57
HORACE, S E R M O N E S
1,5,104
WR BARNES
Brundisium longae finis chartaeque viaeque est
The last line o f Horace's poem apparently means more than it says. The poem is
evidently not long; it is shorter than the four poems that precede it in the book
(121, 134, 142, 143 lines) and the one that follows (131 lines). The reference to
its length cannot be read simply as a statement of fact.
1.
Horace stops in Serm. 1,1 and 1,3 lest the poem seem long (lam satis
est. ne me Crispini scrinia lippit compilasse putes, verbum non amplius addam
1,1,120f., Ne longum faciam ... 1,3,137).* When he stops in 1,5 he says that
the poem is long, because, he implies, the journey was long; but the last line
may convey more than an apology that is too late.* The audience was aware o f
the political purpose at the end o f the journey; Horace stops short o f that, just as
in the course o f the poem he has said only so much o f it that he himself seems
remote from it,3 and at the same time he has indicated that success in it was
certain already.4
2.
Horace's treatment o f his journey to Brundisium can be referred to
Lucilius' treatment o f his journey to Sicily (97ff.M ).5 Horace in Serm. 1,4
criticises Lucilius for writing too much (9ff.; cf. l,10,9f.,50ff.); and his own
style is more compressed than Lucilius', where they can be compared.6 His
treatment o f his journey, in this place in the book next after his criticism of
Lucilius, can be seen as a demonstration o f the principles he had expressed in
his criticism.7 The last line o f the poem may be interpreted then as an ironic
allusion to Lucilius' prolixity, as Horace saw it, whether specifically in his
treatment o f his journey to Sicily (the length of which is unknown 8), or more
generally.
3.
The last line o f the poem defines the form o f the poem ironically, as what
it is not, in terms o f size. The first lines define the subject in terms o f size, that
is, seriousness: Egressum magna me accepit Aricia Roma/hospitio modico
9 If.): from great Rome to small Aricia, and to the other small towns along the
way.9 If the definition o f size at the end o f the poem is referred to that at the
beginning, it appears that the length o f the poem is to be understood as
appropriate to the subject.
In the course o f the poem a number of events are treated in terms o f epic or are
referred to the subjects o f epic.10 The night o f the passage along the canal, and
the next morning, are introduced as if the events to follow were o f epic
importance (9f.,20f.); and the encounter o f Sarmentus and M essius is
introduced as if they were warriors in an epic (5 Iff.). Canusium was founded
by Diomedes, who is described as fortis ; Horace him self was not as heroic
about the bread and the water ( 9 If.).11 Some episodes can be referred to
episodes in the Odyssey : games, in which Horace did not participate (48f.),
someone who could have represented the Cyclops in a pantomimic dance
(63f.),12 a woman, who was not as much interested in Horace as he had thought
(82ff.), a wonder, which did not impress him (97ff.). The first sentence o f
Horace's narrative resembles the first sentence o f Odysseus' narrative of his
wanderings: Egressum magna me accepit Aricia Roma/hospitio modico (lf.),
'Ι λ ίό θ ε ν
' Ισμ ά ρψ
με
φ έρω ν
ά νεμ ος
Κ ικ ό ν ε σ σ ι
πέλασ σ εν,
(Horn. Od. 9,39f.).13 The poem is thus introduced as if for comparison with
Odysseus' account o f his wanderings. The last line may be interpreted then as an
HORACE, SER MON ES 1,5,104
58
allusion to the length o f Odysseus' narrative, a by-word for the foolish and
long-winded story J 4
But the use of epic themes and epic language in the poem is not, or not only,
parody o f epic itself, but also colours the subject o f the poem in those places,
ironically, by allusion to what it is not. This irony does not extend to all the
events o f the journey;15 but it recurs through the poem, and in those places the
allusion to epic emphasises by contrast that an event or a situation is banal.16
The last line may be referred to this treatment o f the subject in terms o f epic.
Scale and subject in poetry are related in Callimachean literary theory,17 which is
evoked by Horace in his criticism o f Lucilius in Serm . 1,4,11;18 and in Serm .
1,5 length and subject, or parts o f it, are represented to the audience with the
same ironic exaggeration. Without that irony, longum ... melos is used o f a
poem that is actually long on a subject that is actually serious in Carm . 3,4,2.19
The phrase longae ... viae itself is perhaps mock-heroic. The journey was
indeed long, if it took between twelve and seventeen days,20 for it could be
made in nine, or even in five.21 Horace describes some stages as seeming long
in the conditions (explicitly, 94f.). But he does not record the passing o f the
days at all punctiliously.22 Against the background o f Odysseus' journey his
journey does not seem long.23
N o te s
1.
Cf. M. Puelma Piwonka, Lucilius and Kallimachos (Frankfurt am Main, 1949), 89,
n.2; Horace’s tone is more formal in E pist . 2,l,4f. (see C.O.Brink, Horace on Poetry .
Epistles Book II (Cambridge, 1982), ad loc .).
2.
Cf. J.C. Orelli-J.G.Baiter-W. Mewes (Berlin, 1892), ad loc .
3.
So most recently W.-W. Ehlers, « .1 1 3 (1985),72f.; cf. Serm . 2,6,50ff.
4.
So I.M. LeM. DuQuesnay, in Tony Woodman and David West (eds), Poetry and
politics in the age o f Augustus (Cambridge, 1984), 39ff.
5.
Porphyrio ad v . 1.
6.
N. Rudd, The Satires of Horace (Cambridge, 1966), 98ff.; on 1,5, C.J. Classen, H .
109(1981), 341ff.
7.
K. Sallmann in Udo Reinhardt and K.S. (eds), Musa locosa . Andreas Thierfelder zum
siebzigsten Geburtstag (Hildesheim, 1974), 182Γ, Classen (n.6), 341.
8.
U. Knoche, Roman Satire (tr. E.S. Ramage) (Bloomington, 1975), 40 (but cf. E.A.
Schmidt, MH 34 (1977), 122, n.3). Cf. F. Marx, C . Lucilii Carminum Reliquiae I
(Leipzig, 1904),CV1I-CV1I1.
9.
Cf. C.J. Classen, Gymnasium 80 (1973), 238.
10.
Further details in Sallmann (n.7), 198ff.
11.
On the text see C O Brink, PCPhS 213 (1987), 29f.
W R BARNES
12.
59
On the cothurni in 64 see E. Doblhofer, Informationen zum alisprachlichen Unterricht
2.2 (1980), 59ff. Sarmenlus in turn describes Messius, gracili sic tamque pusillo 69,
somewhat as the Cyclops describes Odysseus,
Λ λ ίγ ο ς
Tt
κα ί ο ύ τιδ α ν ό ς
καί αχςχυς
Horn. O d. 9,515.
13.
Ehlers (n.3), 80f.
14.
Corpus Paroemiographorum Graecorum , ed. E.L. von Leutsch, F.G. Schneidewin
(Gottingen 1839-1851), 1 210.86, II 13.79, Suda 1,3402 Adler.
15.
See Ehlers (n.3), 74.
16.
Ehlers interprets the use of epic differently (n.3), 78f.; on Horn. O d . 9,39f. see 80f.
17.
Call. A e t . fr.IPf.; see Brink (n.l) on E p ist. 2,1,257-8.
18.
See C.O. Brink, Horace on Poetry . Prolegomena to the Literary Epistles (Cambridge,
1963), 158Γ; on Horace and Callimachus see E.-R. Schwinge, Philologus 107 (1963),
75f.
19.
See E. Fraenkel, Horace (Oxford, 1957), 273f.
20.
See H.A. Musurillo, CW 48 (1954/55), 159.
21.
O v.Pont . 4,5,7, Plu.Cat . Ma . 14, cited by A. Kiessling-R. Heinze (Berlin, 1921),
90.
22.
See Sallmann (n.7), 187, Ehlers (n.3), 73.
23.
Cf. Virg. A . 3,714,718.