No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Horace's Pindaric Apollo (Odes 3.4.60–4)
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 11 February 2009
Extract
Descende caelo, Horace's ode 3.4, challenges the reader with an elaborate Pindaric architecture embracing seemingly disparate elements. After an opening invocation (1–8), the poet discourses at length on how the Muses protect him (9–36), then abruptly notes that those goddesses also nourished Octavian after his recent military campaign (37–42). This breaks off into a composite Titanomachy/Gigantomachy (42–64), followed by a set of maxims (65–8) which the poet further illustrates with other mythical exempla (69–80). This paper contends that the relationship among these various parts comes into clearest focus in the five-line description of the god Apollo that closes the Gigantomachy (60–4). This passage lies at the heart of the entire poem's major interpretive issuespoetics, panegyric, allusion, and structure but its pivotal role in the ode deserves fuller acknowledgement.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Classical Association 1998
References
1 Williams, Gordon, The Third Book of Horace's Odes (Oxford, 1969), p. 52: ‘This section reaches a climax with a hymnic invocation of Apollo (61–64), parallel to that of Jupiter (45–8).’Google Scholar
2 The neat parallelism of Delos and Patara here may be a remnant of the tradition that Apollo spends half the year in each of these sacred locales (Servius on Aeneid4.143).
3 The poem seems to date from 29 or 28 B.C. (see Doblhofer, E., Die Augustuspanegyrik des Horaz informalhistorischer Sicht[Heidelberg, 1966], p. 152; Fraenkel E., Horace [ Oxford, ], p. 273, n. 3, argues for 27), but critics differ on the extent to which Horace's words reflect settled times for Romans. MacKay L.A. argues that ‘lines 41–80 must imply a much more serious criticism of Augustus’policy, or what Horace feared might be Augustus' policy' (‘Horace, Odes, III.4: date and interpretation’, CR 46 [1932], 243–5, at p. 244. Wilkinson L.P. agrees that Horace here ‘pleads’ for a real amnesty against the Antonian remnant (Horace and his Lyric Poetry[ Cambridge, 1951], pp. 69–72). On the other hand, Horace notes that the Muses not only advise clemency but rejoice that they have given this advice (41–2 vos lene consilium el datis et datol gaudetis). The latter phrase must refer to the fact that Caesar has accepted their advice and at least begun a policy of rapprochement with the vanquished. See Peerlkamp P.H.,Horatii Flacci Carmina Q. (Amsterdam, 1862), ad loc: ‘Gaudent dato, quia Augustus accipit, et res bonos eventus habet’ (Williams cf.[n. 1], p. 51). That the advice to be merciful comes from the poet's divine patrons resonates clearly, but a celebratory spirit predominates.Google Scholar
4 Cf. also 45 temperatand 66 vim temperatam.
5 Some commentators see Apollo here fighting in the battle (e.g. Peerlkamp, Wickham). The grammar yields the idea that he ‘stood’ in the line or company of the Olympian warriors, but Apollo's posture does not suggest an active combatant. In battle he would be wielding the bow, not wearing it on his shoulders. Miiller ad loc. and Syndikus H. P, Die Lyrik des Horaz. Eine Interpretation der Oden(Darmstadt, 1973), p. 2.67, claim that the epithets of Vulcan and Juno, too, do not refer to the immediate situation of the battle; Kiessling-Heinze agree in the latter case. But avidus presumably = avidus pugnae or, if the ancient commentators are correct, suggests a quality of fire (in the Gigantomachy depicted on the north frieze from the Siphnian Treasury at Delphi, Hephaestus appears with bellows heating coals to throw at the Giants). The epithet matronahardly styles Juno a warrior but it makes sense in the contest against inpios Titanas(42–3). The train of thought leads us to believe that Apollo took part in the battle and presumably did so as a bowmanbut in verse 60 the battle has suddenly ended.Google Scholar
6 Pliiss, H.T., Horazstudien(Leipzig, 1882), pp. 240–1 would go further to connect the verses on Apollo with the following gnomai. He suggests that the poet, a priest of the Muses (cf. 3.1.3), speaks the gnomic utterances as if moved by the spirit of Apolline wisdom and revelation; the sententiae(3.4.70) are akin to priestly declarations or instructions. Kiessling-Heinze (p. 271) similarly characterize the speaker of the whole poem as ‘der irdische Hypophet der Musen, der den Rat spende’Google Scholar
7 On the Pindaric manner of the poem in general, see Wilkinson(n. 3), p. 72;Kennedy N.T., ‘Pindar and Horace’, Ada Classica18 (1975), 9–24, at p. 24; Klingner F., Romische Geisteswelt (Munich, 1965), pp. 376–94; Borzsak I., ‘Descende caelo...’, Acta Antigua8 (1960), 369–86, at pp. 380–6. On the specific imitations, see especially Fraenkel (n. 3), pp.276–85 (essential reading for the debt of the Horatian ode's whole plan to Pythian1); Pasquali G., Orazio lirico (Florence 1920, repr. 1964), pp. 696–700(important especially on Odes3.4 and Pythian8);Thieler, W., 'Das Musengedicht des Horaz', in Untersuchungen zur antiken Literatur (Berlin, 1970), pp. 394–429; Cremona V., La poesia civile di Orazio (Milan, 1982), 222–38, esp. p. 232 (a good overview of previous work on the subject); and most recently Lyne R. O. A. M., Horace: Behind the Public Poetry(New Haven/London, 1995), pp. 49–55.Google Scholar
8 LIMC vol. 2, no. 1054–65 s.v. ‘Apollon’; Vian, F., La guerre des Geantes. Le mythe avant Vepoque hellenistique(Paris, 1952), pp. 79–82,158–9,203–5. One need not misrepresent the extent of the motif in art to highlight Horace's distinctive treatment, as do Aymard J., ‘La politique d ' Auguste et l'ode 111,4 de Horace’, Latomus15 (1956), 26–36, at p. 35; and Commager S., The Odes of Horace (New Haven-London, 1962), p. 200Google Scholar
9 Aristoph. Av. 1249–51 suggests single combat between Zeus and Porphyrion. Apollod. 1.6.2 has Zeus smite the giant with a thunderbolt and Heracles follow with a bowshot, a procedure found elsewhere in this account which highlights Heracles'; role:
Google Scholar
10 See, for example, Gildersleeve's, B.L.discussion, Pindar The Olympian and Pythian Odes(New York, 1885), p.325Google Scholar
11 Fraenkel started his argument that Horace patterned the whole poem after Pythian1 from the general acknowledgement that verses 61–4 derive from Pythian1.39–40.
12 Ross, D.O.has argued that the collocation of Calliope and Phoebus here evokes Callimachean poetics, given their pairing in poetic contexts in Virgil's Ecloguesand Propertius (cf. their role in Call. Aitia 1), and in view of the ‘recusatio’ closing the previous ode (3.3.69–72 non hoc iocosae conveniet lyrae.1 quo, Musa, tendis? desine pervicaxl referre sermones deorum etl magna modis tenuare parvis):Backgrounds to Augustan Poetry: Gallus, Elegy and Rome(Cambridge, 1975), p. 143. On the poem's Hesiodic background, see Thornton A.H.F., ‘Horace's ode to Calliope (111,4)’, AUMLA23 (1965), 96–102 and Marg W., ‘Zum Musengedicht des Horaz (Carm. 3,4)’, in Monumentum Chiloniense. Studien zur augusteischen Zeit. Festschrift fur Burck E.(Amsterdam, 1975), pp. 385–99Google Scholar
13 Cf. the miraculous stories about the childhood of Aeschylus (Paus. 1.21.2), Stesichorus (Pliny, NH 10.82), and Pindar (Paus. 9.23.2).
14 See Hardie, P.,Virgil's Aeneid: Cosmos and Imperium(Oxford, 1986), pp. 85–90with bibliography.Google Scholar
15 The referee has drawn attention to Horace's more specific reference to the Lycian cult centre at Patara, in light of the fact that Patara (as opposed to Lycia) is seldom mentioned in Greek poetry in connection with Apollo, and that Brutus waged a war against Xanthus and Patara in 42 B.c. (for details, see Radke, G., RE 18.4 [1949], s.v. ‘Patara’, 2557–9): Horace might have been there.Google Scholar
16 Compare the same procedure in Horace's imitation of Pindar's Ol. 2.1–2 Ava
; at Odes 1.12.1–3 Quern virum aut heroa lyra velacril tibia sumis celebrare, Clio?/ quern deum?
17 Eur. Ion 94–1; Phoen. 222–5.
18 Statius'; version of Horace's stanza (Thebaid,1.696–8) reverts to Pindar's second-person address: Phoebe parens, seu Lyciae Patarea nivosisl exercent dumeta iugis, seu Tore pudicol Castaliae flavos amor est tibi mergere crines). The verses in fact conflate Horace with Horace's model. With Castaliae...amor est tibiin Statius compare Pindar's
19 Gurval, R., Actium and Augustus:The Politics and Emotions of Civil War(Michigan,1995), esp. pp. 87–136Google Scholar
20 For example, the Aedes Divi Iulii, before which were set up rostracaptured from Actium (Dio 51.19.2), and the Curia Julia, with its figures of Victoria (Dio 51.22.1), both opened in 29 B.C On the whole subject, see Holscher T., ‘Denkmaler der Schlacht von Actium. Propaganda und Resonanz’, Klio67 (1985), 81–102Google Scholar
21 See Galinsky, K.,Augustan Culture(Princeton, 1996), p.219, who provides an excellent overview of the temple and its meaning; further Zanker P., ‘Der Apollotempel auf dem Palatin. Ausstattung und politische Sinnbezuge nach der Schlacht von Actium’, Analecta Romana Instituti Danici, Suppl. 10 (1983), 21–40, and the admittedly speculative reading of Lefivre E., Das Bildprogram des Apollo-Tempels auf dem Palatin(Konstanz,1989)Google Scholar
22 Triumphal processions started near or perhaps at the old Temple of Apollo in the Campus Martius, where the senate sometimes deliberated on the granting of triumphs (Livy 3.68.7–8,37.58.3, 39.4.2ff., 41.17.3–4); the ludi Apollinares were established victoriae, non valetudinis ergo, utplerique rentur(Livy 25.12.15). See Simon E.in LIMC 2.363–64 s.v. ‘Apollon/Apollo’; Gage J., Apollon romain(Paris, 1955), pp. 283,413–18; Galinsky (n. 21), p. 216
23 A relief now in the Villa Albani in Rome depicting Victoria's reception of Apollo, Diana, and Leto almost certainly represents Apollo's monumental arrival on the Palatine. See Strazzulla M.J., Ilprincipato di Apollo. Mito e propaganda nelle lastre ‘Campana’ dal tempio di Apollo Palatino(Rome, 1990), pp. 111–25; Galinsky (n. 21), p. 216and figure 122
24 The ancient commentators thought that Horace was referring to the general practice of moving troops in the winter from camps to towns, but the reference is surely more precise: Octavian's massive settlement of veterans after the defeat of Antony (see Kiessling-Heinze ad loc.).
25 Parallels between Augustus' victories and the Olympians' conquest of the Giants are drawn obliquely by Horace (Odes1.12, 2.12.6–12) and Propertius (2.1.17–34, 3.9.47–56), and more closely by Ovid (Tristia2.67–76, 333–6). Cf. similar comparisons later at Lucan 1.33ff., Stat. Silv. 5.3.196, Martial 8.50.1–6, Sil. Ital. Pun. 17.645–50. See in general Owen S.G.,Ovidi Nasonis Tristium Liber Secundus P.(Oxford, 1924), pp.74–5; Nicholl W.S.M., ‘Chasing Chimaeras’, CQ 35 (1985), 134–9
26 See Prop. 2.31.15–16; another statue of Apollo citharoedus stood in front of the shrine (Prop. 2.31.5–6). Interpreters from Propertius to Zanker P.have read the cult statue in the Palatine temple as a figure of peace: Prop. 4.6.69–70 citharam iamposcit Apollol victor et adplacidos exuit arma choros(following immediately upon a reference to the monumentaof Actian Apollo); The Power of Images in the Age of Augustus(Ann Arbor,1988), p.85
27 Several critics have pointed this out (e.g. Hornsby, R., ‘Horace on art and politics (Ode 3.4)’, CJ5S [1962], 97–104, at p. 103; Thornton [n. 12], p. 100) but no one has explained exactly how the connection emerges from the text.Google Scholar
28 First in Virgil, Georgics 3.293 iuvat ire iugis, qua nulla priorum Castaliam molli devertitur orbita clivo. Cf. later Lygd. 1.16 per vos[the Muses], auctores huius mihi carminis, oro, Castaliamque umbram Pieriosque lacus; Ov. Am. 1.15.35–6 Apollol pocula Castalia plena ministret aqua. By the time of Martial the Muses themselves could be spoken of as Castalidum sororum(4.14.1). There is no earlier Greek parallel, though the beginnings of the idea may be reflected at Theocritus 7.148.
29 Kiessling-Heinze on 3.4.41: ‘consiliumoft von erbetenem Orakel’. Examples: Enn. scaen. frr. 141–43 V, Val. Max. 1.8.10, Lucan 9.552.
30 For useful critical comment on earlier versions of this paper I am very grateful to William Race, Jenny Clay, the anonymous referee, and the Editor, S. J. Heyworth.