1. Fraenkel, E., Horace (Oxford 1957) 232.Google Scholar

2. Nisbet, R. G. M., Hubbard, M., A Commentary on Horace: Odes, Book I (Oxford 1970) 1Google Scholar. Hereafter N&H with reference to comments ad loc. unless otherwise noted. The following discussions of Odes 1.1 will be cited by author’s name only: Cody, J. V., Horace and Callimachean Aesthetics (Coll. Latomus 147, Brussels 1976)45–71;Google ScholarMusurillo, H., ‘The Poet’s Apotheosis: Horace, Odes 1.1,’ TAPA 93 (1962) 230–239Google Scholar; Schönberger, O., ‘Horatius, carm. 1.1,’ Gymnasium 73 (1966) 388–412Google Scholar; Shey, H. J., ‘The Poet’s Progress: Horace, Odes 1.1,’ Arethusa 4 (1971) 185–196Google Scholar; Syndikus, H. P., Die Lyrik des Horaz, Band I (Darmstadt 1972) 23–27Google Scholar; Vretska, K., ‘Horatius, Carm. I, 1,’ Hermes 99 (1971) 323–335.Google Scholar

3. Ps. Aero ad 1.1. N&H 1: ‘Horace [in expressing his aspirations] goes a long way with a description of other people’s varied occupations.’

4. N&H 3.

5. Hermann, G., De Horati primo carmine dissertatio (Berlin 1842Google Scholar): reprinted in Hermann’s Opuscula 8.395–401. Only Nauck followed Hermann’s suggestion — and often received the blame for the former’s idea (e.g. in Page, T. E., Q. Horatii Flacci Carminum Libri IV [London 1895] 131Google Scholar). Hermann’s view is discussed at length and rejected in Orelli, J. C., Q. Horatius Flaccus, revised by Baiter, J. G. and Hirschfelder, W. (Berlin 1886) vol. 1, 12–13Google Scholar.

6. Hermann would have a good point if it were fully correct to say ‘as a poet Horace comes closest to the gods by his special contemplative vision of life … even before Maecenas can pay him the honour of counting him among the great lyric poets of antiquity’ (Musurillo 23).

7. For such schemas see: Collinge, N. E., The Structure of Horace’s Odes (London 1961) 108–9Google Scholar, who also records earlier structures; Musurillo 232–3; Schonberger 410 n. 61; Vretska 334–5; Shey 185; Ghiselli, A., ‘Lettura dell’ Ode 1, 1 di Orazio,’ Lingua e Stile 7 (1972) 115–8.Google Scholar

8. For this ideal second person singular future, see Handford, S. A., The Latin Subjunctive (London 1947) 109Google Scholar n. 1. So too in English, ‘you see’ may be specific, referring to the addressee or a general audience (‘one sees’). It is important to recognize this ideal type; for instance, in Odes 2.12.9–10, latius regnes avidum domando/spiritum, it is unlikely that Horace is directly warning his recipient, Sallustius Crispus (‘one rules more widely by taming one’s greedy instinct’). This movement from specific address to the general reader is frequent in Horace’s poetry. For example, caelum ipsum petimus stultitia (Odes 1.3.38: ‘we seek heaven itself in our stupidity’) clearly has wider significance than to Horace and Vergil alone.

9. Ps. Acro: decus — quia magna laus est placere meliori (‘because it is a great glory to win the approval of a superior’). But Maecenas can also glory in Horace (cf. Odes l.32.13: o decus Phoebi et dapibus supremi grata/testudo Iovis; ‘lyre, the glory of Phoebus and delight for the feasts of highest Jove’). For Horace’s glory from his readers, see Odes 3.30 (the concluding ode of the collection), especially 7f.: usque ego postera/crescam laude recens (‘I will eternally grow, renewed by the praise of posterity’).

10. For praesidium as ‘unpoetic,’ see Axelson, B., Unpoetische Worter (Lund 1945) 98Google Scholar; yet the ‘unpoetic’ word is here introduced by the grandiloquent o, to produce a typically Horatian callida iunctura. For praesidium vitae (‘livelihood’): Petronius 116.4.

11. For instance Solon 1.43ff. (Diehl); Pindar fr. 221; Bacchylides 10.38–45. Musurillo (235–7) has shown interesting Egyptian and Semitic parallels for the topoi. Yet there is no evidence that this was a Roman commonplace: Horace transforms the Greek topoi into Latin novelties.

12. Shey 185.

13. Libanius, Decl. 30.31 (Foerster).

14. Euripides fr. 659 (Nauck) 1–10: ‘We have all types of desires for our lives … Yet I do not want to obtain any of these, but would like to have a reputation for good repute.’

15. La Penna, A., Orazio e l’ideologia del principato (Torino 1963) 203–224.Google Scholar

16. The philosophical scheme of the lives first appears in Plato, Rep. 581c; the numerous variations thereafter are examined by La Penna. Yet we may do well to keep Fraenkel’s (above n. 1) very sensible evaluation of Horace’s ‘sources’ in mind: ‘Horace probably remembered many Greek passages similar in matter and form and used them freely. Nor was he influenced by poetry alone. The discussion of the various types of bioi and their relative merits played a great part in the treatises of Hellenistic popular philosophy with which Horace was familiar’ (231–2).

17. See Kirkwood, G. M., Early Greek Monody (Ithaca 1974) 104–8Google Scholar; in contrast is Pindar’s defense of communal values through the priamel form in Nem. 8. 37–8.

18. Schönberger 397 n. 20.

19. N&H appositely gloss nobilis as arignōtos (‘renowned’) — there is a clear tension between the epinician vocabulary and the poet’s evaluation here.

20. Ps. Aero pronounces terrarum dominos to be amphibolicos dictum (‘ambiguous’). Skutsch, O., ‘Rhyme in Horace,’ BICS 11 (1964) 76Google Scholar, argues that it should be taken in apposition to deos, since rhyme normally expresses a syntactical relationship in the lesser Asclepiad. The same view is held by Schönberger 393 n. 14, N&H hold out for agreement with the charioteers. I do not believe that the Roman reader could definitely resolve the ambiguity, so both meanings should be left operative.

21. O.L.D. s.v. Maecenas 2; the first recorded generic use of ‘Maecenas’ is Laus Pisonis 238.

22. Porphyrio oddly takes this as a reference to the bronze (cupreus) nails used in building ships. Ps. Aero is puzzled: either Cypria is used synecdochally (abusive) for any wood or wood was stronger on Cyprus. The usual modern explanation is that Cyprus was famous for its woods and ship-building (Ammian. 14.8.14). But in a lyric context Cyprus would probably recall the worship of Venus Cypria (Tib. 3.3.34).

23. Q., Kiessling-HeinzeHoratius Flaccus, Oden U. Epoden (Berlin 1930Google Scholar) ad loc. Ps. Aero, perhaps influenced by Cypria, offers an interesting alternative: a Venere propter mirtum (‘with reference to Venus because myrtle is her tree’). Cody 51 suggests that Horace is painting a word-picture of a man surrounded by the waters:

But we know too little about the audial/visual effect of Latin poetry to judge — the image could just as well be of a man cleaving through the sea.

24. dimoveo can only mean ‘split/cleave’ — see O.L.D. Cf. Verg. Georg. 2.513: agricola incurvo terram dimovit aratro (‘the farmer splits the earth with his curved plough’).

25. There is some irony in the Homeric language used here to describe the storm (cf. Il. 2.144–6).

26. Cody 60 notes this ambiguity, the existence of which is strengthened by the efforts of Ps. Aero to unravel the syntax into an unambiguous word-order.

27. For the onomatopoeia in more extreme form, cf. Ennius, Ann. 140 V.: at tuba terribili sonitu taratantara dixit (‘But the trumpet with terrible tone roared taratantara’).

28. While we logically translate catuli as ‘hounds’ it can hardly mean other than ‘cubs’: cf. Odes 3.3.41, 3.20.2 (‘cubs’ of wild animals), and Episl. 1.2.5–7: venaticus ex quo/tempore cervinam pellem latravit in aula/militat in silvis catulus (‘the hunting-dog’s puppy serves in the woods after it barks at the deerhide in the courtyard’).

29. On this Musenhain, see Troxler-Keller, I., Der Dichterlandschaft des Horaz (Heidelberg 1964) 32–47.Google Scholar

30. N&H note the link between lighter poetry and Bacchus, comparing Prop. 4.1.61–2.

31. Ps. Aero: materiam ipsam carminis pro laude posuit (‘he sets down the very matter of his poetry as an object of praise’).

32. Porphyrio: per ea se egregiam gloriam dicit consequi, de quibus canit; fere enim lyrico carmini materia de nemoribus acfontibus est et si qua sunt his similia aut proximo (‘he says he is gaining great glory from the things he sings about; for generally the subject matter for lyric poetry is comprised of groves and fountains and things similar or close to these’).

33. Presumably Horace wishes to be listed in the canon of Greek lyric poets (Porphyrio: ‘Graecis’ utique intellegendum. nam nondum erant Romani — ‘For certain, “Greek” lyric poets must be understood; for there were no Roman lyric poets yet’).

34. On vates see N&H; Newman, J. K., Augustus and the New Poetry (Brussels 1967Google Scholar); Lieberg, G., ‘Horace et les Muses,’ Latomus 36 (1977) 974–6.Google Scholar

35. For carmen as poem/spell, see Cody 47 n. 11, 48 n. 12.

36. For the Callimachean rejection of popular taste here, see N&H. Horace’s readers may also have seen a rejection of the epic mode in the exaltation of the vates, since Ennius Ann. 214 V. had set up a polemical opposition between the learned epic poet and the rustic fauni vatesque. Cody sees a close connection between the gelidum nemus (‘cool grove’) and the Callimachean genus tenue (‘slight style’). Brink, C. O. reviewing Cody’s book (Gnomon 51 [1979] 60–62Google Scholar), rightly denies that the two symbols can be so easily related. Still, even if Cody exaggerates the ‘Callimachean’ and especially the ‘Socratic’ element in 1.1, there are Alexandrian literary symbols interacting in the poem (e.g. the ‘learned’ poet and the rejection of the common crowd).

37. See Shey 195 n. 14 for doctus as both the ‘learned’ poet and the man who has learnt the lessons of life. Such play on the literary and social codes is typically Horatian. Not only does the poet have the sophia of the Alexandrians (N&H), but also the thoroughly political wisdom of Rome, as illustrated by Epodes 16.36, where all Romans will leave for the Isles of the Blest — or at least the part of the populace better than the ignorant crowd will (aut pars indocili melior grege).

38. Cody 52: ‘all the descriptive details embellishing the would-be vates … and his poetic apotheosis create a unified, ethically positive portrait. Horace’s own poetic values are favorably presented without dissenting ethical judgment …’ Cody (64–6) sees bucolic repose (autarkeia) as Horace’s ideal in his portraits of the poet and the man at the spring.

39. The particular artistry of these lines has been well revealed by Lee, M. O., Word, Sound, and Image in the Odes of Horace (Ann Arbor 1969) 10Google Scholar, 14.

40. N&H 3.

41. Ghiselli (above n. 7) 119.

42. Vretska 334.

43. Schönberger 397; Syndikus 26.

44. Musurillo 233.

45. Cody 49, who also gives ‘wine-drinker’ (63).

46. Reckford, K. J., Horace (New York 1969) 15.Google Scholar

47. Shey 180.

48. Reckford (above n. 44): ‘Is this Horace? The concept of “breaking off” a piece of time to accompany your drink is Horatian; the well-placed adjectives too, emphasizing the freshness, even sacredness of relaxation.’ This identification with the poet is also made by Musurillo (233, 235), comparing Epodes 2.23ff. Similarly Vretska (329): ‘In Ganzen erhalten wir hier das Bild eines Menschen, dem zur Identifizierung mit den Dichter nur das Dichten fehlt.’ Cody (71) the figure as ‘the archetype of the vir beatus, [who] by reason of his acceptance of the gifts of the present forms the very incarnation of otium.’

49. Wine and Bacchic inspiration are linked in Odes 1.18, 1.32, etc.

50. Cf. Theocr, 1.15ff.; Lucr. 2.29ff; Tac. Dial. 12.1. Troxler-Keller (above n. 29) sees Horace’s poetic grove as an intermediate stage between Vergil’s Arcadia, filled with shepherd-poets, and Propertius’ solitary grove of Callimachus (Prop. 3.1.).

51. The description begins at line 19 of a 36 line ode, i.e. halfway through.

52. N&H ad 1.1.22.

53. Page (above n. 5).

54. N&H ad loc.

55. Cf. Odes 2.5.13–15: currit enim ferox/aetas et illi quos tibi dempserit/adponet annos (‘savage time runs on and will give to him the years it takes away from you’).

56. Cf. Cic. Att. 6.1.3: usura nee ea solida contentus est (‘he is content with the interest alone — and not the entire amount of that’).

57. E.g. Reckford (above n. 46) 15: ‘to subtract part of the day’s store.’

58. There is also syntactical ambiguity in nunc viridis arbutus (apparently meaning ‘a presently green arbute’), since the meaning of the first nunc has to be resolved into a temporal marker for stratus (hence, ‘now stretching his limbs’) only after the second nunc is read.

59. In the famous Fons Bandusiae ode (3.13), the eternal coolness of the fountain is purchased at the cost’ of the warm life-blood of the amorous kid. This connection between the gelidum nemus (‘cool grove’) and gelida mors (‘icy death’) has been well explored by Pucci, P., ‘Horace’s Banquet in Odes 1.17’, TAPA 105 (1975) 259–281Google Scholar. Some dissatisfaction with the scene of the poetic grove is already apparent in Shey (188), who sees Horace wanting to state that his pursuits too are conventional. Syndikus (32–3) compares the Musenhain with ideal landscapes in contemporary art — Horace then becomes an ideal poet-figure fastened in that landscape.

60. G. Lieberg (above n. 34) 966 suggests that the Muses play their instruments for Horace, rather than give them to him to play. If so, this would reinforce the impression that Horace is here simply the object of divine activity (Vretska 330: ‘Objekt einer Handlung die unpersönliche Subjekte, Efeukranz und kühler Hain, lenken’), not an active participant in the production of poetry. In the priamel, the men listed at least control their own actions. True seclusion in the poetic grove would break the writer-recipient formula which is such a part of Horace’s poetry and exclude the essential human evaluation of that poetry. It may be that Horace is again emphasizing his type of poetry by the unusual phrase tendere barbiton (‘to tune the lyre’). The contrast would be between the high-pitched and shrill (vox tensa) and the deeper, fuller sound of a relaxed tone (Quint. Inst. Or. 11.3.42: nam vox ut nervi, quo remissior, hoc gravior etplenior, quo tensior, hoc tenuis et acuta magis est — ‘the voice is like the strings of an instrument — the looser it is, the deeper and fuller the sound; the more taut, the finer and more high-pitched the sound’).

61. The thought of Horace’s stature adds further incongruity — if by becoming a vates Horace acts as intermediary between god and man (Syndikus 36), by his growth in height, he turns this image into a physical conceit.

62. On the cliché ‘to touch (psaueiri) the stars with one’s head’, see Vretska 331–4. It is as old as Sappho 52 LP. The substitution of arassein (feriam: ‘to strike’) for psauein adds a comic touch: cf. com. adesp. 531K. and Cic. Att. 2.1.7.

63. Fraenkel (above n. 1) 230.

64. Shey 190–1.

65. See p. 43f. and Musurillo 232–3.

66. Musurillo 232–3; Syndikus 25 n. 12. In particular, cf. Epodes 2.23–4: libet iacere modo sub antiqua ilice, /modo in tenaci gramine (‘it’s pleasant to lie sometimes under an old ilex, sometimes on the matted grass’). The immediacy of the repeated modo functions similarly to the repetition of nunc when describing the man at the spring. Cf. also the urgent nunc… nunc of Odes 1.9.18–24.

67. Schönberger and Vretska, in particular, have well illustrated the peculiarly Horatian use of language in this ode (e.g. Lesboum tendere barbiton: ‘to tune the Lesbian lyre’ — which is unusual in both vocabulary and syntax), so I need not repeat their findings here. Syndikus (25) similarly describes Odes 1.1 is as ‘typical’ Horace, not an overture.

68. An earlier version of this paper was delivered at the 1978 meeting of the American Philological Association. I wish to thank Professors Fred Ahl and Piero Pucci and the referees of Ramus for advice and encouragement which has substantially improved this article.