The ›Epigramma Paulini‹: Critical Edition with an Introduction, Translation and Commentary 9783110982381, 9783110996173

Citation preview

The Epigramma Paulini

Beiträge zur Altertumskunde

Edited by Susanne Daub, Michael Erler, Dorothee Gall, Ludwig Koenen and Clemens Zintzen

Band 409

The Epigramma Paulini

Critical Edition with an Introduction, Translation and Commentary Edited by Roberto Chiappiniello

ISBN 978-3-11-099617-3 e-ISBN (PDF) 978-3-11-098238-1 e-ISBN (EPUB) 978-3-11-098293-0 ISSN 1616-0452   Library of Congress Control Number: 2022948715   Bibliographic information published by the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie; detailed bibliographic data are available on the internet at http://dnb.dnb.de.   © 2023 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston Typesetting: Dörlemann Satz, Lemförde Printing and binding: CPI books GmbH, Leck www.degruyter.com

For Abigail and Giulia

Acknowledgements This book has had a long gestation. I came across the Epigramma Paulini over twenty years ago while researching my MA thesis at the University of Nalples ‘Federico II’ under the supervision of Prof. Salvatore D’Elia who introduced me to the poem. I continued to work on it at the University of Manchester (UK) as part of my thesis for a PhD awarded in 2004. I owe many debts of gratitude to various people without whose contributions and assistance this book would not have been possible. I am particularly grateful to my then supervisors Prof. David Langslow for his time and scholarship and Prof. Roy K. Gibson for introducing me to the painstaking art of commentaries. My thanks go also to Prof. Catherine Conybeare and Prof. Karla Pollmann for many valuable suggestions on early drafts of this work. I would also like to thank Prof. Roberto Palla and Prof. R. P. H. Green for their penetrating comments on individual chapters of my book. Audiences at the Classics departments of UCLA, Manchester, Leeds, Edinburgh, St. Andrews, Lisbon and the Istituto Patristico “Augustinianum” in Rome pointed me in fruitful directions of which I was previously unaware. I would also thank for their support and timely help the librarians of the University of Vienna, the John Rylands Library at the University of Manchester and the whole team at the Fondation Hardt in Geneva. I am most grateful to my family, Abigail and Giulia, to whom this book is dedicated, and to my parents for their moral support over the years.

https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110982381-001

Preface This present work offers the first English translation of, and full-scale commentary on, a poem generally known as the Epigramma Paulini [henceforth EP]. The authorship, date and place of composition of EP have long been the subject of debate, although there is now a general consensus among scholars that it was written in Gaul at some point during the first decade of the fifth century AD. This proposition is based on the imagery and language of the poem which are, in many instances, comparable with those of other Gallo-Roman texts of this period. One of the most widely-discussed features of the fifth century is the “waves” of barbarian invasions and the impact that these may have had on the decline of the Roman Empire. There are two opposing opinions as to the effect of these invasions. Some scholars contend that the integration of these barbarian tribes into Gallo-Roman society was a relatively peaceful process, and accordingly minimise the significance of these events with respect to the demise of the Roman Empire.1 Others believe that these invasions were, in fact, catastrophic.2 In recent years, rather than making generalisations, scholars have tended to look at specific, personal responses to these events. Analysis of these individual reactions to the invasions has led many to believe that the barbarians were a catalyst, rather than an agent, of the extensive changes that took place in the fifth century.3 In the last days of 406, mixed groups of Vandals, Alans and Sueves crossed the poorly defended Rhine. The cause of their emigration was supposedly the pressure from the Huns in the Caucasian steppes.4 The Franks, Rome’s foederati, sought to arrest the advance of the barbarians, but, after initial successes,

1 Cf. e.  g. Bury (1928); Wallace-Hadrill (1961); Matthews (1975); Rouche (1979); Thompson (1982); Goffart (1988), and more recently Brown (2013). On the shift in definition of “frontiers” and “foreignness” see e.  g. Whittaker (1994), Mathisen and Sivan (1996), Pohl et al. (2001). 2 See e.  g. Lot (1945), Latouche (1946), Riché (1953), Courcelle (1964), Rémondon (1964), Musset (1965), Ward-Perkins (2005); Heather (2005) and (2010). See also the review of J. J. O’Donnell on Heather (2005) and Ward-Perkins (2005) (BMCR 2005.07.69) who refers to the generation beginning with P. Brown as the “Reformation” and to the revisionist movement of the “Counter-Reformation” (to which Heather and Ward-Perkins belong) which stresses the aspect of decline (widespread material devastation, collapse of local economies, etc.) rather than political and cultural transformation. 3 See Mathisen (1993); Harries (1994) and Salzman (2021: 18) who speaks in terms of “resilience” to marshal resources to “reorganize and restore social formations even in the face of fractures.” 4 Goffart (1980: 17–8) challenges this assertion: “The idea of migratory pressure is also somewhat strange in view of the well-documented events known to us. […] The image of a crowded barbaricum, full of people being driven frantic by newcomers continually shoving in upon them, is entertaining but […] is not borne out by the facts”. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110982381-002

Preface 

 IX

were defeated by the Alans. The barbarians, without any force to oppose them, moved rapidly towards the central regions of Gaul, pillaged numerous towns in Belgica, and turned south to sack many towns of the provinces of Lugdunensis and Aquitania.5 At the same time Burgundians and Alamanni crossed the Rhine to devastate towns, including Argentorate (Strasbourg), a town of the upper-Rhine valley.6 For two years, according to ancient sources, the barbarians attacked and looted the majority of Gallic towns.7 Few towns showed any resistance.8 To make things worse, frequent military mutinies among the Roman army in Britain and Gaul, perhaps caused by fear of the barbarians9 or in consequence of the increased importance of local leaders,10 elected three usurper emperors in a brief space of time: Marcus, Gratian, a municipal magistrate,11 and Constantine III.12 Constantine, once he gained control of the rebels in the spring of 407, planned to consolidate his power throughout the whole of Gaul. Nevertheless, though his power appeared secure, he and his son Constans II were never able to arrest the attacks of Vandals, Sueves and Alans. Within little more than twenty years, from the death of Theodosius in 395 to the settlement of Visigoths, Burgundians and Franks in the central regions of northern Europe, the western Roman Empire had lost its unity and had changed for ever. These first forms of barbarian occupation of Roman soil were to be the seeds of the future regional barbarian kingdoms. The invasions of 406 showed that the Roman central power, now in Ravenna, was ineffectual in supporting and defending its provinces. The growing phenomenon of usurpers, supported

5 Soon afterwards the Alans led by king Goar were settled in the provinces of Belgica I and II; cf. Bachrach (1967: 476–89). One of the problems in assessing the real impact of barbarians on the Empire is the inconsistency of sources about their numerical composition. For instance, Zos. 5.42 reports that 40,000 Visigoths crossed the Rhine’s limes and besieged Rome in 408. Modern scholars have discordant opinions: Courcelle (1964: 14–20) and Musset (1965: 50–74) depict the invasions in terms of floods, waves, etc. By contrast Goffart (1980: 5) minimizes the impact of the barbarians: “[…] those involved in it were a mere handful of people. […] In other words, the barbarians […] are remarkably deficient in numbers, cohesion, assertiveness, and skills”. 6 The Burgundians will eventually settle in the province of Germania II; cf. Hyd. chron. 108, 110; Musset (1965: 111–2). 7 Cf. e.  g. Hier. epist. 123.A15 Aquitaniae, Novemque populorum, Lugdunensis, et Narbonensis provinciae, praeter paucas urbes cuncta populata sunt. Quas et ipsas foris gladius, intus vastat fames. 8 See Courcelle (1964: 283–6). One of the most remarkable examples of resistance was that of Toulouse led by its bishop Exuperius (cf. Hier. epist. 123). 9 Zos. 6.3.1; Hier. epist. 123.15 10 Zos. 6.2; Olymp. Hist. fr. 12; cf. also Van Dam (1985: 38). 11 Oros. 7.40.4. 12 Zos. 6.3.3; Oros. 7.40.4; Hyd. chron. 42.

X 

 Preface

by local aristocrats and clergymen, was a symptom of disillusionment and the loss of a sense of common identity. The usurpation of Constantine revealed a new, local identity, often limited to small geographical zones or even to the territory of single towns. The secular architecture of the glorious Roman Empire was apparently crumbling under the attacks of “uncultured”, “brutal” immigrants, and a profound pessimism began to pervade the literary works of Romans, especially those living in the provinces. The relentless barbarian invasions, the civil wars and the spread of monasticism all contributed to an unprecedented upheaval of social and political norms. These contemporary phenomena are clearly reflected in the literature of the period, both in the important body of monastic texts and in the literary responses to war. The poem which is the subject of this work represents one form of response to the invasions. Not only does EP provide an insight into historical events, but it also contains a number of points of literary interest, which are explored in depth in the commentary.

Contents Acknowledgements  Preface   VIII

 VII

I Introduction 1 1.1 1.2 1.3 2 3 4 5

Text, Date and Authorship of the Epigramma Paulini   3 The Manuscript   3 Editions and Critical Studies   3 Date, Setting and Authorship of the Epigramma Paulini   7 Structure of the Epigramma Paulini   13 Dramatis Personae of the Dialogue   17 Metre and Style   21 A Satirist in a Locus Amoenus. The Literary Models of the Epigramma Paulini   23

II Text and Translation List of Departures From Schenkl’s Edition (CSEL 16.1)  Latin Text and Critical Apparatus   42 Translation   43

III Commentary Abbreviations  Commentary   117 Bibliography  Subject Index   125 Index of Names   126

 55  57

 41

I Introduction

1 Text, Date and Authorship of the Epigramma Paulini 1.1 The Manuscript EP, a dialogue of 110 Latin hexameters, is transmitted by a single manuscript, the ninth-century Parisinus Latinus 75581 (P in the critical apparatus), folios 87v–90r. In this manuscript, a miscellaneous codex in Caroline minuscule, EP is entitled Sancti Paulini Epigramma. It follows Alethia, a Gallo-Roman poem written by Claudius Marius Victorius, a rhetor in Marseille in the first half of the fifth century, and precedes the fourth poem of Paulinus of Nola. The manuscript contains several grammatical texts and many poems, some of them anonymous.2 The manuscript has four sets of corrections, also of the ninth century.3 Further descriptions of the codex are contained in the paleographical survey of the manuscripts of the Bibliothèque Nationale in Paris by Chatelain,4 in the critical edition of Marius Victorius edited by Hovingh in the collection of CCL, vol. 128 (1960), and Dümmler (1878).

1.2 Editions and Critical Studies The editio princeps of EP was published at Lyon in 1536 (reprinted in 1545) by Gagneius, i.  e. the French theologian Jean de Gagny. Gagny, in the accompanying letter to his edition, presents the story of his extraordinary discovery, explaining that he found in a monastery “in Barbarensis insulae coenobium” some manuscripts in a very bad state of preservation (codices ignavia depravatos) among which were the

1 Formely known as Cod. Colbert 4133 and Regius 6411 2 The manuscript contains the following texts: Beda, De metrica arte; De schematibus; De tropis; Marii Victoris oratoris Massiliensis Alethia libri tres; Sancti Paulini Epigramma; Oratio sancti Paulini; Oratio sancti Ausoni; seven letters between Ausonius and Paulinus; Laus sancti Iohanni; Laudes Domini; Heroo; Bebiani diverso modo et metro dictis; versus Drepanii de cereo paschali; Hymnum sancti Michaelis; Ad Moduinum; Servius Honoratus Aquilino salutem; De pronomine ego quae pars orationis est; De coniunctione; Epigramma psalmi XXII; Epigramma psalmi XXVI; Epigramma psalmi XXVII; Cuilibet gratiarum actio; Epigramma hymni Ananiae; Vulfino grammatico Aurelianensi cohortatio; Hilarii Genesis; Cypriani Genesis; Sodoma; de opere sex dierum; the manuscript ends with the first hymn of Sedulius (Cantemus socii domino cantemus honorem) written in margine. 3 See Lejay (1890: 75). 4 Chatelain (1880: 36–9). https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110982381-003

4 

 Introduction

four books of the Alethia by Marius Victorius: incidit in manus nostras […] poema doctum et elegans quatuor libris distinctum historiam libri Geneseωs [sic] ad vigesimum usque caput persequens, Claudii Marii victoris [sic] Massiliensis oratoris titulo inscriptum.5 He added EP to the three books of Marius Victorius’ Alethia as the fourth book of the Alethia with the title Claudi Marii Victoris oratoris Massiliensis de perversis suae aetatis moribus, Liber quartus Ad Salmonem. The methods of Gagny are debatable. Haste and carelessness vitiated his edition; he not only omitted and iterated words but also substituted entire phrases. Without doubt, his interventions have to be checked and examined with scepticism; his gratuitous interpolation in the edition of Avitus published by him serves as a warning to readers.6 The French theologian in the preface to his edition admitted that he intervened several times in the text with philological corrections due to the fact that the handwriting of the text was inaccurate and illegible at many points: tot vero partim vetustatis iniuria, partim eius qui descripserat incuria mendis liber scatebat […] necesse habui divinare plerisque in locis magis quam legere. Therefore, he defended his editorial principles – factis de integro versibus aliquot proxime ad scripturae sancte ordinem restituere conati sumus – and reassured the reader that he preserved the original version of the text without any extravagant or fanciful interventions: horum te lector optime admonitum voluimus ne nos temere auctorem aut mutilasse crederes aut immutasse.7 In 1560 in Paris G. Morel edited the work of Marius Victorius without including EP. He prepared his edition based a codicem pervetustum found in bybliotheca S. Iuliani Turonensis,8 that is the Abbaye de Saint Julien de Tours. Did Morel omit to edit EP because he did not know of the publication of Gagny’s editions9 and therefore of the existence of this poem? Or did he simply forget to add our poem at the end of the Alethia?10 Some productive investigations, started in the last two decades of the nineteenth century, concentrated increasingly on reconstructing the history of the Parisinus Latinus 7558. Dümmler11 accurately described it as

5 See Schenkl (1888: 338). 6 Cf. Schenkl (1888: 339): nec profecto est cur isti homini fidem habeamus de misera codicis Lugdunensis […] condicione narranti, praesertim cum eadem libidine grassatus sit in Alcimi Aviti libris (he refers to R. Peiper’s praef. to the edition of Avitus, p. LXX n. 125). 7 Schenkl (1888: 338–9). 8 Schenkl (1888: 339). 9 See Schenkl (1888: 240): Gagnei autem editionem, in qua illud Paulini carmen Victori subiunctum esse supra diximus, plane ignoravit Morelius. 10 According to Schenkl (1888: 340 n. 1) Morel accidentally forgot to edit EP, Quod [EP] a Morelio casu aliquo, fortasse cum scheda intercidisset, praetermissum esse adparet. 11 Dümmler (1878: 299–301).



Text, Date and Authorship of the Epigramma Paulini 

 5

a codicem […] scriptum compluribus manibus satis mendosae, utpote a librariis rudibus imperitisque. In 1888 Schenkl identified the codex used by Morel as the Parisinus Latinus 7558 and two years later, in 1890, Lejay published a seminal article on the history of the manuscript. According to him, the manuscript could be dated back to the ninth or tenth century and certainly no later than the eleventh.12 Moreover, he discovered that among the four handwritings that had corrected the manuscript, one was that of Morel.13 Morel started correcting EP but abruptly interrupted his work at line 7. Either Morel did not know of Gagny’s edition14 or, as Fo has suggested,15 Morel, having discovered the reprinted edition of Gagny (1545), believed it superfluous to edit such a small and marginal text as EP again. Doubts were beginning to gather around the validity of the edition of Gagny. Schenkl never found the manuscript that Gagny said to have used for his edition, nor has such a codex ever been recorded in the library of Lyon. He then suggested that the Turonensis used by Morel was the Parisinus and that when Morel’s edition diverged from that of Gagny, it was due to the manipulations of the manuscript by Gagny.16 Was the manuscript of Gagny lost? Schenkl voiced the suspicion that Gagny had made up the discovery of the ancient manuscripts in the coenobium of the insula Barbarensis. He invented it all to prevent himself from being accused of manipulating the Parisinus, the lectio of which he had altered not because of the bad condition of the manuscript but because of his inability to decipher the handwriting. After Gagny, Fabricius edited EP in the Veterum poetarum ecclesiasticorum opera christiana (Basle, 1564) titled Claudii Marii Victoris Oratoris Massiliensis de perversis suae aetatis moribus, Epistula ad Salmonem. He uncritically based his edition on the text printed by Gagny. EP was edited as a text of Marius Victorius, although this time it was considered an epistula and not a liber. Perhaps Fabricius interpreted the ad Salmonem of Gagny as a mark of a letter and not of a book. The edition of Fabricius was included in the Patrologia Latina in volume 61 (pp. 969–72).

12 Cf. Lejay (1890: 75): “une écriture du ix-x siècle, peut-être du xi s., mais certainement pas postérieure”. 13 Hovingh (1960: 193–211) agrees with Lejay. 14 Cf. Lejay (1890: 77): “devait être inédite pour lui, puisqu’il parait n’avoir pas connu la publication de Gagny”. 15 Fo (1999: 101). 16 See Schenkl (1888: 342–4).

6 

 Introduction

I. C. Wernsdorf reprinted EP with a few corrections in the third book of the collection Poetae Latini minores (Altenburg, 1782) and suggested that since the structure of the poem did not fit into the form of a letter it would have been better to call it sermo. In the preface (p. lxviii), Wernsdorf conjectured that EP was a dialogue in the manner of Horace’s sermones, in which the author (Victorius) during a fictitious dialogue with the Abbot Salmon satirises his own fatherland. Wernsdorf printed EP according to the edition of Gagny (although he was not always convinced by the lectio offered by the French theologian) with the title Claudii Marii Victoris, / rhetoris et poetae christiani / de perversis suae aetatis moribus. Schenkl re-edited EP in the corpus of CSEL 16, pars I, Poetae Christiani Minores, (Vienna, 1888, pp.  499–510). Schenkl was an accurate editor and his work marked a real advance in the history of the editions of this text. This edition, based on the Parisinus Latinus 7558, was marked by a meticulous attention to the lectio of the manuscript and a detailed apparatus criticus indicating the choices of Gagny and the corrections of the different hands. On the basis of Schenkl’s edition, in 1956 Griffe translated EP into French (previously Gorini and Clément, in 1865 and 1876 respectively, had translated it from the edition of Gagny). In addition to a few cursory examinations in literary and historical studies, a series of articles on the text and style of EP has appeared in the last forty years. Firstly Gallico17 examined the poem from the point of view of philological textual criticism and literary echoes. Subsequently, Smolak focused his attention on textual lacunae in the manuscript.18 In 1992 Roberts examined some lines of EP, together with other Gallo-Roman poems, with the intention of assessing how the havoc brought to the West by the barbarian invasions had been described by Gallo-Roman poets.19 In 1999 two significant articles were published on EP: Fo gave the first complete Italian translation of EP and an introductory study on authorship and some literary themes of the poem. Smolak translated the poem for the first time into German combined with general notes on the literary milieu of EP, and provided an analysis on the themes of bucolic and satire in the poem.

17 Gallico (1982: 163–72). 18 Smolak (1989: 206–12). 19 Roberts (1992: 97–106).



Text, Date and Authorship of the Epigramma Paulini 

 7

1.3 Date, Setting and Authorship of the Epigramma Paulini The poem gives little help about the period of composition. The only mention of external events is in lines 10–12 where the author says that a barbarus has broken the foedus for the first time, and in lines 18–9 where the barbarian enemy is identified as the Alans, Vandals and Sarmatians. Scholars have always interpreted these lines as references to real events and not as literary fiction and, therefore, they have been tempted to locate the period of composition after the first incursions of barbarian tribes into the Roman Empire in 406–7. As EP recalls both images and turns of phrases very similar to other fifth-century Gallo-Roman poems dealing with barbarian invasions, Schenkl interpreted lines 20  ff. as clear evidence that the author was describing the response of Gallo-Romans to the invasions.20 He thought the poem was composed in 408 during a period of transitory calm in southern Gaul.21 Other scholars have generally accepted this date.22 Roberts and McLynn suggest that EP was written after the invasions of the Vandals, Alans and Sueves in 406–7 but certainly before the coming of the Visigoths in 409.23 For its striking similarities with some fifth-century Gallo-Roman poems, EP has been always seen as a Gallo-Roman text, despite the lack of geographical reference.24 The attempts made so far to locate the poem in Gaul have been poor and vitiated by pre-conception. First Schenkl sought to see a toponym lurking in line 105 te corde hinc gestans abii, tecumque resedi (see 105n.). Thus, he changed tecumque to Tecumque, identifying the word with the name of the river Tech (or Tec) on the banks of which was the town of Ruscino Latinorum, the modern

20 Cf. Schenkl (1888: 501): compositum est hoc carmen ea aetate, qua Gallia meridionalis a Vandalis et Alanis vastabatur. Hi enim diserte in v. 19 commemorantur. 21 See Schenkl (1888: 501): iam si ea, quae leguntur vv. 20 sqq., accuratius inspexeris, mihi puto adsentieris statuenti eo tempore non continuum bellum fuisse, sed pacis quaedam intervalla etsi incerta atque ambigua. […] hoc carmen scriptum esse suspicor initio anni CCCCVIII, quo Constantinus Germanorum impetu represso Galliae si non pacem, at pacis quandam umbram reddidit. 22 The year 408 was accepted by Manitius (1891: 164), Schanz, Hosius and Krüger (1920: 4.2.361), Helm (1949: 2359), Courcelle (1964: 87), Duckett (1969: 96), Duval (1971: 686), Gallico (1982: 163), Solignac (1984: 588), Smolak (1999: 4). Griffe (1956: 189) and Isola (2003–2005: 322) have suggested the slightly later date of 410; Fontaine (1981: 230) has opted for the unspecified first quarter of the fifth century in southern Gaul. 23 See Roberts (1992: 97) and McLynn (2009: 63). 24 See e.  g. Fo (1999: 146): “Siamo cioè, con l’Epigramma Paulini, nell’ambito delle prime reazioni teoriche al fenomeno storico delle invasioni, rivolte al mondo dei fedeli più tiepidi e dei pagani. […] L’Epigramma precorre, e in embrione già abbozza, le tematiche apologetico-morali che saranno ampiamente sviluppate dal Carmen de Providentia e da Salviano”.

8 

 Introduction

Rousillion.25 Teuffel, Schanz, Hosius and Krüger, and Helm all agreed with Schenkl.26 Jullian27 followed the reasoning of Schenkl but proposed in Tecum a reference to the town of Elne in southern Gaul. Griffe, who opened the way towards a more cautious literary interpretation, rightly considered the reading of Schenkl a hypothesis “bien arbitraire” and pointed out that the question of the origin of the poem was unresolvable.28 The other vexata quaestio is the authorship of the poem. According to the title of the manuscript, Schenkl argued that the author of EP was Paulinus, Bishop of Béziers, who, according to the late fifth-century historian Hydatius, wrote a letter about some signa terrifica during the barbarian invasions.29 This has been the hypothesis with which scholars seem to have agreed unthinkingly for more than fifty years.30 The first to disagree with this assumption was, in fact, again Griffe who dismissed the suggestion of Schenkl in favour of a Paulinus of Bordeaux.31 More recently Smolak and Isola argue that the author of EP cannot be identified with certainty, whereas Fo gives new support to the hypothesis of Paulinus of Béziers basing his view on a passage in Gregory of Tours (Hist. Franc. 2.13) in which is quoted a letter from a certain Paulinus who praised the bishops as dignos sacerdotes and relegiones custodes amid the saeculi mala of their time.32 He also briefly hints in a footnote that EP might have been written later on in the fifth century, but he thinks this less probable.33 Schenkl’s theory of date and setting of EP maintains its validity if the poem is compared with the historical and literary milieu of the fifth century. First of all, 25 See Schenkl (1888: 500): [Salmon] ad Tecum fluvium in Sordonum terram ibique domicilium collocaverat, and in the same page, footnote 3: Incertum plane est, de quanam urbe cogitandum sit. […] fortasse Ruscinonem intellegere licet. 26 Teuffel (1913: 430), Schanz, Hosius and Krüger (1920: 4.2.361), Helm (1949: 2360). 27 Jullian (1908–1926: 8.276 n. 3). 28 See Griffe (1956: 188): “nous croyons qu’il faut renoncer à cet argument”. He, however, suggested the likelihood that the poem was written somewhere in southern Gaul: “rien, dans le poème, ne permet d’opter pour la Narbonnaise plutôt que pour l’Aquitaine”. 29 Cf. Schenkl (1888: 502): commemorari enim in Idacii chronico c. XXV Paulinum Baeterrarum episcopum, quem anno fere CCCC electum […] per litteras me edocuit Petschenig. Hunc Paulinum epistulam scripsisse, in qua multa signa effecta terrifica in civitate Baeterris enarraverit, refert Idacius. 30 See e.  g. Sesini (1949: 121), Courcelle (1964: 87), Duval (1971: 686), Fontaine (1981: 230), and Solignac (1984: 588). 31 Griffe (1957: 15). 32 See Smolak (1999: 5), Isola (2003–2005: 320  f.) and Fo (1999: 107–8 n. 13). 33 Fo (1999: 146 n. 38): “In alternativa, si potrebbe per esempio pensare […] l’immediato indomani della prima invasione come ‘data scenica’, retrodatando notevolmente l’immaginato incontro rispetto a quelli che erano i suoi tempi. Ma è un quadro che mi sembra assai meno probabile”.



Text, Date and Authorship of the Epigramma Paulini 

 9

the idea that primum turbato foedere < pacis > (11, on the correction of pacis suggested by Schenkl see 11n.) referred to the fifth-century invasions is confirmed by the historians of that period. The invasions of 406–7 were recorded in the chronicles as the first invasions after Pollentia’s foedus signed by Stilicho and Alaric in 402. Moreover, Paulinus of Pella reported that the invasions in Gaul of 406–7 took place temporibus ruptae pacis which, according to Marcone, is an allusion to the peace treaty agreed between Stilicho and Alaric.34 Secondly, the reusing of some Vergilian phrases and themes indicates that the author of EP was aware of the allegorical, Christian interpretations of the Vergilian Eclogues during the fourth and fifth century.35 The third and most important point is that the strong literary affinity, in terms of thematic and verbal similarities, with the Gallo-Roman Carmen de Providentia Dei (written c. 416), the De Gubernatione Dei of Salvian of Marseille (written between 430 and 440), and the Commonitorium of Orientius (written around the first half of the fifth century), legitimises the suggestion that EP was composed in the same cultural milieu. Looking at the thematic similarities with the Carmen de Providentia Dei (henceforth CPD) and Salvian, the metaphor of bellum profundum (see nn. 15–7 and 15) is central to the analysis of Salvian of the cause that allowed the barbarians to ravage the Roman Empire. For instance, the parallelism in EP of the enemy, more cruel for being hidden (cf. 17 saevior […] occultior hostis), is echoed in the phrase of Salvian, gub. 6.72 […] adeo graviores in semet hostes externis hostibus erant (see 15–7n.). Just like the author of EP, Salvian identifies the present material destruction as intimately connected with the moral behaviour of the invaded populations (see 23n.). Both authors shoot their sharpest rhetorical arrows at the passivity of those who behave as if nothing has happened and live in the alcove of their sins (compare EP 20  ff. with Salv. gub. 6.72 vidi […] nobiles […] licet iam spoliatos atque vastatos, minus eversos tamen rebus fuisse quam moribus). Thus, as EP represents the Romans in their atavistic vices (see 30–8n.), so Salvian brings to the attention of his reader that all has changed except the vitia of his fellow citizens, cf. gub. 6.66 inundarunt Gallias gentes barbarae: ergo, quantum ad mores perditos spectat, non eadem sunt Gallorum crimina quae fuerunt; 6.81 satis enim, ut arbitror, quod proposui evidenter ostendi, ne in summo quidem rerum discrimine cessasse umquam vitia civium usque ad excidia civitatum. The similarities with CPD are more numerous and compelling. More strikingly, the metaphor of bellum profundum and the contrast between social reconstruction and the overgrown, neglected fields of the citizens’ souls, appear in CPD and are explored in more

34 See Paul. Pell. euch. 238 and cf. the comments ad loc. of Marcone (1995: 99–100). 35 See Benko (1980: 670  ff.).

10 

 Introduction

depth than in Salvian’s De Gubernatione Dei. The final section of CPD elaborates in more detail the opening lines of EP.36 The sorrowful picture of ruined and abandoned towns (CPD 913–14 at tu, qui squalidos agros desertaque defles / atria et exustae proscaenia diruta villae) echoes the description in EP of the death of solido de marmore villae (13n.) and the sinister ruin of theatres, absumptaeque omnes vana in proscaenia rupes (14n.). The metaphor of the soul as a field (cf.  28n.), which is left in ruin, and the architectural metaphor of souls as penetralia, i.  e. the innermost rooms of a building (cf. 78n.), are strikingly similar to those in CPD 915  ff. nonne magis propriis posses lacrimas dare damnis, / si potius vastata tui penetralia cordis / inspiceres […] sed cum deformi iaceant prostrata ruina, / obiiciunt nobis casus nostrosque suosque (cf. 26–9n.). It is evident how closely related these two texts are and how similarly they transfer the real attack of barbarians to the metaphorical context of invisible inner enemies. In both texts, the barbarians soon stop being just an enemy in bone and flesh and become treacherous enemies who hunt the defenceless palace of the soul and seize captive minds.37 The pivotal theme in EP of the bellum profundum is exploited in much more depth in CPD. Like EP (see e.  g. 15n.), CPD alternates the description of surrounded towns (see CPD 33  ff.) with the metaphorical citadel of the soul, the metaphysical enemy (passions, sins) overlaps with the physical barbarians; cf. CPD 606  ff. An tibi caelestes illi, quos protulit orbis / fertque, viri non haec eadem tolerasse videntur, / quae patimur: motus animi affectusque rebelles / et circumiectis vitia oppugnantia castris? Idleness is the main cause of inward malaise, cf. EP 15–6 […] interior pestis bellumque profundum / olim nos densa telorum nube fatigat, and CPD 660–1 sed nostris oritur de cordibus: ipsaque bellum  / libertas movet et quatimur civilibus armis (see 15–7n.). However, although the enemy is callidus because he wages an internal, invisible war (cf. CPD 665 cumque haec intus agi prospexit callidus hostis), for the poet of CPD a resurgence is possible after spiritual combat; cf. CPD 958–9 nec quia procidimus fusi certamine primo, stare et conflictum vereamur inire secundum (see also 87–95n.). The figural relationship between the state of the towns and fields and the metaphorical landscape of souls returns in the two poems and provides a similar literary strategy (i.  e. the agricultural metaphor in EP 87  ff. and the architectural metaphor in CPD 919–22). The poets of CPD, EP and Salvian build their analysis of the invasions and social decay around the decisive battle with the inner enemy, vice. Certainly, this is a thematic feature that links

36 Cf. Marcovich (1988: 110–11). 37 Cf. e.  g. EP 25 manicis peccati praeda ligamur, 29 captae mentis with CPD 918 grassantesque hostes captivae mentis in arce; EP 28 praetoria cordis with CPD 926 […] congesta iacent populati cordis in aula; see also 28n.



Text, Date and Authorship of the Epigramma Paulini 

 11

these poems and this implies that their authors shared a common literary education, and perhaps the same geographical background. There is also in these poems a “striking coincidence of wording”.38 Both the poets of EP and CPD name Christians as Christi altaria (EP 3) and arae et sacraria Christi (CPD 928); equally, both poems mention the term proscaenia in similar contexts (see 14n.). As Roberts rightly argues,39 CPD 913–24 suggests a literary dependence on EP: the author of CPD incorporates in his description “the unambiguous phrase” villae […] / […] proscaenia of EP 13–4. In fact, in these very lines other echoes occur between the two poems. For instance, the image squalidos agros (CPD 913) seems to be based on the metaphorical image of the fields in EP (cf. squalescere at 23n.). Both poems employ architectural metaphors to refer to the soul: EP speaks of “the palaces of our heart”, praetoria cordis (28), and CPD 926 of the “inner court of our devastated hearts”, populati cordis in aula (cf. 28n.). On the basis of such a compelling number of phrases and images common to both of these texts, it seems likely that the poet of EP was a Gallo-Roman who wrote at the time of the barbarian invasions and was known among the circle of contemporary literati in Gaul. When was the poem written? To answer this question it is important to know the date of composition of the other two texts that appear to be more closely related to the message and the narrative strategy of EP, namely CPD and Salvian’s De Gubernatione Dei. Salvian wrote his De Gubernatione Dei between 430 and 440. The poet of CPD tells the reader that he begins his analysis upon the state of his country after ten years of slaughter by the sword of Vandals and Goths (cf. CPD 33–4 […] caede decenni / Vandalicis gladiis sternimur et Geticis), which implies that the poem is written after 416. The text of Salvian is the latest of the three. At the time of the debate aroused by the City of God of Augustine and Orosius’ idea of the judgements of God, Salvian reaffirmed the principle that the invasions were the punishment of God, sent for the blasphemy of Christians. By contrast, in EP the invasions are not clearly related to God’s judgement in the form of a cause-and-effect phenomenon. The poet of EP tells of events just happened, and, significantly, he is the only one to speak about a foedus broken for the first time. This mention suggests that the presence of the foedus is a reference to the recent past (407–408?) and this might also explain the decision of the poet to use the present tense in his description. Moreover, the allusions to material reconstruction and the pessimism of an unlikely response to the attacks of the enemy can be perhaps explained only if the author is writing of events which happened recently

38 Roberts (1992: 103). 39 Roberts (1992: 103).

12 

 Introduction

(408–410?). The scenes of slaughter are still fresh in his mind leaving no space for any scenario of future optimism. Unlike EP, the author of CPD projects his analysis into the future, in a long-term fight against the enemy. The allusion in EP to a relationship between barbarians and vice is thoroughly expanded by the poet of CPD and becomes the standpoint of his moral discourse. In this text, much more than in EP, the boundaries between the spiritual foe and the enemy in flesh and bone are so blurred that the reference to the foedus with the Visigoths in 418 could even be interpreted as a pact with Satan that only Christ can dissolve; cf. e.  g. CPD 944  ff. impia non oberunt cum saevo pacta tyranno, / captiva conscripta manu. resolubile Christo est / hoc foedus.40 The optimism of the poet of CPD comes from the belief that God will help His people to fight the enemy, thus spiritual regeneration will foster political resurgence. However, the question of the authorship of EP will continue to be a difficult issue to resolve with any decisiveness. We must also consider the possibility that the name of the author was not Paulinus at all. Fo undermines the authorship of ‘Paulinus’ suggesting the plausible hypothesis that scribes might have “invented” the authorship of this poem.41 In order to preserve its textual transmission, scribes thought to ascribe it to Paulinus of Nola, one of the most important Christian poets. One may also add two more hypotheses of authorship. The first is that, in light of the other poems contained in the manuscript, it is likely that scribes might have given to anonymous poem the name (Paulinus) and the title (Epigramma) which frequently appear in the Parisinus Latinus 7558. The second hypothesis is that the author of EP might have been a woman. This possibility would fit with the presence, in the satirical section of the poem, of the bitter attack against male corruption as responsible for female misbehaviour. However, this feature cannot be identified exclusively as a mark of a female writer since male writers, for instance Prudentius, have also used this theme (see 55–86n.).

40 See also the interpretations of Lagarrigue (1983: 141), and Roberts (1992: 105) about the overlapping of this metaphorical foedus and the historical foedus with the Visigoths, before their settlement in Aquitania in 418. 41 Fo (1999: 106).

2 Structure of the Epigramma Paulini What follows is my interpretation of the poem, which will be explained and justified both in this section and in the Commentary. 1–7: Abbot

8–14: Thesbon

15–51: Salmon

 

 

Near a cave (cf. 6 in antro) an abbot welcomes Salmon into the temple of the Lord and presents himself as guardian (custos) and spiritual guide (magister) of a Christian (cf.  3 Christi) community (1–2). The Abbot invites Salmon, if he has come to do confession, to enter the temple and see the members (altaria) of the community; if Salmon wishes only to converse with someone, there is in the temple his friend Thesbon (3–5). The Abbot, using a language characteristic of the topos of the locus amoenus, adds (6–7) that there in the cave, under the shade of a leafy vine (frondosae vitis), Thesbon has arranged, for the repose (ad requiem) of the brethren (fratrum), grassy seats (herbida […] sedilia) made from living turf (caespitibus […] vivis).   8–12 Thesbon asks Salmon about his own condition and that of his fatherland (9 patriae status), as he knows that the barbarian enemy, who has broken the peace treaty for the first time, now (11 nunc primum) presses upon the peasants and their fields (8–12). Thesbon ends his intervention with two bitter reflections on the havoc of the outside world set in contrast with the peaceful scene of the cave: (a) marbled villas, once pompous, show now their own fragility in their ruin (13); (b) non-functioning theatres (proscaenia) reveal now at once their emptiness and vanity (14).   Salmon replies to Thesbon using three antitheses. The first antithesis introduces the theme of “psychomachy”:     15–17 an internal (cf. 15 interior) plague and a deep (profundum) war against sin had been exhausting people long before (cf. 16 olim) the barbarians invaded.   18–25 the second antithesis stresses another contrast: people strive to repair what the invaders have destroyed (18–21); however, as they are cowardly and prey to sin, neglect the spiritual care of their minds (22–25).

https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110982381-004

14 

 Introduction

 

 

 

30–8 Salmon develops the first antithesis, and concludes that even in the face of material damage people live by the same vices and do not repair the damage done to their interior selves (30–2). The reasons for such a pessimistic conclusion are spelt out in four stages:     33–34 gluttony: even now people’s sole occupation is with banqueting; in banquets they do not distinguish (33 nullo discrimine) day from night, but extend the daylight with artificial nightlights (34 lychnis);   35–6 lust: Pedius and †Lampadius† persist in their adulterous lives;   36 envy: Pollio continues to be envious;   37–38 ambition: Albus is no less driven by ambition, even amid the ruins of the recent catastrophe.

 

     

 

 

26–9 the third and final antithesis introduces the theme of cultura animi: people’s first priority is to restore buildings and the countryside, instead of cultivating the broad inner fields (latos campos) of their souls and the palaces (praetoria) of their hearts, which remain neglected.

39–41 Salmon deprecates the behaviour of his fellow-citizens by recreating a famous (originally Thucydidean) image of the perversion of language: the sacred is what is profitable, honourable is whatever is convenient (39–40); vice is dressed up as virtue (40), the miser acclaimed for being frugal (41). Such distortion of values is not a consequence of war, it is, in fact, the consequence of the leisure and opulence of the past.   42–51 In the final part of his speech, Salmon laments that people are misled not only by visible and clear (cf. 42 aperto) vices, such as those previously listed, but also by the hidden vice (cf. 44 occulti) of secular knowledge (45 terrena […] sapientia), which deceives and leads many astray.  



52–4: Thesbon

55–95: Salmon

 

 

 

 

 

 

Structure of the Epigramma Paulini 

 15

Thesbon intervening seeks to add a misogynistic note to what Salmon has so far said. Salmon’s town (cf. 53 vestra […] in urbe) is more deeply infected by the disease of vices (53 vitiorum morbus) spread by women.   The second speech of Salmon, the longest and most elaborate of all, forms the central focus of the poem. Salmon picks up and challenges Thesbon’s polemical note, and asserts that female moral corruption springs from male depravity (55–86). Such widespread moral debauchery deprives people of any spiritual strength to endure the attacks of the enemies (87–95).   55–86 This distinctive challenge to the theme of misogyny is developed as follows:     55–60 female misbehaviour is a result of male moral degeneracy (cf.  58 nostro crimine). Men should guide women instead of being trapped by their charms;   61–73 male authority (cf. 69 error noster) is too weak to divert women from an excessive desire for ornatus and cultus;   74–9 it is men (cf.  76 vitium nostrum) who encourage women’s interest in pagan literature at the expense of the Bible;   80–6 men’s conduct in life (cf. 80 nos horum, nos causa sumus) sets the example for the moral degeneracy of women. 87–95 Salmon recalls the military metaphor of the internal and external enemy (cf.  87 unus ubique hostis), and concludes with another image of the husbandry of souls: if people had “purged” the knots of their vices from their minds with the scythe of the Word (90 mens […] purgata; 91 falcem Verbi), the power of the enemy would have been ineffectual against them.  

16 

 Introduction

96–7: Abbot

98–105: Salmon

106–10: Abbot

The Abbot interjects that the number of virtuous people (cf. 96 bonorum) among Salmon’s fellows is not small, and that many are pious people nourished by the Church.   Salmon exclaims that these people, men and women alike (100 sexus uterque), are the only consolation for those who live in his fatherland (98–102). He then asks the Abbot about the sustenance he enjoys (cf. 104 requies) in the cave (103–5).   The Abbot adjourns the conversation to the next day: night is coming and it is time to get up (surgere) and join the other brethren, “the holy throngs of saints” (109 sacros sanctorum […] coetus).  

3 Dramatis Personae of the Dialogue In any study of EP it is important to deal with various issues regarding the speakers, how many participate in the dialogue and when does each one speak, since the manuscript transmitted the text without mentioning the dramatis personae and the change of speaker. If one excludes the very early versions of the poem by Wernsdorf (1782) and Ebert (1874), in which the text is divided between two dialoguing characters, Victor, i.  e. Marius Victorius, the suggested author, and the abbot Salmon, Schenkl (1888) makes the first critical and philological attempt. Schenkl ascribes the opening lines of the poem (1–9) to an anonymous monk who welcomes Salmon, the former clergyman of the coenobium, and introduces him to the fratres and his old friend Thesbon.1 The old monk enquires about the state of Salmon’s country. Salmon replies that the country has been damaged by the Alans and the Vandals, but its citizens have begun to repair the physical damage. They remain, however, in greater peril from a hidden and more dangerous enemy. Earthly distractions and age-old vices cause men to neglect the state of their own souls. Thesbon then intervenes for the first time in the dialogue with the observation that it is women who present the greatest danger for the people in the town (52–54). Salmon agrees with Thesbon and offers a gallery of sinful women, but at the same time charges men with responsibility for female behaviour (55–95). After a lacuna in the text, the anonymous monk steps in, objecting to these propositions and stating his belief that there are still people of pure mind and spirit to be found in the city (96–97). Salmon concurs with the old monk, noting however that such people represent the only positive aspect of urban life, and in turn asking the monk about the repose he enjoys in the temple of the Lord (98–105). The monk declines to answer as night is drawing in and instead promises to continue the conversation the following day. He invites Salmon to join them for the evening service (106–110). In 1949 Helm made his contribution to the analysis of speakers present and the assignment of lines to each speaker. He argued that there are only two speakers, Thesbon and Salmon, although he pointed out that a third anonymous speaker opens the conversation in the first seven lines. Helm follows Schenkl’s distribution of lines to the two main speakers, Salmon and Thesbon, but in addition ascribes to Thesbon the lines of the old monk (including lines 8–9 from the introduction). He does comment, however, that the use of namque in line 10 makes

1 Schenkl (1888: 500) suggested that Salmon […] post longum tempus eam urbem, in qua educatus atque institutus erat, revisit. […] Iam cum ad coenobium, quod erat in urbe illa, venisset, excipitur a monacho gravi annis, quem patrem carum vocat. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110982381-005

18 

 Introduction

the allocation of this line to Salmon somewhat unconvincing, but circumvents this difficulty by suggesting that the text has been transmitted only in fragments. Griffe published a short article in 1956 on EP, in which he set out a French translation of almost the entire text, and briefly examined the different speakers and their parts. He largely followed Schenkl’s version with the exception of lines 1–7, which, like Helm, he attributed to an anonymous speaker, and lines 8–9, which he attributed to Thesbon. Smolak (1999) agrees that the majority of the dialogue is between two persons, Salmon and Thesbon. He follows Griffe and Helm in ascribing the first seven lines to a third speaker, who he refers to as the gatekeeper (“Pförtner”), and lines 8–9 he ascribes to Thesbon. Smolak appears to resolve the problem of namque in line 10 by amending the text to read aeque. Fo (1999) also structures the dialogue between only two speakers, Thesbon and Salmon. According to him, in the first fourteen lines Thesbon welcomes Salmon, introduces himself as Salmon’s old friend and starts the dialogue by asking about the condition of the patria, which Salmon has just left. The changes of speaker then follow the version suggested by Helm and Smolak. Fo argues that ille at line 5 is not used by a third speaker to refer to Thesbon but is used by Thesbon to address himself to Salmon. In this case ille would be used not as a demonstrative adjective but as a mark of time: “I that one time was your friend”.2 Moreover, the function of mea viscera (5n.) would necessarily change, referring to Salmon instead of Thesbon, thus echoing the vocatives used by Salmon later in the poem with pater optime and care pater.3 Fo explains the manner of address used by Thesbon by speculating that perhaps Salmon does not recognise his old friend. Although the text makes it clear that the two have been separated for a period of time (cf.  105n.), there is little evidence to support or disprove this hypothesis. Moreover, it is a convention of pastoral poetry and, in particular, Vergilian Eclogues that personae use the vocative to address one another, a device used by the author to intimate to the reader a change of speaker. In my opinion, it appears that a third persona, as identified by earlier scholars, has in fact an important role in the dialogue.4 Far from being an anonymous gatekeeper, the third speaker (see line 2 custodem templi populique magistrum) is likely to be the leader of a community. These words are used in pastoral texts to

2 See Fo (1999:128): “la distanza segnalata da ille va intesa se mai come distanza nel tempo”. 3 See Fo (1999: 128): “mea viscera è un vocativo ‘di figliolanza’ rivolto a Salmon, simmetrico rispetto ai due vocativi ‘di paternità’ che Salmon rivolge al suo interlocutore”. 4 On the redistribution of the dialogue between three characters see also Salzano (2007: 86–7) and McLynn (2009: 63).



Dramatis Personae of the Dialogue 

 19

refer to the simple shepherd, and by Christian writers to portray Christ (for explanation and discussion of these terms see nn. 1 and 2). Here, it would seem fitting therefore that the dialogue is opened by a spiritual leader, perhaps, for example, the abbot of a monastery. Although such an important person does not participate in the majority of the conversation, he represents an essential device in the construction of the poem. He immediately introduces a number of Vergilian allusions, such as, for instance, the reference mentioned above to custos and magister. Furthermore, both the first and fourth lines clearly follow a Vergilian turn of phrase (see nn.  1 and 4). Finally, in lines 6–7, he sets the scene of the dialogue in an antrum (a medley of Vergilian allusions taken from the Eclogues and the Aeneid), and allows the two friends to converse within this locus amoenus (cf. 6–7n.). Thesbon is introduced by being addressed by the Abbot in line 5 with the vocative, and enters the conversation at line 8 addressing Salmon by name, in contrast to peccator used by the Abbot at line 1. Salmon’s response commences with an adversative phrase, at vero, which is a common Vergilian device for introducing new speakers (see 15n.). Despite Thesbon’s first question about the physical state of the country after the ravages of war, Salmon immediately steers the conversation in a spiritual and metaphorical direction, preferring instead to consult his friend about the woeful state of his fellow citizens’ souls. Salmon’s first monologue is broken at line 52 by a short three-line interjection by Thesbon (see 52–4n.), providing some relief in the form of interaction between the two speakers before the second of Salmon’s monologues, and allowing Thesbon to introduce a further topic of conversation, the diatribe against women that Salmon, instead, will subvert in his attack against male corruption (see 55–86n.). The reader is able to follow these changes of speaker through the use of the vocative and of familiar, idiomatic discourse-markers such as quidem in ista quidem (52n.) at the beginning of each interjection. In his second monologue (see 55–95n.) Salmon immediately refutes the theme of misogyny by arguing that men should take responsibility for the behaviour of women. It is impossible to know how this speech ends due to the lacuna in the manuscript at line 94, but it is clear, from the adversative particle attamen (see 96n.), that at line 96 a new speaker commences (96  f.). Salmon’s forms of address to this new speaker, pater optime (see 98n.) and care pater (see 103n.), suggest that he is addressing not Thesbon but the Abbot who opened the poem. The use by Salmon of requies in line 104 (cf. 104n.) harks back to the requiem uttered by the Abbot in the opening lines (see 6n.). Salmon is trying to draw the Abbot into an elucidation of this repose enjoyed by the fratres (cf.  6n.), perhaps because this is the very thing he hoped to find at the monastery. The subsequent use of surgere (see 109n.) by the Abbot in line 109 suggests that Salmon has already in fact enjoyed the requies he seeks. This conversation, with all its Christian imagery

20 

 Introduction

of death and resurrection, strengthens the hypothesis that it is an abbot who plays this third role rather than Thesbon. The re-introduction of the Abbot heralds the end of the poem, as he completes his role by bringing the conversation to a close through the Vergilian commonplace of the coming of night (cf. 106–110n.). This allows the author to complete the ring composition and suggests that EP has been transmitted with its original ending.

4 Metre and Style EP is written in hexameters, the familiar metre of epic, pastoral, satire and didactic poetry. The metrical technique deployed in EP shows that its author was well versed in classical poetry and that his hexameters adhere to the norms which regulate classical hexameters. I will draw attention to some salient aspects which may help readers to characterise the poem’s style and will point out the refined artistry of its lines. I have in mind particularly to compare it with Vergil’s hexameters. The composition of the hexameters is very controlled and very Vergilian in style. For instance, despite the tendency in late Latin to lengthen a vowel followed by the group muta + liq., in the EP the vowel remains short (see vv. 6, 15, 21, 45, 78). The lengthening of vowels appears in two verses: v. 10 namque agris and v. 109 surgere et ad sacros. The shortening of naturally long vowels occurs three times in proper personal names ending in ‘-o’: v. 36 Pollio, v. 77 Maro and Naso, and in the verb fraudabo at line 107. The frequency of elision in EP shows the technical ability of its author to reproduce a poem reminiscent as much as possible of the Vergilian model. The incidence of elision in hexametric poetry of classical authors according to Soubiran1 is 24 % per 100 lines in Ennius, 50 % in Lucretius, 20 % in Ovid’s Met., but the rate increases in Vergil’s works: Eclogues 29 %, Georgics 50 %, Aeneid 54 %. The figure for EP according to my calculations is around 37 %. This means that the poet of EP pursued Vergil’s elision-rate as part of a general attempt to revive his style. On the other hand, the elision of a long vowel or diphthong, rare in many classical poets, occurs several times: vv. 3 Christi altaria, 12 longa in, 15 vero interior, 28 animae et, 76 Paulo et, 77 Phoenissa aut, 79 Flacci et, 91 cordi imprimeremus, 98 plane insontes. The most frequent pattern used in EP is DSSS2 which is also the figure mostly used by Vergil3 and, in general, this contrasts with late antique poets who tend to prefer the pattern SDSS in hexameters.4 In classical hexameters the first foot is either dactyil or spondee with a predilection for the former. The poet of EP follows this rule 63 times; he also avoids the combination of end of word / end of foot in the second foot. The third foot normally includes syllables formed by two words, a rule diligently followed by the author of EP. The fourth foot generally coincides with the end of a word. The same rule is found 44 times in EP. The fifth foot in EP

1 Soubiran (1966: 598–607). 2 It occurs 23 times (20,91 % of total lines) in vv. 8, 11, 12, 17, 18, 19, 26, 29, 32, 33, 34, 41, 44, 52, 61, 62, 65, 77, 85, 87, 102, 109, 110. 3 See Duckworth (1969). 4 See Ceccarelli (2008: 161, vol. 1). https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110982381-006

22 

 Introduction

is always a dactyl and in 28 lines is formed by a word of three syllables. Also, 27 times the hexameter ends with a verb, not too dissimilar from Vergil’s Eclogues where the rate is, for example, 22 in ecl. 1; 16 in ecl. 2 and 19 in ecl. 7. Rhyme between the caesura and the end (also called versus leoninus) seems not to have been sought in classical times but it was more frequent in late-antique poetry.5 A versus leoninus is found 15 times in EP.6 The caesura in this poem is predominantly masculine and in the 3rd foot. Line endings are regularly constructed according to the rules of classical hexameters: the final words are all of either two or three syllables, save for the ending of three lines where two monosyllables end the verse, the second in each case more or less enclitic (see 8 sors est; 18 si quid; 104 ex quo). In this respect, EP follows the hexametric poetry of Horace’s Satires where double monosyllables often occur at the end of the verse. Figures and devices of style that EP displays are clearly those of a doctus poeta. This is a poem of distinctive phrases and iuncturae (e.  g. 2 populique magistrum; 3 Christi altaria; 15 interior pestis; 16 densa telorum nube; 25 manicis peccati praeda ligamur; 28 praetoria cordis; 54 feminei […] furores; 82 nummo decerpere nummum). Anaphoras heighten the pathos of key phrases (e.  g. 18 si quid; 30 nil; 51 scire; 57 lege; 61  f. nec; 74  f. quod multa; 80 nos; 101 si quid); other emotionally expressive figures that stress the empathetic emotionalism of the narrative are apostrophes (see 5, 8, 52, 55, 98, 103, 106), exclamations (18, 51) and several enjambements which is another feature that could be seen as coming directly from Vergil.7 Alliterations are also very pronounced and sometimes artfully patterned: see e.  g. vv. 5 hic habitat tuus ille hospes; 7 herbida caespitibus sunt structa sedilia vivis; 23 […] situ squalescere); 24 subiectaque colla catenis, 27 convulsamve forem aut fractam renovare fenestram; 89 […] sanum saperemus; 90 […] purgata pateret; 92 vellemus veterum vitiorum abscidere nodos; 109 […] sacros sanctorum. Alliteration can also extend beyond one verse, as in 42–3 confessis […] crimine […] / […] capi, and 69–70 […] corpore casto / cerussa. From this brief analysis of the artistry of EP it appears that its author commanded the resources of expressiveness and metre to write good classical Latin hexameters.

5 See Wilkinson (1966: 34). 6 See lines 3, 4, 13, 14, 18, 22, 34, 43, 60, 64, 65, 67, 70, 86, 110. 7 I have counted 24 enjambements in EP. On Vergil’s refinement and development of enjambement see Wilkinson (1966: 194  ff.); Dangel (1985: 72–100).

5 A Satirist in a Locus Amoenus. The Literary Models of the Epigramma Paulini “Each word (text) is an intersection of words (texts) where at least one other word (text) can be read […]. Any text is constructed as a mosaic of quotations; any text is the transformation and absorption of another” (J. Kristeva, ‘Word, Dialogue, and Novel’ in Desire in Language: A Semiotic Approach to Litereature and Art, New York 1980, p. 66)

EP belongs to a cluster of Latin late antique poems whose authors carried out a Christian ‘experimentation’1 with the genre of pastoral poetry and adapted the Stimmung of the Vergilian pastoral world into Christian imagery of rural simplicity and purity. The contamination of pastoral and satire,2 and the framing of a Christian message within the suggestive reinterpretation of the Vergilian Eclogues, make this poem an attractive and interesting piece.3 In my article on EP I argued that Prudentius’ Hamartigenia was the main model in EP’s re-elaboration of the topos of misogyny.4 I should now add further, general observations about other literary models and themes that form the structure of the poem. Vergil is without any shadow of doubt the “code model” of the author of EP.5 Nevertheless, the choice of a dialogue poem may have been not only suggested by the Vergilian Eclogues but also by monastic dialogues. Smolak rightly points out that in the fifth century the dialogue was a flourishing genre particularly among monastic writers.6 The Apophthegmata pateron, dialogues of the Egyptian Fathers, and the Regula magistri, both based on the type of interrogationes and responsiones between an older and a younger monk, were widely read and circu-

1 I borrow this expression from Green (2004: 23  ff.). 2 Cf. Schanz, Hosius and Krüger (1920: 4.2.362) “Vergil klingt häufig nach, einmal sicher Horaz, mit Lucrez und Prudentius finden sich leichte Berührungen”; McLynn (2009: 63) [EP is] “a satirical dialogue wrapped in an eclogue”; Green (1984: 78) “In doing this [i.  e. inserting a satirical message] as a Christian to the classical eclogue he has proved himself something of a pioneer”. 3 The importance of the bucolic model was pointed out by Helm who briefly examined EP as a poem shaped “nach Art von Virgils Eklogen” (1946: 2359). The combination of bucolic and satire has also been recognised, cf. e.  g. Fontaine (1981: 230–1) who considered EP “un ingénieux pastiche des Bucoliques” and “une sorte de divertissement horatien”, see also Smolak (1999; 2000: 31). 4 Chiappiniello (2009). 5 I follow Conte’s terminology; see Conte (1986: 31  ff.), Hinds (1998: 41  ff.) and Gibson (2002: 340-3). See Green (1984: 78): “The poet is not attempting to replace Vergil, or indeed to emulate him; he accepts Vergil as part of his literary heritage and moulds the tradition to his original purposes just as Vergil had moulded Theocritus”. 6 Smolak (1999: 13). https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110982381-007

24 

 Introduction

lated among Christian readers. Without doubt, these texts were the forerunners of the masterpieces of the Dialogi of Sulpicius Severus, the Collationes of Cassian and the Dialogi of Gregory the Great, influential models for the literary form of subsequent monastic tales. In particular, in Sulpicius’ Dialogi, as in the dialogue of EP, a main character (Postumianus in the first book of dialogues and Gallus in the second) leads the conversation while the other characters intervene to make corrections or raise new topics. This format (which is based on Platonic and Ciceronian models of philosophical dialogue) is also followed in EP with the two speeches of Salmon (15–51, 55–95b) and the interventions of the Abbot (1–7, 96–97, 106–10) and Thesbon (8–14, 52–4). The Dialogi are held in the secessus of Primuliacum (this is another clear borrowing from the Ciceronian dialogues in villa) between three friends, Gallus, Sulpicius, and a guest, their dear friend Postumianus who returns from a journey in the East.7 The three friends talk until dusk, then they join the other monks for supper and postpone the speech to the following day.8 This topos of conclusion, as will be made clear later on, also ends the dialogue of EP and, more importantly, is a clear allusion (besides many other Vergilian echoes in both texts) to the endings of a number of Eclogues (cf. 108  ff.n.). Essential to the Dialogi of Sulpicius is the need for a calm retreat where its inhabitants are able to seek the Christian summum bonum by following the examples set by the desert hermits and, in a different way, the Gallo-Roman Saint Martin. Indeed, in EP this need for seclusion is the reason for the construction of the locus amoenus by the monks, an idyllic place of repose set against the sorrowful state of the invaded motherland. One substantial difference from Sulpicius’ Dialogi is the presence of social satire, which in the Dialogi remains at the very margin of the picture, whereas in EP it informs the whole message of the poem,9 as I will presently show.

7 See dial. 1.1 […] intervenit nobis Postumianus meus, nostri causa ab Oriente, quo se ante triennium patriam relinquens contulerat, regressus. 8 Cf. EP 108–109 sed iam conclusi nos admonet hora diei / surgere et ad sacros sanctorum occurrere coetus and Sulp. Sev. dial. 1.27.6–7 nimium enim dudum alias res agentes consumimus tempus, et iam solis occidui umbra prolixior monet, non multum diei vicina nocte superesse. Deinde cum paululum omnes conticuissemus; dial. 2.14.8 haec vos hodie audisse sufficiat, cras reliqua dicemus. Ita pariter accepta hac Galli sponsione surreximus; dial. 3.1.3–5 Gallo iam ad narrandum parato, inruit turba monachorum. 9 See, for instance, the brief allusion to the corruption of the Gallo-Roman clergy in Sulp. Sev. dial. 1.2.5 verum haec, quae maeroris plena sunt, relinquamus.

A Satirist in a Locus Amoenus. The Literary Models of the Epigramma Paulini 

 25

a) The Pastoral Setting of the Epigramma Paulini The first lines of EP herald the imitation of the themes of exile and dispossession of the first and ninth Vergilian Eclogues. Salmon is the supplex (1n.) who, having left his patria (cf. 9n.) invaded by the barbarus (cf. nn. 12 and 18  f.), seeks comfort and repose in the calm antrum (see 6 cui fratrum ad requiem frondosae vitis in antro; requies occurs again at line 104, cf. nn. 6, 104) of a community of fratres, that is, of monks (cf. nn.  1–3, 6, and 109). Although EP in some respects is an elusive text, it carries essential marks of identification with the Vergilian pastoral world. These first lines have a number of significant key words that strongly support such an interpretation. The Vergilian model forms both the initial content of the dialogue and the pastoral setting of the poem. The scenario of the first Eclogue is based on the loss of Meliboeus’ patria (cf. ecl. 1.3), and the settlement of the impius barbarus on his regna (cf. ecl. 1.69  ff.), who brings yet more havoc to the countryside adding to the existing discordia (cf. ecl. 1.69) of the civil war (cf. ecl. 1.12 usque adeo turbatur agris). This setting is echoed in EP by the upheaval caused by the barbarians (cf. EP 12 barbarus incumbit) who, having broken the peace treaty (cf. EP 11 inlaesae turbato foedere < pacis >), have invaded Salmon’s patria. The importance of Vergil in EP lies also in the description of the other characters giving hospitality to Salmon. The first Eclogue’s discordance between Tityrus and Meliboeus is recalled in EP, which presents a similar discordance between on one side Salmon and on the other side the Abbot, Thesbon and the fratres who live in their antrum. Furthermore, this antrum is itself a “pot pourri” of Vergilian allusions taken from the Eclogues’ locus amoenus where the shepherds live, the tranquil shores that harbour Aeneas on the African coast, and the antrum of the underworld in Aen. 6.637  ff. (see nn. 6–7, 6, 7). The author of EP draws from Vergil these important matrices and adapts them to a new context. The reference to pastoral terminology is made in the first three lines: the Abbot introduces himself as custos templi and magister populi (see 2n.), words commonly used in pastoral texts of shepherds as guardians of the flock (see 1–3n.). The choice of these terms in a context resonant of pastoral images, sends the reader back to the Biblical metaphor of Christ as the Good Shepherd. The mimesis of the Vergilian Eclogues is elaborated in a new poiesis. The image of the abbot as shepherd of the soul is reinforced by the terminology generally used to call real shepherds. The pastoral pattern of the antrum as a place of relaxation assumes a new spiritual and contemplative dimension in the Christian antrum. In this new narrative context, the domini templum (2) bestows on its inhabitants physical and, more importantly, spiritual calm.

26 

 Introduction

b) The Vergilian Pastoral Model in Late Antiquity The influence of Vergil on the poetic langue of fourth- and fifth-century writers has been amply considered by scholars. Vergil was regarded as a cultural icon and, by Christians, as the divinely inspired vates whose texts, repositories of religious truth and profound wisdom, represented an “exemplary model” open to fruitful new interpretations and explorations. I do not intend to dwell upon the various dynamics of the veneration of Vergil by late antique writers. Modern studies have greatly increased our knowledge and understanding of the appropriation and re-interpretation of Vergil in late antiquity.10 I, therefore, am going to pay only brief attention to the late antique literary revival of the pastoral genre which begun in the West between the end of the third and the beginning of the fourth century with the pagan poet Nemesianus. Of such rêverie pastorale christianisée,11 there are two examples of “dramatic” idylls written at the beginning of the fifth century, presumably in Gaul: Endelechius’ De mortibus boum and Pomponius’ Versus ad gratiam Domini. In both these texts, the attempt to construct an idyllic landscape able to heal the scars of the disasters of the barbarian invasions is particularly intriguing.12 Pomponius13 wrote at the beginning of the fifth century in hexameters the first Christian eclogue,14 modelled on Vergil’s sixth Eclogue. In this dialogue (in effect a monody, since the second character utters very few lines), the pagan Meliboeus asks the Christian Tityrus, persona of the poet, the reason for his happiness. Tityrus answers that he is singing Christian hymns for which he has an emotional affinity. He then sings for Meliboeus the creation of the world (a clear allusion to the song of Silenus on the creation of the world in Verg. ecl. 6), the story of Israel, the incarnation of Christ, and he instructs Meliboeus in Christian religion.15

10 The bibliography on this subject is vast and in continuous development. However, for the purpose of a general overview see e.  g. Courcelle (1957: 294–319); Fontaine (1978: 50–75); Benko (1980: 646–705); Patterson (1987); Fowler in Martindale (1997: 73–8); Lühken (2002); Rees (2004: 1–16); Witke in Rees (2004: 128–40); McGill (2005), (2007) and (2012: 336  f., 346  f.); Ziolkowski and Putnam (2008: 487–503); Karakasis (2011: 296  ff.); Shanzer (2012); Cullhead (2015: 123–58); Hardie (2019: 44–74). 11 Cf. Fontaine (1981: 233, 230 n. 466), who believes that EP belongs to the same “filière de pastiches virgiliens” adapted to a Christian message. See also Bažil (2009). 12 Cf. Fontaine (1981: 109) “aliénation virgilienne […] d’un présent catastrophique […]; universe bucolique: lieu géométrique de tous les paradis perdus”. A concise overview of bucolic poetry in late antiquity is provided by Effe and Binder (2001). 13 Cf. Isid. etym. 1.39.26; CSEL 16.1 (1888) 609–15; Anthologia Latina (1906, 19722) 189–93. 14 See Schmid (1953: 116 n. 41); Fontaine (1981: 105); McGill (2001). 15 The syncretism of pastoral topoi and Christian imagery is clear in the bucolic description of Paradise; see Versus ad gratiam Domini, lines 66–69 invitant croceis halantes floribus horti /

A Satirist in a Locus Amoenus. The Literary Models of the Epigramma Paulini 

 27

Severus Sanctus Endelechius, a friend of Paulinus of Nola, composed in asclepiads the dialogue De mortibus boum, an original rewriting that compounded the first Eclogue with the third book of the Georgics. Two pagan herdsmen, Buculus and Aegon, converse sorrowfully about the loss of their herd killed by an outbreak of the epizootic plague. A third character, the Christian Tityrus, joins them. He too is a herdsman who, miraculously, has not lost his herd. The other two ask amazed how this has happened, and Tityrus explains that he has kept the herd safe by having marked the heads of his animals with the sign of Christ’s cross: signum quod perhibent esse crucis Dei / magnis qui colitur solus in urbibus, / Christus, perpetui gloria numinis, / cuius Filius unicus (105–8). At the end of the poem, Aegon and Bucolus decide to convert to Christianity. The message of this poem is based on a painstaking mélange of Vergilian and Christian images. In particular, the figure of the deus who has saved Tityrus in the first Eclogue of Vergil suggests to the poet the possibility of using Christ as saviour of Tityrus’ herd. Thus, we have the conflation of two images: Christ the helper of the Christian Tityrus and Christ the Good Shepherd, since He is the only salus of the herd, symbol of all Christians.16 The thematic structure of EP belongs with this act of “appropriation” and Christian interpretation of Vergilian texts.17 c) The Topos of the Locus Amoenus in the Epigramma Paulini Within this Vergilian framework I now come back to EP and analyse the reasons behind the use of a locus amoenus as the setting of the dialogue. The locus amoenus is a fictional world into which one may escape from the real world. The idea of serenity derives from the fact that the locus amoenus is often painted as “un paradis intemporel, d’où tout mal est évacué”.18 The setting

fortunatorum nemorum sedesque beatae / semper erunt, quorum melior sententia menti / his locus urbis erit, divini gloria ruris. 16 Cf. Alimonti (1976: 84  ff.). On Endelechius’ Carmen see now Schierl (2016) with further bibliography. Displaying more sophisticated Vergilian influence, better adapted to the Christian context, were the idealisations of rural vignettes and the constructions of pastoral themes in the Natalicia of Paulinus of Nola and the metaphor of Christ the “Good Shepherd” in Prudentius; cf. e.  g. Prud. cath. 5.113–16 illic, purpureis tecta rosariis, / omnis fraglat humus, caltaque pinguia / et molles violas et tenues crocos / fundit fonticulis uda fugacibus (see nn. 1–3 and 7); cath. 3.102–05 frondicomis […] locis, / ver ubi perpetuum redolet, / prataque multicolora latex / quadrifluo celer amne rigat. 17 For a study of successive appropriations and modulations of the pastoral genre see Hubbard (1998). 18 Fontaine (1980: 219).

28 

 Introduction

of a locus amoenus is always with shady rocks, cool waters and leafy trees rustling in the breeze and often it is the landscape of the herdsman’s day. This topos, as a literary theme, has a long history from Homer onwards. It is always a place for the life of gods and humans set apart from the world of ordinary experience. Above all, the locus amoenus is the most prominent element of pastoral poetry. Theocritus introduced it to a pastoral setting at the start of his first Idyll, but it was with Vergil that the locus amoenus became the sine qua non of rustic ease. The opening scene of EP introduces the characters in dialogue within a rustic shelter, which reminds the literate reader of the bucolic setting of the Vergilian Eclogues. However, what is the effect of having the dialogue set in a bucolic scene? Pastoral is essentially a discourse of retreat, which may either simply escape from the complexities of the city or explore them. Broadly speaking, in the pastoral world, retreat is a device for reflecting upon the present. In the first Eclogue Vergil juxtaposes two antithetical characters: on one side Tityrus, lentus in umbra, embodies countrymen who enjoy pastoral otium and music in rustic ease. On the other, Meliboeus who, escaping outside disorder, is torn by tension and anxiety and represents the effect of the world of cities on the pastoral world. The result is that the countryside is symbolically opposed to urban life, peace to civil discord. The two men react in two diverse ways to social disorder. Tityrus went to Rome and, having boldly praised the political power of a divine young boy, managed to keep his land (the iuvenem of ecl. 1.42 is perhaps the young Octavian). In fact, Tityrus says that on his altaria (ecl. 1.43) he offers sacrifices to him twice a year. Meliboeus, instead, never went to Rome and, not being helped by a benefactor, lost his riches and therefore is now doomed to exile. Tityrus now lives in an exclusive world, free from the disruption of ordinary life, amid green and leafy nature. Meliboeus, by contrast, has been forced to leave his patria (ecl. 1.4 nos patriam fugimus) and his fields (ecl. 1.3 nos patriae fines et dulcia linquimus arva). A futher elaboration of this contrast is the recurring suggestion that leisure, relaxation and abundance are all to be found in the shade, whereas exile, anxiety and hardship are all exposed to the pitiless heat of sun. This is because Vergil portrays Tityrus, who is used to avoiding the mid-day sun in the shade playing music, as owner of a healthy and numerous herd that allows him to make the sacrificial vow in honour of his protector. In contrast, Meliboeus has endured general civil disturbance (ecl. 1.11–2 […] undique totis  / usque adeo turbatur agris) and he is himself anguished about what has happened (ecl. 1.12–3 […] en ipse capellas / protinus aeger ago). Nevertheless, he does not have shade in which to soothe his torment but is forced to flee with his ill-nourished herd through the hostility of sterile nature represented by the image of the naked flint (ecl. 1.15 silice in

A Satirist in a Locus Amoenus. The Literary Models of the Epigramma Paulini 

 29

nuda). However, Meliboeus is not the only one to experience exile and exclusion; in fact, while Tityrus speaks in the first person, Meliboeus uses the plural form (e.  g. linquimus, fugimus, “we are fleeing”, “we are being banished”) to extend the catastrophe beyond his own personal sufferings. d) Otium and Bellum: Rural and Urban Life What the author of EP represents in his verses is similar to the dialogue we read in Vergil’s first Eclogue: two men with antithetical lifestyles who reflect upon the present and judge it differently. The otium wherein the Abbot and Thesbon live is one of the most remarkable ingredients of pastoral Vergilian landscape; it leads to securitas for it comes from the rejection of the negotia of urban life. As in the first Eclogue, otium is often in antithesis to bellum, which in the Eclogue has disrupted the Italian countryside, whereas in EP it has damaged the cities (cf. 13–4n.), that is the world outside the templum domini, scene of the dialogue and the restoring place. Salmon has left his patria since the barbarians, having broken the peace treaty (see 11n.), impend upon fields, properties and peasants (10–1): Namque agris opibusque hominum terraeque colonis nunc primum inlaesae turbato foedere barbarus incumbit […]

Salmon, like Meliboeus, flees the disturbance of urban and agricultural order and is harboured in the peace of a secluded world. There, in the separate space of the antrum (5), Salmon meets the spiritual leader, the custos templi (2), of a community of fratres (5), presumably monks, gathered all in the same place, who host a friend of Salmon, Thesbon. The Abbot and Thesbon live in this sort of locus amoenus, safe from the dangers of barbarians or discord. Is their safety due to simply being far from the epicentre of war or is it divine recompense for their sacrificial lives devoted to chastity? In fact, they define themselves as altaria (3). The presence both in Vergil and EP of altaria might suggest an intertextual comparison between the altaria upon which Tityrus was accustomed to offer his sacrifices to his benefactor and thanks to which he gained protection, and the brethren, altaria of Christ, who sacrifice themselves to God by way of a chaste and ascetic life and who by worshipping God enjoy leisure and peace of mind (cf. 3n.). Like the Vergilian Tityrus, the Abbot and Thesbon live in cool shade and host Salmon who comes from the outside looking for restoration. Using the pluralis maiestatis Salmon admits that he is tired (20–1):

30 

 Introduction

ambiguis spebus licet et conatibus aegris nitimur in quandam speciem reparare priorum

But, and here the author departs from the Vergilian model, this is not the same tiredness as that of Meliboeus who is exhausted because of the long journey (cf. ecl. 1.13 aeger ago). In fact, it is not the journey, nor the war alone that prostrates Salmon, but, as will be clear later in the poem, another enemy who is crueller and more insidious than the barbarus: vice (cf. nn. 15–7, 87–95).19 Thesbon asks Salmon in what state his patria is (9) and, in particular, whether material damage has been repaired because he knows that palaces (13n.) and theatres (14n.) have been left in ruin (12–4): […] nec longa in saecula vitae nunc prosunt structae solido de marmore villae absumptaeque omnes vana in proscaenia rupes.

The author of EP echoes the civil disorder and land confiscation of the Vergilian Eclogues and the mention of the barbarus in line 12 is a further element assimilated from his literary model. As a barbarus soldier is responsible for Meliboeus’ exile in the first Eclogue so a barbarian invader brings into Salmon’s patria death and destruction. We know from other writers that the barbarian influx heavily damaged the northern provinces of the Roman Empire. For instance, Rutilius Namatianus, who always believed that an ordo renascendi would have recovered

19 The importance in EP of the Vergilian model of the first Eclogue is not considered by Isola (2003–2005: 329  ff.). He believes that in EP the conversation between Salmon and Thesbon happens “sullo sfondo di una quiete rassicurante”, and that there is not the same contrast, which one reads in the first Eclogue, between the calm of Tityrus and the anxiety of Meliboeus. I am not convinced by this. The evidence for his opinion does not amount to very much. The Abbot’s final gesture of hospitality reconciles the tension of the dialogue between uncertainty and safety, and reasserts the (monastic?) values of friendship and hospitality. However, it also serves to underline what Salmon has lost. Moreover, it strikes me that Isola compares too literally the use of barbarus in both EP and the first Eclogue. Of course, the Vergilian barbarus was a Roman soldier whereas the barbarian enemy in EP is a foreign invader; however, what I think is important, is that they both exemplify the impact of a destructive force on the lives of many Romans. After all, was the land confiscation and redistribution among Octavian’s soldiers not a dramatic event for many Roman citizens? See e.  g. the vivid account of App. BC 5.12 “They came to Rome in crowds, young and old, women and children, to the forum and the temples, uttering lamentations, saying that they had done no wrong for which they, Italians, should be driven from their fields and their hearthstones, like people conquered in war”; and cf. Prop. 4.1.127–30 ossaque legisti non illa aetate legenda / patris et in tenuis cogeris ipse lares: / nam tua cum multi versarent rura iuvenci, / abstulit excultas pertica tristis opes.

A Satirist in a Locus Amoenus. The Literary Models of the Epigramma Paulini 

 31

the Empire from the barbarian attacks, could not pass over the countless towns in ruin left behind by the barbarian invasion.20 Gaul, amongst the Roman provinces, was severely affected by the first fifth-century barbarian hordes according to many Gallo-Roman writers. For instance, the CPD, attributed to Prosper of Aquitaine and written in 416 or soon thereafter,21 describes Gaul utterly devastated by the barbarian invasions of 406.22 The rhetorical overtone of this hyperbole is clear but its documentary value should not be underestimated. e) The Metaphor of Cultura Animi Salmon begins his answer to Thesbon by claiming that an internal plague (15 interior pestis), a deeper war (15 bellumque profundum) and a more hidden enemy (17 occultior hostis) wage a crueller war against his fellow-citizens. This emphasis on an internal, spiritual plague and a hidden enemy introduces the theme of “psychomachy”, a recurring motif in this poem (cf. lines 87  ff.). This transcendent image is also effective since readers can interpret the material destruction as an allegory of the spiritual state of human souls. Salmon antithetically notes that fields and towns have been repaired, somehow physical hardship is now over (cf. lines 20  f.), whereas people, the prey (25 praeda) of sin, let themselves be tied up by the handcuffs of vice, while their minds become rotten from long abandon. Buildings are restored and fields cultivated while the internal field of the soul remains neglected (26–9): At prius est vitem purgare, abscidere sentes convulsamve forem aut fractam renovare fenestram quam latos campos animae et praetoria cordis excolere et captae conlapsum mentis honorem.

Salmon relates the peaceful hortus conclusus of Thesbon and the Abbot, where the beauty and the calm of nature is reflected in the carefree state of souls, to the outside world, where citizens are under threat from both physical invaders and vice.23 Why did the author use the metaphor of the soul as a field? The image of

20 See Rut. Nam. 1.409–12 agnosci nequeunt aevi monumenta prioris: / grandia consumpsit moenia tempus edax. / sola manent interceptis vestigia muris: / ruderibus latis tecta sepulta iacent. 21 See Marcovich (1989: ix-x). 22 See CPD 17–20 cumque animum patriae subiit fumantis imago / et stetit ante oculos quicquid ubique perit, / frangimur, immodicis et fletibus ora rigamus, / dumque pios agimus, vertimur in querulos. See also Fielding (2014). 23 Cf. e.  g. 16 where densa […] nube suggests a sharp contrast between the calm shade of the antrum and the lethal metaphorical shade brought in by clouds of sins (see also nn. 28 and 29).

32 

 Introduction

cultura animi is a recurring commonplace in pagan (e.  g. Cicero’s Tusculanae Disputationes) and Christian texts alike, and above all it is spelt out in the parable of the sower in the Gospels (see 18–29n.). Both the agricultural metaphor of the soul as a field and similar wording (cf. 26 purgare and 90 purgata; 26 sentes and 92 nodos; 29 captae mentis and 90 libera mens; 16 nube and 90 nebulis) will be resumed later in the poem (see 87–95n.). The return of this motif sheds a light of metaphorical overtone on the overall interpretation of the poem. The spiritual husbandry and architecture (see 28 […] latos campos animae et praetoria cordis) stages a dramatic contrast, a “synecdochic relationship”,24 between villas and fields restored (cf.  13  f.) and the mind’s palaces and fields forgotten (cf.  28n.). The result of this relationship is a specific repositioning of the idea of “barbarian”. Considering the metaphorical use of the term “barbarian” elsewhere in some Christian texts one wonders whether the presence of barbarus in EP points beyond an allusion to Vergil and suggests its conflation with the metaphor of barbarus as a metaphysical enemy (cf. 15–7n.). The imagery of barbarians as an infernal force occurs for the first time in the Carmen Apologeticum of Commodian (third century), who called Kniva, king of the Goths, Apollyon, “the destroyer”, a name taken from the Book of Revelation (9:11). Apollyon is the leader of the swarm of locusts which, at the end of the world, will come out of the Abyss to torture mankind. The barbarian threat to the Empire is thereby imbued with apocalyptic resonance and the image of barbarus is extended by Commodian to include the idea of barbarians as a diabolicus, infernal foe. Another metaphorical figuration of the barbarians is in Ambrose who, soon after the disaster of Adrianople (378 AD) and the death of the Roman emperor Valens, killed by the Goths, compared the brutal force of the Goths with the apocalyptic northern tribes of the violent Gog, who in Ezech. 38 lead the world to its end.25 The clearest example of the metaphorical reflections of contemporary events is in the Psychomachia of Prudentius. Prudentius’ evocations of Vices fighting Virtues contain strong similarities with contemporary descriptions of barbarians. For instance, Avaritia (psych. 557  ff.) is dressed as the wife of the Goth Tribigild (cf. Claud. Eutr. 2.182  ff.); Superbia wears, like a barbarian, pellitos habitus (psych. 178); Ira is called barbara bellatrix (psych. 133).26 With this in mind it appears clear that the term “barbarian” can be applied not only to the pagan otherness inside the body of the Christianised Roman Empire but also to

24 Roberts (1992: 104). 25 Cf. Lenski (1997: 129  ff.). 26 Cf. Shanzer (1989: 357  f.); Malamud (1989: 47–78); Dorfbauer (2012); O’Hogan (2016), and on the allegorical duels now Frisch (2020: 24–38).

A Satirist in a Locus Amoenus. The Literary Models of the Epigramma Paulini 

 33

the otherness of vice plaguing the body of the Christians. Such ‘dehumanisation’ of the barbarian reinforces in the Roman psyche the feeling that the struggle with the barbarian invader is also symbolic and spiritual; as Ferris has aptly explained “the figure of the barbarian became a convenient canvas on which the fears and neuroses of the Roman state were drawn”.27 f) A Further Model: Satire The agricultural metaphor of the soul fits very well with the mise-en-scène of the bucolic dialogue of EP. Thesbon, the Abbot and the other dwellers of the antrum live in a metaphorical “transubstantiation”28 with the natural world; their separate space is a sort of earthly Paradise. By contrast, those who live away from bucolic seclusion are more exposed to the enticements of vice, the internal enemy. This alternation of images between the peace of rural retreat and the hustle and bustle of corrupted urban life paves the way to the deployment of satirical themes in the locus amoenus. Although the antithesis between rustic virtue and urban corruption is deeply rooted in ancient thought,29 in EP this feature is aptly embedded in the pastoral model which is the anti-urban genre of literature par excellence. The author artfully adapts these themes in the frame of different genres. The images taken from the bucolic genre, suitable for the section on physical rest and escape from the barbarian enemy, are substituted with the satiric patterns in the section focused on urban decadence. From the anti-urban genre of pastoral poetry the author leads his readers to the urban art of anti-human satire. Emphasis on the contrast between rustic virtue and urban corruption is well established in ancient texts. The scene of a community gathered together in a rustic surrounding is employed by Juvenal, for instance, in the third satire to contrast with the picture of Rome constructed by Umbricius. The country is a place of leisure and relaxation, moderation from urban excess and freedom from the social class code (cf. 3.171  ff.). The image of country life acts as a foil to city life: the noisy city is contrasted with the refreshing nature of the country with its rivers (cf. 3.190 gelida Praeneste), wooded hills (3.192 positis nemorosa inter iuga Volsiniis) and gardens (cf. 3.223–31, 318–22). This is the idyllic scenario that Juvenal

27 Ferris (2000: 118) and more recently Ferris (2011) on barbarians as dehumanized signifiers of political violence. See also the representation on the solidi of the Christian Roman emperor Valentinian III holding the Cross and trampling a snake with a barbarian face; cf. Ungaro (1985: 78–80). 28 Frye (1990: 143). 29 See, for instance, the exodus from corrupted towns to the countryside (as an ideal place of calm and morality) in Plaut. Merc. 836; and the pristine simplicity of rural life in Horace’s second epode.

34 

 Introduction

envisages as the only place to live with friends in calm and tranquillity. The contrast between city and country is also the backbone of the second satire of Horace, the satire of the city mouse and town mouse. Horace portrays two divergent lifestyles: the country mouse lives in frugality but is safe; the town mouse, instead, lives in luxury but is often in danger. These few examples suggest that the author of EP had at his disposal a stock of literary models of satire that were concerned with rural retreat. The similarities between the defects the pagan satirists discovered in their society and those perceived by Christian writers in their own cities enabled the Christian moralists to adopt the sentiments and, often, the phraseology of the pagans in their lampoons of the contemporary world. Christian satire lived and flourished in the works of a class of writers who were strongly opposed to the morality and religion of the place in which they lived. For instance, in the writings of Christian apologists satire became a natural mode of stating their opposition to the pagan Romans. Yet the vigour of pagan satiric literature had a reawakening in Christian writers of late antiquity. Lactantius, Jerome and Ambrose filled their works with references to Horace, Persius and Juvenal, the last of whom became one of the most widely read Latin authors. Within this satirical framework the author of EP appears to have perfectly compounded themes from the reading of pagan and Christian satire. At the beginning of the satiric section, Salmon deplores the languishing apathy of his fellow citizens in carrying on their lives as usual, although they are now under constant threat of invasions (30–2): nil gladius, nil dira fames, nil denique morbi egerunt: fuimus qui, nunc semper sumus isdem sub vitiis nullo culparum fine manentes.

Similarly, Jerome, in his sixtieth letter, describes the chaos caused by the barbarian invasions and analyses the lesson his society should draw from it. He sadly concludes that “the Roman world is falling and yet we hold our heads erect instead of bowing our necks” (epist. 60.16; see 30–8n.). The author of EP, like Jerome, is utterly convinced that vices are too deeply rooted to be swept away even by disasters. The method that the author of EP uses in his satirical lines is mainly based on the traditional analysis of society according to various kinds of social and sexual obnoxiousness and, above all, the corrupting power of wealth. Three main broad stylised categories are deployed by the author to justify his pessimism: (i) excessive fondness for food and drink (33  f.), lust (35  f.), envy and ambition (36–8), all exemplified by the mention of decadent citizens; (ii) an attack on secular knowl-

A Satirist in a Locus Amoenus. The Literary Models of the Epigramma Paulini 

 35

edge (42–51); (iii) variation of the topos of misogyny that leads to a bitter attack against male custom (55–86). The sequence of corrupted Romans is based on the catalogue style of pagan satirists. Salmon’s personal dislike of a lascivious Pedius, and perhaps of a †Lampadius† – there is here a textual lacuna – (35–6), of an envious Pollio, and of an ambitious Albus, all continuing in the same vices as before the invasions, foreshadow the lines centred on the corruption of women and the negative influence that men have had on them (cf. 55–86). The lack of moral rectitude is evident in the language used by people, accordingly vice is dressed up as virtue, wastefulness and profit named as frugality and honesty (39–41). Thus, stress is laid on the fact that the perversion of values is evident in the distortion of language. Here the author of EP deploys an original elaboration of a famous pagan commonplace: the distortion of values during periods of war. However, in EP distortion comes from moral relaxation during a long period of peace (see 39–41n.). The second speech (55–95) of Salmon answers Thesbon’s interjection (52–4) spurred by a note of misogyny. Salmon skilfully encapsulates his vehement denunciation of male depravity within the literary tradition of female corruption. The length of this mordant invective on men gives to this theme an important place in the overall message of the poem. The mobilisation of topoi of traditional misogyny is always balanced with an anti-misogynistic note. After the initial lines Salmon drifts away from misogyny and underlines the importance of male responsibility. For instance, it is a male crimen (58) that men have misused the role of moral guidance entrusted to them by God (cf. 57 cum lege Dei) and have been ensnared by female charms (59 deliciis […] earum) instead of restraining them. The emphasis on the dominance which women exercise over men (cf. 59 faciles traheremur), and the incapacity of men to restrain female vanity (cf. 63–64 […] suspiria maesti / iungimus et vanas non est pudor addere curas), have the effect of underlining more firmly the absence of any male authority over women. The register used in these lines shows the author’s acquaintance with pagan and Christian traditional misogynistic commonplaces. Nonetheless, it is certain that the author had also borne in mind the examples of authors who had “mitigated” the topos of misogyny with a more or less direct attack against men. Several antecedents of this variation are found in Lucretius and in the sixth satire of Juvenal, are hinted at in some patristic authors and are exploited in more detail in Prudentius’ Hamartigenia (see 55–86n.). However, the interest in the variation of this theme in EP is the fact that the criticism of male complacency reflects a moral and social crisis canvassed on a wider picture of political and military turmoil. Salmon stigmatises many aspects of female behaviour, namely their fondness for ornatus and cultus (61–73) as moral corruptor. The portrait of women who like presenting themselves in new oriental dress or silk outfits, heavily embroidered

36 

 Introduction

(61, 66), weighed down with expensive jewellery and precious stones (62, 65), or the denunciation of female make-up (67  ff.),30 is a rag-bag of characteristics derived from literary topoi. Another topos is the pagan culture-bug: women prefer reading pagan poets and comedies instead of the Bible (see 74–9n.). However, Salmon sets against each one of these misogynistic topoi the mention of male responsibility: ornatus and cultus are balanced by the indignant question nonne error noster? (69); the pagan culture-bug is introduced by another indignant question, non vitium nostrum est? (76). Moreover, so as to wrap up this distinctive ‘misogyny’, the section ends with a further harsh reproach of male corruption and incapability to control women at line 80  f. nos horum, nos causa sumus nos turpiter istis / nutrimenta damus flammis. Thus, Salmon hurls against men his most vitriolic darts, for female misbehaviour is a symptom of a high degree of corruption and immorality among men themselves. Women reflect men’s misdeeds and like a mirror (cf. 83 sicut speculo) they reproduce male exempla (84). The final note of Salmon on this theme is rather telling: “why is an unfortunate woman condemned to the usual blame / since a morally depraved wife pleases a foolish husband?” (85  f.). g) Moral Decay and the Metaphor of Cultura Animi In the light of such a bitter tableau of unredeemed people the conclusion of Salmon arrives clear and expected (87–8): unus ubique hostis diffuso turbine saevit: nec mirum est vinci belli terrore subactos.

The lesson has not been learned; though many have been killed by famine, war and diseases (cf. 30  f.), people continue to live in their old vices. At this point one should pause on the meaning of unus ubique hostis: the nature of the enemy who ravages everywhere is twofold and the link between the presence of barbarians and vices is very close. The deployment of this image heralds the second metaphor, the cultura animi (see 87–95n.), and the juxtaposition of the real enemy, the barbarians, with the spiritual enemy, vice (cf. 91  ff.). Salmon’s second speech ends with a description of the benefits people might enjoy if only they changed their behaviour (89–93):

30 This theme is already present in Jerome as a witty transformation of a standard moralistic and rhetorical theme, which was probably introduced into Christian literature by Tertullian. Jerome often underlines the corrupting effect of make-up that, by inflaming young men and being a stimulant of lustful desire, is cause of social disorder (see epist. 54.7 in 67–70n.).

A Satirist in a Locus Amoenus. The Literary Models of the Epigramma Paulini 

 37

quod si correcti sanum saperemus et atris libera mens nebulis Christo purgata pateret, si falcem Verbi cordi inprimeremus et illinc vellemus veterum vitiorum abscidere nodos adversus Christi famulos vis nulla valeret

The language of moral husbandry and cultivation in this passage harks back to the beginning of Salmon’s first speech. The allusion to the image, deployed at the very beginning of the poem, of the fratres who, living according to Christian precepts, deserve the luxuriant bucolic retreat, God’s temple (cf. 1–7), suggests that the soul, as a garden forgotten by humankind, has overgrown with the weeds of vices. Thus, the metaphor of the locus amoenus perfectly complements the theme of satire. The scene of misfortune, caused by the barbarian invasions, is canvassed on the broader picture of moral decay. The possibility that God had used barbarians to punish Roman sins is not made as transparent as it is by Salvian (see e.  g. 15–7n.) and by the poet of CPD. It is plausible, however, that in this poem one can read one of the first hints that would lead other writers towards this interpretation. h) The Topos of Conclusion The poem ends with another bucolic image (see 104n.). Salmon asks the Abbot to speak more about the peace of his monastic life (103–5):  Nunc age, care pater, cupido mihi fare vicissim,  qua te digna satis requies susceperit, ex quo  te corde hinc gestans abii, tecumque resedi.

The Abbot replies that since night has arrived the conversation should be postponed until the following day (109–10n.). The concluding formula, “we must stop because night is approaching”, is a topos from antiquity passed through to the Middle Ages (106–10n.). This is a commonplace that fits outdoor conversations, even in texts certainly not bucolic, such as Cicero’s De Oratore (3.209). However, this topos is well used in bucolic settings: the first, fifth and eighteenth Idylls of Theocritus, the fifth of Calpurnius, and of course the first, the second, the sixth, ninth and tenth Eclogues of Vergil all end with sunset (see 108  ff.n.). The cumulative effect of Vergilian images used for the locus amoenus and for the identification of characters makes clear that Vergil is the “code model” of the author of EP. Like the Vergilian Meliboeus, Salmon finds hospitality from the Abbot for the coming night and with the promise of knowing, the following day, the amenities of the bucolic retreat, he gets up (cf. surgere on 109n.) to join the other fratres for the evening service. The Vergilian pastoral locus amoenus is the

38 

 Introduction

backdrop against which to enjoy leisure and true friendship, and where spiritual wealth is the reward for being in harmony with God. However, the mention of surgere in EP might suggest that a metaphorical transcendence in the locus amoenus could offer to the exiled a new state of life. In the first Eclogue Tityrus and Meliboeus do not share the same condition of life but they do understand the emotive state of each other and, therefore, they can exchange speeches. Likewise in EP, Thesbon and Salmon live in opposite situations but Salmon can find shelter among the fratres and Thesbon. The pastoral frame fulfils also the function of wrapping the central satirical section where the author meditates on the causes of contemporary misfortune and relates the locus amoenus to the real world. This poem was perhaps addressed to the readers of the aristocratic milieu since only a highly literate audience could have fully understood and appreciated the use of the Vergilian model as a literary vehicle of social analysis.

II Text and Translation

List of Departures From Schenkl’s Edition (CSEL 16.1) I have undertaken a review of the manuscript for the present edition. The text of EP printed below is a lightly revised version of Schenkl’s edition. I add a summary list of departures from that edition. In my edition I print the names of speakers, Schenkl prints none.  

SCHENKL

This edition

4  17 23 26 35 36   82 85 94   95a 99 102 105

loquellis

mentis ac moechatur, leprae dum furuis Polio decerpere nummum? solida nec nos Riphaei prosterneret ..... … . omnia bellum [solatia vitae] solacia vitae abii Tecumque

loquelis est quanto mentes At moechatur; †Lampadius† furiis Pollio decerpere nummum! solita nec nos Riphaei prosterneret < ***> omnia bellum < pectore fortes > solatia vitae abii, tecumque

https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110982381-008

EPIGRAMMA PAULINI ABBOT 5

Si domini templum supplex peccator adisti, immo et custodem templi populique magistrum, quot sunt hic homines, tot Christi altaria vises: sed si conlatis iuvat indulgere loquelis, hic habitat tuus ille hospes, mea viscera, Thesbon, cui fratrum ad requiem frondosae vitis in antro herbida caespitibus sunt structa sedilia vivis.

THESBON Dic igitur, Salmon, quae rerum nunc tibi sors est, quis patriae status est, quid te delectat in illa? 10 Namque agris opibusque hominum terraeque colonis nunc primum inlaesae turbato foedere < pacis > barbarus incumbit: nec longa < in > saecula vitae nunc prosunt structae solido de marmore villae absumptaeque omnes vana in proscaenia rupes.

SALMON 15 20

At vero interior pestis bellumque profundum olim nos densa telorum nube fatigat saevior et tanto est quanto est occultior hostis. et tamen heu si quid vastavit Sarmata, si quid Vandalus incendit veloxque abduxit Alanus, ambiguis spebus licet et conatibus aegris nitimur in quandam speciem reparare priorum. Illa autem nostro quae sunt amissa periclo

4 loquelis P: Schenkl, Smolak loquellis: loquelis Fo 10 Namque P, Schenkl, Fo: Aeque Smolak 13  Schenkl, Fo: in Smolak 17 est P: Schenkl, Fo : est quanto Smolak  https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110982381-009

EPIGRAMMA PAULINI ABBOT 1 5

If you have come as a supplicant sinner to the temple of the Lord, and indeed to the guardian of the temple and the guide of the people, as many as there are men here, so many altars of Christ you will see. But if it rather pleases you to indulge in shared conversation, here dwells your old host, Thesbon, my dear friend, by whom, for the repose of brothers in the cave made by a leafy vine, grassy seats have been built with living turf.

THESBON 10

Tell me, then, Salmon, what is your condition now? In what state is your fatherland, what charm does it hold for you? For, on the fields and on the wealth of men and on the farmers of the land, now that, for the first time, the peace treaty, which had been intact, is broken, the barbarian enemy falls: and the villas, built of solid marble to last for long ages of life, are of no use now, nor all the stones which were used up for vain theatres.

SALMON 15 20

But indeed an internal plague and a deep war has been exhausting us for a long time already with a dense cloud of arms, and the enemy is all the more savage the more he is hidden. And yet, alas!, whatever devastation the Sarmatian has caused, whatever the Vandal has destroyed by fire and the swift Alan has carried off, we strive, albeit with doubtful hope and painful effort, to restore everything to some sort of appearance of before. Nevertheless, what through danger from ourselves we have lost

44 

 Text and Translation

neclegimus longoque situ squalescere mentes ignavi patimur subiectaque colla catenis 25 dedimus et manicis peccati praeda ligamur. At prius est vitem purgare, abscidere sentes convulsamve forem aut fractam renovare fenestram quam latos campos animae et praetoria cordis excolere et captae conlapsum mentis honorem. 30 Nil gladius, nil dira fames, nil denique morbi egerunt: fuimus qui, nunc semper sumus isdem sub vitiis nullo culparum fine manentes. Qui prius in noctem prandebat, nunc quoque potans continuat soles nullo discrimine lychnis. Moechus erat Pedius: moechatur, durat in isdem 35 †Lampadius† furiis; livebat Pollio: livet; Albus, cunctorum quondam captator honorum, orbis in excidio minus ambitione laborat? Nil sanctum nobis nisi quaestus et illud honestum est, 40 utile quod fuerit, vitiisque vocabula recti indimus et parci cognomen sumit avarus. At qui confessis vitiis et crimine aperto non potuere capi – virtutis imagine ducti altius occulti foverunt vulneris ulcus –, 45 hos terrena trahit sapientia nescia veri et miseros idem, qui decipit, incitat error. Inquirunt causas rerum astrorumque meatus, quae sit forma poli, cur longo flumina cursu non pereant, latus iaceat quo limite pontus, quaeque Deo tantum sunt nota, recondita cunctis 50 scire volunt heu pro nefas et scire videntur.

23 mentis P: mentis Schenkl, mentes Smolak: Fo 26 ac P, Schenkl, Fo: at Smolak 35 moechatur, Schenkl, Smolak: moechatur; Fo: 36 Lampadius furiis] Lepedum furuis P: leprae dum furuis Schenkl: †Lepedum† furiis scripsit Fo: ut libitum furiis coni. Smolak 51 pro P: Schenkl: pro Fo: proque Smolak 

EPIGRAMMA PAULINI 



 45

we neglect and we, cowardly, allow our minds to become rotten through long decay and we have surrendered our necks to be subdued by chains, and, as the prey of sin, we are bound with handcuffs. 25 However, we first cleanse the vine, cut away the brambles, and repair the wrenched-off door or broken window, rather than cultivating the broad fields of our soul and the palaces of our heart and the fallen honour of our captive mind. 30 Sword, cruel famine, and even diseases have accomplished nothing: what we were, we are still now and always, remaining under the same vices, making no end to our faults. He who used to prolong his midday meal into the night, now also by drinking draws out the daylight with lamps blurring day and night. 35 Pedius was an adulterer: he is still an adulterer, †Lampadius† persists in the same rage; Pollio was envious: he is still envious; does Albus, who was once in pursuit of all honours, strive less driven by ambition in the midst of the ruin of the world? Nothing is sacred for us except gain, and is honourable 40 what has been profitable; we give to vice the name of virtue and the miser takes for himself the title of ‘frugal’. And those who could not be caught in evident vices and in manifest crime – who, having been led astray by a deceitful image of virtue cherished the deeper sore of a hidden wound – an earthly wisdom, ignorant of the truth, carries away 45 and this same error, which deceives them, animates these miserable people. They investigate the causes of things and the courses of stars, what the shape of the sky is, why the rivers in their long course do not dry up, what the boundary of the wide sea is. Those things known only by God and which are hidden from all human 50 beings, they wish to know and indeed, blasphemy!, they even fancy that they do know.

46 

 Text and Translation

THESBON

Ista quidem, Salmon, sunt nostri crimina sexus; sed levis est vestra vitiorum morbus in urbe, si non feminei magis exarsere furores.

SALMON 55 60 65 70 75

Ante diem, Thesbon, tenebris nox umida condet, quam possim mores huius percurrere turbae, quae, cum lege Dei vivant sub lege virorum, pro pudor haud umquam sine nostro crimine peccant. Nam nisi deliciis faciles traheremur earum, haut illas vitiis vellemus vivere nostris, nec rigidas auro vestes nec vellera Serum nec lapides, toto quos fert mercator ab orbe, fundorum pretiis emerent. Suspiria maesti iungimus et vanas non est pudor addere curas, si gravis ignotis processit Lesbia gemmis et decies Passiena novo radiavit in ostro. Iam si mutatis studeant occurrere formis atque viris alios aliosque opponere vultus, nonne error noster? quid agunt in corpore casto cerussa et minium centumque venena colorum? Mentis honor morumque decus sunt vincula sancti coniugii; si forma placet, venientibus annis cedet amor: sola est senium quae nescit honestas. Nam quod perpetuis discursibus omnia lustrant, quod pascunt, quod multa gerunt, quod multa locuntur, non vitium nostrum est? Paulo et Solomone relicto aut Maro cantatur Phoenissa aut Naso Corinna. Nonne cavis distent penetralia nostra theatris? Accipiunt plausus lyra Flacci et scaena Marulli.

74 Nam P: Nam scripsi: nam Schenkl: iam Smolak, Fo 

EPIGRAMMA PAULINI 

 47

THESBON

These are, certainly, Salmon, the crimes of our sex, but the disease of vices in your city would be slight if the passions of women did not burn all too much.

SALMON 55 60

The damp night, Thesbon, will envelop the day in its darkness before I could survey the habits of this crowd; while, by the law of God, the women live under the rule of males, they never sin, oh shame, without our fault. In fact, if we did not let ourselves be easily taken in by their charms, we would not wish them to live by our vices, neither clothes stiff with gold, nor fleeces of the Seres, nor the precious stones which the merchant brings from every part of the world would they buy at the price of an estate. In grief our sighs we join with theirs and we are not ashamed to pile on frivolous concerns, 65 if Lesbia has gone out weighed down with unheard-of precious stones, or Passiena has shone out ten times in a new purple dress. But if they should strive to present themselves in varied outfits and show off before men faces which are always different, this surely is our fault. What function on a chaste body has 70 powder and rouge, and the poisons of a hundred colours? The honour of the mind and decorous morality are the ties of a virtuous marriage; if you prefer exterior beauty, over the passing years love will cease. It is moral integrity alone that does not know old age. But when women cover all subjects in continuous chats, 75 when they indulge in feasts, when they are busybodies and talkative, is this not our fault? And, with Saint Paul and Solomon left aside, Vergil is recited by a Dido, or Ovid by a Corinna. Should the private quarters of our souls not be different from hollow theatres? The lyric poetry of Flaccus and the stage productions of Marullus receive applause.

48 

 Text and Translation

80 Nos horum, nos causa sumus, nos turpiter istis nutrimenta damus flammis – culpetur honesti inproba nupta viri nummo decerpere nummum! – nam sicut speculo referunt accepta tenaci ingenio similes morisque exempla secuntur. 85 Cur solita infelix damnatur femina culpa, cum placeat stolido coniunx vitiosa marito? Unus ubique hostis diffuso turbine saevit: nec mirum est vinci belli terrore subactos. quod si correcti sanum saperemus et atris libera mens nebulis Christo purgata pateret, 90 si falcem Verbi cordi inprimeremus et illinc vellemus veterum vitiorum abscidere nodos, adversus Christi famulos vis nulla valeret, 94 nec nos Riphaei prosterneret 95a < * ******** ******** > omnia bellum, 95b et qui nunc nostra grassantur clade superbi

ABBOT 96

Attamen in vestro populo non rara bonorum turba viget multosque pios ecclesia nutrit.

SALMON 100

Sunt plane insontes multi, pater optime, quorum esse velim similis, nec desunt < pectore fortes >, quos ad victrices det sexus uterque coronas. Ac si quid patriam commendat, si quid in illa est,

82 nummum!] nummum? Schenkl, Fo, Smolak 85 solita P: solida Schenkl: stolida Fo: solida Smolak: solita malim 94 nec nos rifei prosterneret et omnia bellum P: post prosterneret addidit Smolak accola montis 95a ante omnia bellum lacunam coni. edd. 95b post superbi lacunam indicant edd. 99 ] solatia vitae P: [solatia vitae] Schenkl: Fo: [solatia vitae] Smolak 

EPIGRAMMA PAULINI 

 49

80 85

It is we, yes, we who are the cause of these things, we who shamefully add nourishment to their desires –let the dishonest wife be blamed for taking money from the money of a ‘honest’ husband! – for, like in a mirror, they reflect accordingly what they have received in their retentive nature and follow the examples in their own behaviour. Why is an unfortunate woman condemned to the usual blame since a morally depraved wife pleases a foolish husband? A single enemy rages everywhere with a widespread storm: and it is no wonder that all people subdued by the terror of war are defeated. But if we, being corrected, understood what is healthy and if our mind 90 lay open to Christ in freedom, purged of dark clouds, if we pressed the scythe of the Word onto our hearts and from there we wanted to cut away the knots of our old vices, no force would prevail against the servants of Christ. 94 Neither would prostrate us of the Riphaean 95a everything the war 95b and those who now made arrogant by our defeat run riot

ABBOT 96

However, amongst your people, no small group of the virtuous thrives, and the church nourishes many pious people.

SALMON 100

Yes, excellent father, there are certainly many guiltless people whom I would like to resemble, nor are there lacking those , whom both sexes provide for the crowns of victory. And if anything commends my fatherland, if there is anything in it which

50  105

 Text and Translation

quod iuvet, hoc unum est, haec sunt solatia vitae. Nunc age, care pater, cupido mihi fare vicissim, qua te digna satis requies susceperit, ex quo te corde hinc gestans abii, tecumque resedi.

ABBOT 110

Non equidem invitus recolam mea gaudia, Salmon, nec te tantorum indicio fraudabo bonorum: sed iam conclusi nos admonet hora diei surgere et ad sacros sanctorum occurrere coetus. Crastina lux verbis accedet libera nostris.

102 solatia vitae P: solacia vitae Schenkl, Fo, Smolak 105 abii tecumque P: abii Tecumque coni. Schenkl: abii, tecumque Fo: abii tecumque Smolak

EPIGRAMMA PAULINI 

105

 51

gives us pleasure, it is that alone: these are the consolations of our life. Come now, dear father, tell me in turn, I am eager to hear, how this very worthy repose supported you, since carrying you in my heart I went away from here, and with you I remained in spirit.

ABBOT 110

Yes, I am certainly not reluctant to recount my joys, Salmon, Nor shall I deprive you of the account of such great benefits. But the hour of the day that is already at its end urges us to get up and join the holy throngs of the saints. The light of tomorrow will come without impediment to our conversation.

III Commentary

Abbreviations References to Latin texts are abbreviated as in the TLL, with the following exceptions: EP Epigramma Paulini CPD (Ps.-Prosper) Carmen de Providentia Dei Greek authors and works are cited according to the conventions of LSJ. The titles of journals and periodicals are abbreviated after the manner of L’Année philologique (Paris 1928-). In addition, the following abbreviations are used: Blaise

Bömer CCL CE CIL CLAVIS CSEL DS Forcellini GL Hartel ICUR ILS LSJ

MG Mohrmann O’Donnell OLD PL PLRE I PLRE II RE

Blaise, A., Dictionnaire latin-français des auteurs chrétiens (revised by H. Chirat), Strasbourg 1954 Bömer, F., P. Ovidius Naso, Metamorphoses: Kommentar, Heidelberg 1969–1986 Corpus Christianorum, Series Latina, Turnhout and Paris 1953Buecheler, F., Lommatzsch, E. and Riese, A., Anthologia latina, pars posterior : Carmina Latina epigraphica (3 vols.), Stuttgart 1895–1926 Corpus inscriptionum Latinarum, Berlin 1863Machielsen, I., Clavis patristica pseudepigraphorum medii aevi, Turnhout 1994 Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum, Vienna 1887Dictionnaire de Spiritualité, ascétique et mystique, doctrine et histoire, fondé par M. Viller, S. Cavallera, et al., Paris 1932–1995 Forcellini, A., Totius Latinitatis lexicon (4th ed. by V. De Vit, in 6 vols.), Prato 1858–1875 Keil, H. (ed.), Grammatici Latini (8 vols.), Leipzig 1855–1880 Hartel, G. de (ed.), Sancti Pontii Meropii Paulini Nolani carmina (CSEL 30), Vienna 1894 de Rossi, G. B., et al. (eds.), Inscriptiones Christianae Urbis Romae septimo saeculo antiquiores, nova series, Rome 1922Dessau, H. (ed.), Inscriptiones Latinae Selectae (5 vols.), Berlin 1892–1916 Liddell, H. G., Scott, R., and Jones, H. S., A Greek-English Lexicon (9th ed.), Oxford 1940 (with the Revised Supplement edited by P. G. W. Glare, Oxford 1996) Monumenta Germaniae Historica: Antiquitates: Poetae Latini medii aevi (6 vols.), Munich 1881Mohrmann, Chr., Etudes sur le latin des chrétiens, Rome 1958–1965 O’Donnell, J. J., Augustine: Confessions (3 vols.), Oxford 1992 Glare, P. G. W. (ed.), Oxford Latin Dictionary, Oxford 1968–1982 Migne, P., Patrologiae cursus completus. Series Latina Prior, Paris 1844Jones, A. H. M., Martindale, J. R., and Morris, J., The Prosopography of the Later Roman Empire, A.D. 260–395, Cambridge 1971 (vol. 1) Martindale, J. R., The Prosopography of the Later Roman Empire, A.D. 395–527, Cambridge 1980 (vol. 2) Pauly, A., Wissowa, G., and Kroll, W., Real-Encyclopädie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft, Stuttgart 1893-

https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110982381-010

56 

 Commentary

Schenkl Souter TLL Wernsdorf

Schenkl, C. (ed.), Poetae Christiani Minores, pars I (CSEL, 16.1), Vienna 1888 Souter, A., A Glossary of Later Latin to 600 A.D., Oxford 1949 Thesaurus Linguae Latinae, Leipzig 1900Wernsdorf, I. C. (ed.), Poetae Latini Minores, Altenburg 1782

Electronic resources BTL–1 CLCLT–3 PHI

Bibliotheca Teubneriana Latina, Stuttgart/Leipzig/Turnhout 1999 CETEDOC. Library of Christian Latin Texts, Turnhout 1996 Classical Latin Texts, Packard Humanities Institute, Los Altos 1991 (now an online free resource)

Commentary 1–7 Abbot: Introduction of Salmon to the locus amoenus The Abbot opens the dialogue and welcomes Salmon into the domini templum (1), presumably a monastery. The temple has the features of an antrum (see 6n.), wherein the Abbot takes on the role of custos and magister, standard terms in pastoral poetry in the sense of “shepherd”, and commonly used in Christian texts to refer to Christ (see 1–3n.). The Abbot welcomes Salmon and invites him, if he seeks redemption for his sins (cf. 1 supplex peccator), to join the inhabitants of the templum, and Salmon’s dear friend Thesbon (see 5n. on mea viscera as vocative). There in the antrum dwells Thesbon, who in the refreshing shade of a leafy vine has made comfortable seats out of the green turf (see 6n., 7n.) for the repose of the brethren (referred to as altaria and fratres, see 3n., 6n.) of that community. It is clear that in these lines the main model is the Vergilian Eclogues and in particular the first, for the tone and the occasion of both are similar. In the first Eclogue, Vergil deals with the state of chaos and dispossession of the Italian farmers, but he also underlines the values of friendship and hospitality. Equally in EP there is the same antithesis between otium (the fratres) and bellum (Salmon fled his patria when it was invaded by barbarians), whereby the monastery, compared to the urban mayhem, emerges as the only place of calm and refuge. Moreover, the Vergilian pattern is extended by the naming of the leader of the community with the pastoral terms of custos and magister, the same terms Vergil used in the Eclogues for the shepherds (see 2n.). In this singular antrum Salmon will be hosted (and his anxiety perhaps soothed, cf. 106–10n.) by the Abbot and the fratres who live in the peace of their monastery (cf. 6n. on requiem). 1–3 The Abbot tells Salmon that if he has come, as a supplicant sinner (1 supplex) to God’s temple (see 1n.) where the guardian of the temple and the guide of the people lives (see 2n.), he (Salmon) can visit any member of that community (see 3n.). The choice of custos and magister is a functional allusion to the pastoral metaphor of the “Good Shepherd”. The Christological interpretation of Christ as the “Good Shepherd” is firmly rooted in Christian religion; cf. e.  g. Is. 40:11, 65:2. On this topos represented in Christian art see e.  g. Nestori (1975), Weitzmann (1977– 1978), Provoost (1999) and Huskinson (2008). The clearest examples are psalm 23:1–2 dominus pascit me: nihil mihi deest; / in pascuis virentibus cubare me facit. / ad aquas, ubi quiescam, conducit me (the gratefulness of the Christian towards Christ is expressed by the similarity of the shepherd and his flock), and Ioh. 10:11 ego sum pastor bonus. bonus pastor animam suam dat pro ovibus suis. The fourth https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110982381-011

58 

 Commentary

century saw a renaissance of the rêverie pastorale, and the allegorical interpretation of the Eclogues as prophecies of the promised land provided Christians with a description of the pastoral, Vergilian world as an interior landscape, a new “état de l’âme” (Fontaine 1978: 72). The most suggestive use of this theme in Late Antiquity is, however, Prud. cath. 8.33–40 (God the tireless Shepherd protects, looks after and restores to the flock the sick sheep). custos and magister are direct references to pastoral terminology and contribute to create the scenario of the antrum as an idyllic Vergilian landscape (see 2n.). 1. domini templum: the image of the temple refers back to the metaphor of Christians as a mystic temple in 1 Cor. 3:16 templum Dei estis, 1 Cor. 6:19, Eph. 2:20–2, and 2 Cor. 6:16 vos enim estis templum Dei. The poet of EP introduces the reader (and Salmon) to the physical scene of the dialogue, the locus amoenus where the fratres live in rustic ease (cf. 6–7n.). In Paul. Nol. carm. 28.189 templum refers to the inner sanctum of a church (Green 1971: 95). This use may fit nicely with the scene in EP where the characters converse in the hollow space of an antrum. The choice of templum rather than the word ecclesia, normal term for “church”, exemplifies a linguistic concession to educated tastes; see Morhmann 1.62 and 1.157. From the fifth century onwards templum had the more comprehensive meaning of any building dedicated to God (see Souter, 414). For instance, according to Eucherius (see laud. her. 41.460  ff.) and Cassian (see e.  g. inst. praef. 2 verum ac rationabile Deo templum) the monastery is dei templum, temple of God (on Eucherius and Cassian see also the studies of Pricoco 1978: 184 and Leonardi 1977: 415). On this imagery see also Lanci (1993), Spatafora (1997) and Hogeterq (2006). supplex peccator adisti: this is a significant echo of Verg. Aen. 6.110  ff. and, in particular, of line 6.115 quin, ut te supplex peterem et tua limina adirem, the words of Aeneas who enters the antrum of the Cumean Sybil (cf. Verg. Aen. 6.42  ff.) and begs her to escort him into the underworld to visit the Elysian fields (cf. 6n. on in antro). By comparing these two passages one notes some similarities: (a) the antrum, see Verg. Aen. 6.42  ff. excisum Euboicae latus ingens rupis in antrum, / quo lati ducunt aditus centum, ostia centum, / unde ruunt totidem voces, responsa Sibyllae; Aen. 6.98  f.; (b) the authority of the Sybil and of the Abbot; (c) the reference to altars, the arae in Aen. 6.124 Talibus orabat dictis arasque tenebat, and the altaria in EP 3. supplex peccator: a Christian image that breaks into the Vergilian allusion. This is the first example of the pattern sustained throughout the poem of the syncretic use of Vergilian echoes and Christian terms. This iunctura seems to be a hapax legomenon in poetry but occurs in prose in Aug. serm. 99.6 venit unus supplex peccator; see also Schuller (1999: 48).

Commentary 

 59

2. immo et custodem templi populique magistrum: Wernsdorf (ad loc.) was the first to point out that custodem and magistrum should be interpreted as “bishop” and “abbot” and suggested that these terms, although recalling the pagan magister pecoris, point usu christiano to the leader of a religious community; cf. also Schenkl (p. 510) and Griffe (1956: 188 n. 7). If one reads this line within the frame of Christ as the Good Shepherd, custos and magister could be considered as examples of the projection of that Christological image onto the Abbot; cf. also Smolak: “metafora biblica […] in cui Cristo, il buon pastore, era rappresentato dall’abate” (2000: 31). custodem templi: unusual expression in Christian terminology. The author of EP is steeped in bucolic vocabulary and by echoing Vergil he picks up the theme of the “Good Shepherd” (1–3n.). For custos meaning “shepherd” see Verg. ecl. 3.5 hic alienus ovis custos bis mulget in hora; ecl. 5.43  f., ecl. 10.35  f., georg. 1.17  f., and georg. 4.433; cf. Fo (1999: 124–5) for more examples in Vergil. The epithet custos templi occurs also in Verg. Aen. 4.484 Hesperidum templi custos, (see also this Vergilian echo in Sil. 2.150 [Theron] Alcidae templi custos araeque sacerdos, 13.49 custodes […] templi). populique magistrum: within the frame of Vergilian allusions (see 1–7n.) the poet is here referring to the role of the Vergilian shepherd, called in the Eclogues, and in pastoral texts, magister; cf. e.  g. Verg. ecl. 2.33 […] Pan curat ovis oviumque magistros, ecl. 3.101, georg. 2.529  f., georg. 3.445  f., georg. 4.283  f. Aen. 12.717 (cf. Fo 1999: 125 n. 27); Calp. 4.106 [memini] et venisse Palen pecoris dixisse magistros. In Latin pagan writers, political leaders (dictatores) are called magistri populi (e.  g. Varro, ling. 5.82 est summa populi dictator, a quo is quoque magister populi appellatus); see also the sixth-century gloss of Isid. orig. 9.3.11 dicti dictatores, quasi principes et praeceptores, unde et magistri populi nominabantur (cf. TLL s.  v. 77.75  ff.). In Christian contexts, magister is found referring to Christ or the apostles, cf. e.  g. Paul. Nol. carm. 20.51, 19.151, 25.179, 27.568 (Green 1971: 80), or denoting the leader of a clergy (a bishop or an abbot) as in Prud. perist. 11.231  ff. si bene commemini colit hunc pulcherrima Roma / idibus Augusti mensis, ut ipsa vocat / prisco more diem, quem te quoque, sancte magister / annua festa inter dinumerare velim (to the bishop Valerianus); see also Ferrand. 17 [Fulgentius] magister utriusque professionis (i.  e. monastic and episcopal career). populus can be used to denote a monastic community, as in e.  g. Cassian. conl. 15.3.3 quem beatus Macarius usque ad horam nonam cum populis praestolatus. The epithet populi magister is not common in Christian authors, TLL (s.  v. magister 86.6) has only one example: Dionys. Exig. Conc. 15.19 et doceas quae nos universi […] episcopi et magistri praesulesque populorum […] docemus. However, it occurs in a propempticon of Paulinus of Nola in which the bishop Niceta is called populi magister, cf. carm. 17.321–3 […] non enim unius populi magistrum, / sed nec

60 

 Commentary

unius dedit esse civem / te deus terrae. In this case, since the phrase belongs to a context replete with Vergilian allusions, Paulinus is identifying the role of the bishop with that of Vergilian shepherds. It is more usual to have monasterii magister in order to designate an abbot with a grandiloquent word, e.  g. Sidon. epist. 7.17.4 […] ut tuo ipse sub magisterio monasterii magister accedat. In the case of EP, however, the author had to choose a different term to fit in the hexameter. Hence, there is a deliberate and interesting use of populique magistrum here. 3. quot […] tot: this phrase may be based on a proverbial phrase in Latin (perhaps from the Greek Philem. fr. 89 (Kock) ἡμῶν δ’ὅσα καὶ τὰ σώματ’ἐστὶ τὸν ἀριθμὸν καθ’ἑνός τοσούτος ἔστι καὶ τρόπους ἰδεῖν) since Ter. Phorm. 454 quot homines, tot sententiae (see Otto 1890: 166). This proverbial expression was also known and used by Christian writers, as in e.  g. Ambr. virg. 2.5.33 et quoniam quot homines, tot sententiae. Christi altaria: the use of altaria is here metaphorical and refers to the fratres of the community (cf. Fo 1999: 124). In pagan and Christian texts alike altars can be used metaphorically, cf. e.  g. Ov. epist. 1.110, trist. 4.5.2 [sodales] unica fortunis ara reperta meis, Pont. 2.8.68; CPD 927–8 plangamus captiva manus: nos splendida quondam / vasa Dei, nos almae arae et sacraria Christi; cf. Marcovich (1988: 112). This usage is popular with Damasus. In his fourth-century epigrams the recurring altaria Christi alludes to the martyrs’ sepulchre in a manner of juxtaposition of martyr and his tomb, place of worship and sacrifice for God (see Ferrua (1942: 162 n. 2)). Cf. Ps. Damas. epigr. 16.5 (Ferrua 1942: 120) hic numerus procerum servat qui altaria Christi, 32.2 (Ferrua 1942: 166) [tumulus] Gorgonium retinet servat qui altaria Christi, 48.4 (Ferrua 1942: 195) incola nunc domini, servas qui altaria Christi. I disagree with the interpretation of Mensorio (2019: 20–1) who, recalling the epigrams of Damasus, argues that Christi altaria refers to the tombs where the monks of Thesbon’s community have been buried and that, therefore, Thesbon leads Salmon to the cemetery of the monastery. In EP altaria does not have a literal sacrificial, physical meaning and it appears unlikely to me to be a reference to Damasus. By contrast, it is arguable that in the context of Vergilian pastoral allusions (cf. 1–7n., 1n.) the author had transferred a Vergilian item into his new Christian antrum. The brethren of EP sacrifice themselves to God by way of a chaste and ascetic life. They could also initiate a peccator (like Salmon) into a new Christian way of penitential life (cf. also 109n. surgere; 110n. lux). In pagan pastoral texts I found altaria used only by Vergil, and it appears to have the important role of trait d’union between religion and the bucolic world, cf. Verg. ecl. 1.43, 5.66, 8.64, 8.74, 8.105. In extant Latin poetry, Vergil is the author who uses it most (five times in the Eclogues, once in the Georgics, ten times in the Aeneid), followed by Statius (fourteen times), Silius Italicus (nine) and Ovid (six).

Commentary 

 61

4–5 If Salmon wishes to engage in conversation (see 4n.), there, in the domini templum (cf. 1n.), lives his dear friend Thesbon (see 5n.). Note the shift from seeing (cf. 3 vises) to talking (see 4 conlatis […] indulgere loquelis). The Abbot seems to be saying that if Salmon has come there to do confession, he will have access to the temple and may see any member of the community. If, on the other hand, Salmon wishes only to converse with someone, then he does not need to go further into the antrum, he can stop there and meet his friend Thesbon. 4. sed si conlatis iuvat indulgere loquelis: a Vergilian turn of phrase, see Aen. 2.776 quid tantum insano iuvat indulgere dolori, 6. 135 […] et insano iuvat indulgere labori and 9.614–5 vobis picta croco et fulgenti murice vestis, / desidiae cordi, iuvat indulgere choreis. If one sees a variatio of Aen. 2.776 a possible interpretation would be that both Aeneas and Salmon have lost their country due to invaders, but, unlike Aeneas, the Christian Salmon can be soothed by the irenic effect of the antrum, temple of God. Some scholars have explained this verse, clearly of Vergilian influence, either as a failed attempt to resonate the tragic tone of the Aeneid’s passage (e.  g. Gallico (1982: 164): “manca il senso del tragico e del soprannaturale”); or as a mere literary cliché (Courcelle (1976: 216): “Paulin de Béziers remploie ce iuvat indulgere comme un cliché pour s’excuser de faire oeuvre littéraire”). I do not see an attempt of slavish imitation, rather the clever reuse of a model. The author might have borne in mind the second book of the Aeneid, and the scenario of war and fleeing in that book perhaps was reminiscent for the EP’s author of current events. The author could indeed suggest that conversion and friendship may relieve the sorrow caused by the calamitous events set out in the following lines (cf. 8–12n.). conlatis […] loquelis: “shared conversation”. The word collatio/conlatio became in Cassian’s Collationes an established term to indicate a dialogue between monks in a cloister. Schenkl’s emendation of loquellis for the manuscript’s loquelis is unnecessary, as Gallico (1982: 167) has shown. Gallico provides parallels for loquela (e.  g. Mar. Victorin. gramm. 6.17 loquela et querela […] uno L scribenda sunt; Serv. on Aen. 4.360), and makes the observation that the use of loquella in fifth century is unproved. Fo (1999) agrees with Gallico, whereas Smolak (1999) keeps the emendation of Schenkl. 5. hic habitat tuus ille hospes, mea viscera, Thesbon: the pair tuus ille generally refers to a familiar person as in e.  g. Mart. 7.44.1 Maximus ille tuus, Ovidi, Caesonius hic est, see also OLD ille s.  v. 4. tuus ille indicate that Thesbon might have been known by Salmon in the past.

62 

 Commentary

mea viscera: does not mean “my love” (Schenkl, p. 510) but “my dear friend” (cf. Wernsdorf, ad loc. amicus meus intimus). Searches in digital databases have elicited that there are no examples of viscera used as a form of address in pagan authors. The nearest equivalent in the period up to and including Apuleius would seem to be cor, “heart”, or words meaning “life” or “soul” (anima, -ae, anime, animule, uita); cf. also Dickey (2002: 152, Glossary s.vv.). By contrast, in Christian texts the expression mea viscera is fairly commonly used to refer to people with whom one has particularly close emotional ties (see Blaise, 852; Forcellini, s.  v. 12). For other istances of mea viscera to convey an affectionate form of address, cf. e.  g. Phil. 1:12 tu autem illum, ut mea viscera, suscipe: quem ego volueram mecum detinere, ut pro te mihi ministraret in vinculis Evangelii; see also the comment on viscera in Hier. in Eph. 1.12 ‘viscera’ significare internum cordis affectum, et plenam ex animo voluntatem, cum totum quidquid in nobis est, suscipitur a rogato. Alias autem omnes liberi ‘viscera’ sunt parentum. A search of the CLCLT–3 databank has shown that mea viscera will become a common tag in Medieval Latin, see e.  g. Aelredus Rievallensis, hom. 14.17 orate proinde, o dulcia viscera mea, ut desiderium animae meae tribuat mihi Dominus; Petrus Venerabilis, epist. 133.27 valete viscera mea. Thesbon: on the etymology of this name the hypothesis of Schenkl (p. 500 n. 4) is likely to be right and is accepted by Smolak (1999: 10–1), and Fo (1999: 150). Thesbon might allude to Elijah, who is named in the Vulgate Thesbites; see 3 Reg.17.1 et dixit Elias Thesbites de habitatoribus Galaad ad Achab. The author of EP may have opted for the name Thesbon, alluding to Elijah, since Elijah was considered the archetype of monastic hermits in the best-selling biography of Paul of Thebes, the Vita Pauli of Jerome, and in Ambrose’s De Helia et ieiunio (cf. Smolak 1999: 10). Jerome interpreted the name Thesbon as festinus ad intellegendum (see Hier. interpr. Hebr. nom. 11.15 (CCL 72.73)). See also the etymology of Salmon at 8n. 6–7 Thesbon, Salmon’s friend, has arranged in a cave (6 in antro), for the repose of the brethren, grassy seats (7 herbida […] sedilia) made from living turf (7 caespitibus […] vivis). A cave can be a resting place or nursery of deities (cf. e.  g. Hes. Th. 483; Verg. georg. 4.152 (Juppiter born sub antro Dictaeo); Calp. 4.95–6); it is also the ideal place for physical or spiritual repose, often associated with idyllic landscapes; cf. e.  g. Hom. Od. 9.132, 13.96  ff., Theoc. Ep. 7.136–7; Verg. ecl. 1.1  ff, 1.75  f., 5.19, 9.45, Aen. 1.162  ff. (the cave of the Nymphs; see 7n.), Aen. 6.42  ff. (the antrum of the Sybil is the passage to the underworld; cf. 1n. on supplex peccator adisti); Prop. 3.3.25  ff. (the green hollow of Phoebus); Nemes. 3.26 nosque etiam Nysae viridi nutrimus in antro. For further interpretations of the figure of the antrum see 6n. on in antro.

Commentary 

 63

In these lines the Vergilian model is relevant. In his representation of the antrum the author of EP was certainly aware of the topic descriptions of the locus amoenus both in the Eclogues (a cool and shady place that offers refuge from social disorder or love’s passions) and Aeneid’s Elysium (6.637  ff.) where the souls of the Blessed lie on soft river-banks and dwell in the midst of a wood of scented bay-trees. The Vergilian pattern is to be seen in EP in the choice of an antrum as the most suitable place wherein to set the dwelling of the fratres (cf. 6n.) and to construct the image of a serene place where the fugitive Salmon could meet his friend Thesbon and have access to the community of his brethren. On the topos of the locus amoenus valid remarks are made by Curtius (1990: 183–202), Schönbeck (1962) and Rosenmeyer (1969: 179–203); more recently see Petrone (1988: 3–18), Hass (1998) and Lühken (2002: 155–60, 232–5). 6. cui fratrum ad requiem frondosae vitis in antro: “by whom, for the repose of brothers in the cave made by a leafy vine”. On the Latin dative of the agent (dat. auctoris), which is found especially with periphrastic passive forms, see Hofmann and Szantyr (1965: 96–7), who report that in Christian literature the usage is confined essentially to writers with a somewhat artificial (“gekünstelt”) style, including Ambrose and Hegesippus. fratrum: the term fratres in the monastic terminology of the beginning of the fifth century is used to name the inhabitants of little monastic communities gathered in small rural dwellings, or in former aristocratic villas, as in the case of Sulpicius Severus at Primuliacum; see Fontaine (1981: 230 n. 467). The reading of the last lines of EP enhances this explanation: Salmon calls the Abbot pater optime (98), which is another monastic term for a leader of a community (e.  g. Honoratus, founder of Lérins, is called pater by Eucher. laud. her. 42 and Faust. Rei. hom. Hon. 3.20). Christians of the first communities called themselves fratres, i.  e. members of the same religion. Afterwards, Christian preachers used this term to address all Christians gathered in assembly. Subsequently, in a monastic milieu frater became synonym of “monk” (see Mohrmann 3.296–8). Sulpicius Severus tells us that Martin spent his first years of hermitage in humble sheds with his fratres, the first documented community in Gaul, see Sulp. Sev. Mart. 10.4–5 ipse ex lignis contextam cellulam habebat, multique ex fratribus in eundem modum […]. Cassian dedicated his group of conferences to Honoratus and Eucherius fratres, who are pre-eminent among the many holy dwellers of Lérins; see Cassian. conl. 11 praef. 1.1–10 o sancti fratres Honorate et Eucheri. ad requiem: in philosophical dialogues the term expresses the rest and leisure enjoyed in rustic villas e.  g. Cic. de orat. 1.224 [the orator] philosophorum libros reservet sibi ad huiuscemodi Tusculani requiem atque otium. Nonetheless, a meaning of physical relief is possible, see e.  g. Lucr. 6.1176–7 [description of the

64 

 Commentary

plague in Athens] nec requies erat ulla mali: defessa iacebant / corpora. In pastoral poetry requies is an essential feature of the locus amoenus and of the life of shepherds; cf. e.  g. Calp. 3.14–7 has pete nunc salices et laevas flecte sub ulmos. / nam cum prata calent, illic requiescere noster / taurus amat gelidaque iacet spatiosus in umbra / et matutinas revocat palearibus herbas. In Vergil requies refers to the repose after agricultural toils (e.  g. georg. 2.513–5) and the absence of affliction: see Verg. ecl. 1.79 hic tamen hanc mecum poteras requiescere noctem, ecl. 7.10 and Aen. 4.434  f. In the locus amoenus of EP the requies is of course not that of shepherds but of the fratres (cf. Fo 1999: 126), and it is not simply a “bien-être physique” (cf Andrè 1966) but also interior immunity from vices (see at 104n. digna requies). frondosae vitis: the adjectival stem frondos- occurs 48 times in extant pagan Latin, including Enn. ann. 6.179 silvae frondosae. This adjective is generally used in reference to mountains or woods, cf. Catul. 64.96 (Idalium frondosum); Stat. Theb. 4.158 (frondosa / Oeta), silv. 4.5.55 (frondosa / Hernica); Sil. 5.484 (frondosi / roboris). frondosus occurs seven times in Vergil but the expression frondosa vitis is used only once in extant pagan Latin at Verg. ecl. 2.70 semiputata tibi frondosa vitis in ulmo est. According to Gallico (1982: 164), the presence of frondosae vitis in EP is an infelicitous textual allusion to Vergil: “l’autore dell’Epigramma non ha saputo o voluto rendere […] il dramma umano che turba l’animo di Coridone”. It is, however, possible that in this line we have an example of original reinterpretation of the Vergilian model: the neglect of rural toil by Corydon is replaced by the industrious work of the fratres (cf. 6  f.), the joy of Christian life in EP (cf. 102 solatia vitae) takes the place of the pain of love in ecl. 2. in antro: read here “in a dell” and see OLD sv. 2 “a hollow place with overarching foliage”; cf. also Fedeli (1980: 15) on Prop. 1.1.11 nam modo Partheniis amens errabat in antris: “si può dedurre che qui antrum è sinonimo di convallis”. The author of EP, by mentioning the leafy antrum and the requies within it, wishes to suggest the option of spiritual tranquillitas in a monastic milieu. The Vergilian model provides, besides some features for the description of the cave (cf. e.  g. 6 frondosae vitis, 7 sedilia and nn.), important examples of antra as places of hospitality (cf. the mention of the antrum in Verg. ecl. 1.75), or as access (see the cave of the Sybil in Aen. 6.42  ff.) to the Elysian fields where the souls of the Blessed live (see 6–7n.). Several poems of the Greek Anthology take the form of an invitation to a stranger to stop and restore himself in a grove; see e.  g. Anthol. Pal. 9.313–5, 16.227  ff. The figure of the antrum yields further suggestive allegorical implications in Christian contexts. For instance, Prudentius uses the image of the antrum as an allegory of the human soul that must be defended from the assault of the vices; see e.  g. Prud. psych. 5  ff. dissere, rex noster [i.  e. Christ], quo milite pellere culpas  / mens armata queat nostri de pectoris antro,  / exoritur quotiens turbatis sensibus intus / seditio; cf. also psych. 773 sub pectoris […] antro. Did the

Commentary 

 65

author of EP conceal in the ideal of the idyllic antrum a spiritual undertone? One may venture further and suggest the cave here is a metaphor of the human soul, blessed by God (see the mention of the requies of the brethren in line 6) because it is pure and free from the presence of vice. 7. herbida caespitibus sunt structa sedilia vivis: the adjective herbida occurs in technical prose (e.  g. Varro rust. 2.1.16 pascas […] capras in montuosis potius locis fruticibus quam in herbidis campis; Plin. nat. 12.31.56, 13.17.60, 16.36.88) and historiography (e.  g. Liv. 1.7.4, 9.2.7; Tac. hist. 5.3.14, ann. 15.5.14). For its definition cf. Isid. diff. ad loc. ‘herbidum’ dicimus locum, in quo herborum viriditas numquam cessat, herbosum autem, qui facile herbam generat, et ad tempus arescit. Bömer (8.103–4 on Ov. met. 8.282–3 […] quanto maiores herbida tauros / non habet Epirus) finds it to be rare in classical Latin. It is even rarer in Late Latin and mostly used in prose. In Christian texts it occurs in Prud. cath. 5.121–3 felices animae prata per herbida / concentu pariles suave sonantibus / hymnorum modulis dulce canunt melos, where the poet represents, through a clear allusion to Vergil’s description of the Elysian fields, the blessed life of Christians in Paradise (see Van Assendelft 1978: 179–80). Cf. also Tert. pall. 3.51; Lact. ira 13.4; Prud. psych. 863; Aug. civ. 4.8.20; Ennod. carm. 1.7.50, 2.10.3. Is the use of herbida in EP modelled on the Prudentian image in cath. 5.121–3? The expression in Prudentius indicates the idea of heavenly serenity; accordingly, the author of EP may be equating the condition of the dwellers of the domini templum (cf. 1n.) with that of Prudentius’ felices animae in Paradise. caespitibus […] sedilia vivis: caespites and sedilia are common items of the rural (pagan) landscape, cf. e.  g. Hor. carm. 1.19.13, 3.8.4; Ov. met. 2.427  f; Stat. silv. 1.4.131; Calp. 5.25–6 […] tum caespite vivo / pone focum, 6.70–2 venimus et tacito sonitum mutabimus antro / seu residere libet, dabit ecce sedilia tophus / ponere seu cubitum, melior viret herba tapetis. Schenkl (p. 503) and Gallico (1982: 165) rightly argue that in this line the author particularly had in mind the Vergilian description of the cave of the Nymphs which served as a model for his caespitibus […] sedilia vivis; cf. Verg. Aen. 1.162  ff. hinc atque hinc vastae rupes geminique minantur / in caelum scopuli, quorum sub vertice late / aequora tuta silent: tum silvis scaena coruscis / desuper horrentique atrum nemus imminet umbra / fronte sub adversa scopulis pendentibus antrum; / intus aquae dulces vivoque sedilia saxo / Nympharum domus. Readers should note that sedilia is used in the fifth foot of the hexameter both here and in Vergil’s verse. This line need not be just the shallow imitation that Gallico sees (1982: 164), for it gains in force if one compares the two contexts. Vergil describes the Libyan seacoast as a tranquil, green harbour where the tired and war-sick Trojans could soothe themselves. In EP Salmon is invited to stay with the fratres in the shade among the green natural surrounding to ease

66 

 Commentary

his mental and physical distress. The idyllic description of the antrum using Vergilian words or phrases that derive from contexts of beatitude gives strength to the hypothesis of a heavenly antrum in EP (cf. 6–7n.). 8–14 Thesbon: The barbarian invasions and the breaking of the foedus Thesbon introduces the external world and the barbarus into the peace of the antrum. The question of Thesbon about the present state of Salmon’s patria directs the interpretation of the following lines towards another allusion to the first Vergilian Eclogue (see 8–12n., 9n.). The presence of the barbarus plays a central role in this section (12n.) since his disruptive action upon the peasants (10n.) and their fields is set in opposition with the requies (6) in the antrum (cf. 8–12n.). In addition, the mention by Thesbon of the material damage suffered in the towns (13–4n.) heralds the images of the bellum intestinum (15–7n.) and allows Salmon to draw a suggestive parallel with the internal, spiritual damage (18–29n.). 8–12 These lines are embroidered with literary allusions to the political disorder and land confiscations of Verg. ecl. 1 and 9. The use of similar language such as patriae (9), colonis (10), turbato (11) and barbarus (12) underscores an adaptation of Vergilian images that an educated and alert readership would be able to pick up. The upheaval in Italy caused by land confiscations in ecl. 1.11–2 […] undique totis / usque adeo turbatur agris […] is echoed in EP 11 by using the same verb nunc primum inlaesae turbato foedere pacis (cf.  12n.). The loss of his ancestral land lamented by Meliboeus in ecl. 1.3–4 nos patriae finis, et dulcia linquimus arva / nos patriam fugimus […] is recalled in Thesbon’s question to Salmon, quis patriae status est, quid te delectat in illa? (9). Another indication of a Vergilian model is the presence both in EP and in Vergil of the mention of farmers affected by war, cf. Verg. ecl. 9.4 [it is the advena that speaks] […] haec mea sunt; veteres migrate coloni and EP 10 namque agris opibusque hominum terraeque colonis. In this group of lines the subject barbarus (12) is made more dramatic by position and marks the climax of Thesbon’s questions. Both the choice and position of barbarus recall Verg. ecl. 1.70  f. impius haec tam culta novalia iles habebit, / barbarus has segetes […]. The disruptive arrival of the barbarus miles in Vergil’s first Eclogue resonates with the destructive force of the foreign barbarian enemy in EP. 8. dic igitur, Salmon, quae rerum nunc tibi sors est: Thesbon asks Salmon how he has been affected by the arrival of the barbarus (see 12n.). The urgency of the questions is conveyed by a tricolon with polyptoton (quae […] quis […] quid). Salmon: the name Salmon might be a variant of the Biblical King Solomon, interpreted by Hier. interpr. Hebr. nom. 40.7 as umbra virtutis; cf. also Schenkl

Commentary 

 67

(p. 500 n. 1) and Smolak (1999: 10). This hypothesis is strengthened by the fact that in the textual transmission the name Solomon has been spelt, among other variants (for instance, Sarmon in the Septuagint, Salma in 1 Chron. 2:11), in Salmon; see e.  g. Ruth 4:20 Nahasson genuit Salmon, Salmon genuit Booz; 1 Par 2:11; Matth. 1:4. Solomon was reputed to be wiser than any other man; cf. 1 Reg. 4.29  ff. dedit quoque Deus sapientiam Salomoni et prudentiam multam […] et erat sapientior cunctis hominibus […] et veniebant de cunctis populis ad audiendam sapientiam Salomonis, et ab universis regibus terrae, qui audiebant sapientiam eius. Cf. also the etymology of Thesbon at 5n. 9. patriae status: a rare iunctura found only once in classical prose: Cic. Cael. 70 Quae lex ad imperium, ad maiestatem, ad statum patriae, ad salutem omnium pertinent; no evidence is found in poetry. It seems that this iunctura is limited to late Latin prose, see e.  g. Ambr. Hel. et ieieun. 17.63. Like in Verg. ecl. 1.3, in EP patria is the first intrusion of the non-pastoral world into the locus amoenus of the fratres (cf. Coleman 1977: 72 on Verg. ecl. 1.3–4). For other descriptions among early fifth-century Gallo-Roman writers of their patria pillaged by the barbarian invaders see CPD 15–8 nos autem tanta sub tempestate malorum / invalidi passim caedimur et cadimus / cumque animum patriae subiit fumantis imago / et stetis ante oculos quicquid ubique perit; and Paul. Pell. euch. 309  ff. pars ego magna fui quorum, privatus et ipse / cunctis quippe bonis propriis patriaeque superstes. 10. namque: Smolak (1989: 207) replaces namque with aeque in order to have Salmon speaking at line 10, whereas the manuscript presents namque. But Smolak may be doing damage to the text here. The use of namque after the verb dicere (cf. EP 9 dic igitur) is found in Vergil who used this particle in dialogues to introduce the reason or an explanation of a question: Aen. 3.362–3 fare age, namque omnem cursum mihi prospera dixit / religio, Aen. 6.341–4 […] quis te, Palinure, deorum / eripuit nobis medioque sub aequore mersit? / dic age. namque mihi, fallax haud ante repertus, / hoc uno responso animum delusit Apollo. I would see a Vergilian echo (within the context of cumulative Vergilian images) in the choice of namque. In this line it is Thesbon the speaker who, knowing that the barbarians have broken the foedus, explains why he wants to know the conditions in which Salmon lives. agris opibusque hominum terraeque colonis: the movement of the tricolon from the natural landscape to the resources of human beings, to end finally with the peasants of the land, highlights the widespread violent onrush of the invaders. Within the rich web of Vergilian intertextuality, both the choice and position of colonus resonates with the dispossessed farmers in Verg. ecl. 9.4 [advena] diceret: ‘haec mea [i.  e. fields] sunt; veteres migrate coloni’.

68 

 Commentary

11. nunc primum inlaesae turbato foedere < pacis >: the manuscript has nunc primum inlaesae turbato foedere vitae. It is probable that vitae has intruded from the line below but what it has outsted is a matter of conjecture. Gagny mantained vitae whilst Schenkl amended the probable dittography and suggested replacing vitae with pacis. The modern editions of Smolak and Fo follow Schenkl’s reading. I also keep pacis. For foedere pacis as an hexametric clausula see Lucr. 5.1155 qui violat factis communia foedera pacis; Lucan. 4.205, 4.365 and Sil. 2.700 audite, o gentes, neu rumpite foedera pacis. turbato foedere < pacis >: the expression turbato foedere is used in Prudentius as a metaphor for mental disorder: c. Symm. 2.627–8 disiunctasque animi turbato foedere partes / nec liquida invisit sapientia nec Deus intrat. Within the context of Vergilian allusions this line may also be resonant of Verg. ecl. 1.11–2 […] undique totis / usque adeo turbatur agris. The breaking of a foedus is used as a vivid image to represent the outbreak of civil wars, see e.  g. Lucan. 1.80 machina divulsi turbabit foedera mundi. Schenkl believes that the foedus mentioned here is a reference to the peace treaty broken by the barbarian invasions of 406–7. 12–4 Just as marble villae are of no use anymore (nec […] nunc prosunt), so are the “vain”, frivolous stone theatres of the past. Note the grammatical structure of these lines: the hyperbaton nec […] / nunc prosunt, the emphatically placed villae and rupes; prosunt is to be taken with both nouns. The author is pointing out that theatres, which were already frivolous constructions in the past, are now doubly vain since they are of no use anymore. These lines make a sharp contrast with the previous image of the antrum undamaged by the recent events (see lines 6  ff.). The author may be implying here that the secular world, with all its civilised greatness, cannot stand against the barbarians, malign enemies, unlike the rusticity of the monastic antrum. The author skilfully sketches a picture of natural rocks spoilt for the sake of architectural greatness (unlike the rock of the antrum). For conventional criticism of architectural expenditure see 14n. The ruin of towns is one of the most frequent themes in the descriptions of Gallo-Roman writers. Rutilius Namatianus, for instance, described the death of towns in the collapse of monumenta and grandia moenia; cf. e.  g. Rut. Nam. 1.45 non silvas domibus, non flumina ponte cohercet and 1.409–12. The poet of the CPD (see 13n. and 14n.), Orientius and Paulinus of Pella all lamented the death of Gallic towns fallen into barbarian hands; for further examples see the literary surveys of Courcelle (1964: 278  ff.) and Matthews (1975: 307  f.). The mention of theatres and marbled villae, as Fo points out (1999: 141), may be suggesting that the poem of EP was addressed to learned readers of aristocratic circles by using indirect allusions to their lifestyle. The author of EP

Commentary 

 69

gives a negative and satirical nuance to the image of ruined theatres and villas by pointing out the vanity of the social values of his fellow-citizens. 12. barbarus: the barbarians are the uncivilised foreigners (see Alans, Vandals and Sarmatians mentioned in lines 18  f.), who broke the peace treaty and upset the social order, just as the barbarus miles in Vergil caused the exile of Meliboeus (cf. 8–12n.). On the historical and spiritual dimension of the barbarian enemy and on the mobilisation of metaphorical interpretations of this term see 15–51n. 12. […] longa < in > saecula vitae: Thesbon reflects sarcastically that even the pompous buildings and the theatres beloved by the Romans have shown their vanity and fragility when faced with the barbarian strife. Salmon, instead, decides to leave aside the topic of ruined towns, which appear frequently in other Gallo-Roman writers (see 12–4n.), and compares material restoration with spiritual ruin (cf. 18–29n.). The manuscript has nec longe saecula vitae, where longe is likely to stand for longae; the manuscript often has the lectio -e instead of -ae. Initially Gagny interpolated ad and read longae ad saecula vitae. The conjecture of Schenkl of adding in before saecula has been followed by all modern editors of the poem. The conjectured phrase longa in saecula between the fourth and fifth foot of the hexameter is not totally peregrine as Lucan. 6.697 et rector terrae, quem longa in saecula torquet testifies. The arrangement of adjective/preposition/noun would repeat a similar pattern used in the next two lines (13 solido de marmore; 14 vana in proscaenia). Contra Gallico (1982: 168) who interprets longae in agreement with vitae and explains that this line echoes Paul. Nol. carm. 22.63 [Christian faith in God] aeternae tendens saecula vitae where the plural form saecula is pleonastic. 13. solido de marmore villae: marble is often mentioned as an ornament for luxurious houses, cf. e.  g. Cic. parad. 13 marmoreis tectis, ebore et auro fulgentibus; Hor. carm. 2.18.15  ff. In this line there is a Vergilian echo of the scene of Aeneas praying, in the antrum of the Sybil, to Phoebus and Trivia in order to obtain their favour during his trip and promising to build a solid temple as a reward, cf. Verg. Aen. 6.69  f. tum Phoebo et Triviae solido de marmore templum / instituam […]. As in Vergil, the choice of solido means something hard to demolish. But, whilst in Vergil’s passage the marble temple to the gods will last, EP hints that even what was thought firm eventually collapses under the barbarian furore. See 14n. for the presence of villas in CPD. Gallo-Roman villas were in fact wonderfully adorned with marbles, and archaeological excavations have shown that from the fifth century many of them, where they were not abandoned, were downsized;

70 

 Commentary

cf. Monturet and Rivière (1986: 193  ff.) on the marbled villa of Séviac (the biggest Gallo-Roman villa situated in Aquitaine, between Bordeaux and Toulouse). For the topical contrast of the pastoral simplicity of the past set against the opulence of private buildings of contemporary Rome see e.  g. Tib. 2.5; Prop. 4.1.1  ff.; Verg. Aen. 8.359  ff. In Roman satire, marble villas are used as a questionable example of luxury, cf. e.  g. Iuv. sat. 14.86–95. As righlty pointed out by Schuller (1999: 61), this theme is also frequently deployed by Christian authors. 14. absumptaeque omnes vana in proscaenia rupes: “[nor are] all the stones which were used up for vain theatres”. The adjective vana and the noun proscaenia have been variously translated, cf. Griffe (1956: 190): “frivoles théâtres”; Fo (1999: 155) “vani teatri”; Smolak (1999: 8) “protzige Terrassen”. The choice of vana is felicitous since the author encapsulates in it manifold levels of meaning: the theatres are at once frivolous, empty and useless (without function). This line exhibits a negative opinion of theatres that will be resumed later in the poem at line 78  ff. (see 78n.). By using proscaenia the author is concerned with theatres and not with “villa-terraces” as Roberts argues (1992: 104); see also Wernsdorf (ad loc.): ‘proscenia’, pro ipsa scena, vel theatro. Marcovich (1988: 111) gives to proscaenia the unlikely sense of “terraces” as it recurs in CPD 914 atria et exustae proscaenia diruta villae, and he supports his explanation by quoting an inscription in CIL 6.406.7–8 tabulam marmoream cum proscaenio et columnis. However, this is not the usual meaning of proscaenia which is used with the meaning of theatre (usually attested in plural form); cf. e.  g. Verg. georg. 2.380–1 non aliam ob culpam Baccho caper omnibus aris / caeditur et veteres ineunt proscaenia ludi (Servius on georg. 2.380–1 explains proscaenia as “sunt pulpita ante scenam, in quibus ludicra exercentur”), or simply as metonymy of theatre; see e.  g. Claud. Stil. 2.403 pompeiana dabunt quantos proscaenia plausus (cf. Forcellini and OLD s.  v. proscaenia). In the light of the following lines, it is worth considering the presence in EP and CPD of proscaenia to describe the ruins caused by the invasions. Both authors follow the same narrative strategy of recalling to the readers their material loss (EP 10  ff., CPD 15  ff., 901  ff.) and comparing it with the sorrowful state of their souls (EP 22  ff., CPD 915  ff. esp 916 […] vastata tui penetralia cordis). It is also important to note that both texts end with an appeal for physical revival (cf. EP 87  ff. and CPD 918  ff., and nn. 26–9, 87–95). absumptaeque omnes […] rupes: Griffe (1956: 190) loosely translates “employés à bâtir”, but better are the translations of Fo (1999: 154) “rupi consunte” and Smolak (1999: 8) “Felswände […] abgebrochen”. Did the author intend to invite his reader to read this line against Verg. Aen. 1.428–9 […] immanisque columnas  / rupibus excidunt, scaenis decora apta futuris (the harmonious construction of Carthage as seen by war-stricken Trojans)?

Commentary 

 71

On the motif of the over-exploitation of nature cf. e.  g. Ov. ars. 3.125 nec quia descrescunt effosso marmore montes. The detail of theatres built from solid rock and marbled villas left derelict after the invasions is an application of two conventional condemnations of buildings. One tradition condemns private buildings. Roman orators were particularly keen on condemning extravagance in private building, cf. e.  g. Cato, or. 36 fr. 1 dicere possum quibus villae atque aedes aedificatae atque expolitae maximo opere citro atque ebore atque pavimentis Poenicis sient. This idea became a topos in poetry, see, for instance, Lucr. 2.20  ff., Verg. georg. 2.461  ff. (eulogy of rustic simplicity); Hor. serm. 2.6.102  ff., carm. 2.18 (both Vergil and Horace are indebted to Lucretius, see Nisbet and Hubbard (1978: 288  ff.)); Iuv. sat. 1.94 (see Courtney (1980: 79)). This commonplace was still exploited in late antiquity, see Hier. epist. 46.11 ubi sunt latae porticus? Ubi aurata laquearia? Ubi domus miserorum poenis et damnatorum labore vestitae? Ubi ad instar palatii opibus privatorum extructae basilicae ut vile corpusculum hominis pretiosius inambulet?; in Is. 8.24 (see Wiesen (1964: 20  ff.)); Ambr. Nab. 1.1–2 = 2.469 Schenkl. Another tradition condemns frivolous activity in public buildings; for instance, cf. the condemnation of Pompey’s theatre in Cic. off. 2.60. The practice of exploiting nature for architectural purposes was often deprecated by moralists who praised the simple life; cf. e.  g. Plin. nat. 36.5; Sall. Catil. 13.1 nam quid ea memorem quae nisi iis qui videre nemini credibilia sunt, a privatis compluribus subvorsos montis, maria constrata esse?, 20.11; Hor. carm. 2.18.17  ff.; see also Dyck (1996: 448–49); Gibson (2003: 142  f.). On the mania for covering the countryside with sprawling villas, see Weeber (2003: 60  ff.) for further examples and discussion. The author of EP condemns both private (13 villae) and public buildings (14 proscaenia). 15–51 Salmon: Agricultural metaphor: internal and external enemy Salmon continues with the description of the barbarian aftermath (cf. 8–12n.), though he evokes the comparison between the neglect of the internal state of human souls and the material restoration of towns (18–25). The metaphor of souls as fields (see 18–29n.) widens allegorically the context of material reconstruction (see line 21) and at the same time prepares the juxtaposition (indicated earlier at 15  ff.) of the internal and external enemy. Furthermore, it sets up a contrast with the locus amoenus (6–7), for it puts the peace of the fratres in the flourishing natural surroundings against the distress (cf. 16 fatigat) of people in the patria badly hit by the invasions (see 18 vastavit, 19 incendit). As in pastoral poetry one finds a symbiosis between nature and human emotions (see e.  g. Theoc. Ep. 1.1–3, 8.45–8; Verg. ecl. 5.20  ff.), so the author of EP seems to draw the parallel of the sympathy between nature and the human soul. The locus amoenus is perhaps mirrored in the requies (cf. 6) of fratres who, in turn, care for their antrum. Equally, the state of the patria and of the towns (cf. 53 vestra urbe) echoes the conscience

72 

 Commentary

of their inhabitants. Spiritual well-being has been forgotten (see 23n.), and moral dissolution (cf. 24 ignavi) has led to slavery, both literal and metaphorical (cf. 24  f., 89  ff.). In lines 30–8 the meaning of the sentes (26) that overgrow the fields of the soul is spelt out. The sentes are, of course, the vices that, through the three examples of philedonia, philargyria and gastrimargia (cf. Smolak (1999: 15)), infest the town and darken human souls (cf. 39  ff.). In fact, another vice, deep rooted in the soul, wears down Salmon’s fellow citizens even more dangerously: secular knowledge. Pagan sapientia is the altius vulneris ulcus (44) that encourages people to discover what is in fact concealed from all human beings (cf. 50 recondita cunctis). In these lines the allegorical implication of external and internal enemies (the invaders and sin, respectively) allows Salmon to exploit the theme of psychomachy which was firmly established in Christian texts. This internalisation of the external enemy has its main model in the moral epic of Prudentius’ Psychomachia and its “psychological manoeuvre” that moved the battle from a terrestrial field to a spiritual one. Hence, the message of EP gains in effectiveness since the plea for moral rectitude, the main prerequisite for winning the battle against the vice, warns the reader that the consequences of defeat by this enemy will be no less severe than those of being overrun by the barbarians. The model of Prudentius is also visible in the texture of single lines. For instance, line 25 may be based on Prud. ham. 434 since both contexts allude to the slavery of humankind to sin or vice (see 25n.); other Prudentian reminiscences can be recognised elsewhere in the poem (cf. e.  g. 89n.). 15–7 An internal plague (interior pestis) and a deep-seated war (see nn.  15 and 16) are exhausting Salmon and his fellow citizens (see 16n.), the better the enemy is hidden, the crueller it is (see 17 saevior […] occultior hostis). The presence of interior, profundum and occultior are the three items for the metaphorical application of the images of pestis and hostis. This metaphor is used by other Christian writers, cf. e.  g. Eucher. epist. ad Val. 65–72 multus corpori curationum usus impenditur, multum huic operae in spem medelae datur. Numquid medicinam anima non meretur? Et si varia corpori auxilia studio tuendae sanitatis adhibentur, fas non est tamen animam velut exclusam iacere et quasi neglectam morbis suis intabescere atque unam a propriis remediis exsulare; immo vero plura animae conferenda sunt, si corpori tanta praestantur. For the martial image of vices depicted as internal enemies worse than the external ones (cf. 25n.), see Ambr. in Luc.10.11 sunt autem et alia bella, quae vir sustinet Christianus, diversarum quoque proelia cupiditatum studiorumque conflictus multoque graviores domestici hostes quam extranei. Ambrose, further on, says that vices are grassantes hostes captivae mentis in arce (cf. Pricoco (1990: 204  f.)). Salvian uses a similar image in gub. 6.72 adeo graviores

Commentary 

 73

in semet hostes externis hostibus erant. Significantly similar to the image of EP is the metaphor in CPD that equates the presence of vices in the human heart to the internal bellum of civil war, cf. CPD 658  ff. verum si quid obest virtuti animosque retardat, / non superi pariunt ignes, nec ab aethere manat, / sed nostris oritur de cordibus: ipsaque bellum / libertas movet et quatimur civilibus armis. 15. at vero: both particles introduce a reaction such as objection or protest, and they usually mark a change of speaker in dialogues; see Kroon (1995: 367). Three times in the Eclogues Vergil used at at the beginning of a line to introduce new speakers. The most important is ecl. 1.64  ff. at nos hinc alii sitientis ibimus Afros, / pars Scythiam, et rapidum cretae veniemus Oaxen, / et penitus toto divisos orbe Britannos. Meliboeus replies that, unlike Tityrus, he was forced to give his land to the barbarus and go to live among other (real) barbarians. Similarly, in EP Salmon mentions the barbarian tribes that have pillaged his fatherland (furthermore, nos is also present in EP at line 16). For further discussion see Fo (1999: 130). Other instances from the Eclogues are ecl. 3.66 [Menalca] at mihi sese offert ultro meus ignis Amyntas, ecl. 5.88 [Mopsus] at tu sume pedum, quod, me cum saepe rogaret; cf. also Aen. 2.535, 9.747. interior pestis: this image might have an intentional ambivalence: from the historian’s point of view pestis hints at the spreading of the plague among the civilians during prolonged sieges; cf. Hyd. chron. 15 saeviente nihilominus pestilentiae malo, 16 et ita quatuor plagis ferri, famis, pestilentiae, bestiarum. From a metaphysical point of view, Christian historians saw barbarians as pestiferous; cf. Thelamon (1981: 150  ff.). The adjective interior implies a contrast of external and internal (moral) disease and it suits the language of Christian, monastic moralists, cf. e.  g. Cassian. conl. 17.26 philargyriae peste corruptus. The metaphor of sin/vice as spiritual illness is found several times uso christiano: see e.  g. Prud. psych. 899  f. o quotiens animam vitiorum peste repulsa / sensimus incaluisse deo; Aug. civ. 1.32. bellumque profundum: Wernsdorf (ad loc.) explains the phrase as follows: “bellum profundum, occultum et in vitiis animi reconditis haerens”, and compares this line with Salv. gub. 6.72 (see 15–7n.). The adjective profundum, to be understood as “deeply rooted” in the human soul, picks up interior of the first hemistich. It is remarkable how similarly EP and CPD framed the invasions in a spiritual context wherein the distinction between external and internal enemy is blurred; cf. CPD 608–9 quae patimur: motus animi, affectusque rebelles, / et circumiectis vitia oppugnantia castris. Elsewhere in the poem, vice (the Devil), like the barbarians, profits from Roman weakness; see CPD 665–6 cumque haec intus agi prospexit callidus hostis, / de studiis vestris vires capit.

74 

 Commentary

16. olim nos densa telorum nube fatigat: Salmon’s fellow citizens have been suddenly attacked by the nomadic tribes of Alans, Sarmatians and Vandals while a hidden enemy is hurling against them a cloud of weapons. Salmon answers antithetically to Thesbon: the attack of barbarian tribes is recent (cf. 11 nunc primum), the war waged by the enemy from within against his fellow-citizens is long-standing (olim). The cloud of weapons hurled by vices is similar to the metaphorical combat in Prud. psych.128  f. inde quieta manet Patientia, fortis ad omnes / telorum nimbos et non penetrabile durans. The impressive image of a cloud of arms is already found in Hdt. 7.225 (Spartans at Thermopylae are cut off from the sunlight by the Persians’ hail of missiles) and will become a cliché of representing war, cf. e.  g. Liv. 34.49.6, 38.26.7 velut nubes levium telorum coniecta obruit aciem Gallorum. It is particularly used by the poets of the first century AD in order to elevate the dramatic tone of the description, see e.  g. Lucan. 2.261–2 […] nec pila lacertis / missa tuis caeca telorum in nube ferentur, and 4.488–90 non tamen in caeca bellorum nube cadendum est / aut cum permixtas acies sua tela tenebris / involvent, but see also Sil. 9.10–12 […] Nam sparsi ad pabula campis / vicinis raptanda Macae fudere volucrem / telorum nubem and 7.595 aversumque premit telorum nubibus hostem. densa […] nube: this line makes a suggestive contrast between the refreshing shade of the green antrum under which Thesbon and the Abbot live (cf. 6–7n.), and the metaphorical shade of the urban storm-clouds of sin under which citizens in the town suffer the double assaults of vices and barbarians (cf. 90 nebulis). The overtone of densa nube makes a picture of epic grandeur, cf. e.  g. Verg. Aen. 12.457–8 […] densi cuneis se quisque coactis / agglomerant, Lucan. 7.497–8 [Caesar] in densos agitur cuneos perque arma, per hostem / quaerit iter; Sil. 4.550–1 hinc pila, hinc Libycae certant subtexere cornus / densa nube polum. 17. saevior […] hostis: on the threat of vice as a crueller enemy than real foes cf. Iuv. sat. 6.292–3 nunc patimur longae pacis mala. Saevior armis / luxuria incubuit victumque ulciscitur orbem. The double meaning of a physical and a metaphysical enemy is picked up again towards the end of the poem (cf. e.  g. 87–95n.). The juxtaposition of the two kinds of enemies is strengthened by the presence of the adjectives saevior and occultior. The latter suggests an enemy with the skilled capacity to remain hidden. Cf. e.  g. the cunning of the devil who, disguised as a serpent in the earthly Paradise, could better hide himself and thence be more menacing against Adam and Eve; see also Hier. Pauli 5 hostis callidus, epist. 22.29 variis callidus hostis pugnat insidiis. sapientior erat coluber omnibus bestiis, quas fecerat dominus Deus super terram; and Salv. gub. 6.72 at 15–7n.

Commentary 

 75

18–29 While people strive to restore their houses and put in order their vineyards, the “broad fields” of their souls and the “palaces” of their hearts (28) are left unrepaired. These lines are modelled on the theme of cultura animi which has a long tradition in both pagan and Christian literature; cf. Plato, Phaedrus 276e; Cic. Tusc. 2.13 ut ager quamvis fertilis sine cultura fructuosus esse non potest, sic sine doctrina animus; Hor. epist. 1.14.1–5 vilice silvarum et mihi me reddentis agelli / […] / certemus, spinas animone ego fortius an tu / evellas agro, et melior sit Horatius an res; Plin. epist. 4.6.2. The topos of cultura animi in Christian teaching has its main model in the parable of the sower in Matth. (20:1–16 and parallels, see also Ioh. 15:1–2 in 26n.); based on this model, see e.  g. Ambr. fid. 4.12.168 sicut agricola vitium, pater dominicae carnis est cultor. The theme of the sympathetic relation between nature and the soul was particularly cherished by fourth- and fifth-century landowners, who, like Ausonius, used to live in their secessus in villam as animae rusticae naturaliter Christianae, cf. Aus. opusc. 3.1.11.16; Paul. Nol. epist. 39.3; Prud. c. Symm. 2.1020–2 o felix nimium sapiens et rusticus idem / qui, terras animumque colens, inpendit utrisque  / curam pervigilem, 2.1037–9 […] simul et cordis segetem disponit et agri, / ne minus interno niteant praecordia cultu / quam cum laeta suas ostentant iugera messes. The topos of cultura animi is still a familiar theme in late fifth-century homiletics, see. e.  g. Caes. Arel. serm. 6.1, 6.4 animae nostrae cura, fratres carissimi, maxime terrenae culturae similis est. sicut enim in terra […] ita et in anima nostra fieri debet; Leo M. serm. 14.1; see TLL s.  v. cultura 1322.52  ff, and Partoens (1999: 161–86) for further examples and discussion. The imagery of the soul’s fields occurs twice in EP, here and towards the end of the poem (cf. 87–95n.). In these lines the ruinous effect of the invasions upon the outside world is set in contrast with the peaceful and flourishing natural surroundings of the locus amoenus of Thesbon and the Abbot (cf. 8  ff.). Yet, with the subsequent image of fields and towns repaired, set in opposition to the fields of the soul, left neglected (cf. 26–9), the author of EP opens up the interpretation of the text to metaphorical connotations. The sympathetic correspondence between external nature and the human psyche is one of the most important images of pastoral poetry. The analogy in lines 26  ff. between souls and fields is a counterpart to the locus amoenus described in the first lines of EP. The spiritual latos campos animae picks up the real agris of line 10 (see 28n.). 18  f. vastavit Sarmata / […] Vandalus incendit […] abduxit Alanus: catalogues of barbarian tribes were a popular theme in late-antique literature, cf. e.  g. Hier. epist. 60.16; Prud. c. Symm. 2.808–9; Sidon. carm. 5.474–77; Drac. Romul. 5.34  ff; see also Roberts (1989: 138).

76 

 Commentary

18. Sarmata: nomadic tribes from Scythia (cf. Hdt. 4.117) and the Caucasian steppe (cf. Plin. nat. 6.16). Their most important tribes, the Roxolani and Iazyges, became clientes of Rome and were settled near the Danubian estuary, cf. Dauge (1981: 92), Berthelot (1930). The Iazyges, allied with the Marcomanni and Quadi, clashed often with Marcus Aurelius in Dacia during the so-called bellum Sarmaticum in A.D.174–5; see Dauge (1981: 219). Meanwhile, the Roxolani, together with the Goths, invaded Moesia (see RE s.  v. 2542  ff.). The Sarmatian threat seemingly came to its end with Constantine the Great, who dispersed them to scattered regions of the Empire. They did not have any substantial role in the fifth-century invasions; therefore, EP might be echoing the cliché of Sarmatians as among the most ferocious enemies of Rome (cf. Ambr. in Luc. 10.10 who included the invasions of Sarmatians among many portents of the world’s end). Wernsdorf (ad loc.) sees in Sarmata a synonym of Goths: nempe Gothos hic silere non potuit [i.  e. the author of EP] qui erant praecipui populorum, Galliam devastantium. Schenkl (p. 501) disagrees with Wernsdorf and sees in Sarmata a generic name of small tribes associated with the Alans before the invasions of 406–7 (see also Fo (1999: 105) who accepts the thesis of Schenkl). 19. Vandalus: tribe native to Jutland until 170 AD when they moved to Hungary (see Musset 1965: 102–08). During the fifth century, with the Suevi and the Alans, they invaded Gaul in 406 (cf. Oros. hist. 7.40.3 gentes Alanorum […] Sueborum Vandalorum multaeque cum his aliae Francos proterunt, Rhenum transeunt) and Spain afterwards (409). The Vandals were well-known for their fierceness, see Zos. 6.3 καὶ πολὺν ἐργασάμενοι φόνον ἐπίφοβοι; Chron Gall. a. 452, c. 63 Galliarum partem Vandali atque Alani vastavere; CPD 33–4 caede decenni / Vandalicis gladiis sternimur et Geticis. Alanus: gentes from Caucasus, formerly a clan of the Sarmatians who, urged by the Huns, took part in the fifth-century invasions (see e.  g. Jord. Get. 24; RE s.  v. 1282  ff.; Musset 1965: 78–9). Compare EP 19 velox […] Alanus with Lucan. 3.94 Sarmata velox. 20. ambiguis spebus licet et conatibus aegris: despite the uncertain future and the difficult task, people immediately embark on repairing the damage caused by the enemy (cf.  21n.). The chiastic composition in this near “golden line” of ambiguis (a) spebus (b), conatibus (b) aegris (a), heightens the inanity of the material reconstruction: the forceful ambiguis and aegris enclose in a negative frame any hope (spebus) and attempt at recovery (conatibus). ambiguis is used with the meaning of “doubtful” (cf. TLL s.  v. 1842.18  ff.; OLD s.  v. 1b), for Salmon’s fellow citizens are uncertain whether and when the barbarians will attack them again. The adjective aegris conveys the idea that the material restoration has been carried out

Commentary 

 77

with great difficulty (cf. OLD s.  v. 5a), and it prepares for the image of moral sickness mentioned in the next lines. Sickness and moral deterioration are a familiar theme in Christians texts, cf. e.  g. Aug. serm. 87.10–1 aegrotat humanum genus non morbis corporis sed peccatis, and Prud. perist. 11.177–78 his corruptelis animique et corporis aeger / oravi quotiens stratus, opem merui. Regarding the iuncturae of ambiguis spebus and conatibus aegris see Verg. Aen. 8.580 and 12.910  f. 21. nitimur in quandam speciem reparare priorum: the invasions ravaged the West throughout the winter of 406–7 (Zos. 6.3.1; Hyd. chron. 15  ff.) with swift attacks (cf.  19 velox […] Alanus) and devastating sieges. Whenever there were intervals between the raids, the citizens could start their reconstruction. On the social and economic recovery of fifth-century villas in Gaul from the invasions see Percival (1992: 156–164); on the phenomenon of social reorganisation in Rome and the Roman Empire see now Salzman (2021). Schuller (1999: 70) righly points out that the phrase in speciem reparare seems to be confined to late Latin, see e.  g. Paul. Nol. carm. 20.46–9. A similar simile is found in Ambr. in Luc. 7.168 pollicetur dura cordis eorum apostolicis ligonibus esse fodienda, ut longo incultu situm mentis obductum sermo bis acutus invertat. 23. neclegimus longoque situ squalescere mentes: this line begins to set up the theme of the “neglect of the mind” by using terms that can be found in agricultural contexts like, for instance, the verb squalescere (variation of squalere) which means fields, being untilled, are ragged and full of weeds; cf. Verg. georg. 1.507 […] squalent abductis arva colonis. The transmitted text has mentis. Schenkl (p. 486) noted that in the manuscript the accusatives plural in –es are written in –is, and corrected to –es all nominatives and accusatives plural ending in –is. Fo (1999: 154) accepts Schenkl’s text; contra Smolak (1999: 6) who keeps mentis as genitive with longoque situ. I accept mentes squalescere as an accusative with infinitive since longoque situ (“through long decay”), being ablative of cause, explains why the human mind has become barren. For situs with the meaning of “dullness” and inactivity of mental faculties, see OLD s.  v. situs3 1b. 24. ignavi patimur subiectaque colla catenis: Gallico (1982: 165) and Courcelle (1976: 45) see in this line a close reference to Aeneas’ pietas in Verg. Aen. 2.721  ff. haec fatus latos umeros subiectaque colla  / veste super fulvique insternor pelle leonis / succedoque oneri […]. Aeneas, carrying his father on his shoulders, flees Troy as it is seized by the Greeks. Here an intentional Vergilian echo appears questionable since subiecta colla is a common iunctura (see TLL s.  v. collum 1662.67  ff). Christian authors, for their part, used this image to convey the idea of a metaphorical subjection to vice, see Caes. Arel. epist. de hum. 7 si […] superbiae infeli-

78 

 Commentary

cia colla submittimus; Faust. Rei. serm. 12.6 qui […] avaritiae vel luxuriae infelicia colla subdiderit. Moreover, colla catenis at the end of a hexametric lines is found several times in Latin poetry; see e.  g. Prop. 2.1.33; Ov. ars. 1.215 ibunt ante duces onerati colla catenis; Stat. 1.944; Sil. 4.359–60 nomen et iniectus Spartanis colla catenis / Regulus inflabant veteri praecordia fama. The neck burdened under a load of chains is one of the favourite images of defeat used by pagan writers to describe Roman triumphs. A deliberate innovation of this image recurs among Christian writers who described the soul metaphorically bound and prey of sin (as is imagined in EP); cf. TLL s.  v. catena II.36  ff. 24  f. colla […] / dedimus: for this iunctura in Christian texts see e.  g. Paul. Nol. carm. 15.201 […] quam si ferro colla dedisset. 25. manicis […] ligamur: same image found in Lucan. 3.565 ast alias manicaeque ligant teretesque catenae. This passage enhances the contiguity of the themes of the historical hostis and the metaphysical enemy of line 17 (see 17n.). manicae denote handcuffs, see OLD s.  v. 1a. Compare the detail of the allegorical handcuffs of sin with Prud. ham. 434–36 [the greedy man] ducitur innexus manicis et mille catenis / ante triumphales currus [of the Devil] post terga revinctus / nec se barbaricis addictum sentit habenis. Strikingly similar to EP are Prudentius’ presentation of humans excessively ambitious and forgetful of their Christian duties, and the metaphorical vignette of the losers subdued to the triumphal chariot of the victorious enemy (who in this case is the Devil/vice). Roberts (1992: 105) rightly points out that in EP 25 and CPD 942 [excutiamus] peccati servile iugum, ruptisque catenis there is the same “language of mental imprisonment”. 26–9 This is a further elaboration of the Stimmunglandschaft. These lines repeat the previous antithesis between the material restoration and the derelict state of souls (cf. lines 20–25), and add the metaphor of spiritual husbandry (cultura animi) and architecture. A similar example of inverted priorities is found in CPD 913–18 at tu qui squalidos agros desertaque defles / atria et exustae proscenia diruta villae, / nonne magis propriis posses lacrimas dare damnis,  / si potius vastata tui penetralia cordis / inspiceres multaque obtectum sorde decorem / grassantesque hostes captivae mentis in arce? On the similarities between these two texts see also Cutino (2011: 362). The outward appearance of a house contrasts with the ethical way of life of its inhabitants, see e.  g. Iuv. sat. 14.64  ff. ergo miser trepidas, ne stercore foeda canino / atria displiceant oculis venientis amici, / ne perfusa luto sit porticus, […] / illud non agitas, ut sanctam filius omni / aspiciat sine labe domum vitioque carentem?

Commentary 

 79

26. at prius est vitem purgare, abscidere sentes: “however, our first concern is to cleanse the vine, to cut away the brambles”. The manuscript has ac which is kept by Schenkl; Gagny proposed reading et, Fo maintains ac, while Smolak (1999) prints at. Both at and ac are secure elsewhere in the poem (at in 15, 26, 42; ac 99). The most likely emendation is that of Smolak because the adversative at, in view of the antithetical comparison between the neglected spiritual fields of the soul and the restored material fields, marks well the idea of contrast. On the harmony of nature and soul see Theoc. 8.41–8. The simile of husbandry will be picked up in a metaphorical context in the second speech of Salmon (see 87–95n.). The imagery of this line recalls the parable of Ioh. 15:1–2 in which Christ is compared to a vine and God to the farmer: Ego sum vitis vera, et pater meus agricola est; see also 18–29n. abscidere sentes: for the interpretation of brambles as sin see Ambr. paen. 2.1.5 pudor es ut unusquisque crimina sua prodat, sed ille pudor agrum suum arat, spinas tollit perpetuas, sentes amputate and Prud. c. Symm. 2.1040 extirpamus enim sentos de pectore vepres. 28  f. quam latos campos animae et praetoria cordis / excolere: for the metaphor of the soul as a field see 18–29n. In praetoria cordis there is another coalescence of the physical and metaphysical with a word taken from the physical realm denoting a metaphorical place. In EP, the palace of the heart is the abode of the soul and storehouse of virtues. The manuscript’s reading is praecordia cordis, which involves perhaps ugly repetition. The edition of Gagny keeps praecordia. Wernsdorf, despite printing praecordia, makes the observation that the text might be corrupted and suggests, without any explanation, the emendation penetralia based on the reading of CPD 916 (see 26–9n.). Finally, Schenkl has brought into his edition the emendation praetoria. All modern editions have accepted Schenkl’s correction. I also believe praetoria is a valid emendation and its suitability is reinforced by Aug. conf. 10.8.12 et venio in campos et lata praetoria memoriae. Besides the metaphorical use of praetoria, the presence of two other words used in EP, campos and lata, is striking. It is more than likely that the author of EP was familiar with this very distinctive metaphor of Augustine’s Confessions (see O’Donnell 1992: 3.173). According to Lagarrigue (1983: 138 n.3) this is an example of very close imitation of a model, “l’Epigramma Paulini a repris l’expression presque mot pour mot […] pour mettre en parallèle la ruine de l’âme et celle de la villa romaine”. praetoria, which were lofty private palaces (cf. TLL s.  v. 7.1073  f.), picks up the similitude at villas / souls (cf. 18–29n.) and makes closer the contrast between villas restored and souls forgotten (on the repetition of this theme see also 87–95n.). Compare this image with a similar architectural metaphor in CPD 926 […] populati cordis in

80 

 Commentary

aula and note the return of this kind of metaphor in line 78. Both in EP and CPD the examples of architectural metaphors might come from the variatio of ‘corporeal metaphors’, e.  g. “the eyes of the soul” (see Curtius 1990: 136). Schuller (1999: 78) tentatively suggests that the poet of EP might be alluding to Prud. c. Symm. 2.1035–70 and esp. 1035–7 his Deus agricolam confirmat legibus; ille / ius caeleste patris non summa intellegit aure, / sed simul et cordis segetem disponit et agri. The verb excolere (“to cultivate”) used figuratively is well attested since Cic. Arch. 12 nisi animos nostros doctrina excolamus; see also TLL s.  v. 1277.74  ff. 29. captae conlapsum mentis honorem: this line harks back to the previous metaphor of external restoration set against internal neglectfulness (cf.  26–9). Wernsdorf (ad loc.) is certainly right to point out that in this verse the image of the neglected state of the human soul is strengthened by the parallels with the ruins caused by the invasions (cf. 27). The fallen honour of the mind is in a symbiotic relation with the ruined palaces and theatres of lines 13–14. Since in Christian writers honor is used with the meaning of moral dignity (see Blaise, 393), this line takes on the role of preparing the description of mala that have caused the fall of human honor (see 30–8n.). The military image of captae mentis is to be paralleled with libera mens of line 90 where the agricultural metaphor of campos animae is picked up (see 87–95n.). mentis honorem is repeated again in line 71 mentis honor (see 71  ff.n.). 30–8 Vices deeply rooted in urban lifestyle (33–8) are epitomised through the sins of gluttony (33–4n.), lasciviousness (35), anger (36) and vainglory (37–8), each of which are forced into connection with Roman characters: Pedius, †Lampadius†, Pollio, Albus. These names could have been inspired by characters found in Roman satire or comedy and therefore meant to reinforce the poet’s satirical stance. The “Katalog der Hauptlaster” (Smolak 1999: 15) recalls a long tradition of catalogues of vitia found in both the Bible (cf. e.  g. Marc. 7:20–3, Matth. 15:17–20, Rom. 12:9–21) and Christian (monastic) moralists (cf. e.  g. the extensive discussion in Cassian. inst. 7). It is also a familiar topic of classical literature, especially in satire; cf. e.  g. Hor. sat. 1.2.25  ff., 1.4.25–8, epist. 1.2.44–63 (Horace singles out the four vices of avaritia, ambitio, argenti splendor and insania amoris). In similar thematic contexts satirists from Lucilius to Juvenal contrasted the frugalitas, simplicitas and industria of the idealized farmers of early Rome with the luxuria, avaritia and ambitio of modern urban life (cf. Braund 1989: 23–47, 192–215). Furthermore, according to ancient historians, immorality and corruption are by-products of a vast Empire and wealth; see e.  g. Sall. Catil. 2.5, and hist. 1.11. For topical attacks on the pervasiveness of a corrupt lifestyle Christian apologists, in particular, were

Commentary 

 81

keen to contrast disastrous events with the unchanged habits of Christians and Romans in general. For instance, compare EP with Hier. epist. 60.16 Romanus orbis ruit et tamen cervix nostra erecta non flectitur; 123.14 [the world collapses about us and yet] solliciti sumus, quid manducemus aut quid bibamus; 128.5 orbis terrarum ruit et in nobis peccata non corruunt. […] Vivimus quasi altera die morituri et aedificamus quasi semper in hoc victuri saeculo; Ambr. in Luc. 10.10 Chuni in Halanos, Halani in Gothos, Gothi in Taifalos et Sarmatas insurrexerunt. […] nunc avaritia stimulat, nunc accendit libido, nunc metus terret, nunc iracundia exagitat, nunc ambitio movet, nunc terrere tentant spiritalia nequitiae, quae sunt in caelestibus. Similarly, an anonymous fourth-century panegyrist lamented that although the whole of Gaul was dramatically ravaged by barbarians, its inhabitants continued the same shameful behaviour; see paneg. 11.4.1–3 sed emendatio morum iudiciorumque correctio et difficile luctamen et periculi plenum negotium fuit. Perhaps the closest example to EP is Salv. gub. 6.66–7 numquid populi civitatum, qui impudici rebus prosperis fuerant, asperis casti esse coeperunt? Numquid ebrietas, quae in tranquillitate et abundantia creverat, hostili saltem depopulatione cessavit? Vastata est Italia tot iam cladibus: ergo Italorum vitia destiterunt? Obsessa est urbs Roma et expugnata: ergo desierunt blasphemi ac furiosi esse Romani? Inundarunt Gallias gentes barbarae: ergo, quantum ad mores perditos spectat, non eadem sunt Gallorum crimina quae fuerunt? A similar rebuke is also found in Aug. civ. 1.33 who in Africa, after the Vandalic attack, asserted that [vos] nec contriti ab hoste luxuriam repressistis: perdidistis utilitatem calamitatis, et miserrimi facti estis, et pessimi permansistis. 30–1. nil gladius, nil dira fames, nil denique morbi  / egerunt: after the mention of the ruinous effects that barbarian attacks have had on the country (cf. 18–19, 26–27), Salmon laments that the disasters caused by war (gladius), starvation (fames) and disease (morbi) did not have any significant impact on the behaviour of his fellow citizens (cf. 32  ff.). The author of EP uses gladius, fames and morbi in their literal sense, although it is not uncommon, especially among late-antique historians and commentators, to find these words coloured with allegorical implications. For instance, the disasters and destruction brought by the barbarians were interpreted by some fifth-century authors (see e.  g. Hyd. chron. 16.46–8; Olymp. Hist. fr. 30; Hier. epist. 123.16–7; cf. also Burgess in Mathisen and Sivan (eds.) 1996: 321–32) as the fulfilment of biblical prophecies of Ezech. 5:12 (in the context of the wrath of God against Jerusalem that heralds the end of the world) tertia pars tui peste morietur, et fame consumetur in medio tui, et tertia pars tui in gladio cadet in circuitu tuo, 6:11 [Israelites] gladio, fame et peste ruituri sunt. Later commentators patterned their interpretation of Ezech. 5:12 on the fifth-century allegorical reading of this passage; cf. e.  g. Gregory the Great who compared

82 

 Commentary

at length the prophecies of Ezekiel with the effects of the siege of Rome by Agilulf’s Lombards (hom. in Ezech. 2.6.22). dira fames: Courcelle (1984: 1.250) suggests that the author of EP had in mind the passage of Verg. Aen. 3.255  ff. sed non ante datam cingetis moenibus urbem, / quam vos dira fames nostraeque iniuria caedis / ambesas subigat malis absumere mensas, where the harpy Celaeno predicts to the Trojans they will suffer starvation in Italy. By contrast, Gallico (1982: 165) believes that this iunctura was too frequently used in Latin poetry to argue a close imitation of Vergil. It has emerged from PHI and BTL–1 searches that the assumption of Gallico is wrong, since in classical authors the collocation dira fames appears to be attested only in Vergil and Ov. met. 8.845 […] sed inattenuata manebat / tum quoque dira fames […] and met. 11.371 diramque famem) which is itself a clear reminiscence of the Vergilian line; see Bömer 8.263. The presence of dira fames in EP is particularly appropriate. Picking up the statement of Celaeno in this line the poet of EP transforms the terrible hunger, consequence of the Trojan war, into the most terrible disaster caused by the barbarian invasions. In late antiquity this image recurs more frequently, but in each instance the model is Vergil; cf. e.  g. Paul. Nol. carm. 31.461–62 where dira fames is the ascetic task of fasting, hic cruciet me dira fames, hic turpis egestas / contractum pannis tristibus obsideat; Rufinus’ translation of Euseb. Caes. hist. 2.8.1, 9.8.4 fames dira absque ulla miseratione vastabat; the author of the CPD 356  f cum vero Aegyptum Chananaeque regna teneret / dira fames; Oros. hist. 7.3.6. In the late fifth century dira fames becomes a literary cliché, cf. e.  g. Sedul. carm. 2.36.9 who deployed this image in order to elevate the tone of the phrase with a learned echo, dira fames, quae nos rostro conpungit acuto. 33–4. “He who used to prolong his midday meal into the night, now also by drinking / draws out the daylight with lamps blurring day and night”. There are several warnings against gluttony in the Bible, see for instance Is. 22:13 comedamus et bibamus cras enim moriemur; Luc. 21:34 attendite autem vobis, ne forte graventur corda vestra in crapula, et ebrietate (see also Matth. 24:49, Luc. 17:27). Gluttony is often a cliché used by moralists to lampoon the Hellenizing effect of the transformation of the proverbially frugal meals of republican Rome into elaborate convivia, cf. e.  g. Lucil. 4.167, 8.308–18, 9.327–9; Hor. sat. 2.2.77–81 […] quin corpus onustum / hesternis vitiis animum quoque praegravat una / atque adfigit humo divinae particulam aurae (gluttony is a vice that, more than the body, spoils the state of mind); Liv. 39.6.8–9; Iuv. sat. 4.139–43 […] nulli maior fuit usus edendi / tempestate mea; Circeis nata forent an  / Lucrinum ad saxum Rutupinove edita fundo  / ostrea callebat primo deprendere morsu  / et semel aspecti litus dicebat echini (the gluttony of Montanus epitomised the corrupt Roman society of the emperor Domitian).

Commentary 

 83

34. continuat soles nullo discrimine lychnis: people do not distinguish anymore (cf. nullo discrimine) day from night; banquets are their exclusive occupation, therefore the daylight of the sun blends with the artificial light of banqueting lamps. The image of blending day and night in continuous meals is found in e.  g. Prud. ham. 320–4 […] numquid madido sapor inditus ori  / vivit ob hanc causam, medicata ut fercula pigram / ingluviem vegetamque gulam ganeonis inescent, / per varios gustos instructa ut prandia ducat / in noctem lassetque gravem sua crapula ventrem and Palla’s comment (1981: 204): “il gusto si corrompe in pranzi doviziosi e interminabili”. lychnis: pace Schuller (1999: 93), the lychni (“lamps”) were not mere common lamps but lofty chandeliers that adorned rooms during banquets. The first occurrence in Latin satire is in Lucil. fr. 15–6M porro clinopodas lychnosque ut diximus semnos / ante pedes lecti atque lucernas. Cicero, adopting a scathing and moralistic attitude, describes a lounge, scene of a sumptuous banquet, lit by lychni: Cael. 67.15 lux denique longe alia est solis, alia lychnorum. Vergil, although perhaps without the same critical overtone, adorned with lamps the hall of Dido’s palace in Aen. 1.726 […] dependent lychni laquearibus aureis. In Christian Latin the association of lychni with banquets gradually faded, for instance Paulinus of Nola used them to adorn the altars of Felix, cf. Paul. Nol. carm. 14.98 clara coronantur densis altaria lychnis. In EP the use of lychni is clearly satirical and moralising. soles: by means of lamps people make days follow upon days without interruption of the night. I take soles as an accusative of object depending on continuat rather than an accusative of duration. nullo discrimine: a frequent iunctura, cf. e.  g. Lucr. 5.1314 [leones] turbabant saevi nullo discrimine turmas; Verg. Aen. 1.574 Tros Tyriusque mihi nullo discrimine agetur; Lucan. 3.119–20 […] Pereunt discrimine nullo / amissae leges; Prud. ham. 72–3 triplex ille tamen nullo discrimine trina / subnixus ratione viget […]; CPD 39 nec querar extinctam nullo discrimine plebem. 35. Pedius: for the generic mention of a Pedius (a common aristocratic Roman name, cf. RE s.  v. 38  ff.), cf. e.  g. the exempla of Pers. 1.85 fur es – ait Pedio – Pedius quid? and Hor. sat. 1.10.28–9 cum Pedius causas exsudet Poblicola atque / Corvinus (in this case Pedius is a lawyer in the trial of Petrillus, who is accused of theft). moechus erat: moechus (“adulterer”) is a derogatory word, cf. TLL s.  v. 1324  f. In classical prose it is used very rarely, once by Cicero, but more often from Fronto onwards and by Christian writers. It is more commonly found in comedy (10 times in Plautus and 4 times in Terence) and in poetry (6 times in Catullus, 5 times in Horace, and once in Propertius). The satirists were particularly fond of it since it is attested 12 times in Juvenal and 29 times in Martial. For the same line position see Mart. 1.74 Moechus erat: poteras tamen hoc tu, Paula, negare. A warning against

84 

 Commentary

adultery is also frequently found in the Bible, see e.  g. Ex. 20:14 and Matth. 5:28 quia omnis qui viderit mulierem ad concupiscendum eam iam moechatus es team in corde suo. 35–6. (…) durat in isdem  / †Lampadius† furiis; livebat Pollio: livet: the reading, surely corrupt, of the manuscript is: lepedum furuis linebat palio linet. Schenkl’s edition of these lines is [Pedius] […] durat in isdem / leprae dum furvis; livebat Polio: livet (“while he persists in the same darkness of lasciviousness”). The emendations livebat and livet are likely to be correct. Although Brandes and Petschenig suggested to Schenkl to read furiis instead of furvis, he maintained furvis and explained that, although rare, this adjective is found in a similar context in Prud. cath. 1.74 iam culpa furva obdormiat. Schenkl also corrected Lepedum of the manuscript in leprae dum interpreting lepra metaphorically for “lasciviousness”, as also found e.  g. in Cassian. inst. 7.26. Griffe (1956: 190 n.12) considers the correction of Schenkl “risqué” and accepts the suggestion of Petschenig and Brandes of in isdem / […] furiis “fort acceptable”. Gallico (1982: 169) points out that this emendation, although paleographically valid, causes a redundancy of meaning on the ground that the vice of lasciviousness has already been presented in the previous line. Smolak’s edition has [Pedius] […] durat in isdem / ut libitum furiis (“[Pedius] persists at his whim in the same madness of lust”). According to Smolak (1989: 208–10) Schenkl’s leprae dum furvis is unlikely, since the poem has no other disease terms used metaphorically. Furthermore, lepra is used to mean “vice” only in Biblical exegesis (cf. TLL s.  v. 1177.75  ff.), terminology that the poet here seeks to avoid; furva is nowhere else used as a noun, by contrast furia is widely used. Therefore he proposes to read leprae dum a corruption of libitum and suggests metri causa to read ut libitum. Griffe (1956: 190) proposes to read a proper name in the lepedum of the manuscript and suggests reading “Limpidius”. Fo (1999: 150–1) agrees with Griffe that another character should represent the vice of furia, but he prefers to write Lepedum within the cruces of a locus desperandus and translates “dura nelle identiche †Lepedum† furie”. I agree that someone’s name is a valid correction since the author personifies, in a very concise style, proper names with vices. However, since the manuscript’s Lepedum is unmetrical, I agree with Green (1984: 77) and suggest reading Lampadius, a name which appears in comedy (Plautus’ Cistellaria) and satire (Varro, Men. 8.2). livebat Pollio: livet: I print Pollio, instead of Schenkl’s Polio, because Polio with one “l” appears not to be attested. It is possible that one “l” of the name lapsed during the transmission of the text as it is a common paleographical error to read a second “l” as part of “i”. Pollio is a very common name (see RE s.  v. 1413  ff.). In Roman satire the name Pollio is found twice in Hor. sat. 1.10 (the

Commentary 

 85

famous politician and man of letters Asinius Pollio), and more frequently in Mart. 3.20.18, 4.61.9 (an actor) and Iuv. sat. 6.387, 7.176, 9.7, 11.43. 37. Albus: if the reading of the manuscript is correct this is an unusual name since a Postumius Albus is only found in Livy (see Liv. 3.4.1) and resurfaces again only later on in the biography of Pescennius Niger in Hist. Aug. 8.1.6. One might suggest that the author of EP opted for the name Albus instead of the more common Albius, a typical name of the Roman upper-class (see RE s.  v. 1338), which could not be metrically fitted into this line as it stands. Perhaps, there may be here a direct reference in EP to Horace for in EP Albus is affected by the same vice as Horace’s Albius. Horace depicted an Albius attracted by costly craftsmanship (cf. Hor. sat. 1.4.28 stupet Albius aere) among a multitude of misers and social climbers. The fact that in EP too Albus is driven by ambition and vainglory would make the parallel with Horace plausible (see 38n.). Alternatively, it may be that Albus was not intended as a name but as an adjective (albus), which if linked to captator would mean candidatus, and, therefore, would refer to Pollio as the ambitious seeker of honours; cf. Forcellini s.  v. albus II.1. captator: in satirical texts captatores, the professional legacy-hunters, are despised for being so obsessed with the pursuit of wealth and power that they disregard ordinary decent behaviour, cf. e.  g. Hor. sat. 2.5.57 captatorque dabit risus Nasica Corano; Iuv. sat. 5.98, 6.40, 10.202, 12.114, but see also Petron. 125.3, 141.1. 38. orbis in excidio minus ambitione laborat?: the manuscript has excidionius, Schenkl corrects excidio minus. Since the reading of the manuscript is here evidently corrupt, the textual emendation of Schenkl is correct and fits the general context of the previous lines. Gallico (1982: 169–70) points out that the rhetorical sentence breaks up the rhythm of the line and, therefore, suggests reading nimis instead of minus. However, the emendation seems senseless since the author recurs often to rhetorical questions in the satirical section (cf. e.  g. 69, 76, 82). In addition, a rhetorical question performs a valuable function in satirical dialogues; see for instance how a rhetorical question marks well the end of the catalogue of vitia in EP 30–8. orbis in excidio: for a similar phrase in poetry see Prud. ham. 915  ff. procinctum videt angelicum iam iamque cremandi / orbis in excidium tristes […]. However, this iunctura is found more frequently in prose, see Ambr. Abr. 1.6.56 totius orbis fuisse illud excidium. ambitione laborat: is based on Hor. sat. 1.4.25–6 […] quemvis media elige turba / aut ob avaritiam aut misera ambitione laborat. One notes that in both poems the contexts are similar since the authors attack people who, being attracted by

86 

 Commentary

material wealth, disregard any spiritual (care of one’s soul in EP) or intellectual (love of poetry in Horace) activity. 39–41 The author of EP deplores the distortion of values through vice’s blindness, as being the result of past laxity and opulence. The content of these lines is largely traditional, since the reproach of the perversion of language was a famous theme in antiquity. For instance, this topos occurs as a stock theme of love’s blindness: the lovers, blinded by passion, perceive feminine defects as virtue, cf. e.  g. Pl. R. 474d; Lucr. 4.1160–70; Hor. sat. 1.3.44–56 esp. 55  f. at nos virtutes ipsas invertimus atque / sincerum furimus vas incrustare; Ov. ars 2.657 nominibus mollire licet mala; rem. 323  ff. The distortion of values, used in texts that describe the effects of war and its repercussions on social life, is ultimately based on the model of Thuc. 3.82.4–5 “The words normally used to evaluate deeds were changed to fit what was thought justified. Irrational daring came to be regarded as loyal courage, and prudent hesitation a respectable cover for cowardice; restraint was deemed a pretext for lack of courage, and intelligence for everything meant not being active for anything” (trans. Rhodes; see Loraux (1986)). On the use of this theme, see Pl. R. 560d-e (a relaxation of customs after a period of war has caused a distortion of language and a different evaluation of the actions undertaken); Isoc. 20; Sall. Catil. 52.11 iam pridem equidem nos vera vocabula rerum amisimus; quia bona aliena largiri liberalitas, malarum rerum audacia fortitudo vocatur, eo res publica in extremo sita est; Iuv. sat. 14.109  ff. esp. 111 […] frugi laudetur avarus [avaritia is the main cause of the perversion of values]; Tac. hist. 1.37 nam quae alii scelera, hic remedia vocat, dum falsis nominibus severitatem pro saevitia, parsimoniam pro avaritia, supplicia et contumelias vestras disciplinam appellat. Making profit and accumulating wealth is a satirical topos often related to the theme of avaritia, see e.  g. Hor. epist. 1.1.52–5 (a scolding comment on moral corruption in Rome) vilius argentum est auro, virtutibus aurum. / ‘O cives, cives, quaerenda pecunia primum est, / virtus post nummos!’. Haec Ianus summus ab imo prodocet […]. 39  f. “Nothing is sacred for us except gain, and is honourable what has been profitable”. sanctum in line 39 recalls a colloquial expression that can be found in e.  g. Cic. Verr. 1.4 nihil esse tam sanctum quod non violari; S. Rosc. 70; Iuv. sat. 3.109 praeterea sanctum nihil est neque ab inguine tutum; cf. Link (1910: 49  ff). The antithesis of honestum and utile (40) derives from the stock material of rhetorical examples; cf. e.  g. Cic. off. 3.7–10. Smolak (1999: 16) suggests that the author might have known Cicero’s de officiis, which was one of the handbooks of late antique schools; see Curtius (1990: 522  ff.), Dyck (1996: 40  ff.). It is likely that the author of EP knew Cicero’s distinction of honestum (moral good) and utile (the

Commentary 

 87

expedient) and has used it for his own rhetorical purposes; see esp. Cic. off. 2.10 [philosophers] quicquid enim iustum sit, id etiam utile esse consent, itemque quod honestum, idem iustum, ex quo efficitur, ut, quicquid honestum sit, idem sit utile. 40–1. […] vitiisque vocabula recti / indimus et parci cognomen sumit avarus: “[…] we give to vice the name of virtue / and the miser takes for himself the title of ‘frugal’”. The condemnation of avarice is a satirical topos found in both pagan and Christian writers, see e.  g. Hor. sat. 2.3.82 danda est ellebori multo pars maxima avaris; Lact. inst. 6.4.19–21 and Ambr. Nab. 2.4 inflammatur lucro avaritia, non restinguitur. For the topos of reversed mores, cf. e.  g. Arist. Rh. 1.9.1367a; Hor. epist. 2.2.194 [scire volam] quantum discordet parcus avaro; Iuv. sat. 14.109  ff. fallit enim vitium specie virtutis et umbra, / […] / nec dubie tamquam frugi laudetur avarus; Quint. 3.7.25 idem [scil. Aristotle] praecipit illud quoque […] utendum proxima derivatione verborum, ut pro temerario fortem, pro prodigo liberalem, pro avaro parcum vocemus. Very close to EP is the rebuke found in Orient. comm. 2.17–9 omnia dum volumus, facimus quaecumque probari / utque suis nullus non faveat vitiis, / lenito titulo parcum se dicit avarus. In Prudentius’ Psychomachy the vice Avaritia disguises herself as the virtue Frugality, see psych. 553–4 fit virtus specie vultuque et veste severa / quam memorant Frugi. For the phrase vocabula recti see Rhet. Her. 3.7. 42–46 These lines are grouped around two images: the deceptive absence of a clear (42 aperto) sin diverts people from the presence of the hidden (44 occulti) metaphorical wound caused by vice; and the emphatic description of people being driven and deceived (see 43 ducti, 45 trahit, 46 decipit) by the error of secular knowledge (46). 42. confessis vitiis et crimine aperto: Salmon is referring to people who are not overtly sinful. For confessus used with the meaning of “evident” see TLL s.  v. 14.232.44  ff. manifestus, de eo quo constat, dubium non est. crimine aperto is a rare iunctura found in extant Latin only once in Nepos, vit. Paus. 3.7 sed quod harum rerum nullum erat apertum crimen. It is more common in late Latin in plural form such as in Greg. M. moral. 297.15 ut enim de apertioribus criminibus taceam, ecce alius fratri in corde suo tacitus invidet. 43. virtutis imagine ducti: people are misled by a wrong notion of virtue (cf. 46n.). The idea of deceptive appearance belongs to rhetorical formulations, cf. e.  g. Iuv. sat. 14.109 fallit enim vitium specie virtutis et umbra (the context is the distortion of language caused by avaritia, see 39–41n.); Sen. epist. 45.7 vitia nobis

88 

 Commentary

sub virtutum nomine obrepunt, 120.8 mala interdum speciem honesti obtulere et optimum ex contrario enituit. The phrase virtutis imago is rather common, see e.  g. Ov. ex Pont. 2.8.31; Stat. Theb. 3.419; Sil. 1.185 and 3.45. For imago in a similar negative context see Greg. M. moral. 5.21.42 ne […] antiquus hostis sub aliqua imagine virtutis occidat. Although the contexts are different, the same iunctura of virtutis imagine followed by the verb ducere in CPD 823 et qui [i.e the just Christians] conversos virtutis imagine ducant may suggest that the authors of EP and CPD are drawing this phrase from the same stock of rhetorical examples. 44. altius […] ulcus: this verse recalls line 17, the enemy is more savage as more hidden (see 17n.), and it harks back to the metaphorical depth of bellum profundum against vice. The author applies to vice the conventional image of a wound more dangerous because of being hidden, cf. e.  g. Lucr. 4.1068 ulcus enim vivescit et inveterascit alendo (psychological effect of love compared to the physical effect of a neglected wound); Verg. georg. 3.454 alitur vitium vivitque tegendo. The word ulcus has a stronger connotation than vulnus as it suggests a festering wound or sore opposed to a localised laceration of a tissue; cf. OLD s.  v. ulcus 3 and Brown (1987) on Lucr. 4.1068–72. The metaphor of vice as illness is frequently found in Christian texts: see e.  g. Paul. Nol. carm. 19.212–6 (St. Felix, like a doctor, heals the ulcera of vice). 45. hos terrena trahit sapientia nescia veri: the desire to find out the naturae mores is the standpoint of Augustan poets (cf. Verg. georg. 1.51) who had for their model Lucr. 3.1072 naturam […] cognoscere rerum (cf. 47n.). By contrast, the topos of the rejection of pagan culture as misleading and erroneous is typically Christian, and especially monastic. This polemical topos occurs first and foremost in the Bible; see e.  g. Luc. 15:1–32; 1 Cor: 1:20 nonne stultam fecit Deus sapientiam huius mundi, Col. 2:8 videte ne quis vos decipiat per philosophiam, et inanem fallaciam secundum traditionem hominum, secundum elementa mundi, et non secundum Christum: quia in ipso inhabitat omnis plenitudo divinitatis corporaliter. Yet the author of EP, like all the Christian Fathers, uses his own pagan education and rhetorical skills as a tool to repel pagan literature; a “rhetoric of paradox” according to Cameron (1991: 66  ff). Many of the Christian Fathers used the techniques learned in rhetorical schools both to praise the truth of Christian teaching and to criticize secular knowledge. However, Eastern Fathers had a more positive attitude towards pagan culture than Western Fathers, who were more critical and displayed reservations about the value of pagan literature. Before Jerome and Augustine the attitude of Christian Fathers towards pagan learning varied from expressions of mild disapproval to vehement condemnation. For instance, if at times Tertullian appeared

Commentary 

 89

tolerant and interested in pagan science, provided that there was no abuse of it (cf. e.  g. anim. 2, idol. 9), Cyprian whole-heartedly spoke against it, cf. e.  g. patient. 2 hanc se sectari philosophi quoque profitentur, sed tam illic patientia falsa est quam et falsa sapientia est (the hypocrisy and superficiality of the philosophers can lead Christians neither to wisdom nor to the patience of God). Arnobius warned Christians against profane literature stating that the reader should learn and not be entertained (Arnob. nat. 1.59). Lactantius rejected any knowledge of pagan philosophy as non vera sapientia (cf. inst. 4.3.2) and pointed out that Christians did not have a need for rhetoric, for wisdom was seated in the heart not in the tongue (inst. 3.13.4–5). According to Lactantius, pagans could not have attained a genuine wisdom prior to the reading of the Scriptures; cf. inst. 3.16.17 […] et ideo cum vacare sapientia humanam vitam putarent, philosophiam commenti sunt id est latentem atque ignotam sibi veritatem disserendo eruere voluerunt: quod studium per ignorantiam veri sapientiam putaverunt. Apart from the clichés of rejection of pagan reading, in Jerome and Augustine the approach to pagan literature and learning was of genuine approval. They believed that a complete acceptance of Christianity did not imply a complete rejection of the useful and worthwhile contained in pagan texts. Jerome was of the opinion that secular literature could be used to advantage by Christian readers; cf. e.  g. epist. 70.6.1 [the books containing pagan writers] eruditionis doctrinaeque plenissimi sunt, hence his advice to purge, purify and use them, cf. epist. 21.13.6 mundemus eam et omni sordium horrore purgemus. Augustine by no means sought to avert Christians from secular knowledge but he firmly maintained that one had to read ne quid nimis “not too much of anything” (doct. christ. 2.39.58). Christians, he claims in one of his favourite allegories, should imitate the Jewish people who in their flight from Egypt despoiled the Egyptians of their knowledge and used for their own sake what the pagans unlawfully possessed; cf. doct. christ. 2.40.60 sic doctrinae omnes gentilium non solum simulata et superstitiosa figmenta gravesque sarcinas supervacanei laboris habent, […] sed etiam liberales disciplinas usui veritatis aptiores, et quaedam morum praecepta utilissima continent; […] debet ab eis auferre Christianus ad usum iustum praedicandi Evangelii. Vestem quoque illorum […] accipere atque habere licuerit in usum convertenda Christianum. The hexametric clausula nescia veri is found only in Ov. epist. 1.65 misimus et Sparten: Sparte / quoque nescia veri. 46. et miseros idem, qui decipit, incitat error: this line is more than a simple reminiscence of Ovid as Schuller suggests (1999: 110). I see here a pointed reference to Ov. met. 3.431 atque oculos idem, qui decipit, incitat error. In Ovid error is the delusory image of himself that Narcissus saw reflected in the water; by contrast in EP error is used to condemn the false image, given by pagan knowledge, of

90 

 Commentary

understanding (see also Gallico 1982: 167). The tone in Ovid is pitiful (Narcissus, like a child, does not comprehend that what he sees is the mirrored shape of his body), whereas in EP the tone is contemptuous. One may conjecture a possible interpretation of the episode of Narcissus and its adaptation to the context of EP. Narcissus died because he was deceived by his own image with which he fell in love. In EP pagan intellectuals die spiritually because they fall in love with their own intellectual endowments and are deceived into believing that secular knowledge is the true way to their own salvation. On the reception of Narcissus’ story in European literature, see Vinge (1967). Such a close quotation of Ovid in this line and of Vergil in the next one (cf. 47n.) is very striking in this context of rejecting terrena sapientia. It is possible that these lines may contain an element of autobiography of a rhetor or grammarian who had cherished the reading of pagan literature and then, being converted to Christian religion, rejected it as foolish and a false kind of knowledge; see also Fo (1999: 136). 47–51 The division of human sapientia into branches (47 astronomy, 48–9 geography) is a legacy of pagan rhetorical classification; cf. e.  g. Arist. Metaph. 1004 8a; Lucr. 1.126  ff. Hor. epist. 1.12.16–9 and Vergil who offers a better example of the ancient classification of knowledge in georg. 2.477–82 accipiant caelique vias et sidera monstrent,  / defectus solis varios lunaeque labores,  / unde tremor terris, qua vi maria alta tumescant / obicibus ruptis rursusque in se ipsa residant, / quid tantum Oceano properent se tinguere soles / hiberni, vel quae tardis mora noctibus obstet; see also ecl. 5.31–40 (Silenus’ song on cosmogony), Aen. 1.742–46 (Iopas’ cosmogony), 6.724–26. Such classification of the study of natural phenomena was also maintained (with the purpose of criticising it) by Christian writers; cf. e.  g. Cypr. spect. 9 contemplari potest […] mundi pulchritudinem […] solis ortum aspiciat, […] lunae temporum cursus […], astrorum micantes choros […] et terrae molem […] et flumina, extensa maria; Lact. inst. 3.5.2 nam solis ac lunae varii cursus et meatus siderum et […] natura corporum […] et natura terrarum; Ambr. off. 1.26.122 et profundi aeris spatia metiri, coelum quoque et mare numeris includere; Hier. in Eph. 2.4.17  ff. nonne vobis videtur in vanitate sensus et obscuritate mentis ingredi […] qui physicus scrutator oculos trans coelum levat, et ultra profundum terrarum et abyssi quoddam inane demergit; Aug. vera relig. 23.52. 47. inquirunt causas rerum astrorumque meatus: this line recalls the makarismos of Verg. georg. 2.490 felix qui potuit rerum cognoscere causas, the most famous pagan statement on scientific wisdom. Elsewhere, causas rerum is found in e.  g. Ov. met. 15.68; Pers. 3.66 discite et, o miseri, causas cognoscite rerum; Paul. Nol. carm. 22.35 nosse moves causas rerum et primordia mundi; CPD 630 et penitus

Commentary 

 91

causas rerum scruteris opertas. For the line-ending astrorumque meatus cf. Lucr. 1.127–9 qua propter bene cum superis de rebus habenda  / nobis est ratio, solis lunaeque meatus / qua fiant ratione et qua vi quaeque gerantur; Verg. Aen. 6.849– 50 [alii] […] caelique meatus / describent radio; Paul. Nol. carm. 22.129 caelique meatus. According to Fo (1999: 136), in this verse the author of EP echoes Lucretius’ passage quoted above. However, I believe that in light of the rich intertext of Vergilian allusions throughout the poem, this line, more than Lucretius, may present a pointed reversal of the Vergilian makarismos of scientific understanding. 48. quae sit forma poli, cur longo flumina cursu: traditionally, pagan authors praised those who could understand the workings of nature, see e.  g. Aristot. P.A. 2.645a5. The study of astronomy was considered an antidote to popular superstition, cf. e.  g. Plin. nat. 2.23. In Christian texts, astronomy is often classed among those activities detrimental to the cause of salvation and truth, cf. e.  g. Ambr. off. 1.26 quid tam obscurum, quam de astronomia et geometria tractare, quod probant; et profundi aeris spatia metiri, caelum quoque et mare numeris includere; relinquere causam salutis, erroris quaerere; Aug. mus. 6.13 avertit [a contemplatione aeternorum] denique amor vanissimae cognitionis talium rerum […] curiositas nascitur ipso curae nomine inimica securitati, et vanitate impos veritatis. The hexametric clausula flumina cursu is found elsewhere only in Verg. ecl. 8.4; Tib. 3.7.125; Ov. fast. 4.467–8; Stat. silv. 1.1.20; Calp. 2.15. The expression longo cursu is frequently found in poetry, see e.  g. Lucr. 5.651 and 6.179; Verg. Aen. 3.116, 3.430 and 5.131. 47–9. inquirunt […] / […] cur […] flumina […] / non pereant, latus iaceat quo limite pontus: the verb perire is used here with the meaning of “drying up”. The locution latus pontus is rare, see Ov. epist. 7.56 multa tamen latus tristia pontus habet. 50  f. Human beings wish to know (cf. 51 scire volunt) the causes of natural phenomena which are known only to God (50 quaeque Deo tantum sunt nota), and impiously (cf. 51 pro nefas) fancy that they know them (51 scire videntur). The belief of misleading pagan knowledge and the human habit of questing for understanding is enhanced by the repetition of scire and the verbs volunt heu and videntur related by the v-alliteration in the first two and last two feet of the hexameter (see 51 scire volunt heu pro nefas et scire videntur). The author of EP reiterates here the Christian topos of pagan knowledge as morbid curiosity and philosophy as a sterile vocation; cf. e.  g. Lact. inst. 3.3.6 quanto magis, qui naturalia, quae sciri ab homine non possunt, scire se putant, furiosi dementesque sunt iudicandi; Aug. conf. 10.35.55 ex hoc morbo cupiditatis in spectaculis exhiben-

92 

 Commentary

tur quaeque miracula. hinc ad perscrutanda naturae, quae praeter nos est, operata proceditur, quae scire nihil prodest et nihil aliud quam scire homines cupiunt. 51. scire volunt heu pro nefas et scire videntur: same incipit in Iuv. sat. 3.113 scire volunt secreta domus atque inde timeri. The parenthetical form of interjection pro nefas is prosaic in tone and generally used in poetry in the single form nefas (see Forcellini, s.  v. 3), cf. e.  g. Hor. carm. 3.24.30 (heu nefas), 4.6.17; Verg. Aen. 7.73, 8.688, 10.673. This kind of interjection (pro + noun or adverb) recurs again in line 58 (cf. 58n.). pro nefas is more common in late Christian Latin prose, see Cypr. Ad Donat. 8; Aug. c. acad. 2.1.2; Salv. gub. 6.9, 7.20; Hier. epist. 22.14, 45.4, 54.15. 52–4 Thesbon: Feminei furores Thesbon agrees that such are the crimina (52) of Salmon’s fellow male citizens; however, the morbus (53) in the town would be less serious were it not for the women (54n.). 52. ista quidem: Fo (1999: 131 n.30) rightly notes that Vergil also used ista quidem to mark a change of speaker in Aen. 12.807–8 sic dea summisso contra Saturnia vultu: / ista quidem quia nota mihi tua, magne, voluntas. It is, therefore, plausible that the poet of EP had used Vergilian “signposts” to contain the speeches of speakers. 53. sed levis est vestra vitiorum morbus in urbe: morbus harks back to the metaphor of vice as pestis (see 15n.) and the effects of barbarian invasions with the mention of the gladius / fames / morbi at line 30 (see 30n.) 54. si non feminei magis exarsere furores: the noun furor had a semantic evolution, from military contexts it then came to be used, since the Augustan poets, more frequently in elegiac themes; see OLD s.  v. 3a, TLL s.  v. II.c.74  ff.; cf. also Korpanty (1985: 248  ff.). On the topos of misogyny and its intersection with broad elegiac themes in EP see 55–86n. The adjective femineus is well attested in classical poetry: Vergil uses it no less than 5 times, 3 times in Propertius, 16 in Ovid and 7 in Silius. 55–95 Salmon: Social satire and the return of the agricultural metaphor This section, which forms the second speech of Salmon, after the interruption of Thesbon, contains many features taken from pagan and Christian satire skilfully framed in a suggestive and original treatment of the theme of female corruption (see nn. 55–86 and 80–86). Salmon agrees with Thesbon about the moral corrup-

Commentary 

 93

tion of women, although he repeatedly reminds his audience that such a crimen lies, above all, with men who, themselves morally depraved (see nn. 58, 69, 76), are unable to restrain women, who are subject by divine law to male authority (57; see also 80 nos horum, nos causa sumus). Then, after these preliminary lines (see 55–60n.), Salmon goes into details. He lampoons (in a negative main clause, after a conditional clause referring to men) the coquetry of women (see 61–73n.), their loquacity, and their fondness for pagan literature (see 74–9n.). The lines on the depravity of women contain three conventional criticisms of excessive female cultus (see 61–73n.): expensive clothes (61, 66), jewellery (62, 65), cosmetics (67– 70). The following lines on the foolish fondness for secular sapientia criticize the disregard of the Bible (76), the acquaintance with pagan literature, and the regular attending of theatre (78–9), initially associated with women but in fact extended to men (cf. e.  g. 83–4, where it is said that women reflect, like a mirror, men’s behaviour). In the final part of his discourse Salmon, having stigmatised the debauchery of his fellow citizens, laments that if they had kept their souls clean from the weeds of vice, they would now have the physical and spiritual strength to endure the hardships brought about by the enemy (see lines 87  ff.). Salmon thus reverts to the parallelism between the agricultural restoration of lines 26  ff. (see nn. 15–51 and 26–9) and the metaphorical husbandry of the soul (87–95n.). 55–86 This section begins with the topos of a diatribe against women, but the author accords to it a very distinctive treatment by criticising male mores as responsible for female coquetry. The whole section is carefully crafted. The first two lines, which introduce Salmon’s reproach against women, give way surprisingly to the first statement of male fault (see 58 […] sine nostro crimine peccant), reinforced by the mention at line 57 of the guiding role that God gave to men (the anaphora of lege at the second and fifth foot of the hexameter is forceful). Then, the expression turns bitter – for instance one notes the anaphora of nec (61–62) and quod (74–75), the use of enjambements (63, 72), the indignant questions of Salmon (cf. tricolon in crescendo in lines 69 nonne error noster?, 76 non vitium nostrum est? 78 nonne cavis distent penetralia nostra theatris?) – and it reaches its climax with line 80, where male depravity is repeated and the anaphorical nos gives more force to Salmon’s outburst. The author of EP mobilises in his rebuke of female depravity many traditional commonplaces derived from pagan and Christian misogyny. Discourse on the weakness of the female sex, more inclined to passion and error, is widespread in pagan literature, and this attitude passed into Christian reflection on women. Christians, based on their reading of the Bible (on women as the cause of sin and disgrace cf. e.  g. gen. 2:21–23; 1 Cor. 11; Apoc. 14:4) either shaped woman as

94 

 Commentary

the Devil’s door (see e.  g. Tert. cult. fem. 1.1.2 diaboli ianua), or ascribed to them the ambiguous role of asexual virgin. Among the vast secondary literature on how pagans and Christians saw and described women see, in particular, the detailed analyses of Thraede (1972) and Brown (1988), and the still useful work of Marquardt on Roman private life (1886: 702  ff.). On Christian reflections on women see Criniti (1999: 47–75), and for the figure of the asexual virgin see Le Moine in Mathisen and Sivan (1996: 230–41, esp. 239 “Jerome is that almost unbelievable paradox […] a man who enjoyed the company of women enormously […] teaching them to read the Psalms in Hebrew […] and yet denounced women as the occasion for mankind’s fall from grace”). Late-antique society maintained the perception of the inferiority of women’s nature and the indispensable presence of male dominance in family life, a “Victorian morality” often on the verge of misogyny (Cracco Ruggini (1989: 611); see also Giannarelli (1980: 15  ff.)). Even though many women were influential and learned matronae (one may remember, for instance, the predominance of wealthy female addressees in Jerome’s corpus of exegetical works and letters), the general opinion appears to have been that women were physically weaker than men and more prone to bodily desires and passions; see e.  g. Clark (1993: 119) and on Gallic women Bruguière (1974: 332–5), Pelletier (1984), Krause (1991). In EP there is a partial reversal of such “misogyny” since Salmon repeatedly reminds Thesbon that men are the cause of women’s misbehaviour (cf. 55–95n.). The author of EP certainly knew examples of male corruption in pagan authors and patristic literature (cf. e.  g. Lucr. 4.1123–32 – love undermines a man’s strength –, and 5.1423–29 on male effeminacy; Iuv. sat. 6.457–64, a sarcastic vignette of the miser husband clinging to his wife’s greasy face; Ps. Cypr. spect. 3 homo fractus omnibus membris et vir ultra muliebrem mollitiem dissolutus; Lact. inst. 6.20.29; Ambr. epist. 29 (PL 16. 1232–33)). A more detailed adaptation of this theme appears in Prud. ham. 279–97 where the topos of male corruption comes after the lines describing female depravity (ham. 264–78); see Fontaine (1969); Palla (1981: 191–92, 195  ff.) and Chiappiniello (2009). The distinctiveness of EP lies in the fact that this relation between male corruption and female depravity is more clearly set out as cause and effect. 55–60 The poet’s initial dismay at the behaviour of female turba (cf. 55–6) gives way to the critique of male mores (see nn. 58 and 60). The first couplet is an expression of the common reproach to women for their amorality, the final two couplets suggest that men, to whom, according to the Scripture, women are subdued (see 57n.), bear the real responsibility (cf. 58) since they are willingly attracted by female deliciis (59).

Commentary 

 95

55. ante diem […] nox umida: this line resembles the centonic poetry. Salmon says to Thesbon that his list of examples of moral corruption in the secular world is too long to be contained in one afternoon. His answer begins and ends with two clear Vergilian echoes. The incipit ante diem harks back to Aen. 1.372  ff. where Aeneas replies to Venus that his tale of woes is too long to recount: O dea, si prima repetens ab origine pergam, / et vacet annalis nostrorum audire laborum, / ante diem clauso componet vesper Olympo. The second hemistich recalls another line of the Aeneid. At Aen. 2.6  ff. Aeneas seeks to postpone to the following day the story of the fall of Troy and his journey to Carthage: […] Quis talia fando / Myrmidonum Dolopumve aut duri miles Ulixi / temperet a lacrimis? et iam nox umida caelo / praecipitat suadentque cadentia sidera somnos. On the technique of centos see Pelttari (2014: 96–114); on Vergilian centos see McGill (2005) and (2007). nox umida: same metrical position (between the fourth and fifth foot of the hexameter) of Aen. 2.8. (see above) and Aen. 3.198 involvere diem nimbi et nox umida caelum. It is a Vergilian iunctura found elsewhere in e.  g. Aen. 5.738, 5.835, 11.201; it became a common epithet in later poets, cf. e.  g. Ov. fast. 2.635; Sil. 13.413; Stat. Theb. 10.1; Claud. rapt. Pros. 1.276. tenebris nox […] condet: a poetic phrase to mean “sunset”, found elsewhere in e.  g. Verg. Aen. 11.187 conditur in tenebras altum caligine caelum; Sil. 1.556–7 nox tandem optatis terras pontumque tenebris / condidit. 57. cum lege Dei vivant sub lege virorum: the assertion that women by divine law live under male authority recurs often in Christian texts (see e.  g. Tert. cult. fem. 1.1.1 et ad virum tuum conversio tua, et ille dominabitur tui; Ambr. hex. 5.18 [mulier] iustum est ut eum gubernatorem assumat) and is mainly patterned on gen. 3:16 sub viri potestate eris et ipse dominabitur tui; but see also in St. Paul’s letters: 1Cor. 11:3 caput autem mulieris vir, and 11:7–8 [vir] quoniam imago et gloria Dei est, mulier autem gloria viri est. non enim vir ex muliere est, sed mulier ex viro, Eph. 5:22  ff., Col. 3:18. Male superiority had also been codified by Varro, fr. apud Lact. opif. 12.17 mulier […] a mollitie, virtus, ut viritus, a virilitate; see Lévy (1983), Cracco Ruggini (1989: 610  ff.). This literary background makes more trenchant Salmon’s criticism of male moral conduct (see e.  g. line 58). The vigorous expression (repetition of lege, v-alliteration in vivant / virorum) heralds the following striking line (see 58n.). 58. pro pudor haud umquam sine nostro crimine peccant: this strong assertion of male responsibility will be reasserted at line 80 in the statement nos [i.  e. men] causa sumus (80n.). pro pudor is a conventional expression of disapproval (see OLD s.  v. pro3 2a; Forcellini s.  v. pudor 10); cf. e.  g. Petron. 81.5; Flor. 1.11; Mart. 10.68.6; HA Aurel. 41.9, Prob. 1.4. This line may be echoing pro nefas (51),

96 

 Commentary

setting, therefore, an explicit parallel with other male vitia (cf. 30–8n.). pro pudor is used at the start of the hexameter in e.  g. Lucan. 10.47, 77 and Stat. Theb. 10.270, 874. 60. haut illas vitiis vellemus vivere nostris: “we would not wish them to live by our vices”. vitiis nostris picks up nostro crimine (58) and makes clear that vice is the essence of human crimen (cf. 53n.). vitium is here used to denote “vice, sin”; Fo (1999: 158) loosely translates it with “macchie”. With the meaning of “vice”, vitium is frequently used by Prudentius in e.  g. ham. 156 quique bona infecit vitiis et candida nigris, ham. 159 [Satan] inventor vitii non est deus, and cath. 6.53–4 at qui coinquinatum / vitiis cor inpiavit. For the same v-alliteration and the return of vitium see 92 vellemus veterum vitiorum abscidere nodos (see 92n.). 61–73 The blissful simplicity and the calm rustic retreat of the fratres clashes with sophisticated urban lifestyle; cf. e.  g. in Verg. georg. 2.495  ff. the praise of rustic life set against elaborate vignettes of urban life where fraternal rivalry, civil wars, the folly of sailing and the absurdity of urban fashion (cf. e.  g. Verg. georg. 2.506 ut gemma bibat et Sarrano dormiat ostro) are in sharp contrast with the ideal life of the farmer. The author of EP appears to have had in mind and adapted to his purposes Juvenal’s vivid vignettes on the repulsiveness of women’s make-up in satire 6, and Propertius’ attempt (1.2) to persuade Cynthia to stop wearing jewels and cosmetics (see e.  g. nn. 62, 65 and 70). ornatus and cultus (on the condemnation of costly clothes, jewels, cosmetics see nn. 61, 62 and 67–70) are common rhetorical targets for pagan and Christian moralists to lampoon as signs of debauched habits; cf. e.  g. Lucian. Am. 38–42; Lucr. 4.1121  ff.; Sen. benef. 7.9.4; Tert. cult. fem. 1.4 and passim; Arnob. nat. 2.41; Comm. instr. 2.18, 2.19; Ambr. virg. 1.6.28  ff.; Hier. epist. 107.5, 130.7. On the topos of moral decline see also Marquardt (1886: 702  ff.); Fontaine (1969: 63  ff.); Palla (1981: 192); Weeber (2003). ornatus is often associated with female misdemeanours both in pagan and Christian satire, see e.  g. Iuv. sat. 6.259–60 haec sunt quae tenui sudant in cyclade, quarum / delicias et panniculus bombycinus urit, sat. 6.457–9 nil non permittit mulier sibi, turpe putat nil  / cum virides gemmas collo circumdedit et cum / auribus extentis magnos commisit elenchos; Hier. epist. 45.3 (rebuking vestes Sericae, nitentes gemmae and picta facies). 61. nec rigidas auro vestes nec vellera Serum: this is a rhetorical image to depict clothes embroidered with gold, cf. e.  g. Verg. georg. 2.464 inlusasque auro vestis; Iuv. sat. 6.482 aut latum pictae vestis considerat aurum (cf. OLD s.  v. aurum 3). It is a favourite device to criticise women for their clothes heavy with excessive

Commentary 

 97

decorations, see e.  g. Hier. epist. 107.10 spernat bombycum telas, Serum vellera et aurum in fila lentescens. vellera Serum: a common iunctura that occurs in e.  g. Verg. georg. 2.121 velleraque ut foliis depectant tenuia Seres; Petron. 119.11 hinc Numidae accierant, illinc nova vellera Seres. In the same metrical position in CPD 144 vellere Serum and Paul. Nol. carm. 25.51 non cupiat lapidum pretium neque vellera Serum. The Seres (see RE s.  v. 1678  ff.) were Chinese tribes living in Eastern Asia and known for their costly silken fabrics, cf. e.  g. Plin. nat. 6.17.20. 62  f. nec lapides, toto quos fert mercator ab orbe / fundorum pretiis emerent: to buy a jewel at the price of an estate is a proverbial phrase; cf. e.  g. Plaut. Epid. 226 quasi non fundis exornatae multae incedant per vias; Prop. 3.13.12 matrona incedit census induta nepotum; Sen. dial. 7.17.2 quare uxor tua locupletis domus censum auribus gerit, and benef. 7.9.4 non satis muliebris insania viros superiecerat, nisi bina ac terna patrimonia auribus singulis pependissent; Mart. 3.62.5 aurea quod fundi pretio carruca paratur. The trade and the use of precious stones is a topical theme in pagan and Christian authors alike to condemn female cultus, cf. e.  g. Tib. 2.4.27–8 o pereat, quicumque legit viridesque smaragdos / et niveam Tyrio murice tingit ovem; Manil. 5.518–19; Plin. nat. 33.12.40; Tert. cult. fem. 1.1–2, 1.6, 1.9 saltus et insulas tenera cervix circumfert; Cypr. hab. virg. 14 An […] Deus voluit […] ut […] de aurium cicatricibus et cavernis pretiosa grana dependeant, gravia etsi non suo pondere, mercium tamen quantitate? For the allusion to exotic jewels, cf. e.  g. Sen. contr. 2.5.7 Numquid gemmas et ex alieno litore petitos lapillos et aurem vestemque nihil in matrona tecturam concupivit? For the extravagance of wearing pearls cf. e.  g. Plin. nat. 1.17.8 and Petron. 55.6 63  f. “In grief our sighs we join with theirs and we are not ashamed to pile on frivolous concerns”. Men foolishly diminish their wealth to please women and buy for them costly jewels. This is another sarcastic note on men’s lack of authority: women sigh to obtain gems, whereas men sigh because they comply. suspiria is an erotic word (see OLD s.  v. 1) and implies men’s erotic attachment to women. 64. non est pudor: a common formula in Ovid, particularly in lines concerning excessive cultus (cf. 67–70n.), see e.  g. ars 3.203 nec pudor est oculos tenui signare favilla; rem. 351  f. tum quoque, compositis cum collinet ora venenis / ad dominae vultus, nec pudor obstet, eas; see Gibson (2003: 178) 65. si gravis ignotis processit Lesbia gemmis: for the theme of being weighed down by clothes or jewels, cf. Ov. ars 3.131 nec prodite graves insuto vestibus auro. For further examples of feminine luxuria see Gibson (1995) and (2003: 147). Pru-

98 

 Commentary

dentius puts a Christian spin on the topos of excessive ornament in ham. 268  ff. […] nec enim contenta decore / ingenito externam mentitur femina formam / ac, velut artificis Domini manus inperfectum / os dederit, quod adhuc res exigat aut hyacinthis  / pingere sutilibus redimitae frontis in arce,  / colla vel ignitis sincera incingere sertis / auribus aut gravidis virides suspendere bacas, / nectitur et nitidis concharum calculus albens / crinibus aureolisque riget coma texta catenis; on these lines see also Dykes (2011: 216–20). On the attenuated topos of misogyny and the trenchant attack against the degradation of effeminate men both in ham. 268  ff. and EP see Chiappiniello (2009: 179–84). processit: the choice of this verb implies that Lesbia displays her vanity in public. The verb procedere is frequent in elegiac descriptions of female mores, cf. e.  g. the gait of Cynthia in Prop. 1.2.1 quid iuvat ornato procedere, vita, capillo?; also Tib. 4.2.11 urit, seu Tyria voluit procedere palla; and Ov. ars 3.165 femina processit densissima crinibus emptis. Christian authors use procedere in diatribes against female cultus, see e.  g. Tert. cult. fem. 2.12 si … procedatis cultae et expictae; Cypr. hab. virg. 5 quid ornata, quid compta procedit. Lesbia: for the satirist of EP, Lesbia embodies the volatile mood of women. The mention of the name Lesbia may suggest that the author of EP had read Catullus; see also Fo (1999: 136). 66. et decies Passiena novo radiavit in ostro: for criticism of the frequent changing of clothes, cf. e.  g. Plaut. Epid. 229 quid istae, quae vesti quotannis nomina inveniunt nova?; Tib. 1.8.13 frustra iam vestes, frustra mutantur amictus. decies: it stands for “many times”, see e.  g. Hor. ars 294 praesectum deciens non castigavit ad unguem, and ars 365 haec [pictures] placuit semel, haec decies repetita placebit; Lact. inst. 4.28.7; Claud. carm. 14.5. See also OLD s.  v. 1b. and TLL s.  v. 5.1.168.55  ff. Passiena: literary examples of this name are not extant but a Passiena is mentioned in a fourth-century African epitaph, written in hexameters, from the northern province of Byzacena; see Anthol. Lat. 559 Manibus hic placidis Passiena casta quiescit. / quinq. et XL vixit pia larga benigna. / hoc sibi costituunt patres fratresque sepulcrum (cf. Wilmanns in CIL 8.412). Another Passiena appears in an inscription, CORP. VI.7270 Passienae Helpidi […] Passiena Athenais; cf. TLL s.  v. 1031.44. One might conjecture that Passiena was a well-known name in late antiquity and that the author, to make his poem a current examination of his times, intertwined fictional (see e.  g. 76  f.) and real characters, classical and contemporary authors (see 79n. scaena Marulli). It is also possible that we are missing an allusion to a familiar figure. To fit in the hexameter Passiena has to be scanned with syneresis.

Commentary 

 99

ostro: means “purple” but it can be used as metonymically to say “clothes”; cf. e.  g. Verg. georg. 3.17 illi victor ego et Tyrio conspectus in ostro; Prop. 4.3.51 nam mihi quo Poenis nunc purpura fulgeat ostris; see also OLD s.  v. 2. A similar note to the rebuke of female extravagant cultus in EP can be found in Ambr. Nab. 5.25 illa tibi imponet sumptuum necessitatem, ut gemma bibat, in ostro dormiat, in argentea sponda recumbat, auro oneret manus, cervicem monilibus. 67–70 The author of EP castigates the excessive use of female cosmetics as the most deceiving aspect of cultus. Although one can find examples of subversive eulogy of feminine cultus as an expression of culture and refinement (see e.  g. Ovid in the Ars Amatoria and Medicamina), generally attacks against womens’ cosmetics are a leitmotif of satire. The traditional line of accusation lampoons beauty falsely enhanced by cosmetics, and links facial make-up with the desire to seduce; cf. e.  g. Xen. Oec. 10.2–13; Dio Chrys. 7.117  f.; Sen. Controv. 2.7.3–4; Tib. 1.8.15; Prop. 1.2.1–12 quid iuvat ornato procedere, vita, capillo / et tenuis Coa veste movere sinus /, aut quid Orontea crines perfundere murra, / […] / crede mihi, non ulla tuae est medicina figurae: / nudus Amor formae non amat artificem; Iuv. sat. 6.501–3 […] tanta est quaerendi cura decoris. / tot premit ordinibus, tot adhuc conpagibus altum / aedificat caput […]. See also Fedeli (1980) on Prop. 1.2, and more generally on cultus in the Roman world cf. Wyke (1994) and Richlin (1995). On Christian authors, see e.  g. Tert. cult. fem. 2.2.4–5 (cultus and female beauty) Perit enim ille, simul ut tuam formam concupierit, et admisit iam in animo quod concupivit, et facta es tu gladius illi; 2.4.1–2 solis maritis vestris placere debetis […] uxor nulla deformis est marito suo; and pall. 4.10; Ambr. virg. 28 ; Hier. epist. 54.7 quid facit in facie Christianae purpurissus et cerussa? Quorum alterum ruborem genarum labiorumque mentitur, alterum candorem oris et colli: ignes iuvenum, fomenta libidinum, inpudicae mentis indicia, epist. 38.3 illae […] purpurisso et quibusdam fucis ora oculosque depingunt quarum facies gypseae et nimio candore deformes idola mentiuntur, epist. 127.3 illae enim solent purpurisso et cerussa ora depingere, sericis nitere vestibus, splendere gemmis, aurum portare cervicibus; Prud. ham. 273–6 taedet sacrilegas matrum percurrere curas, / muneribus dotata Dei quae plasmata fuco / inficiunt, ut pigmentis cutis inlita perdat / quod fuerat, falso non agnoscendo colore. For further examples especially in Greek literature see Grillet (1975: 97  ff.), Rosati (1985), and Knecht (1972: 129  ff.) on Christian writers. 67. mutatis […] formis: the critique of the constant changing of cosmetics may refer to Ovid’s prescriptions on facial beauties in ars. 3.197  ff. and rem. 351  ff. but see also Hier. epist. 22.32 where female vanity is attacked with a similar rhetorical vehemence: At nunc plerasque videas armaria stipare vestibus, tunicas mutare

100 

 Commentary

cotidie. The phrase mutatis formis is based on the reading of the Metamorphoses (see Bömer 1.12), cf. e.  g. Ov. met. praef. 1 in nova [corpora] fert animus mutatas dicere formas. 68  ff. The disapproval of cosmetics as frivolous and devious activity is a traditional topos in Western literature, see e.  g. Xen. Oec. 10.7 “Wife, you must understand that I too do not prefer the colour of white powder and rouge to your own […] human beings consider the human body most attractive when it is unadorned” and Shakespeare, Hamlet, 3.1.154–6. “I have heard of your paintings too, well / enough. God hath given you one face, and you / make yourselves another”. See also 67–70n. 69. error noster: unlike other Christian authors who condemned and warned against female attractiveness, the author of EP pinpoints in the female luxuria a sign of the moral debauchery of men (see also nn. 58 and 80). corpore casto: a common iunctura in late Christian Latin but rarely found in classical Latin; see e.  g. Sen. Phaed. 704  f procul impudicos corpore de casto amove / tactus; Plin. epist. 4.11.9 quasi plane a casto puroque corpore novissima sanctitate reiecit. 70. cerussa et minium centumque venena colorum: women are naturally inclined to prefer studied elegance and beauty products instead of simplicity and naivety. cerussa (white lead) and minium (cinnabar) are ingredients of female make-up and they are topical stock items in stigmatising female cultus. The word cerussa is often used as a metonymy of cultus in anti-cosmetic contexts, cf. e.  g. Plaut. Most. 258, 264; Ov. medic. 73  f. nec cerussa tibi nec nitri spuma rubentis / desit; Mart. 10.22; Tert. cult. fem. 2.7 ego in illo die Christianae exultationis […] videbo an cum cerussa et purpurisso […] resurgatis, an taliter expictas angeli in nubile sublevent obviam Christo; Hier. epist. 127 quoted in 67–70n. See also TLL s.  v. cerussa 952.13  ff. On the anti-cosmetic tradition see Rosati (1985: 9–19) and Gibson (2003: 21–5, 174–5). For venena applied to cosmetics, see Ov. rem. 351  f. at 64n. 71  f. Purity of mind and decorous morality are the bindings of holy marriage. In accordance to the Bible’s teaching these are the Christian virtues that should be preferred to secular studied elegance; see e.  g. 1 Petr. 3:3–4 quarum [women] non sit extrinsecus capillatura, aut circumdatio auri, aut indumenti vestimentorum cultus: sed qui absconditus est cordis homo, in incorruptibilitate quieti, et modesti spiritus, qui est in conspectu Dei locuples. The expression mentis honor is echoed by mentis honorem at line 29; the adjective sanctus is used with the moral meaning of “blameless, virtuous”; cf. OLD s.  v. 4a.

Commentary 

 101

vincula […] / coniugii: a rare iunctura that seems to be confined to Christian prose as in Ambr. Exp. ps. 3.32 vincula complura sunt in hoc saeculo […] vincula coniugii. 72  f. si forma […] / […] honestas: in these lines the poet deploys the conventional topos of transitory human beauty which has a long tradition since e.  g. Mimn. fr. 5.4–5W ἀλλ’ὀλιγοχρόνιον γίγνεται ὣσπερ ὄναρ / ἥβη τιμήεσσα; Theogn. fr. 985W; Sall. Catil. 1.4 nam divitiarum et formae gloria fluxa atque fragilis est; Ov. ars. 2.113–4 Forma bonum fragile est, quantumque accedit ad annos, / fit minor et spatio carpitur ipsa suo; Prop. 2.28.57 nec formam aeternum aut cuiquam est fortuna perennis; Nemes. ecl. 2.24 donum forma breve est; see also e.  g. prov. 31:30 fallax gratia et vana est pulchritudo: mulier timens dominum ipsa laudabitur. The phrase forma placet is Ovidian, see e.  g. Ov. ars. 1.614, 3.480 and fast. 2.763. These lines expand on the criticism of cultus (cf. 67–70n), and the preference of interior moral integrity (73 honestas) to exterior sophisticated appearance (72 forma). 74–9 In these lines the author of EP delivers a tirade against women who prefer pagan poetry (74–7) and comedies (78–9, see 78  f.n.) to reading the Bible. The rejection of pagan culture is a motif common to Western Fathers (cf. nn. 45 and 47–51). The choice in EP to represent the Bible by picking Paul (New Testament) and Solomon (Old Testament) (see 76n.), and pagan texts by Ovid (Naso) and Vergil (Maro) (see 77n.), might suggest that the author knew a similar parallel made by Hier. epist. 22.29 quid facit cum psalterio Horatius, cum evangeliis Maro, cum apostolo Cicero. It is clear in Jerome’s passage that psalterio stands for the Old Testament, evangeliis for the New Testament, and Horace and Vergil for pagan writers. Pagans also rebuked sarcastically the bookish knowledge of women, cf. e.  g. Iuv. sat. 6.434–7 illa tamen gravior, quae cum discumbere coepit, / laudat Vergilium, periturae ignoscit Elissae / committit vates et comparat, inde Maronem / atque alia parte in trutina suspendit Homerum. Common to Christian authors is the adaptation of pagan sources used for a polemical opposition to pagan culture; see also Fo (1999: 139). The author, by mentioning Phoenissa and Corinna (77) in addition to Lesbia previously named (65), uses as Konzentrationsfigur the names of three famous fictitious personae of pagan literature. The choice of these three names, Lesbia, Phoenissa and Corinna, is very interesting: pagan literature provides women with models to emulate and convinces men that those models are attractive. This use of pagan literature to lampoon pagan literature itself is typical of the satire of Jerome; his characteristic is, as Wiesen (1964: 70) points out, the “juxtaposition of a reminiscence from a classical author and an exhortation against the reading of classical authors”.

102 

 Commentary

74. nam quod perpetuis discursibus omnia lustrant: “But when women cover all subjects in continuous chats”, contra Fo (1999: 159) who reads this line metaphorically and translates “E il fatto che poi con perenne andirivieni vagano dappertutto”. The satirical condemnation of female curiosity is another well- established commonplace, see e.  g. Theogn. 15.64 recalled almost verbatim by Plaut. Trin. 207  f. sciunt id quod in aurem rex reginae dixerit, / sciunt quod Iuno fabulatast cum Iove; Iuv. sat. 6.402 haec eadem novit quid toto fiat in orbe. The noun discursus taken with the meaning of “talk, chat” is commonly found in late antique texts, see TLL s.  v. 1.1369.35  ff. The verb lustrare can also mean “consider”, cf. TLL s.  v. II.3.b; the same hexametric clausula is found in Verg. Aen. 6.886–7 sic tota passim regione vagantur / aeris in campis latis atque omnia lustrant (“and so they [i.  e. Anchises and Aeneas] wander everywhere in the whole region, in the broad fields of air and consider everything”). Both the manuscript and Gagny’s edition have nam, which Schenkl corrects to iam. Smolak (1999) and Fo (1999) accept the correction of Schenkl. I agree with Gallico (1982: 170) that nam has to be restored with adversative meaning like the Greek δὲ; cf. Hofmann and Szantyr (1965: 505–06 s.  v. b), and Kroon (1995: 144  ff.). 75. quod pascunt […] multa locuntur: as in the previous line, the poet sketches another stock of misogynistic themes of talkative, busibody women who have replaced men in organising banquets. For a satirical parade of women’s occupations and interests see Iuv. sat. 6 passim; on women’s fondness for gossip and verbosity see Plaut. Trin. 207  f. quoted in 74n., Aul. 124; Sen. contr. 2.5.12 quae id solum potest tacere quod nescit; Iuv. sat. 6. 434–56; Mart. 2.90.9, 9.35; Hier. epist. 133.4 and, above all, 1 Tim. 5:13 simul autem et otiosae discunt circumire domos, non solum otiosae, sed et verbosae et curiosae, loquentes quae non oportet. The verb pascere used figuratively, and with no direct object, for parare convivia is found in late Latin; cf. e.  g. Hist. Aug. Hadr. 17.4 ad deprehendendas obsonatorum fraudes, cum plurimis sigmatibus pasceret, fercula de aliis mensis etiam ultimis sibi iussit adponi; Comm. instr. 2.37; Sulp. Sev. dial. 1.25.6 [memini Vincentium] a Martino saepius poposcisse, ut ei convivium in suo monasterio daret: in quo quidem exemplum beati Ambrosi episcopi praeferebat, qui eo tempore consules et praefectos subinde pascere ferebatur; Ambr. Hel. 8.24; see TLL s.  v. 595.55  ff., and Forcellini (s.  v. 9, p. 520): qui cotidie aut saepe alios convivio excipit. Fo (1999: 151) retains pascunt, in the same way as it is in the edition of Schenkl, but wonders whether one might read poscunt instead of pascunt “nel senso di reclamare denaro”. 76. non vitium nostrum est?: this verse recalls the male self-reproach of line 69 and prepares for the climax of line 80; see also 55–86n.

Commentary 

 103

Paulo et Solomone relicto: for a similar invective see Hier. epist. 22.29 quoted in 74–9n. and epist. 21.13 at nunc etiam sacerdotes Dei omissis evangeliis et prophetis videmus comoedias legere, amatoria bucolicorum versuum verba cantare, tenere Vergilium et id, quod in pueris necessitatis est, crimen in se facere voluntatis. Paul and Solomon are representatives of the Old and New Testament. The hypothesis of Wernsdorf (ad loc.) that there is a suggestive link between the mention in these lines of female readers and the texts of Paul and Solomon, who addressed their writings to women, is plausible. Similarly, Fo accepts Wernsdorf’s note and suggests a further parallel with Ecclesiastes, a text believed to be written by Solomon, which deals with worldly injustice, divine help and human responsibility against evil (1999: 147 n. 39). For the hypothesis of Salmon as a variant of Solomon see 8n. 77. aut Maro cantatur Phoenissa aut Naso Corinna: “Vergil is recited by a Dido or Ovid by a Corinna”. Phoenissa and Corinna are ablative of agent without preposition. This usage is already found in Augustan poetry; cf. e.  g. Prop. 2.33.29 Icare, Cecropiis merito iugulate colonis; see also Fedeli (1980) on Prop. 1.13.13 and, more generally, Hofmann and Szantyr (1965: 122). Phoenissa and Corinna stand here both for female readers and for characters of pagan poetry. With these names the author of EP points out the type of literature that female readers enjoy. The reading of pagan poetry is blamed for obstructing the approach to Scripture and for offering to women models which divert them from Christian morality (Phoenician Dido is an example of passion and irrationality, Corinna of sensuality). The mention of two of the most famous pagan poets (Vergil and Ovid) is also another, more subtle, criticism of male responsibility, since the creators of these immoral female role models are both male. Phoenissa: the ‘insane’ passion of Dido in the Aeneid was a conventional example that Christian authors were keen on using in order to condemn the legacy of pagan texts; cf. Aug. conf. 1.13.20 (reproaching himself for taking fiction seriously) et plorare Didonem mortuam, quia se occidit ab amore, cum interea me ipsum in his a te morientem, Deus, vita mea, siccis oculis ferrem miserrimus; see Comparetti (1966: 110–11), Watkins (1995: 34–8). The fabula lascivientis Didonis was one of the most read and staged parts of the Aeneid in late antiquity; cf. e.  g. Macrob. Sat. 5.17.5 quod ita elegantius auctore digessit ut fabula lascivientis Didonis, quam falsam novit universitas, per tot tamen saecula speciem veritatis obtineat et ita pro vero per ora omnium volitet, ut pictores fictoresque et qui figmentis liciorum contextas imitantur effigies hac materia vel maxime in effigiandis simulacris tamquam unico argumento decoris utantur, nec minus histrionum perpetuis et gestibus et cantibus celebretur. See also Addamo (1952). Corinna: Ovid’s Corinna, like Tibullus’ Delia and Propertius’ Cynthia, is an example of excessive passion in love affairs.

104 

 Commentary

78  f. Criticism of pagan poetry and theatre is a topical theme in Christian authors; see e.  g. Cypr. epist. 2.1 (theatre is not for education but for the destruction of young Christians), Ps. Cypr. spect. 6–7; Arnob. nat. 4.36; Lact. inst. 6.20 (all spectacles tend to corrupt the mind) vitanda ergo spectacula omnia, non solum ne quid vitiorum pectoribus insidat, quae sedata et pacifica esse debent, sed ne cuius nos voluptatis consuetudo deleniat et a Deo atque a bonis operibus avertat; Hier. epist. 1.5; Prud. ham. 308–11 and perist. 10.221; see also Palla (1981: 202). According to Augustine, theatre appeals to curiositas, which is a vice that leads to demons: Aug. cons. evang. 1.33.51 per omnes paene civitates cadunt theatra, caveae turpitudinum et publicae professiones flagitiorum, cadunt et fora vel moenia, in quibus demonia colebantur; see also O’Donnell (1992: 2.150  ff.). The excessive frequentation of theatres seen as a symptom of decadent mores is also found in Salv. gub. 6.39 nos ecclesiis Dei ludicra anteponimus, nos altaria spernimus et theatra honoramus. 78. nonne cavis distent penetralia nostra theatris: criticism of a passion for theatre is connected with the previous criticism of curiositas and concupiscentia oculorum (see nn. 45, 47–51). For cavus meaning “concave”, “hollow”, cf. e.  g. Verg. Aen. 3.566 ter scopuli clamorem inter cava saxa dedere; Prop. 4.1.15 nec sinuosa cavo pendebant vela theatro. Taken with the meaning of inanis (“vain”, “futile”) is not classical and occurs rarely, cf. e.  g. Prud. ham. 438 inflaturque cavo pompae popularis honore; see also TLL s.  v. 718.67  ff.; Stam (1940: 198) and Palla (1981: 229). This line may contain a double meaning: (a) theatres are of concave shape but also empty, because in ruin; (b) they are also futile; in this case, the connotation of vanity would pick up line 14 vana in proscaenia (see 14n.). Theatres in the cities of late antiquity were still very popular for they provided people with education and entertainment, and the most common forms of spectacle were mimes and pantomimes (cf. 79n.); see e.  g. Bowersock et al. (20002: 719–21). For instance, Augustine lamented that there were too many spectacula in Carthage in his day: in psalm. 103.13 videtis quid faciat civitas ubi abundant spectacula: in agro securius loquerer. penetralia nostra: “the private quarters of our souls”. penetralia literally means “the innermost part of a building”; cf. e.  g. Verg. Aen. 6.71 te quoque magna manent regnis penetralia nostris; Hor. carm. 2.13.6; Ov. met. 1.287; Liv. 6.1.41; Lucan. 5.70; see OLD s.  v. 1. In EP it is used metaphorically of the most secret part of the soul (see OLD s.  v. 1c), cf. e.  g. Stat. silv. 3.5.56 animi penetralibus imis, Theb. 9.346 animae […] penetralia; Claud. IV cons. Hon. 255  f.; Cento Probae 9–12; Paul. Pell. euch. 20 [vox] […] abrumpens tacitae penetralia mentis; Prud. ham 542 [Satan’s spear] cordis penetralia figens; CPD 915  ff. nonne magis propriis posses lacrimas dare damnis, / si potius vastata tui penetralia cordis / inspiceres multaque obtectum sorde decorem / grassantesque hostes captivae mentis in arce? The presence

Commentary 

 105

of penetralia harks back to the architectural metaphor of the praetoria cordis (see 28n.) and, since the poet has condemned the abandoned state of human souls, this line might suggest a further parallel between the emptiness of unused theatres and the derelict ‘palaces’ of the heart. 79. accipiunt plausus lyra Flacci et scaena Marulli: on the traditional theme of disdain for pagan poets, cf. e.  g. Min. Fel. 23.1–2, 7–8, 31.3–4 (poets as corruptors of the truth); Tert. Nat. 1.10, 2.1 apud poetas omnia indigna, quia turpia, 2.7 (poets are inventors of falsehood, and Plato rightly excluded them from his ideal republic). By metonymy lyra stands for pagan lyrical poetry (see Hor. carm. 1.6.10; Ov. am. 2.18.26; see also TLL s.  v. 1951.25  ff.) and scaena Marulli for theatre. Gagny’s text has scena Terenti, while the manuscript has Mapulli corrected by Schenkl to Marulli (pp. 506, 509). Marullus (RE s.  v. 2053) was a mimographer who flourished in the fourth century at the time of Marcus Aurelius, see Hist. Aug. Marc. 8.1 [Marcus Aurelius and Verus] Adepti imperium ita civiliter se ambo egerunt, ut lenitatem Pii nemo desiderat, cum eos Marullus, sui temporis mimografus, cavillando inpune perstringeret; Serv. on Aen. 7.499 nam quod Marullus mimographus dixit; and on ecl. 7.26 nam Marullus mimographus contempsit; see also Manitius (1891: 153), Schanz, Hosius and Krüger (1920: 4.2.362). Horace and Marullus stand for contemporary public literary taste. The mention of Marullus (and perhaps of Passiena, cf. 66n.) brings a contemporary reference to the poem and therefore to its message. Among public shows the mimes, in particular, were believed to foster adultery and corruption; cf. e.  g. Min. Fel. 37.12 nunc enim mimus vel exponit adulteria vel monstrat, nunc enervis histrio amorem dum fingit, infligit; Cypr. Ad Donat. 8 […] tum delectat in mimis turpitudinum magisterio vel quid domi gesserit recognoscere vel quid gerere possit audire. Adulterium discitur dum videtur; Tert. apol. 38.4, spect. 25.3.9–11 sed tragoedo vociferante exclamationes ille alicuius prophetae retractabit et inter effeminati histrionis modos psalmum secum comminiscetur; Lact. epit. 58.4.5–7 nam mimus corruptelarum disciplina est, in quo fiunt per imaginem quae pudenda sunt, ut fiant sine pudore quae vera sunt. 80–6 Salmon laments that male moral degeneration offers to women (cf. 85–6) examples of corruption and debauchery (cf. 83–4). Salmon’s intervention ends in the same manner as it started (see nn. 55–60 and 60): with a further reproach to men. It, therefore, appears that the whole social satire of Salmon has been constructed around these bitter attacks of male conduct and responsibility. 80. nos horum, nos causa sumus: the vitriolic pointe of the satire of EP is not delivered against women tout court but is essentially a social satire on the

106 

 Commentary

debauchery of men, a satura tragica, such as Gnilka (1990: 145–77) suggests for the satirical vignettes of Prudentius. Men seem not to have any sort of control over women, their conduct appears to be opposite to accepted norms. There is in EP a gender reversal, as here men are the cause of moral misery; cf. Chiappiniello (2009: 181), Malamud (2011: 116). 81. nutrimenta damus flammis: though this line appears to be a variation of a proverbial expression (cf. Hor. sat. 2.3.321 oleum adde camino; Hier. epist. 22.8 women as ardens corpusculum: quid oleum flammae adicimus), it seems more likely that the author might have recalled a line from Verg. Aen. 1.176 nutrimenta dedit rapuitque in fomite flammam where Vergil describes the first attempts to light a fire by the Trojans disembarked on the Libyan shores; see also Gallico (1982: 166). 81–82. […] culpetur honesti  / inproba nupta viri nummo decerpere nummum!: “[…] let the dishonest wife be blamed / for taking money from the money of a ‘honest’ husband!”. I do not read in this line a rhetorical question as Fo (1999: 161) does: “potrebbe la sposa di un uomo di pregio interiore essere incolpata di sperperare improba moneta su moneta?” I rather see here a sarcastic assertion, especially if we read honesti as an ironical expression. decerpere takes here the meaning of demere, minuere, rapere (see TLL s.  v. 158.77; OLD s.  v. 4); late authors used decerpere with this meaning (TLL s.  v. 158.78  ff. cites examples mainly from late-antique writers). The phrase nummo decerpere nummum is only attested in EP, see TLL s.  v. decerpere 159.19. 83  f. Women like mirrors repeat what they see in men’s behaviour. “To reflect like a mirror” is a proverbial phrase, see e.  g. Ter. Adelph. 413  f. inspicere tamquam in speculum, in vitas omnium / iubeo, atque ex aliis sumere exemplum sibi; cf. Forcellini s.  v. speculum 1a. Rather than to speculo I read tenaci referred to ingenio in enjambement. The concluding expression exempla secuntur usually appears as iunctura at the line-end of a hexameter, see e.  g. Verg. georg. 4.219 his quidam signis atque haec exempla secuti. 85  f. cur solita infelix damnatur femina culpa / cum placet stolido coniunx vitiosa marito?: “Why is an unfortunate woman condemned to the usual blame / since a morally depraved wife pleases a foolish husband?” Women are not the only ones to blame, since their foolish husbands prefer them to be morally depraved. The manuscript has solita. Schenkl proposes the emendation solida with the meaning of integra, a Grecism, based on the Greek ὅλος, and used elsewhere by e.  g. Hor. carm 1.1.20 partem solido demere de die (cf. Nisbet and Hubbard 1970:

Commentary 

 107

11; OLD s.  v. 8). According to Schenkl, one should translate the line as “why the unfortunate woman should be condemned for the whole blame […]”. Gallico (1982: 171–2), though admitting that Schenkl’s correction is interesting, suggests reading solite, a rare adverb mostly used by sixth-century Christian authors like e.  g. Coripp. Joh. 2.279, 346, 4.283 (cf. Souter, 381 s.  v. solite). He then translates: “Perché di solito [usually] si condanna l’infelice donna per la sua colpa, dal momento che una moglie viziosa piace allo stolto marito?”. Smolak (1999) prints solida; Fo opts for stolida and explains (1999: 151–2) that having stolida in lines 85, in light of the next line cum placeat stolido coniunx vitiosa marito, would make “un intenzionale gioco d’autore su una duplice stolidità”. I see no reason to correct the manuscript in this line and keep solita with the meaning of “to be constantly, usually liable to”; see also OLD s.  v. 3. 87–95 The military metaphor of lines 15  ff. now returns, although the adverb ubique could mean that the author is now pointing not only to metaphorical but also to real enemies. In this case a conflation of the images of the two enemies might occur. Furthermore, the agricultural metaphor of souls (cf. 18–29n.) also returns to reinforce an impression of ring composition, with the recurrence of nebulis (90, cf.  16 nube), the past participle purgata (90, cf.  26 purgare), and the infinitive abscidere nodos (92, cf. 26 abscidere sentes). One should note that though sentes at line 26 might have a two-fold meaning (cf. 26n.), now the meaning of nodos is clearly metaphorical (see 92n.). The mention of barbarians conveys a metaphorical message to the sentence and, one might say, to the whole poem. Salmon does not clearly state that the wrath of God has sent the barbarian invasions to punish his fellow-citizens, but he may allusively suggest that moral corruption might be one of the causes of the bloodshed (cf. 89–94). For a complementary explanation of the cause of the invasions, see CPD 913–8 (quoted at 26–9n.), 919–22 quae nisi per cunctas patuisset dedita portas / inque suam cladem facibus fomenta dedisset / haec etiam, quae facta manu speciosa fuerunt / devoti meritum populi testata manerent, and 931–3 nec rabidis iustam moveamus questibus iram / iudicium culpando Dei, quod mentis et oris / officium multa transcendit maius abysso. Both poems set up a clear analogy between the spiritual condition of mankind and the material state of the country; on this analogy see Lagarrigue (1977: 141). However, EP lacks the patriotic resurgence that is suggested in CPD 658  ff. (see 15–7n.), but, as in CPD, there is conflation of spiritual fighting (against vices) and real fighting (against barbarian invaders); see Lagarrigue (1983: 139), who points out that the message, “spirituel et temporel”, is conveyed in a context “poétiquement ambigu”.

108 

 Commentary

87. unus ubique hostis diffuso turbine saevit: this line introduces the theme of the internal, spiritual enemy that is more destructive than the real, physical enemy. For a similar juxtaposition see CPD 960  ff. Cuncta licet variis terroribus impleat hostis / et vigili clausas obsidat milite portas, / cum victo [i.  e. against the devil, already defeated by Christ] tamen est bellum […]. This verse could be a reminiscence of Verg. Aen. 10.602–4 talia per campos edebat funera ductor / Dardanius, torrentis aquae vel turbinis atri / more furens. 88. nec mirum est vinci belli terrore subactos: Salmon, having described the depravity of men and women alike, adds that it is no wonder people have now been defeated by the terror of war. For a similar argumentation see Hier. epist. 60.17 nostris peccatis barbari fortes sunt, nostris vitiis Romanus superatur exercitus. A patriotic resurgence in EP is unlikely; people subdued (subactos) by the force of vice are now also defeated by the terror of war. One may set this line in contrast with the optimism in CPD where Gallo-Romans are summoned to overcome all kinds of terrors of the enemy (cf. CPD 960  ff. at 87n.) and, once renewed in Christ, to gain the palm of victory. Fo (1999: 161) interprets subactos in relation to belli terrore and translates “e non stupisce siano vinti i sopraffatti dal terrore della guerra”. I see vinci belli terrore as a consequence of being subdued to vice; for subactus taken with the meaning of mollitus see Forcellini s.  v. subactus. Cf. also Prud. cath. 12.161  ff. at nos, subactos iugiter / erroris imperio gravi, / dux noster saucio / mortis tenebris liberat; Ambrosiast. in Rom. 6.15 relevati et reparati deo adiuvante vitiis, a quibus prius subacti fuerant. 89  ff. Submission to Christian morals would protect Romans against not only the assaults of passions and vice but also against the barbarian invaders. 89. si correcti sanum saperemus: people are able to judge what is good for themselves if they only used their reason; a similar rebuke is found in CPD 238  f. sed quia liber homo et sapiens discernere rectis / prava potest, in se intus habens discrimina rerum / iusque voluntatis. sanum saperemus: this phrase occurs several times in Plautus: see e.  g. Amph. 448 sane sapio et sentio, Cas. 740 sapis sane, Men. 790 and Pseud. 662. sanum sapere here ‘translato uso’ is a feature of Late Latin as in Prud. perist. 10.247–8 potesne quidquam tale, si sanum sapis, / sanctum putare? […] atris  / […] nebulis: a lofty Vergilian phrase in Aen. 2.356–7 […] Inde, lupi ceu  / raptores atra in nebula, and Aen. 8.258 […] nebulaque ingens specus aestuat atra. This image refers back to densa nube (see 16n.). ater is a sinister but also poetic, archaic word for niger (cf. Marouzeau 1935: 152); it is mainly found in poetry but see in prose for instance Tac. ann. 13.41 and hist. 5.22. In this context

Commentary 

 109

ater, traditionally associated with death (cf. e.  g. Hor. carm. 1.28.13; Tib. 1.10.33; Sen. Oed. 100  f.), colours the phrase with a connotation of clouds being dark as the bringer of vice and spiritual death; see also Cassian. inst. 5.2.3 taetras vitiorum tenebras. 90. libera mens nebulis Christo purgata pateret: nebulis and purgata pick up nube at line 16 (see 16n.) and purgare at line 26 (see 26n.), thus binding together the metaphors of the husbandry of fields and souls. The meaning of purgare is ambivalent: it literally means “to eradicate weeds” (see OLD s.  v. 2) but can metaphorically be found, especially uso christiano, with the connotation of purifying one’s mind from sin (see Blaise s.  v. 6). This and the following lines strengthen the juxtaposition of the neglected husbandry of fields and souls. 91. si falcem Verbi cordi imprimeremus: metaphora ducta a putatione vitium (so Wernsdorf, ad loc.), resonant of the scythe as instrument of God in Apoc. 14:14–9; for this symbolical use of falx in Christian contexts see TLL s.  v. 205.15  ff. Fo (1999: 137) reads in the mention of the falx an interesting parallel with the signum crucis Dei in Endelech. mort. boum 105, since both allude to Christ’s help as a shield against external enemies, the plague in De mortibus boum and the barbarian invaders in EP. The image of the scythe extends the metaphor of internal and external fields (cf. 26–9n.). The hypothesis of a possible resurgence in EP might also recall the “optimisme combatif” (Lagarrigue 1983: 142) of the poet of CPD who urges his fellow-citizens to shake off the yoke of sin and restore freedom in their fatherland, see CPD 941  ff. sed si quis superest animi vigor, excutiamus / peccati servile iugum, ruptisque catenis,  / in libertatem et patriae redeamus honorem. The poet of CPD believes that spiritual regeneration brings material and political regeneration, hence he ends with an appeal to embark on a battle against real and spiritual enemies, cf. CPD 958  f. nec quia procidimus fusi certamine primo, / stare et conflictum vereamur inire secundum. On the iunctura of falx + premere see Verg. georg. 1.156–7 […] et ruris opaci / falce premes umbras and Hor. carm. 1.31.9–10 premant Calenam falce quibus dedit / fortuna vitem. 92. vellemus veterum vitiorum abscidere nodos: this line harks back to the vitis allegoria of Ioh. 15:1  ff. in line 26 at prius est vitem purgare, abscidere sentes (see 26n.). abscidere nodos means to cleanse the vine and cut away the knots (cf. Wernsdorf ad loc.); for a similar metaphorical use of this agricultural image cf. Cassian. conl. 5.19 possumus […] radices abscidere vitiorum and conl. 24.11 ut etiam nodum vestrae propositionis abscideret. As with the previous line (see 91n.) the author is expanding the image of cultivating the vines of real fields and in so doing he sets up a correspondence with the metaphorical husbandry of the soul’s

110 

 Commentary

vines by the use of verbal repetition. On the theme of good husbandry see e.  g. Cic. Tusc. 3.6.13 nos autem audeamus non solum ramos amputare miseriarum, sed omnes radicum fibras evellere (cf. also nn. 15–51 and 18–29). 93. Christi famulos: “servants of Christ”. It is a generic term (derived from the patristic Greek δοῦλος τοῦ Θεοῦ) to denote Christians (see Mohrmann 3.296). In monastic texts it is generally used as a synonym of monks (cf. Columbàs 1959: 281). vis nulla valeret: on this phrase see Verg. Aen. 6.552  ff. porta […] columnae / vis ut nulla virum, non ipsi excindere bello / caelicolae valeant. 94–5. The paradosis is lacunose. The manuscript has: nec nos Rifei prosterneret omnia bellum / et qui nunc nostra grassantur claude superbi. It is plausible that one or more lines have been accidentally omitted by the scribe. After prosterneret Gagny completed the lacuna thus: arcus Alani / nec servile etiam subverteret omnia bellum. Gagny’s conjecture although attractive is a mere guesswork. Griffe, Gallico and Fo do not heal this lacuna, whereas Smolak (1989: 211–2) proposed reading in these lines nec nos Riphaei prosterneret accola montis / omnia bellum. The conjecture of accola montis is arbitrary and based on the mention of Riphaei montes in Serv. on Aen. 9.81 and Mart. Cap. 6.663. Thus, according to Smolak, the poem would have here another explicit mention of barbarians (as at lines 18  f.), since they were considered the inhabitants of the mountains par excellence. However, since the original reading of the passage is not recoverable, I am unable to decide upon a text. Therefore, I insert a conjectural lacuna between prosterneret and omnia. 94. Riphaei: the manuscript has Rifei which should be corrected in Riphaei, see e.  g. Serv. on Aen. 9.81 nam ecce Ripaei, montes Arcadiae, non scribuntur cum aspiratione: quam addimus cum Riphaeos, montes Scythiae, significamus. Riphaei is a generic term for “barbarian”, who came from the Riphaeian mountains, in the northern part of Scythia (see RE s.  v. 921); cf. e.  g. Claud. In Eutr. 2.151; Jord. Get. 5 in cuius Scythiae medio est locus, qui Asiam Europamque ab alterutro dividit, Riphaei scilicet montes, qui Tanain vastissimum fundunt intrantem Maeotida. Riphaei was normally used as a poetic form to name the Alans; see e.  g. Verg. georg. 1.240, 3.381; Lucan. 2.635, 3.266; Sil. 12.5; Stat. Theb. 1.418. See also OLD s.  v.2; Griffe (1956: 192) and Courtois (1955: 40). 96–7 Abbot: an urban turba bonorum The optimistic attempt of the Abbot to save a significant number of Salmon’s fellow-citizens from the harsh critique of Salmon (see 96 in vestro populo) is a social

Commentary 

 111

strategy that the author of EP shares with Salvian, who rescues among Gallo-Romans only the clergy and a number of saeculares; see Salv. gub. 4.62 excipio enim primum omnes religiosos, deinde nonnullos etiam saeculares religiosis pares aut, si id nimis grande est, aliqua tamen religiosis honestorum actuum probitate consimiles, ceteros vero aut omnes aut paene omnes magis reos esse quam barbaros, and gub. 7.14 exceptis tamen perpaucis ferme sanctis atque insignibus viris qui, ut quidam [i.  e. Paul. Nol. epist. 32.3] de numero ipsorum ait, ‘sparsis redemerunt crimina nummis’. 96. Attamen: like at vero at line 15, attamen is an adversative particle that introduces a new speaker; cf. e.  g. Verg. ecl. 10.31; Ov. met. 2.702; see OLD s.  v. at 2.c. vestro populo contrasts with populique magistri (2). The opposition between the two populi is made more evident by the presence of the adjective vestro, which points out that the two communities live in two different environments, the locus amoenus of the antrum and the outside world, exposed to invasions and contaminated by the morbus of vices. 96–7. […] non rara bonorum / turba […] multosque pios: lay persons who distinguished themselves for their moral and intellectual high standards were called boni, “la fine fleur de la société” according to Amherdt (2001: 191); cf. e.  g. ICUR 7.19220.1 hic iacet egregium decus urbis atque bonorum; Sulp. Sev. Mart. 1.1.6 vale, frater in Christo, venerabilis, decus bonorum sanctorumque omnium; Sidon. carm. 24.80. The litotes non rara turba marks the polite disagreement of the Abbot with Salmon’s opinion. The Abbot reminds Salmon that although people are prey to vice, nevertheless the Church nourishes many pious Christians. The emphasis on non rara and multos is a “témoignage précieux” Griffe (1956: 193) against the generalised attacks of Salvian on Gallo-Roman society. ecclesia nutrit: for the simile of “mother” Church see e.  g. Tert. mart. 1.1 domina mater ecclesia; Aug. mor. eccl. 30.62 ecclesia catholica, mater Christianorum verissima. 98–105 Salmon: repose in the locus amoenus Salmon accepts the Abbot’s criticism and agrees that indeed many saeculares, men and women alike (cf. 100 sexus uterque), win their own bellum profundum (100n.) in town. Salmon’s last request is to know the nature of the requies (104) that the pater and the fratres (cf. 6n.) enjoy in the antrum. 98. pater optime: pater optime is an epithet of reverence and a pagan form of address directed either to distinguished people as a form of captatio benevolentiae, cf. e.  g. Hor. sat. 2.1.12–3 […] cupidum, pater optime, vires / deficient; Verg.

112 

 Commentary

Aen. 1.555 sin absumpta salus et te, pater optime Teucrum, or to gods, see Acc. trag. 241 o Dionyse, optime pater; Ov. met. 7.627–28 dum numerum miror, “Totidem, pater optime”, dixi / “tu mihi da cives, et inania moenia supple”. Orosius (hist. praef.) addresses Augustine as beatissime pater. 99. esse velim similes, nec desunt < pectore fortes > : the manuscript has esse velim similes, nec desunt solatia vitae, which is a clear example of dittography. solatia vitae appears below in line 102, surely the scribe’s eye while copying this line wandered to the line below. Griffe, Gallico and Smolak do not make any correction (cf. e.  g. Griffe 1956: 193 n.18 “le vers 99 est incomplet […] mais le sens de la phrase n’en souffre aucunement”). Solatia vitae is metrically impossible since the spondee desunt should be followed by a dactyl. I follow the emendation pectore fortes suggested by Fo (1999: 152–3); fortes suggests people with the physical strength to repel barbarians and with the spiritual force to resist vice. Alternatively, Fo proposes pectore sancti on the ground that the poet mentions the crowns of victory at line 100 and explains: “credo ci si debba riferire a persone di fede tanto provata da poter anche, nell’eventualità, affrontare la morte (per mano dei barbari?), per testimoniare la fede”. 100. quos […] coronas: coronae were prizes for athletes and more generally symbols of success tout court (see OLD s.  v. 1a). Wernsdorf suggested a parallel with Apoc. 4:10 et mittebant coronas suas ante thronum. This line reminded Fo (1999: 152) of a passage in Prosp. epigr. 23.5 crescunt virtutum palmae, crescuntque coronae. The first and foremost reference here is, however, Saint Paul: 1 Thess. 2.19, 1 Petr. 5.4, Phil. 4.1, 2 Tim. 4.8 (life as agon). In EP the martyrs arguably could mean either Christians who spiritually suffered and endured the assaults of the devil or Christians executed by the invaders. The poet of CPD in the context of fighting against vice recurred to a similar metaphor, cf. 851–2 […] Aspera vitam / dat via: nam campo capitur, non fine corona. ad victrices det: dare followed by ad and accusative rather than a dative is a distinctive mark of late Latin, see TLL 1475.15–26 s.  v. dare ad. 101  f. It is as if Salmon, at last, gives an indirect reply to Thesbon’s question at line 9. The consolation is not in the state of the patria itself but in the presence in it of some real Christians. It is possible, like Gallico suggests (1982: 167), that solatia vitae may be reminiscent of Lucretius’ praise of Epicurus’ heuremata, 5.20–1 ex quo nunc etiam per magnas didita gentis  / dulcia permulcent animos solacia vitae. One may also compare Lucr. 6.4–5, where Epicurus himself is a specimen of solacia vitae for the whole humankind: et primae dederunt solacia dulcia vitae / cum genuere virum tali cum corde repertum. As Meliboeus in Verg. ecl. 1.3  f.

Commentary 

 113

is away from his patria, so Salmon is nostalgic for his patria and seeks somehow to balance the bleak description of the sinful lifestyle of his fellow-citizens with the more encouraging presence of many guiltless men (98 insontes multi). 103. nunc age, care pater, cupido mihi fare vicissim: “Come now, dear father, tell me in turn, I am eager to hear”. This phrase recalls two Vergilian lines: Aeneas speaking to his father Anchises in Aen. 2.707 Ergo age, care pater, cervice imponere nostrae, and the impatient questioning of Deiphobus to Aeneas in Aen. 6.531  f. sed te qui vivom casus age fare vicissim / attulerint. On cupido mihi (“I am eager”) see Hor. sat. 2.1.44 nec quisquam noceat cupido mihi pacis. The vocative care pater picks up pater optime at 98. 104. qua te digna satis requies susceperit: a thematic ring composition; requies picks up ad requiem in line 6 (see 6n.). The offer of mental and physical rest that can be enjoyed in the antrum is one of the main tenets of this poem and it recalls the final lines of Verg. ecl. 1.79  f. hic tamen hanc mecum poteras requiescere noctem / fronde super viridi. The topos of a monastic community that bestows a spiritual requies upon all its members fits nicely in EP with the repose that Salmon has found amid the cool environment of the antrum; see e.  g. Eucher. laud. her. 31 qui alieni sunt ab illo rei publicae humanae tumultu, sepositi, quieti, silentes and Mohrmann 2.81–9. 104–5. ex quo / te corde hinc gestans abii, tecumque resedi: “since / carrying you in my heart I went away from here, and with you I remained in spirit”. The manuscript has tecumque, Wernsdorf keeps tecumque and suggests comparing it to Plin. epist. 9.31 postquam a te recessi, non minus tecum, quam cum apud te fui. Schenkl adds < ad > and prints Tecumque, understanding an allusion to the river Tech and the eponymous town in Gallia Narbonensis mentioned by Plin. nat. 3.32. Schenkl speculates that the author of EP could well be Paulinus of Béziers who, according to Hydatius, wrote about signa terrifica during the fifth-century barbarian invasions. Griffe (1956: 194 n. 19) objects to the emendation of Schenkl as “bien arbitraire” and “tout à fait inadmissible” and explains: “Salmon veut dire que, lorsqu’il a quitté le père abbé, il a continué cependant à vivre par le coeur (corde) avec lui: il l’a emporté avec lui (te hinc gestans) et il est resté avec lui (tecumque resedi). Gallico (1982: 172), Fo (1999: 153) and Smolak (1999) agree with Griffe. I see no reason to change the text of the manuscript and I also retain tecumque. resedi: topos of the “Einheit im Geist”, so Schuller (1999: 172). I interpret resedi metaphorically with the meaning of being closer in spirit with somebody; cf. also Schenkl (p.  500) “[Salmon] eiusque memoriam [i.  e. of the Abbot] pio

114 

 Commentary

semper se animo coluisse dicit”; on resideo see Forcellini s.  v. II.2 (uso translato). I also interpret in this way Fo’s translation of the line: “andandomene da qui, in cuore portai te, e, con te, dimorai” (1999: 163) and Smolak’s “seit ich, dich in meinem Herzen tragend, von hier fortgegangen bin und mich, nicht ohne dich, bleibend niedergelassen habe” (1999: 10). 106–10 Abbot: topos of conclusion Both EP and the first Vergilian Eclogue end with nightfall (see e.  g. ecl. 1.83 […] cadunt […] umbrae) and both hosts offer their guests hospitality. The question about the repose in the antrum might also explain why Salmon made his journey to the fratres. The antrum appears to be for Salmon the only peaceful place wherein it is possible to soothe the ruinous effects that the invasions have had on him. By the cumulative effects of Vergilian allusions, and by this harsh antithesis between the mystical pastoral antrum and the chaos of the outside world, the author attempts to adapt the monastic antrum to the Arcadian escape-world of Tityrus. Yet, it is not pure pastoral escapism but involves also confronting and understanding the evils of war and the alluring sirens of luxury and vanity. Despite the textual lacuna at lines 94  f., this sort of ring composition is important because it proves that we have this text more or less complete (contra see Helm 1949). Time has run out; the talk will be resumed the next day. The Abbot invites Salmon to stay for the coming night (108n.) in his antrum, to get up (cf. surgere on 109n.) and to join the other fratres. The sympathy of the Abbot for Salmon, who is fleeing his patria, and the hospitality he is offering echoe the hospitality of Tityrus in Verg. ecl. 1. However, Vergilian pastoral allusions in this final scene of EP are not confined to the first Eclogue. The topos of the impending night calls to mind the end of the last Eclogue and the presence of the verb surgere, used both in the concluding lines of the tenth Eclogue and of EP (see 109n.), reveals the close relation between EP and its source. In addition, it is the presence of surgere and of requies in line 104 that might suggest in these final lines the allegorical interpretation that the antrum is the only place of peace and resurrection from evils (see 109n. on surgere). The coming on of darkness is a concluding formula which soon became a conventional way of ending a literary composition (cf. Curtius 1990: 90–1). This is a commonplace that fits only outdoor conversations even in non-pastoral texts (e.  g. Cicero, de orat. 3.209). Like EP, in the context of monastic dialogues, both Sulpicius Severus and Cassian end some of their dialogues with a sunset; see e.  g. Sulp. Sev. dial. 1.27.6–7, 2.14.7; Cassian. conl. 3.22.4 his nos sermonibus eruditos abba Pafnutius e sua cella non tam alacres quam conpunctos corde ante medium noctis emisit.

Commentary 

 115

106. non equidem: it is always at the beginning of a hexametric line in Vergil, e.  g. Aen. 4.330, 8.129, 10.793. The only time it is used in the Eclogues is in ecl. 1.11 (non equidem invideo, miror magis) to mark the response of Meliboeus to Tityrus. 107. fraudabo: it is Wernsdorf’s conjecture (in the edition of Gagny) to replace laudabo of the manuscript. The former is preferable as the context requires a verb which points out that Thesbon will not leave Salmon’s initial questions unanswered. Later editions have accepted this correction. The verb fraudare is well attested in both Classical and Christian Latin (see TLL s.  v. col. 1263). For its use in a monastic dialogue see e.  g. Sulp. Sev. dial. 1.6 nihil, inquit Postumianus, vostra studia fraudabo. 108  ff. This is a literary motif in pastoral poems, e.  g. Verg. ecl. 1.79, 2.67 6.85–6, 9.63, 10.75–7 (cf. 109n.) all end with nightfall. 109. surgere et ad sacros sanctorum occurrere coetus: the Abbot refers to the brethren with the epithet sanctorum. Earlier Latin Christian writers used sancti as a collective denomination for Christians, later on the word developed the more specific meaning of “monks”; cf. e.g Peregr. Aeth. 7.2 sancti […] hoc est clerici vel monachi, 10.9; Evagr. Anton. 27 sanctorum […] exercitum et illam Lirinensis insulae cohortem, referred to the island of Lérins; see Pricoco (1978: 82 n. 14). surgere: the author ends the poem with a Vergilian echo of ecl. 10.75–7 surgamus. solet esse gravis cantantibus umbra,  / iuniperi gravis umbra: nocent et frugibus umbrae. / ite domum saturae, venit Hesperus, ite capellae. It is important to note that these lines also end the Vergilian Eclogues. In a Christian context, surgere often occurs as a synonym of resurgere, referring to Christ’s resurrection, see e.  g. Rom. 6:4 ut quomodo Christus surrexit a mortuis per gloriam Patris, ita et nos in novitate vitae ambulemus. If that connotation is present here, the message might be that as Christ rises from the dead so Salmon can rise in the antrum from the anxiety of material destruction brought about by the barbarian enemies and from the death of the sin (Salmon is called peccator by the Abbot at the beginning of the poem; cf. nn. 1 and 3 on Christi altaria). 110. crastina lux verbis accedet libera nostris: crastina lux appears twice in Vergil (Aen. 8.170 and 10.244) and is a iunctura only found in hexametric poetry; see also Gallico (1982: 165 n. 10). libera: the adjective libera meaning “without impediment” is mainly confined to prose, cf. e.  g. Cic. Rab. perd. 17 liberum tempus nobis dabitur ad istam disceptationem; Liv. 22.60.9 cum […] noctem ad erumpendum liberam habuissent; see also TLL s.  v. 1287.51  ff.; OLD s.  v. 8b.

116 

 Commentary

lux: having begun with the leafy antrum (cf. line 6 frondosae vitis), the poem ends with an image of light. lux here can also have an eschatological undertone: among the fratres Salmon can rejoice in the light of Christ set against the external darkness of vice. Thus, the members of this Christian community, the Christi altaria (3), thanks to their spiritual sacrifice to God, perform the paramount function of redeeming the sinner Salmon and introducing him in a new Christian penitential life (cf. 3n.). Set in contrast with this final note of lightness one may recall, for instance, the previous mentions of darkness in densa nube and atris nebulis (see nn.  16 and 89–90). The obedience to nature by the Abbot who postpones the dialogue for lack of natural light, is also set in stark contrast with those who indulge themselves in prolonging the durration of their banquets with the artificial light of lamps in lines 33–4.

Bibliography Editions of the Epigramma Paulini Gagny, G. (1536). Claudii Marii Victoris Oratoris Massiliensis de perversis aetatis suae moribus, Liber quartus Ad Salmonem, pp. 250–254 in Christiana et docta divi Alchimi Aviti Viennensis archiepiscopi, et Claudii Marii Victoris Oratoris Massiliensis, poemata, aliaque non poenitenda, Paris. Fabricius, G. (1564). Claudii Marii Victoris Oratoris Massiliensis de perversis suae aetatis moribus, Epistula ad Salmonem, p. 350, in Veterum poetarum ecclesiasticorum opera christiana, Basel. Wernsdorf, C. (1782). Cl. Marii Victoris, de perversis suae aetatis moribus, pp. 161–169, in Poetae Latini Minores (vol. 3), Altenburg. Schenkl, C. (1888). S. Paulini Epigramma, pp. 499–510, in Poetae Christiani minores, pars I (CSEL, 16.1), Vienna. Fo, A. (1999). ‘Il cosiddetto Epigramma Paulini attribuito a Paolino di Béziers: testo criticamente riveduto, traduzione e studio introduttivo’, RomBarb 16, 97–167. Smolak, K. (1999). ‘Zwischen Bukolik und Satire: Das sogenannte Sancti Paulini Epigramma’, IJCT, 6.1, 3–20.

Secondary literature Addamo, M. (1952). Didone nella letteratura latina, Palermo. Amherd, D. (2001). Sidoine Apollinaire. Le quatrième livre de la correspondance. Introduction et Commentaire, Bern. Andrè, J. M. (1966). L’Otium dans la vie morale et intellectuelle romaine, Paris. Bachrach, B. S. (1967). ‘The Alans in Gaul’, Traditio 23, 476–489. Bažil, M. (2009). Centones Christiani. Métamorphoses d’une forme intertextuelle dans la poésie latine chrétienne de l’Antiquité tardive. Diss Collection des Études Augustinienne, Paris. Benko, S. (1980). ‘Virgil’s Fourth Eclogue in Christian Interpretation’, ANRW II.31.1, 646–705. Berthelot, A. (1930). L’Asie ancienne centrale et sud-orientale d’après Ptolémée, Paris. Blaise, L. (1955). Manuel du latin chrétien, Strasbourg. Bowersock, G. W., Brown, P., Grabar, O. (20022). Late Antiquity. A Guide to the Postclassical World, Cambridge (Massachusetts) and London. Braund, S. H. (1992). Roman Verse Satire, Oxford. Brown, P. (1988). The Body and Society: Men, Women, and Sexual Renunciation in Early Christianity, New York. Brown, P. (2013, revised edition), The Rise of Western Christendom. Triumph and Diversity, A.D. 200–1000, Chichester. Brown, R. D. (1987). Lucretius on Love and Sex. A Commentary on De Rerum Natura IV, 1030–1287 with Prolegomena, text, and translation, Leiden. Bruguière, M. B. (1974). Littérature et droit dans la Gaule du V siècle, Paris. Burgess, A. (1993). The Chronicle of Hydatius, and the Consularia Constantinopolitana, Oxford. Bury, J. B. (1923). History of the Later Roman Empire, London. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110982381-012

118 

 Bibliography

Bury, J. B. (1928). The Invasions of Europe by the Barbarians, London. Cameron, A. (1991). Christianity and the Rhetoric of Empire: the Development of Christian Discourse, Berkeley. Ceccarelli, L. (2008). Contributi per la storia dell’esametro latino (2 vols.), Rome. Chatelain, E. (1880). ‘Notice sur les manuscrits des poésies de S. Paulin de Nole. Suivie d’observations sur le texte’, Bibliothèque des Écoles Françaises d’Athènes et de Rome 14, 1–95. Chiappiniello, R. (2009). ‘Feminei Furores. Prudentius’ Hamartigenia and the Epigramma Paulini’, VChr. 63, 169–188. Clark, G. (1993). Women in Late Antiquity. Pagan and Christian Lifestyles, Oxford. Clément, F. (1876). Introduction à l’histoire de la poésie chrétienne, Paris. Coleman, R. (1977, reprinted 2001). Vergil: Eclogues, Cambridge. Columbàs, G. M. (1959). ‘El concepto de monje y vida monástica hasta fine del siglo V’, StudMon 1, 257–342. Comparetti, D. (19662). Virgil in the Middle Ages (trasl. E. F. M. Benecke), London. Conte, G. B. (1986). The Rhetoric of Imitation : Genre and Poetic Memory in Virgil and Other Latin Poets, Ithaca (New York). Courcelle, P. (1957). ‘Les exégèses chrétiennes de la quatrième Éclogue, REA 59, 294–319. Courcelle, P. (1964). Histoire littéraire des grandes invasions germaniques, Paris. Courcelle, P. (1976). ‘Les lecteurs de l’Éneide devant les grandes invasions germaniques’, RomBarb 1, 25–56. Courcelle, P. (1984). Lecteurs Païens et Lecteurs Chrétiens de l’Énéide, (2 vols.), Paris. Courtois, P. (1955). Les Vandales et l’Afrique, Paris. Cracco Ruggini, L. (1989). ‘Juridical status and historical role of women in Roman patriarchal society’, Klio 71, 604–619. Criniti, N. (1999). Imbecillus sexus. Le donne nell’Italia antica, Brescia. Crusius, F. (1929). Römische Metrik, Munich. Cullhed, A. (2015). The Shadow of Creusa. Negotiating Fictionality in Late Antique Latin Literature, Berlin and Boston. Cutino, M. (2011). Ps.-Prospero di Aquitania. La Provvidenza divina, Pisa Dangel, J. (1985). ‘Les enjambements dans L’Enéide: lecture syntactique et incidences métriques’, Latomus 44, 72–100. Dauge, Y. A. (1981). Le Barbare. Recherches sur la conception romaine de la barbarie et de la civilisation, Brussels. Den Boeft, J. and M. L. van Poll-van de Lisdonk (eds.) (1999). The Impact of Scripture in Early Christianity, Leiden. Dickey, E. (2002). Latin Forms of Address from Plautus to Apuleius, Oxford. Dorfbauer, L. (2012). ‘Claudian und Prudentius: Verbale Parallelen und Datierungsfragen’, Hermes 140.1, 45–70. Drinkwater, J. and Elton, H. (eds.) (1992). Fifth-century Gaul: a crisis of identity?, Cambridge. Duckett, E. S. (1969). Latin Writers of the Fifth Century, New York, London. Duckworth, G. E. (1969). Vergil and Classical Hexameter Poetry, Ann Arbor. Dümmler, E. (1878). ‘Die handschriftliche Üeberlieferung der lateinischen Dichtungen aus der Zeit der Karolinger’, Neues Archiv für ältere deutsche Geschichtskunde, 3, 87–159, 239–322. Duval, P. M. (1971). La Gaule jusqu’au milieu du Ve siècle, Paris. Dyck, A. (1996). A Commentary on Cicero, De officiis, Ann Arbor. Dykes, A. (2011). Reading Sin in the World. The Hamartigenia of Prudentius and the Vocation of the Responsible Reader, Cambridge.

Secondary literature 

 119

Ebert, A. (1874). Geschichte der christlich-lateinischen Literatur von ihren Anfängen bis zum Zeitalter Karls des Grossen, Leipzig. Effe, B. and Binder, G. (eds.) (20012). Antike Hirtendichtung. Eine Einführung, Düsseldorf. Fabricius, A. (1858). Bibliotheca Latina Mediae et Infimae Aetatis, Florence. Fedeli, P. (1980). Sesto Properzio : il primo libro delle elegie, Florence. Ferris, I. M. (2000). Enemies of Rome: Barbarians through Roman Eyes, Stroud. Ferris, I. M. (2011). ‘The Pity of War : Representation of Gauls and Germans in Roman Art’, 185–201 in E. S. Gruen (2011) (ed.). Cultural Identity in the Ancient Mediterranean, Los Angeles. Ferrua, A. (1942). Epigrammata Damasiana, Rome. Ferrua, A. (1990). The Unknown Catacombs, New Lanark. Fielding, I. (2014). ‘Physical Ruin and Spiritual Perfection in Fifth-century Gaul: Orientius and his contemporaries on the Landscape of the Soul’, JECS 22.4, 569–585. Fontaine, J. (1969). ‘La femme dans la poésie de Prudence’, REL 47 bis, 55–83. Fontaine, J. (1978). ‘La conversion du christianisme à la culture antique: la lecture chrétienne de l’univers bucolique de Virgile’, Association Guillaume Budé, Lettres d’humanité, 1, 50–75. Fontaine, J. (1980). Études sur la poésie latine tardive d’Ausone à Prudence, Paris. Fontaine, J. (1981; 19954). Naissance de la poésie dans l’Occident Chrétien, Paris. Fowler, D. (1997). ‘The Virgil Commentary of Servius’, 73–78 in C. Martindale (1997) (ed.). The Cambridge Companion to Virgil, Cambridge. Frisch, M. (2020). Prudentius, Psychomachia. Einleitung, Text, Übersetzung und Kommentar, Berlin, Boston. Frye, N. (1990). Anatomy of Criticism, London. Hass, P. (1998). Der locus amoenus in der antiken Literatur: zu Theorie und Geschichte eines literarischen Motivs, Bamberg. Gallico, A. (1982). ‘Note per una nuova edizione dell’Epigramma Paulini’, SSR 6, 163–172. Giannarelli, E. (1980). La tipologia femminile nella biografia e nell’autobiografia cristiana del IV secolo, Rome. Gibson, R. K. (1995). ‘How to win girlfriends and influence them: Amicitia in Roman love elegy’, PCPS 41, 62–82. Gibson, R. K. (2002). ‘Cf. e.  g.: A typology of ‘parallels’ and the function of commentaries on Latin poetry’, 331–357 in C. Shuttleworth Kraus and R. K. Gibson (eds.) (2002). The Classical Commentary. Histories, Practices, Theory, Leiden, Boston, New York. Gibson, R. K. (2003). Ovid: Ars Amatoria Book 3. Edited with Introduction and Commentary, Cambridge. Gnilka, C. (1990). ‘Satura tragica, Zu Juvenal und Prudenz’, WS 103, 145–177. Goffart, W. (1980). Barbarians and Romans (418–584): the techniques of accommodation, Princeton. Goffart, W. (1988). The Narrators of the Barbarian History, Princeton. Gorini, A. (1865). Translation of Epigramma Paulini in Mélanges littéraires des Pères latins, (vol. 2), Paris. Green, R. P. H. (1971). The Poetry of Paulinus of Nola. A study of his Latinity, Bruxelles. Green, R. P. H. (1984). ‘Tityrus lugens’, Studia Patristica 15, 75–78. Green, R. P. H. (1991). The works of Ausonius, Oxford. Green, R. P. H. (2004). ‘Refinement and Reappraisal in Vergilian Pastoral’, 17–32 in R. Rees, (ed.) (2004). Romane Memento. Vergil in the Fourth Century, London. Griffe, E. (1956). ‘L’Epigramma Paulini, poème gallo-romain du V siècle’, REA 2, 187–194.

120 

 Bibliography

Griffe, E. (1957). La Gaule chrétienne, (vol. III), Paris-Toulouse. Griffe, E. (1962). ‘La pratique réligieuse en Gaule au V siècle’, Bull. litt. ecclés. 63, 241–267. Grillet, B. (1975). Les femmes et les fards dans l’antiquité grecque, Lyon. Gruen, E. S. (2011) (ed.). Cultural Identity in the Ancient Mediterranean, Los Angeles. Hardie, P. (2019). Classicism and Christianity in Late Antique Latin Poetry, Berkeley. Harries, J. (1994). Sidonius Apollinaris and the fall of Rome (407–485), Oxford. Heather, P. (2005). The Fall of the Roman Empire. A New History, Basingstoke and Oxford. Heather, P. (2010). Empires and Barbarians. Migrations, Development and the Birth of Europe, Oxford and New York. Helm, R. (1946). RE 36.18.2 s.  v. Paulinus 13, pp. 2359–2360. Hinds, S. (1998). Allusion and Intertext: Dynamics of Appropriation in Roman Poetry, Cambridge. Hofmann, J. B. and Szantyr, A. (1965). Lateinische Syntax und Stylistik, Munich. Hogeterq, A. (2006). Paul and God’s Temple: a historical interpretation of cultic imagery in the Corinthian correspondence, Leuven. Hosius, C. (1920). Geschichte der römischen Literatur, Munich. Hovingh, P. F. (1960). ‘A propos de l’édition de l’Alethia de Claudius Marius Victorius parue dans le Corpus Christianorum’, SE 11, 193–211. Hovingh, P. F. (1960). Claudii Marii Victorii ‘Alethia’, Corpus Christianorum, Series Latina 128, pp. 269–297, Turnhout. Hubbard, T. K. (1998). The Pipes of Pan: intertextuality and literary filiation in the pastoral tradition from Theocritus to Milton, Michingan. Huskinson, J. (2008). ‘Degrees of differentiation: Role models on early Christian sarcophagi’, 287–99 in S. Bell and I. L. Hansen (eds.) (2008), Role Models in the Roman World : Identity and Assimilation. Memoirs of the American Academy in Rome. Supplementary Volume 7, Ann Arbor. Isola, A. (2003–2005). ‘In margine a una lettura dell’Epigramma Paulini’, RomBarb 18, 315–332. Johnson, S. F. (ed.) (2012). The Oxford Handbook of Late Antiquity, Oxford. Jones, A. H. M. (1977). The Decline of the Ancient World, London. Jones, J. W. J. (1960–1). ‘Allegorical interpretation in Servius’, CJ 56, 217–226. Jullian, C. (1908–26). Histoire de la Gaule, (8 vols.), Paris. Karakasis, E. (2011). Song exchange in Roman Pastoral, Berlin and Boston. Knecht, A. (1972). Gregor von Nazianz: Gegen die Putzsucht der Frauen, Heidelberg. Korpanty, J. (1985). ‘Furor in der Römischen Poesie der Augusteischen Zeit’, Klio 67, 248–257. Krause, J.-U. (1991). ‘Familien und Hausholtsstrukturen im spätantiken Gallien’, Klio 73, 537–562. Kroon, C. (1995). Discourse Particles in Latin. A study of Nam, Enim, Autem, Vero and At, Amsterdam. Lagarrigue, G. (1977). Salvien, Oeuvres, (2 vols.), Paris. Lagarrigue, G. (1983). ‘Le Carmen de Providentia Dei. Optimisme religieux et espoir patriotique’, Hommage Schilling 37, 137–145. Lanci, J. R. (1993). Building a Temple of God: Paul’s metaphor of the community as a temple in its Roman Corinthian context, Cambridge (Mass.). Latouche, R. (1946). Les grandes invasions et la crise de l’occident au Ve siècle, Paris. Lejay, P. (1890). ‘Marius Victor, l’editeur Morel et le ms. Latin 7558 de Paris’, RPh 14, 71–78. Le Moine, F. J. (1996). ‘Jerome’s Gift to Women Readers’, 230–241 in R. W. Mathisen and H. G. Sivan, (eds.) (1996). Shifting Frontiers in Late Antiquity, Aldershot.

Secondary literature 

 121

Lenski, N. (1997). ‘Initium mali Romano Imperio. Contemporary Reactions to the Battle of Adrianople’, TAPA 127, 129–168. Leonardi, C. (1977). ‘Alle origini della cristianità medievale: Giovanni Cassiano e Salviano di Marsiglia’, StudMed 18, 491–608. Leumann, M., Hofmann, J. B. and Szantyr, A. (1977). Lateinische Grammatik, Munich. Lévy, E. (ed.) (1983). La femme dans les sociétés antiques. Actes des colloques de Strasbourg Mai 1980 et Mai 1981, Strasbourg. Link, W. (1910). De vocis Sanctus usu pagano, Königsberg. Loraux, N. (1986). ‘Thucydide et la sédition dans les mots’, Quaderni di Storia, 12, 95–134. Lot, F. (1945). Les invasions germaniques. La pénétration mutuelle du monde barbare et du monde romain, Paris. Lühken, M. Christianorum Maro et Flaccus. Zur Vergil- und Horazrezeption des Prudentius, Göttingen 2002. Malamud, M. A. (1989). A Poetics of Transformation: Prudentius and Classical Mythology, Ithaca, New York. Malamud, M. A. (2011). The Origin of Sin. An English Translation of the Hamartigenia, New York. Marcone, A. (1995). Paolino di Pella: Discorso di Ringraziamento, Firenze. Marcovich, M. (1988). ‘Patristic textual criticism’, ICS 13, 147–149. Marcovich, M. (1989). De Providentia Dei. Text, Translation and Commentary, Leiden and New York. Marouzeau, J. (1935). Traité de Stylistique appliquée au Latin, Paris. Marquardt, J. (1886). Das Privatleben der Römer, 2 Aufl. Besorgt von A. Mau, Leipzig. Martindale, C. (ed.) (1997). The Cambridge Companion to Virgil, Cambridge. Mathisen, R. W. (1993). Roman Aristocrats in Barbarian Gaul. Strategies for survival in an age of transition, Austin. Mathisen, R. W. and Sivan, H. G. (eds.) (1996). Shifting Frontiers in Late Antiquity, Aldershot. Matthews, J. (1975). Western Aristocracies and Imperial Court AD 364–425, Oxford. McGill, S. (2001). ‘Poeta Arte Christianus: Pomponius’ Cento Versus ad Gratiam Domini as an early example of Christian bucolic’, Traditio 56, 15–26. McGill, S. (2005). Virgil Recomposed: The Mythological and Secular Centos in Antiquity, New York. McGill, S. (2007). ‘Virgil, Christianity and the Cento Probae’, 173–194 in J. H.D Scourfield (ed.), (2007). Texts and Culture in Late Antiquity: Inheritance, Authority and Change, Swansea. McGill, S. (2012). ‘Latin Poetry’, 335–360 in S. F. Johnson, (ed.) (2012). The Oxford Handbook of Late Antiquity, Oxford. McGill, S. and Pucci, J. (eds.) (2016). Classics Renewed. Reception and Innovation in the Latin Poetry of Late Antiquity, Heidelberg. McLynn, N. B. (2009). ‘Poetic Creativity and Political Crisis in Early Fifth-century Gaul’, JLA 2.1, 60–74. Mensorio, M. (2019). ‘Sancti Paulini Epigramma: evoluzione tardoantica di un genere letterario’, Misure Critiche, 18, 5–37. Monturet, R. and Rivière, H. (1986). Les thermes sud de la villa gallo-romaine de Séviac, Paris and Bordeaux. Musset, L. (1965). Les invasions: Les vagues Germaniques, Paris. Nestori, A. (1975). Repertorio delle catacombe romane (Roma sotterranea cristiana 5), Rome. Nisbet, R. G. M. and Hubbard, M. (1970). A Commentary on Horace: Odes Book I, Oxford. Nisbet, R. G. M. and Hubbard, M. (1978). A Commentary on Horace: Odes Book II, Oxford.

122 

 Bibliography

O’ Hogan, C. (2016). Prudentius and the Landscape of Late Antiquity, Oxford. Otto, A. (1890). Die Sprichwörter und sprichwörtlichen Redensarten der Römer, Leipzig. Palla, R. (1981). Prudenzio: Hamartigenia. Introduzione, traduzione e commento, Pisa. Partoens, G. (1999). ‘Deus agricolam confirmat. L’élaboration de la parabole du semeur dans les livres contre Symmache de Prudence’, 161–186 in J. Den Boeft and M. L. van Poll-van de Lisdonk (eds.) (1999). The Impact of Scripture in Early Christianity, Leiden. Patterson, A. (1987). Pastoral and Ideology. Virgil to Valéry, Berkeley and Los Angeles. Pelletier, A. (1984). La femme dans la société gallo-romaine, Paris. Pelttari, A. (2014). The Space that Remains. Reading in Latin Poetry in Late Antiquity, Ithaca and London. Percival, J. (1992). ‘The fifth-century villa: new life or death postponed?’, 156–164 in J. Drinkwater and H. Elton (eds.) (1992). Fifth-century Gaul: a crisis of identity?, Cambridge. Petrone, G. (1988). ‘Locus amoenus/locus horridus: due modi di pensare il bosco’, Aufidus, 3–18. Pohl, W., Wood, I. and Reimitz, H. (eds.) (2001), The Transformation of Frontiers from Late Antiquity to the Carolingians, Leiden and Boston. Pricoco, S. (1978). L’isola dei santi: Il cenobio di Lerino e le origini del monachesimo gallico, Rome. Pricoco, S. (1990). Eucherio di Lione: De Contemptu Mundi, Florence. Provost, A. (1999). ‘Le caractère et l’évolution des images bibliques dans l’art chrétien primitif’, 79–101 in Den Boeft, J. and M. L. van Poll-van de Lisdonk (eds.) (1999). The Impact of Scripture in Early Christianity, Leiden. Putnam, M. C. J. and Ziolkowski, J. M. (2008). The Virgilian Tradition. The First Fifteen Hundred Years, New Haven and London. Rees, R. (ed.) (2004). Romane Memento. Vergil in the Fourth Century, London. Rémondon, R. (1964). La crise de l’empire romain de Marc-Aurèle à Anastase, Paris. Rhodes, P. J. (1994). Thucydides: Histories III, edited with translation and commentary, Warminster. Riché, P. (1953). Les invasions barbares, Paris. Richlin, A. (1995). ‘Making up a woman: the face of Roman gender’, 185–213 in H. EilbergSchwartz and W. Doninger (eds.), Off with the Head! The Denial of Women’s Identity in Myth, Religion and Culture, Berkeley, Los Angeles, London. Roberts, M. (1989). The Jewelled Style: Poetry and Poetics in Late Antiquity, Ithaca. Roberts, M. (1992). ‘Barbarians in Gaul: the response of the poets’, 97–106 in J. Drinkwater and H. Elton (eds.) (1992). Fifth-century Gaul: a crisis of identity?, Cambridge. Rosati, G. (1985). Ovidio: i cosmetici delle donne, Venice. Rosenmeyer, T. G. (1969; reprint 2004). The Green Cabinet. Theocritus and the European Pastoral Lyric, Bristol Rouche, M. (1979). L’Aquitaine des Wisigoths aux Arabes, 418–781: Naissance d’une région, Paris. Salzano, A. (2007). Agli inizi della poesia cristiana latina. Autori anonimi dei secc. IV–V, Salerno. Salzman, M. R. (2021). The “Falls” of Rome: crises, resilience, and resurgence in late antiquity, Cambridge. Schanz, M., Hosius, C. and Krüger, G. (1920). Geschichte der römischen Literatur, (vol. 4.2), Munich.

Secondary literature 

 123

Schierl, A. (2016). ‘A Preacher in Arcadia? Reconsidering Tityrus Christianus’, 241–264 in S. McGill and J. Pucci (eds.) (2016). Classics Renewed. Reception and Innovation in the Latin Poetry of Late Antiquity, Heidelberg. Schmid, W. (1953). ‘Tityrus Christianus. Probleme religiöser Hirtendichtung an der Wende vom vierten zum fünften Jahrhundert’, Rheinisches Museum für Philologie, 96, 101–165. Schönbeck, G. (1962). Der locus amoenus von Homer bis Horaz, Heidelberg. Schuller, A. (1999). Das sogenannte Sancti Paulini Epigramma. Einleitung, Text, Übersetzung und Kommentar, PhD diss., University of Vienna. Sesini, U. (1949). Poesia e Musica nella Latinità Cristiana dal III al X secolo, Turin. Shanzer, D. (1989). ‘Allegory and reality: Spes, Victoria and the date of Prudentius’ Psychomachia’, ICS 14, 347–363. Shanzer, D. (2012). ‘Augustine and the Latin Classics’, 161–174 in M. Vessey and S. Reid (eds.), A Companion to Augustine, Chichester. Shuttleworth Kraus, C. and Gibson, R. K. (eds.) (2002). The Classical Commentary. Histories, Practices, Theory, Leiden, Boston, New York. Smolak, K. (1989). ‘Zur Textkritik des sog. Sancti Paulini Epigramma’, WS 102, 206–212. Smolak, K. (2000). ‘La poesia cristiana latina tra il quarto e il quinto secolo’, Salesianum, 62, 19–39. Solignac, A. (1984). DS 12.1 s.  v. Paulin de Béziers, coll. 588–89, Paris. Soubiran, J. (1966). L’Elision dans la Poésie Latine, Paris. Spatafora, A. (1997). From the ‘Temple of God’ to God as the Temple. A Biblical theological study of the Temple in the Book of Revelation, Rome. Stam, J. (1940). Prudentius Hamartigenia with Introduction, Translation and Commentary, Amsterdam. Teuffel, W. S. (1913). Geschichte der römischen Literatur, VI Auflage unter Mitwirkung von E. Klostermann, R. Leonhard und P. Wessner, neu bearbeitet von W. Kroll und F. Skutsch, dritter Band, Leipzig and Berlin. Thelamon, F. (1981). Païens et Chrétiens au IV siècle, Paris. Thompson, E. A. (1982). Romans and Barbarians. The Decline of the Western Empire, Madison. Thraede, K. (1972). ‘Frau’, in Reallexikon für Antike und Christentum, 8, 197–269. Van Assendelft, M. M. (1978). Sol ecce surgit igneus. A commentary on the Morning and Evening of Prudentius, Gröningen. Van Dam, R. (1985). Leadership and Community in Late Antique Gaul, London. Vinge, L. (1967). The Narcissus Theme in Western European Literature up to the Early 19th century, Lund. Ungaro, L. (1985). ‘Il ripostiglio della Casa delle Vestali, Roma 1899’, Bollettino di numismatica 4, 78–80. Wallace-Hadrill, J. M. (1961). ‘Gothia and Romania’, Bulletin of the John Rylands Library 44, 219–237. Ward-Perkins, B. (2005). The Fall of Rome and the End of Civilization, Oxford and New York. Watkins, J. (1995). The Specter of Dido: Spenser and Virgilian Epic, New Haven and London. Weeber, K-W. (2003). Luxus im alten Rom: Die Schwelgerei, das süsse Gift, Darmstadt. Weitzmann, K. (1977–1978). Age of spirituality. Late antique and early Christian art. Third to seventh century, New York. Whittaker, C. R. (1994). Frontiers of the Roman Empire: A Social and Economic Study, Baltimore. Wiesen, D. (1964). St. Jerome as a satirist: a study in Christian Latin thought and letters, Ithaca. Wilkinson, L. P. (1966). Golden Latin Artistry, Cambridge.

124 

 Bibliography

Witke, C. (2004). ‘Recycled Words: Vergil, Prudentius and Saint Hippolytus’, 128–140 in R. Rees (ed.) (2004). Romane Memento. Vergil in the Fourth Century, London. Wyke, M. (1994). ‘Woman in the mirror: the rhetoric of adornment in the Roman world’, 134–151 in L. J. Archer, S. Fischler, and M. Wyke (eds.), Women in Ancient Societies: an Illusion of the Night, Basingstoke and London.

Subject Index abbot 6, 17, 58–60 allegory 31, 64 altaria –– metaphorical 11, 13, 21  f., 28  f., 42, 57  f., 60, 83, 104, 115  f. antrum 19, 25, 29, 31, 33, 57  f., 60–66, 68  f., 71, 74, 111, 113–116 barbarian invasions VIII, X, 6–8, 11, 26, 31, 34, 37, 66, 68, 82, 92, 107, 113 barbarus 7, 25, 29  f., 32, 42, 66, 69, 73 Bible 15, 36, 80, 82, 84, 88, 93, 100  f. brethren 13, 16, 29, 57, 60, 62  f., 65, 115 corruption 12, 15, 19, 24, 33, 35  f., 80, 84, 86, 92, 94  f., 105, 107 cosmetics 93, 96, 99  f. cultura animi 14, 31  f., 36, 75, 78 cultus 15, 35, 93, 96–101 dialogue XI, 3, 6, 17–19, 23–30, 33, 57  f., 61, 67, 115  f. distortion –– of values 14, 35, 86  f. Eclogues 9, 18  f., 21–25, 28, 30, 37, 57–60, 63, 73, 115, 118 enemy 7, 9, 11, 13, 15, 17, 30–33, 36, 43, 49, 66, 69, 71  f., 74, 76, 78, 88, 93, 108 evening 17, 37 fatherland 6, 13, 16, 43, 49, 73, 109 foedus 7, 9, 11  f., 66–68 Good Shepherd –– Christ 25, 27, 57, 59 hostis 9, 15, 31, 36, 42, 48, 72–74, 78, 88, 108 husband 36, 49, 94, 106 husbandry –– cultura animi 15, 32, 37, 78  f., 93, 109  f. internal enemy 33, 73 jewels 96  f. knowledge –– secular, pagan 14, 26, 35, 72, 87–91, 101 locus amoenus XI, 13, 19, 23–25, 27–29, 33, 37, 57  f., 63  f., 67, 71, 75, 111, 119, 123 makarismos 90 marble 43, 68  f. metaphor 9, 15, 25, 27, 31, 33, 36  f., 57  f., 65, 68, 71–73, 78–80, 88, 92, 105, 107, 109, 112, 120 https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110982381-013

mimes 104  f. misogyny 15, 19, 23, 35  f., 92–94, 98 monk 17, 23, 63 ornatus 15, 35, 96 pastoral 18, 21, 23, 25–29, 33, 37, 57, 59  f., 64, 67, 70  f., 75, 114  f., 120 patria 18, 25, 28–30, 57, 66  f., 71, 112, 114 perversion 14, 35, 86 poetry –– classical 18, 21–23, 26, 28, 33, 47, 57  f., 60, 64, 67, 71, 75, 78, 82  f., 85  f., 91  f., 95, 101, 103–105, 108, 115, 119 psychomachy 13, 31, 72 repose 13, 17, 19, 24  f., 43, 51, 57, 62–64, 111, 113  f. responsibility –– male 17, 19, 35  f., 94  f., 103, 105 reversal 91, 94, 106 satire 6, 21, 23  f., 33–35, 37, 70, 80, 83  f., 92, 96, 99, 101, 105 satirical 12, 23, 33  f., 38, 69, 80, 83, 85–87, 102, 106 scythe –– metaphorical 15, 49, 109 sentes 31  f., 44, 72, 79, 107, 109 sin 13, 31, 45, 47, 72–74, 78  f., 87, 93, 96, 109, 112, 115 soul 10, 25, 31, 33, 37, 45, 62, 64, 71, 73, 75, 78–80, 86, 93, 104, 109 sunset 37, 95, 114 templum 25, 29, 42, 57  f., 61, 65, 69 theatre 70  f., 93, 104  f. vice 10, 12, 14, 30  f., 33, 35  f., 45, 65, 72  f., 77  f., 82, 84–88, 92  f., 96, 104, 108  f., 111  f., 116 villa 24, 70, 79, 121  f. war X, 10, 13  f., 19, 25, 29–31, 35  f., 43, 49, 61, 65  f., 70, 72, 74, 81  f., 86, 108, 114 wealth 34, 38, 43, 80, 85  f., 97 weeds –– of sin 37, 77, 93, 109 women 15–17, 19, 30, 35, 47, 92–98, 100–103, 105  f., 108, 111, 118 wound 45, 87  f.

Index of Names Alans VIII, IX, 7, 17, 69, 74, 76, 110, 117 Albus 14, 35, 44  f., 80, 85 Ambrose 32, 34, 62  f., 72 Augustine 11, 55, 79, 88, 104, 112, 123 Cassian 24, 58  f., 61, 63, 73, 80, 84, 109, 114 Cicero –– Ciceronian 32, 37, 83, 86, 101, 114, 118 Constantine IX, X, 76 Corinna 46  f., 101, 103 Courcelle VIII, IX, 7  f., 26, 61, 68, 77, 82, 118 Damasus 60 Endelechius 26  f. Fabricius 5, 117, 119 Fo 5–8, 12, 18, 59–62, 64, 68, 70, 73, 76  f., 79, 84, 90–92, 96, 98, 101–103, 106–110, 112–114, 117 Gagny 3–6, 68  f., 79, 102, 105, 110, 115, 117 Gallico 6  f., 61, 64  f., 69, 77, 82, 84  f., 90, 102, 106  f., 110, 112  f., 115, 119 Griffe 6–8, 18, 59, 70, 84, 110–113, 119  f. Helm 7  f., 17  f., 23, 114, 120 Horace 6, 22, 33  f., 71, 80, 83, 85  f., 101, 105, 121 Jerome 34, 36, 62, 88, 94, 101, 120, 123 Juvenal 33–35, 80, 83, 96, 119 Lesbia 46  f., 97  f., 101 Lucretius 21, 35, 71, 91, 112, 117 Marullus 47, 105 Meliboeus 25  f., 28–30, 37, 66, 69, 73, 112, 115 Morel 4  f., 120 Orientius 9, 68, 119 Orosius 11, 112

https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110982381-014

Ovid 21, 47, 60, 89, 92, 97, 99, 101, 103, 119 Passiena 46  f., 98, 105 Paulinus of Nola 3, 12, 27, 59, 83, 119 Pedius 14, 35, 44  f., 80, 83  f. Pollio 14, 21, 35, 41, 44  f., 80, 84  f. Pomponius 26, 121 Prudentius 12, 23, 27, 32, 35, 64  f., 68, 72, 78, 87, 96, 98, 106, 118, 121–124 Salmon 6, 8, 13–19, 24  f., 29–31, 34–37, 42  f., 46  f., 50  f., 57  f., 60–63, 65–67, 69, 71–74, 76, 79, 81, 87, 92–95, 103, 105, 107  f., 110–116 Salvian 9, 11, 37, 72, 111 Sarmatians 7, 69, 74, 76 Schenkl 4–8, 17  f., 41, 56, 59, 61  f., 65  f., 68  f., 71, 76  f., 79, 84  f., 102, 105  f., 113, 117 Smolak 6–8, 18, 23, 59, 61  f., 67  f., 70, 72, 77, 79  f., 84, 86, 102, 107, 110, 112–114, 117, 123 Stilicho 9 Sulpicius Severus 24, 63, 114 Theodosius IX Thesbon 13, 15, 17–19, 24  f., 29–31, 33, 35, 38, 42  f., 46  f., 57, 60–63, 66  f., 69, 74  f., 92, 94  f., 112, 115 Tityrus 25–30, 38, 73, 114  f., 119, 123 Vandals VIII, 7, 11, 17, 69, 74, 76 Vergil 21–23, 25–29, 32, 37, 47, 57, 59  f., 64–67, 69, 71, 73, 82  f., 90, 92, 101, 103, 106, 115, 118  f., 121  f., 124 Victorius 3–6, 17, 120 Wernsdorf 6, 17, 56, 59, 62, 70, 73, 76, 79  f., 103, 109, 112  f., 115, 117