| ! HORACE AND CUROPARRA Hxnh aod Simusctuve in Odes T27 by Robert ¥ *LHorace 7 avoids displeying amiltation over the dea en enemy, sven when that enemy was the quaen who had bean solemily declared hostis populi romani. In the onening he door not mention her name, ae if he were keeping it im reserve 7 the ending and did not want to mix it with the gay imvitetlon to drink. But even in the ending, sven after the powm hac slowky the Oriental progressed from astonishment at the audacity wonan (6..) who has dared to challengn Rome and ¢ hopa for the aestruction of the eternal oity to admiration Zor the herote Geath of the last of the Macedonion dynasty, even in the ending he describes Cleopatra, hee charseter and her actions, with mentioning her by nams, Horace aid not want wheaver yead nis opaning to fail to notice how much more nobla and ohiyalrous in his joy ie the Boman ojtisan then the erietoorstle pact of hesbow,** Pasguelits digoussion of the 'Cleepatra Oda? forms part 4. aH, Was Horace dup! of his chapter on Horace and Ali contrasting hie om "chivalrous’ atiitude towanle Cleopatra 2 with Aleaeus? towarde Wyrtilus?® fs the poem even tebeut? Cleopatra at al1? Most scholars have followsd Fasqualé in asguming that 3% is, ond have been uarhle to plain Horssa’sB= amnarent yolts~fage exeept in terme of soma id heart on the part of the post. Wilkinson sees the pean = ¥ orthodox song of triumph which slips dun paaeeyrie of the vanquished quaen® ~ 28 containing an © of surprise" and illustrating Horacs’s “generosi ty". For Nove: vthe ode on Oleonetra ie a strange poem.” *7 al. the poetey and receives the tribute, nomaninity with whieh the defeated queen ie extol ion with the comment anda his disens: tory of mankind it aey not often : of similar magnitude was glorified at the game time se profoundly human. “cll da, to be sure, triumph and Joy; forret that a dangerous enemy has had vex refers to Horacets “doubtle mort that Horace was "the frst post to ve te confirm, thet in Cleopatra the worl unparalleled'.«? Imes, on the other hana, soos she cont us deriving from the contradictions in Cleonmire's oma she ut despite all that has been written about this ode, as Lone ‘the subject of the poem ~ in any inve sense ~ de asesued be the historical Cleopatra, the ocrtre. mand the apres: ¥gite-fage will continue to present a problem atteapts at axvlaation. tthe Le Fenna’s point of view is sor what different. He se.3 ode soton imuediate reac ion to a great event suicide and the end of tna war,* 6's port: ie for him a “weseured sexe" of the b: autbrask of war, SW thoy preceded and accompanied an active nart ia the propagands war, Horner froa the shock o the immediate explosion of fsuling tho great eventa," And yet "to Horese's lack of semri as to his poetie vigour is due the orention of io at the end of the ods inereases Cleopatra, w virtue of her couregsous suicide and, perhans to ar even + > extent, by virtue of the serenity with which she contemplate tho ruins of her palage: = Sigurs whieh hes « the unanimous admiration of vosterity (4.0).%9 VaRe Joh nore recontly argued thet “we have groom ace co's unique, that nos ier ravresent SELB EMU: erponsi, nossi even covrageous nrotes$ ened of a great ond noble ledy. ut it is at least pees 3 no isas 2 part of Ootav thom the wine-bibber and her agp." Ne goes on clearly Imow, thot ¢ VG, ean we felt about Actin and Cleopatra's ea. that the ode desoribes what Veruss falt abouts other yp both mode are mot fecling on thes mattera? (...) Supnese expressions of Horacets om moods bub cumicaterss of moods trnat?" Cheops wa, he press ¥ rons meMacedonian princess, a politician shrewd at hor wore cod brilliant at hex best, very imaginative and oy worthy of the Ptolomie line, more an Slisebeth I then a Envle Antoinette or even a Hexy Quacn of Sects It requires considerable effort to forget our Shelesponrs and te feee ourasives from the “tangled network of memovioe, half memories, learning, prejudica ¢ aget of us carry about with us and which couveptiona of whet de probable proms rather than others, And yet as soon ag the firs at all 4a and wa ask ourselves whether it 4 writing in the period imusdiately following Aetiua’, chawla neon Cleapatre am the noble queen depleted by Plwharshy ever ansumed that he aid begins te seen Ineredi bles When members of primitive seaietien refar to theme: the word they usa is frequently their ow tere Som Yam! As Lavi-Strauss aptly comments, “iu their syes on seaantial Immenity disappears as socn as ons goes bayoud attribute the boundaries of the groupe"? This is no more then en Llius~ tration of the commonplace that one's self~ieft to a large extent on the differences one perceives te &: between oneself end others, an individual's sense of belens’ © & group ts sloosly related to +Be his group, and himself, as being im some way 4iflerans fron othes groups and their membore, When sonfiiet oscure between aceletise or botwaen groups or individunle within o unit, group loyalties and eelfaietini tong seems Lapartent. Perceived differences ~ whieh may contain a grester ox alament of truth - between the conflicting units tend to recs: somreupondingly greater emphasis, Each aide = or its lsadera « will tend to produce an idesliaed portrait of itesit and » carlenture of the opposing aides Since the cohesiveness of group de crucial te success whatever tha means y watch the conflict 4a resolved, symbols which oan beooma foci of is will be prominent in each side's self-definition end the soomp will be depleted as in gone sengs uegating or tureeten’ fuong the eymbols whieh tend to ba fount in such ef tuntions . Version of especially prominent are those presenting ea 22 the supposed veluey of the group, frequently ambodted in a ak myth. Had Plato's Republic ever existed, sveainend alusat corte ; soclety's self-dsfinition wor keen the *noble Lie? end his theory of de Pinte te expliest ebout the integrating function chertsr myth, but in given sltuctione ef sont justifying the Republicts secial order end * ai fferant.Gm tes y from degres to which it effectively difte: co Lot ita enemies. the nature of the situation of oon? 1 thus. be important in helping determine the nature 9 myths that wil be curvent, When the situasion changes tha oy the pold ties. ent will stand in nesd of modification or of chang Buring the course of the eonfijet aiffarm¢ verxions w: produced at diffarmnt times, but previous versfons be eradicated and at the end of the co: to that confltes, A clvil wer is a form of conflict An aides hold most of their values 4n common” mnoure loyalty ig all the mors pressing since many om enah elds will have had sociel relationshine with eons of 4 whom they ers now fighting. One would absense of real eifferencesa between the ive cides te regu? da even greater euphasie being plaged on symbole whose fusetion da to give euch aide a distinct identity and ab is in the right, weuld be miaheading, however, +o and the characterizations of the two eldes thet a situation as being ne more than ‘war aysteua of political authority ~ this 4 siapler systene traditions!ot but by no means peouliar to them - depand for their velidetion on some kind of mythical charter. Py purporting to provide 2 ity of the rulers thia justification for the nowar and autho: mythical charter, if believed in by the masse of the ru validates the existing onder and helns to maiutein of the sled to the rulers ond the system. Loyslty 4 is not essentialay different from pescetine Leo symbols that can be used as fool of loyalty ia a ai tua have been used to valid conflict will tend to be those wh. The enemy will, v the authority of the rulere in peseotimes % the possible, be depleted aa negating or threatening wh system clains to stand fore outa attempt to establish his claim to 3 Oster i! authority was made more difficult by the fect that he wes leading Romans inte battle agsinet other Homans, 7% Antony’s forces allowed him to play down ® givil war. The ‘official varaion' waa that Octevian waa she stood for from attempting to preserve Rome and a SMI of the deesient Orient. His historic uiesion was to reassert the values and traditions of Italy and Rome, to 286. the historic destiny of the Roman ncople to be Puls) Cleopatra wae an ideal enemy. By fooussing attention om her for survive on make the war seen @ strug) Octavian cout a part of Rome: not only Romets hegenony, but har wow itself, were threatensd by Cleopatra, ber a armies«Be Leach hos argred that for a sovloty to exist the eon inte a of vargepts that resches the senses mot be clasaith number of discrete "things? by languages’? A comsaquence © is that objects which thrsaten to blur these wecsssary distine sic: tand to become endowed with ‘ritual volus*, the foous of taboo attitudes, These attitudes may be more or 2 formated. when they exist mainly at the unesnecious Levei Lene Lows ox are manifest only in patterns of behaviour, sp or justifications of this behaviour - unrelsted te the ay itgudes ~ may be currant in of the object of these unconscious at the scciety concerned. Marriage rules have ox iwpertan’ Ye play in the organization of traditions? ecciotisa, Inoast ~ th semeone who in ‘not syndiebie* 14, regaried as sexual interesurse in terms of the seciety's marriage rules”"~ constitutes a Muaming of the distinotion = between thosa whe are ayeiieble end she who are net available for marriage ~ that must ve narriage exchanges and alliances are to funotion as a scolel organisation, In all imow sceieties theses ext. taboo - for whieh various (ueually unteseb! provided ~ but if vonsider to be tneautuou In Egypt, it seers, marriages betwosn « brother and his elder sister were not considered imcantuoury, whertie riers between a brother and his younger sicter = unless he 25 wnetever the precise rele in oashen’ fra was, by foman standards, both incestuou uous me @ possessed, for the Romans, the ehjeot’. The fascination she exertad ov:=o be understocd, Secondly, though Greek, she quan, The Bowes, following the Grecke,’ Orient the opnosite of themselves. In writers who cumbaet, mtal? woman w Amportance of Poman qualities the *0: @ Roman leader te regarded with a mixture of te pla @icapproval ond the unhappy consequences of +! Oleopates an sseentiel distinetion ara underlined .”! captivated Cassar, had now eaptivetad artonye un-Roman enough (end after Caesar e sensitive s but a female monarch of Greek stook in an Oriented preduot of om incestuous marriage, inesstue' had darad to ohallenge the might of Rhie being ao, the edroumstanees ¢ not display her as fact that he cout subarraseing for Setavian, do a reek’ & Johnsen points out, ODE EI 2 doy Romen pul aa presented with two ay sarlier myth she was both the ‘atesholic slut? and the enemy? in tue Later myth, the 'Steic gains’ made familiar to us miterse Bat the vropagation of 4% co by subseque: could uot eradicate the memories cx the sariiuz ones Rosen yu will have coexisted wieaeily in the a:+10- dnything written about Cleonatra in she years after Aotius ané her death will hava had to coms to terns with theas contra- Sietory views of her character and astions, either by ignorine one of them or by attempting to reconcile them and vesolve tha Lehwe contradiction. One of tha charneteristios of many prt myths ie the statement and sttamoted roeolution of parc oppositions, Inaofar, then, as Horave’s ode attempts te come to terme with the contradiction it resembles many nyths, and the Kind of analymis social anthrop veon applying to them®? may shed some Light on the way Gleonaive 4 depieted in the poem, T am not enying thet thie Ying et enalysis will everywhera prove vecful, ner an I claiming thet move traditional literary analyses are valueless) ZT say rather, arguing thet a consideration of the theartie structure ef thie poem and the associations evoked by its imagery saa shew that. Lies 6 eoheren’ the ambivalent surface of the poem the: 3 benent! structure of ideas, and that the individus) elements and oppositions of the thematic structure eannot be understood except im velation to the whole.” As we have seen, the conflict that sane to an end with ofms Antony and Cleopatra Acthum hed, for the Rommn public, two a: were hold to msnacs the stability and integrity of Bowes They threatened the continuation of civil war, The victory at Actiwawll woe thas the vietory of the Foreas of Feacs ar the Foress of Yar and Chaos, Secondly, Cleopatre was held tc represent the menace of Oriental decadsnee, Actium thus re: sd the vietory of the virtuse of the Roman Republie o vioes of the Oriante wis Ins the The formal struoture of tha poem is ot: ted with the Orient; 2 fivat three stanzas, Rome ie conn two etenene following two Rowe defeats the Orient; and in the le the Orient ia tranaformed by Rome. The opening words of the poem recall the onening wemia of Aleaeus’ triuzph-poem ond are an invitation to a ritual act o celebration of tha enemy's aefant. Mune om: Lenin onggests that thie ds an occasion? the post invites Ris sudden perform a o¢lebration of an exceptional traditional king. June, twiee repentad, ombasiseas thet is a moment of vertionler eigniftcance, 2ete livers / meonia tellng recalls Refe Libera, without the bondage of orien: Roma's Republican freedom (the dance te performed ah rites much of Oybele, end the adjective also pointe to th eng ths indigenous, rooted-in-the-soll nature of Reme%s religious traditions, Jelius refers to the soil in ite preduetive capa Tt ie the "ative Italien soil’ of tne Geovgior. The me's religious $aNs8 room) the anokent origina of 1: The same agsoclations are atteched to p Rineally, godeles evokes the fresdon and2 Roman associations, smphamises the cohesive solidarity of ths Romans who exe the poem's formal addvessear, ani reminds us of the vitual opening of the poem, Tha first atensn ts thw to "trus Romans’, avokes a coneteligtion of images assoatated with the traditions of Republican Rome - frasdom, stinehment to the Itelien soil, patriotic and restrained (ian. not "doemdenk!? religious emotions - and at the sams time suggeuts that now ia the tima te perform the celebration. The second stanga tells us why euch a celebration was not sppropriete before. Antehan implies that the present fs souchew 4 different from what went before, Nefan rsealla the religions imagery of tha first stanzs end suggests that some volition bas been renoved”>, casouban ie 0 wholesoua Iislian wine and exits ret ling and a guitis refers us once more to the past, The half imply that the encestral tradition, having veen defiled, hee now basn rectored. Talen together wi ret etensa thay give us one side of the ploturs: thin ia whet seas and de good, ened and (for some reaaon ae yet mapecifled) 4 has neem ti ate to revive tha ani @ishonoursd, Oaly now 4s i9 appropr’ tradition with « ritual oslebretion by drinking cersaetielly she obrekon, was bset Of Yielian whnes, The reason way auch a ¢ nafas before is given by the next ous end a hel? stanase. The 2 ané the continuity of Roman institutions - wee heing threatened by Capitol ~- a natural symbol for Rome, tha Repub! Rome oubitione of a recing. The formal. transition fron OrLent is effertt=ned by this juxtaposition of Republie and monarchy’ sOne dimension of the cpperitton beiwees 2 + pesce ond stability againat war aad chacs - stated in thh antithesia between the two halves of the second eelliars now 1 stanza, The refaranee to the encest: they ara assceleted with the period befors the rave: wax, The second dimension — the firat stanza and the third. Cleopatre’s gontaming tus ex, held together Segrading decadence, is contrasted with the Jo era held together by tends of loyalty to ancient gradi: moxtug explains the ritual contamination iuplicit im gate and fyxorem contrast with the rites of the Seliie Juche? nagony of Hareotiea in the next stansa belongs with tha and connect Cleopatra's furor end aruntcenness wi is the antithesis of Cacouban. The whol sperare forty and the ‘Oriental menace* were in the lest am lune est on@ tompug erat, in the first stenze, elon: that stretches back as far as Romets distant origina. they contimity. Perosat implies, ox the contrary, thet the Orient threat waa a mere episode which could be edad by © deed action (ainuit furorem). the first section thus constitutes a thesatie whole presents the opposition of forces at differant levels, Rome 1 eternal, free, Republican, whewmobamty devout, moral antole the Grient 4s sphemereal, enolaved by paselen, = éiasclute and aggressive, Semantieslly, the gonty Ye are given various elemente of a complex whole whieh repre all that Rome stands for, to each of which thera is an antithesis representing slementa of what ~ im the ayes af ‘ox Lemons Romans ~ the Orient standa for, Then we are given various of what constitutes the 'Orlentel menace’, and sach of en implicit Roman antithesis, The only explieds sontrass ie © between Capitolio and regina, These are the centzal the opposing sidege By juxtaposing them not only has Yoxece effected the formal transition hetwaen the frst ome sesend halves hole of of the saetion, he has clso given us two explicit ayabele whi halp us to structure thoss implicit in his imagery. The formel transition betwaen the firat and secon ceekions of the poam is effected by meena of the interlocking phraaes iv linea 12-14, At the themetio level we nave the cradued ‘eupenxonas of the temporal dimension (aternal Rome ~ aphemerak Orient} « the transition from an atemporal opposition between Rese and the Orient to their confrontation in s historical dimension 4s accompanied by a transition from tha sywbhelie epratiion of two cultures to the actual conflict vetween Ootavien ant Cleopatra, the shampione ef eaok sides in the fourth stanza the Battle of Aetius ia aliwiad to but not desoribed, Verog timores suggests the weraslity and fet: of Clespatra's ambitions while ab Ttalia reminds ua of the“ise she was held to represent, the simile of the hawk and the dove is 8 vall-Imowa one from the Dad (XEEZ, 139¢f.), There, 14 was used of Aoki Lies pursuing Heotor) hore, Octavian pursues Cleopatra, The ola! cultures hes bacoma a conflies betwson hereats Ia an ailucive « we have have s hint that Clsepatra may not, after el’, be Aeserving of complete abomination. The Orient is to be deapised, but Cleopatra proved a worthy opponent for Ccteviens was & praiseworthy achievement, On the surface, Norsee’s attitude towards the figure of Cleopatrs becomes anbivalent, and thi apparent chenge of attitude preparss the way for the Laat section of the podite The transition itaslLf ie effected by mens of the highly charged phrase gatale wongtrun™, tne use of a tora trom augury recalls the religious alluaiene of the firot stun. Kongiran iteel? carries a double meaning. It is @ sign ef evil omen, 2 sign sent by the gods, This ie reinforced by the adjective fatale. The appearance of Oleopatra boded 111 for Nema, but it was 6 warning, & warning hesded by Octavian, who in protecting tome from the mong trum (in ite other meaning of *monatrous aberration’ or freak’, dea. - in the terme of the discussion im seetion ZI - a "taboo object*) ie carrying out the will of the gods, Ts victory ensured the continuation of the glorious and sredetexnined cours of Roman history®?; i was also - together with bie aggumption of power - a necessary condition for that centinustlons“Ge The remainder of the section then deseribss Cheepntra’o: attitude towarée her defeat and her death. Two aapeote axe eesordbed, here te a reminder that her defeat ig the defent of the Orient (Aecentem reiom) but there is also the assertion that hers was a noblle Lotumt quea,..uiseree, smi serene. fowtie combiveret, deliberate morte ferogion, aad the fi invldens / private deduet, auperbe / non bumisis mulian get Cleopatrats death was a Roman denthy in it she revealed « zane « that justified her being treated, eurlier in the poem, ae 9 worthy adversary for Octavisns but if her death wor hep triumph is din that she could not be diapleyed in Octavien’s telwaph ie it was still the triumph of Rome over the Orient and ef Ootevlen over the Cleopatra of the first sectiod of the seam, Tha lect word takes ue back $0 the opening allusion te Aleseus axd. suggests that the triumph being celebrated is of a especial kind, ite meaning and several dimensions epparent omy when the poom is considered as a wholes So far we have considered the renolubion of twe enpowitionss LY Rome ageinet the Orient; Romete vietory over the Ordent: the Romanization of the Orient (noth in a ailitary and 4m 6 moze? sense? Rome gained control over Reypt and ‘the Orisas*. = Meopatre ~ telumphed over ite defest through Cleopatra's Roman death). 2) Ostavien against Cleopatra? Cotavian's vietoxy ever Cleonatras Octavients triumph (the actual triumph held by Ostaviant the triumph indlested by the Aleaie openings and Avgustue’ ascunphion ef powar 80 as to make possible the fulfilment of Rowete satiny}.“27+ Mase eppeeitions correspond to the earlier and Later of Cleovatra. The embarrassing change of euphesie made by the cirounstences of Cleopatra's decth ie reflected 3 poem by the contradiction betwaen Cleopatra, the cent of the abominable Orient (regina), end Cleepatre, Ostavients herofe adversary (non humilis mulior). Thera is, im effect, third opposition in the poem, the resolution of which res the contradiotion between the first and second oppositions, Cleopatra wae Greek, but sha had tamporarily been oversone (Qenentig, sbria, lymebaten, fyroren) by the Orient Gan sontaminate oun grea). Actium brought her to her sense her death she revealed her trus qualities. This ‘conversioat was accompanied by the loss of two of the attributes central vo her role as monstrum and aymbol of the Orient. when ehe ated sho was no longer a queen (iscentem reziam, priuete) and she dieplaysil masculine quelities (non humilis miier, nee millebriter). We have, thus, the third opposition and its resolution. 3) The true Cleopetra against the Oriental Cleopatras the defeat of the political Orient; the Liberetion of the true Cleopatya and @efeat of tha moral Orient. The resolution of this thi: epposition ie also depleted in the veourrent and changing image of drinking, which helps to 2 the poem together and underlines the more) message of the myth ot Cleopatra, So long as Cleaopatre wae being driven mad by Wareotic, it was nefas to drink Cascubon. Sy*driniing’ (gombiberat) she poles“1B 2h of the asps Cleopatra atoned ritually for the poliwtiion, eliminated 1%, ond made possible the ritual celskra vy the driniing of Caecuban, Seen and anelysed ag a ‘myth of Cleopatra’ the ede » & coherent structure of ideas. Three oppositions are ren Sctavients vietory at Actium, and the resolution of the th resolves the contradiction implicit in the juxtaposition o other to. The overall thomatio structurs - the digfarent oppositions ana the relationships between them ~ gives mesning not only to each opposition, but also to each clement in sach opposition, In thie, the myth of Cleopatra wa have in the poom is remarlably eimilar to many primitive mythe. Iv If Lt were @ primitive myth, we should not have to asic awkward = and unanewerable ~ questions like “Wheat, then, in the poem about? Wiat is Horace saying?" The author would be uximow, no sonsoious ‘nesonge’ need be inferred, ond we could tele it as 8 representation of the way in which a Rouen after Aetiun tended to see the world. If I dia not think this a Legitimate way of looking at the poem I should not have begun in the Aivst places But it ds nots primitive myth, end the ousstions reaxine I do not think the poem represents Horace’s attitude toma historical Gleonatra, Nor do T thin': ho te oa: propaganda, I% is conceivable that he was trying to provide «version of the myth which would resolve the soutmdistier 4ts earlier and later forms and so sliminnte a posaiisl of embsrressment to Augustus, tit, like othera whe have reacin. a ae gourt post, Avg againet the notion thet Herses wae myth-maker, I de not think this is likely. £ am inolinsd, rete fie aa spect te see the ode an not being *about? anythi Cleopatra or Octavian's propaganda, but ae being an axare of his - and of moat Romans® - reaction to pesca, an attamyt make sense of the events that had taken place ang se dont Lge in Rome during the preceding yeers®®, the langunze » used = which may have been the only language avatlable t: hi he waa to ba understood ~ 4s the language of political myth. Hs ¢ hie depose ~ tno has elaborated on the raw material he had mtually inconsistent myths of Cleopatra = and he han oraated a ‘new’, more inolusive, myth, which ’axplaine' the somextous events of the preceding years. It can, of course, be argued that by forcing the pour into the atraightjacket of an analysis of this kind I hava so diste: 4%. that amy conclusions I may have reached ere irrelevant to ox ® charge understanding of the poem as iitersture. My resly to th ht of its thematic would ho, firatly, that asen in the U4, tus poew reveals Horace's grostuess as 8 poet, The way he suceseded in reducing so complex a structure of idems to written word commends admiration. Secondly, I should xg importance of ita context for understanding ony work of 3 belonging to a cultura that 49 not oure®7, Whore that context is scanty, an attempt to make sen=20— whatever means we have at out disposal ~ and that in where appropriate, the soolal eclencos ~ is # Ae Hole Pimley has expresasé 14, "ALL art is 8 Gelogue. LAaves ell intersst in the past. And one of the pertie L qm hende in a contemporary wey, by his very existences 1% saoma to be inherent in humen existence to tum and eohum to past (auch as powerful yolees may wege us 49 give Lo aple the mora preeiealy we Meaten amd the more we become awore of 4 pasimeas, even of ite near~inacosssibility, the mone ment the dialogue becomes. In the end, it cnn only be a dial the present, about the present, 0”?fle ORES 1) Gy Panquali, Omamte Mirtoh®, Florence, 2968; ope $I~-Ge 2) Since only two Lines of Aleasus’ poam eurvive, any con’ aa to the differences between Horace’s attitudas and hia ia an any cars hagerdouts BR. 133, 453 Alfwed Noyee, Portrait of Nornos, Lonfomy DB Po 1293 E. Fenenkel, Homes, Oxford, 1957, poe L6G01y ge. 2p Be GGe Perret, Horace, Paris, 1959, eng» trons. Hsvorits 1 90% Steole Commager, The Odes of Norscs, New Yewsn and I 1962» Pee Aomty 4) CV» Ines, "Cleopatra as fetele monstrmn®, O9 MELT (L263). 2 §) Antonio Ta Penna, Oranio « L'idgclogla del prinetnato, Suirity L963, BPs 54, T1-2y 55-50 6) WR. Johnaon, A Quan, a Great Queen? Cleopatra and the Polities of Misrepresantation’, Arion VI {1967}, 387402. 7) @, Kitson Clark, The Critica’ Mistorian, London, 1957) vs 16be 8) As Jolmsony gitioy Pe 402, points ont, 44 is only the unstated saggumption that Horace was writing in the white heat of the news of Cleopatra's death and thet he must have been writing ‘aboutt her death that imposes an early date om the poste“220 9) Claude Mviwstrause, Les Stepetures (Mmentat ses ge La The Haguey 1967) pe She Of. elao Marwhnl? 2, SabRina, "On Sociology of Primitive Exchange’, in M. Banton (ede), Shs Relevence of Hodele fox Social Anthropology, AsSedo Hono, London, 1965, e9pe DPe 49-158. ernie 20) Cf, Barrington Hoore, Sre, "Notes on the Prowess of Acquiring Power’, in cal Power Seeial Theory, Cambridge, Maes. , 1958, for a consideration of how ‘charter aythe* heave used to preserve group loyalties 12) Ig thie ware not the case, the confiiet would mot, airietly opeaiing, bea civil war at all. 12) I$ de a$ least plausible that after Activa 2 geasraldned feeling of relief at ths end of the fuser of the provieus deondes and of hope that with the advent of peace ne only the political superstructure tut Slee the more), esisdt of 26 at Republican Rome could be reatorad was, for some ‘any rate, widespread in Rome, Discussion of Auauaten Literature has tended to sonsentrate en the relatiens betwecn thu writer wmf end Augustus or Mascenas, Any writer myst take into aseowmt the views and expectations of his audiends, even if bie aim ie te challenges then: en eesount of Auciotan literature from the point of view of the sociology of literatura would, despite the scantiness of the evidenze, be @ worthwhile undertakings43) 14, 15) 26) “solo in quella che gli Ateniesi disdero dolla lore lest: 47) a2 BR, Lanoh, Animal Catagories and Verbal, Almae*, ia Boll. Lonnedorg (ade), Now Dizeotions in the study of Japouage, Cambridge, Waese, 1964. A similar argumms is the main thee of Mary Douglas, Purity end Dance, Tendon, 1965. Of. Lévi-Strauady Ope Chtes ohe 12> ARAde, PPo 21~L2, ef. Plato, Crities, ond Jean Servier, Histoire de L'utosle, Paria, 2967, chs II and aap, Po 44: “h*Atlantide nlagh one seulement L’opposé mythique @'Athanes ia vertucuas, xéintégrée par de justee lois. Zils représents 1*Orient et tout perticul{drament la Perse dont les invasions evaians dbranié les structures grecques plus encore que les Atlentas dans un Tointain pased mythique (4..)%. Cf. also la Penna, on, cit ps 60, who, apeniing of the “masfigaranions ethoo-neligious® della batteglia 41 Asie® in Auguatan Ltersture, commenter “Una trasfiguragions del genere trove riscontre nell tantieni ts aon EES 4 Persiant.* Sea, for instenas, Livy, boo's XXX, on Iaelius and Sophonishas Vigil, Aeneid VIII, 688 on Cleopatra heraelt, where the word Asfag, interjected at the mention of Antony's association with her, ia particularly significant; and fen Dido's case if very much more complex and subtly tied in IV, although |Br) 29) 20 22) che reoks ¢ with the whole poatio design of the works (6¢, Vingi2, 6 etwty in eivilized poetry, Oxford, 1963). Cf. Ry Syme, The Roman Revolution, Oxford, Gides PBo 389 ff. See, for example, E.R,Leach (sd), The Structural Study of Myts Bnd Totemiem, A.SeA. Monographs 3, Londons 1367< he ‘structure’ of a poem is an ambiguous concep. Tuco it in two senses. The fret 1o the fonanh gtruotures the volation- ship between the ideas and their expression, the way in whiet, by mene of verbal contrests, repetitions, transi tena, ths position of themes and images in the framework ef the poss and their distribution by Lines or stanzas the idsan ara reduced to the written word, The thomtic struchers is rather, independent of the expression of the idea, It Lay the logical or semantic relationship between idess, Images “and concepts. The thematie structure is in & sence stemporal: tha opposition between Roms and the Orient is independent of the way in which, by meons of the forsel structure, 1% te expressed in the poem. The thematic sinucsure of the pose would be the seme even if the order of the three mein sections were reversed. My use of the concept of thematic structurs ae sonething lying behind the formal structuse is in part derived from Ldvi-Strauss? analyses of Amerindian aythe, bet On whereas for him the awtonomy of the estructura derives22) ? a2S— ths fact that in the last amalysie it ve: at categorizing the miverse accemling to waive: characteristics of the human brain, in my analysis derives from structural contraints imposed by a si of group conflict. We ara, of course, referring te different things when we use the term ‘myth’, and in this senec mr A Tee procedure ig only loosely analogous te hie. See 2a ‘Claude Lévi-Strauss = Anthrovolegist and Pailosegher*, Now Left Review 34 (1965), for a oritiqne of some of the implications of MvigStrauss? method, ani Jean Plage’, fe 3: 2 Parle, 1968, for a soneias and coherent ys: exposition of etructuralist method. This kind of could perhaps be applied fruitfully to other woxke whose mubjectouatter ie akin to polition? myth. A soneiderasion of some of Horace’s other odes (IIT 3 and IIZ 5, for exemple) and even the Agneld in these terms would be extrenehy interesting. Puluinar is so Roman a word that in the Yonunentum Anoyran (1X 28) the phrase per omia puiuinaria had te be éremslos as Spobup sv Of, note 17. Gf. Imes, git. Wie conclusions are in many vespects similar to mine, but he regnrds ths ode av a "portrait? of Ceogais wiving from she snd sees the contradictions in the ode ag complexities and contredietions in her character and careers~26~ 25) Of, Livy's interpretation of the course 0; Undorlying the idea that Roma wns deptined to becom is the ad@itional notion that enemies and disasters ne visited upon the Roman people in créer to teat thas faege TIZ 20 8; VIL 27 1}, National greatn wns omy achieved, and cculé only be regained, when men 42 old Romen virtues - pigtas, meudentia, mutioliies J iriure consordie, digoiplina ete, - which are the ves characters in Livy's version of Roman histomr, See Livy, Wis historical aims and methods, Cambridge, 196, 26) Gf. the in some respects similar view of La Pam, on. PP. SL-2e 27) T have argued the point more fully in my intredugtion % Gatvllue, translated by James Michie, in prease 28) HoT. Muley, Agnects of Antioity, London, 196%, pe Sa