1. Colton, C., Lacon: Or, Many Things in Few Words, Addressed to Those Who Think (New York 1823), vol. 1, no. 427Google Scholar.

2. Not only monarchal power (which I discuss below), but also supernatural power (which I intend to outline in a future publication). The important theme of abuse of supernatural power is exemplified in the numerous cruel and unjust actions of the higher powers in Thebaid.

3. Contra Kabsch, E., Funktion und Stellung des zwölften Buches der Thebais des P. Papinius Statius (Diss. Kiel 1968), 182Google Scholar, who observes that Statius portrays power and its negative consequences, but maintains that this theme is not anchored deeply enough.

4. Hartman, J., ‘De Domitiano Imperatore et de Poeta Statio’, Mnemosyne 2.44 (1916), 359–65Google Scholar, cites and discusses passages in the poem that he contends are critical of monarchy (1.138–49; 3.83–85, 99–102, 216f.; 5.241f, 321f.; 8.260–63, 286–88, 678f.; 10.179–81, 699–701; 11.263f, 574–79, 654f., 684, 701–3; 12.196–200, 504f., 590f., 771–73). For a treatment of the theme of monarchal power in Thebaid, see Ahl, F., Kings, Men and Gods in the Thebaid of Statius (Diss. Texas at Austin 1966), 11–55Google Scholar. Ahl has written with great insight on the aims and themes of postclassical epic, including Statius; hence the frequent references to his critical studies in the notes. On human suffering caused by monarchs, see the discussion of Burgess, J., Man and the Supernatural in Statius’ Thebaid: A Study in Consistency of Theme and Mood (Diss. Reading 1978), 110–36Google Scholar, whose thematic study deserves far greater attention by scholars than it has hitherto received.

5. Burgess (n. 4 above), 126, maintains that the impression of monarchy that emerges from a reading of the poem must be based on the conduct of Theban monarchs owing to their pervasive presence. This feeling is probably what prompts Venini, P., ‘Echi senecani e lucani nella Tebaide. Tiranni e tirannidi’, RIL 99 (1965), 161Google Scholar, to contend that the poet is entirely condemnatory of institutional monarchy, even though she recognises that Theseus and Adrastus do possess excellent qualities.

6. Although in favour of Adrastus it must be mentioned that he makes repeated attempts to avert war (cf. 2.367–70; 3.388–93, 440–49; 4.38–41) and the duel between the sons of Oedipus (11.433–35); the monarch is powerless to prevent the war or fratricide against the wishes of the gods. Burgess (n. 4 above), 219–23, recognises that Adrastus is compelled to wage war because of the destructive machinations of the gods; cf. Aricò, G., Ricerche Staziane (Palermo 1972), 131Google Scholar.

7. Certainly the actions of Adrastus prior to the Argive massacre of the sleeping Thebans are anything but admirable (10.227–44, 266–68); it appears initially that his behaviour cannot be so easily accounted for in supernatural terms as his undertaking of war, since there is no specific depiction of a god inspiring him to a lust for bloodshed prior to the massacre. However, the narrative makes clear that the divine infection of Thiodamas with a sudden frenzy has an effect on all the Argives, including Adrastus (10.219–21). Still it must be remembered that despite the divine infusion of the Lemnian women with hatred (5.85–169, esp. 155–58) and furor (195–240) Hypsipyle remains unaffected. The effect of Adrastus’ failure to remain similarly untainted is to demonstrate the vulnerability of even a mostly just and pious man to the destructive influences of malevolent supernatural powers.

8. Rothfeld, O., ‘Statius and His Age’, Proceedings of the Bombay Branch of the Classical Association (Jan. 1912-July 1913), 43Google Scholar, contends that the troubles of Thebes attracted little interest during the Flavian period. Loesch, W., Die Einfürung der direkten Rede bei den epischen Dichtem der Römer bis zur domitianischen Zeit (Diss. Erlangen 1927), 65Google Scholar, argues that Statius’ choice of theme shows that he wanted to display his poetic and rhetorical gifts without treating political themes or glorifying Hadas, Rome. M., ‘Later Latin Epic and Lucan’, CW 29 (1936), 155Google Scholar, denies that the poem has any relevance to the concerns of contemporary Schetter, Romans. W., Untersuchungen zur epischen Kunst des Statius (Wiesbaden 1960), 125Google Scholar, observes that Thebaid is a purely mythological epic and does not have any general applicability to Rome as do the works of Vergil and Lucan. Venini (n. 5 above), 162 and 164f., contends that the emphasis on the theme of tyranny in the epic can be attributed primarily to its use in schools as a rhetorical commonplace and does not have any direct relation to the political situation in Rome.

9. Snijder, H., P. Papinius Statius, Thebaid: A Commentary on Book III with Text and Introduction (Amsterdam 1968), 21Google Scholar, acknowledges a vague connexion between the despairing tone of Thebaid and mood of pre-Flavian Rome, but refutes the notion that Statius was attempting to use the mythological framework of the Theban legend primarily as a means of exploring the political and spiritual tensions of his age. Vessey, D., Statius and the Thebaid (Cambridge 1973), 63fGoogle Scholar., argues against the subversionary potential of Thebaid and disclaims the notion that the epic contains even the faintest suggestion of political allegory. Frassinetti, P., ‘Stazio epico e la critica recente’, RIL 107 (1973), 253Google Scholar, claims that the inconsistency in the spiritual world of the poem precludes the possibility of deriving any message and subscribes to Schetter’s view that Thebaid lacks a higher purpose and a compelling moral sense. Recently Ogilvie, R., Roman Literature and Society (Sussex and Totowa 1980), 234Google Scholar, has asserted, ‘The Thebaid cannot be said to be about anything. The poem is not in any sense the author’s testament about the world …’

10. Suetonius says that the historian Hermogenes of Tarsus was executed and his copyists crucified for unflattering innuendoes in his History (Dom. 10.1). The philosopher Arulenus Rusticus, according to Suetonius, was executed for publishing panegyrics upon the Stoic senators Paetus Thrasea and the elder Helvidius Priscus and describing them as sanctissimi uiri (Dom. 10.3; cf. Dio Cass. 67.13; Tac. Agr. 2.1). Tacitus tells us that Arulenus and the biographer Herennius were executed for eulogising Thrasea and the elder Helvidius, respectively (Agr. 2.1; cf. Dio Cass. 67.13). According to Dio Cassius, the orator Carrinas Secundus was exiled and the poet Maternus executed for delivering practice speeches against tyrants (59.12.6f., 67.12.5, respectively). On the fate of the younger Helvidius Priscus, see below, n. 11.

11. The younger Helvidius Priscus was put to death for allegedly rebuking in a comic afterpiece the divorce of Jupiter from his wife under the characters of Paris and Oenone (Suet. Dom. 10.4).

12. E.g. Ercole, P., ‘Stazio e Giovenale’, RIGl 15 (1931), 43–50Google Scholar; Scott, K., ‘Statius’ Adulation of Domitian’, AJP 54 (1933), 247–59Google Scholar; Cancik, H., Untersuchungen zur lyrischen Kunst des P. Papinius Statius (Hildesheim 1965), 93–100Google Scholar; Vessey (n. 9 above), 6f.; Williams, R., P. Papini Stati Thebaidos Liber X (Leiden 1972), 166fGoogle Scholar.

13. Cf. Ahl, F., ‘The Rider and the Horse: Politics and Power in Roman Poetry from Horace to Statius’, ANRW 2.32.4 (1984), 90Google Scholar.

14. Other direct or oblique references to the justice of his cause occur in the speeches of Argia (3.696–98), Adrastus (3.712f.), the queen of the Bacchanals (4.403–6), Jocasta 7.508–10, and Antigone (11.365–67, 379–81). Polynices also defends his claim to the throne in 2.358–62; cf. 11.395. Ahl (n. 4 above), 16, cites the words of the Bacchanals’ leader as evidence of Eteocles’ wrongful usurpation of the throne (4.403–6), yet elsewhere remarks (p. 23) that ‘the kingdom is [Polynices’] right because he is Polynices, and that is all … This is not a wronged brother …’. If the claim of Polynices to the throne is just — and numerous statements in the narrative and speeches point to the justice of his cause — then clearly he has been wronged.

15. Cf. Ahl, (n. 4 above), 22; ‘The Thebaid: A Reconsideration’, ANRW 2.32.5 (1986), 2829 and esp. 2852Google Scholar.

16. The text used in this paper is that of Hill, D., P. Papini Stati Thebaidos Libri XII (Leiden 1983)Google Scholar.

17. The belief of Tacitus, according to Collingwood, R., The Idea of History (Oxford 1946), 44Google Scholar.

18. Cf. Ahl (n. 15 above), 2833, 2885; Ahl (n. 4 above), 24.

19. Contra Ahl (n. 15 above), 2885: ‘The issue of kingship remains unresolved.’

20. On this idea of ‘tyranny upon accession’ see the perceptive comments of Burgess (n. 4 above), 120f.; cf. Ahl (n. 4 above), 50.

21. Cf. Ahl (n. 4 above), 55.

22. See esp. Boyle, A. J., The Chaonian Dove (Leiden 1986), 149ffGoogle Scholar.

23. Snijder (n. 9 above), 19f.; contra Vessey (n. 9 above), 63f.

24. Not all critics and historians agree that Domitian was hostile toward Titus. See especially Hartman (n. 4 above), 350 and Waters, K., ‘The Character of Domitian’, Phoenix 18 (1964), 55ffCrossRefGoogle Scholar. Hartman (n. 4 above), 355ff., discounts even the possibility that rumours of animosity between Domitian and Titus existed by arguing that Statius would not have written an epic on the theme of fraternal strife unless the relationship between the brothers was cordial. However, as shown elsewhere in this paper, fear of imperial reprisal did not prevent Statius from inviting other unflattering associations to be made between the Principate and events and characters in both Thebaid and Silvae.

25. See Ahl (n. 15 above), 2832f.

26. Ahl(n. 15 above), 2832.

27. On the significance of clementia in Statius, see Verrall, A., ‘The Altar of Mercy’ in Collected Literary Essays: Classical and Modern (Cambridge 1913), 219ff.Google Scholar; Mozley, J., ed., Statius, with an English Translation (London and Cambridge, Mass., 1928), 16ff.Google Scholar, 26ff; Tillyard, E., ‘Statius’ in The English Epic and its Background (Oxford 1954), 103ffGoogle Scholar.; Schetter (n. 8 above), 77ff.; Duff, J., A Literary History of Rome in the Silver Age from Tiberius to Hadrian (London 1927), 382ffGoogle Scholar.; Ahl (n. 4 above), 150ff.; Watkiss, L., The Thebaid of Statius: A Reappraisal (Diss. London 1966), 220ffGoogle Scholar.; Kabsch (n. 3 above), 165ff.; Burgess, J., ‘Statius’ Altar of Mercy’, CQ 22 (1972), 339ffCrossRefGoogle Scholar.; Burgess (n. 4 above), 346ff., 373ff.; Williams (n. 12 above), xxi; Vessey (n. 9 above), 309ff.; Holland, J., Studies on the Heroic Tradition in the Thebaid of Statius (Diss. Missouri at Columbia 1976), 238ffGoogle Scholar.; Rieks, R., Homo, Humanus, Humanitas (Miinchen 1976), 222ffGoogle Scholar; Burck, E., ‘Die Thebais des Statius’ in Das römische Epos, ed. E. Burck (Darmstadt 1979), 340–43Google Scholar; Ahl, F., ‘Lucan and Statius’ in Ancient Writers: Greece and Rome, ed. T. Luce (New York 1982), 934f.Google Scholar; Ahl (n. 15 above), 2890–92; et al.

28. Burgess (n. 4 above), 374f.; cf. Burgess (n. 27 above), 349.

29. Most scholars maintain that Silvae 1–3 were published in 93 or 94. On this dating see Vollmer, F., P. Papinii Statii Silvarum libri V (Leipzig 1898), 10ff.Google Scholar; Legras, L., Étude sur la Thébaide de Stace (Paris 1905), 340ff.Google Scholar; Newmyer, S., The Silvae of Statius: Structure and Theme (Leiden 1979), 47ff.Google Scholar; Bright, D., Elaborate Disarray: The Nature of Statius’ Silvae (Meisenheimam-Glan 1980), 53f.Google Scholar; Hardie, A., Statius and the Silvae: Poets, Patrons and Epideixis in the Graeco-Roman World (Liverpool 1983), 64ffGoogle Scholar. Thebaid was probably completed in 91/92; cf. Legras 338ff. Kytzler, B., ‘Beobachtungen zum Prooemium der Thebais’, Hermes 88 (1960), 340ffGoogle Scholar. and Venini, P., ‘Studi sulla Tebaide di Stazio. La composizione’, RIL 95 (1961), 59fGoogle Scholar., suggest the date 90/91.

30. Burgess (n. 27 above), 345f., sees the ideal of clementia presented in Theb. 12.481–518 converted into reality in Silv. 3.4.73–77.

31. Cf. esp. Burck, E., ‘Die Schicksalsauffassung des Tacitus und Statius’ in Studies Presented to D. M. Robinson (St. Louis 1953), vol. 2, 693–706Google Scholar; cf. also Burgess (n. 4 above), 4–83.

32. Cf. Vessey, D., ‘Exitiale Genus: Some Notes on Statius, Thebaid I’, Latomus 30 (1971), 381; Burgess (n. 4 above), 370fGoogle Scholar.

33. The cases mentioned in nn. 10–11 above of Hermogenes, Arulenus Rusticus, Herennius Senecio, the younger Helvidius Priscus, Carrinas Secundus, Curiatius Maternus, Paetus Thrasea and the elder Helvidius are only a few of the many examples of exile and violent elimination of imagined, potential or actual political opposition to the Julio-Claudian and Flavian emperors. On opposition to the Julio-Claudian and Flavian emperors and punishment meted out by them to their opponents, see MacMullen, R., Enemies of the Roman Order (London 1966), 46–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

34. On Thrasea’s view of death as the true expression of individual freedom, see Dio Cass. 62.15.3f.; 62.26.4.

35. Cf. Ahl (n. 4 above), 12. Two of the more infamous praetorian prefects were Aelius Sejanus and Ofonius Tigellinus who exerted considerable influence over Tiberius and Nero, respectively. On the affection of Tiberius for Sejanus, see Tac. Ann. 4.11; on Tigellinus’ corruption of Nero, see Tac. Hist. 1.72. Sejanus in particular assumed a prominent political role during the reign of Tiberius; his conspiracy to set up his own power base and his attempt to assure his own succession are well recounted by Tacitus. On the account by Tacitus of Sejanus’ political intrigues, see Syme, R., Tacitus (Oxford 1958), vol. 1, 401–6Google Scholar.

36. For example, Legras (n. 29 above), 46, notes that the suicide of Maeon is evidently an invention of Statius but does not comprehend the political significance of the scene.

37. Adrastus makes 22 speeches totalling 298 lines.

38. The importance of the twelth book featuring the heroism of Argia and Antigone, the war undertaken by Theseus and scenes of mourning cannot be underestimated in terms of their contribution to the thematic design of Thebaid. However, some critics fail to recognise the significance and relevance of this final book to the rest of the epic. See, for instance, Moore, C., ‘Prophecy in Ancient Epic’, HSCP 32 (1921), 108Google Scholar.

39. Cf. Ahl (n. 27 above), 935: ‘Statius studiedly balances Theseus’ chivalry toward the Argive women with reminders of the shameful treatment he has accorded others, particularly the Amazons. We must not, then, exaggerate Theseus’ stature in Thebaid. Quite apart from his treatment of women, his other credentials as a moral hero in the epic are hardly solid.’

40. Cf. Ahl (n. 15 above), 2896.

41. Ahl (n. 15 above), 2896; cf. Ahl (n. 27 above), 935: ‘We know Oedipus’ act [of slaying his father] was unintentional; with Theseus’ we cannot be sure.’

42. Cf. Burgess (n. 4 above), 356ff., 549f. n. 26; contra Vessey (n. 9 above), 314f.

43. Cf. Ahl (n. 15 above), 2895.

44. On the brief conflict between Athens and Thebes, see the shrewd observations of Burgess (n. 4 above), 354–60.

45. Contra Ahl (n. 4 above), 61 n. 16, who interprets Theseus’ eagerness for war and obliviousness to its hardships as purely a measure of his support for the justice of the women’s cause. Nevertheless there is something disturbing about the eagerness of Theseus for war, who unlike Adrastus earlier (cf. 3.388–93; 440–49; 4.38–41), gives no thought to the destructive consequences of its undertaking.

46. Ahl. (n. 4 above), 61 n. 16.

47. Cf. Vessey (n. 9 above), 130; Burgess (n. 4 above), 354.

48. Ahl (n. 4 above), 59.

49. Burgess (n. 4 above), 350, remarks astutely on the ‘significance of this comparison. Vessey (n.9 above), 315, notes the comparison but conveniently chooses to ignore its rather sinister implications.

50. On the comparison of Theseus with Jupiter, Vessey (n. 9 above), 314f., contends that the Athenian king, ‘in his impartial devotion to justice and to law, is an earthly reflection of the supreme god’ and attempts to link the monarch closely with Vespasian and Domitian. However, Newman, J. in his review of Vessey (n. 9 above), CW 69 (1975), 84Google Scholar, well points out that the comparison of Theseus with Jupiter does not ennoble the character of the Athenian monarch (and notes this is even less the case if he is compared with Domitian), since Jupiter is depicted as a grim deity who ushers in harsh winter (12.650). Ahl (n. 4 above), 58, notes the comparison but does not comment on its significance.

51. Burgess (n. 4 above), 359.

52. Snijder (n. 9 above), 18.

53. Cf. Moreland, F., ‘The Role of Darkness in Statius. A Reading of Thebaid 1’, CJ 70 (1975), 30 n. 14Google Scholar.

54. Cf. Snijder (n. 9 above), 18–21; Williams (n. 12 above), xxi; Vessey (n. 9 above), 315 n. 1; and Delarue, F., review of Vessey (n. 9 above), Latomus 33 (1974), 439Google Scholar.

55. Vessey (n. 9 above) 314f. Vessey maintains that Theseus corresponds to Vespasian who restored peace and Domitian who maintained it after the civil wars; he also suggests that Theseus’ triumph over the Amazons corresponds to Domitian’s victory over the Germans and Dacians (cf. Snijder [n. 9 above], 18f.). Furthermore, Vessey argues that there is a clear analogy between Athens as depicted in the epic and Rome.

56. The ambiguous epithet magnanimus appears to refer mainly to the spirited and impetuous qualities of Theseus (and of Domitian by association), as it appears to in relation to Capaneus (9.547). Statius employs this adjective twenty times in Thebaid (2.564, 733; 3.55, 82, 349; 4.112; 5.653; 6.268, 827; 7.375; 8.357; 9.457; 10.399,662; 11.1; 12.72, 795, 814).

57. Newman (n. 50 above), 84.

58. In Thebaid a human tyrant such as Creon possesses many of the same unflattering characteristics that inform the personality of the divine tyrant Jupiter, namely malevolence, rigidity, hypocrisy and lack of concern for natural justice (cf. Schubert, W., Jupiter in den Epen der Flavierzeit [Frankfurt 1984], 297Google Scholar). According to Tacitus and other historians of the imperial period, the aforementioned personal qualities were commonly attributed to Domitian during his reign (compare the description of Domitian’s personality by Dio Cass. 67.1.1). Judging by the accounts of these historians, a Roman audience of this time may have identified Creon with Domitian just as they may have associated the Theban monarch with Jupiter. If so, the dethronement of Creon by Theseus comes to symbolize not only a rejection of the rule of Jupiter (cf. Schubert [n. 58 above], 297) in a universal sense but also that of Domitian on a contemporary level.

59. The murders of Tiberius Gemellus, Britannicus and the younger Agrippina are but a few instances of familial bloodshed among the Julio-Claudians.

60. Cf. Ahl (n. 4 above), 64f.

61. I express thanks to Professor Anthony Boyle (U.S.C.), Ms Bronwyn Williams (Sydney) and Dr Marcus Wilson (Auckland) for reading earlier drafts of this article and offering many constructive suggestions.