. It is thus imperative to consider how Statius served as 1) a legitimate-or what I term licensed4-spokesperson for the dominant Domitianic society, and 2) an interpreterand, concomitantly, 3) creatorof distinction. Statius should be viewed as a poet whose own public distinction, or symbolic capital-his voice ringing with auctoritas-was sought and recognized as a means of promoting and legitimizing the distinction of others. Once accepted and recognized as a licensed spokesperson, Statius' words acquire new significance and power. According to Bourdieu, a licensed spokesperson is inextricably linked to language; he speaks the "dominant language," that is, the official language of the state, which "imposes itself on the whole population as the only legitimate language."5 In other words, the dominant language is the form of the society's linguistic practices against which all other deviations (e. g., slang, accents, dialects, etc.) are measured and compared. 6 In Bourdieu's analysis of French society, differences in language reflect real social (class)differences by which upper-class aristocrats are identified not only with the dominant, and thus, legitimate language, but also with other markers of distinction divided according to categories of capital (discussed earlier in Chapter One); that is, those who possess competency in the dominant language tend to occupy the higher rungs of the social class order (i. e., the dominant culture) and also possess a large volume of other types of capital (economic, cultural, etc.). During the Republican period, for example, political and literary individuals such as aristocratic senators and equestrians contributed to the production of a licensed language, not only through practice, but also through traditional education, namely, legitimate forms of language (and culture) exemplified by oratory, rhetoric, and canonical Greek and Roman authors. Under the Empire, the dominant language and culture are espoused by the emperor himself and perpetuated through well-educated and literaryoriented individuals like Statius and other prominent authors. Though a direct correspondence between political activity and linguistic competence cenainly exists, not everyone need be politically active, nor for that matter exceptionally ranked, to speak the licensed language and exercise its corresponding culture. Moreover, increasing access to social mobility (primarily through economic wealth or literary production) during the imperial period allowed even those with servile antecedents to acquire some degree of competence in the licensed language and culture; thus we must tread cautiously in imposing too rigorously Bourdieu's class model upon that of ancient Rome. The specificity of the dominant language's form is not important; theoretically, it is not important whether the dominant language is identified with proper grammar, polysyllabic words, or complex sentences, so long as it remains relationally opposed to deviations from its form.

Statius as LicensedSpokesperson

49

It is differences in style and vocabulary-that is, a binary opposite to the dominant language-that define the dominant language as such. For instance, the dominant language may adopt a specific pronunciation, the use of one particular word over another, a more "formal" style over more "colloquial" types, thereby creating standards which encourage explicit comparison to deviations. Mispronunciations or dialectal differences imply a cultural inferiority, a foreignness, a station outside the realm of the dominant culture. Moreover, the dominant language acquires its authority through recognition by the whole population as the dominant and licensed language, and it is precisely through this acceptance that the language has the ability to impose its authority on others. Those who lack the ability to speak or understand the licensed language (i. e., who lack this linguistic cultural capital) are "excluded from the social domains in which this competence is required or are condemned to silence." 7 For instance, the cultural values reproduced and verbalized by the dominant language in specific literary contexts are significant factors in distinguishing linguistic (and cultural) competence; without such competence, allusions to cultural or other literary parallels within a text lose their significance and power. Statius' numerous mythological allusions and comparisons are meaningless without the cultural and linguistic competence capable of deciphering both the immediate meaning within the literary context, and the larger symbolic and cultural implications. A fitting example is Silvae 3.4, where Statius praises Pergamum, the birthplace of Earinus (Domitian's delicatus),a place that Statius asserts is even more blessed than Ida, the home of the mythological Ganymede (Pergame,pinifera mu/tumfeliciorIda, I ilia licetsacraep/,aceatsibi nube rapinae, 3.4.12-13). The comparison requires a cultural familiarity with geography and mythology in order to understand the implicit equation that Statius makes between Earinus and Ganymede. Statius' remark elevates the boy beyond mortality to timeless myth and, even more, reinforces Domitian's association as the earthly Jupiter. Similar mythological declarations abound throughout the Silvae, and should not be superficially regarded as only stylistic tendencies, as many scholars have been apt to do, but as examples of Statius' literary auctoritas, through which he purposefully asserts deliberate meanings and characterizations for his addressees. Statius is prone to these kinds of allusions that require extensive geographical and/or mythological knowledge on the part of the reader. His references to specific marbles, for example, are presented by geographical or mythological aetia, requiring not only a precise understanding of geography and myth, but also a cultural knowledge of the material objects to which the otherwise ambiguous allusions refer. The form (i. e., structure and style) and content of Statius' poetic discourse, then, reflect both the dominant language

50

Nothing OrdinaryHere

and its accompanying dominant culture. Statius supplies cultural meaning and also assumes for his audience a comprehension of the licensed languagetwo factors upon which the success of his poems relies. Statius' declarations about Domitian's equusor Gallicus' pietas reflect his sense of authority; the poet speaks the "discourse of authority," i. e., in a legitimate, sanctioned competence. Poets like Statius are authorized to speak the dominant language and to use it on formal occasions; it is a form of discourse that reflects "authorized, authoritative language, speech that is accredited, worthy of being believed, or, in a word, performative, claiming (with the greatest chances of success) to be effective."8 Without the external recognition of authority, words are powerless. Like the skeptronin Homer that symbolically endows the speaker with the authority to speak and be heard, this authority comes from an outside source. An enlisted soldier can no more effectively mobilize and command troops than a private citizen can declare war. The licensed spokesperson is thus capable of the performative utterance, recognized and socially sanctioned and, as such, powerful enough to institute "a legitimate, that is, universally recognized, identity." 9 Just as, to continue the Homeric analogy, the orator's authority is mandated by the group, the licensed spokesperson also acquires his authority from another individual or group, and, in so doing, the spokesperson becomes an "agent capable of acting on the social world through words," equipped "withche signs and the insignia aimed at underlining the face chat he is not acting in his own name and under his own authority." 10 All poets may claim authority for their words in one way or another, yet not all can be called licensed spokespeople, endowed with a recognized, sanctioned power of words which can act directly upon their social world. 11 A literary dilettante, for example, may speak the dominant language, but may not have the legitimate power and the recognized authority to effect change or exert influence on his social world through performative utterance. 12 The auctoritaschat characterizes Statius' declarations about the Emperor and other addressees suggests that he is highly conscious of his possession of the dominant language and his ability to assert it legitimately; throughout the Silvae Scacius exhibits an awareness of the existing dominant language (and culture) which differentiates the culturally refined from the uncultured. As we have seen, Silvae 1.1 presents the authoritative interpretation of Domitian's equestrian statue, and it is Statius' ecphrasisthat provides this authoritative reading. Statius' comparison of Oomician's much taller monument to Caesar's inferior equestrian statue nearby, is designed to reinforce visually the marked difference in the two leaders' leadership and prominence. So clear is the distinction between the two that the individual who does not comprehend the

Statius as LicensedSpokesperson

51

physical symbolism of the monuments' spatial interplay should be considered uncultivated: "Who is so boorish that, when he looks at both stacues, does not agree that as much as the horses differ so too do the rulers atop them?" (quis rudis usqueadeoqui non, ut viderit ambos,I tantum dicat equosquantum distare regentes,89-90). Statius' cultured readers clearly are not included among such rudes;they speak the dominant language (i. e., they read or hear Statius' poetry) and at the same time they are educated through the poet's words. On the one hand, Statius' poem is a manifestation of the dominant language, but it also reinforces the dominant culture by providing the accompanying verbal commentary necessary for Domitian's statue to be interpreted appropriately and correctly. Statius' comment indicates not only that he knowingly separates himself from the uncultivated rudeswho do not speak the dominant language or comprehend its culture, but that his poem speaks to those who do. It is Statius, however, as his remark confidently implies, who makes the observer of the monument non rudis. In Silvae 4.5, a lyric ode to Septimius Severus, Statius asserts a comprehension of the dominant culture and language for the addressee who is not a native Roman. Here he includes a lengthy encomium on the addressee, which celebrates Severus' Romanitas ("Roman-ness") despite his North African origins. In addition to certain linguistic qualities, Severus displays other characteristics that make him nearly indistinguishable from native-born Romans

(45-50): non sermoPoentJS,non habicus tibi, externa non mens: !talus, !talus. sum Urbe Romanisque turmis, qui Libyam deceant alumni. est etfrementi vox hilarisfaro venalesed non eloquium tibi, [Your accent is not African nor is your appearance; and your way of chinking is not that of a foreigner. You are Italian, definitely Italian. There are those in Rome and within Roman squadrons who could more likely claim Libyan descent. Your cheerful voice is heard in the busy lawcourts of the forum, but your eloquence cannot be bought.]

Non sermo Poenus refers not to a foreign language, but to Severus' style of speaking and lack of accent. The phrase acknowledges the existence oflanguages that deviate from the accepted, recognized form of the dominant one. His everyday conversational speech (sermo) is not only pure, but in keeping with the licensed language of the dominant culture. 13 Clearly,

52

Nothing Ordinary Here

then, the licensed language applies not only to written forms of discourse, but also to everyday forms of speech, of which the latter was a readily identifiable marker of rank and background. 14 Severus lacks the dialectal variations that many North Africans exhibited in their Latin. By all appearances he seems co be a native-born speaker-an observation that Statius' assertions seek to validate and confirm. In both pronunciation and refinement, Severus exhibits competence in the legitimate language. Beyond differentiating between Severus' seemingly pure Larin and the Punic dialect, Statius emphasizes that even among fellow Romans, Severus displays an eloquence that can stand the test of the Roman forumnamely, his oratorical activity is one traditionally associated with upperclass Romans. Moreover, his cultural refinement is proven by his refusal to accept money for his services (venale non eloquium), unlike base pleaders or the notorious sophist. And his linguistic competence further correlates to familiarity with the dominant culture, since not only is Severus' linguistic practice purely Roman, but so too his dress and way of thinking (habitus, mens). In short, despite his origins, he appears a true Roman in every sense, which is really what matters. The fact that Scatius devotes six lines out of a total sixty to compliment Severus' Roman speech illustrates the importance Romans placed on the dominant language not only for its inherent value, but for its association with the correlating dominant culture. Rather paradoxically, Statius cleverly distinguishes his addressee by making him indistinguishable from other upper-class Romans, in effect by emphasizing Severus' commonality. In fact, the poem's purpose centers on Severus' linguistic competence and therefore his practice of the correlating dominant culture, an especially important form of distinction for North Africans against whom a general Roman prejudice regarding their education and cultural refinement was directed. 15 The dominant language is made up of a specific linguistic form that itself actively asserts and maintains a cultural superiority, somewhat similar to the modern day French Academie. The Romans' consciousness of the existence of a licensed language appears much earlier in several literary sources. Catullus 84, for instance, mocks Arrius, an impoverished orator of low birth with a tendency for overusing the aspirate (chommoda for commoda, hinsidias for insidias). Arrius' pronunciation is not an unintentional slip, but a conceited hypercorrect attempt at legitimate competency, a fact which Catullus both implies by the emphatic word placement of chommoda (as the first word of the poem) and explicitly states (quantum potuerat, 2). Arrius' practice stands in stark contrast to the accepted norms described by Cicero (Orator 160), and by Quintilian (Inst. 1.5.20), who stresses the sparing use (parcissime) of the aspirate as the legitimate pronunciation.

Statius as LicensedSpokesperson

53

Arrius' excessive use of the aspirate betrays simultaneously his misunderstanding of the dominant language and his humble origins; his enthusiastic desire to appear linguistically (and culturally) competent despite his social class standing, has thus resulted in hypercorrection. Catullus' poem, then, illustrates how an individual's habitusaffects linguistic competence; discrepancies between one's attempts at legitimate competence and one's actual possession of it were not only recognized but also ridiculed. The desire to overcompensate for low-birth or lack of cultural capital is not unusual. In Epistle27, Seneca offers the anecdote of Calvisius Sabinus, who "possesses both the purse and the mind of a freedman" (etpatrimonium

habebat Libertiniet ingenium: numquam vidi hominem beatum indecentius, 27.5). Though very rich, Sabinus lacks competence in the dominant language and the education and literary experience that would have otherwise provided this competence. In his desire to seem culturally refined (nihi/,ominuseruditus volebatviderz),Sabinus purchased, at an extraordinary price, a select group of slaves. They were ordered to serve as prompters at dinner parties, where Sabinus attempted to impress his friends by quoting from culturally-recognized legitimate authors (e. g., Homer and Vergil). However, his inability to produce the quotations correctly, even after being prompted, reveals his true, humble origins and conceited social airs, much to his guests' amusement. Economic wealth may have purchasing power, but it cannot compensate for one's low birth or lack of education. In another letter (Ep. 114) Seneca more explicitly illustrates his awareness of a licensed language and those who deviate from it. By drawing on examples from literary men, past and present, Seneca argues that language is inexorably intertwined with one's tenor of life (his habitus), in other words: ut vita sic oratio.16 Seneca acknowledges that many authors often deviate from the legitimate norm, as in the case of Sallust, whose unique style became the unfortunate model for other authors, such as L. Arruntius, who subsequently imitated Sallust's linguistic vitia (17) to the extreme (vides autem quid sequatur ubi alicui vitium pro exempw est, 18). Seneca expressly points to the existence at any given time of a recognized licensed language against which corruptions, both accidental and deliberate, are identified and criticized.17 There also appears to be a literary pretense for the dominant language and competence in it. In Satire l. 10 Horace decries not only unpolished literary works, but also chose written for the common crowd with an eye towards mass approval. He implies a disparity between a refined work (i. e., written in the dominant language) understood by only a linguistically competent audience and the common work, which only the ordinary, or even disreputable reader can understand (72-75):

54

Nothing OrdinaryHere saepe stilum vertas, iterum quae digna legi sine scripturus, neque te ut mirecur turba labores, contencus paucis lectoribus. an tua demens vilibus in lucis dictari carmina malis? [If you're going to write compositions worthy of a second-read, you'll have to erase often, and don't let the common mob read your work. Be content with just a few readers.Or do you stupidly prefer your poems to be recited in second-rate schools?]

Horace goes on to list the kind of readers he envisions for his carefully crafted poems in contrast to those he does not. The former group, all of whom represent the legitimate culture and competence in the dominant language are described as docti (87) and include Vergil, Maecenas, and Octavian, among others. In a binary opposition, Horace lists those for whom his works are not intended; these men appropriately enough are described in derogatory terms (cimex78, ineptus79) and do not possess the culture or learning (i. e., who are not legitimately competent) necessary for fully appreciating Horace's laborious efforts. 18 Language betrays social distinctions and is directly connected to social power. Nevertheless, language--eicher spoken or written-is not in and of itself distinctive, since every individual has the capacity to speak: "What is rare ... [is] the competence necessaryin order to speak the legitimate languagewhich, depending on social inheritance, re-translates social distinctions into the specificallysymbolic logic of differential deviations, or, in short, distinction." 19 Because competence in the legitimate language "can function as linguistic capital, producing a profit of distinction on the occasion of each social exchange," the study of Statius as a licensed spokesperson involves, in part, an analysis of the amount of his linguistic capital. 20 How did Statius acquire this capital and thereby become a licensed spokesperson? We have already seen some examples of his literary auctoritas;how did he come to possess this authority and in what other ways do his poems reflect this self-conscious assertion of his role as licensed spokesperson for Domitianic Rome? Since the acquisition of the licensed language, or linguistic capital, is a social phenomenon, bound up with an individual's habitus,21 we must begin with an examination of Statius' life, which serves as an appropriate starting point for the intersecting act of obtaining both cultural and linguistic capital. Statius himself is the best source for biographical information concerning his life and poetic production (see Silvae 3.5, 5.3, 5.5). Though subjective, and

Statius as LicensedSpokesperson

55

somewhat incomplete, he nonetheless provides us with an accurate glimpse of the educational upbringing that shaped his habitus. The gensPapinii may have been of equestrian rank, though Statius never refers to himself or his father as an eques,and this has been disputed. 22 From the limited evidence of our sources we can glean that his genswas not disreputable, although apparently constrained by finances (non tibi defarmesobscuri sanguinisortusI neesine Lucegenus, 5.3.116-117). Interestingly, Vollmer uses this line in part to assert a traditional form of literary patronage between Statius and his private addressees; he starts from the position, as already noted in the introduction, that "Statius war nicht reich," based upon Juvenal's testimony (7.82-88). The natural inclination is, from this starting point, to assume that the Muse is equivalent to livelihood or money.23 While Statius may not have been extraordinarily wealthy (however that may be defined in his day) his economic situation surely does not offer conclusive evidence for the motive of his literary production. Statius was born around AD 50 in Naples, 24 where he lived until sometime around 63, when his family moved to Rome. Yet, despite the relocation Statius remained deeply influenced by his Neapolitan origins, as witnessed not only by the Hellenistic form of his poetic art, but also by his own laudatory remarks on the city. For instance, in Silvae 3.5 he urges his wife Claudia to return with him to Naples, citing the area's fertility and refined elegance as compelling arguments to move. Unlike other poets (e. g., Horace) who may rhetorically praise their birthplaces, Statius had legitimate cause for boasting of Naples' cultural and literary superiority as a rival to even Rome itself. His hometown possessed all the symbolic accoutrements of culture, but was free of the noise, bustle, and annoyances experienced in Rome. 25 While extolling the cultural and intellectual attractions that the city has to offer, Statius depicts Naples and its environs as an elegantly refined smaller model of the capital. It boasts similar forms of culture: large walls that mimic those of Rome (76), many-columned temples (90), two cheaters (91), and an all around cosmopolitan spirit. According to Statius, Naples, though not the capital, has become the cultural center of the world, the example par excellenceof elegance and refinement: here the whole world flocks to its beaches on the Bay (75-76); the seasons are temperate (83); like Rome, the city administers justice, but without the quarrels of the Forum Romanum (87-88); nearby are the tourist spots: the Sybil's abode, Capri, Surrentine vineyards. The city combines the best of both worlds: Roman honos and Greek licentia (94). It is this "Greek-ness"-the city's heritage-which lends Naples its cultural distinction, and instilled within the young poet a sense of what was tasteful and elegant.

56

Nothing OrdinaryHere

Statius' elaborate praise of Naples in 3.5 and elsewhere (e. g., 1.2.260-65; 5.3.104-120) was by no means mere nostalgia for his beloved birthplace. The city prompted universal praise. As early as the second century BC Naples and its surrounding bay had acquired a reputation as a cultural center, a magnet for the wealthy, a place to see and be seen. Though his family was not especially wealthy,26 Statius would have witnessed first-hand the erection of numerous elaborately constructed villas around the Bay of Naples. From an early age he would have been introduced to an atmosphere of Greek philosophy and learning, as well as a spirit of lively literary competition encouraged by the establishment of the Neapolitan Games in AD 2, a festival rivaling the Capicoline games at Rome. 27 The city drew not only rich literary dilettantes, but also other professional poets of the time, and even the emperors themselves, all of whom Statius would have repeatedly seen. Thus Naples was already well-established symbolically as a literary center by Statius' time; after all, it was the burial spot of Vergil,28 whose shrine became not only a tourist attraction, but an object of devotion among Roman poets, in particular Silius Italicus (Mart. Ep. 11.48, 49) and Statius himself (4.4.51-55). As a literary city promoted by the emperors, Naples and its refined spirit would have fostered Statius' competence in the dominant language as a natural part of his upbringing, and the city was the center for many intellectual and literary professionals who lived and worked in the area and who also would have spoken the legitimate language. In addition, because it traditionally attracted many Greek inhabitants (especially literary and philosophical men who produced works in Greek) and fostered Hellenistic influences, Naples would have undoubtedly offered Statius an opportunity to become fluent in Greek. 29 There, in his most formative years, Statius was exposed not only to the high volume of economic capital consumed and materially advertised by the affluent, but also to the prevalent literary culture. There he was invested with the cultural capital of the literary elite. While undoubtedly these Neapolitan origins alone must have shaped Statius' social .outlook and poetic production, it was his father, a poet and teacher, who may have had the greatest impact on Statius' literary predilections and linguistic tendencies. 30 Although Statius' family could not boast of long-standing illustrious stock or exceptional wealth, it did indeed manage to distinguish itself through literary means. Stacius was immensely proud of his father's literary accomplishments and he devoted an entire poem (5.3) to honor him. He begins this epicedionby addressing his father in purely literary and pedagogical terms, calling him "preeminent father" (genitorpraedocte), and appealing for leniency, claiming that his poetic ability suffers without his father's presence (1-18). Later, by invoking the canonical representatives of

Statius as LicensedSpokesperson

57

various literary genres to join in bewailing his father's death, Statius affirms his father's literary versatility (5.3.100-103): omnia namque animo complexus es omnibus *usus31 qua fandi vis lata pater, sive orsa libebat Aoniis vincire modis seu voce soluta spargere et effreno nimbos aequare profatu. 32 [Your mind embraced all subjects, you employed all forms in which the latent power of speech is clear, whether it pleased you to enchain what you began within poetic measures, or shower it in prose and match cloudbursts (as Homer said) with utterance unbridled. 33]

Unlike other epicediaor conso/,ationes within the Silvae,where encomiagenerally enumerate a wide range of laudatory remarks on the life of the deceased, Statius' epicedionto his father focuses almost exclusively on literary and pedagogical activities. Statius has constructed his father's biography in a deliberate way, purposely designed to emphasize the literary skills of both father and son; in fact, Statius has employed the same methods used to distinguish his addressees in order to distinguish his father (and himself). Emphasis is placed on his father's literary capital--often a hereditary form of capital, as the poet deliberately implies. So great is the distinction derived from his literary skill that the Elder Statius could endow Naples itself with illustrious fame, had it not already possessed it (si tu stirpevacansJamaequeobscuraiaceresI nil gentile

tenens, illo te cive probabasI Graiam atque Euboico maiorum sanguineduci, 109-111). The assertion is rhetorically shrewd and strategically placed; it immediately precedes Statius' brief remarks on his family's gens and seeks to deemphasize lineage in favor ofliterary accomplishments. The family name may lack an illustrious heritage, but the literary distinction acquired by his father exceeds time-honored Homeric examples of eloquence (Nestor and Odysseus, 114-115). Even more, it is not Naples which is responsible for the Elder Statius' reputation, rather it is the poet who glorifies and enhances the already famous literary and cultural center. Following the post-Homeric tradition, both Velia and Naples justifiably vie for the right to be named the Elder Statius' patria (126-136). In this case, distinction of gens is surpassed by literary distinction. In addition to, or perhaps as a result of the distinction derived from literary competitions, the Elder Statius became a reputable grammaticus,first in Naples, and then in Rome, 34 after moving the family to the capital and educating, as Statius asserts, future Roman magistrates and religious leaders. Formal education is instrumental in the perpetuation of the licensed language. 35 The

58

Nothing OrdinaryHere

dominant language and its associated culture were reproduced not only through the teacher's active use of the licensed language within a pedagogical setting but, even more directly, through the study of canonical samples of oratory, rhetoric and literature that were offered as exempla worthy of aemu/,atio and imitatio. Statius' father was clearly recognized as a conveyer of the licensed language since it was into his care that parents entrusted their children's educational rearing. He seems to have had two separate careers, first in Naples where he taught young boys the customs and deeds of their forefathers (5.3.146-48), and later, at Rome where he provided young boys with the traditional Roman instruction (176-77); Statius is deliberate in stating that his father instructs the proceresof the future, educating Roman youth in religious rites, and providing the necessary cultural capital that allowed many students to become integral participants in Roman government and religion. Most tantalizing is a possible reference to Domitian himself as a pupil of the Elder Statius, an identification first suggested by Curcio and subsequently accepted by Traglia, Hardie, Jones, and Southern. 36 The lines in question refer to the education of the Dardaniusfacis exp/oratoropertae,I qui Diomedei celat penetralia furti, (5.3.178-79), a reference to the Roman Pontifex Maximus, in charge of the sacred fire in the temple of Vesta, brought over by the Trojan (Dardan) Aeneas. Statius' switch to the singular and specific from the previously plural and general proceresquefuturos has been interpreted as a deliberate reference to the Pontifex Maximus himself, Domitian. 37 The precision of meaning depends entirely on how we date the poem, whereby a later date of at least AD 81 reinforces an identification with the Emperor. But the difficulty in precise dating of the poems, particularly of Book 5, makes the identification tenuous and has thus provoked debate. 38 Given Vespasian's choice for his son's schooling, a connection between the Elder Statius and the future Emperor could indicate a relative measure of the family's reputation at Rome during this time, and would also suggest an earlier relationship between the younger Statius and Domitian. Despite the disputed question as to Domitian's schooling under the Elder Statius, other evidence suggests a connection between the Flavian family and the gens Papinii. Vespasian seems to have favored a poem which the Elder Statius composed on his role in the civil wars of AD 69, and the Emperor may have subsequently rewarded the poet with an Alban estate in as early as 70, where the Elder Statius was later buried at his death in 79. 39 This reward may further reinforce the idea that Vespasian had already cultivated a prior relationship with the poet through Domitian's schooling. In any event, the reference possibly links an imperial family member to Statius' family at least as early as 69 or 70.

Statius as LicemedSpokesperson

59

In addition to his father's career, Silvae 5.3 also depicts the kind of education Statius received and the nature of the influences that shaped him from his earliest, formative years. Statius' praise of his father's literary accomplishments is meant not only to honor the latter's memory, but to assert publicly his own literary heritage. The Elder Statius' possession of the accepted intellectual and linguistic capital-his reputation as a respected author and his public sanction to educate the Roman youth (and maybe even an imperial family member)-contributed considerably to Statius' own literary predilections. Silvae 5.3 is as much a self-asserted affirmation of Statius' own literary abilities as it is a poem about his father. Statius had not only the benefits of a Neapolitan environment to enhance his cultural development, but also the influences of Roman life and the literary skills of his father. This acquisition of combined cultural capital, encouraged and perpetuated through the family both consciously and subconsciously, would have been one of the primary components in the formulation of Statius' overall habitus. Statius himself recognizes how and to what degree his father and teacher influenced his reception of the dominant language and inspired his literary distinction. In a particularly striking passage, he deliberately distinguishes between his father's dual roles, noting that while the Elder Statius provided the essentials oflife-provisions provided by any parent-he also gave the gift of linguistic competence (5.3.211-214): nee enim mihi sidera cantum aequoraque et terras, quae mos debere parenti, sed decus hoe quodcumque lyrae primusque dedisti

non vulgareloqui etfamam speraresepulcro. [Not only did you give me the stars, the seas, and the lands, which every parent must provide, but you were the first to give me the gift of the lyre, and the first to teach me to speak elegantly and to strive for immortal fame.)

Statius' declaration of his acquisition of linguistic capital (non vulgarel.oqut) works perfectly with Bourdieu's theories. Statius draws attention not to the fact that his father taught him how to speak, but in what manner to speak: non vulgare.Statius' linguistic acquisition most likely included not only the study of renowned Greek and Roman authors, but the study and practice of rhetoric. The discipline of rhetoric which "amounted to a specialized dialect whose complexities and ties to the literature of the past gave it cultural authority," belonged to the cultural elite, and it "set one apart from one's social inferiors. "40 As Gleason elaborates, Statius' acquisition of the dominant language

60

Nothing OrdinaryHere

in which he was taught to speak "non vulgare''constitutes an essential element of his literary distinction. There is in his statement the implied existence of an inferior language that deviates, in a binary, relational opposition, from the accepted "norm" recognized as licensed.41 Statius commonly relies upon this form of litotes,particularly to emphasize an individual's special quality or distinction.42 The exact meaning of non vulgareis elucidated by the negative connotation suggested by the word vulgarewith its implied opposites, and is understood in connection to other similar instances where the term is used. The word is charged with social and cultural meaning and can be applied not only to people (as in the lower ranks, or common mob), but also to the material possessions and, significantly, linguistic tendencies of this group. 43 In Statius, the term occurs pejoratively, in opposition to a culturally or genetically superior position, often equivalent in meaning to plebeius. Other instances of the adjective's use in the Silvaeaccord with its meaning in this context and further clarify it. In 3.3.111-115 Statius praises Etrusca's distinguished genus, which he describes as nee vulgare (I 15). The exact meaning derives from comparison to her husband's humble freedman status, described earlier in the poem, and from the introductory line of the passage in which her genus is also described as sublime (I 11). It is her genus, sublime and nee vulgare,which succeeds in illuminating the overall reputation of the household thereby transforming it into one that is clarus:"Thus whatever was missing from his paternal bloodline was supplied by his mother's, and the household, rejoicing in the marriage, saw its obscurity grow bright," (sicquicquidpatrio cessatuma sanguine,mater I reddidit, obscurumque latus clarescere vidit I conubiogavisadomus, 119-21). In a similar context, Venus in Silvae 3.4 rescues Earinus from an ignoble servitude (iugum . .. vulgare,33-34), spiriting him away to the more distinguished household of the Emperor Domitian. Here references to alternative types of ordinary, common slavery, described in an equally pejorative manner (sordida tecta,33, and plebeia . .. iura 37-38) further elucidate vulgare.Any form of slavery is, of course, within the realm of vulgaris,and yet the point of the passage is to explain how Earinus' beauty-which is non vulgaris-merits an equally distinguished form of slavery. The boy, described earlier as "distinguished in his extraordinary beauty" (egregiaepraeclarumformae, 26) would be out of place in a domus vulgaris.While one may argue that there existed many different ways to speak non vulgare,Statius seems to have in mind the values represented by the implied polar opposites of vulgaris,such as clarus, sublimis, egregius,insignis.Thus, Statius stresses that his father taught him how to speak in a manner superior to that of the common or ordinary people (plebs),eloquently and with distinction, that is, non vulgare,or in other

Statius as LicensedSpokesperson

61

words, clare.Moreover, the juxtaposition of etfamam speraresepulcrowith non vulgarel.oquiin the same line (214), reinforces (and in typical Statian style, reiterates) exactly how Statius' extraordinary linguistic talent will culminate with his own literary immortality. The subsequent passage in 5.3 reinforces Statius' proficiency in the dominant language since it is precisely linguistic capital that facilitates his poetic competence, the second gift given by his father (i. e., the lyre). Even more, these gifts of cultural capital make possible his reputation, or symbolic capital. The conversion of cultural capital into symbolic attains its highest success in the tomb: non vulgarel.oquietfamam speraresepul.cro. This expectation of posthumous literary immortality is, of course, a literary topos,but Statius confidently suggests that his reputation both present and posthumous is grounded specifically in his linguistic competence, a competence first acquired through his father's instruction and successivelyhoned through the professional literary circuit in Naples and Rome where he was several times victorious (3.5.28-33; 5.3.225-33). Statius is clearly asserting a space for himself among his renowned literary predecessors, boldly foretelling not only literary success, but literary immortality. Through language-clare and egregi,e, i. e., non vulgare,-Statius himself becomes clarus. So far I have demonstrated that Statius claimed competence in the dominant language; yet this does not satisfactorily explain his role as a licensed spokesperson in Domitianic Rome. We should not be surprised to find a Roman author praising himself, even if such laudatory remarks are couched in the commendation of others or subtly woven throughout the work. Statius is attuned to his role as a professional poet and does not hesitate to emphasize his success, like Horace, himself a lyric poet. 44 Yet only external praise or recognition determines the status of a licensed spokesperson. This raises the question, at what point do others recognize Statius' words as "performative utterances," 45 capable of expressing social meaning and lending authoritative significance to his social context? On the one hand, the licensed spokesperson's authority must be officially mandated by an external source which possesses the power to sanction the speaker's words as authoritative and legitimate. It is this official source that often gives the speaker an authorized title or visible insignia symbolizing the endorsed sanction. On the other hand, a second external source, such as the wider populace, a social group, etc., must recognize and accept the speaker as a licensed spokesperson. This second external source does not provide power, but recognizes it by decoding the symbolic insignia that have been bestowed by the sanctioning force. Only when a poet is recognized as an authoritative voice do his words acquire force and become sought, precisely for the power and meaning only his words can convey to an audience. The process of legitimization and recognition of a spokesperson might be exemplified by our

62

Nothing OrdinaryHere

own culture in which social groups recognize the mandated authority possessed by a judge, a police officer, even a Pulitzer Prize winner through titles, a gavel, a badge, or other visible insignia. The fact that several of his addressees specifically commissioned poems illustrates that Statius was recognized as a licensed spokesperson by many Romans of his day. Nevertheless, commissions alone are not necessary to confirm one's identification as a licensed spokesperson; it is just as important that Statius' addressees-even those who received poems without soliciting them-recognize and accept him as a licensed spokesperson, whose words represent truth. This is especially true for the Emperor Domitian, who may not have specifically commissioned poems from Statius, but who may have been pleased and entirely accepting of those written for him and in his honor. Informal and formal recitationesprovided Statius with opportunities for both legitimization and recognition. Poetic victory crowns or titles, in some cases given by Domitian himself, served as symbolic insignia of imperial (or legitimate) approval; these visible or otherwise implied symbols provide the more general public a way in which to recognize Statius' role as a licensed spokesperson. Statius' success on the professional poetic circuit certainly would have enhanced this popular recognition. The fullest evidence ofStatius' external recognition as a popular and authoritative poet derives from his own works in which he formulates his persona as a professional poet. Although inherently biased, such evidence, when combined with external controls, can be successful in illustrating not only how Statius viewed himself within the literary context ofFlavian Rome-or rather, how he wished to be viewed-but in fact how others might have viewed him as well. Statius' victories at professional public games cannot be challenged as untrue. Whether or not Statius himself embellishes or overemphasizes these victories rhetorically is for our purposes immaterial; for, the fact remains that his poetry was legitimized by the external recognition of his worth. Statius' introduction to the literary world was early and must have been facilitated, at least in part, by his father's influence. Other forces, however, drew Statius into the literary sphere of Rome. His wife, Claudia, may have moved among literary circles, and her former husband seems to have been a professional poet himself (Silv.3.5.52-54). 46 Possible references to her literary interests corroborate this; here in Silvae 3.5 Statius' immediate purpose is to persuade Claudia to return with him to Naples, and he emphasizes his wife's prior loyalty with allusions to her editorial role in the composition of the Thebaid(33-36): tu procurrentia primis carmina nostra sonis totasque in murmure noctes

Statius as LicensedSpokesperson

63

aure rapis vigili; longi tu sola laboris conscia, cumque tuis crevit mea Thebais annis. [Late into the night you listened enraptured to the sounds of my nascent poem rushing forth in whispers; you alone understood my tedious efforts, and with your years my Thebaidgrew.] Vibius Maxim us, the addressee of a lyric ode (Silvae4. 7) and apparently a literary man himself, also played the part of editor for the Thebaid(4.7.25-28). 47 Statius was clearly well integrated in the Roman literary milieu. In the tradition of imitatio and aemulatio, Statius considers himself a competitive rival to the already recognized national poet laureate, Vergil. In the final lines of Thebaid Book 12, clearly written following previous recitationesof parts of the work, 48 Statius suggests an already growing popularity for his epic, laboriously written (multum vigilata, 811) over a period of 12 years

(812-19): iam certe praesens tibi Fama benignum stravit iter coepitque novam monstrare futuris. iam te magnanimus dignatur noscere Caesar, ltala iam studio discic memoracque iuvemus. vive, precor; nee tu divinam Aeneida tempca, sed longe sequere et vestigia semper adora. mox, cibi si quis adhuc praecendit nubile livor, occident, et meriti pose me referentur honores. [Alreadyyour present fame has paved a kindly way for you and initiates a new repute for future generations. By now high-minded Caesar deigns to know you, and Italy's schoolboys learn and memorize you by heart. Prosper, I pray; do not compete with the divine Aeneid,but follow from behind and always revere its steps. Soon, if any youthful envy still overshadows you, it will die away; and, after I am long gone, deserving accolades will ensue.]

Recitationesof portions of the poem have not just drawn attention to the poet and his work; they seem also to have inspired the Emperor's approval and, if we may believe Statius, the work had already been sanctioned as a school-text. The use of dignaturunderlines this approval, while the verbs discitand memorat underscore the possible pedagogical role of the poem, or at lease suggests its popularity as a commonly memorized piece. 49 The repeated use of iam suggests that the level of renown that the poem has already achieved prior to formal publication may be extraordinary. Moreover, line 817 deliberately recalls

64

Nothing OrdinaryHere

Aeneid2.7I0-I I (mihi parvus Iulus I sit comes,et Longeservetvestigiaconiunx); by cleverly reworking the Vergilian image, Statius acknowledges that his Thebaid is Aeneas' Creusa, which must stand back and venerate the Aeneid from afar-a traditional example of epic aemu/,atio.Nonetheless Statius implicitly draws a comparison between his own epic and Vergil's, hinting at a lasting immortality for his poem, possibly equal to that which the Aeneid had already achieved.50 Line 815 (lta/,a iam studio discit memoratque iuventus) suggests that Statius may in fact have in mind his own education, during which he memorized Vergil'sAeneid as part of his instruction. If so, he may be subtly inviting further comparison between the two poems, likening the progressive path of his epic with that of the Aeneid, and implying that the two (i. e., poets and their epics) may one day be on equal footing, an anticipation hinted at by the closing sentiment, beginning and ending with the emphatically placed mox and honores. At any rate, if Statius had not yet been confident enough to assert an explicitly competitive comparison between the Aeneid and the Thebaid in AD 92, it is clear that by the time Statius has published Book 4 of the Silvae51 the status and renown of the Thebaidhas been elevated enough for Statius to reconsider his and the poem's literary position. While in the closing lines of the Thebaid Statius instructs his epic nee tu divinam Aeneida tempta, three years later he asserts with greater confidence that his epic now legitimately challenges Vergil's masterpiece, as we saw in the poem to Vibius Maximus: "Indeed, with you as my steadfast advisor, my Thebaid,tortured by endless revision, competes with bold lyre for the joy Mantuan Vergil derived from his fame" (quippetefido monitorenostraI Thebaismulta cruciataLimaI temptat audacifide Mantuanae I gaudiafamae, 4.7.25-28.). In a similarly bold claim, at the beginning of the Achilleid, Statius implies that he will surpass even Homer, by filling out the myth of Achilles recounted only partially by the famous Greek master (I .3-7): quamquam acta viri multum inclita cantu Maeonio, sed plura vacant: nos ire per omnem -sic amor est-heroa velis Scyroque latentem Dulichia proferre tuba nee in Hectore tracto sistere, sed tota iuvenem deducere Troia. [Although many of Achilles' deeds have already been celebrated by Maeonian [i. e. Homer's) song, still more tales are left to tell: allow me to recount-for such is my goal-the whole story from beginning to end: to summon with Odysseus' trumpet the hero hiding on Scyros, and not

Statius as LicensedSpokesperson

65

to end with his dragging of Hector, but to escort the youth through the whole Trojan saga.]

Stacius' assertion that he is responsible for completing Homer's mythological account displays a profound self-assurance in poetic ability, perhaps a newly found confidence following wide praise of his Thebaid.52 This occurrence is not the sole occasion in the Silvae where Statius seemingly reevaluates and asserts himself as a Vergil redux. In Silvae 2.7, a hendecasyllabic poem honoring Lucan, Statius twice asserts the superiority of Lucan and his epic over that of Vergil and his Aeneid. He instructs Mantua not to challenge Lucan's Baetican birthplace, Corduba; 53 in a more explicit comparison, Statius asserts the pre-eminence of Lucan's poetic abilities over Vergil's, since Lucan began his compositions ac an age earlier than that at which Vergil composed his Cu/ex(73-74). Among a list of renowned Roman authors who are instructed to bow to Lucan {including Ennius, Lucretius and Ovid), Statius gives Lucan the ultimate honor of having Vergil's Aeneid bow as well: "What? I will say more: even the Aeneid itself will revere you as you sing to the Romans" (quid?maiusloquar:ipsate Latinis I Aeneisvenerabiturcanentem, 2.7.79-80). Statius, then, regards Lucan as the superior poet, and it is with him that Statius most directly aligns himself. Significantly, Lucan is the only other poet known to have written a group of poems entitled Silvae.54The exact nature of these poems is unclear, but it appears right, as Vollmer argues, 55 that Statius viewed Lucan's work as a model for his own, and chat Lucan's adlocutioad Pol/am,referred to by Scatius in 2.7.62-63, is the specific model for Statius' edogaad Claudiam (Silvae3.5). Moreover, Statius devotes an entire poem to Lucan (2.7) and not VergiJ.56 Other connections reveal Statius' attempts at creating a literary bond between himself and Lucan. In justifying the literary value of producing poetry traditionally inferior to heroic epic, Statius refers to the example of Vergil's Cukx, 57 an example chat Lucan uses in his own self-justification. 58 Lucanian influences on Stacius' cone, style, and artistic ideals have been noced,59while Scacius may have modeled his prose prefaces on similar prefaces composed by Lucan. 60There may also exist a more personal connection between the two authors, since according to some scholars, Polla, Lucan's wife, is also identified as the same woman who was remarried to Pollius Felix, the addressee of Silvae 2.2, and she herself had literary connections as the probable daughter of Marcus Argentarius, an epigrammatisc and rhetorician.61 In face, Statius refers to her in the poem as docta,a description chat alludes not just to her husband's but her own literary predilections. 62There is no doubt that Statius held Lucan in high esteem, a sentiment that he admits

66

Nothing OrdinaryHere

openly in 2praef. 22-26. 63 In asserting Lucan's superiority over Vergil, and, concomitantly expressing deep regard for the poet-in the form of reverentia, imitatio, and aemu/,atio,Statius clearly fashions himself on the literary side of Lucan, implying thereby that one day he too will surpass Vergil. While Lucan may have been the Vergil of his day, Statius is the Vergil of his own time. Statius' reevaluation of his epic within a three to four year period certainly suggests the work's growing fame, and in fact Statius may have had legitimate recourse to challenge the literary preeminence of the Aeneidwith his own poem. References to the reception of his epic poems like those mentioned above, along with the reception of the published Silvae,illustrate Statius' deep preoccupation with the idea ofliterary agonand the current and posthumous evaluation of his own position in literary history.64 Though Statius may have been justified in self-praise, both implicit and explicit, such /,audationes do not themselves provide absolute proof of his role as a licensed spokesperson. There is, however, external evidence that corroborates the argument. Recitationesof the Thebaid and other works (like Statius' now lost De Bello Germanico)would have played an especially significant role in both the initial establishment and subsequent perpetuation of fame and approval. 65 Given that Statius began composition of the Thebaidin AD 80, we can assume that recitationesof portions would have followed at least as early as the next couple of years which suggests that Statius may have acquired popularity among Roman audiences as early as 83 or so.66 Juvenal's famous commentary on Statius in Satire 7 attests to the popularity Statius seems to have enjoyed from recitationesof his Thebaid (7.82-88): curritur ad vocem iucundam et carmen amicae Thebaidos, laetam cum fecit Statius urbem promisitque diem: tanta dulcedine captos adficit ille animos tantaque libidine volgi auditur. Sed cum fregit subsellia versu esurit, intactam Paridi nisi vendit Agaven. [The city goes nuts at the pleasing voice and song ofThebes' best friend, Statius, when he gratifies Rome and marks a recital date on the calendar. Statius captivates their hearts with his sweet voice and the crowd can't get enough of him. But although he has mesmerized the audience, he'll starve unless he can sell his untouched Agave.]

Although Juvenal's poem cannot be dated to before AD 118, 67 Juvenal speaks from past personal experience, having served as an eyewitness to Statius' popularity, at least as far as his Thebaidwent; moreover, his comment

Statius as licensed Spokesperson

67

suggests chat the Thebaid remained relatively popular well after its initial release co the public some 20 years earlier. Even if Juvenal disapproved of Scatius' Agave,68 his language betrays a true respect for his epic work (iucundam, tanta dulcedine,tanta libidine).Juvenal, therefore, serves as a significant example attesting to an external audience chat recognizes Statius as a licensed spokesperson. Other forms of less subjective evidence exist. In particular, victory crowns or titles awarded to the winner of poetic competitions served as symbolic insignia of both official approval and wider recognition of the poet's legitimacy. A crown authoritatively and publicly pronounced the individual's preeminence and superiority, and indirectly would have promoted his literary status to a wider audience. The magnitude of these victories (and their corresponding symbolic insignia) to the poet himself is indicated by repeated literary references to the awards. Minor agonesmay not be worthy of mention, but renowned competitions, themselves symbolic of literary achievement, could receive a prominent place in the poet's work. 69 In Silvae 5.3, Statius provides a summary review of his career, in particular his poetic victories (and losses) (225-230). He begins with victories at the games at Naples, the Sebasta, sometimes called the Augustalia; unfortunately we have no way of dating such victories or identifying the works which brought the poet success. Hardie argues chat the list is presented partly in chronological order with the Alban games (227-229) listed before the Capicoline (229-230) in accordance with their schedule on the professional circuit. His interpretation works conveniently with his dating of the Capitoline Games at which Statius did not win, yet it does not satisfactorily incorporate the initial mention of the games at Naples, which Hardie lacer argues occurred after the Capicoline games.7° It is more likely, in my opinion, chat the games in Silvae5.3 are listed hierarchically, in increasing order according to the prominence and reputation of each. A victory at the Sebasta games, although not quite as prestigious, was by no means insignificant, and, in fact, before the institution of Domitian's Capitoline Games in AD 86, they were the only western rival to the four great games of Greece.71 Geer provides evidence from three inscriptions (/G 3.128; Ins. Oly. 232; IG 14.747) erected by victors who boast their wins in order of prestige. On these hierarchical lists, the Sebasta games show up as numbers 5, 6, and 8 respectively, outranked only by games in Greece, and surpassing as many as 80 victories at other games, some of which are not even specifically named-an indication of their relatively lower prestige.72 Strabo likewise provides evidence of the Sebasta's prestige, noting that the games were equal to the most distinguished ones held in Greece.73 Even more significant, the games at Naples were important enough to attract the attention of the Roman emperors

68

Nothing OrdinaryHere

themselves, including Augustus and Claudius.7 4 The Julian-Claudians were not alone in their attendance; the Flavian Titus seems to have presided twice over the games prior to his reign and dedicated a public building there in AD 80 or 81 when the games were probably held at a special time, presumably in honor of the Emperor.75 The presence of the Roman emperors, or at the very least their imperial associations, suggests that the games were officially recognized and sanctioned as a valuable literary, cultural, and even religious event. The notion that emperors officially commended victorious poets with symbolic insignia becomes more evident when we examine references to Statius' Alban victory in AD 90. It seems to have been a victory in which he took special pride, mentioning it on three separate occasions (3.5.28-31; 4.2.63-67; 5.3.27-29), and the subject matter of his winning poem was Domitian's double Dacian and German triumph of 89 (4.2.63-67). Statius' De Bello Germanico,of which we have only a brief fragment, is perhaps the very poem.76 Hardie favors a much earlier composition date around AD 83, closer to his proposed dramatic date, and he offers Domitian's Triumph of 83 (in honor of victory over the Chatti) as the impetus for the poem's creation. An earlier composition date for the De BelloGermanicomight suggest that the Emperor had already by this time recognized Statius as an authoritative spokesperson, approved for applauding and advertising the victory. 77 Regardless of whether or not we can identify the De Bello Germanicowith Statius' Alban victory, it is dear that the subject matter was political and public in nature, focused on the Emperor's exploits in Dacia and Germany, and that Statius was awarded the golden crown for his efforts. There is evidence that suggests Domitian himself was the judge at the games at his own Alban villa. Another contestant, P.Annius Florus, who also seems to have written about the Dacian Triumph, lost the contest, despite what the audience deemed an overwhelming victory. He blames the Emperor (invito quidem Caesareet resistentenon quod sibipuero invideret,sed ne Africa coronammagni Iovisattingeret).78 It is not clear whether Florus was a rival to Statius at the same Alban Games, but his complaint implies not only that topical material was a popular subject for Domitian's Alban games, but the choice of subject matter might have been driven, in part, by the fact that the Emperor adjudicated the competition. If so, as Coleman points out, the Emperor may be viewed as a kind of imperial patron, who, like his Flavian brother and father, encouraged the literary exploitation of positive imperial events "to compensate for their lack of historical tradition." 79 The way in which Statius describes his Alban victory also implies the Emperor's involvement in the judging, or at least, the final approval. In 5.3.227-229 he claims to have received the crown out ofDomitian's own hand (sertaCaesarea

Statius as LicensedSpokesperson

69

donata manu), while in 3.5.28-30 and 4.2.65-67 the terminology is nearly identical. The Latin may be metaphorical, but nevertheless suggests that in both cases the Emperor endows him with the symbolically significant wreath (3.5.29: sanctoque indutum Caesarisauro; 4.2.67: proelia Pal/,adiotua me manus induit auro).As officiator of the event, Domitian sanctifies Statius' victory in a symbolic act of placing the crown on his head. Statius' choice oflanguage alludes to the significance of the act: in placing the crown, the Emperor simultaneously authorizes the poet's words as legitimate, clothing him with distinction. The insignia (i. e., the crown) stands as a marker which, when decoded correctly, allows outsiders (the general populace, literary dilettantes, friends, etc.) to recognize and acknowledge the poet's authority. In so doing, they distinguish Statius from the other competitors (and other Romans) and accept him as a spokesperson of the dominant culture and its values. Domitian's institution of poetic contests (both the Alban and the Capitoline) suggests a personal interest in literature as well as a desire to patronize the arts, perhaps in attempts to employ poets in the process of Domitianic promotion. Coleman's seminal work on Domitian's relationship to literature not only revises previously-held views regarding literary oppression under the reign of Domitian, but successfully illustrates the Emperor's active role in the literary world. 80 This naturally calls into question our notions of "patronage" and "patron," and, while we cannot employ these terms in the same manner as for the Augustan reign, the evidence presented by Coleman indicates that the Emperor took a decidedly profound interest in literary activities.81 Some of his activities appear to stem from his own literary inclinations, such as the restoration oflibraries, while his devotion to the cult of Minerva also implies intellectual interests. 82 While both acts can be viewed as propagandistic, Suetonius reveals that Domitian's desire to replenish libraries destroyed by fire was sincere since he went to great lengths to find replacement volumes. 83 Other actions of his, however, may have been wholly motivated by politics. The institution of the Alban and Capitoline games might underscore the validity of Domitian's literary predilections, but the games also could have served to advertise Domitianic policy, military victories, and cult, or even to find suitable authors for espousing such subject material, as for example his double Dacian/German victory.84 If so, we can view Domitian as a literary sponsor who either explicitly commissioned works or approved of them once they had been written, yet before formal publication (e. g., in the libel/usstage).85 It is difficult to assess from Statius himself the precise role of Domitian in the creation of the poems. Although the manuscript transmits "ordered to hand over" (tradereiussum)at lpraef18-20 ("I was ordered by our most merciful leader to hand over these hundred versus which I composed on Domitian's

70

Nothing OrdinaryHere

equestrian statue following the very day on which he had dedicated the monufeci, indulgentissimoimperatori ment," centumhosversus,quosin ecummtJXimum posterodie quam dedicaveratopus, tradereiussum),which would dearly show Domitian's heavy-handed approach, the transmitted text is unlikely to be correct for reasons of style and content, as Hakanson and others have pointed out. 86 Rather, Statius likely wrote "I daredto hand over to our most gracious leader ... " (tradereausussum, as Sandstroem first conjectures and Courtney prints), which accords perfectly with his poetic inclinations and assertions of spontaneity, 87 and which allows us to make sense out of the imagined interlocutor's objection ("you could have seen it beforehand," potuistiillud et ante vidisse), which limps badly with the transmitted text. Thus we do not have a second Augustus, who issued non molliaiussato Vergil; instead we must look elsewhere for dues to Domitian's role in Statius' poetry. We find in 4praef.28-29 that Statius submitted poems to the Emperor, perhaps in private recitationesat the palace, well before formal publication and closer to the poems' dramatic dates. 88 This chronology follows the typical distribution of literary works at the time, which required that an author submit poem(s) to an addressee (and perhaps some friends) for feedback and approval, before releasing them to a wider audience. 89 Thus it also indicates a literary relationship between the two, and it makes no difference from what side the poems were initiated, since in either case it is dear that they received imperial sanction. Statius probably would not have formally published such poems if the Emperor had expressed disapproval beforehand. Many of the Silvae, especially those addressed to the Emperor, reflect, even publicize, the kind of messages that underscore Domitianic ideology.90 Such themes do not necessarily mean Statius was a slavish flatterer. Although his encomiaof the Emperor may seem hyperbolic, even disgraceful to modern tastes, such assessments often stem from a priori negative opinions of the Emperor. Statius' proDomitianic poems may provide a foil for such traditional interpretations, reflecting an alternate view of Domitian and his policies. Statius' approval of the Emperor is illustrated by appealing to traditional elements of panegyric and encomia,and should be seen not as self-debasement at the cost of imperial favor, but rather as an illustration of how a licensed spokesperson reflects and represents the dominant culture. Imperial praise does not undermine the underlying validity of the poet's words. It would be shortsighted to interpret the literary culture in Domitianic Rome as parallel to that during the reign of Augustus. There was no Maecenas, no established literary circle; unlike Augustus, Domitian took a more personal role in the literary world without an intermediary, and purposefully instituted literary games possibly for propaganda reasons. Domitian involved himself

Statiusas LicensedSpokesperson

71

more directly, and we may go so far as to suggest that he was more aggressive in his literary patronage. Beneficiagiven to Statius by Domitian also suggest the Emperor's active role in his approval of a licensed spokesperson. In 3.1.61-64, Statius mentions the gift of an improved water supply for his Alban villa (astego,Dardaniaequamvissub collibusAlbaeI rusproprium mag-

nique ducis mihi munerecurrensI unda domi curasmulcereaestusqueievare). There is no evidence for the specific impetus for Domitian's munus,but it may perhaps have followed Statius' Alban victory, given the connection of locations, i. e., the result, not the impetus of the poet's creation. Statius speaks with pride about this favor as well as a later distinction when he is invited by the Emperor to banquet. That Statius devotes an entire poem (4.2) to the event itself speaks of the relative degree of pride that Statius experienced in being singled out in such a way. Statius' self-publication of these acts of im91 suggests that they too served as a kind of insignia of the perial beneficia Emperor's favor towards the poet. 92 It is equally possible that Statius may have received imperial liberalitas in the form of money, even though he tactfully makes no mention of this kind of gift. Yet we should not jump to the conclusion that these instances of imperial beneficiawere the sole inspiration for the poems. As a professional poet Statius may have anticipated rewards-r even hoped for them. But we can hardly justify a conception of Statius' art whereby we envision the poet composing solely with the hopes of receiving payment, as if his poetic mentality would have allowed himself to debase his craft in such a manner. Worse yet, are we to expect Statius groveling at the feet of all his addressees? If he received payment it came from the poet's excellence in speaking for his times, and is not representative of slavish flattery. Statius, as we shall see, found distinction itself as the greatest reward for his poetic efforts. Moreover, we cannot discount the reciprocal nature of Statius' relationship with Domitian. While we may view his dinner invitation as purely an act of beneficiumon the part of the Emperor, such gift-exchange is not entirely one-sided. Roller's recent work on redefining the notion of patronage and gift-giving inspires the idea that perhaps Domitian also benefited from Statius' presence at the banquet, since such events force the guest into a "giftdebt," or expectation of reciprocity.93 Thus, in return for the Emperor's generosity, Statius might produce a poem celebrating the event (and the Emperor, of course), just as he might celebrate Vindex's Hercules or Claudius Etruscus' baineum following a similar invitation to dine. 94 Domitian may have had this expectation in mind when he invited Statius, particularly since it was not uncommon for an author to immortalize such an important event; in this regard, we might view Stacius as being valuable--if not more so-to the Emperor as the Emperor was to Statius.

72

Nothing OrdinaryHere

As already noted above, it is Statius' voice of auctoritas,in addition to autobiographical assertions outlined here, that especially reflect a self-consciousness about his literary and professional role, not only with regard to the Emperor, but to private individuals as well. The same kind of literary confidence that characterized Statius' equestrian encomiumreappears in Silvae 1.6. Statius' account of Domitian's Saturnalian festival, with its lengthy description of the edible and visual treats, celebrates not only the event itself, but more importantly, the Emperor's generosity, an assertion audaciously pronounced: "Let Jupiter summon rain-clouds over the earth and threaten showers on the broad fields, so long as these torrential storms are brought by our Jupiter" (ducat nubi/,aIuppiterper orbemI et /,atispluvias minetur agrisI dum nostri Iovis hi ferantur imbres, 25-27). The comparison makes a deliberate, forceful contrast between the threatening unpredictability of the king of gods and the kind beneficence of the Emperor whose "storms" comprise a generous deluge of gifts. Domitian's characterization is completed with Statius' bold command to ¼tustas (38-45), urging her to compare Jupiter's Golden Age with the renewed Golden Age initiated by Domitian, an age even more bountiful and in which the Emperor-not the earth-provides all necessities. Statius' poem, then, provides the legitimate, authoritative commentary to accompany the imperially-sanctioned Saturnalian games; in effect, Statius rewrites the event, communicating additional cultural and political meaning through a poetic discourse that further legitimizes the Emperor's character and beneficence. The auctoritaswith which Statius creates distinction for his addressees 95 He transforms visible material objects into especially applies to his ecphrases. verbalized licensed language that then corresponds to the dominant culture. In other words, Statius' ecphrasesassert his role as a licensed spokesperson by providing the necessary commentary to make otherwise meaningless material objects represent significant cultural values that reflect upon the owner. For instance, Statius' poetic approach in 4.2 is similar to that which we have already seen in 1.1; here Statius' description of Domitian's Palatine triclinium reflects not the mere words of a memorable recollection, but part of the poetic discourse of distinction, where descriptive words become symbolic agents of meaning. Statius' specific descriptions provide a cultural-and in the case of the Emperor, political-commentary that gives material objects social connotations. He thus translates the visual decorations of the room (the gilded ceiling, marble columns, etc.) into symbolic meaning that imparts distinction to the Emperor himself and promotes ideological messages of Domitian's reign;96 the ecphrasisof the room's lofty ceiling, supported by more than 100 columns, combined with numerous mythological allusions, communicate as

Statius as LicensedSpokesperson

73

many symbolic messages about the Emperor's divine grandeur and legitimate rule as visual details of the room itself. Statius clearly understands not only the symbolic role that decoration played, but in transferring them into poetic discourse, he illustrates an understanding of the symbolic possibilities of ecphrasis.In his analysis of Silvae4.2, Cancik is first to recognize this social value of Statius, whose description rounds out the scant archaeological remains of the Palatine triclinium;even more, however, Cancik implicitly agrees with the notion that Statius is a licensed spokesperson who could provide the "correct" accompanying commentary necessary for a full comprehension of the cultural meaning behind decorative markers: " ... der Bestimmung und Sinn dieses Bauwerkes kannte und sein Erlebnis als Dichter auszudriicken suchte." 97 The way in which Statius confidently exploits ecphrasisas pan of the dominant language to assert cultural meaning and define an addressee according to the dominant culture reflects a literary auctoritascapable of distinguishing the Emperor and private individuals with equal success. The biographical information that Statius himself provides, in addition to the less explicit voice of auctoritas,reveals that Statius fulfills the role of a licensed spokesperson as defined by Bourdieu. Moreover, with the sanction and approval of the Emperor, other individuals (like the addressees of the Silvae)also recognize and accept the poet as a spokesperson and therefore contribute to Statius' establishment as a literary and social poet for the dominant culture. Surely it is not mere coincidence that the majority of poems in Silvae 1-3 were composed in AD 90/91, immediately following the Alban victory. The common denominator among all the addressees is that each desired or welcomed an opportunity to see their lives immortalized by Statius. 98 The Alban victory, in conjunction with previous publicity, once and for all confirmed Stacius' role as a spokesperson for the dominant culture. le should not at all surprise us, then, that private individuals seeking their own kind of personal legitimization called upon an imperially sanctioned poet co publicize and celebrate their own distinction, in a manner and form similar to that which the Emperor himself received. The symbolic value with which Statius endows material objects through his poetic discourse is an important aspect in the creation of distinction for his addressees. Many material objects on their own reflect various values of the society, but Statius also deliberately exploits objects to communicate symbolic meanings otherwise not immediately apparent. Manifestations of material wealth reflect the tastes and fashions of the dominant culture and form a significant part of the licensed language that Statius speaks.The next chapter therefore examines specific material goods as they appear in the Silvaeand evaluates their relative values within their social context; only then is it possible to account fully for

74

Nothing OrdinaryHere

the role of material wealth as a type of vocabulary in Statius' discourse of distinction that imparts cultural and symbolic meaning upon the owner. It is hoped that the subsequent catalogue of material wealth-the first of its kind for Statius' Silvae-will serve as a valuable and useful reference tool for those interested in identifying examples of costly material goods characterizing the early Empire.

Chapter Three

MaterialWealthin the Silvae

As a spokesperson of the dominant language, Statius also speaks for the dominant culture in which material wealth functions as a discriminating social factor and covers a broad range of visible manifestations. Prior to Statius, nearly all of our textual evidence concerning material goods derives from a dearly marked tradition of moralizing that applied negative values to material objects, condemning visible manifestations of economic prosperity as symbols of declining moral standards in society. Reaching as far back as the Republic, to Lucretius and Horace, and continuing through the early empire, authors consistently reject "non-Roman" customs, including the accumulation of wealth and its ostentatious display. They vividly set out to combat, more Sallustiano,the intrusion of luxuria and avaritia. In his second speech against Catiline, for example, Cicero portrays Catiline and his followers as spendthrifts whose ostentatious expenditure and luxurious living differentiate them from the more restrained and responsible, and thus virtuous Romans (In Cat. 2.10). 1 The wealth of Catiline and many of his supporters is cast in terms of negative, amoral behavior, extreme and depraved. Their money misappropriated and misspent, becomes a visual symbol for their squandered talent and mishandling of their aristocratic station. By the mid-to-late first century AD, however, it is dear that abundant wealth was indeed an essential part of the dominant culture, and an even more essential force in visual display, as evidenced by the biographers of the Julio-Claudians. The rather reactionary stand of Seneca and Juvenal against sumptuous goods (indeed, for different reasons) arises precisely because they are fighting the dominant culture as they see it. Yet, regardless of the negative values applied by the Roman moralists-and even despite our own interpretive evaluation of such material objects-we must concede that these manifestations are representative of what the dominant culture valued as tasteful and fashionable. It is remarkable that, amidst so

75

76

Nothing OrdinaryHere

many moralizing attitudes towards material wealth, Statius' voice represents an abrupt divergence from this tradition. The specific kinds of material objects described in the Silvae are ones that appear in Domitian's Palatine palace and, significantly, in the villas of private citizens whose backgrounds range from patrician to servile. Extensive archaeological evidence also attests to the plethora of expensive goods described in the Silvae.The extraordinary universality of material objects exemplifies the power of the dominant culture. In many cases Domitian's endorsement of certain objects endows them with cultural value, sanctions them as symbols of taste and fashion, and thereby legitimizes them. But tastes and fashions are ever-changing and are not always created by a single individual authorized with the highest political power. Equally possible was the adoption of particular objects or styles by Romans of high status, who also represent the dominant culture. Once recognized as "fashionable" these material objects or styles become highly desirable, actively sought out by Romans of various ranks as a means of exerting their own form of social power (i. e., distinction). Material objects thus become not only status symbols, but powerful instruments in social mobility and self-promotion. As Habinek has rightly stated, "there was less practical motivation for an individual aristocrat to conceal his wealth and indeed much reason to display it, thereby advertising his own glory and that of his household, attracting clients and allies, and gaining a competitive edge over his peers." 2 Yet, as Habinek also notes, this desire for display, particularly as a competitive element in the pursuit of power and prestige, also led to internal strife among classes of society, a point illustrated by Cicero's condemnation of Catiline. Unlike many of his literary predecessors, however, Statius' description of material wealth lacks the moralizing attitude that traditionally discredits the importance of wealth in the creation of distinction and social mobility. His descriptions of material goods are an exceptionally significant component within his discourse of distinction-they form part of the vocabulary of the dominant language, which, as a licensed spokesperson, Statius speaks loudly and clearly. Moreover, Statius' celebration of material wealth in his poems illustrates the power ofliterature in the textualization of the visual and physical into symbols more lasting and wide-reaching. The Silvaeare social documents that, without the distractions of negative biases, demonstrate the tastes and fashions of Flavian material culture through which Romans leverage their material wealth to advance their personal distinction. Since, according to Bourdieu, the dominant culture is the standard by which all others judge their own worth, it is understandable that material goods represented in the Silvaeare objects that Romans from all walks of life (from aristocrats to freedmen) aspire to. Indeed, the range of individuals who

Material Wealthin the Silvae

77

possess such goods suggests their universal appeal as symbols of fashion and taste. Empirically these goods are part of the discourse of the dominant culture. As manifestations of economic capital, material wealth (in all its various forms) is the common denominator among the Silvae'saddressees, who, although widely disparate in their possession of non-material capital, are nonetheless similar in their possession of large volumes of material capital. What follows in this chapter, then, is a study within the proper historical context of the manifestations of wealth as they appear in Statius' poems. This examination reveals the types of material objects that the dominant culture of Domitianic Rome considered tasteful, objects to which cultural values were applied, and through which individuals sought power and distinction. For the ease of the reader I have divided the types of material wealth into three major categories, consisting of I) Residential, 2) Personal, and 3) Funerary; I have further subdivided these categories to express the range and variety of material goods represented in the poems with the hope of making this categorization as all-inclusive as possible. The following discussion is designed not only to illustrate the significant breadth of material wealth in Statius' world, thereby providing a foundation for subsequent discussion, but just as important, to provide a helpful reference to the material world of the first century AD, a guide relevant to any socio-cultural study of the period.

RESIDENTIAL

Villas Many, and perhaps all, of the Silvae'saddressees possess opulent villas.3 These villas appear in various literary forms, from longer ecphrasesto mere passing references, but they are by far the most prevalent type of material culture within Statius' discourse of distinction. Two poems are devoted solely to villas themselves (I.3; 2.2), fourothers, (l.2, 1.5, 3.1, 4.2) are parallels, containing descriptions of villas or interior decorations. For the most part, the kinds of villas found in Statius' Silvae represent a later type, such as the villa maritima or villa suburbana,more focused on aesthetics and comfort than on the practicalities of agricultural revenue, a concern of earlier farm types. The villa rusticadescribed by authors such as Cato and Varro formed an integral element in the social and political fabric of Republican Rome, not only as a necessary land investment, but within the space of senatorial otium.4 Yet its importance as an economic agricultural investment meant that functionality and utility took preference over aesthetic considerations. 5 The reputed austerity and simplicity of the villa rustica'sdecoration and amenities seem a far cry from the lavish villas of Statius' Silvae, where the aesthetics and pleasurable

78

Nothing OrdinaryHere

comforts not only lend themselves to ecphrasis,but illustrate their importance in the showcasing of fashion and taste, and the new social values communicated by these visual features. Agricultural villas did not become obsolete during imperial times, however, and some even provided extra revenue to build more luxurious pleasure villas.6 Yet the decrease in those villas built purely for agricultural production and the increased interest in visual aesthetics suggests a corresponding realization from the first century BC onwards that, as a symbol of economic prosperity and cultural refinement, the villa served as a vehicle of social empowerment-a way for individuals to display prominently and publicly their economic and cultural capital.7 The recognition of the villa's symbolic power, and the changing cultural values associated with it, was already developing by the late Republic; the third book ofVarro's De Re Rusticareveals the emergence of the elegant, but inutilis, villa that was meant to symbolize cultural refinement through costly interior furnishings; such a villa, like that of Varro's interlocutor, Pulcher (3.17.1), contrasts with the functional, simple villa rustica, which consequently arose as a symbol of traditional Roman mores,rooted in agricultural production. Yet another of Varro's interlocutors, Axius, asserts that his equally luxurious villa is more culturally and economically valuable because it is agriculturally productive; nevertheless, as Varro reveals, the farm animals and shepherds are themselves symbols, showpieces meant to publicize Axius' adherence to the old Roman moresoriginally represented by the true villa rustica.In this case, Pulcher's Greek works of art and Axius' farm animals serve the same symbolic function; they advertise the cultural values of the owners, even if Pulcher and Axius disagree on what these should truly represent.8 The villas described by Statius exemplify the fulfillment of this development; these owners do not appeal to the once-valued simplicity and rusticity of Republican Rome. As Statius presents it, agricultural production is merely a by-product of their primary goal of communicating new cultural values that prioritize elegant refinement and aesthetic beauty over old-fashioned, rustic mores. By Statius' time, the imperial villa becomes truly a symbolic investment as much as an economic one. 9 The primacy of visual aesthetics over agricultural functionality is clearly indicated by Statius' own treatment of villas; in Silvae 1.3 and 2.2, he lists their agricultural advantages as part of the encomium, but focuses most of his praise and attention on the villas' aesthetic qualities. As the villa began to function symbolically and thus acquire power in asserting cultural values, the prominence of its location became an increasingly important factor. While the location of villae rusticaewould have been chosen primarily with agricultural and economic concerns in mind, IO Statius'

Material Wealth in the Silvae

79

poems reveal that the site of the imperial villa was based more on personal taste and symbolic distinction than practicality. 11 The significance of amoenitas (an aesthetically pleasing locale) as a valuable symbolic commodity is no better indicated than by Scacius' literary (and physical) approach to Manilius Vopiscus' villa in 1.3. Here he devotes the first 34 lines to a description of the landscape features which decorate the Tiburtine site: rolling grassy hills, call woodland forests, and the gently-flowing Anio river present a picture of idyllic peace, suitable co the philosophical nature and literary production of its owner (1-34). The villa's amoenitas is not entirely self-serving (i. e., to be enjoyed aesthetically by the dweller inside) but is envisioned from the exterior with an eye co the passing visitor, although this, coo, eventually reflects on the owner inside. The villa's setting serves co characterize Vopiscus' philosophical way oflife and his cultural capital; Scatius' initial reaction co the villa's amoenitas as he approaches echoes the kind of response the villa was designed to evoke, communicating messages about the addressee and increasing the anticipation of discovering the treasures within. Once inside, Statius repeats his description of the villa's exterior setting (35-46) but now from an inside perspective, or prospectus-the view of the amoenitas from within the villa's walls. The prospectusof both urban townhomes and country villas were deliberately created by careful attention to architectural plan, and owners manipulated views of the villa's exterior amoenitas through carefully placed windows, room axes, and additional interior decorations meant co interplay with the prospectus, such as landscape paintings. The fact that prospectusseems to be an essential feature of both the urban and country homes of the affluent further indicates its important symbolic role. The dual function of a villa's amoenitas in providing symbolic external meaning and contributing to the creation of stunning prospectus(which served as part of a room's interior decoration) is exemplified by Cicero (Dom. 44.116) in his attack against the infamous Clodius. Clodius' choice of a sire high on the Palatine for his elegant home stems from a desire to enhance the setting with a 300-foot portico, designed to provide a pulcherrimusprospectus and communicate an imposing visual statement amidst the neighboring homes (faci/,eut omnium dnmos et laxitate et dignitate superaret). The symbolic and aesthetic importance of domestic prospectusis further implied by a legal context. Seneca's Controversiae5.5 involves an affluent country villa owner and a poor neighbor whose tree blocks the rich man's prospectus(249 M). So seriously does the villa owner prize his prospectusthat, after offering monetary recompense to cut down the tree and being refused, 12 the rich man burns down the tree, accidentally destroying his neighbor's home in the process. Interestingly, as part of his argument, the poor man asserts that

80

Nothing OrdinaryHere

his adversary's opulent, oversized villa blocks his prospectus.The case is hypothetical of course, and reflects the Elder Seneca's own moralizing criticism of luxurious villas, but it suggests a cultural reality in which prospectuswere the object of legal disputes, especially among the affluent who might go to great lengths to create the perfect view.13 Prospectus were valuable not only from an aesthetic and symbolic standpoint, but could also increase the economic value of property, and it is for this reason, in part, that some owners actively sought 14 legal servitudes to protect particular prospectus. Amoenitas and prospectusare perhaps even more significant for Pollius Felix's (2.2) vil/,amaritima, where architectural advances allowed the villa to be built into the rocky Campanian clif£ Pollius' seaside villa, located on the Cape of Sorrento, (Punta della Calcarella) 15 boasted a striking setting. This exploitation of the site's locale was purposely designed to inspire the visitor with awe and wonder, a point made clear by Statius' initial reaction as he approaches by sea (1-29). The site fulfills the requirements mentioned by Cato in his De Agricultura(see note 1O), possessing both land and sea access, and farmland for viticulture, although here the main house is located not at the foot of a mountain, but high above on its summit. The villa peers over acrescent bay, the freshwater stream to which it has access, and the bathhouse and accompanying shrines located on the beach (the modern-day Marina di Puolo). A zigzag colonnaded portico, set into the rocky cliff through the use of terraces, connected what must have been a considerable distance between the upper main part of the villa at the cliff's summit and its lower portion. 16 Like all such porticos, it was functional, connecting the two parts of the villa, but pleasurable as well, providing enjoyable and varying prospectustowards the sea as one descended or ascended. 17 Moreover, the colonnaded porticus contributed to the overall impressive effect of the villa's exterior appearance, as Statius himself notes by comparing the imposing size of the portico to that of a city. 18 As in Silvae 1.3, Statius shifts from an exterior-oriented description of the villa's landscape setting to an interior-perspective, repeating his description from the vantage point of architecturally-manipulated prospectus.The house's lofty location at the cliff's summit is purposefully constructed to provide numerous views over the property and especially towards the sea (44-62). Here Statius finds individual rooms of various heights and on their own axes.19 The architectural variation of the rooms provided shifting views from inside the home, while the complex architectural layout of the house required to achieve such prospectuswould have equally impressed the outside visitor. The villa enjoyed not only splendid views of the sea but also of productive fields, where grapes were cultivated for wine (98-106). This indicates

Material Wealthin the Silvae

81

that the villa's location provided not only an ideal amoenitas,but also agricultural advantages. While the added revenue was probably a by-product of the owner's primary concern for comfort and pleasure, not farming, the villa's fertile soil and impressive setting fully merit its claim as ruris opes(98). The role of amoenitasand prospectuswere driving forces behind a villa's architectural plan, since they provided the initial visual marker of the owner's economic affluence and cultural taste. Amoenitas and the manipulation of prospectusplayed a significant role in the creation of an owner's distinction through their ability to influence the outside viewer or visitor in a sensory way. Thus, these seemingly innocent aspects of a villa's location are actually highly charged with symbolic meaning, imparted through socially and culturally recognized values of taste and fashion. The Silvaeillustrate the villa's powerful role as a symbol that could communicate messages about an owner's cultural refinement and economic prosperity. Perhaps most exemplary of the villa's importance as a symbolic vehicle of distinction is the repeated criticism directed against it by Roman moralists, who attached negative values to the villa as a means of attacking what they perceived to be a decline of Roman morals. The vil/,amaritima, like that of Pollius Felix, with its emphasis on elaborate architectural plans, piscinarii, and prospectus,alongside carefully planned gardens and interior decoration, especially suffered at the hands of the Roman moralists. In sharp contrast to the early vil/,arusticawhere austerity and practical functionality symbolically reflected traditional Roman mores, the imperial villa appeared to challenge the mosmaiorum by asserting new values and tastes. Negative commentary from as early as Cicero and Horace 20 indicates the rising popularity of villas to provide pleasure and comforts rather than agricultural revenue. 21 Republican authors were not alone in their complaints about pleasure-villas. Seneca's harsh criticism of the practice of utilizing villas, their luxurious contents, and the activities occurring within, as a calculated vehicle for attaining outside approval, points to a well-established practice and implies the symbolic role which the villa had attained by that time. To contrast the practices of his day, Seneca offers Scipio's villa at Liturnum (Ep. 86) as a symbol of the cultural values cherished by Romans of old and now lost. Scipio's viii.arusticais a working farm, its towers not decorative, but architecturally required as militarily defensive; the house is void of the mirrors, African marbles, gilded ceilings, and paintings so popular among the villas of Seneca's contemporaries (5). Seneca's praise of Scipio's virtues connects the simplicity and rusticity of the villa with Scipio's moral character-a comment on the declining standards of Neronian Rome. 22 In a similar manner, Martial draws a sharp contrast between Faustinus' traditional working farm with its fruitfulness and rustic charm and Bassus' refined,

82

Nothing OrdinaryHere

yet "elegantly starving" frescoed vil/,asuburbana,where even the simplest of foods must be imported. 23 Similarly in 12.50, Martial pokes fun at the millionaire's luxurious villa which, although possessing all the expected elegant and showy features (gardens, a 100-columned colonnade, bathhouse, etc.) lacks functionality. Juvenal deplores features of the pleasure villa that especially epitomize the frivolous spending on "worthless" comforts, such as extended colonnades or imported furnishings. 24 Criticisms such as these reflect individual biases, but most importantly, they provide telling evidence that the villa became a significant symbolic investment among Romans of wide-ranging backgrounds. The social criticisms of Seneca, Juvenal or Martial must have been inspired by a social reality; they might not like what is occurring, but it is a fact oflife that they must accept. The Silvae balance such negative attitudes, and illustrate the fashion and tastes of the day, when villas were not universally regarded as symbols of decline, but conversely, as symbols of prosperity. As we have seen, Statius sharply breaks from the tradition of moralistic discourse, not only in the ecphrastic descriptions of villas, but in his clear approval of them. No longer a symbol of reputed austerity and strict morality, the villas became symbols of economic affluence, cultural refinement, and fashionable taste. Villas became an integral part ofltaly's physical landscape, but just as significantly, they became part of the vocabulary of wealth, a prominent sight in the literary discourse of Statius' Silvae.

Gilded Ceilings Within the villas of his addressees Statius encountered a wealth of costly and elegant furnishings. Showy features, like gilded ceilings, were purposely positioned to attract the eye, as they in fact do when Statius first enters Vopiscus' Tiburtine villa (auratasnetrabes,1.3.35). The gilded ceiling in Violentilla's house contributes to its worth, making it acceptable for Venus' presence. The particular gold used in Violentilla's ceiling (roboraDalmaticolucentsatiatametaUo,1.2.153) was imported from Dalmatia, "one of the most obscure provinces of the Empire," and thus very costly and much coveted, a fact Statius reiterates in 4. 7.13-16. 25 Statius' poetic discourse, then, provides the additional commentary that enhances the cultural value ofViolentilla's ceiling, otherwise the specific gold type would have been virtually indistinguishable (and meaningless) to the reader or observer. Private citirens like Vopiscus and Violentilla are noticeably displaying their understanding of the tastes of the dominant culture, which was perpetuated by the Emperor himself, who also decorated his Palatine palace with gilded ceilings (4.2.31, auratiqueputes/,aquearia caeli;c£ 3.3.103). Yet gilded ceilings were not a new fashion. Although the archaeological remains are scant, the gilded architrave on the peristyl.e portico of the first century

Material Wealthin the Silvae

83

BC villa ofFannius Synistor at Boscorealegives us some idea of their glittering, shimmering effect.26 Moralists often applied negative social value to gilded ceilings, deploring them as symbols of extravagant economic expenditure; for example, in advocating simplicity over luxury, Horace cites gilded ceilings (aureum'4cunar,Carm.2.18.1-2) as an example of excess.The decorative feature sparked criticism during the Neronian period as well; Seneca's complaints of the luxurious ceilings amidst marble and mosaic floors, suggest the continuation of the trend. 27 The appearance of gilded ceilings in Statius' Silvaeindicate that they continued to be an acceptable sign of taste and fashion, promulgated by the imperial court and embraced among private citizens, who hoped to emulate the fashion legitimized through the Emperor's example.

Citrus Wood As suggested by Seneca's remark in the previous section, the interplay of various decorative features was essential in creating an overall visual effect. The brightness of the gold ceilings could be dramatically enhanced by a contrasting darker tone, like Vopiscus' gilded ceilings which glitter against Mauri pastes(1.3.35), lintels crafted out of citrus-wood imported from north Africa (Mauri, modern day Morocco). The wood, like gilded ceilings, represents the taste of the dominant culture, appearing again in Domitian's palace where it occurs in its most popular form, a table. In this case, however, the table-legs are comprised of imported Indian ivory (/ndisque innixa columnis I robora Maurorum, 4.2.38-39), an extremely costly material. 28 Citrus-wood was hewn from a type of cypress tree, and frequently comprised small Roman dining tabletops, often laid upon an ivory base, as we have just seen in the case of Domitian. 29 This type of table was opulent, the quintessential measure of comparison; Martial contrasts this expensive type with his own, made out of ordinary beechwood and resting atop a tile. The wood's attraction probably lay in its distinguished "mottled" pattern, a variegation that provided a sharp and distinctive contrast when paired with ivory.30 Such a pairing once again illustrates the importance of complementary patterns and colors, purposefully juxtaposed to create a striking visual effect. But, perhaps its most characteristic feature is the distinct scent of lemon exuding naturally from the wood, a surprise to visitors unaccustomed to the product. While most often employed for dining tables, the wood was considered a valuable commodity in other forms, such as writing tables; in the case of Propertius, it served as paneling or ornaments in a citrus-wood bedroom (thyius thalamus).31 Seneca, denouncing perceived moral decline, points to a citruswood bookcase trimmed in ivory, as an example of self-absorption and

84

Nothing OrdinaryHere

extravagant materialism.3 2 His comment, though negatively biased, nonetheless implies the popularity of the product and its symbolic power in communicating prosperity and taste. Obviously, the lavish villas discussed throughout this chapter would have contained equally opulent furnishings not only serving a practical function, but also providing decorative enhancement to any room. Yet beyond Domitian's ivory and citrus-wood table mentioned above, Statius devotes only a few lines to descriptions of furniture; the only other passage describes a little ivory-carved couch (signiscrescittorusaspereburnis, 3.1.38) in Pollius Felix's Herculean temple; the couch was quite delicate and sumptuous, its value and beauty increased by plush purple-embroidered cushions (hie tibi

Sidnnio celsumpulvinar acanthoI texitur 37-38). 33

Marbl.e(general) Like all of the decorative features already described, marble was a luxury, not a necessity. Beginning in the late Republic, it became a "symbol of wealth and power because it was expensive, imported, and unnecessary (especially in a land endowed with good building stones like peperinoand travertine)." 34Its use for primarily aesthetic purposes was established in 78 BC when Lepidus became the first to employ solid (rather than veneer) Numidian marble in his door-sills, which immediately evoked accusations of frivolity and extravagance (vilissimo usu, Plin. Nat. 36.7.49). 35Pliny (Nat. 36.109), who blames the selfish desires and ostentatious material displays of private citizens for the origins of luxury (and the decline of morality), enumerates famous politicians of the late Republic to underscore the connection between material goods and the quest for power. As Fant has rightly pointed out, "it was no accident" that many of these politicians had connections to areas where marbles were quarried. 36 These include Mamurra, the praefectus fabrum appointed by Caesar, who was responsible for establishing the Luna quarry to meet the needs ofCaesar's building program. In 61 BC, he is said to have used marble veneer on all the walls of his house, and was the first to incorporate only marble columns throughout it.37 Pliny also mentions Lucullus, who first brought marble from Chios to use in his private home. 38 At this time negative values were attached not to the material itself, but to its use as a private domestic decoration. By the rime of Pliny the Elder, the desire for marble had dramatically increased as had its utilization for private decoration-hence Pliny's lengthy negative introduction deploring the extravagant overuse of marble among the Romans of his day.39 The connection between marble and power, however, did not depend entirely on factors of rarity and expense. The "royal associations" connected to the material were readily exploited, and in the late Republic politicians and

MaterialWealthin the Silvae

85

victorious generals returned to Rome to erect monuments constructed out of marble taken from their conquered territories. Therefore, early on in the history of marble, the material acquired a symbolic role of communicating conquest and power.4 Foreign marble quarries soon came under the control of individual Romans, and later the Emperors themselves as Rome began to conquer and expand. Thus, the quarries for gialloantico,for example, originally under the control ofNumidian kings, passed into the hands of Romans once the African province was expanded. 41 Because of the symbolic power communicated by the display of marble, it is not surprising, then, that Augustus early on felt the need to control both foreign and domestic quarries, since he relied upon marble for his own build42 In his developing programs to assert symbolically his power as princeps. ment of the quarries at Luna (via Agrippa), Augustus allowed ownership of the quarry to remain in the hands of the local inhabitants, but did assume control over the right to command the supplies and distribution of the material. In this regard, then, he contributed to the process by which emperors maintained ownership over quarries, a system further developed by Tiberius and later reorganized in the late Flavian period, when the system became "more directly commercial. "43 Initially the quarries produced marbles for specific requests, but eventually they began to mass-produce the stone and acquire large stocks. Moreover, according to Waelkens, the imperial quarry system owes its ultimate organization co Domitian (and Trajan) whose building projects "played an enormous role in the development of many of the imperial quarries." 44 Domitian's syscemization of quarries allowed the simultaneous exploitation of quarries in close proximity, extensive "prefabrication and standardization" of pieces, such as sarcophagi, columns, capitals, and slabs for veneering, and even the production of the preliminary forms that were later carved more precisely into statues or portrait busts. 45 Thus, from the period of Augustus, marble became an intimate part of the dominant culture under the domain of the emperor himself. Color and rarity, as well as supply and demand, affected the cost, value, and desirability of particular types of marble, with all these aspects influencing one another. 46 Further, marble was heavy and dense, making it difficult to transport across long distances, a factor chat also increased its value and desirability among those who wished to decorate their homes with more exotic, foreign kinds.47 For example, the transport of pavona:z.zetto to Rome was costly, since most of the quarries that produced it were located nearly 200 miles inland at Docimium. Waelkens' study of the production of marble sarcophagi reveals the correlation between the geographical location of quarries, transport costs, and ultimately the value of the product; he has shown that

°

86

Nothing OrdinaryHere

coastal workshops were well-suited to prefabrication production (in which only the general outline of the pieces is cue) since they could be easily loaded onto the nearby ships. It was these coastal quarries (e. g., on the Proconnesus, at Ephesus and Aphrodisias) that played a larger role in international trade. The ease with which such prefabricated items (in which products are only half finished) could be transported lessened their commercial value. Waelkens has shown that inland quarries on the other hand, such as those at Docimium, "seem to have specialized in the production of elaborate, fully finished items, be it statues, portraits or sarcophagi, made for the very rich." 48 Presumably the products were fully finished in order to lessen their weight before the long and difficult transport across land to the coast where only then could they be easily shipped. 49 Because of the increased cost involved in transporting the goods a long distance overland, and because of the risks involved in transporting fully-finished products (their completed sculptural features were more fragile and susceptible to breakage than the half-done prefabricated goods of the coastal quarries) such products acquired a higher commercial value. Though Waelkens' study focuses primarily on sarcophagi and the quarries that produced pavonazzetto,his conclusions could be applied to other types of marble and marble production. Generally speaking, and understandably, the greater the distance from its original source, the higher che value. Marble, especially costly imported varieties, is the most prominent decorative feature in the Silvae.While at times marble receives only passing mention, at other times it is described at great length. In poem 1.3, for example, we are told only that Vopiscus' house contains marble, patterned by its natural veining (picturatalucentiamarmoravena, 36) and complementing the citrus-wood and gilded ceiling, the whole effect being one of airy luminescence. In 1.2 and 2.2, however, Statius devotes longer ecphrasticpassages to the imported marble used in the villas ofViolentilla and Pollius Felix. Statius' references to various types according to geographical place names, rather than colors, suggests his audience's familiarity-a familiarity chat Statius naturally assumes for them, hue also indicative of the popularity of and the fashionable tastes for certain marbles during the Domitianic period. Pliny the Elder does the same in his art history of marbles, asserting audience familiarity with types to apologize for omitting descriptions of their colors.5° Initially, colorful veined marbles were considered inferior in value to the purer white types, like Lesbian and Thasian (see below), though the taste for more colorful varieties increased with time. 51 In fact, Statius' attention to marbles in the Silvaeis deliberately intended to evoke the correlating visual image, and thus its corresponding economic and cultural value.52A list of marbles in Silvae 2.2, classified by origin (85-94), 53gives an idea of not only the lengths to which

Material Wealthin the Silvae

87

Pollius went in procuring the best, bur also the colorful effect achieved by his careful selection. These include seven types: (1) veined Eastern Syenian (a reddish granite, Plin. Nat. 36.13.63); (2) Phrygian Synnadian (white marble with purplish-red spots, or pavonazz.etto); (3) Lycurgian, i. e. Laconian or Lacedaemonium (bright green porphyry, or verdeantico,Plin. Nat. 11.55); (4) Numidian (yellowwith red veins, or gialloantico,Plin. Nat. 36.8.47); (5) Thasian (white with glittering spots, or Graecolivido, Plin. Nat. 36.5.44); (6) Chian (a type of variegated marble occurring in a range of colors, commonly red and gray, Plin. Nat. 7.46) ;54 and (7) Carystian (white with greenish-wavyveins, or cipollino verdeonda,to,Plin. Nat. 36.7.48). In his poems Statius is not specific about the precise application of the marble types, yet he does effectively communicate the visual impact char the abundance and variety of colors (red, yellow, green, white, purple) would have had on the visitor. The recent examination of Domitian's triclinium, however, provides some indication of the aesthetic way in which marble was employed in a room. 55 The triclinium, consisting of a rectangular, colonnaded room, with an apse on one side, was flanked by a fountain court on two other sides, and with a garden peristyu leading up co the main entrance, which itself was faced with six pavonazzettocolumns. In addition to the marble columns and pilasters, which vary in types, the floor was also paved with marble, and fragments of gial/,oantico seem co have been used for the walls along with pavonaz.zettomoldings. Attention must have focused on utilizing the various colors of marbles in different applications for an overall brilliant effect. In addition to color, the reputation or rarity of each individual type would have communicated its economic and cultural value, so long as the visitor's own cultural capital allowed him to read the room correctly. Pollius has successfully combined a mixture of well-known (though by no means common-place) types with rarer marbles, like Syenian marble, imported from southern Egypt and infrequently mentioned by Roman auchors. 56 le is significant that this unusual type appears in Domitian's palace triclinium (4.2.27), since it is the only other occasion in which it appears in the Silvae-a further indication of its value and social worth, and, by association, Pollius' sense of caste. Numidian gial/,oantico, also imported from Africa, was used both privately and publicly throughout the Republican and Imperial periods; 57 this type in particular was frequently criticized as a symbol of extravagance.58 It appears again in Claudius Etruscus' balneum (1.5.36) and is less explicitly referred to as Libycussilex in Violentilla's home (1.2.148) and as mons Libys in Domitian's triclinium(4.2.28). It is indeed remarkable that che marble was employed not only by the Emperor, but by a freedman's son (Claudius Etruscus). This universality clearly implies chat the type was fashionable, appreciated for

88

Nothing OrdinaryHere

its worth and beauty in a public and private manner, by Romans of all backgrounds. Like gialw antico, Phyrgian pavonazzetto was utilized frequently at Rome, not only in private homes, as Horace indicates in Carmen3.1, but even on public buildings, such as in the restoration of the Basilica Aemilia and in the Forum of Augustus as paving in the Temple of Mars Ultor. 59 Such usage was not always the case; the type does not appear in sources until Tibullus, and even Pliny makes no mention of it, both indications, according to Fant, chat the type was "one of the last of the major decorative stones to become known at Rome." 60 The marble seems to have become one of the most popular and coveted of all the colored marbles by the time of Augustus. Moreover, inscriptional evidence from the quarries at Domicium suggests not only that a "building boom" was taking place under the reign of Domitian, but that pavanazzettowas increasingly demanded for this program. 61 The greater desirability of the type is reflected, of course, in its application in Violentilla's town-home (1.2. 148) and Domitian's palace triclinium (4.2.27). Greek marbles were perhaps easier to import, but were nonetheless valuable. Only rarely does Statius fail to identify the type, specifically, as in the Herculean temple erected by Pollius (3. 1.5). But in the majority of the cases he is at pains to detail the marble with which his addressees' villas were constructed. For example, verde antico, visually characterized by its sea-green color, decorates Pollius' villa (2.2.90) and the town-home of Violentilla (l.2.148-9). It was so popular chat, as Strabo tells us (8.5.7), anew quarry on Mt. Taygecus was established specifically to meet Roman demand. Its composite properties made it difficult to work, but did not keep it from becoming widely used in Greek temples or Roman baths, as we see mentioned by many Roman authors. 62 In addition to verdeantico, other imported Greek marbles found their way into Pollius' villa. Pure white marble from Thasos (2.2.92) originally seems to have been an extremely rare marble, incorporated only in temples, but became more popular and widely available by Neronian times; in fact Seneca tells us the type was so fashionable that (extravagant) Romans even began to make use of it to decorate utilitarian swimming pools. 63 Its value as a symbol of fashion and taste may be further implied by its service in the Emperor Nero's tomb. 64 Black Lucullan marble, quarried in Chios, was named for the famous Roman general who first introduced it into Rome in 74 BC, 65 and is another type found in Pollius' villa (2.2.93). Early on it seems to have been a rather rare type, and may have continued to be, if we can reasonably rely on its absence from the literature where it does not appear outside of Statius. 66 It occurs only one other time in the Silvae, significantly, in Domitian's triclinium (4.2.28). The last marble type found in

Material Wealthin the Silvae

89

Pollius' villa (2.2.93) is another Greek import, Carystian marble; otherwise known as cipollinoverdeondato,it was distinguished by a wavy veined pattern and greenish hue, often compared co the sea. It decorates both the townhouse ofViolencilla (1.2. 149-50) and Domitian's palace (4.2.28). 67 The domestic spaces described in the Silvaevisibly abound in their variety and number of marble types. Violentilla's house, for example, in addition co che white, purplish-red, green, and yellow hues provided by the pavonazzetto, verdeantico, cipollino,and giallo antico mentioned above, also included flexus onyx (alabaster; Plin. Nat. 36.12.59) and Egyptian purple-red porphyry (Plin. Nat. 36.11.57). Together the number of types in her home totals six. Significancly, as already pointed out above, Domician's palace triclinium differs licclefrom the villas of private individuals. It contains the same number of marble types as Violentilla's town-home (six); in addition to Libyan giallo antico, Syenian reddish granite, black Chian, and sea-green cipollino,it also contained Ilian (Phrygian) marble (pavonazzetto)and marble from Luna, the latter which bore the weight of the pillars. The recent evaluation and reconstruction of Domitian's triclinium attests to the presence of such marbles in the remains of architectural fragments. 68 Statius' description of Claudius Etruscus' bath departs slighcly from his other descriptions of marble; here Statius emphasizes the types of marbles excluded from the decorative scheme in order co emphasize che rarity and value of the types included. The types we earlier noted, praised in the villas of Pollius, Violentilla, and lacer in the Emperor's palace, (Thasian, Carystian, onyx, ophites [serpentine Plin. Nat. 36.11.55-6]), are excluded in favor of other (superior) types: Numidian giallo antico and purplish-red porphyry. 69 This selectivity may provide some additional evidence regarding the relative economic and cultural values attached to these particular types. Yee, Statius' emphasis on exclusion versus inclusion, that is, Claudius' sense of taste, is a deliberate poetic construction, an integral element in Scacius'creation of distinction for his addressee (this will be discussed further in Chapter Five).7° Thus, we see a clear example of how material objects form not only part of Statius' visual vocabulary, bur pare of his discourse of distinction. Moreover, the poem provides valuable evidence of the existence of a culturally recognized hierarchy of marbles during the Flavian period.

Marbk columns Marble columns were popular in elevating a room's grandeur, especially if constructed out of a particularly valuable material. Violentilla's gilded ceilings are supported by countless columns (innumeris columnis, 1.2.152), while Domitian's palatial triclinium is praised for its size, where more than 100

90

Nothing OrdinaryHere

columns are said to support the dining room's lofty ceiling and create a sense of regal majesty (non centum insignecolumnis,I sedquantae superoscaelumque At/ante remissoI sustentarequeant, 4.2.18-20). Often such columns were constructed out of brick and veneered with expensive marbles. In the case of Domitian's palace, the columns seem to have been solid marble. Though we have no surviving archaeological remains to reconstruct Violentillas town-home, Domitian's tricliniumhas been reconstructed and provides a glimpse of the effect provided by such numerous and lofi:y columns. There, columns made up the internal room created within the tricliniumproper and are probably those to which Statius refers in his poem. Gibson, Delaine, and Claridge's reconstruction of the room indicates that two sides of the internal order consisted of gray granite columns, numbering six on each side, while the main entrance was comprised also of six columns, although these were made of pavonazzettomarble. 71 These columns which make up the walls of the triclinium also consisted of two upper tiers of columns. Quite dearly all of these do not amount to the 100 columns described by Statius (although there were many more since the space also included a colonnaded peristykand two colonnaded fountain courts). 72 Yet the visual effect is not diminished by the smaller number; all of the columns of the internal order have been restored to a height of 36 feet each, the columns of the second tier measure 28.8 feet, and those of third estimated to 22.4 feet;73 this means that the total height of the columnar walls reached over 90 feet. The effect of such a height would have been enhanced by the roof, which was probably a timber truss, not a barrel-vaulted ceiling, as has been suggested in the past.74 This roof was "possibly the largest, dear span, timber-roofed structures [sic]in Rome at the time, as likely to elicit the hyperbole of contemporary accounts as any vaulted structure." 75 Statius' comparison of the triclinium to Jupiter's home (presumably the Capitoline temple) not only is meant to connect Domitian with the god, but implies a comparison between the two structures, as the Capito line temple also had a timber roo£76 Thus, as we see in the case ofDomitian's triclinium,the columns served a practical architectural purpose, but they also played an integral role in creating a sense of majesty through vertical height. Columns contributed to the creation of an atmosphere and a visual backdrop against which the owner intended himself to be viewed by others. Statius' awe of the triclinium'sspace should be considered more accurate than exaggerated.

Mosaics Mosaics, another vehicle of distinction forming part of the vocabulaty of visual decoration and literaty ecphrasis, consisted of two main types: floor mosaics, or opustessellatum,and wall/vault mosaics, opusmuseum. Pliny the Elder tells us

Material Wealthin the Silvae

91

that the first floor mosaic arrived at Rome as early as Sulla's rule, when the dictator installed mosaics at his Temple of Fortuna. Following their public introduction, floor mosaics found their way into private homes, subsequently creeping up the walls to the vaulted ceilings above, where the colorful glass tesseraecould refract light-beams of various hues. 77 Generally, floor mosaics seem to have been more common than wall mosaics and were prized for their lasting durability, but despite this functionality, they were still a source of artistic expression, varying from province to province throughout the Mediterranean.7 8 The utilitarian nature alone does not explain their popularity; Romans realized the full potential of floor mosaics not only for practical purposes, but as way to enhance the aesthetic qualities of the domestic space. By Statius' time, the preferred style in Italy proper was a geometric pattern in black and white, occasionally enhanced with blacksilhouetted figures.79 Wall mosaics, on the other hand, became increasingly popular by the Flavian period for their visual impact and expensive materials, but they appeared only in the most wealthy homes or prestigious spaces. Being less utilitarian and more decorative, wall or vault mosaics occurred less frequently, not only because of the increased difficulty involved in their installation, but more often than not, because wall paintings were a more economical decorative choice. This emphasis on aesthetic value over functionality, however, inspired the use of delicate polychrome tesserae,admired for their bright refractive qualities. 80 The very medium allowed for a wide range of thematic depictions, some of which, as Kondoleon has argued, were designed to advertise an owner's patronage and benefactions, such as in the case of mosaics illustrating games or spectades. 81 Thus, not only could mosaics provide a visual delight but may have been deliberately commissioned to celebrate a particular event related to the owner's personal activities. Mosaics, like all interior furnishings, possessed their own unique symbolic power that reinforced and provided additional commentary about an owner. Marbles may have caught Statius' eye as he visited Violentilla's house, Pollius' villa, and Domitian's palace, but Manilius Vopiscus' floor mosaic (1.3) particularly captured the poet's attention. Its visual impact was created by the sun's rays which shone down from a clerestory and refracted off the upper (colored) tiles, thus illuminating the floor below. Statius provides little detail about the mosaic beyond its extraordinary brightness and beauty, although we do learn that it was comprised of unusual or extraordinary figures (novisfiguris, 56). It seems to have been polychrome (variaspicta per artes,55); otherwise a comparison to the polychrome mosaic of Sosus at Pergamum would be meaningless. 82 The mosaic's figures and its comparison to this famous

92

Nothing OrdinaryHere

"Unswept" floor (which depicts scraps of food and banquet leftovers) provides an associative value, communicating the social and economic worth of Vopiscus' mosaic. It may also be that Vopiscus' floor replicated the detailed drinking doves that appeared on the Sosus mosaic. 83 The polychrome tesserae of the mosaic also suggest its overall value, particularly since simple black and white geometric patterns were the more common type at this time. It is possible chat Vopiscus had the mosaic imported from an eastern province like Syria or Palestine where the polychrome style and figures were especially popu1ar at this time. 84 If so, the mosaic's commission and acquisition, by which it would have been imported in pieces to be assembled on site, would undoubtedly have elevated the economic value of the piece. Statius deliberately highlights Vopiscus' mosaic as an extraordinary work of art, purposely designed as the room's tour deforce. We can safely assume chat the villas ofViolentilla, Pollius, and Domitian also included mosaics of various sorts, yet Statius points out only one other example, the vaulted wall mosaics in Claudius Etruscus' Bath. Complementing the bright yellow and purple marbles described earlier, the ceilings shine and the gables glitter with polychrome glass mosaics (variovitro, 1.5.42), which include lifelike, realistic images (in speciesanimamque, 43). Claudius' wall mosaic, rarer than the floor type, must have been extremely expensive, especially since glass tesseraewere difficult to obtain and their red, blue, and green hues required a more complex production process. 85 The mosaics imply that Claudius spared no expense, and that his selectivity and cultural refinement extended beyond just his choice in marbles. As we see in these examples, mosaics formed pare of a room's interior decorative scheme, an integral element contributing to che visual interplay among the various media of marble, wood, and gold. 86

Fountains Although Statius explicitly mentions fountains only in his sketch of Violentilla's (1.2.155) cownhouse and Vopiscus' villa (1.3.37), undoubtedly they would have formed an integral part of the architectural and decorative scheme in Claudius Etruscus' balneum, where water fell into silver basins. In Violentilla's home the fountains are described only as lively water falling into marble basins (perspicuivivunt in marmoreJontes, 1.2.155), and there seems co have been more than one. Vopiscus' entire villa, on the other hand, seems to have been organized around a water scheme of some sore; in his rather obscure opening description of that villa, Scatius describes an arrangement that allowed a water channel off the Arno to enhance the estate both decoratively and architecturally, since this waterway seems to have divided the estate (and

Material Wealthin the Silvae

93

its buildings) in half (et insertogeminosAnienepenatesI aut potuit sociaecommercia noscereripae I certantesquesibi dominum defenderevillas, 1.3.2---4). Presumably the channel was designed to provide an elaborate arrangement of fountains and smaller waterways throughout the interior rooms, as Statius further suggests (mireran emissasper cunctacubilia nymphas?37). The prevalence of fountains and water gardens attested by the archaeological remains at Pompeii and Herculaneum offers some sense of the aesthetic and sensory effect these fountains would have had. 87 In his study of the Casadel Torello,for example, Anderson has shown how water dominated the house as an architectural and decorative feature; 88 there the home's impluvium was not only functional, but also decorative, since its north rim featured a bronze bull statuette which served as a fountain: water poured from the bull's mouth into a small marble basin below, which rested in the impluvium basin. 89 These features indicate, as Anderson asserts, that the atrium was "gradually becoming a fountain court." 90 The atrium would have complemented the main water feature of the house, a nymphaeum located in a pseudoperistyleoff the tablinum. This entire space boasted a complex water scheme in which two pillars near the tablinum opening actually served as decorative fountains that spilled into vases;91 meanwhile the oecusto the west of the pseudoperistykalso contained fountains in the form of wall outlets that poured water directly into the lower gutter. 92 But the tour deforce of the space (and the house) was the nymphaeum that comprised one wall of the pseudoperistyle, and consisted of three niches below which were mosaic panels; all three had outlets for water that cascaded into a rectangular basin placed in front. A central basin was situated in the center of the garden where there also would have been an ornamental water outlet. Moreover, a central pipe fed other outlets positioned in other columns surrounding the peristyle;these also functioned as fountains. 93 Anderson interprets the entire space as an outdoor summer triclinium, in which water was the central feature, and he notes such a space was popular in Pompeii, with more than forty attested. 94 While we cannot know for certain how closely Violentilla's townhouse or Vopiscus' villa followed the model of the Casodel Torelw(especially since we do not know if they contained nymphaea), the latter serves as one example of the way in which water could dominate a house and function both architecturally and decoratively.95 Other examples from Pompeii and Herculaneum, such as the Casa di LoreioTiburtino(II 2 2)96 show domestic spacessimilarly dominated by the presence of water and may provide a fitting visual comparison for the use of water in the homes of Statius' addressees, especially Vopiscus' villa.97 In describing his Tuscan villa (Ep. 5.6), Pliny likewise points out the role of water in his home,

94

Nothing Ordinary Here

mentioning a cubiculumcontaining a small fountain (fonticulus,23) with jets, a pool with a cascading waterfall (23), an outdoor nymphaeum (36) with a large marble basin containing marble and dishes floating in it, and another small room with a fountain (40). All these domestic fountains served a practical function in providing coolness during the hot summers and a water source for drinking and gardening; in addition, the interplay of clear and splashing water offered a pleasant visual and aural ambiance. The amount of water and the difficulties involved in acquiring so much of it would have made the fountains costly, and thus would have elevated their economic (and cultural) value and desirability.

AntbJu.esand Collections In addition to architectural and decorative elements featured in the interior rooms, antiques and collectible objetsd'art were attentively acquired to enhance a room's aesthetics and convey the owner's artistic taste and refinement. For many, art collecting was a popular hobby as an enhancement to the space of otium, cultivated during the late Republic and inspired by the influx of Hellenistic wealth pouring into the capital, reaching its height of popularity during the early Empire. 98 The Silvaeunmistakably illustrate the Flavian fervor for art collecting. At times Statius speaks in general terms about antiques, providing only a passing comment on the form or costly media. For instance, in 1.3.49-51, he extols the artwork and antiques which adorn Vopiscus' house (vidi artesveterumquemanus,47), but he provides minimal information about specific objects, telling us only that the pieces consist of expensive materials like gold, ivory, gemstones, silver, and bronze, and probably included miniatures as well as colossal statues.99 Pollius, too, possesses objetsd'art, and here Statius is more specific. Marble busts of renowned philosophers are designed to inspire the owner as well as to reinforce his philosophical predilections to the visitor, while antiques designed in wax, that is, encaustic painting, 100 bronze (veteresceraequeaerisquefiguras,2.2.63), and marble are attributed to such famous artists as Apelles, Phidias, Myron, and Polyditus (64--67). Rooms luxuriously decorated with marble, gilded ceilings, and other furnishings provided the perfect backdrop for displaying equally valuable works of art or collections of objects, which were often thematically arranged. 101 Moreover, the reduction of large-scale originals into smaller replicas allowed for their display in a smaller, more appropriate setting within the Roman domus. An object's antique status and genealogy were important considerations affecting its cultural and economic value. Other significant aspects include the work's formal qualities, aesthetics, and "associativevalue," that is, the association with other famous works of art or artists. 102 As we have seen

Material Wealthin the Silvae

95

in che case of Pollius, antiques in particular were prized, especially when the owner could attribute che piece co a renowned ancient master such as Phidias, Myron, Polyclicus,or Lysippus. This kind of attribution not only increased the object's economic value, but more importantly elevated its cultural value and the symbolic value it subsequently imparted on the owner. Literary descriptions of art objects indicate the importance chat owners themselves placed on an object's antique Greek provenance, since this is information that either the owner or an inscription must supply.103 A work of art created by a Greek master (or somebody alleged to be one) served as a vehicle of distinction, since it asserted its owner's artistic discernment and refinement. Attributions to famous Greek artists also suggests the popularity and value of Roman copies of Greek originals; while we might suspect the validity of claims regarding the genuineness of antiques, true authenticity was less a concern for Roman art collectors, who valued fine copies almost as much as the originals themselves. 104 Today an object's total value depends for a large part upon authenticity, but in the ancient world, copies were coveted, provided they were good. Originals or presumed originals brought with them greater prestige to the owner, but exceptional copies, naturally more available, were perfectly acceptable for artistic display and collecting, especially if their formal qualities so closely matched the original that they could claim a Greek master as their creator. Nowhere else in the Silvaedo we see the cultural significance of art collecting and the symbolic importance of originality and provenance more aptly illustrated than in poem 4.6, a tribute to Novus Vindex's miniature bronze statue of Hercules Epitrapezios. The poem is more than an ecphrasisof a beautiful object; it is a celebration of the owner's artistic taste and connoisseurship. Like Pollius, Vindex possesses antique works reputedly created by great Masters: Myron, Phidias, Polyclitus, Apelles, even Praxiteles (25-29), and among these treasures is the showpiece, a bronze Hercules created by Lysippus and possessing a distinguished historical provenance, including the previous owners Alexander the Great, Hannibal, and Sulla. 105 Vindex's Hercules statue possesses economic value, but its role as the impetus and focus of Scacius' poem illustrates how works of art not only created visual impact, but formed part of che discourse of distinction designed ultimately co promote the owner, not the object. We will return to Vindex in Chapter Five with a closer analysis of his poem and the role of connoisseurship as a form of distinction. In addition to sculptural antiques, Pollius Felix (2.2) also boasts works of art in Corinthian bronze, a material considered more valuable than gold (aeraque ab lsthmiacis auro potiora fovi/lis, 68) and more precious than Temesaean bronze, an inferior type (see below}.106This is che only example of

96

Nothing OrdinaryHere

Corinthian bronze in the Silvae, though possibly Novius Vindex's bronze Herculean statuette (4.6.47-9) consisted of the material. The value of Corinthian bronze lay in its unusual alloy (a mystery still today) as well as its origins, since the conflagration of Corinth in 146 BC was reputedly responsible for its creation. The bronze had a distinct scent allowing connoisseurs to distinguish it from more common types, and it was often used for household objects, miniatures and even life-size statues. 107 The economic value of this particular metal seems to have been extremely high, and it is commonly praised among Roman authors. Yet, Corinthian bronze fuelled the fires of the moralists, who deplored not the material itself, but the way in which it was utilized. Seneca chastises the collector who wastes time rearranging his Corinthian bronzes, and considers the practice of Corinthian bronze-collecting as a kind of mania. 108 In contrast, Pliny speaks approvingly of the seventy-seven-year-old Spurinna who puts his Corinthian bronze pieces to practical use, rather than upon the collector's shelf Pliny praises the material as being elegant and refined, yet clearly disapproves of its use as a mere object of collecting. 109 Pliny is consistent in his opinion and personal practice; in Episde3.6, he describes in positive terms his recent purchase of a small Corinthian bronze miniature, which he donates to a public spot in the temple ofJupiter in his hometown rather than reserving it for private display in his own house. 110 In addition to the renowned Corinthian type, bronze and its base metal, copper, were considered inferior to silver and gold, as Statius' comments on the functional yet decorative water basins in Claudius Etruscus' bath indicate. Here, in keeping with the owner's general theme of hierarchy, Claudius Etruscus has incorporated not Temesaen aes (in this case copper), but silver basins (nil ibi plebeium;nusquamTemesaea notabisI aera,sedargentofelix propellitur unda I argentoquecadit, 1.5.47-49). Temese, a small town located on the toe of Italy, a region inhabited by the Bruttii, and a prosperous Italian province, was celebrated for its copper-mines, a reputation stemming from its 111 As we have identification with a source of copper mentioned in the Odyssey. already seen in the case of mosaics, although the basins are functional, they are essentially works of art designed to evoke external approval. The attention that Statius gives to works of art, as we have seen above, suggests the significant role that art collecting played in personalizing an owner's economic wealth, taste, moral character or literary and philosophical pursuits. Such owners as Pollius, Vopiscus, and Claudius spent time and money commissioning new, or acquiring antique, objects to complement their decorative schemes and promote their own familiarity with artistic masters and famous pieces or types. These objects were carefully chosen to impress a visitor or guest visually, but more importantly they served a symbolicfunction, communicating

MaterialWealthin the Silvae

97

the owner's taste and artistic discernment. Like all superfluous spending, art collecting was also the object of moral criticism, cited as an example of self-absorption and materialistic selfishness.For example, when comparing Serenus' simple, functional possessions to the fashionable, yet frivolous, art collections of others, Seneca illustrates how carefully chosen objects were designed not only to elicit outside approval and praise, but even to inspire a competitive spirit and envy among equally fashionable and affiuent visitors and guests.112 Like the villa itself, art collections functioned as vehicles of social power-a way for owners to exert their cultural superiority over affluent contemporaries through visible objects supplied with social meaning and value. 113

PERSONAL Purpk It is significant that the cushions of Pollius' Herculean temple mentioned earlier are purple, the most costly dye and the most culturally valuable. Purple was traditionally a sign of status, since it was expensive and difficult to extract and produce. 114 Economic expense in the dye's production led to its cultural value; it functions symbolically in the purple-bordered togas of noblemen and the triumphator,and as the color of emperors. As the official, public color of the state and the Emperor, purple was recognized for its symbolic power, and thus it became redefined in a private context as a symbol of political status or high rank, but more importantly, as a symbol of cultural refinement, high taste, and affluence. In Silvae 1.2.1 79, for instance, Venus recommends Stella as a worthy bridegroom because he will soon wear the purple toga that signified a curule office-a visual symbol not only of his rank and status (and favor with the Emperor) but also of his economic affluence and cultural sophistication. 115 Its significance as a symbolic marker of culture and taste resulted in the frequent usurpation of purple garments and insignia by lower-ranked private individuals, even when the color was legally reserved only for emperors. 116 Lower-ranked citizens imitated this symbol of culture and taste by acquiring and wearing less-expensive, inferior forms of the dye. 117 As with most decorative items, purple also had its own internal hierarchy; Tyre and Sidon were the most famous sources of the finest purple (and hence, by association, the finest clothing) as abundant literary references attest; 118 since Tyrian and Sidonian purple were the standard of measure, Romans easily identified inferior types with a discerning eye.119The range of hue was broad, but the most valued shade was a very dark reddish-purple, although the process of extraction allowed much lighter versions that were also acceptable.120

98

Nothing OrdinaryHere

Because of its desirability, purple was used for a variety of products, not only furniture cushions and drapery, as we see in the case of Pollius' temple, but in clothing as well. Purple clothing became a symbolic mark of economic prosperity and cultural refinement; specific referencesto purple in the Silvaeillustrate its importance as a visual status marker among Romans-a highly effective means of communicating social prominence quickly. For example, Sidonian purple is part ofViolentilla's cultusthat recommends her beauty and value as a potential wife (1.2.125) and matches her economic affiuence. Atedius Melior dresses Glaucias, his adopted son (of servile background), in purple (2.1.132) and employs the product abundantly in the boy's funeral (2.1.159). Purple is likewise used by Abascantus for the funeral of his aristocratic wife (5.1.225). These are not merely passing details but symbolic vocabulary. Statius' comments on Glaucias' purple clothing are intended to distinguish Melior's economic wealth, but, in exemplifying the way in which Melior spends his money, Glaucias' purple clothing indicates Melior's paternal devotion. 121 Statius clearly comprehends the symbolic significance of purple, and deliberately exploits its cultural value in distinguishing these addressees. Statius even defines his own economic wealth, refinement, and literary excellence through the color purple. Poem 4.9, recalling both the meter and subject of Catullus 14, playfully teases Plotius Grypus by ridiculing his lack of taste; Grypus, the addressee, becomes the object of Statius' mock-attack, since he has reciprocated Statius' beautiful purple-painted book costing ten asseswith a moth-eaten moldy one, worth the value of one debased Gaian as. The purplebook contains Statius' original poetry, while Grypus' decrepit book holds only the reprinted ramblings of old Brutus. Purple becomes an exterior signifying marker of the book's literary value contained within (4.9.8). Although originally intended to symbolize the political power and status of aristocratic Romans (and then the Emperor), the Silvae indicate that purple has evolved from being solely politically symbolic to a cultural symbol of fashion and taste. It is significant that Romans from wide-ranging backgrounds wear purple; the fact that those of servile background, like Glaucias, and Domitian's eunuch, Earinus (3.4.55) wear purple signifies its power as a culturally recognized symbol of refinement and elegance. Besides color, fabric types were also vital in communicating one's economic affluence and sense of taste. In particular, Statius mentions silk, imported from China and very costly and luxurious. 122 Like purple, it forms part of Violentilla's cultus (1.2.122) that Venus herself supplies 123 and comprises the funeral couch upon which the deceased Priscilla is laid to rest during her funeral procession (5.1.215). Silk is a material associated with women in particular, but its light, translucent quality incited criticism among Roman

MaterialWealthin the Silvae

99

moralists like Seneca, who viewed it as a symbol of feminine sexual impropriety. 124 In the case of Violentilla, however, whose beauty and association with the goddess of sex is a major form of capital and integral to the poem's purpose (see Chapter Five), silken clothing was especially appropriate.

Gemsand Jewelry The attention to color and aesthetics that Romans gave to their interior decorations also applies to their personal adornment. Besides clothing, jewelry was a kind of personal embellishment that provided an opportunity to display taste and fashion, but also to communicate symbolic meaning. Jewelry encompasses a broad range of forms ranging from necklaces to earrings, and media ranging from gold to gems. Its cultural and economic value is exemplified by frequent literary references and by abundant archaeological exempla. 125 Republican sumptuary laws regulated jewelry-wearing according to rank, 126 but outside of the ius anuwrumsuch laws do not appear during the Early Empire, or at any rate they were not enforced. Rather, the literary sources and archaeological evidence suggest that jewelry-wearing wasextremely popular and in most cases free from regulation.127 Nevertheless, it did become the object of moralizing discourse denouncing women in particular for their showy abundance of jewelry and regarding such display as a flagrant, self-absorbed materialistic passion. 128 But, culturally and aesthetically, jewelry formed an essential part of a woman's cultus,as we see in the case ofViolentilla (1.2) whose jewelry consists of amber (I 24), crystals (126), gold (127), and Indian necklaces (129). This list provides some idea of the abundance and variety of costly gems and metals that adorned Violentilla and enhanced her beauty. Crystals in particular were valuable imports (see Silv. 3.3.94), as was amber, which was imported from the Baltic and consisted of a variety of shades, the most prized being Falernian (named after the prized wine), a rich honey color. 129 Violentilla's Indian necklaces most likely refer to pearls, since the sea Nereids collect them for her (l.2.129). 130 Pearls were costly and much coveted, often imported from the coast of Persia (including the Red Sea, Indian Ocean and Persian Gulf). 131 Their recognized cultural value, in addition to their economic worth, is fully illustrated in poem 4.6; here Statius emphasizes the enjoyable time he spent at the home of Vindex, by declaring that the date should be marked with the Red Sea pearls, rather than the usual common white chalk (18-19); the comparison is significant for it accords with Vindex's economic affluence and his art collection described in the poem. Yet the reference is even more interesting in that it dearly shows Stacius exploiting the recognized symbolic and economic value of an esteemed material good as a means of enhancing his addressee's good taste and expertise as a fashionable host.

JOO

NothingOrdinaryHere

Not only women wore jewelry; Melior who, as we saw above, dressed his adopted son in purple, also provided Glaucias with gemmed finger rings (2.1.134). Statius does not specify the type of gems, but the detail occurs within the context of Glaucias' cultus, which, as we have already seen, consisted of variously colored, custom-tailored clothes. Together, the clothing and jewels illustrate Melior's economic generosity and true paternal devotion, since he ensures that his adopted son-although of servile origin-receives only the best. Another young boy of servile origin who also wears jewelry is Earinus, the eunuch cupbearer of the Emperor Domitian. Silvae 3.4 celebrates the dedication of his locks of hair to the temple of Asclepius at Pergamum, his birthplace. 132 Statius provides a quasi-mythological aetionof the boy's voyage to Domitian's palace, prior to which Venus readies Earinus, adorning him with beautiful clothing as well as gold necklaces and finger rings (52). Additionally, the shorn locks are placed in a box of gold and jewels (90-91), while later Amor has Earinus gaze into a gold and jeweled mirror to preserve his image forever (94). Again, Statius does not specify the types of gems, but merely provides an overall impression of brilliance. Males of non-servile origin also wore jewelry; Stella, the addressee of Silvae 1.2 and dedicatee of Book 1, seems to have worn gemmed rings, though Statius himself does not provide this information. In praising Stella's poetry, Martial (5.11) describes that, although Stella wears a multi-gemmed ring of sardonyx, emerald, diamonds and jasper on a single finger, the real gems are found in his poetry. The passage is striking not only because it shows jewelry popular among the senatorial elite, but because it demonstrated jewelry being used as a measure of comparison with a non-material product (poetry) which may not be as economically valuable, but is certainly as, if not more, culturally valuable. Martial's comparison perfectly illustrates that Romans applied economic and cultural values to both material and non-material wealth. While it was fully expected that someone of Stella'srank and status should wear jewels, it is remarkable that we find Earinus and Glaucias wearing the same types of jewelry as Stella, a patrician senator. Rings were especially significant for aristocratic males and possessed a cultural value separate from other forms of jewelry; signet rings suggested cultured literacy, while the gold band ring (anulusaureus), like the color purple, was legally permitted only to senators and legal equestrians, in order to distinguish their ranks and the cultural values associated with them. So culturally significant was the "right to wear a gold ring" (ius anuli aurez)that it was frequently usurped by freedmen and unofficial equestrians who desired to possess this form of capital, and thus assert greater self-distinction. 133 Many literary examples attest to both the unlawful exploitation of the gold rings by those who desire to appear aristocratic but who possess no such rank.

Material Wealthin the Silvae

JOI

Pliny the Elder tells us (Nat. 33.6.23) that even the less affluent slavesand freedmen wore gold-plated iron rings so as to appear as legal equites(equestrians), a practice appearing again in Petronius' Satyricon(32.3). Other literary examples attest to the lawful acquisition of the ring (and its accompanying rank) which nonetheless provoked resentment from those criticizing the increasing ease of social mobility. Martial, for example, mockingly criticizes Zoilus, a slave who recently acquired equestrian rank, and, as Martial asserts, whose iron ring of slavery, though more suited ro him, has evolved into the heavily gemmed gold ring he now wears with his newly acquired rank (anulusiste tuisfoerat modo cruribusaptus:I noneademdigitisponderaconvenient,11.37). Thus, such jewelry not only served the symbolic function of distinguishing among ranks, as we have already seen with regard to the color purple, but also became part of the moralizing discourse against the perceived rise in social mobility. 134 Jewelry designs in the ancient Roman world were often geometric in shape; this may be related to the role that gems and gold seem to have played in architectural decoration, as Rudolph has pointed out; 135 in Silvae 1.3 Statius seems to indicate that the interior decoration of Vopiscus' villa consists, in part, of gems, which probably enhanced architectural details, furnishings or other works of art. Statius tells us that it is difficult for him to recall all the beautiful decorative features which included gold figurines, ivory, and gems worthy enough to adorn fingers (dignasdigitiscontingere gemmas,49), a remark that suggests their architectural rather than personal use. Yet, it is also possible that Scatius' comment, if it does refer to architectural decorations, may imply that the gems were not real, but realistic painted images of the sort we find in wall paintings from Pompeii and environs, thereby further explaining Scatius' assertion chat the gems dignasdigitiscontingere. The above examples illuscrace chat gems and jewelry not only signified economic wealth, but cultural refinement, and in some cases, even rank. Like the other forms of personal adornment and interior decoration discussed thus far, gems and jewelry are encoded symbols correlating with a social reality, but within Statius' discourse of distinction, they also become literarily symbolic.

FUNERARY As we have seen, purple was one of the many important visual elements in costly funerals. The Silvaecontain four epicedia(2.4; 5.1; 5.3; 5.5) and three conso/.ationes (2.1; 2.6; 3.3), all of which describe the extensive lengths to which the affluent went to honor their deceased relatives or friends through visual display. Elaborate funerals not only provided due honor to the deceased, but also paraded the economic wealth, social prominence, and familial pietasof the surviving relatives. Wealthy funerals incorporated a variety of

102

Nothing OrdinaryHere

costly imports, commonly utilizing different types of aromatics, while erecting funerary monuments or tombs to continue commemorating the dead (and publicizing the living) well after the funeral had ended.

Aromatics Spices and herbs are the most prominent feature in Statius' funerary discourse within the Silvae.136Typicallysuch aromatics were applied to the hair or body of the deceased, or placed alongside the body on the pyre and burnt at the time of lighting. Propertius speaks of incense being burned near the body while it was lying in state within the atrium (presumably to mask the odor of decay), while perfume anointed the body before the actual burning. 137 In rare instances, the aromatics seem to be used purely for preservation, as in the funeral of Priscilla (Silv. 5.1), whose husband cannot bear to destroy her beauty through cremation and thus entombs his preserved (i. e., embalmed) wife in a crypt which will safeguard her loveliness. Ovid implies chat although the aromatics were more commonly reserved for funerals, they were also used for cosmetics or perfumes. 138 Aromatics might also be burnt at a birthday celebration, which had religious undertones, or in the anniversary of a death. l39 There are numerous types of these spices and herbs, and like the marbles discussed earlier, Statius assumes a familiarity among his audience in recognizing the specific aromatic type according to its geographical origins. For ease of organization, below is a list of each type, classified according to its origin, as they appear in the poems, followed by a brief description of each. 140

Saffron Cilicumflores (2.1.160); Sicaniisquecrocis(2.4.36); Cilicum messes(2.6.87); messesCilicum (3.3.34); ver Cilicum (5.1.211); Coryciaecomae (5.1.214); Sicanii croci(5.3.41-42). Cilicia, located along the coast in Anatolia, was considered the most renowned producer of saffron in the world, where at the so-called Corycian cavern, plots were designated for the culture of the purple saffron crocus (Crocussativus).141 Its economic value can be attributed to the labor-intensive production, where the dried stigmas of the flower produced only minimal quantities of the spice. Its value as a commodity for purchase has remained relatively unchanged over time. Thus, in the Roman world the time-consuming process required to produce the spice made it rare and highly desirable. Saffron was most frequently designated for burnt sacrifices, but when mixed with sweet wine it was also used in theatres to create a perfumed atmosphere, and could even be used as an especially costly hair dye or aphrodisiac. 142 Like

Material Wealthin the Silvae

103

marbles, different types of spices or even variations within a particular type reflect a hierarchy that depended upon origin. Sicilian saffron (Sicania),grown in the area of Centuripa, was less renowned than Cilician, as Pliny indicates, but nonetheless still must have been considerably costly.143

Putchuk munera graminis Indi (2.1.160); Indicas messes(4.5.30-2); Indorum seges (5.1.212). The phrase "harvests of India'' is fairly ambiguous. Van Dam identifies the spice as putchuk (Latin costum),which is harvested from the kusth plant in Kashmir. 144The root of this perennial herb was used in various ways from religious ceremonies to ointments, medicines and even in food. 145 According to Van Dam, Statius is unique in being the only source for the herb's use in cremation rites. Despite its rather exotic origin and "exquisite odor" (Plin. Nat. 12.41), the herb is inferior to other imported spices, like saffron, especially since it was often used in less expensive medical prescriptions. 146

Myrrh I Incense liquores Arabes (2.1.161); Arabum gramine (2.4.35); odoriferousSabaeos (2.6.86); messesArabum (3.3.34); cinnama Sabaeis (4.5.32); ver Arabum (5.1.211); JI.oresSabaei (5.1.211); Cinyreagermina (5.1.214); odoratasArabs decerpsitaristas(5.3.44). Like the ambiguous spice from India, references to Arabian spices are equally vague. Confusion arises from the fact that imported Arabian spices constituted a broad range of types including cinnamon, amomum, balsam, and cassia, in addition to the more standard myrrh and frankincense. Their identification as JI.oresSabaei stems from their origin in southern Arabia, where the Sabaeans harvested myrrh and frankincense, seemingly the most common type of Arabian spices.147 Thus, while references to the harvests of Arabia and Sabaea may in fact be one and the same, they are nonetheless ambiguous as to their specificity: should we understand odoriferosSabaeos (2.6.86) and JI.oresSabaei (5.1.211) as referring to myrrh or frankincense, or cinnamon, more explicitly defined in 4.5 (cinnamaSabaeis)?The coupling of odoriferosSabaeosin 2.6.86 with Phariaecinnama two lines later suggests that in this instance the Sabaean spice may be identified with myrrh or frankincense. In 5.1 Cinyreagermina most certainly refers to myrrh with its mythological allusion to King Cinyras, father of Myrrha, so that the identification of JI.oresSabaei in the same poem must be either cinnamon or frankincense.

104

Nothing OrdinaryHere

Clearly a variety of spices could be represented by the otherwise ambiguous reference to Sabaea. The application of these Arabian spices was equally wide-ranging; Dalby notes chat myrrh (myrrha)and frankincense (tus) were typically used in Roman religious ritual and fescivals.148These spices often served as oil perfumes to be applied to the hair, as we see indicated by liquoresArabesin 2.1.161 and confirmed by the subsequent passage describing the application of funeral spices to the hair of the deceased (arsuraml.averecomam,2.1.162). When used in the same manner, but within a different context, these aromatics served as aphrodisiacs. 149 Equally ambiguous is the relative economic value of Arabian spices since, in most cases, we cannot know the specific variety to which Statius refers (with the exception of 4.5). Surely, price and desirability ranged according to individual type, and, like saffron, hierarchies could exist within the same class. Dalby cells us, for example, that the qualities and price ranges of myrrh could vary from as little as 12 to 16 denariiI pound, an average price, to as much as 50 denariia pound. 150

Cinnamon Pharii liquores(2.1.161); Phariae cinnama (2.6.87-8); rara Sabaei cinnama (5.3.42-43). Egyptian (Pharian) cinnamon, different from the Sabaean version (a type of Arabian spice mentioned above), was traditionally associated with the phoenix. 151 LiquoresPharii, again, are ambiguous, and may indicate only cinnamon, or a combination of spices, including cinnamon, which were used as an ointment. Regardless of origin, cinnamon, and its related casia-a slightly inferior aromatic from the same type of tree-were extremely costly commodities, so much so that they were only rarely used to spice food, but were especially valued for expensive and serious medicinal purposes. 152 In addition to their function in funerals or religious ritual, the spices, often in the form of extracted oil, were highly prized as perfume applied co the hair. 153 Pliny the Eider's claim that individuals were willing to pay as much as 400 denarii I pound for the seductive perfumed spice indicates the high economic value attached co cinnamon as a perfume.

Balsam liquoresPakstini (2.1.161 ); tura Pal.aestinis(5.1.213; 3.2.141). Although native co southern Arabia, the Palestinian aromatic, balsam, was reputedly transplanted to Jerusalem by the Queen of Sheba. 154 Pliny's remarks regarding the defeat of Jerusalem during the reign of Vespasian, when the native

Material Wealthin the Silvae

105

Jews, anticipating the sack of their city, set out to destroy their precious trees, implies the economic value associated with the aromatic. Soon after Vespasian's victory, some trees were taken back to Rome to help commemorate the triumph of the Emperor and his son, Titus. 155 Opobalsamum,the most valued and expensive type of balsam, collected from the resin of the tree, was used as one of the kinds of perfumes applied to the hair, and, like other expensive aromatics, was said co have medicinal properties. 156The otherwise completely ambiguous Hebraeiliquores(5.1.213) may be referring to Jerusalem balsam.

Cardamom Assyrio amomo (2.4.34); Assyrio manantes gramine sucos (2.6.88); Assyrios liquores(3.3.212); multo amomo (3.4.82). Here again we have three fairly ambiguous references, since Assyrian can mean generally "eastern." Amomum, probably cardamom, would fit into this category since it was an import from India, 157 and it is possible that the ambiguous Assyriogramine and Assyriosliquoresalso refer to the same spice. Cardamom was sometimes employed as perfume, but appears in funerals much more frequently in Latin literature than other aromatics listed here. 158 The best types could carry a hefty price tag, as much as 60 denarii I pound. 159 A brief review of the spices listed above reveals chat the funeral of a private citizen could incorporate many different types of aromatics. For example, Glaucias' funeral consisted of five types; Philetas was honored with four types, and the aristocratic wife of Domitian's freedman secretary, Priscilla, also had five kinds. Claudius Etruscus showed his filial pietas to his deceased father by including at least two types of aromatics, while Statius grieved over the loss of his father with three types. When we consider the variety of ways in which aromatics were employed in funerals, as well as the range of scents that each exuded, it is difficult to imagine how an observer could easily discern the numerous varieties wafting through the air. While there is no reason to challenge the validity of Statius' funerary descriptions, it is nonetheless important to realize that the references to funerary aromatics are not necessarily indicative of personal observation or report; as a recognized cultural symbol and as an integral part of the vocabulary of funerals, they serve a symbolic function in Statius' discourse of distinction. Statius' descriptions provide clear evidence that relatives attempted to display familial pietas through highly visible funerals, publicizing their grief, not only through lament and tears, but through the use of extremely expensive aromatics. Like other forms of display designed to attract external approval, costly aromatics and other

106

Nothing OrdinaryHere

kinds of funerary monuments and rituals received attacks from Roman moralists who cited them as extravagant, designed to distinguish the still-living rather than honoring the deceased. 160 It should not be surprising, then, that like other visual symbols such as columns and marbles, aromatics find a place in Statius' Silvae,where their literary descriptions not only evoke a visual image, but more importantly an olfactory one-these sensory responses, evoked through words, necessarily recall the economic and cultural values associated with individual spices. Aromatics are an essential part of the vocabulary of funerals-not only in their real ritual enactment, but in their literary form as essential elements of the conso/,atio or epicedion,whereby they represent the economic wealth and the culturally-significant pietas of the still-living addressee.

Monuments and Tombs Tombs and monuments were another type of funerary vocabulary that honored the deceased while publicizing the still-living family.Although aromatics play the most prominent role in the funerals described by Statius, marble tombs or funerary monuments figure as another significant display of economic capital. 16 1 Inherently, monuments are symbolic; they commemorate the virtues of the deceased, but they serve as a continuing symbol of familial pietas. For example, Claudius Etruscus erects such a tumulusin honor of his father, while Statius, although lacking the financial resources for an elaborate monument, avows that, if he could, he would erect a monument to rival temples or even Aeneas' tomb for Anchises. 162 Melior has also erected an elaborate tomb on the Via F/,aminiain honor of his adopted son, Glaucias. The funeral of Priscilla (5. 1), the wife of Abscantus, is our best example in the Silvaeofone such elaborate funerary tumulus.Wanting to preserve his wife's beauty for eternity, Abscantus has embalmed her body with aromatics (tantasvenerabi/,e marmorI spiratopes,230-31 ), laying her inside a grand marble tomb. The details of the elaborate tomb illustrate the lengths to which Abscantus has gone in order to preserve his wife's vitality and distinguish his own marital devotion. We will examine her tomb and it cultural significance in greater detail in Chapter Five. The literary accounts of material objects described in Statius' Silvae are not mere rhetorical descriptions within the context of encomia;rather, they are deliberately placed symbols of recognized cultural values that contribute to the addressee's distinction. As the licensed spokesperson of the dominant culture, Statius utilizes these manifestations of economic wealth not only to underscore his addressee's economic affluence, but to communicate the cultural values legitimately associated with the specific fashions and tastes of Domitianic Rome. By giving language to singular material objects Statius

MaterialWealthin theSilvae

107

provides them with their own code of meaning (even if interpretations of chose meanings were at rimes a matter of dispute). In the next chapter I will examine Statius' application of language to examples of both material and non-material wealth as an indicator of the economic and cultural values associated with each type.

Chapter Four

Statius'Languageof Wealth

In the previous chapter we saw how portrayals of material wealth in Statius'

Silvae encompass a broad range of expensive, luxurious goods. Yet Statius' conception of wealth goes well beyond physical objects to include other types of capital (economic, symbolic, cultural) by which value is determined through a system of relational differentiation. In this regard, the theories of Bourdieu outlined in Chapter One are applicable to an examination of the ways in which Statius refers to "wealth." The value associated with a particular form of capital depends not only upon specific context but also explicit or implicit comparison to its opposite. Such a binary system applies to all kinds of entities considered valuable by an individual or society; a person's total combined capital, or wealth, is calculated not only by the monetary value of possessions (i. e., economic capital), but also other kinds of resources and experience that help distinguish individuals from one another. Cultural capital (family lineage, education) and symbolic capital (fame, prestige) are prominent features in the Silvaeand occupy just as high a rung (sometimes a higher one) on the ladder of distinction as economic capital. With this framework in mind, we must reflect on the role of language in Statius' expression of various types of wealth. As we saw in the previous chapter, certain passages in the Silvae, notably ecphrases, present and describe valuable possessions. In verbalizing physical objects, Statius incorporates them as a significant element in his vocabulary of distinction. Yet, he often utilizes words to represent wealth in more explicit terms. In so doing, he transforms real objects or ideas of wealth into words that assert additional meaning. The English term "wealth" most readily calls to mind economic capital, in relational opposition to poverty; even within this category, English contains a variety of expressions to denote economic prosperity or lack thereof. While "cash" refers almost exclusively to monetary notes (e. g., the one-dollar, or five-dollar bill), "money" refers to all types of currency (cash and

109

110

Nothing OrdinaryHere

change), even that invested in non-liquid property. Moreover, in particular instances, the English "wealth" can be applied metaphorically to non-material entities, such as "a wealth of ideas." Like English, Latin also possesses various terms to express both economic and non-economic "wealth." Consider the range of meanings contained within the following group of words: pecunia, census,fortuna, opes,divitiae, luxus.Individually each may express its own specific nuance of meaning, or their meanings may overlap. In some cases certain words suggest an underlying social/cultural value based upon Roman mores. Determining why Statius utilizes a particular term when he does can help us to formulate some guidelines for ascertaining values associated with both material and non-material goods, particularly in relation to one another, and will provide a fuller understanding of Statius' conception of wealth within the context of Domitianic Rome. This chapter provides a detailed analysis of the language that Statius employs to express various types of economic and non-economic wealth. In it, I will discuss how Statius utilizes or extends traditional meanings within their specific contexts, and I will elaborate upon Bourdieu's theory of converted capital by pointing out occasional instances where Statius' language of wealth simultaneously signifies more than one type of valuable capital. When describing an individual's wealth, Statius relies almost entirely on three different Latin terms: opes,census,and divitiae. Like our own English vocabulary, the difference in meaning among the three is often ambiguous; at times Statius chooses one over the other for metrical considerations or variatio.Nevertheless, visible patterns appear in his choice of vocabulary related to conceptions of wealth, and some instances involve a particular nuance that may suggest deeper social implications.

MATERIALWEALTH Opesis the most prevalent word associated with wealth in the Silvae.Its forms occur eighteen times within the corpus, more than any other word for wealth. The flexible nature of the term and the way in which Statius employs it account for this frequency; it can refer to economic wealth, economic resources (which can be expended on valuable goods), valuable objects/possessions, or even non-economic but nonetheless valuable entities. Opes,then, represents all kinds of capital which can be considered valuable or abundant in nature, closely adhering to Bourdieu's socio-economic theories. In the singular, opsmeans "method" or "assistance," while in the plural opesprimarily means "power" (e. g., military strength, power exercised over others, physical force, influence, etc.) and also refers to private or public "resources," although clearly the two ambiguous meanings can overlap. Because of this ambiguity, even the ThesaurusLinguaeLatinae admits the difficulty in

Statius'Languageof Wealth

Ill

ascertaining specific definitions of the word, and notes changes in meaning over time; for example, the sense "riches" (synonymous with divitiae) becomes frequent in poetry beginning with the Augustan Age and in the prose of Seneca's day.1 Earlier, however, its military and resource connotations frequently occur in texts of or about the Republican period (Livy and before), although they continue in imperial authors as well.2 In Sallust's Bellum Catilinum, for example, Caesar extols Rome's ancestors who were able toestablish a formidable Roman state from meager resources (profectovirtus atque

sapientiamaior illisJu.it, qui exparvis opibustantum imperiumfecerequam in nobis,qui ea beneparta vix retinemus,51.42). Cicero uses the word to express the other common meaning during this period, "power." In the ProMilone,3 he sarcastically comments on the exaggerated precautions undertaken to defend Rome against Cicero's client, Milo. Guards, military power and arms are made ready for a possible onslaught. To stress Pompey's overreaction and misguided characterization of his client, Cicero wittily explains that Milo's strength (vires)and physical force, or power (opes),must necessarily exceed the capacity of a single man, or in other words, his client does not merit such exaggerated preventative strategies. Diachronically the range of meaning for opes broadens; Augustan poets, as well as prose authors from Seneca the Younger on, use the term more frequently to express general economic prosperity, often with negative connotations. 4 In contrast, Statius often uses the term in highly specific contexts or to represent very explicit types of wealth and, moreover, usually does not employ opesin a negative sense, preferring other vocabulary for such contexts. 5 The transition in meaning from "power/resources" to "wealth" is not a far leap. An abundance of personal resources leads to wealth, which in turn can lead to power. Historically, moreover, political power and social status were inherently connected to an individual's economic assets, i. e., in Republican Rome birth status (which often merited large amounts of money) meant special standing in politics. One need only recall the Roman census which helped guarantee that class membership was strictly maintained according to one's economic capital or that foreign, prosperous lands were exploited by powerful, influential generals returning from a provincial campaign. Votes could be won by canvassing in the Forum, where the candidate was attended by a lengthy train of clients, some of whom were monetarily indebted to their patronus. Moreover, electoral bribery was not unusual as a method for making one's way into politics. 6 In all these cases, money or other forms of economic capital might potentially be converted into an entirely different capital such as power, which often assumes the form of public reputation and fame (i. e., symbolic capital). How this significant relationship

Nothing OrdinaryHere

112

between personal capital and symbolic capital, or distinction, functions in Statius' Silvaewill be addressed in the subsequent chapter. In the Silvae,Statius never employs opesin the strict Republican sense of power or military resources. Rather, its most common use occurs within the context of economic wealth. While we could accurately translate each instance of opesas "wealth," the word often reveals different hues of meaning. Occasionally Statius uses opesas a metonymy for a specific description of especially impressive material possessions, as in 1.3, where he excitedly describes the marvelous contents of Manilius Vopiscus' Tiburtine villa, which includes gold, ivory, bronze and silver objects. In addition to these costly goods, the house contains a noteworthy mosaic floor (1.3.52-57): Oum vagor aspeccuvisusque per omnia duco, calcabam necopinus opes. Nam splendor ab alto ddluus et nitidum referencesaera testae monstraveresolum, varias ubi picta per artes gaudet humus superatque novis asarota ftguris: expaveregradus. [While my eyes were wandering and passing over all these sights, I was unaware I was treading upon riches. For, the brilliance shining down from above and the tiles gleaming bright drew my attention to the radiant ground; decorated with various images,it rejoices,and with its novel figuressurpassesthe famous "unswept"mosaic. My steps halted in awe.] Clearly, opesrepresents not just the floor itself, but the wealth chat went into creating an expensive commodity (e. g., che materials, design, execution, or possibly even importation costs). Yet the object is more than just an expensively crafted floor; what could ordinarily be considered a purely utilitarian architectural feature becomes a work of art. Indeed, Statius expresses surprise at treading upon such a beautiful artistic piece, implying once again the extravagance invested in the home's decor. In this case, the economic capital invested in an elaborate mosaic floor converts into symbolic capital. As a rival to other works of art, notably the "Unswept Pavement" of Sosus at Pergamum (the cultural value of which has already been discussed in the previous chapter), the exquisitely decorated floor increases in value and contributes to the fame of the villa itself and the reputation and distinction of its owner, Vopiscus. 7 In a similar way, Statius describes the wealthy contents of Claudius Etruscus' balneumwhere opesrepresents the costly material goods which have contributed to the creation of an elaborate and expensive bath-house. After

Statius'LanguageofWealth

113

enumerating the various kinds of imported marbles used in the bath, Statius proceeds to describe in more general terms the other architectural elements which display the owner's discriminating taste (1.5.41-44): non limina cessant, effulgent camerae, vario fastigia vitro in species animamque nitent. Stupet ipse beatas circumplexus opeset parcius imperat ignis. [The thresholds are not overlooked and the rooms gleam, while the ceilings glitter with different colors of glass fashioned into life-like images. The furnace itself marvels at the fortunate wealth he encompasses and orders his fire to burn more gently.]

There is nothing ordinary here in this bath (nil ibipkbeium, 47): realistic mosaics, silver (not bronze) basins, and flowing light abound here. Presumably the publication of the poem promoted and perhaps even enhanced the bath's reputation. In both cases opesrefers to economic capital not in its raw form, implying the potential for expenditure (liquid or capital), but in its deliberately expended form. Such examples reveal how Statius employs opesto represent specific, costly items, which in turn aid in the creation or propagation of symbolic capital. This kind of use varies from other authors who generally employ the term in a purely non-specific manner. 8 Opescan also be used to express revenue or imports from abroad, an extended use not usually associated with the word; this usage approximates more closely the primary meaning of "resources." In this case such resources appear to exist in a raw form, either to be sold in their natural state or available for conversion into other profitable goods. For example, in 3.3, Statius enumerates the public offices held by the freedman Tiberius Julius Augusti libertus (the father of Claudius Etruscus) during the reign of Nero. As State Treasurer, he oversaw the collection of foreign tributes as well as the importation of various foreign goods from around the Empire (85-88). 9 As the overseer of the digestusopum, Claudius Etruscus is responsible for the organization of a multitude of foreign imports, destined for the imperial treasury. These imported goods range from the gold mined from the mountains of Spain and Dalmatia (89-90) to African grains (91), from Massylian citrus-wood to Indian ivory (94), all of which are commonly converted into luxurious household adornments (often in the form of furniture) described elsewhere in the Silvae.10 Here opesclearly refers to the imported goods destined for the Roman market. Once many of these raw materials are converted into costly products and purchased by wealthy Romans, such economic forms of capital transform into symbolic capital.

Nothing Ordinary Here

114

The use of opesto express foreign revenue or imports occurs also in 1.4. Like Claudius Etruscus, the addressee, Rutilius Gallicus, was deeply involved in imperial service. Under the reign ofVespasian he served as governor of Asia (80-1) and consul (82), during which time he was commissioned to supervise the collection of tribute from foreign provinces like Libya (83-86). Rome increases her wealth through the economic capital procured from Libyan tribute, the spoils of foreign triumphs, and other economic resources (opes)from the province. While the exact nature of these opesis ambiguous, Statius considers them part of the overall revenue destined to increase Rome's treasury. Statius also employs opesto denote a general sense of economic prosperiry in contrast to paupertas.In 3.1 Hercules complains to Pollius Felix about the embarrassingly humble temple dedicated to him which stands in stark contrast to other more luxurious temples. Hercules enumerates Pollius' many villas, their costly contents, and elaborate temples and wonders why his temple alone does not reap the benefits of Pollius' wealth (opes)(91-96): "tune," inquit, "largitor opum, qui mente profusa tecta Dicaearchi pariter iuvenemque replesti Parthenopen? Nostro qui tot fastigia monti, tot virides lucos, tot saxa imitantia vultus aeraque, tot scripto viventes lumine ceras fixisti." ("Are you," he said, "the same benefactor of riches who selflessly restored Puteoli's households and youthful Naples? Are you the one who built so many towers on our hill, formed so many green glades, who set up so many life-like marble and bronze sculptures, and so many waxen images lit up with painted realism?"]

While Pollius is a largitoropum in others' eyes, to Hercules he appears pauper et indigus( 102). Largitorand pauper stand in oppositional relation to one another as a measurement of Pollius' economic expenditure. In the end, at Hercules' bidding, Pollius erects a worthier, more expensive temple, thus truly deserving his title as largitoropum.11 The implied moral implications regarding economic prosperiry and its proper utilization occur frequently in the Silvae. In 2.3 Statius praises Melior for using his wealth moderately; he does not hoard it away, but spends it in a manner which will allow others to enjoy it visually or sensually: "This same man readily shows contempt for his wealth; unlike others, he does not keep his riches stockpiled away in the dark, but brings them to light to share," (idem

auri facilis contemptoret optimus idem I promere divitias opibusqueimmittere

Statius'Languageof Wealth

115

lucem,2.3.70-71). If properly expended, economic opescan also serve a practical purpose within the Roman family. For example, the children of Iulius Menecrates will prosper socially given their origoand opes;both assets will allow his daughter to marry immediately into a patrician household, while allowing his sons to participate in the Senate (4.8.59-62). 12 Here opesserves a practical financial advantage for the family: for the daughter as a dowry, for the sons as a required economic capital to enter the social rank of the Curia. Opesalso functions as an important contribution to a Roman woman's economic and cultural capital by recommending her as a distinctive woman. For example, in 1.2 Statius describes the beauty of Violentilla, differentiating between her natural beauty, which rivals that of the goddess (high forehead, hairstyle, etc.) and the artificial wealth (i. e., jewels) which Venus provides in order to enhance her natural endowments (1.2.114-122): 13 Latias metire quid ultra emineat matres, quamum Latonia nymphas virgo premit quamumque egomet Nereidas exsto. Haec et caeruleis mecum consurgere digna fluctibus et nostra potuit considere concha; et, si flammigeras potuissec scandere sedcs hasque imrare domos, ipsi erraretis, Amores. huic quamvis census dederim largita beatos, vincic opesanimo. ["Take note how much her stature rises above other Roman matronae, as much as Latonian Diana towers over her own nymphs or I over my own Nereids. She is beautiful enough to rise up with me from the deep blue and she could recline on my conch shell; if she could ascend the fiery halls and enter this heavenly abode, even you, Cupids, would mistake her for me. Although I have generously given her countless assets, her mind surpasses her wealth."]

The above passage introduces an equally lengrhy one (I 22-29) describing the natural resources (gemstones and pearls, for example) which have been harvested to provide Violentilla with beautiful adornments (census).Census,then, seems to represent the jewelry itself, which Venus goes on to describe in detail, while opescan be rather ambiguously translated simply as "riches." The popularity of expensive, ornate jewelry as part of a Roman woman's cultus, especially during the Empire, is reflected in extensive archaeological and literary examples. 14 Jewelry serves not only co display a woman's economic wealth, but also to enhance her overall beauty, a valuable form of personal capital. Violencilla's costly jewels are consistent with her equally costly townhome, described just as

116

Nothing Ordinary Here

elaborately later in the poem. While opesis material in its general meaning in this case, it is important to understand that the material wealth (e. g., jewelry) represented by the terms cemus and opes contribute to Violentilla's overall beauty-itself a non-material form of cultural capital and a traditional ideal commending Roman women. 15The phrase vincitopesanimo, preceding the description of the jewels, is intended, however, to emphasize that Violentilla's animus is superior to the economic worth of the jewelry, and thus by association her beauty. Pederzani has rightly pointed out that the line depicts Violentilla as the ideal Flavian woman. 16 Yet despite all her ornamentation, Violentilla exercises moderation in her wealth in accordance with her virtue (animo)-a sentiment which functions as a common motif throughout the Silvae.Violentilla, thus, is shown to be a woman of the highest cultural and economic worth who can flaunt more than jewels and even beauty; while these are valuable economic and cultural contributions to a woman's overall capital and are even capable of recommending her as an exceptional wife, it is Violentilla'sanimus that truly distinguishes her character and elevates her worth as a woman. Her animus functions as a counterbalance to her abundant beauty and thus distinguishes her from other women who depend upon only the superficial material adornments to demonstrate their worth-a vain woman like those against whom Juvenal directs some vituperation in Satire 6. 17 Just as opescontributes to a woman's economic and cultural worth, they also serve a practical purpose in Roman funerary customs. In these instances, opesalmost always represents the expensive incense, perfumes or other imported unguents described in the previous chapter. In 3.3, for example, Statius encourages Claudius Etruscus to heap his father's funeral pyre high with expensive imported funerary incense letting the fire consume his inherited wealth: "Generously pile up on the funeral pyre the aromatics of the East and the harvests of the Cilicans and Arabs; let the fire burn the wealth intended for your son's inheritance," (Tu l.argusEoa I germina, tu messes

CilicumqueArabumquesuperbasI mergerogis;ferat ignisopesheredis,3.33-35). In another funerary context (5.1, Statius stretches the meaning of opesin a completely new way, so that its meaning must be inferred purely from context. Because Priscilla's husband could not bear the burning smoke of the pyre and the destruction of his wife's beauty (nee enim fumantia busta I cl.amoremquerogipotuit perferre,226-7), he entombed Priscilla in a marble crypt along the Appian Way. There her body suffers no decay, and the marble tomb exudes opes:"No longer will time strip you, the toils of age cannot harm you: protecting your body, the respectful marble wafts its perfumes," (Nil longior

aetasI carpere,nil aevipoterunt vitiarel.abores: I siccautum membris,tantas venerabik marmor I spirat opes,228-231). The implication is that the body has

Statius'Languageof Wealth

117

been preserved, perfumed with imported, costly embalming fluids normally associated with the wealthy. Here Statius has used opesin a novel manner not otherwise found in Latin literature, to suggest not only the embalming perfumes themselves, but the substantial amount of economic capital expended on Priscilla's preservation. 18

NON-MATERIALOPES In contrast to the material capital expressed in the meaning of opesdescribed above, Statius occasionally employs the extended meaning of the word in reference to non-economic, non-material goods. In these cases opesfrequently recalls its original, primary meaning of"resources," though again without military or political connotations. Instead, these are personal resources, natural gifts or faculties which, like economic opes,are to be rightly expended for a particular purpose. In 1.4, instead of calling upon Apollo or the Muses for poetical inspiration (Ast ego nee Phoebum, . . . neeAonias decimal cum Pallade divas . .. 19-21), as is his usual fashion, Statius calls upon Rutilius Gallicus himself (ipseveni viresquenovasanimumque ministraI qui caneris,22-3), since he particularly excels in the art of speech (nee tu, quando tibi, Gal/ice,maius I

eloquium, fandique opibus sublimis abund4s, I sperne coli tenuiore lyra, 1.4.34-6). 19 Here Statius comes closest to Bourdieu's conception of intellectual capital: Gallicus possesses not merely eloquence, but a wealth of sublime speech and poetical ability. This kind of non-material use of opesperhaps suggests a dichotomous relationship between the values associated with economic prosperity and intellectual prosperity. Such an implied contrast between two different kinds of wealth (opes)is paralleled in a passage from Seneca's De Beneficiis.Here Seneca describes an individual who, although the "best example of possessing riches" (divitiarum maximum exemplum), was nonetheless "lacking intellect" (ingeniisterilis),(2.27.3). Seneca goes on to describe that despite this individual's avaricious nature, he could more readily offer money (nummos) than words (tanta illi inopia eratsermonis).20 This extended use to suggest verbal output or ability occurs elsewhere (though not frequently) in Latin literature, mostly during the Augustan period. In a passage from Ovid's EpistulaeEx Ponto,we see again how opescan be employed in both senses to play upon the word's double meaning. Here Ovid explains to Germanicus chat he will not erect a Parian marble temple, as he cannot afford the expense; his exile (ilia ruina) has stripped him of his economic resources (opes).Instead, he will rely upon his one remaining influential resource (opes), his poetical ability (carmen), to regain favor with the emperor: "I won't erect a temple for you, Germanicus, made from Parian marble: that punishment of mine has ripped my wealth away. Affluent cities and

Nothing Ordinary Here

118

households can build you your temple. Naso will thank you with a different kind of riches of his own: a poem," (neetibi de Pariostatuam, Germanice,tem-

plum I marmore:carpsit opes il/,a ruina meas. I temp/,adomus facient vobis urbesquebeatae.I Naso suis opibus,carminegratus erit, 4.8.31-34). Similarly, Horace also employs the word to suggest poetical production. At Ep. 1.3, he advises Celsus to rely less on others' literary exemp/,aand instead to focus on his own creative inspiration, i. e., privatae opes(1.3.15-20): quid mihi Celsus agit, monitus multumque monendus, privatasut quaerat opeset tangere vitet scripta, Palatinus quaecumque recepit Apollo, ne, si forte suas repetitum venerit olim grex avium plumas, moveat cornicula risum furtivis nudata coloribus? [Tell me, what has Celsus been doing? He's been warned again and again to draw on his own creative juices and to avoid cribbing off the writings that Palatine Apollo has received; otherwise if by chance the flock of birds comes to recover their plumage, the little crow naked with his stolen colors may incite ridicule.] Other non-economic uses of opesoccur in the Silvae, occasionally with more ambiguous meanings. We have already seen how in Silvae 3.1 Hercules complains of Pollius' unequal expenditure of economic wealth; he is /,argitoropum when it comes to others, but has proven to be a pauper. However, following Pollius' construction of a costly new temple, Hercules gives his approval

(3.1.166-70): Macte animis opibusquemeos imitate labores, qui rigidas rupes infecundaeque pudenda naturae deserta domas et vertis in usum lustra habitata feris foedeque latentia prefers numina. Quae tibi nunc meritorum praemia solvam? [Blessingson your heart and your riches; emulating my Labors, you have conquered the unyielding cliffs and the disgraceful wilderness of hostile nature. You've made use of the wild beasts' territory and have coaxed forth the woodland spirits shamefully hiding. What rewards should I now give you for your toil?] At first glance, it appears that Hercules praises Pollius' economic wealth (opibus), given the earlier references to Pollius' economic expenditure. Yet

Statius'Languageo/Wealth

119

further consideration of the passage indicates an alternate meaning. Earlier in the poem the planning and eventual execution of the temple is described (I 17-41). Some twenty lines are devoted to the monumental task involved in reshaping the rocky landscape to accommodate the new temple: innumerable workers are employed; trees muse be cut; limestone hewn; che foundation laid; and, most difficult of all, boulders muse be split to make room for the new building. In his praise, Hercules compares Pollius' endeavor to his own Labors, noting specifically the effort involved in reshaping the landscape (qui rigidas ... ), thereby emphasizing the extensive undertaking of the project. Hercules, then, praises not Pollius' wealth but his resolve (animis) and wherewithal (opibus). Pollius' apesare in fact labors of his own kind. Opibus is inclusive, referring to the various efforts involved in the temple's execution, specifically the lengths to which Pollius has gone in order to build the temple: the designing, planning, organizing, employing of workers, and eventual construction. "Wherewithal" accurately captures the full extent of Pollius' apesin this context, a clear parallel of which is seen in Valerius Flaccus (3.702-14). There, one of the Argonauts attempts to persuade his fellow sailors not to abandon Hercules, who has remained in Mysia to search for his boyfriend Hylas. The Argonaut foretells a time in the future when they will wish for Hercules' presence: Saepe metu, saepe in cenui discrimine rerum Herculeas iam serus opesspretique vocabis arma viri, nee nos tumida haec tum dicta iuvabunt. [Often when you are afraid and it is a critical moment, coo late will you call for the resources of Hercules and the arms of that man whom you've abandoned; and then these prideful words will not help you one bit.]

The idea is that the Argonauts will miss all the resources that Hercules offers-strength, power, courage, determination, etc.-meaning, in short, his wherewithal to get the job done. In both cases apesrepresents everything that is at one's disposal to accomplish any given task. The similarity in the Herculean context is made even more striking with the analogous use of opes. In a final example of Statius' use of opes,we find a variant of the noneconomic meaning described above. Here, wealth is employed to describe the abundant natural resources of a particular landscape. In 2.2, Statius pens a detailed narrative about Pollius Felix'svilla. After recounting the opulent architectural features and costly contents of the building, Statius begins his description of the villa's natural setting with a simple question: "How do I

120

Nothing OrdinaryHere

now enumerate the riches of the place, the fertile fields jutting into the sea and the cliffs dripping with vines for Bacchus' wine?" (Quid nunc ruris opespontoque novaliadicam I iniectaet madidasBaccheonectarerupes?2.2.98-9). The site abounds with a wealth of natural advantages (opesruris), such as cliffs overlooking the sea (wild landscape) and fields abundant with prolific grapevines (cultivated land). So beautiful is the property chat the local vegetal gods even convene to enjoy it. The villa not only entails a visually attractive setting where its inhabitants can feast their eyes on the wealth of natural beauty, it is also situated conveniently and prosperously in close proximity to the sea and fields full of grapes for home-grown wine. The overall value (in all senses of the word) of the estate's main building increases dramatically when combined with the wealth of its natural locale. This specific meaning of opes occurs elsewhere only rarely: rurisopes(Manilius 4.523), and similarly telluris opes (Valerius Flaccus I.510). Other examples of opes in the Silvae are discussed below when they occur in conjunction with alternate terms for wealth.

CENSUS AND DIVITIAE While Stacius prefers to use opesto convey all types of wealth, particularly with an underlying notion of potentially expendable resources, he also employs other Latin words to express economic prosperity. It is not unusual for the terms opes,divitiae and censusto overlap in meaning; in Statius' poetry this is particularly true when his purpose is to express unspecified economic prosperity. In some cases it is nearly impossible to distinguish between two terms, especially when, in order to emphasize abundance, they appear in the same poetic breath and function as poetic hyperbole in an accumulation of associated words. Variatioand meter are also considerations in determining Statius' word choice. Yet in each instance, we must consider whether Statius has in mind a more specific meaning or underlying connotation that directs his decision to choose one particular word over another. Censusappears six times in the Silvae.Traditionally the word is closely associated with the Roman household and is linked to the Roman census in which social class standing depends on economic capital. An individual's total economic capital, or census,encompasses a range of investments: money or savings (unspent wealth), properties (city houses and villa), furnishings, and other forms of revenue (spoils of war, harvests, etc.). Juvenal gives the dearest example of exactly what censusmeans: in a passage bemoaning the state of the lawcourts, the speaker of the poem describes the priority of an individual's economic prosperity, seeing that the first queries posed to a lawyer center on his census(protinusad censum,de moribusultimafiet quaesitio,137). He goes on to ask potential questions regarding the make-up of the census,illustrating the

Statius' Languageof Wealth

121

range of economic investments: "How many slavesdoes he possess?How many acres does he own? How many dessert dishes does he have?" (3.137-9). Naturally the association of the word censuswith the Roman census (i. e., the aestimatioof household economic capical to assess class rank) is particularly prevalent in Republican literature or in passages describing this time period, when the census was of primary consideration. Livy uses the term in this way almost exclusively.21 Cicero similarly applies the term in an identical sense (descriptus. .. populuscensu, ordinibus,aetatibus,Leg.3.44). Yet interestingly enough it is clear that the Roman census and the family fortune (census)associated with class structure is still an object of concern during the Empire. In another instance, Pliny recommends one of his own acquaintances as a potential husband for a friend's niece; among the bachelor's many positive qualities, Pliny mentions (though reluctantly) the man's familial economic wealth (Ep. 1.14): Nam cum imaginor vos, quibus quaerimus generum, silendum de facultatibus puto; cum publicos mores atque etiam leges civitatis intueor, quoad vel in primis censushominum spectandos arbitrantur, ne id quidem praetereundum videtur. [For, when I picture you, and your brother whom we hope to fix up with a spouse, I don't think more needs to be said about financial matters; when I contemplate current customs and even the laws of the state, which especially consider men's financial situation worthy of scrutiny, I don't see how we can ignore this issue.]

He goes on to observe that such censusis important not only for the social value put on economic capital for the purposes of the Roman census, but also for defraying the costs associated with any future offspring the couple may produce and for keeping the censuswithin the family and passing it on to future generations. 22 This primary sense of censusclosely follows the word throughout Latin literature, and although at times it may lose its primary association with the Roman census per se, the word still retains its original connection to household finances, and significancly, expenditure of the family fortune. 23 In De Vita Beata, 7.17.2, Seneca in his customary manner complains of extravagant living; among numerous luxuries, he asks, "Why is your wife wearing the entire family estate on her ears?" (Quare u.,cortua /,acupletisdomus censumauribus gerit?). His use of census(instead of another "wealth" term) implies that this affluent wife is inappropriately expending the overall household economic capital on trivial goods such as earrings. Domus quite dearly emphasizes the connection of censuswith the household. 24 Likewise Ovid discourages a lover

Nothing Ordinary Here

122

from spending his censuson especially costly ornamentation such as Tyrian dyed clothing, urging him instead to purchase the less-expensive dyed material.25 Such references to ill-spent household censusare a frequent topic of discourse in Roman literature, particularly among imperial authors. 26 As these examples show, in a broad sense we could accurately translate censusas simply "economic wealth of a household"; yet, the word possesses a very specific underlying connotation, whereby it expresses one's total family fortune, or in English terms, one's "net worth." It is inherently dangerous to assume the reason for any author's choice of vocabulary; in considering Statius' use of census, context does not always make it readily apparent whether he intends to express this underlying meaning, particularly when accompanying words associated with the household may be absent. Yet other contemporary authors have used censussimilarly, to describe the proper expenditure of economic wealth within the household, so we should take this usage into consideration when dealing with Statius' employment of census. We must question why Statius chooses censusover divitiae or opesand what implications this decision may have on our understanding of values during this period. For example, in 3.3 Claudius Etruscus' father is praised for his generosity, especially in regard to his sons' education: "How willingly this rich man spent the household income on his sons' upbringing," (quam dives in usus I natorum totoque vokns excederecensu, 147-8). Concerned with their everyday comforts and future success, the father is willing to expend the family fortune on the boys' upbringing. Exaggeration aside, this is a sacrifice by any standard. Seneca would have certainly approved of this expenditure more than spending the family censuson jewelry. Like Seneca, Ovid and Juvenal, Statius associates censusnot only with the family fortune, but the proper way to spend that fortune. In this regard censusoften suggests value judgments about how the family should invest its total economic capital. In two other passages in separate poems, Statius employs censusin the same phrase with divitiae.27 In 2.6 he empathizes with the severe grief that Ursus, the addressee, experiences following the death of his delicatus.As an expression of the depths of Ursus' grim emotional state, Statius describes the bereavement in relation to his economic worth, suggesting that Ursus could bear the loss of his wealth much more easily than he has borne the loss of a loved one (2.6.60-68): 0 quam divitiis censuqueexutus opimo fortior, Urse, fores! Si vel fumante ruina ructassent dites Vesuvina incendia Locroe seu Pollentinos mersissent flumina saltus

Statius'Languageof Wealth

123

seu Lucanus Acir seu Thybridis impetus ahas in dextrum torsisset aquas, paterere serena frome deos; sive alma fidem messesque negasset Cretaque Cyreneque et qua tibi cumque beaco larga redit Fortuna sinu. [More bravely,0 Ursus, could you endure losing all your money and your whole estate! If thriving Locris had belched out destructive flames from smoldering Vesuviusor waters had drowned your Pollentine estate or the Lucanian Acir, or the force of the Tiber had overflowedirs right bank with high waters, you would tolerate the gods with an unruffled brow; or, if kindly Crete and Cyrene had denied you their pledged harvests and wherever else generous Fortune returns to you with bountiful breast.] The juxtaposition of the two words could certainly be interpreted as poetic reduplication or hyperbole, particularly given the context in which Statius is emphasizing the extreme degree of Ursus' despair. Even so, there is a significant distinction to be made. While divitiaerefers to abundance, specifically of money, it does not, historically, have an association with the household or the Roman census. Divitiaecalls to mind wealth in the sense of our English "money," or otherwise economic wealth that is a part of the total family estate. Censuson the other hand connotes a total economic capital, of which divitiae("riches," goods bought with money, or savings) are just one portion of his entire estate. The notion that censushere refers to Ursus' family estate is further elucidated by the subsequent lines, in which Statius, much in the way Juvenal had done, describes Ursus' various investments, including villa properties in Locri and Rome, land properties in Crete and Cyrene, and other sources of family revenue. If he lost these contributions to his total census,Ursus nevertheless could bear it unruffied (serenafronte, 65) compared to the grief he now feels with the loss of his delicatus. Thus we may argue that'\.economic goods lose their value in comparison to the loss of a family member or loved one. At face value, dismissing poetic hyperbole, the explicit assertion is that Ursus could bear poverty, perhaps risking social class standing, more easily than living bereft of his delicatus. Silvae 2. 7 reveals further that divitiae refers perhaps to a more general sense of economic riches or even savings, while censusretains a more specific meaning in its association with the family fortune and how that fortune is expended, is further evidenr in 2.2. Here the distinction between the two words appears more deliberate. Statius extols Pollius Felix's management of his economic capital, specifically because he is temperate; he does not hoard away his heaps of riches (divitiae) like a miser, but spends them moderately, allowing public display of the family fortune (census)(2.2.151-53):

Nothing OrdinaryHere

124 Non tibi sepositas infelix strangulat area divitiasavidique animum dispendia torquent fenoris: expositi censuset docta fruendi temperies.

[No wretched coffer keeps a tight fist on riches hidden away, nor do loans with a ravenous interest rate trouble your heart: your wealth is open to all and you are conscientious in your moderate spending.]

Thus divitiae seem to be partial contributions to one's censuswith the idea that these riches include raw forms of economic value such as coins, gold, or silver that can be hidden or stored away. The implication of divitiae as raw forms of economic wealth which are not spent, but saved, is emphasized by sepositas, (in stark contrast to expositicensus);etymologically, divitiae are riches mined from the earth, such as gold and silver, or provided by the earth such as agricultural products. 28 Statius clearly praises those individuals who spend (moderately and appropriately) their censuson various investments, rather than retaining it strictly in the form of raw riches, invisible to the public eye. This kind of value judgment was anticipated by Horace, who, though not explicitly employing the term divitiae, expresses an identical sentiment (qui dis-

crepantistisI qui nummos aurumque reconditnesciusuti I compositismetuensque velut contingeresacrum, Sat. 2.3.108-11 0). Such judgments on the expenditure of one's total combined economic capital are certainly in keeping with the idea that censusspecifically refers to one's family fortune. An almost identical meaning for divitiae occurs in 2.3, in which the term is this time contrasted with apes.Here Statius describes how Melior excels (optimus) in the management of his finances: "[he] spends his money and does not keep his wealth hoarded away in darkness," (promeredivitias opibusqueimmittere lucem, 2.3.71). There is a marked contrast in how Melior manages his financial affairs: saving versus spending. On the one hand he expertly keeps his money (divitiae, i. e., savings) in order, while simultaneously expending some of his wealth (apes)on goods visible to the public eye (immittere lucem). This attestation of apesis consistent with other occurrences mentioned above in which apes is associated with potentially expended economic wealth. Moreover, our understanding of the underlying connotation associated with apeshelps to elucidate the possible intended contrast between the two wealth terms. Statius does not always employ censussolely in connection with men. While other Roman authors mentioned above decry wealthy women's indiscriminate squandering of the family census,Statius mentions the possession of censusas a positive feature suitable for a successful union between bride and

Statius' LanguageofWealth

125

groom. In 2.7 he lists the numerous qualities which make Polla an appealing bride for her future husband, Lucan. Among these are not only her physical and personality attributes, but also her census(2.7.82-88): sed taedis genialibus dicabo doctam atque ingenio tuo decoram, qualem blanda Venus daretque Iuno forma, simplicitate, comitate, censu,sanguine, gratia, decore, et vestros hymenaeon ance postes festis cancibus ipsa personabo. ["With the marriage corch I [i. e., Calliope) will bless you with a learned woman suitable to your genius, one such as kindly Venus or Juno would gram, distinguished by beauty, honesty, charm, affluence, pedigree, elegance, and loveliness; and I myself will sing the wedding hymn outside your door with joyful song.")

Polla can boast many qualities which make a woman physically attractive, but in addition to such non-material commodities she (herself or her family) also possesses a censuswhich becomes a valuable marital commodity. The juxtaposition of censuwith sanguinedeliberately emphasizes Polla's value as a suitable bride. She can contribute to che marriage not only her economic census,but also the reputation of her family lineage, two commodities which in many cases are inherently inseparable. Censusin place of another wealth word, such as divitiae, suggests the social function of the term as it pertains to marriage; Polla's censuswill become a significant contribution to the joint economic capital of the married couple. 29 While up to this point I have differentiated between censusand divitiae, there are two passages in Statius when censusis used in connection to opes.In the first example, similar to 2.6, Statius describes Melior's severe grief following the death of Glaucias, his adopted son. Melior provides an elaborate and coscly funeral for the boy, spending large amounts of money on imported perfumes and unguents. Nonetheless he would also willingly heap upon the funeral pyre all his fortune, which is now worthless-it cannot bring back Glaucias (cupit omniaferre I prodiguset totosMelior succenderecensus,I desertasexosusopes, 2.1.162--04). Censusrefers to Melior's entire family fortune. Opes in this case quite dearly is synonymous with census,following the need for variatio,but without the underlying household connotation expressed by census.It can simply be translated in the more general sense of economic wealth (expended or to be expended). Now, however, in a much more morbid kind of expenditure, Melior

126

Nothing OrdinaryHere

not only freely spends his economic capital on costly funerary goods, but would even spend his entire fortune on the pyre. As in 2.6, the underlying sense, poetic hyperbole aside, is that Melior values his adopted son more than his economic worth, which is now hateful to him (exosusopes);this is the only occurrence in the Silvaewhere opesis viewed in a truly negative sense. A parallel can be found by returning again to Ovid's story of Midas, who foolishly misunderstood the value of economic prosperity. After learning his lesson, Midas became thoroughly disgusted with his wealth (perosusopes,11.146). However, while Ovid's use of opesis negative precisely because Midas foolishly mistakes the value of overabundant economic wealth, Statius' negative context has little to do with a lack of proper expenditure and avarice. Rather, Melior's wealth is hateful to him because it can do nothing to replace or restore his son; it is valuable only for the grim task of buying funerary offerings. Melior's disgust with his censusand opes serves to express the relative value Melior places on his adopted son in comparison to his economic prosperity. We have seen how divitiae can refer generally to economic capital, often with the underlying connotation of non-expended wealth and especially when used in contrast with censusor opes;this meaning is consistent in all of its uses throughout the Silvae.However, Statius does not use it often, only five times throughout the poems. Three of these have been discussed above. In two occurrences divitiae is used in conjunction with other wealth terms, serving as poetic variatio or duplication of idea. In 5.1 Statius uses it to express the general economic prosperity of three traditionally wealthy regions: India, China, and Arabia (siBabylonosopes,LydaesiponderagazaeI Indorumquedares SerumqueArabumquepotentesI divitias, 5.1.60-62). In 3.3 divitiae refer to economic wealth collected from various peoples throughout the world, but in this context, like opes,it has an underlying connotation of"collected revenue"

(iam credituruni I sanctarumdigestusopumpartaequeper omnesI divitiaepopulosmagniqueimpendia mundi, 3.3.86-88). While divitiae is used relatively infrequently as a noun, Statius more commonly employs its numerous adjectival or adverbial forms to describe wealthy (i. e., expensive or valuable) objects or individuals. Dives, or its contracted form dis, can refer to either economic value (a monetary price put on an object) or abundance (a plethora of goods that indicates wealth). Thus, while an individual can be divesbecause he owns certain economically valuable possessions, there is also the underlying understanding that he possesses an abundance of such valuable goods. This desire to express abundance accounts for Statius' frequent tendency to emphasize quantity in addition to quality. 30 Bourdieu's theory of "distance from necessity'' applies nicely to the relationship between wealth and abundance. 31 Abundance and wealth allow an

Statius'language of Wealth

127

individual to live comfortably and to purchase expensive non-necessities for personal pleasure, delight, or aesthetics. The relative ratio between abundance and necessity determines an individual's economic wealth; the less a person must concern him/herself about daily economic needs, the greater his/her abundance of wealth. For example, Diana is described as wealthy (dives), specifically because, although she already has abundant praeda, she still receives additional offerings in all of her temples. 32 The same kind of meaning occurs in 3.1. When caught in a rainstorm, Statius, Pollius Felix, and the rest of the picnicking party are unable to find adequate shelter, despite the abundance of houses and extravagant towers scattered throughout the area: "We could find no place to move our picnic, despite the fact chat countless homes dominated the joyful fields and the mountain glittered, rich with its countless towers," (neequo conviviamigrent,I quamvis innumeraegaudentia rurasuperne I insederedomus et multo culmine dives I mons nitet, 77-80). In chis case not only individuals and their possessions are "wealthy"; even natural landscapes can be made to be wealthy through the intervention of humans. Sometimes the specific distinction between abundance of materials and their cost is blurred, as in l .5 where, because of the abundance and costly materials involved in Claudius Etruscus' balneum, the Nymphs, carried in by the Virgo and Marcia aqueducts, have never lived more lavishly (non umquam aliis habitastisin antris I ditius, 1.5.30-31 ).33 At other moments, wealth is determined by rarity or scarcity. As we have already seen in Chapter Three, in 5.3.41, Statius describes various expensive funerary offerings, including crocus (saffron), Arabian perfumes, and rare cinnamon, harvested by the wealthy Sabaeans. The Sabaeans are economically wealthy (dites) precisely because they reap a costly commodity. Its economic value is underscored by rarasince scarcity naturally increases demand, thereby increasing value. While this example reflects the rarity associated with economic wealth, Statius also uses the adjective to describe non-economic wealth. In 5.1, an epicedionthat praises the numerous laudable qualities of Priscilla, Statius refers to the woman as a rarissimaconiunx ( 11), especially distinguished among other Roman matronae,and in this case, a valuable commodity to her husband. In one particular instance, the meaning of the adjective dives is expanded and assumes a moral connotation. As already seen above, in 3.3 Statius describes the many admirable qualities ofTiberius Iulius Augusti libertus, namely his concern for the education of his sons. He is described as divesin ususnatorum:wealthy in regard to the needs of his sons, but with the underlying idea of generosity, a notion further emphasized by the subsequent phrase (totoquevolensexcederecensu,3.3.148). This specific use for dives recalls another similar occurrence, albeit with a different adjective.

Nothing OrdinaryHere

128

Melior, like the prodigadona he devotes to Glaucias, is himself called prodigus (162) because he extravagantly heaps high the funeral pyre, without a second thought about the cost involved in such an extravagant expenditure (cupit

omnia ferre I prodigus et totos Melior succenderecensus,I desertasexosusopes, 2.1.162-4). Unlike other authors who use the word in a negative sense to imply wasteful profligacy, 34 Statius employs the term positively to imply generosity and abundance. If ever there were an appropriate time to spend economic capital lavishly, this would be the occasion.

LARGUS AND BEATUS

Dives is just one way that Statius communicates the ideas of abundance, economic value, and generosity when it comes to the expenditure of economic capital. Another common word associated with wealth is /,argusand its variable forms. Implicit in the word is an idea of abundance but only in regard to an individual's material possessions. Yet the word can be used in both economic and non-economic contexts. In Latin literature the term appears frequently in association with nature, as in Silvae1.3.15-6, where Statius describes the generosity of nature in bestowing the beautiful site for Manilius Vopiscus' villa: "Not more lavishly has Nature ever indulged herself," (non /,argiususquamI indulsitNatura sibt).The villa abounds in lovely natural advantages, including woods, fertile soil, and pleasant streams. Likewise, the term often describes a profusion of natural elements, such as water, as in Horace's Epode.16.53:"Happily we will marvel all the more, how the rainy East wind does not scour the fields with abundant showers," (pluraquefelicesmirabimur,ut neque/,argisI aquosusEurus arva rar,/,at imbribus).35 Such usage occurs in Statius, but with new meaning. We have already seen how in 1.4.25-30 Statius refuses divine aid and relies instead on the addressee himself Here he sends away the fountains of Piplea or Pirene and calls upon the lavish draughts from Gallicus' own font, a praise of the addressee's literary and verbal talents (25-30): licet enthea vatis excludat Piplea sitim nee conscia detur Pirene, largospotius mihi gurges in haustus, qui rapitur de fonte tuo, seu plana solutis cum struis orsa modis seu cum tibi dulcis in artem frangitur et nostras curat facundia leges. [Inspiring Piplea does not quench the poet's thirst, and knowing Pirene is not granted; instead I draw bountiful draughts stolen from your own font, whether you produce straightforward prose without metrical constraints,

Statius'Languageof Wealth

129

or whether your captivating eloquence is restrained into poetic art and rules over my literary requirements.]

The notion of abundance and generosity appears again in 1.6, this time in a slightly changed sense. Here Bacchus (Lyaeus) is generous, assuring that all audience members at Domitian's Saturnalian games enjoy a plentitude of wine (/.argiLyaei,(quis convivia,quis dapesinemptas,I /.argiflumina quis canat

Lyaei?I iamiam deficio tuaque Baccho. . . in serum trahor ebrius soporem, 93-97). One of the themes of the poem is abundance, a motif designed to emphasize the liberality and beneficence of the Emperor. The anaphora of quis further underscores this theme. 36 Indeed, Bacchus (i. e., Domitian) has been almost too generous in providing wine, as Statius' drunken state implies. Venus is similarly generous in her gifts, as in 1.2.120, where she provides Violentilla with ample jewelry. Largusis also positively employed in connection with economic expenditure, often with moral undertones regarding economic generosity, as for example Pollius Felix, whom we have already encountered as a /.argitoropum, a man who enjoys (and lets others enjoy) his economic prosperity. 37 Claudius Etruscus is praised for his unstinting expen38 His diture on his father's rather costly funeral and is characterized as /.argus. generosity must be an inherited trait, for later in the same poem, Statius characterizes Claudius' father in the same way (/.argiEtrusci, 3.3.149), this time with regard to his open-handed expenditure on his sons' upbringing. Fortuna herself can also show a free hand; in a lengthy description, Statius summarizes Flavius Ursus' total economic capital regarding Ursus' abundant good fortune (2.6.67-68). 39 Another word occasionally associated with wealth in the Silvaeis beatus. Traditionally the word's primary meaning is non-economic and associated with felicitas (especially among philosophers), vita, or even the manes of the Underworld. 40 Pliny, in speaking of the vicissitudes of Fortune, describes withdrawal into retirement as a particularly happy occasion: "this man voluntarily enjoys a very blissful leisure," (hiespontebeatissimootiofruitur, 4.24.3). Horace, writing to Quinctius, explains to him how he and others have perceived Quinctius' life (Ep. 1.16.18-20): ''All of us at Rome always keep saying that you are happy, but don't trust someone else's observation more than you trust your own self-perception; and don't think that anyone is happy, except the wise and good man," (iactamusiam pridem omniste Roma beatumI sedvereorne cui de te plus quam tibi credasI neveputesalium sapientebonoquebeatum).Seneca devoted an entire dialogue to the subject of the vita beata,describing it in terms of the philosopher's true wisdom. 41 Statius occasionally employs the word in this manner, but more often with an underlying connotation of "good fortune," as

130

Nothing OrdinaryHere

when he praises Domitian's political and military accomplishments, portraying the emperor as "happy" or "fortunate" (et /,audumcumuw beatus omni I scandesbelligerabnuesquecurrus, 4.3.158-59). In 1.3.15-16, it is the land which is fortunate due to the abundance of its natural beauty (quaeforma 42 beatisI ante manus artemque/,ocis). Beatus is also used as a polar opposite of pauper; the connection is of course natural: economic wealth provides comfort and thus, happiness. 43 The question is, however, how much wealth is needed to make an individual bea4 It is a literary toposthat tus or, as the case may be, its relative opposite, pauper?4 a poet claim he requires only limited economic resources to supply him with happiness and satisfaction. Horace is content with his simple Sabine farm and needs no additional luxuries. In Carmen2.18 he refers to himself as a pauper, whom the wealthy man (dives)courts (10-11), but his so-called poverty more than satisfies him (nihil supraI deos/,acesso neepotentemamicum //,argi.ora fia,gito I satis beatus unicis sabinis, 11-14). In an identical Alcaic strain Statius echoes Horace when he describes the contentment he derives from his rather meager estate: "Blessed by the gift of a small estate where ancient Alba attends to her Trojan gods, I greet strong and eloquent Severns, but not with my usual song" (parvi beatusruris honoribusI qua prisca TeucrosAlba colit /,ares,I fortem atquefacundum SeverumI non solitisfidibus saluto,4.5.1--4). 45 In both cases we can define beatusas "happy," but given its context the word can also be translated "wealthy," or "blessed," according to the speaker's own criteria for economic happiness. Statius says as much, by describing himself as beatus,and his estate as parvus. In such cases, what constitutes such self-proclaimed paupertas? Though assuredly not a dilapidated shack-after all, it did have an aqueduct supplying water-Statius may consider his estate spare in comparison to the elaborate villas he describes throughout the Silvae.Though maybe not as economically prosperous as others, Statius claims to enjoy just as much happiness. Moreover, the manner in which he esteems his own economic capital in relation to his non-economic capital, and in relation to others,' is of primary significance for ascertaining values associated with each. This point is further elaborated in Chapter Five. In other instances, Statius uses the term more straightforwardly to mean "wealthy," often with the underlying connotation of abundance, as in 1.5.44, where the furnace of Claudius Etruscus' balneum marvels at the abundant/costly riches it encompasses (stupet ipse beatas circumplexusopes, 43--4). Such a definition is not uncommon among imperial authors and can, in extended use, modify non-economic nouns even within economic circumstances. Martial uses it in the context of sportu/,a.Pliny, always ready to lend a helping hand, offers a monetary gift to his friend who, though intellectually

Statius'Languageof Wealth

131

"rich" (beatissimus),lacks che economic resources to provide the accoutrements necessary to befit his daughter's fiance's wealthy and distinguished station. 46 Similar to Pliny, Scatius describes Violentilla's jeweled adornments as beatoscensus,"abundant," or "valuable." In one instance beatus("economically prosperous") derives its specific meaning by functioning as che binary opposite of inops("poor" or "without sufficient means"): "Now, whoever you are, rich or poor, rejoice at being the Emperor's dinner-guest" (iam se,quisquis is est, inops beatus I convivam ducis essegklriatur, 1.6.49-50). In the same poem, the plentitude ofluxurious "party favors" that Domitian bestows upon the Roman populace renders che emperor worthy to be called beatus(1 .6.37), in this case, "generous." Thus like the other adjectives described here, beatus expresses a variety of connotations related to economic capital involving worth, abundance, and generosity.

LUXUS Up to this point I have focused generally on terminology relating to wealth chat affirms economic prosperity as a positive attribute, so long as one's capital is spent wisely. In this respect, Statius' voice stands apart from traditional Roman discourse denouncing economic prosperity and its public display. Occasionally, however, Statius employs certain wealth terms which express a negative connotation, and he uses these terms almost always when drawing a comparison between sensible and unscrupulous spending. Moreover his change in vocabulary is deliberate; the reader is not to confuse negative with positive examples, represented in most cases by different word choice. Comparisons between temperate and intemperate economic management occasionally incorporate the stock example of the wealthy Ease, a region quintessentially prosperous yet associated with fiscal mismanagement. Take, for example, 1.3, in which Statius invokes a blessing on Vopiscus: "Worchy of the riches of Midas or Croesus or Persia's treasures, blessings upon the wealth of your mind" (Digne Midae Croesiquebonis et Persidegaza lmacte bonisanimi, 105-6). Here Statius employs two distinct terms: gaza and bona.47 The references are to the traditional exempla of Eastern prosperity and excess. Midas believes riches are wonderful but is proven wrong, at great cost; Croesus thought money led to happiness, but Solon taught him the true place of money in the hierarchy of feelings; and Persia is the great producer of Ho race's apparatus,the costly and extravagant luxuries.48 All of these details are used to accentuate Vopiscus' proper understanding of wealth and its place in securing happiness; he manages his wealth moderately and wisely. This contrast is emphasized by the repetition of bonis-not the luxuries of the east but the wealth of philosophical living, i. e., Vopiscus' Epicurean inclinations. 49 Unlike

132

Nothing OrdinaryHere

Croesus and Midas, he possesses the intellectual capital to possess wealth and expend it sensibly. Luxus is another such negative word, which traditionally denounced the improper expenditure of wealth (including the acquisition of material goods purely for outside approval), or, in less philosophical terms, excessive extravagance.50Unlike other Roman authors who deplore excessivewealth or acquiring it for the purpose of attaining symbolic capital (e. g., fame), Statius embraces the luxurious goods so prominent throughout the Silvaeand recognizes their importance in the creation and propagation of the owner's reputation. Interestingly, though, Statius' use of the term is addressee-specific, and he employs it both negatively and positively according to context. I return again to 1.3, in which Statius portrays Manilius Vopiscus' grandiose villa, which displays expensive artwork, mosaics, and elaborate architectural features. The description of the villa would perhaps incite most modern viewers to define the villa as luxuriously excessive, and would most likely elicit the disapproval of Roman moralists like Seneca, who, as we have already seen, prefers the austerity of Scipio's simple estate (Ep. 86). Yet, according to Statius, Vopiscus' villa is not excessive (/uxu): "[here one will find] delights lacking excess, and even Gargettian Epicurus would abandon Athens and his own garden, in preference for Vopiscus' estate" ( ... luxuquecar-

entes!deliciae,quasipsesuisdigressus AthenisI malkt desertoseniorGargettiushorto, 1.3.92-94). Statius is speaking to and for the dominant culture, and within this context the standard for reaching luxusis quite high. Unlike his contemporary moralists who would find the villa exorbitant, Statius considers it within acceptable limits, even for an Epicurean philosopher; moreover, the poet claims Epicurus himself would abandon his garden in favor of it (93-4). Nevertheless, even Statius conceives of a limit to economic expenditure and its manifestations; it is unclear, however, exactly what his conception of luxusentails, other than ostentation or frivolous spending (again, also all relative) to the point of excess and gaudiness. Trimalchio or even Nero (who is said to have dissolved expensive pearls in liquid to drink) may be appropriate references.51Vopiscus' villa, then, is dearly grandiose and elegant (sanusnitor),but not excessivelyso (luxuquecarentes deliciae),and thus is in keeping with his Epicurean modusvitae. Scatius' use of the term luxus is similar in 5.2, where the negative term likewise underscores the addressee's moderate character. Although Crispinus is not an Epicurean, Statius goes to lengths to describe the generous nature and intellectual capabilities of the young man who has grown up without the guidance of his father. Among other things, Statius extols Crispinus' recent appointment to the military tribuneship, his patrician lineage, and his economic wealth. His moderation in prosperous elegance is praised in the same way as Vopiscus'-"[You have] a cheerful morality, a calm mindset, elegant affluence

Statius'Languageof Wealth

133

that avoids excess,and a loyalty freely applied in everything" (tunehilarisprobitas etfrons tranquil/anitorquellu.xuriaeconfinetimenspietasqueper omnes!dispensata modos,5.2.73-75); in general, his wise economic expenditure suits his overall temperate character, an attribute Statius appreciates and strives to underscore. Crispinus, Statius relates, was poisoned by his mother in an attempted murder plot, yet he exhibited unprecedented generosity in exculpating her crime, an event which Statius elaborates for the next twenty lines. Crispinus manages his emotions the same way he manages his economic prosperity-wisely and generously. We do not learn, as with Vopiscus, the exact nature of Crispinus' wealth, since the purpose of this poem is to emphasize the young man's blossoming talents, not his economic property. While Vopiscus is chiefly distinguished by his sensible and tasteful economic expenditure, underscored by his Epicurean inclinations, Crispinus is conversely distinguished largely by the wise expenditure of his talents and character. Thus, Statius uses Crispinus' proper economic spending as a reference point to emphasize the similar nature that the young man displays with regard to others. He is, on all fronts, a class act. That Statius' use of luxuslluxuriais addressee-specific is further attested to by two contrasting instances where the term is used in a positive sense yet without its philosophical connotations involving proper expenditure. In these examples, the term is used to mean "excess," but in a positive sense, highlighting-as with the other two instances-a personal character trait. In 1.6 Statius extols the generosity of the Emperor Domitian, who has bestowed divessparsioupon the Roman people during his Saturnalian Games: abundant wine, food, showers of perfume, elaborately dressed servers, and novel entertainment including female warriors and dwarves. These enjoyments are described as novasluxus (51). They are novas,presumably not only because of their expensive, luxurious (or even imported) nature, but also because the poor and lower classes can enjoy them, perhaps for the very first rime. The Games are described in terms of a private banquet, but one to which Domirian has generously invited all walks of life. This theme is expressed explicitly (iam se, quisquis is est, inops, beatus, I convivam ducis essegloriatur, 49-50) 52 to portray Domirian as excessive in a positive sense in his profuse munificence to the Roman people. In the final example, Statius is consistent in his tendency of employing lu.xusto underscore character traits. Here again, in 2.1, lu.xusrefers positively to extravagant abundance. In this rather dismal and negative context (the funeral of Glaucias, Melior's adopted son), Statius uses luxusto reinforce Melior's generosity and fatherly love. Like Domitian with his divessparsio,he shows no restraint in his funerary spending; he spends freely and offers an abundance of offerings (2.1.157-163):

Nothing OrdinaryHere

134 Quid ego exsequiaset prodiga flammis dona loquar maestoque ardentia funera luxu? quod tibi purpureo tristis rogus aggerecrevit, quod Cilicum £lores,quod munera graminis Indi, quodque Arabes Phariique Palaestiniqueliquores arsuram laverecomam?

[Why should I speak of the funeral rites and the gifts lavishly bestowed upon the flames, and the corpse burning with grim luxury? Or the gloomy pyre with its purple cushions or the saffron, or the countless aromatics imported from India, Arabia, Egypt and Palestine,anointing your hair which will soon be engulfed in flames?] The anaphora of quod and the specificity of the enumerated gifts underscore both the abundance and costliness of the funerary gifts; Melior has spared no expense on this elaborate funeral. There is of course an underlying sense of "throwing away'' money seeing that, as discussed earlier, Melior has come to hate his economic prosperity for its inability to bring Glaucias back to life. Nonetheless, this description of funerary luxury (maestusluxus) is meant to emphasize the abundant devotion and affection that Melior possesses for Glaucias, sentiments which Statius is careful to highlight throughout the entire poem. In both of these cases luxus is used positively to reinforce the possessor's extremely generous character in relation to others, while in the previous two instances luxus is used to reinforce the especially refined, wise nature of two temperate men. The examples discussed in this chapter illustrate Statius' broad concept of wealth, incorporating both material and non-material capital. His specific vocabulary choices suggest nuances of meaning within widely-ranging social connotations. Language, then, not only verbally represents and depicts material, visible objects in literary form as we have seen in Chapter Three, but it comprises the conduit through which such objects are charged with real meanings. Through language, Statius has successfully extracted social meaning from material objects and how they are used. In the process, he converts visible material goods into symbols of wealth that incorporate both economic and cultural values, thereby indicating various forms of distinction. Thus, language becomes the vehicle through which non-material forms of capital, often devoid of correlating visual representations, achieve their own meanings of wealth. In the following chapter we will see just how Statius' carefully crafted verbal discourse functions in the creation of distinction for his addressees.

Chapter Five

Creating Distinction

The Silvaepresent a map, so to speak, of the various kinds of people inhabiting the Domitianic social landscape. The broadly delineated range of social, cultural, and economic backgrounds represented by these individuals makes their collected appearance in the Silvaeall the more remarkable. What should we make of the poetic juxtaposition of a wealthy senator and a freedman? Or what conclusions can we derive from the similarity in treatment of Statius' address to the Emperor and that to a private Roman citizen? How does Statius' poetic form and style direct our conception of what Romans considered valuable and distinctive? It is impossible to define fully the dynamics of a Roman system of social evaluation, since such a reconstruction depends, in part, on the fragmentary nature of our sources. Nevertheless, Bourdieu's theories can facilitate our efforts to discern structure and meaning from the incomplete evidence we do possess. By conceptualizing Domitianic Rome as a multi-dimensional space, in which agents compete for distinction, we may conceive the division of space according to various fields (public, family, economic) and their respective capital (politics, lineage, money, etc.). Such a structural model, though to some degree contrived, encapsulates the agonistic nature of Roman society within a framework of relational values. Bourdieu defines the "field" as a "site of struggles in which individuals seek to maintain or alter the distribution of forms of capital specific to it." 1 Thus, a person's relative position within a multi-dimensional social space depends upon his/her total combined capital, allowing for myriad possibilities to convert one type into another. Relative position within any given field depends upon the amount of capital an individual possesses in that particular field; for example, a long-standing patrician possesses more capital of blood-line, so to speak, than a freedman. That same freedman, however, serving as the secretary of the emperor, may possess greater political capital (i. e., power) than the patrician who has retired into a 135

136

NothingOrdinaryHere

life of full-time quies.But what type of capital is more valuable in the pursuit of distinction-e. g., active power or a name? While political activity in the Roman Republic was a necessary component of elite identification, does service to the imperial court-itself comprised largely of non-patricians-result in honor for the freedman and disgrace for the patrician? Either way, distinction is necessarily dependent on the shifting values associated with public and private activity and those traditional demarcations of social classes associated with each. Imperial service, for example, means different things to different people, particularly because perceptions of distinction are both subjective and relative. Moreover, since distinction involves external evaluation, it is not static and stable, but ever-changing depending upon the viewer and the viewee. A freedman who serves in Domitian's court may appear distinctive among fellow freedmen or family members, but would he achieve the same assessment of distinction from a retired patrician enjoing a life of literary activity? The question comes down in part to who assesses distinction and whose determination holds the greatest weight. While answers may be evasive, we can at least attempt to identify modes of distinction and the role of literature in their creation and dissemination. There is no doubt that for most Romans-like most other people throughout history-distinction (i. e., symbolic capital) was deeply significant to social identity. Competition for the profit of distinction was pervasive and assumed many forms and crossed multiple social boundaries. Close scrutiny of the way in which Statius treats his addressees can facilitate an understanding of the distribution of capital types and the symbolic role of distinction within the complex social space of Domitianic Rome. What was valuable in Statius' eyes, and in the eyes of his addressees? What, specifically, made a Roman of the Flavian era wealthy? How does Statius use poetry (and the examples of his literary predecessors) to distinguish addressees according to the varying types and amounts of capital each possesses? In what ways do other types of capital convert into symbolic capital, or distinction? Could a wealthy freedman's son achieve greater distinction than a wealthy patrician, especially if both possess similar amounts of economic capital? This chapter aims to illuminate our understanding of Domitianic society by continuing to examine the textualization of both the material and non-material assets of Romans, focusing on those who occupied widely divergent social spaces but for the most part shared an equal literary space within Statius' Silvae. It is clear from internal evidence that some of Statius' addressees specifically commissioned poems for occasions they considered important. Such examples reveal the addressee's desire for distinction and their recognition of Statius as a legitimate spokesperson to effectively advertise-even

CreatingDistinction

137

promulgate-this distinction. Such addressees may even have provided instructions specifying what personal aspects they wished to be emphasized. Despite differing motivations for poetic composition, in all cases Scatius' encomia-both formal and informal-illustrate what the addressee considered important (or what Statius thought must have been important to him/her). Scholars have formerly overlooked the social importance of Statius' encomia,which both reflect and formulate the addressee's distinction; some, in my opinion, have reduced the social significance of these encomiaby overemphasizing the role of rhetorical structure. 2 The fact is that the Silvaemirror a corresponding social reality; otherwise their effect would fall flat, words of praise rendered meaningless not only for the addressee but the wider audience. Just as important, the poems provide an insightful glimpse into the ways in which addressees evaluated various types of capital as currency for purchasing distinction in the eyes of their contemporaries. In anticipation of the subsequent discussion, I include below, following Bourdieu's model, a three-fold delineation of numerous types of fields and their accompanying capital. While not exhaustive, the list is intended to provide a reference that may be referred to throughout the remainder of this chapter.

CULTURAL A. B. C. D. E.

lineage (pedigree) / social rank artistic appreciation / art collecting education culture/ refinement

pietas F. beauty

G. occupations and interests 1. philosophical 2. literary 3. political 4. military

ECONOMIC

A. Savings and investments (land holdings) B. Visual manifestations 1. villas 2. jewelry 3. clothing 4. artwork 5. funerals

Nothing OrdinaryHere

138

SYMBOLIC(DISTINCTION) A. Fame B. Reputation C. Poetry Silvae 1.2: The Distinction of Literary Production

L. Arruntius Stella is a central figure in the first book of the Silvaeand is distinguished by this honor of place in Statius' poetry. He is the dedicatee of the book, and his marriage to Violentilla is celebrated in 1.2, which follows the encomium for Domitian's equestrian statue that must come first for obvious reasons. 3 Despite the fact that Stella is aristocratic, handsome, and rich, the primary reason for this distinction bestowed upon him is that he, like Statius, is a literary man who shares (collega,1prae/23) the pleasures and perils of their profession and is recognized by Statius himself as one of the best in their trade (optime et in studiis nostris eminentissime, lpraefl-2). Stella's elegies were widely known to the Roman public and followed in the elegiac traditions of Catullus and the Augustan poets. Martial (Ep. 5.11) likens Stella's literary talent to the sparkling rings he wears on his fingers. The clever comparison implies a valuation ofliterary brilliance as both qualitative and quantative, much in the same way one can measure economic capital (i. e., both by numerical quantity of goods and their overall quality, or economic value). The underlying idea seems to be that not only is Stella prolific (as the number of rings suggests) bur truly gifted (as the brilliance of the gems implies). In Silv. 1.2 his poems are described as characteristically docta,and it is dear that all the young men and women throughout the city had learned them by heart (I 72-173). 4 His poem to his future wife, Violenrilla, was apparently very popular as an elegy and is perhaps his most well-known attempt. His popularity as an elegiac poet in particular, and a cul cured literary man in general, is reinforced by the description of his penateswhich are likewise docti (50). The description is ambiguous but may suggest that Stella's literary distinction extends as well to his home or that he hosted literary recitationesthere. Eicher way, it would seem that his literary output was more serious than that of a mere dilettante. 5 Moreover, it is perhaps Stella's literary distinction chat has made him esteemed, and which drew all ranks of Roman society to witness his elaborate wedding celebration (232-35). Additional evidence from both Statius and Martial corroborates that Stella wrote other elegiac poems, in particular one following the model of Catullus 2.3, on the death of Violemilla's pet dove.6 Martial's Epigram 1.7, quoted in the previous chapter, illustrates Stella's poetic superiority over Cacullus' by drawing a comparison between the hierarchical

CreatingDistinction

139

relationship between the two species of birds that form the subject of some of their love poems.7 Given Stella's preeminence as a poet in Rome, special attention must be paid co the bond between Statius and Stella and the interplay between their poetry. Stella, in fact, plays a role in the formation and presentation of Statius' poetry, as can be seen in the preface where Statius confesses co Stella his hesitation in publishing the poems (2-11). Stella is in Statius' presentation of things his "co-equal" (colkga)and this literary bond is a formative presence in the poem devoted to Stella (1.2). Yet, it is not enough to say, as Vessey does, 8 that Statius' presentation of Stella as a "co-equal" helps validate the latter's poetic art; for, indeed, Stella's poetic art was already highly regarded. More important is the development of the literary relationship and what it has to say about poetic art and culture. Stella commissioned Statius to write a poem about his marriage to Violentilla (lpraef.20): " ... your wedding hymn written which you requested of me," (qui epithalamium tuum quod mihi iniunxeras).How far Stella guided Statius' encomiasticstylus, however, is open for debate. Based on the similarities between Martial's and Scatius' treatments, White argues that Stella provided dear instruction on how he wanted to be portrayed. 9 If so, the poem reflects che importance Stella himself placed on his own literary activity. Statius' acknowledgement of the commission serves not only to advertise Stella's literary patronage (amicitia),which was traditionally customary, IO bur more significantly, to underscore Stella's literary collegiality; his selectivity in choosing Statius to celebrate his marriage reflects positively on his own literary taste and their joint professionalism. In addition, the characterization of Stella as a serious poet diminishes the unspoken tension normally experienced between poet and addressee, in which the social relationship between the superior patron (or commissioner) and inferior poet-cliensstruggles against the literary relationship between the inferior addressee (the object of the poet's literary skill) and the superior poet whose literary mastery is solicited. Statius thus creates a level of literary equality between himself and Stella and, in so doing, enhances Stella's own symbolic capital as a literary man in his own right. 11 The preface, then, deliberately introduces Stella as a literary colleague and professional poet, not a mere literary dilettante. 12 Although ic is an epithalamium, che poem exhibits many elegiac and epic motifs, as Hardie and Pederzani have shown. 13 Within the context of her study of Martial's parallel epigram 6.21, Watson likewise identifies, though in a limited fashion, several elegiac features of Silvae 1.2.14 Imporcantly, she posies that Statius "whitewashes" Violentilla's and Stella's characters to counteract rumors of an illicit pre-marital sexual relationship amounting co adultery. 15 And she claims chat Stacius'

Nothing OrdinaryHere

140

poem "presents the bridal pair as morally impeccable." Yet their (a)mmoral activity, while open to interpretation, has little to do with the thrust of Statius' purpose, and questions surrounding the couple's behavior obfuscates the deliberate interplay between reality and unreality, which are intertwined throughout the poem. In fact, the poem is not intended to purify the couple's illicit sexual relationship, if indeed it even existed, but to assert Stella's identification as an elegiac poet worthy of distinction, as attested by an equally distinguished literary producer. Stella's distinction was not limited to literary production, but Statius mentions other assets which recommend him as a worthy bridegroom. For example, his youth (and by association, good looks, line 172) is stressed several times and there is no hint that he has been married before (iuvenis71, 81, 90, 107, 179); his lineage is noteworthy as being both native Latin and of patrician senatorial stock, 16denoted not only by the adjective darus but also by the role of Nobilitas,who prophetically offered a cognomen suitable to Stella's lineage and future accomplishments 70-73: cl.arusde gente Latina est iuvenis, quern patriciis maioribus ortum Nobilitasgavisa tulit praesagaque formae protinus e nostro posuit cognomina caelo. [There is a young man distinguished by Latin pedigree and descending from patrician ancestors; Nobility joyfully bore him and right away gave him a name from our stars, thereby presaging his beauty.]

This patrician lineage naturally would have been a political asset as well, as we see in the poem. Statius devotes eight lines to describe Stella's membership in the XVviri sacrisfaciundis ( 176--77), his curule office (probably an aedileship, 178-180) and his responsibility in organizing Domitian's triumphal games in honor of the Dacian victory (180-81). Together, these social positions are closely interrelated: Stella's natural high-born rank recommended him to politics and a link to the imperial court, as Statius suggests (178 ff. iamqueparens Latius), and his literary skills enhance and reinforce his aristocratic background. 17 Thus Stella's cultural assets, culminating in a significant amount of cultural capital, made him a particularly desirable son-in-law among Roman matronaeeager to marry off their daughters: " ... although he especially is sought as a son-in-law by Ausonian mothers," (quamvisAusoniismultum gener illepetitus I matribus,76--7). It is interesting chat, while Stella was extremely affluent, as Martial and other external evidence attest, Statius does not capitalize upon this fact as a

CreatingDistinction

141

component of Stella's distinction. 18 In his study on the wealth of Stella and Violentilla, Sartori argues that Stella's marital marketability resides chiefly in his large economic capital-only briefly mentioned by Statius-rather than in non-material assets such as his patrician birth or physical attractiveness. 19 This assessment, however, is purely conjectural, devoid of solid textual evidence. More interesting, however, is Sartori's supposition that Stella's familial wealth was acquired through commercial enterprise, namely the production of brick tiles, and that this was consistent with his senatorial/patrician status since it could be considered within the realm of agriculture-a respectable form of economic revenue for men of his social stature. 20 Statius makes no mention of such economic enterprise, but no matter how tenuous Satori's argument may be regarded, there should be no real doubt that Stella was economically comfortable, as Martial's description of Stella's numerous rings suggests. Statius' relative silence on Stella's economic wealth does not imply the lack of its existence, but merely indicates his attention is focused elsewhere, namely on Stella's literary professionalism. All told, only 13 of 277 lines are devoted to the specific cultural assets noted for Stella above. This number contrasts markedly with other poems of the Silvae in which Statius consciously underlines distinction via manifestations of economic capital (e. g. 1.3 or 1.5). Instead, Statius focuses on the literary capital that distinguishes Stella from other young, well-bred, rich bachelors. This creation of distinction is accomplished in two ways: 1) explicit praise of the addressee's literary skill, which comprises 31 lines (93-103, 172-73, 196--99, 247-259), and 2) literary mimesis, which cleverly recasts Stella and Violentilla's affair in an "elegy" that concomitantly mirrors and recreates the addressee's elegiac activity. Statius structures his poem so that the real-life love affair forms an aetion that is positioned centrally in the poem and recounted as an elegiac narrative in dactylic hexameter, the traditional meter for the epitha/,amiumand also for epic. Statius' elegy of Stella and Violentilla is framed within the context of real marriage. Reality and unreality intermingle through the characterization of Stella and Violentilla as bride and bridegroom (at the beginning of the poem), elegiac lover-poet and his Muse-lover, Asteris, (in the middle of the poem), and husband and wife (at the end of the poem). The elegiac elements ofStatius' poem are purposely inserted to underscore Stella's own elegiac poem to Violentilla. Silvae 1.2 begins with an evocation of the Muses in the epic manner: "Whence did Latin mountains resound with song?" ( Unde sacro Latii deceptively sonueruntcarminemontes?)The nine goddesses converge but E!.egea joins their company for the wedding festivities (7-10). This opening introduces us to the idea that Statius will not be composing the jocular ribaldry of

142

Nothing OrdinaryHere

elegiac, but a more elevated treatment of an elegiac topic. Moreover, it is only appropriate chat Stella's poetic Muse, Elegea-responsible for both his literary success and his real-life (and literary) love (i. e., Violentilla)-be present for the wedding. Her insistence on attending the ceremony and being present from the beginning of the poem hints at the inseperable nature of Stella and his literary production, the source of his distinction. Stella's literary skills merit the elevated meter of epic, but rather than calling upon the Muses co aid poetic inspiration, the goddesses are instead described as attending the wedding festivities-a mingling of fantasy and reality prevalent throughout the rest of the poem. At this early point in the poem, Violentilla is described as the traditional virginal bride (/umine demissamet dulciprobitate rubentem, 12) whose downcurned eyes and blushing cheeks act as literary visual markers of a traditional bride within the genre of epithalamium; Statius, however, adapts the conventional epithalamialpudor, or virginity, co a kind of sexual abstinance chat instead preserves the memory of her late husband. 21 The gods Apollo, Bacchus, and Mercury accompany Stella while Amor and Gracia perfume him with scented flowers. The presence of the gods, especially Love personified, sanctify the nuptial act which is further justified in the later aetiological narrative (46-201) describing Venus as the original initiator of the union. The aetion for the marriage is retold as an elegiac affair, in which Stella and Violentilla are described as elegiac characters who experience a complete cycle of the conventional elegy. Stella, the love-sick victim (edomui, victus, 77), is overpowered by Love's arrows (Amor 74-80); his love is intense (sanguine toto, 170) and wholly devoted (deditus, 171). Yet he is repudiated by his lover, Violentilla (under the literary name of Asteris) who has only been lightly touched by the pangs oflove. As Venus' alumna (158), Violentilla exhibits the goddess' gifts (112 ff.) and thus becomes the epitome of the elegiac mistress who torments and overpowers her lover with her sexuality.22 Violentilla's real-life hesitation (presumably due co pudor) is translated into the conventional elegiac refusal. Here as an "overpowering misress" (potens domina) she is characterized in terms quite different from the young, modest bride described earlier (23, 77, 158).23 Her stubbornness affects Stella's characterization; he suffers under his mistress' rejections, displaying the usual elegiac maladies-sighs (33), prayers and tears (195-96), burning (8 I), and long nights of hopelessness as he is turned away by the watchful ianitor in a typically elegiac paraclausitheronscene (34-37; 196). 24 In the elegiac fashion of militia amoris,25 Stella's love-tabors are likened to the physical efforts demanded by epic heroes (38-40): "Worthy indeed would your reward be, even if Juno were co assign you Hercules' Labors and the Fates forced

CreatingDistinction

143

you to run against Stygian monsters, or if you were swept away through the Cyanean waves," (dignaquidem merces,et si tibi JunowhoresI Hercukos,Stygiiset si concurrere monstrisI fota darent,si Cyaneosraperere per aestus).Such elegiac toils included verbal entreaties, but more importantly, poetry itself His real-life poetic activity (and his poems about Violentilla) contributes to the mimetic process, whereby Stella, the elegiac lover-poet, writes poems to Violentilla-Asteris in the hopes of swaying her (197-199). This mimesis, of course, is a clever intertextual recreation. Statius' elegy not only recasts the real-life affair as an elegiac poem within the context of a real wedding ceremony (and within the dactylic epithalamium poem), but also echoes the real-life poems that Stella actually wrote; here Statius has changed Violentillas pseudonym from lanthis (as we learn it from Martial) to Asteris, a play upon Stellas own name. 26 Stella himself--or rather the persona he creates for himself-must have played a role in his own elegies as the lover, but now at the center of Statius' elegy, he is characterized as a poet who both writes and is written about. The Stella of Statius' poem is concomitantly a literary elegiac character and a real elegiac poet. The interplay in which Stella is recast into both a real and fictional literary context wittily mimics his real-life occupation as an elegiac poet and as Violentillas lover. His portrayal in 1.2 occupies two levels of meaning: he is 1) the poet-lover in real life who translates his love-experiences into literary creations (in which he becomes the elegiac character, the victus, and Violentilla, Asteris, the domina); and 2) the poet-lover character in Statius' elegy. Hence, Statius' elegy mirrors, or even becomes one of, the very poems which Stella has created in real life and which are realistically alluded to in Statius' elegiac fiction in 1.2.197-199 (quoted above). Stella's repeated appellation as vates(33, 46, 94, 98,201,239) or, in one instance as Pieriusiuvenis (107), reinforces the mimetic effect and asserts his seriousness as a real-life, divinely-inspired poet of whom the gods necessarily approve. The boundaries between literary fiction and reality are blurred even more when Statius metaphorically depicts Stella as Amors faithful companion (comes)(95-101): noster comesille piusque signifer; armiferos poterat memorare labores claraque facta virum et torrentes sanguine campos, sed tibi plectra dedit mitisque incedere vates maluit et nostra laurum subtexere myrto. hie iuvenum lapsus suaque aut externa revolvit vulnera. [He is our friend and comrade-at-arms; he could recount the toils of war, the famous deeds of men and the fields flowing red with blood; but instead

144

Nothing Ordinary Here he has devoted his music to you and prefersto walk gently among poets, intertwining his laurel with our bay leaf. He recounts the failings of young people and love'swounds, both his and others.']

Statius' assertion that Stella possesses the ability to compose epic, but consciously chooses the "lesser" genre of elegy reinforces Stella's professionalism in the tradition of the recusatio.The characterization follows elegiac convention. Within the limits of reality, the lines stress Stella's seriousness as an elegiac poet; even more deeply, they suggest Stella's fidelity in another real-life context: he will be an ever-faithful (pius, 95) lover, a quality that can result only in marriage and his identification as a husband. The real-life exceptional quality of Stella's literary skills is symbolized by their effectiveness within Statius' elegy; for it is only after reminiscing about her lover-poet's poems, and more importantly their subject (i. e., herself), that Violentilla finally relents and submits herself to the bonds of marriage. Stella's poetry effects change on its subject, a power that can only be realized through the talent of a truly exceptional poet. In this sense, Stella is set apart from other elegists like Catullus and Propertius, since his poetry sways his lover to marriage, an unusual result within the genre of elegy. Unlike his elegiac predecessors whose poetry could not convince their respective addressees to life-long fidelity, Stella has accomplished the ultimate elegiac feat. Statius' elegiac-Stella and the real-life Stella are both successful-not only in poetry, but in love. Inside the poem, Stella's reward culminates in the expectation of sexual intercourse-the ultimate outcome for the lover-poet's la.bores.Outside the poem, Stella's reward is marriage. But his success is not limited to love; his reward includes the distinction resulting from renown as an elegist, reinforced by the praise bestowed upon him within Statius' poem. At line 201 Statius returns to the formal wedding occasion where he emphasizes the addressee's literary success and the couple's successful marital union. The elegiac characterization of Stella is dismissed in favor of his real-life role as professional poet and husband. This change is signaled by a call for blessings on the addressee's wedding couch: "Blessings on your wedding couch, most pleasing among Latin poets, since you have achieved the end of your hard journey, the labors of your undertaking, and have reached port," (macte toris,

Latios inter placidissimevates,I quod durum permensusiter coeptiquelaboresI prendistiportus, 201-203). Stella, both the literary lover-poet and the real-life poet, has survived the trials and tribulations of poetic and amatory la.bores and has won his just rewards.27 Apollo, among other gods, accompanies the poet, their comiti canoro (219-228), in preparation for the marriage ceremony. Reality is fully restored when Statius describes the wedding pomp; Hymen,

CreatingDistinction

145

Juno, and Concordia, traditionally absent from the affairs of elegy, finally make an appearance, the climax of Stella's real-life love affair, which, unlike the conventions of elegy,culminates in legitimate and lawful marriage (238). This too, is confirmed by Stella's new identification as husband: vir (237) and maritus (241, 274); Violentilla is restored to her characterization as the chaste bride who assents to wedlock (conubia, 211), likened to Lavinia and Claudia (242-246), and the soon-to-be mother of Stella's children (266-71). No longer the domina exerting power over her lover; she is now possessa(274) by her worthy husband. Esteemed elegiac poets (Philetas, Propertius, Ovid, and Tibullus, 250-55) are welcomed to honor and accompany their poetic compatriot at his marriage feast.28 Their presence symbolizes Stella'sliterary preeminence since he is included in their circle, and Statius reiterates his literary bond with Stella, first introduced in the preface (257-59). Although Stella is a central figure in the poem, Violentilla occupies a substantial role as well. All in all, Statius devotes an astonishing nearly 100 uninterrupted lines to her alone (107-201), 43 of which are specifically focused on a description ofViolentilla's capital, both cultural (beauty) and economic (107-140, 147-157). This number means that approximately one-third of the entire poem focuses on Violentilla herself; the attention given co Violentilla can be accounted for, in pare, by her role within Statius' elegy and because the epithalamiumrequires a description of che bride. Sartori suggests that Statius' attentions are owing to his greater acquaintance with Violentilla, since she shared a common birthplace with him, 29 but given the above discussion, this detail alone cannot account for the prominence she receives in the poem. We know little of Violentilla other than that she was Neopolitan by birth and wealthy. Otherwise Scacius only tells us that her beauty competes with the "glory of her fathers and the ho nor of her birth," (gloriapatrum I et generis... honos, 108-109); the ambiguous reference may hint at a patrician or senatorial rank, though this identification is disputed by Sartori, who argues that Stacius indicates only that her family was prestigious through some other means. He suggests, rather, that her family was not patrician but had become wealthy and prominent through ceramic commercial production (crematistiche)as was common among other wealthy villa owners around the Bay of Naples. 30 There is, however, no textual evidence to support this view. Nor does Violentilla's precise social rank seriously affect her status, particularly if her family belonged to the upper-equestrian order and was counted among other exceptional Neapolitan families. After all, marriages between senators and equestrians were not uncommon and certainly were socially acceptable by this time. 31 Rather the ambiguity surrounding her precise social station

146

Nothing OrdinaryHere

merely underscores the face chatViolentilla possesses other kinds of capital chat distinguish her and recommended her as a wife. That is, patrician status alone was not required to make a woman distinctive at this time. Moreover, the visual and physical features ofViolentilla's beauty symbolize her high taste and sense of fashion, suggesting chat one need not possess patrician/senatorial rank to reflect the highest taste. 32 While men of the senatorial rank were distinguished from their equestrian counterparts by visual symbols, namely their clothing, women were not bound by the same regulacions.33 Indeed, while (patrician) senators continued to assert their cultural supremacy over equestrians and lower ranked individuals through status symbols, 34 upper-class equestrians certainly remained socially prominent and-through their tide and status symbols-sought to distinguish themselves from newer equestrians and freedmen. Moreover, such class distinctions among women were not visibly regulated through precise symbols (as color or tunic-borders), and a welldressed fashionable equestrian woman could certainly pass for patrician. Significantly, Statius devotes 19 lines to an ecphrasisof Violentilla's beauty and accompanying jewelry (107-136), indicating the social importance of such assets. Her expensive and plentiful jewels, described through mythological and geographical allusions, serves as an external symbol not only of her sense of caste, but also of her economic capital. 35 The ecphrasisof her cownhouse (147-57), where imported marbles, fountains, and gilt gables abound, further exemplifies the extent of her economic capital, and identifies her as truly refined. The suitability of Violentilla's villa for the presence of Venus (digna deaesedes,147) suggests a social tenet: 36 one's residence should coordinate with one's personal appearance, since both are visual representations of invisible assets, such as taste. This connection explains, in pare, why Statius has devoted 24 lines to Violentilla's economic capital. Beauty and money are two important vehicles through which a noble Roman woman could visually express her sense of fashion and taste, and thus exert her social distinction from other women. If Violentilla lacked patrician status, as Stacius' vagueness may indicate, her beauty and wealth more than compensate for this lack, a reading chat is also suggested by the emphasis placed on these two assets in the poem. Statius closes the poem with a prayer that her youthfulness-that is, her youthful beauty (forma)-age slowly (277). At the beginning of the poem, Venus acquiesces to Violentilla's beauty by purposefully toning down her own appearance so chat the bride may alone be distinctive in her beauty (13-50). 37 The close relationship between Venus and her alumna, Violencilla, is an important one and has larger literary and social implications than previously recognized. Stacius' visual and literary portrayal of Violentilla as the foster-child of Venus,

CreatingDistinction

147

whose beauty closely mirrors that of the goddess (mihi dukis imagoI prosiluit, 12-3), echoes, I would argue, a contemporary trend offemale private portrait sculpture that comprised a portrait head atop a body fashioned after the model of the nude or semi-nude Capitoline Venus (or Aphrodite Knidos) type. The text, moreover, reinforces the possible connection to the statuary trend since Violentilla's beauty reflects Flavian aesthetics based on sculptural portrait styles; for example, along with pale skin (20, 23) she exhibits a high forehead and piled-up coiffure (113-14). 38 The description mirrors the kind of portrait head typically propped up by the nude Venus body, whereby the "representation of the well-maintained female body complements the meticulous constructions of hair," and would have also promoted an image of high status or rank. 39 Violentilla's beauty and the accompanying accoutrements (that is, her cultus)are distinctive, and she stands out (much like a sculpture) in comparison to other women (Latias metire quid ultra I emineat matres (114-15); pukherrima forma lltalidum (273-74)). It should not surprise us that Statius' description of Violentilla may be influenced-perhaps even directly inspired-by the corresponding statuary trend. After all, his poetry deeply reflects the physicality of Domitianic Rome, and his penchant for ecphrasisoften entails descriptions of real-life objects (e. g., Domitian's equestrian statue, Vindex's Hercules). Since the Augustan period, women associated with the imperial court were represented in the likeness of Venus; this new trend, however, involved not only a new type (Capicoline Venus), but the representation of private women unconnected to the court. D'Ambra has successfully argued that this statuary trend was meant to symbolize "the feminine arts of adornment, or cultus. .. to create an elegant image worthy of the public renown or achievement of the spouses of the women depicted in these porcraits."40Thus, Violentilla's literary characterization as a (nude) Venus may further reinforce her culture and refinement, which of course was also materially manifested by her elegant villa. That Violentilla is characterized as Venus' alumna in which her beauty mirrors that of the goddess is striking not only because it hints at the contemporary statue trend, but also because it reminds us of the visual and symbolic ambiguity of the goddess. The precise nature of Violentilla's forma in the poem is itself remarkable; she exhibits two different types. One, occurring at the beginning and end of the poem, is referred to within the context of epithalamium occasion (represented by downcast eyes and blushing cheeks or matronly beauty that ages slowly), and symbolizes the bride and wife's reproductive potential. The other, occurring in the middle of the poem and within the elegiac narrative where Violentilla is characterized as a domina and ordered by Venus to exercise her fleeting gifts (exerce formam etfagientibus utere

148

Nothing Ordinary Here

dnnis, 166), recalls the sexual power of the goddess of erotic love, and thus would emphasize Violentilla's role within Stella's elegiac literary production. The shifting nature ofViolentilla's forma within the poem echoes the ambiguous visual nature of Venus and the corresponding contemporary statuary that incorporates the goddess' body. 41 The heads of these statues reflect veristic portrait features while communicating abstract notions of refinement and culture; yet the nude or semi-nude body in the stance of the famous Aphrodite Knidos of Venus Capitoline is ambiguous. The voluptuous curves and position of the hands to cover-yet draw attention to--the woman's sexual organs, suggests both modesty and a consciousness of her sexuality. D'Ambra has argued that the nude or semi-nude body is a traditional symbol of matronly beauty, more specifically qualified as reproductive fertility-a type of beauty associated with the prospective bride and wife. Yet, one cannot dissociate the other type of beauty so explicity rendered by the pose and so characteristically associated with Venus, goddess of sexual love. After all, the original Aphrodite Knidos was rejected by its original commissioners for being overly sexually explicit. Thus, these statuary types, like Violentilla, potentially represent two types of beauty, that associated with the typical Roman matrona, symbolizing reproductive fertility, and that associated with the typical elegiac mistress, symbolizing sexual power. Statius' visual portrayal of Violentilla, reinforced by a real artistic parallel, is perfect. On the one hand her forma, representative of the chaste demure bride (and later the wife who will bear children), at the beginning and end of the poem fufills the requirements of the epitha/,amialoccasion; on the other, her forma identifying her as the sexually powerful dnmina who renders Stella victus meets the greater poetic purpose of distinguishing Stella as a serious elegiac poet. Just as Violentilla's villa enhances her beauty, so too does she enhance Stella. On the most basic level, her sense of fashion reflects positively upon her future husband. A fitting parallel suggests how Violentillas cultural and economic capital-together, a manifestation of her taste--could convert into a symbolic form that Stella himself can utilize for his distinction. In Ep. 6.32 Pliny bestows upon his friend Quintilianus a monetary gift to be used on aesthetic accoutrements (clothing, etc.) for his daughter, who is soon to marry Nonius Celer. Though not of consular rank like Stella,42 Nonius (honestissimo viro, 6.32. 1) is a distinguished court advocate (civilium officiorum, 6.32. 1), whose public prominence demands that the appearance of his future wife match his own elegance (nitor, 6.32. 1) and distinction. The implication, of course, is that her refinement (cultus)should reflect positively on him, particularly given that he is publicly eminent and politically active. As in the case of Quintilianus' daughter, Violentilla's clothing, jewelry and villa are an "objectification" of her

CreatingDistinction

149

economic and cultural capital chat match Stella's and recommend her as a suitable spouse for himself. 43 They are a symbol of her taste, which itself is "the basis of all that one has-people and things-and all that one is for others, whereby one classifies oneself and is classified by others." 44 But why then, if Statius desires co emphasize particularly Stella's literary capital, does he devote so much attention to Violencilla and her own distinction? How does Violencilla's capital serve to underscore Stella's literary capital? The answer lies in understanding that not only does Violencilla enhance Stella's capital on a realistic level, but also on a literary level within Statius' elegy. Statius is deliberate in his characterization ofViolencilla and by making her the alumna of Venus, creating an especially close relationship between private, real-life mortal and goddess, he successfully calls co mind the ambiguous visual and symbolic markers of the goddess. This literary technique and careful crafting of Violentilla's physical portrayal in part solves the problem posed by the contradictory opposition raised by the poetic occasion and the poet's underlying purpose. Violentilla's visual portrayal and association with Venus, with its emphasis on forma, allows Statius to represent Violencilla simultaneously as bride and wife and the elegiac domina, che former necessitated by the addressee's request, the latter clearly meant co reinforce the addressee's elegiac production. This manipulation to some degree most vividly illustrates the way in which Statius can both exploit and intertwine the poetic occasion to meet greater need of distinguishing the addressee according to his primary form of capital (i. e., literary production). As the subject and inspiration of Stella's elegiac poetry, Violencilla herself provides the essential asset to his literary production (i. e., cultural capital), which in turn contributes to his distinction. Stella's Violencilla-his "Asteris" sung throughout the city-is the force behind the literary persona that Stella creates for himself and which Statius so cleverly portrays in 1.2. Violentilla's pseudonym, Asteris, (i. e., che Greek for "Stella") exemplifies their interrelated connection on both purely literary and realistic levels, and clearly Statius' audience muse possess a suitable amount of cultural capital to correctly decode the pseudonym. Similarly, the couple's real-life interconnected exchange of different forms of capital is reciprocal. The whole city sings of the poet's [Stella's] Asteris [Violentilla] (Asteriset vatis totam cantataper urbem, 197-99). Violencilla is both the inspiration and subject of Stella's poetry: without Violencilla, Stella has no Asteris. Concomitantly, Stella's poems advertise Violencilla's cultural capital (beauty) converting it into symbolic-all of Rome can identify her by her beauty and by association with Stella. Without Stella, Violentilla is not Asteris. Statius' epitha/,amium, therefore, both explicitly and, implicitly, through subtler literary mimesis, chiefly accentuates Stella's literary capital.

150

Nothing OrdinaryHere

In Domitianic Rome, poetic professionalism is distinctive45; like Statius who is distinctive via his poetry, so too, is Stella. This connection lends greater significance, then, to the two poets' literary equality (colkga),emphasized in the preface to the book, and which forms an integral structural part of Statius' poem. Silvae 1.5: The Distinction of Discerning Taste

The portrayal of Claudius Etruscus sharply diverges from that of Rutilius Gallicus, the addressee of the preceding poem. The contrast between the two men is accentuated by their juxtaposition within the Book, and perhaps also by the opening of 1.5 where, in favor of a more lighthearted theme, Statius bids Laborand Cura to depart, running themes of 1.4. Many scholars have comyet these observations provide mented on the nature of the poem's ecphrasis, only a cursory introduction to, and in some cases subjective underestimation of, the poem's social significance.46 Likewise, in the "doublespeak" tradition of Ahl, mentioned in the introduction, Holtsmark has even interpreted the poem as criticism of Claudius' tremendous wealth. He remarks that the poem's lengthy proemium is disproportionate to the bath's ecphrasis;this "perverse structure," in his words, reflects Statius' "tongue-in-cheek" appraisal of the baths as a "thing of gross misproportion, a thing monumentally lacking in taste."47 Yet, Holtsmark has misjudged the significance of the proemium as a contribution to the ecphrasisproper (see below), and he has read subversive criticism into many of the poem's words where such criticism does not exist. We may challenge, too, Holtsmark's conception of "taste": is the bath tasteless because of its owner's social status, or because it contradicts contemporary notions of aesthetics and excess? Comparison to other contemporary, or slightly earlier, balneareveal that Claudius' balneum corresponds to Flavian fashion and other publicly and privately funded baths which display similar building materials and decoration. 48 Most importantly, Statius' poem does not aim at criticizing Claudius' affluence, but at highlighting his economic capital as a way to distinguish its proper expenditure and good taste. His bath merely becomes a visual and symbolic representation of the addressee's cultural refinement which, we must imply, extends to all areas of his life. Claudius Etruscus was the son of the imperial freedman, Tiberius Iulius Augusti libertus; the latter, through imperial service, was awarded equestrian rank during the reign ofVespasian, an extraordinary example of social mobility at the time. 49 It is striking that Statius is silent in the poem about Claudius' social rank as an eques,50 which was in fact an attribute worthy of praise as other Silvaeattest, most notably 4. 7. 51 Claudius' mother was herself probably equestrian, 52 and he seems to have attained the rank even before his father (3.3.138-45), perhaps, as Nauta argues, through some kind of distinguished

CreatingDistinction

151

service (of which we hear nothing). 53 Yet, Claudius' servile antecedents technically did not permit him legal entrance into the Order, 54 and it is unclear whether or not Claudius truly possessed the legal title of eques Romanus (which would need to have been granted by the emperor, and in a ceremony with the ius anuli auret) or, whether he merely usurped the title informally, a common practice among those who only fulfilled the property requirement. 55 His father's acquisition of equestrian rank, moreover, was also "extra-legal"56 and could never fully erase the family's servile origins, especially in the eyes of the freeborn, including legal equestrians and the senatorial elite. 57 This resentment arises from the social contradiction residing in one's birth origins (original rank) and the later acquisition of higher status. The distinction between these two cannot be overly stressed.58 For, although rank contributed in large part to social differentiation through visual symbols (e. g., the l.atuscl.avus,amphitheater seating) that maintained divisions not only among the upper three hierarchies of aristocratic orders (senatorial, equestrian, decurion) but also between aristocrats as a group and the lower ranked freedmen and slaves, other factors such as education, connections, and money, could allow lower-rank individuals a degree of prestige (i. e., status) and social mobility. 59 This ascension obviously created tension and even resentment among freeborn aristocrats who at times manifested outward hostility towards those of lower-rank but equal or greater status, and such aristocrats justified their own superiority through claims to their elegant refinement which they asserted was innate and could not be acquired. 60 Freedmen answered back "by emphasizing their personal accomplishments in buying their freedom and accumulating wealth."6 1 The bath of Claudius Etruscus may reflect such a social phenomenon. There can be no doubt that Claudius' status is clouded by his background. Even if a legal eques,of which there is no definitive proof, he was certainly a novus eques,and must have represented the lower rung of the Order, now characterized by an "office-holding minority" that "derived honor from the rank of their office."62 Thus, though technically an equestrian, Claudius lacks a long-standing inheritance in the status, and is still, after all, the son of a slave. Although the elevation from slave to equestrian is a source of praise for Claudius' father, who did hold political offices (as Statius points out in 3.3), it may have been a lingering source of embarrassment for his son, especially if Claudius did not possess legal status in the Equestrian Order. Silvae3.3 describes the details of Claudius' education in which his father directed his son towards a life in which he could appreciate and participate in the refinement and luxury characteristic of freeborn aristocrats (3.3.147-153). At least in a generally superficial level, Claudius' balneumis proof of the successful outcome of this attainment. His

152

Nothing OrdinaryHere

economic capital and cultural capital (in the form of taste), are visually manifested through the bath, which itself represents the family's success and belies-in a physical and thus lastingly visual way-their servile past. I would argue that Statius' poem-and, perhaps, with it Claudius' intent-is, in large part, a defense of Claudius' cultural refinement amidst the lingering traces of his cultural lineage and, possibly, the resentment of his fellow freeborn aristocrats. On a much simpler level, Statius' poem also distinguishes Claudius' bath from others,' since che construction of luxurious private balneawas especially fashionable at che time. 63 le is plausible chat Ecruscus commissioned the poem not explicidy but implicicly;Scaciuscellsus he composed 1.5 "in the space of a dinner," (intramoram cenae, lpraef30); presumably Claudius had invited Scacius(and also Marcial)64 co dine, with the underlying intention of encouraging both co enjoy a soak in the bath beforehand, when Claudius could use the opportunity to point out specific architectural and decorative features which lacer appear in the poem. 65 The composition of a poem following this ace ofhospicalicywould be appropriate and probably expected. White convincingly argues chat Claudius sought a "publicist" to advertise his balneumand its owner's refined elegance and economic wealth, an interpretation chat accounts for Martial writing about the same bath. The likelihood chat Claudius may have implicicly sought poems advertising the luxury of his balneumindicates his desire to be distinguished for economic wealth and refined taste. There are literary and descriptive variations between Martial's and Statius' poems, but they may be explained by their differences in purpose; whereas Martial may be aiming at simple praise, I would argue chat Statius' purpose runs much deeper in its attempt to distinguish Claudius' taste admisc possible, implied criticism. The exact location of Claudius' bath is not known, although ic may have been located on the Quirinal or in the Campus Martius. 66 Although it is impossible to determine che exact degree to which the balneum functioned as a purely private bath (to be used only by Claudius and guests) or semi-public (in which limited public access was allowed), it would have been publicly conspicuous. le would also have been difficult for immediate neighbors and more distanced Romans alike co ignore che visual and audial spectacle involved in the construction process of the bath. Everyone would have wanted co know who was responsible for che new building and what its intended function was. In the tradition of Rumor,it can be imagined that most Romans would have made it a point to discover the nature of Claudius' balneum before its completion, regardless of its distinction as private or public. If, however, it was purely private, Statius' poem may have served as an advertisement of the bath's interior, making it-linguistically-as visually accessible as its exterior. In any

CreatingDistinction

153

case,the poem highlights details that the bather or the general outside viewer may have missed. Thus, Statius acts as a tour guide who visually directs the reader-observer through the bath; in the midst of painting an overall image of its brilliance, Statius illuminates impressive features, molding the reader's response to the bath and what is distinctive about it. What has thus far not been fully explored by critics of the poem is that Statius emphasizes Claudius' distinction primarily by highlighting what Claudius (and his bath) are not. Though the use of negatives is typical of Statian style, its added prominence in 1.5 suggests additional significance, especially if we hear an underlying defensive tone in the poem. Here, meaning and distinction are derived through an implicit comparison to a relational opposite. This notion of "binary opposition," grounded in the theory of semiotics, is a fundamental principle of Bourdieu's theory of distinction: "The vision of the social world, and most especially the perception of others ... is in fact organized according to interconnected and partially independent oppositions ... especially in the system of paired adjectives employed by the users of the legitimate language to classify others and to judge their quality, and in which the term designating the properties ascribed to the dominant always receives a positive value."67

In other words, it is not the specificity of the material object itself that imparts meaning to the words "tasteful" or "elegant"; rather it is the implicit knowledge that there exists another similar object that is "not tasteful," or "not elegant," i. e., "tacky," or "vulgar." Nothing material is innately tasteful by definition-it can only acquire such meaning through comparison to other objects that represent the opposite social judgment. Moreover, it is the dominant culture that determines-by its public and private practice and the ensuing processes oflegitimization-what is "tasteful" and what is "vulgar." As the legitimate spokesperson for the Domitianic dominant culture, Statius affirms these relative social dichotomies through the use of specific adjectives and nouns that require a conscious (or even subconscious) understanding of paired linguistic opposites. Thus, an appreciation ofStatius' heavy use of negatives to describe what the bath is not, requires recognition and understanding of their binary, positive counterparts. Through litotes, then, Statius ultimately emphasizes what the bath is, and thereby provides a contextual social meaning that reflects upon Claudius himself. This method of portraying the positive by painting the negative appears from the beginning in the poem's proemium (1-2): "Not Helicon does my inspired lyre strike with heavy quill, nor do I call upon the Muses, goddesses I have so many times exhausted," (Non Heliconagravipulsat chelysentheapkctro

154

Nothing OrdinaryHere

I nee '4ssatavocototiem mihi numina Musas.)He rejects the usual epic invocation of Muses and Apollo, in favor of the water Naiads, who are demanded by the poem's subject, though innately inferior and inappropriate for dactylic hexameter. Here the Naiads reign supreme (undarum dnminas,6) and are joined by Vulcan, the bath's "king of the blazing fire" (regemcorusciignis,6-7). Statius dismisses (ite ... proculhinc, a negative connotation here) infamous mythological water nymphs like Salmacis, Oenone, and Hylas' ravisher (20-22), in order to introduce a longer passage that describes the bath's public aqueduct sources, in the form of (positive) Latin water Nymphs: the Aqua Virgoand Aqua Marcia. Interestingly, Statius devotes eight lines out of the poem's total 65 to this seemingly minor detail (23-31). But is it truly a minor detail? Clearly, the aqueducts serve a practical function and do not affect the bath's visual aesthetics, praised later. Here is where Statius' role as tour guide becomes especially significant, since the details regarding the bath's water source would not be readily clear to the average visitor or outside observer (nor would they probably evoke much interest).68 Why does Statius, then, belabor the point for eight lines? The Virgo and Marcia, the water supplies for Claudius' balneum,were public aqueducts, a fact which probably would have been well-known to most Romans. The use of a conduit from a public aqueduct line to supply both private and public balnea was costly, and public aqueducts seem co have been reserved primarily for publicly-funded, large-scale thermae.69 This means that Claudius' use of public aqueducts for his privately funded, and relatively modest-scaled bath was exceptional, since wells or cisterns normally would have provided the service.70 The utilization of a public water source, like the Aqua Virgoand Marcia, for private use required a grant by the emperor himself, or in other words a highly official authorization. 71 As Bruun has noted, access to aqueducts was not an inherent right and was gained by special favor: "The right to private water in Rome had nothing to do with 'objective Notwendigkeiten,' but was solely a privilege awarded by the emperor." 72 Normally only the tremendously large imperial baths utilized this source, since smaller baths were supplied by cisterns and "water-lifting apparatus" that kept the holding tank, located on the bath's roof, constantly filled; 73 the Stabian baths at Pompeii, as well as those at Herculaneum, Ostia, and Cyrene operated thusly.74 Claudius' similarly modest-sized bath, which probably was not completely open to the public, does not seem to have necessitated the amount of water for which an aqueduct would be needed; use of the Marcia and Virgotherefore suggest an additional distinction, since it indicates an imperial grant and thus testifies to his proximity to the imperial court-a point well-made by Statius' elaborate passage.75 Though such grants increased over time (especially under the reign ofNerva), as Frontinus points

CreatingDistinction

155

out (88.2), they still represented only a fraction of the total water distribution in the city.76 In his analysis of water pipes and their stamps, and based on evidence originally supplied by Eck, Bruun identifies 288 owners of private water conduits in Rome, of which 47% were senators and only 6% were equites.77 Acknowledging that the evidence is incomplete, Bruun nonetheless suggests that private access to aqueducts was reserved primarily for the upper classes, and, in particular, for consular families.78 If we can trust Bruun's analysis, even in its general conclusions, we may assert that Claudius' aqueduct access was exceptional and thus highly distinctive. Access to the Virgo seems to have been especially exclusive since its water reached very few privati and the Marcia was symbolically renowned as the carrier of the highest quality water, normally thus being reserved for drinking as opposed to other purposes like baths. 79 Thus, it is not accidental that Stacius devotes eight lines to pointing out the very distinctive nature of Claudius' water supply. Nor is it a mere display of erudition that Statius makes reference to the banishment of specifically Salmacis, Oenone, and Hylas' ravisher (20-22), 80 who were water nymphs. His contrast between the sexually transgressive spring Nymphs and the two aqueducts is striking. Salmacis, of course, was renowned for emasculating males who dared to enter her spring, while Oenone was deserted by the dandy Paris, and the final nymph abducted (and presumably raped) Hercules' lover, Hylas. These nymphs (and their associated "dirty'' waters) stand out against the clarity, purity, and cleanliness of the Aqua Marciaand Aqua Virgo.Statius utilizes three specific mythological references as another subtle-and yet not so subtle-way to emphasize the special quality and distinction of Claudius' water sources: they are pure in their mythological contexts and of course, consist of the purest types of water being brought into the city. Claudius' waters are safe and of the best quality: unlike the aforementioned springs, the Aqua Virgodid not pose a threat for swimmers (atque exceptura natatus I Virgoiuvat, 25-6) while the frigid temperature of the Aqua Marcia (MarsasquenivesetfrigoraducensI Marcia,26-7) suggests a purity that contrasts with the sexually charged mythological nymphs whose waters we would imagine as hot, a temperature to be associated with sexual passion. Moreover, Statius is undoubtedly making a pun, contrasting the Aqua Virgo(virgin) with other non-virginal and thus sexually suggestive springs. Statius may also be drawing a symbolic and economic comparison between Claudius' private baths and the large-scale public-oriented Thermaeof M. Agrippa, which was located in the Campus Martius, and thus possibly in the vicinity of Claudius' balneum. Significantly, the Aqua Virgowas one of Agrippa's major public works, designed specifically, in part, to supply water to his other construction project, the Thermae.Though technically these were

156

Nothing OrdinaryHere

privately-funded baths to which the public had access, they were, of course, closely associated with Augustus via Agrippa's connections with the princeps; hence Agrippa's Thermaewere probably viewed not in the same light as private balnea,but as a public benefaction supported by Augustus himself. 81 The Virgo and Thermae, their benefactor, and their connection to Augustus, would have been well-known co Romans of Statius' day. The deliberate identification of the Virgoas one of Claudius' water supplies forces a multitude of implicit comparisons between Agrippa, Claudius, and their baths: old and new; public and private; Augustan magistrate and private citizen; and so on. Such comparisons tacitly raise Claudius to Agrippa's stature, and perhaps even elevate him beyond it, since Claudius' bath surpasses Agrippa's in their novelty, splendor, and cultural refinement. There is, of course, a further implication chat Claudius, a private individual, funding his baths personally, has eclipsed one of the major monuments and symbolic remnants of the Augustan period. Without a doubt, the aqueducts so deliberately mentioned by Statius have major social and cultural implications, economically and symbolically elevating the value of Claudius' balnem. Stacius' elaboration on the bath's water source is entirely calculated; it emphasizes Claudius' connection to the imperial court and his exclusivity in having access co the public aqueducts, a political privilege chat is culturally matched in his choice of marbles for the bath (see below). The passage thus becomes a symbolic statement about Claudius' distinction on multiple levels. Statius' negative statement, which concludes the aqueduct passage and is directed to the water nymphs, consequently rings positivelytrue (30-31): "Never have you inhabited a richer grotto," (non umquam aliis habitastisin antris I ditius.)The bath is rich in the fullest sense of the word. Statius also plays upon this interconnection between reality and mythology (where water-Nymphs inhabit the baths), by distinguishing the bath's furnace as constructed by Vulcan and heated with the help of Venus' amores.Here, too, Statius has effectively made his point through the use of negatives: "So that no ordinary flame heats the furnace, she herself [i. e., Venus] has ignited her Cupids' torches," (neu vilisflamma caminosI ureret,ipsafacesvolucrumsuccendit Amorum, 32-3). The adjective vilisis loaded, and all its related meanings apply to the immediate context-"coscing little, cheap"; "having little material value, worthless"; "unworthy of esteem"; "of inferior rank, station, i. e., associated with common people, low life."82 Interestingly, Statius uses the word only one other time in the Silvaeand also in the immediate context of gods. In 3.2.113, Stacius tells Maecius Celer, who is departing for Egypt, that he will learn why the great Egyptian deities are in the form of ordinary animals (vilia cur magnosaequent animalia divos).The binary comparison is between ordinary and magnificent,

CreatingDistinction

157

low versus lofty, and so on. In 1.5, the furnace is "non-ordinary'' because it is divinely inspired. By negating the negative term vilis, Statius forces the reader to consider the possible binary antonyms to derive meaning: "economically expensive," i. e., carus;"distinctive," or "aristocratic" (non-plebeian), i. e., clarus,a word usually employed to describe upper-class senatorial Romans. 83 The word vilis encompasses and simultaneously communicates the whole gamut of capital: cultural, economic, and symbolic. Because the furnace is nee vilis, by metonymic association, so too is the balneumand its owner. Statius describes the rest of the bath in a similar way, particularly the marbles used to decorate it. 84 What distinguishes this bath from "ordinary'' baths are the marbles that are not used: "Thasos and wavy Carystos are not allowed here; onyx grieves from far away, and ophitescomplains at being left out," (non hue admissaeThasosaut undosaCarystos;maeretonyx longe,queriturque exclususophites,34-35). These are specificallyThasian, Carystian, onyx and serpentine. Their exclusion heightens, in binary opposition, the inclusion of other, more refined choices that Statius then goes on to mention, namely N umidian gialloanticoand porphyry (sol.anitetflavis Nomadum decisametallis

. . . sol.acavoPhrygiaequam Synnadosantro I ipsecruentavitmaculislucentibus Attis, 36--42). Chapter Three has shown that the types of marbles excluded from Claudius' baths were by no means "ordinary" and in fact they do appear in other poems of the Silvae, such as in Violentilla's opulent villa. As tour guide, though, Statius is leading the viewer's perception and reaction, and guides them to see that Claudius has chosen only the mostelegant and expensive stones available to him. The emphasis on exclusion versus inclusion calls attention to Claudius' selectivity, and thus, his taste. In choosing only the best, rarest marbles, Claudius Etruscus himself, as Statius reports, has worked hard to situate himself in an aristocratic vein. It is important to note at this time that Statius' version of the bath's marble decoration deviates from Martial's account (Ep. 6.42.14-15); the latter includes onyx and ophites in his description, while, as we have seen, Statius is explicit about their exclusion. We could attribute the differences to a mistake on either poet's part; no sure conclusion can be reached without archaeological testimony. 85 Yet, Statius' emphasis on the exclusion of certain types of marble like onyx and ophitesis an integral part of his overall purpose. And so, it is more likely that Statius' conscious exclusion of these marbles shows a deeper level of observation on Statius' part; if onyx and ophiteswere visible, how could Statius have forgotten them? At any rate, even if Statius were excluding them, what is clear is that he is emphasizing the non-vulgar appearance of Claudius' bath. His "correct" commentary on the bath's decoration contributes to the bath's cultural and symbolic significance in relation

Nothing OrdinaryHere

158

to the owner: exclusion signifies high taste. Claudius' taste reinforces his cultural refinement and makes us forget his servile background. This deliberate comparison between what eou/,dhave been used and what has been used does not end with the description of marbles. Claudius' discriminating taste extends co the water basins (piseina)where again, "nothing is ordinary," (nil ibi pkbeium, 47).86 Again, Statius has chosen a sociologically-loaded word and negated it. Just like vilis,pkbeium is highly negative and has a variety of related connotations that encompass the full range of capital types (economic, cultural, and symbolic). The word is traditionally associated with the plebeian class, and the "ordinary," "base" connotations associated with it, in binary relation to the senatorial class and its associated refined taste. 87 Statius follows the same pattern of exclusion/inclusion marked by the contrasting nusquamlsed(47-50):

nusquamTemesaea notabis aera, sedargento felix propellitur unda argentoque cadit, labrisque nitentibus instat delicias mirata suas et abire recusat. [Never will you see the ordinary Temesean bronze; instead the fortunate water flows from silver into silver, and stops still in a lustrous basin and, marveling at its own riches, refuses to go further.)

The economic and social hierarchy between silver and Corinthian bronze has been discussed earlier. This selectivity and refinement is further reinforced by the emphatic repetition of argento(48, 49) which stands in stark contrast to nusquam. .. aera(47-8) which draws attention to both the quality and quantity of silver used in the bath in comparison to the more ordinary and less valuable bronze. Claudius' choice of metal exhibits an exceptional amount of economic expenditure and cultural taste that are non-plebeian. Moreover, his careful selectivity, in which certain materials are deliberately excluded, communicates an understanding of elegance and refinement; with a view to quality over quantity, Claudius has deliberately avoided the pitfalls of a "Trimalchionic effect." By negating pejorative words, neevilisand nilpkbeium, that encompass a range of social and economic connotations, Statius has succinctly characterized Claudius as economically wealthy, culturally refined, and distinctive. Moreover by employing words typically associated with social class to stress individual aspects of the balneum (nee vilis and nil pkbeium), Statius has, perhaps, compensated for Claudius' servile heritage, and asserted the appearance of higher social status for him. Within the field of cultural capital, Claudius inherently possesses little capital from his lineage, but his economic

CreatingDistinction

159

resources have allowed him co exhibit a taste chat belies his servile antecedents. Even the poem's concluding line, "and now may your fortune learn to be reborn better," (et tua iam meliusdiscatfortuna renasci,65) effectively suggests Claudius' successful cultural ascendancy. His economic capital (externally manifested by the elegant balneum)has converted into symbolic capital since the balneum stands as a visual representation to everyone of his economic prosperity. His cultural capital, mainly in the form of taste, is visible only to those who have observed the balneum's interior (in person or via Statius' poem). We see, then, the importance of literature (i. e., Statius' poem) in the process of conversion and the creation of symbolic capital. Textualizing the physical, it is the poem that transforms a sensory (visual) experience-and one that is limited in its accessibility-into one that is more lasting and permanent. Thus, the bath becomes a vehicle of distinction, communicating Claudius' economic wealth and a cultured taste that mirrors, even transcends, aristocratic aesthetics. Scatius ends the poem using this same pattern of negative accentuation, by comparing Claudius' balneum with the stock exempla of luxurious ones (60-63): nee si Baianis veniat novus hospes ab oris talia despiciet (fassit componere magnis parva) Neronea nee qui modo lotus in unda, hie iterum sudare neget. [If a new guest recently vacationing at Baiae's baths should come, he would not scoff at this bath nor (if we can compare great with small) would anyone who had just swum in Nero's bath refuse to enjoy the sauna a second time here.]

Fassit componeremagnisparva, which, on the surface, seems to differentiate the disparity in size between Claudius' bath and those at Baiae (and, by association, those of Nero), is actually ambiguous, forcing the reader to decide which of the baths is parva and which magna, i. e., not necessarily a size differentiation, but a quality one; inferior versus superior. Statius cleverly suggests that Claudius' balneum challenges comparison with not only the luxurious baths of Republican Rome, but also two of the three large-scale public, imperially-related baths of the time, the Thermae Neronis and the ThermaeAgrippae. Finally, Statius now explicitly highlights Claudius' increased cultural capital by calling for a blessing upon his "brilliant mind and attention to detail," (nitenti I ingeniocuraque,63-64). It is one thing to possess tremendous

160

Nothing OrdinaryHere

amounts of economic capital, but another to have the cultural capital (ingenium and cura)necessary co expend chat wealth in a refined and elegant manner.88 The use and emphatic position of nitenti and ingenio are deliberate; previously its forms have frequently and prominently appeared throughout the poem co describe the bath's brilliant materials. 89 Now, these materialsin effect the whole balneum-mirror Claudius' own brilliance; the bath's style, structure, and decoration are quite literally a reflection of Claudius' sense of good taste. Visible brilliance has become a symbol for the correlating invisible abstract. Even more, nitor is a word traditionally reserved for aristocratic men; by abandoning the use of a negative, Statius now ends his poem with a positive affirmation of what Claudius is not: pkbeius and vilis.Through economic means and his cultural nitor Claudius seems to transcend his social rank, by appearing to be aristocratic. I would argue further chat Scatius' heavy use of negatives, through binary opposition, is purposeful, designed to forestall any possible objections co Claudius' servile antecedents. By focusing exclusively on Claudius' balneum-the tour de force of his manifested economic capital-Statius has successfully reflected Claudius' symbolic distinction and implicitly summed it up in one effective image: nitor.

Silvae 2.1: The Distinction of Paternal Pietas Atedius Melior is the dedicatee of Book 2, but unlike Stella he was not a professional poet. Nevertheless, he was a literary man, whose tasce.Scatiuspraises in the Preface: "The best man, and most refined, no less in his taste of literature chan in his lifestyle," (vir optime nee minus in iudiciolitterarumquam in omni vitaecowretersissime,2praef.1-3).Melior clearly appreciated Statius' poetic ability, and their familiaritas (1) may explain why Stacius devotes three poems to him (2.1, 2.3, 2.4), more than any other addressee in the Silvae, save Domitian. 90 Silvae2.1, an epicedionon the death of Melior's puer, Glaucias, is the first and most serious poem of the three.91 I will focus on this first poem, addressing the other two at the end of the discussion as a point of comparison. In Silvae2.1 Melior is described as a childless bachelor. Childlessness (orbitas)seems to have been a growing trend among Roman aristocrats 92 for reasons chat can only be conjectured. Garnsey and Saller argue that, under the early Empire, Roman aristocratic men increasingly produced fewer children to avoid the added expense and trouble they incurred, in favor of individualistic accumulation of economic wealth. A Roman man could instead protect his posterity and fortune by testamentary adoption of an adulc.93 While avoiding the expense and trouble involved in raising an infant, adoption of an older child or young adult allowed an otherwise childless man to acquire the benefits and advantages that children provided. These included the expectation

CreatingDistinction

161

that children would later support an aged parent and provide proper funerary rites upon their death; 94 moreover, even an adopted child (with prior slave status) could carry on the family name and maintain its reputation and distinction to some extent. 95 Finally, we cannot discount the important role that a child played in providing companionship for childless bachelors. The shifting criteria for inclusion in the Roman senate, less exclusionary and dependent on heredity, may also explain an increase in orbittts.96 The concomitant increase in childlessness implies, therefore, that the production-and even possession--of children became rarer, and thus an increasing source of pride. This trend is supported by our sources which comment not only on the social ramifications of childlessness, but exhibit special praise for those who are parents. In Ep.4.15, for example, Pliny explicitly praises Asinius Rufus for fulfilling his "civic duty'' (fonctusest optimi civisofficio,3) by producing children 97 Elsewhere the Silvae also echo social views amidst the popularity of orbittts. that seem to stigmatize childlessness (and its associated nuisances) and celebrate children. 98 Two poems, significantly juxtaposed, congratulate addressees on the recent birth of a child (4.7; 4.8). Silvae4.7 is a lyric ode to Vibius Maximus in which praise turns to gnomic reflections criticizing childlessness: "Childlessness must be avoided by every effort," (orbitasomnifagi,endanisu, 33); "when childlessness is buried, there is no weeping," (orbitasnullo tumu/,atajletu, 37). The emphatic placement of orbitttsis of course deliberate. Moreover, three (2.1, 2.6, 5.5) of Statius' six epicedia(discounting 2.4,) lament the death of an adopted foster-child or favorite. A quick calculation shows then that 5 poems out of 32 (little over 15%) are specifically focused on the value of children. This does not include the many other positive references to children where poems are not directly focused on the subject (e. g. 1.2, 3.3, 3.5, 5.2). Domitianic legislation also reveals orbitasto have been a continuing social problem. The law bestowing benefits on parents producing three, four, or five children (ius liberorum)was a reinstated relic from the period of Augustus, whose law was intended to increase the population, especially of aristocratic families, following years of civil war. The law was part of the !ex Julia instituted in 18 BC and the later lex PappiaPoppaeaof AD 9; the laws both exempted fathers from certain legal duties and allowed them earlier political candidacy, and released freeborn women from the constraints of guardianship while also providing distinction. 99 Domitian's reinstitution of the law was consistent with his overall moral legislation and role as censorand may reflect a sincere interest in rectifying the problem of childlessness. Melior's decision to adopt an infant son, then, embraces imperial ideology that generally discouraged childlessness. While he does not benefit from the ius liberorum, he does benefit from some of the advantages that a child

162

Nothing Ordinary Here

could provide. 100 As an epicedion,IOI 2.1 honors Glaucias, yet the poem primarily aims at emphasizing Melior's paternal role as the primary source of his distinction. Melior's adoption of Glaucias was not economically selfserving, as would have been che adoption of an adult son; 102 Glaucias was not only an infant, but the son of slave parents and freed by Melior himself. Generally adoptees were adults, not infants, and adoption was "conducted between males and involved the legal transfer of the adoptee into the agnatic family of the adopter." 103 Thus, unlike the typical adoption that involved adult adoptees and which was often financially and otherwise pragmatic, Melior's adoption of an infant-and former slave-is itself unusual and suggests a deeper, perhaps more sentimental, affection. 104 Statius emphasizes both facts to demonstrate chat Melior, unlike other contemporaries, is willing to expend trouble, time and money in raising Glaucias from infancy co adulthood. This devotion accounts for the rather ambiguous identification of the two; Statius alternately calls Melior dominus (51, 70, 76, 80), pater (103, 119), and erus (129), while Glaucias is puer, a word that can mean both son and slave.105 Despite this deliberate ambiguity, their paternal-filial affection is portrayed as purely natural, serious and sincere. Excess, normally a negative quality, is a theme interwoven throughout the poem and characterized as a positive extension of Melior's deep paternal pietas. In order to fully explore the possibilities of Melior's paternal characterization, I will, for the sake of this discussion, consider Glaucias' biography in chronological order, realizing chat I will deviate from the order in which Scatius presents it in the poem. Although the poem, composed after Glaucias' untimely death, initially introduces him as an alumnus (a foster-child), this characterization is balanced by the ferocity of Melior's grief, which is likened to the loss experienced by a lioness and a tigress, which have been bereaved (orbati) of their natural-born cubs (8-1 0). Melior's grief is natural and primal, like that of a parent who has lost his/her own flesh and blood. That Melior's grief is real is deliberately corroborated and sanctioned by Stacius' role as consolator.He himselflost his own pater (34). He himself consoled other patres, matres, and nati (30-34). Thus, Statius is expertuswhen it comes to matters of real sorrow and proves his capability as a consolatorfor Melior's grief, validating Melior's paternal pietas as real. The poet and his addressee share a bond in their similar experiences. On the one hand, Stacius lost his father; on the other, Melior has lost his son, hence Statius' exhortation that they weep together: "I won't be stern and try and prevent you from grieving; rather, share your groans with me and let us weep together," (nee te LugereseverusI arceo,sed confergemitus pariterque Jleamus, 34-5).

CreatingDistinction

163

Glaucias was born inside Melior's household, not purchased on the slave market, i. e., he was a verna (72-75): 106 non te barbaricae versabat turbo catastae, nee mixtus Phariis venalismercibus infans compositosque sales meditataque verba locutus erum tardeque parasti. quaesisti lascivus [No foreign auction block put you on display, nor as a child were you mixed in with Egyptian wares for sale; you did not unrestrainedly seek a master and eventually acquire one by speaking carefully thought-out words with calculated wit.] The point, which takes four lines to make, is deliberate. This domesticity (and Italian nationality) excepts him from the venality of the general run of slaves, and it "naturalizes" Glaucias' birth in relation to his adoptive father. The point is brought out emphatically by an emphasis on Glaucias' birthplace (76-78), with a significant, rhyming emphasis on hie and hinc:"Here is your home, here you were raised, dear to the household of your once-master," (hie domus,hinc ortus, dominiquepenatibus olim Icarus). Moreover, Glaucias is distinguished because he is freed, through Melior's careful intervention precisely so that "they may not complain of his birth," (ne quererere genus, 78). This means that the adoption-if it was in fact legally established-would have taken the form of adrogatio,since as a freedman Glaucias was sui iuris.107 Manumission allows Glaucias to enjoy the rank of libertus,and indicates Melior's immediate concern for the child's social standing and thus a desire to differentiate their relationship from a mere slave-master one. The ambiguous vocabulary used to describe their familial positions mentioned above actually draws greater attention to the fact that Melior, once his dominus, deliberately chooses to change his identification in order to become Glaucias' pater. Moreover, adrogatio would have given Glaucias at least the "private rights of an ingenuus,"and, as an adrogatus,he would have "acquired the personal position of a son (filiusfamilias)within the familia." 108 Statius takes care to clarify the paternal-filial relationship and distinguishes, in particular, Melior's role as a true father, since childless bachelors often utilized a favored slave rather than adoptioor adrogatio to provide the benefits normally offered by children. 109 By ensuring Glaucias' freedman status, Melior would have consciously rejected the more common (and perhaps easier) means of securing companionship and posterity through a slave favorite. Adrogatioallowed childless bachelors to secure a trustworthy heir who was already connected to the family, rather than relying on a less familiar outsider, and the act effectively offered the same benefits and

Nothing OrdinaryHere

164

advantages to the adoptive father as the act of adoptio.110 Again, Melior's adoption (i. e., adrogatio)of an infant rather than the usual adult male would suggest that he desired not just any heir, but a son. In manumitting Glaucias, Melior establishes his role as a true Roman pater, an identification that would otherwise be incompatible with Glaucias' slave status. More significantly, Glaucias' "naturalization" into Melior's household culminates in a recounting of the ritualistic susceptioor tollereliberosby which normally the paterfamilias legitimizes his natural-born child as his own by raising it up and naming it. 111Melior employs the ceremony as a symbol of adoption, and in so doing immediately acquires the role of paterfamilias (2.1.78-81):112 raptum sed protinus alvo sustulit exsultans ac prima lucida voce astra salutantem dominus sibi mente dicavit, amplexusque sinu tulit et genuisse putavit. [ ... but right away, snatched up at birth from the womb, he lifted you up rejoicing; and as you were greeting the stars with your first wail, he called you his own, by his own choice; and then holding you tight to his chest, he imagined that he had begotten you himself.]

This identification is significant; by definition the paterfamiliashad potestas over the "materfamilias,sons, daughters, adopted children, grandsons, and granddaughters." 113 By acquiring a son, Melior acquires the title, and it means that Glaucias becomes financially attached to the familia as a legal heir. 114Through adrogatio,Melior appears to have given Glaucias a second birth: et genuisseputavit. The choice of words used (raptum,protinus, exultans, prima) 115 to describe the adoption emphasizes Melior's eagerness and commitment to treat the child as his own, a point belabored by the following 23 lines (82-105) that philosophically promote adoption as a more definitive proof of a father's affections given that it requires an active desirability and choice: "Your mind and heart first made you his father, later on his beauty and nature," (et te iamfeceratilli I mensanimusquepatrem, necdum moresvedecorve, 102-103, c£ 2.1.96). 116 Moreover, the textual recreation of the act of susceptio, normally reserved for naturally-begotten children and here applied to Glaucias, minimizes the rather selfishly pragmatic financial and social implications suggested by adoption in general (particularly since both forms usually involved adult adoptees) by emphasizing Melior's desire for a true son whom he can raise from infancy and educate as any other Roman father would. That Melior nurtured the child from his infant cries (104-105) continues the

CreatingDistinction

165

characterization of the child's "natural" birth within the adoptive father's home. 117 Statius makes dear chat it was not Glaucias' character and beauty that inspired the adoption, but rather Melior's own mem and animus (103). The difference is one of responsibility; Melior is not persuaded by Glaucias' beauty-which may imply self-serving motives-but he initiates the adoption, suggesting altruistic motives. The encomium that follows (106-124) illustrates that Melior reared his son in the same manner as any Roman father would do, with an emphasis on wrestling, Greek poetry and declamation; and, like any father, Melior (ipsepater) swells with pride at Glaucias' talents and would be pleased to hear that Glaucias' teachers (ipsi magistrt)marvel at his accomplishments. Melior's appellation aspater may subtly imply that Glaucias has "inherited" Melior's own intellectual capabilities: like father, like son. In addition to attention to Glaucias' education, Melior has spared no cost in his son's clothing, outfitting him extravagantly (126-37); Glaucias' tunic is neither too big (indicating it was a hand-me-down-a cost-saving measure), nor too tight (implying the child has outgrown a garment not yet replaced), but fits perfectly (I 31) (suggesting a custom fit and clothes bought specially for him); this is not a minor detail, but a significant comment on Melior's economic generosity and paternal role. Glaucias' cloches are numerous and expensive, dyed in both green and purple, while his fingers sparkle with rings. Melior's economic expenditure is portrayed as excessive since he sets no limit to the gifts and accoutrements he provides his adopted son (non turba comes,non munera cessant,135). Yet, here excess is laudable as an external display of internal paternal pietas.118 Notably, what makes Melior distinctive is that he is indistinguishable from any other father when it comes to the rearing of his son; the father of Claudius Ecruscus, for example, did not hesitate to spend his entire fortune for the benefit of his sons' well-being and future success (3.3. 147-48, quoted earlier). The only thing Glaucias cannot provide, however, is the praetexta, worn by free-born children. Although this comment can be construed as tactless, 119 it is arguably purposeful, for it exemplifies the depth of Melior's paternal devotion. What is otherwise expected in terms of paternal behavior from "real" fathers, becomes a point of distinction for Melior, whose son is neither blood-related, nor aristocratic. Melior's generosity towards Glaucias is distinctive precisely because of the boy's servile background, something chat denies him the praetexta, a point reinforced by ambiguous familial vocabularly integrated throughout the poem. Daily interactions between Glaucias and Melior, retold in the form of vivid nostalgic anecdotes, further characterize Glaucias' filial role and thus Melior's paternal one. Statius devotes thirteen lines (56-68) to a description of these otherwise mundane occurrences, which include Glaucias' ability to

166

Nothing Ordinary Here

allay Melior's cares, join him at the dinner cable, awaken him in the morning, and eagerly await his return. Moreover, he appeases Melior's anger at che household slaves (famuli);che detail may seem minor, the kind found distasteful by many Statian scholars. Actually, it is an important feature taken from the daily activities of the family since it forces a distinction between Glaucias, the son-and thus young master of che household-and the household slaves among whom he would have been counted were it not for Melior's intervention. As a son-and unlike a slave-Glaucias is irreplaceable. Statius reinforces this fact by the series of questions, introduced with che anaphoric quis (57, 58, 60, 62, 65, as, for example, quis curasmentisquearcanaremittet?57). Like any child, Glaucias enlivened the house with his cries; without him the house is dead, mute, desolate: "The house is dead silent, desolate, I declare; and the rooms are neglected, and a grim stillness hangs over the cable," (muta

domus,fateor, deso/,atique penates,I et situs in tha/,amiset maestasikntia mensis, 67-68). The implication, of course, is that the empty house reflects Melior's own aggrieved state-of-mind. This description of daily life activity underscores Melior and Glaucias' close familial relationship, which in turn, justifies the expensive funeral given in Glaucias' honor: "Why do you marvel if your loyal father honors you with so great a funeral?" (Quid mirum, tanto site pius altorhonoratIfonere?69-70). The line aptly describes Melior in two respects, pius altor (the both the religiously dutiful and the steadfast father) and generous, indicated by the qualifying tanto. The sentiment quid mirum seems to anticipate criticism for the amount of money and ostentation displayed for a young child with a servile heritage. Here expensive imported herbs, of which the economic value has been described earlier, combine with purple and other funeral gifts that display not only Melior's economic wealth, but his paternal devotion (cupit

omnia ferre I prodigus et totos Melior succenderecensusI desertasexosusopes, I 62-64, translated earlier). 120 As with Melior's expenditure on Glaucias' education and clothing, here, too, he is excessive (prodigus);this characterization is in stark contrast with his portrayal in 2.3.67-71, where he is praised for moderation. Again, excess is positively qualified by the very person on whom he spends his money so extravagantly; its abundant visual manifestations symbolize Melior's otherwise invisible paternal pietas; Melior values his son more than his economic capital-a celling sentiment, particularly in light of the rising trend of orbitasin favor of the personal accumulation of wealth. Glaucias, thus, is not an asset to Melior's household census,as a famulus or delicatus would be, but the object of affection for which Melior's censusis prodigiously expended. Just as Melior's excessive material expenditure exhibits paternal affection, his excessive grief also externalizes this pietas. Melior even surpasses

CreatingDistinction the lamentation of Glaucias' birth-parents

167 and attracts their attention

(173-75): "As he was laid out, his natural father and grieving mother were present, but the stunned parents were looking at you instead. Why is this surprising?" (erant illicgenitor materqueiacentisI maesta,sedattoniti te spectavere parentes.I quid mirum?)The use of genitoraccentuates just that; Melior is the pater ( 103, 119) but not the natural father. The visual image of the birth parents as onlookers-grouped among the general spectators-who focus their attention not on their dead child but on Melior, underscores the degree of the latter's grief. It also reinforces the notion that the focus of the poem is not Glaucias, but Melior, the child's father. How excessive is the funeral and Melior's audible laments? Arguing primarily through comparison co the Como/,atioad Liviam, Manning, contra Gossage and Argenio, challenges the reality of Melior's excessive grief, asserting that literary descriptions of immoderate sorrow do not exemplify a corresponding social reality.121 He notes that early imperial moralists and historians traditionally criticized intense, prolonged manifestations oflamentation, the kind of behavior exemplified by Melior and other addressees (Ursus, 2.6; Abascantus, 5.1); moreover Manning attributes Melior's excess to epic convention and the established topoiof consolatory literature. We can, however, reasonably assume that Melior experienced a great emotional loss, otherwise the effect and purpose of Statius' poem would be irrelevant. Further, visual manifestations of grief were essential as a measure of the internal, and invisible, degree of affection and familial pietas.Seneca attests to the social importance placed upon visible grief; he complains that, in becoming too dependent upon public opinion, many Romans feign tears in public when in actuality they feel no sorrow. 122 His comments on grieving in Ep.63 suggest limits, at least for philosophers, co the extent of acceptable lamentation (plus aequo, 1; immodice, 14). 123 Has Statius correctly reported Melior's lamentation, or has poetic license allowed him to exaggerate it? Even more, would Statius have put so much emphasis on Melior's grief if he believed it would elicit external criticism? Statius' description may be defensive, as the repeated phrase quid mirum (69, 175) may imply. Perhaps Statius is responding to onlookers who had criticized the degree of Meli or's affection, as manifested through excessive lamentation and a particularly expensive funeral. But Statius' depiction is deliberate, and its purpose and effect depend upon on his audience's ability to recognize Melior's grief as excessive, whether or not it actually was. Here, as elsewhere in the poem, excess (2.1.12-13; 23-24; 33; 169-72) carries positive, rather than negative connotations. This fact is emphasized not only by the defensive quid mirum, but the fact that the whole city shares in Melior's grief, coming out in droves to witness the funeral procession through Rome (175-78):

Nothing OrdinaryHere

168 plebs cuncta nefas et praevia flerunt agmina, Flaminio quae limite Mulvius agger transvehit, immeritus flammis dum tristibus infans traditur, et gemitum formaque aevoque meretur.

[All the people and a large crowd preceding the funeral parade weep at this horrible event; the Mulvian Bridge along the Flaminian Road leads them beyond the city walls, while the child is given over to the grim flames undeservedly, but deserving lament because of his youthful age and beauty.]

Further details confirm the funeral's expense: Statius tells us it was on a grand scale (tantofunere, 69-70; maestoluxu, 159) and included purple cushions for the corpse (purpureoaggere,159), as well as countless offerings and aromatics (including saffron, myrrh, cinnamon, and balsam, 160-2), the expense and rarity of which were described in Chapter three. Statius' description of the public nature and expense of the funeral is rather striking in that it is what we would typically find given for adult Roman males, nor children. As Harlow and Laurence point out, funerals for children were conspicuously different than those for adults, lacking the "elaborate rituals, processions and panegyrics given in front of citizens during the day, and instead held in the quiet of the night and early daybreak. 124 Thus, Glaucias' funeral would have been an anamoly in traditional Roman funerary practice; it is certainly no accident chat Statius elaborates upon its details, since the event's unusual nature reflects Melior's exceptional affection for his son. Although Melior has thus deviated from the normal attention devoted to children's funerals, his actions are in keeping with the special nature of their father-son bond, as Statius reminds us earlier in the poem (84-7): non omnia sanguis proximus aut serie generis demissa propago alligat; interius nova saepe adscitaque serpent pignora conexis. [Nearest bloodlines and family kin descended generation by generation do not bind everything; often newly-adopted ties intertwine more tightly than blood relations.]

Melior's excessive sorrow, manifested by audible wailing and an elaborate funeral, comprises an essential aspect of the poem's overall theme. As poet and licensed spokesperson, Statius has guided a precise reader-response, by suggesting

CreatingDistinction

169

chat not only is Melior's grief excessive but chat chis excess is a positive reflection of Melior's real feelings. le is only natural chac the excess Melior showered upon Glaucias when alive recurs when he is dead. In the end, che poem resonates only with the paternal-filial relationship. Statius emphasizes neither Melior's social rank (of which we know nothing) nor his own activities, but his role as an adoptive facher which, above all, distinguishes him. Even passages chat illustrate Melior's economic expenditure are used to emphasize the more valuable non-material asset of paternal pietas. This explains why Statius gives the poem priority over the two other poems dedicated co Melior. Poem 2.3, agenetheliacon,narrates a mythological aetion of a conspicuous plane-tree in the garden of Melior's home. 125 Though some scholars 126 have (mis)read this poem as an explanation for Melior's sudden withdrawal from political life in AD 88, an interpretation rejected by Billerbeck, 127 the poem aims at portraying Melior's elegant refinement, quies, and careful economic expenditure. Poem, 2.4, a conso/,a,tio on Melior's dead parrot, with Catullan and Ovidian antecedents and early identified by Vollmer as a parody of the conso/,a,tio genre, is deliberately humorous, and, like 2.3, more light-hearted. 128 Besides being a parody, the poem also displays Melior's refinement and economic wealth. 129 One could argue that the inclusion of 2.3 wichin the same book as Glaucias' epicedionundermines the seriousness of the latcer. However, the light-hearted treatment of the parrot's conso/,a,tio actually highlights, by contrast, the depth of Melior's grief and the gravity of Glaucias' death in 2.1. 130 The fact chat Statius identifies only 2.1 as an epicedion(2praef8) further underlines the two poems' contrasting degrees of gravity. Thus, it is not just the fact that Melior is a father that deserves attention in this poem, but that he is an adoptivefather, by his own choosing, and treats Glaucias as if he were his own natural-born son. Melior's paternal pietas is all the more distinctive considering Glaucias' servile heritage. Melior, however, is not entirely unique in his adoptive paternal affection; Stacius himself adopted a slave-boy to whom he pays couching tribute in an epicedion (5.5). That poem displays many similarities to Glaucias' epicedion,mosc notably the portrayal of the paternal-filial relationship as natural and sincere. Thus, just as Statius validates Melior's grief, by likening him to orbati /.eones(2.1.9), Statius also justifies his role as a pater, despite the child's origins: "I was not his natural father ... buc I lose my son," (non fueram genitor ... orbus ego, 5.5.11-13). 131 Scatius also "naturalizes" his relationship wich his son, and, in a strikingly similar passage to 2.1.72-75, carefully emphasizes the boy's Italian nationality (5.5.66-69):

Nothing Ordinary Here

170 non ego mercatus Pharia de puppe loquaces delicias doctumque sui conuicia Nili infantem lingua nimium salibusque protervum dilexi: meus ille, meus.

[I did not purchase from an Egyptian merchant ship some chatty plaything, nor did I love a child learned in the noisy joking of his Nile homeland or with a too-quick tongue or too-experienced wit: he was mine, my own.]

Like Melior, Statius also employs the susceptioas a symbol of his adoption, and he, too, gives [a second] birth ro his son: "I gave him another birth," (quin alios ortus . .. dedi, 73-4). This act makes the boy truly his own: meus ilk, meus,69. The two poems communicate an identical message: an adoptive father possesses as much paternal pietas as a natural one. 132 Statius' extensive attention to the pater-filius relationship might thus appear to be self-serving, were it not for the fact that the message contrasts with poem 2.6, a consolatioto Ursus on the death of his delicatus,Philetas. Although Statius validates Ursus' affection and grief as real, he does not characterize it as paternal. Philetas is not an adoptive son, but a slave delicatus,a point emphasized repeatedly not only through specific vocabulary in which, unlike Glaucias, Philetas is called afamulus (8, 10), but also through the portrayal of his servile relationship with Ursus. For this reason, Ursus is never described in paternal terms-the poem contains no susceptio,no "naturalization," no description of the child's infancy or educational rearing, and no description of the child's clothing. Philetas does, however, receive an extravagant funeral, which nevertheless is described as neeservilis,an emphasis on Philetas' origins, but also Ursus' economic wealth and generosity. The tone of 2.6, where the distinction of paternal pietas is strikingly absent, sharply contrasts with the epicediafor Melior's and Statius' own sons. Ursus, instead, is praised for his role as an exceptional and (perhaps erotically) loving erus (51), who in turn inspires exceptional devotion from his delicatus. Whereas Melior and Statius are portrayed as pii patres,here it is Philetas who is pius famulus (10), i. e., he dutifully obeys his master. In other words, Philetas does not identify Ursus as a father, as Glaucias does Melior. This explains why he, unlike the adopted sons of Statius and Melior, can be replaced and thus ease Ursus' grief: "Put away your grief; by chance the Fates will give you another Philetas, and he himself [i. e., Philetas] will gladly teach this new one his customs and habits and how to gain your love," (pone,precor,questus; alium tibi Fata Phikton, Iforsan et ipsedabit moresquehabitusquedecoros I monstrabitgaudenssimikmque docebitamari, 103-5).

CreatingDistinction

171

The relationship exhibited between Ursus and Philetas serves as a point of comparison for the paternal relationship between Melior and Glaucias (and Statius and his son). As an adoptive father, Melior's affection for Glaucias is not self-serving; this selfless devotion is reinforced by his careful attention to the child's education and clothing. Ursus, however, maintains his superiority as master, an act that is by nature, self-serving; Philetas servesas a devoted (pius), possibly erotic, companion, and as a visible manifestation of Ursus' refinement. Glaucias, however, is a son who, in this role alone, is capable of making Melior a devoted (pius) father. In rejecting the current trend of orbitas,Melior has deliberately chosen his role of paterfamiliasover a life of economic selfishness. In fact, as the running theme of excess indicates, he is the exact opposite of selfish, excessivein all things related to Glaucias. In so doing, Melior accepts Domitianic ideology, and the important cultural identification as a pater. Melior's sincere, but excessive grief, then, corresponds to other visual forms of proof exhibited throughout the poem that legitimize his role as a father, whereby his altruistic behavior makes him Glaucias' genitor,even if he cannot biologically claim the title. Silvae 4.8: The Distinction of Family

As a poem that celebrates the birth of a child, Silvae 4.8 can to some degree be seen as a counterpart to 2.1; both poems overlap in the thematic importance of children in the role of the Roman family, yet Silvae 4.8 celebrates not just a birth, but the birth of a third child and a male heir. Despite their thematic overlap in terms of love of children, this gratulatio offered to Menecrates diverges from the attention to death in 2.1. The opposed poetic genres explain many of the differences in tone and topoi;but it is social differences, between the children and their fathers, that create far deeper variations in the portrayal of the addressees' distinction. Melior has only one child, and his social rank is strikingly absent from 2.1; Menecrates, however, has three children, and his social rank is closely connected to them and their future prospects. Here also the distinction between natural-born and adopted children is paramount, despite Statius' earlier dismissal of the importance of paternal bloodline (2.1. 82-105). The blood connection between father and son and beyond assumed the inheritance of various types of nonmaterial capital through the generations, and this continuity was a culcural asset that Melior could not assert for himself and Glaucias. As with 2.1, 4.8 reveals growing trends regarding the Roman family, with particular regard to orbitas and Domitian's three-child law. Just as interesting, however, is how the poem reflects the new social emphasis placed on the value of the maternal bloodline as a legitimate vehicle for cultural inheritance. The juxtaposed

172

Nothing OrdinaryHere

discussions of this poem and the previous analysis of 2.1 reveal just how skillfully Statius manages to manipulate the poetic occasion and his addressees' capital to create uniquely crafted individual distinctions for them. It is at this time, during the early Empire, that daughters evolved from being what Garnsey and Saller term genealogical "dead-ends" into significant vehicles of familial posterity. 133 Daughters began to become instrumental in continuing a father's sense ofimmortality. This is implied by Pliny, who, writing to inform his wife's paternal grandfather of her miscarriage, acknowledges Fabatus' desire for a great-grandchild: ''All the more you desire to see greatgrandchildren from us," ( Qua magiscupis ex nobispronepotesvidere, 8.10.1); and "No more fervently do you desire great-grandchildren than I desire children," (Neque enim ardentius tu pronepotesquam ego liberoscupio, 8.10.3). Pliny's own desire for a child indicates that despite the increase of orbitas,children remained important for many Romen men as a cultural legacy. Moreover, the familial interconnection is recognized as a supreme advantage for the children's future; the whole extended family, including the maternal bloodline, are regarded as contributors to the offsprings'total combined inherited capital. This point Pliny himself explains when he imagines his future children (8.10.3): "I imagine they will inherit from me and from you a direct pathway towards public office, a well-known name and a well-established pedigree," ( ... quibus videora meo tuoque laterepronum ad honoresiter et audita latius nomina et non subitasimaginesrelicturus).134There is, then, a reciprocal relationship between children and their parents and grandparents: the father and maternal grandfather provide essential capital of possible benefit to a child's future success, while the child provides both the father and, most interestingly, the maternal grandfather, with a sense of immortal posterity. Poem 4.8 excellently illustrates this social phenomenon, whereby the maternal bloodline is valued for posterity's sake and, inversely, children act as contributors to their family's continuing legacy. As a Neapolitan (4praef.21), Menecrates lived near Pollius Felix, his father-in-law and the dedicatee of Silvae Book 3 and the addressee of Silvae 2.2 and 3.1. This familial connection is stressed repeatedly throughout the poem; Menecrates' wife serves as an intermediary vehicle through which Pollius passes on his own capital to his grandchildren. The poem begins with an introduction designed to heighten the magnitude of the child's birthday: Statius exhorts Naples, the child's birthplace, to unlock the temple doors, festoon them with garlands, and prepare incense and sacrificial victims (1-3). Such preparations were generally reserved for festal days, not private occasions;135 thus the reason for this request, "behold, a third child increases illustrious Menecretes' stock," (clarigenus ecce Menecratisauget I tertia iam subo'-es,3-4), seems all the more exceptional.

CreatingDistinction

173

Moreover, the child bestows distinction on Naples itself and, by compensating tibi nofor Vesuvius' destruction, has restored divine favor to che city (,procerum bi'-e vulgus I crescitet insani solatur damna ¼sevi, 4-5). Yet, significantly, Menecraces, although the biological father, is not solely responsible for the child's lineage; Scatius accordingly exhorts Sorrento co celebrate the birth, not because of its geographical proximity but because it is the birthplace of the child's maternal grandfather (materniqualitusavi, 1O), Pollius Felix, who also possessed a villa nearby in Puceoli (cf. Silv.2.2). This connection between geography and bloodline is lacer reinforced when Scaciusinvokes the Neapolitan gods, di patrii, 45), co keep the household and its family safe for their patria (54). Another passage connects the bloodline between the two families and again stresses the contributions of the maternal side: Menecraces' toddlers "compete" in their physical resemblance to their maternal grandfather, Pollius (11). 136 A passing description of a maternal uncle (Libycapraesignis avunculushasta,12), who is also enjoined to celebrate, concisely proves the family's military distinction, while Polla's deep affection for her grandchildren makes them seem if they were her own sons, and she may also subtly acknowledge them as her own heirs: " ... Polla considers them her own kin and lifts them up to her kindly lap," 137 (sibigenitosputat atto/1,itque benignoI Pollasinu, 13-4). Acropos ensures the children old age and virtus, while Apollo promises poetic ability (18-19). Coincidently, these are assets belonging to Pollius himself, who, in 2.2, is generally characterized as already advanced in age and enjoying che luxury of retired life that consists of composing poetry, while at the end of 4.8 he is more explicitly acknowledged for passing on virtusto his grandchildren (58). 138These traits contrast with those of Menecrates, who is repeatedly identified as a iuvenis(14, 26, 32) and appears co have no literary inclinations. Finally, ic is from Pollius chat the children will inherit their taste (i. e., part of their cultural capital), largumnitorem (57)-a dear reminder of 2.2, where Pollius' elegantly refined villa is praised, yet where he is distinguished chiefly by his literary refinement and philosophical way of life; there is the sense coo, that Pollius' economic capital also passes to the grandchildren through his daughter's dowry. Given che prominence of other women in che Silvae,it is curious indeed that nowhere do we learn the name of the children's mother, Menecrates' wife and Pollius' daughter. Instead, her value resides chiefly in her male relationships, especially her father, who is portrayed as a more significant influence on the children than she herself. Emphasis is placed on the role of Pollius, che maternal grandfather of the newborn, in passing on his cultural capital co his new grandchild. This prominence reflects his recognition chat his daughter's son will perpetuate his bloodline and his own reputation. Bue Menecrates also plays an essential role in his child's future success. His own distinction resides primarily in his social

Nothing OrdinaryHere

174

rank and the fact that he is now a father of three. Two passages attest to Menecrates' rank (4.8.59-62) and suggest that the family will enter the patrician order for the first time via marriage; and 4praef2 where Menecrates is described as spkndidus-a typical equestrian epithet. He is thereby compared to Grypus, the subsequent addressee of 4.9 who is described as maiorisgradusiuveni, a deliberate class distinction between Menecrates' ordo equesterand Grypus' ordo senatorius.139 Interestingly, Menecrates' equestrian rank is described in senatorial terms, indicated by the adjectives darus and nobik (3-4), both of which characterize the senatorial ranks of Stella and Gallicus. 140 This identification indicates that Menecrates represented the uppermost tier of the equestrian class. His own equestrian rank is a form of cultural (and economic) capital vital to his children's future. Not only does his rank and its accompanying wealth (opeset origo)maintain the family's present position, hut, most significantly, it even allows social and economic mobility as the poem's closing lines suggest (59-62): quippe et opes et origo sinunt hanc lampade prima patricias intrare fores, hos pube sub ipsa, si modo prona bonis invicti Caesaris adsint numina, Romulei limen pulsare senatus. [Indeed their wealth and pedigree allow the girl to enter patrician doors at her first opportunity for marriage and allow the boys at early manhood, (and only if the favoring spirits of unconquerable Caesar are present for the noble), to strike the threshold of Romulus' Senate.]

In short, the sons will enter the Senate and the daughter's first marriage will result in a patrician husband. The prominence of Pollius throughout the poem may allow us to understand origoas implying not only the children's immediate birth origin, i. e., their father, but also their entire family line, which includes their maternal grandfather Pollius Felix. This idea acquires particular significance by the tantalizing possibility that Pollius' wife and the children's grandmother, Polla, may be identified with the possibly senatorial-ranked Argentaria Polla (Lucan's first wife and patroness of Silvae 2. 7). 141 The identification is by no means certain, but such a marital union could well have increased Pollius' own prestige (since he does not seem to have been senatorial-ranked) and thus would have "furthered the chances of social advance for his descendants" (i. e. their grandchildren). 142 Thus, if the two Pollas are indeed the same person, we see again how the female line could play a seemingly small though actually instrumental role in the elevation and perpetuation of a family's distinction. 143 While Polla's rank

CreatingDistinction

175

may be a driving force behind the family's prestige, it is nonetheless Pollius and Menecrates who are publicly acknowledged for their contributions to the children's future success. Regardless of Polla's precise identification, Statius subtly suggests that it is the combined contributions of both Menecrates and Pollius that enable social mobility and thus increase the family's combined worth. Because Statius ends with this sentiment, it serves as a fitting conclusion to a poem throughout which the theme of joint family assets has been prevalent. Moreover, it follows an enumeration of these joint assets, by which Statius points out the specific division of contributors: Menecrates (genitor) has provided the children with good character (pkidos mores),Pollius (avus) with polish (/,argumnitorem 57), and together (uter) the two provide the "pursuit of distinguished virture" (pulchraestudium virtutis, 58). This assessment of joint family assets appears again in Silvae 4.7, a lyric ode to Vibius Maxim us congratulating him on the birth of his child. Here again Statius differentiates between contributors of the child's inherited capital, with both Vibius and the child's grandfather providing military capital and Vibius contributing literary capital. 144 These assets are not only in the form of inherited skills, but also exempla to which the child can aspire, a point aptly stressed

(41-44): duret in longum generosus infans perque non multis iter expeditum crescat in mores patrios avumque provocet actis! [Let the noble child long live; let him grow into his father's nature and by his deeds let him challenge his grandfather through a path untried by most.]

Though Pollius may share in the celebration of his great children's distinction, it is Menecrates, the father, who alone can be characterized as a state benefactor: "Blessings, o youth, you who illuminate your worthy country," (macte,o iuvenis, qui tanta merentiI lumina ddspatriae, 14-15). The notion ddspatriae is essential for Menecrates' distinction-the birth of his third child reflects Domitianic policy that encouraged upper-class families to beget three children. In fulfilling this duty, Menecrates has served the state well: tanta lumina, where lumina represents an "honorific metaphor for a distinguished citizen," underscores the weighty worth of the benefaction. 145 Moreover, the increase in Menecrates' progeny is symbolized by the house itself, which is audially and visually imagined as "abuzi' in happy chaos with the noise of so many little masters (duki strepiteccetumultu I tot dominis c/,amatadomus, 15-16). The same

176

Nothing OrdinaryHere

image is repeated later, when the numerous children, described in terms of a crowd (turba,43) and a generous throng (agmen,44), loyally surround (circumstat) their father to defend him amidst Statius' jocular attack. 146 These words, among others, deliberately evoke images and sounds of multiple voices, damor, and crowding suddenly created by the birth of the third child: circumit (11); procerumvulg;us(4); tergeminaepro/is (21); totiensLucina ... intravit repetita (22-3); tertiusinfans(35). At every opportunity, then, Statius stresses this multiplicity, where three really does suddenly become the magic number. Ironically, Domitian had already granted Menecrates privileges of triple-offspring prior to the actual birth, which Statius cleverly now introduces as the fulfillmem of Domitian's prophetic omen (20-22). The prestige associated with parenting a trio is fully attested by Pliny, who despite being unable to father children himself, is given the privileges granted to parents of three children (i. e., the ius trium liberorum).In Episde 10.2.1, he profusely thanks Trajan for the honor: "I cannot adequately express with words, sir, how much joy you have give me, because you deemed me worthy to receive the right of parents with three children,"

(Exprimere,tUJmine,verbisnonpossum,quantum mihiguadium attul.eris,quod me dignum putasti iure trium liberorum).The new distinction does not diminish Pliny's desire for children, but his pride in receiving these privileges from the Emperor himself is obvious. In another letter to the Emperor (10.94), Pliny requests the privileges for Suetonius, who likewise has not had the good fortune to bear children of his own (2-3): Huie ius trium liberorum necessarium faciunt duae causae; nam et iudicia amicorum promeretur et parum felix matrimonium expertus est, impetrandumque a bonitate tua per nos habet quod illi fortunae malignitas denegavit. [There are two reasons why he should receive the ius trium liberorum; one, so that his friends' judgment of his merit might be publicly expressed; and two, that, although his marriage has unfortunately not yet produced children, he may, through your goodness and my help, have that which cruel fortune has denied him.]

Perhaps most interesting about Pliny's justification is his first reason (iudicia amicorumpromeretur),which again dearly suggests the symbolic prestige associated with receiving the public honor itself, which can only be legally conferred by the emperor, regardless of the individual's worthiness. Pliny's letters reaffirm Statius' poem, and indicate both the ongoing problem of orbitasand the subsequent prestige associated with the ius trium liberorum.

CreatingDistinction

177

Yet, just as Menecrates and Pollius are valuable contributors to the children's economic and cultural capital, the children are important for the cultural and symbolic capital of their father and grandfather. They serve as vehicles of familial continuity 147 and, together, they confer distinction upon their father (and even by association, their grandfather) by providing justification of the legislative reward endorsed by the Emperor himself; hence Statius' hope that the house (metonymic for gens) continue to be "fertile ... and unchanged with its sacred gifts," (fertilis. .. et donis numquam mutata sacratis,23-24). Donis refers metaphorically to the children themselves, but more importantly it also references to the imperial (sacratis)privilege (donis) bestowed upon Menecrates' family as a result of his having produced three children. Thus, Statius hopes not only that the family line will sustain itself through the children, but that Menecrates' offspring will each produce three of their own. 148 The children have their own assets according to gender, but these assets also are linked to the family. In their father's estimation the male children are valued more highly (mactequod et prolestibi saepiusaucta virili I robore,25-26). Nevertheless, Menecrates' daughter is also highly valued for her ability to continue the familial bloodline by producing grandsons for her father (citiusdabit il/,anepotes,27), in the same manner that Menecrates' wife produced grandchildren for her father. She will even bear children more quickly (citius),because traditionally girls married at a younger age than their brothers. Menecrates' daughter thus not only perpetuates her father's bloodline, but through her mother's, she also passes on the legacy of Pollius, her grandfather. 149 This is a poem, then, in which the complexities of distinction arise from the interconnection between the father, his children, and a grandfather. In contrast to 2.1 and 5.5, the poem exemplifies the continuing social importance placed upon blood-relationships in the perpetuation of family capital. But all three poems together indicate the distinction conferred upon fathers who choose children over orbitas and economic selfishness. Additionally, poem 4.8 provides a foil for the notion that the production of children ceased being a significant contributor to the identity and family legacy of Roman males; more importantly, it outlines the significance of the maternal bloodline, even though this factor remains merely mechanical. In 4.8, Menecrates' wife is distinctive not as a woman in her own right-we never learn anything about her-but, like her daughter, is valued merely as a producer of children and a nameless conduit of capital between a male line and them. She, then, exercises responsiblity for maintaining Pollius' legacy,yet it is from him, not her, that her children inherit certain qualities. Thus, ultimately the bloodline

178

Nothing OrdinaryHere

is preserved, at least symbolically, through the paternal lines alone; one through the father and another through the maternal grandfather. While Menecrates' distinction arises from having produced three children, in accordance with Domitianic legislation, it resides primarily in his cultural capitalhis family, i. e., both his children and his father-in-law. Finally, the children provide a substantial dividend of distinction as visible manifestations of the family's social prestige, and, with their inherited capital, capability of elevating the family's distinction to even greater heights. Silvae 2.2: The Distinction of Epicureanism

We have already noted how, in Silvae4.8, Statius characterizes Pollius Felix as a grandfather who contributes significant intellectual capital to his grandchildren. There, his persona is a gentle one like that which Statius presents in Silvae 2.2, an ecphrasticpoem describing Pollius' Surrentine villa; but, as we shall see, the villa is only a vehicle for the owner's distinction. Scacius is particularly selective and purposeful in his presentation of the building's laudable characteristics, focusing in particular on its natural setting and interior decoration. Unlike Pliny's ecphrases of his own houses (Ep. 2.17, 5.6), Statius does not aim to give a complete site-plan of the villa; 150 instead, he focuses on those elements chat are striking for their material value, beauty, or originality. He seeks to create an overall visual impression from two perspectives, one from a distance and one nearby. 151 Moreover, this careful selection aiming at specificity not completeness, contributes co the poem's primary purpose of praising the owner. Szelest most lucidly expresses the idea that the ecphrasisis articulated not for its own sake, but for that of Pollius' encomium,which is inextricably attached to the descriptio.151 In her seminal article, she notes that Statius' originality resides precisely in this blending of encomiumwith ecphrasis,whereby the work of art or architecture is a natural reflection of the owner's taste. 153 Thus, even though, for example, Pliny's villa ecphrases are much more carefully descriptive (and thus seem to differ from Statius' approach), they nonetheless achieve a similar purpose. The only real difference is chat Pliny's encomium is in the form of implicit self-praise. Nevertheless, Statius' descriptive approach has evoked criticism, namely from Sherwin-White, who, in comparing Pliny with Statius, seems to misunderstand Statius' primary intent, which was to provide an encomium of the buildings' owners. 154 Van Dam, on the other hand, identifies two main intents: the celebration of"man improving upon nature, and the almost symbolic connections between owner and surroundings." 155 His reading on the first point follows closely the interpretative trend first introduced by Pavlovskis, who argues that 2.2 is meant primarily to glorify man's technological advances and

CreatingDistinction

179

his "subjugation of nature," contrary co literary predecessors like Horace who praise rustic simplicity. 156 Her influential interpretation found a following among others who picked up on her theme of"civilized peace." 157 Yet her occasionally contrived argument cannot be reconciled with the Epicurean theme of the poem since the philosophy of Epicurus tends to deplore civilized refinements and advances (e. g., Luer. De Re. Nat. 2.22-31). I suggest instead that Pavolvskis' emphasis on man and nature in terms of technological advance needs to be redirected, with closer attention to Statius' poetic purpose and more in keeping with Van Dam's second identified intent. The poem is in fact not primarily designed to celebrate man's subjugation of nature or even man's technological advances as they are represented by Pollius' luxurious villa; the focus is not on the villa as an architectural wonder, but its owner as a philosophical and intellectual marvel. Scacius presents Pollius' visually prominent villa as a reflection of otherwise intangible qualities. The poem is perhaps one of the most illuminating examples in which economic capital, manifested by a physical and visual entity, serves to communicate cultural values of the owner's context. The poem is also one of the more interesting ways in which Statius employs his poetic medium to redirect the eyes of his readers to comprehend exactly what Pollius' villa intends to say. The words of the poem, of course, textualize the physical and visual, elaborating visual details to new extended meanings perhaps otherwise unintelligible. In Statius' hands, the villa becomes a representation of the owner's Epicurean predilections and intellectual pursuits rather than a mere representation of material wealth-the usual external message conveyed by such an ecphrasis.Statius' poem thus must be viewed as a true vehicle for symbolic distinction. The villa's role as a symbol of Pollius' self-professed Epicureanism has been noted by many, 158 nevertheless, it is my hope that the subsequent reconsideration of the textual evidence will provide a fuller examination of che extent to which ecphrasisfunctions as a physical, literal, and metaphorical tool for communicating a message not immediately conveyed by the visual image of the villa itself. Moreover, a reexamination of the poem will allow me to frame Pollius' distinction within the context of Domitianic Rome and consider the role of the villa as a representation not only of economic wealth, but of philosophical and literary quiesas important values embraced by Romans living during the first century. The specific features of Pollius' maritime villa have been explored in Chapter Three and for the sake of brevity need not be repeated. It is enough to reiterate that the maritime villa is easily imaginable: it hung high on the rocky cliffs over the bay, had its own crescent-shaped beach below, vineyards, baths, and was oriented on an east-west axis that allowed for maximum adaptability to sun

180

Nothing OrdinaryHere

exposure. There is no doubt chat Pollius' villa clearlyexhibited the fashion, comfort, and prosperity typical of the period; and while che inherent economic and cultural value of these physical and material elements were precisely chose upon which Claudius Ecruscus' distinction (1.5) depended, here they are secondary. For Pollius, Scaciusreorients these material reference points according co another social value, philosophy. Although Statius dons the personaof a mere visitor, he simultaneously serves as a tour guide, pointing out specific points of visual interest. In so doing, he deliberately fashions his response into one that the reader should likewiseshare.159 His choice of words and details is deliberate; Statius limits our visual scope and forces our eyes to contemplate those physical features that communicate a symbolic message.He purposefully imbues his description with visual and metaphorical allusions to impose the appropriate reaction and interpretation that the everyday visitor or reader might otherwise miss. His telescopic control and power in guiding our reaction suggests the power of poetry as one that can transcend the ephemeral nature of a purely sensory (visual) experience. This poem tells us liccle about Pollius' life beyond his philosophical and intellectual lifestyle, lease of all about his social standing. D'Arms suggests possible freedman origins, 160 as che name Felix, perhaps Latinized from the Greek Eudaemon, may hint at an attempt co cover up a prior family servile status in the hope of social mobility. 161 Nisbet and Hardie dismiss the idea, 162 associating him with the local aristocracy, since the poem itself indicates he served as a magistrate in his native Puteoli and as a public benefactor both there and in Naples, as well as being a denizen of the lacter. 163 Statius is relatively silent regarding Pollius' social rank, devoting litcle attention to his past political involvement and instead focusing solely on his intellectual pursuits and Epicurean way oflife as vehicles of distinction. 164 Although we do not explicitly learn of Pollius' Epicurean predilections and poetic pursuits until midway through the poem, these exceptional qualities-the primary force behind Pollius' distinction-are subcly introduced from che beginning. The theme of loftiness inherent in Epicurean philosophy introduces the poem and the villa's description: "The lofty villa looks down onto the Dicarchian deep," (celsa Dicarchei speculatrix villa profundi, 3). Throughout, Stacius stresses the villa's high, rocky, cliff-side locale (rupes, 14; scopulispendentibus, 16; saxa aspera,31; altum culmen, 34-5; iugum discentiasaxa 58; culmina, 73; rupes, 99; scopulos, 101; scopulis,116; scopulis,120). The image is vital for Statius' poetic characterization of his addressee: just as the villa occupies a physically elevated and isolated position above the beach and water below, the owner inside it both physically and metaphorically occupies an intellectual and

CreatingDistinction

181

philosophical pedestal-a point deliberately made at the end of the poem where explicit encomium mirrors this initial ecphrasticdescription: "From the lofty citadel of your mind you look down upon us in our aimlessness and you are amused at human 'joys,"' (celsatu mentis ab arce I despiciserranteshumanaque gaudia rides, 131-2). Statius purposefully recalls the Epicurean Lucretius' famous passage.165 Moreover, despite the seemingly hostile natural surroundings supplied by the rocky cliffs, Pollius is quite the opposite, finding philosophical and intellectual serenity in the lofty abode of his villa and mind. This emphasis on physical rocks stresses all the more the owner's capabilities to overcome the tumultuous and unforeseeable precipices of life through devotion to the calming pursuits of Epicurean ism and poetry. This seeming contradiction between rocky surroundings and spiritual serenity is nonetheless fully reconciled by the symbolic assimilation between Pollius and his surroundings, whereby his inner peace is seen as influencing the physical qualities of nature itself. The connections between Epicureanism and nature are close; Lucretius often employs natural exempla as proofs, and, more importantly, he relies upon che image of the turbulent sea as a point of comparison to the calm mind. 166 In Stacius' poem the sea is preternaturally consistently calm, a reflection of Pollius' philosophical self-assurance. Thus, Pollius is initially described as "serene" (placidus, I O) just like the "serene bay" below him