|
Lucan's style is characterized by inventiveness and a persistent striving for drastic effect. [1] Like all "Silver" epic, the Bellum Civile is rather more episodic in nature than earlier epic. In Lucan's case, at least, this aspect cannot be said to stem merely from the profound rhetorical influence of the period: since the universe he describes is marked by rupture and fragmentation, the kinds of narrative discontinuities he employs are appropriate to the subject matter. To the extent that circumstance allowed, the Aeneid was used as a negative compositional model for the Bellum Civile. Lucan skillfully adapts (often by inversion or negation) the traditional elements of the genre to his new, "anti-epic" purpose. Throughout the poem, the challenge of stylistic innovation called for in the narration of the nefas (wickedness) of civil war is forcefully met. Intensity of ExpressionLucan is justly renowned for his verbal intensity and power of expression. [2] Though he makes good use of the rhetorical techniques that dominate much of "Silver" Latin literature, his work generally avoids the artificiality that a striving for rhetorical effect can sometimes produce. A fierce passion can be detected in almost any passage of the Bellum Civile, most often a relentless, seething anger directed at those held responsible for the collapse of the Roman Republic, or a deeply-felt horror at the perversity and cost of civil war. To take a single example, at 6.724-5 Lucan takes over a fairly well-worn sententia to describe the plight of the soul of a dead soldier forced by the witch Erictho to reincarnate: a miser, extremum cui mortis munus inique / eripitur, non posse mori. There are a number of precedents for this rhetorical stroke, but Lucan's model was probably Sen. Ep. 24.18: moriar, hoc dicis ... desinam mori posse. Even allowing for the different genres employed by the two writers, Lucan's transformation of the archetype remains quite remarkable: Seneca's trite, almost smug expression is transformed by his nephew into an outburst of enraged indignation. This is achieved by various effects. To begin with, the shock of the reversed image, the very violation of Seneca's complacent maxim, is in itself quite powerful. This is strengthened by the vocative address a miser, a pathos-generating device that recalls (among other things) the plight of Virgil's Eurydice (G. 4.526), thereby producing a more emotionally-charged atmosphere. This emotion is intensified by the adverb inique, located in the emphatic final position of the verse and the violent verb eripitur at the beginning of the following line. The metrical pauses after a miser (diaeresis) and eripitur (caesura) heighten the impact. In munus mortis there is a significant echo of Cat. 101, attaching to the otherwise unidentified soldier a sense of fraternal loss - perhaps even alluding faintly to the horrifying notion of civil war pitting brother against brother. Finally, there is persistent alliteration on m, producing a mournful effect and adding to the sense of loss. The Authorial PersonaAnother feature of Lucan's poetic style that heightens the sense of relentless intensity is the frequent intrusion of the authorial persona into the narrative. An example is the narrator's rebuttal of the general admiration for Scaeva's battle heroics against the Pompeian army: infelix, quanta dominum virtute parasti! (wretched man, with virtue you have prepared the way for a tyrant, 6.262). This kind of editorial interruption is a device to which Lucan resorts with great frequency, and which he brought to epic poetry from prose. Although there were before him occasional examples of such authorial intrusions (e.g. Virg. Aen. 4.193ff.), they tended to be isolated and relatively insignificant. One of the generic features of epic poetry since Homer had been the ostensible impartiality of the narrator: events could only be described, not explicitly commented upon. Thus, until Lucan, epic had maintained at least the semblance of narratological neutrality - even if selection of episodes, attribution of motive etc. had always allowed the poet ample scope for personal bias. In the Bellum Civile, however, even the pretence of authorial impartiality is no longer maintained. As Mayer notes,
In addition to outrage and pity (which are often, of course, expressed singly rather than in combination), Lucan frequently resorts to scorn in the form of invective in this editorial mode. An example is the introduction of Sextus Pompey:
A further type of intervention is the expression of authorial aporia (uncertainty). An example is Lucan's statement of perplexity over the nature of the power exercised by the Thessalian witches over the gods:
Such incertitudes challenge another defining characteristic of epic: the assumption of authorial omniscience. In earlier epic, the poet had little scope for expressing doubt or asking questions. The genre, almost by definition, took for granted various assumptions about the functioning of the universe (as evidenced by, e.g., the convention of the deorum ministeria); speculation, if included at all, was generally left to characters within the poem. [4] Vocabulary and DictionThe vocabulary of the Bellum Civile is more limited than that of Latin epic generally and Virgilian epic in particular. One result of this is the occasional repetition of the same word within a few lines. The most striking example in the necromancy passage is the five-fold occurrence of terra, the first four instances of which are found in a span of less than 30 lines (6.728, 739, 745, 756; the fifth at 788). A second example is the repetition of mors at 6.724 and 726, and again at 770 and 772 - though in this case the repetitions are undoubtedly deliberate and meant to provide emphasis. In his choice of vocabulary, Lucan shows an avoidance of poeticism and ornament, frequently limiting himself to the more neutral and obvious words. Physically vivid words, such as spumantia (6.719), inlatrat (729), and subrepens (753) are also favored. The use of plain words is best-suited to his generally cynical and pessimistic expression. Thus, Lucan tends to reject the prevailing trend in epic towards an elevated vocabulary, generally preferring to limit himself to a more prosaic terminology in order to remove "epic distance." He is less concerned to embellish his material than present it in a dry, sardonic light. Thus, for example, Lucan shows a marked preference for the immediacy of the prosaic mors (occurring six times in the Erictho passage) over its poetic equivalent letum (which does not occur in the Erictho passage). In all, mors occurs 126 times in the Bellum Civile, while letum is found 36 times. In Lucan's epic death is generally not romanticized. Perhaps the most striking example of prosaic diction in the Erictho passage is the repeated use of cadaver (6.727, 755, 776, 822), a word chosen over the more poetic corpus for its shock effect. In all, cadaver occurs 36 times in the Bellum Civile, while the Aeneid has it twice and the Metamorphoses only once. The word is generally avoided by Augustan poets; exceptions are invariably aimed at creating a special effect. Thus Virgil uses it of beasts at Georgics 3.557, and of the corpse of the savage Cacus at Aen. 8.264. It should be added that Lucan generally does not employ the shock effect of cadaver in isolation, but rather, heightens its impact by associated effects. Thus in 6.727, in addition to the violence of the image, cadaver is juxtaposed with the equally prosaic word serpente. In 6.755 he employs the startling paradox cadaver (se) levat, following up with the converse paradox cadaver ut cadat at 822. Finally, at 6.776 the poet incorporates the word in a hauntingly paradoxical image: maestum fletu manante cadaver. Syntax and Syntactic FiguresLucan typically employs a sentence structure based on parataxis and participial elaboration. The use of subordinate clauses is generally kept to a minimum. Outside speeches or authorial comment, sentences tend to be three to four verses long. However, Lucan's frequent recourse to participles allows him to expand sentences almost without limit, as the final sentence of the Erictho passage illustrates:
One of the most striking features of Lucan's syntax is the diminished role of the finite verb, and the consequent reliance on participles and circumstantial ablatives. For example, in the first five lines of the Erictho passage, there are only three finite verbs (levavit, aspicit, pavet), as opposed to five participles (fata, spumantia, astantem, proiecti, timentem). Participles and ablative absolutes generally contain important ideas parallel or opposed to the main verb. In long periods, polysyndeton (the use of multiple connecting participles) sometimes blurs syntax so as to conceal the actual relationship of dependence. One of the chief syntactic figures employed by Lucan is hyperbaton (inversion of normal word order). This is generally used in speeches and the author's own comments rather than narrative, which tends to be less elaborate. In his usage of this figure, Lucan is often thoughtful and psychologically appropriate. Thus, there is little hyperbaton to speak of in the corpse's lengthy prophecy: for the most part, he is merely an unwillingly messenger, delivering his message as quickly and straightforwardly as possible. However, for a brief moment the reluctant prophet engages in an emotional exhortation, and for this Lucan resorts to a measure of hyperbaton:
Likewise, Lucan uses hyperbaton to suggest Erictho's agitation, as she threatens to reveal Persephone's darkest secrets:
Lucan often employs anaphora (word repetition at the beginning of successive clauses) for emphasis. For instance, the force and urgency of Erictho's commands to the cadaver is underlined by anaphora of the imperative da:
Anaphora may also be employed for pacing, as in the splendidly rhythmical verse: per busta sequar, per funera, custos (6.734). In order to mark the beginning or end of a passage, Lucan makes use of various ornamental arrangements. The "golden line" is regularly so used, as at 6.780-1 (a rare case of two consecutive golden lines). Likewise, a line framed by a noun-epithet pair, as at 6.793, is a favourite device to open or close a section. SententiaeLucan's extensive use of sententiae is, no doubt, a direct result of his own rhetorical training, but reflects as well the pervasive influence of rhetoric and declamation on the literature of the period. Nonetheless, the poet demonstrates a gift of expression, an ability to turn a memorable phrase, that goes beyond mere rhetorical or declamatory skill. Quintilian, in his well-known assessment of Lucan, declared the poet to be sententiis clarissimus. Even the vignettes of Statius and the point of Martial cannot compete with Lucan at his best. The Bellum Civile abounds with memorable sententiae (i.e. lapidary or generalizing statements). Nothing could capture the restless energy of Caesar more effectively than the line nil actum credens cum quid superesset agendum (2.657). Curio's immorality is scathingly assessed by the pointed antithesis emere omnes, hic vendidit urbem (4.185). The confused motivation of the Roman people is nicely expressed by ignorantque datos ne quisquam serviat enses (4.579). Lucan's sententiae are generally based on antithesis or, more frequently, paradox. As such, they often serve to express manifestations of the universal discors machina, or to highlight the violation of natural law. Antithesis is regularly employed by Lucan to produce an eye-catching juxtaposition of opposed terms. An example from the Erictho passage is 784-5: tristis felicibus umbris / voltus erat. The use of paradox within a sententia was a favourite device of declamation, since it was effective in momentarily heightening the attention (and capturing the imagination) of an audience. It was also widely exploited in "Silver" prose and poetry; many of Lucan's usages (e.g. 6.724-5) are based on archetypes found in the writings of his uncle Seneca. Paradox was Lucan's favourite form of sententia, since it was inherently appropriate both to his own artistic tendencies and his poetic subject; indeed, civil war itself is treated as a perversion and virtual paradox by Roman poets from Virgil onwards. Moreover, paradox is a remarkably powerful poetic tool in its own right; a sententia often acquired added piquancy from the expression of a surprising, or pathetic, or outrageous reversal of normal circumstances. A good example from our text is 6.822-3: carminibus magicis opus est herbisque, cadaver / ut cadat. As Bonner notes, a significant feature of Lucan's use of the sententia is his skillful deployment: he regularly uses a sententia to effectively round off a passage, whether a speech, description, or narrative section. The placement of a sententia at the termination of a speech shows a clear declamatory influence, for it was at the conclusion that a declaimer particularly hoped to win applause. A splendid example of this use of a "terminal sententia" is found at the conclusion of the cadaver's prophetic speech, where it is declared that the domus Pompeiana will find no place on earth "safer" than Pharsalus (6.819-20): o miseranda domus, toto nil orbe videbis / tutius Emathia. Catachresis and PunningAlong the same lines, Lucan's deliberate catachresis (incorrect use of words) and inverted syntax are devices intended to disrupt a straighforward reading of the poem, to "distract narration from its narrated events," to "beggar its own description." [5] Through broken syntax and diction the poet achieves a metaphor for the universal perversion, the discors machina that has resulted from civil war. The most common syntactic inversion is the reversal of normal subject-object relations. Such reversals mirror on the poetic level the thematic perversion of cosmic order that is inherent in the universal discors machina of Lucan's epic. Not surprisingly, Erictho is a master of such expressions; she distorts syntax as easily as she distorts the normal operation of the universe. For example, in her initial "prayer" to the nether powers she uses the expression modo luce fugata / descendentem animam (6.713-4), which Henderson translates as "a soul on its way down, having just put the light of day to flight." This effectively conveys her perverse power, and serves as an anticipation of her delaying of dawn at 6.830. Puns are also a regular feature of Lucan's poetry, which likewise serve to destabilize the reader's reception of the poem. A notable example is the expression pectus apertum (6.722). This is clearly meant to be taken as "(ripped) open breast," but the colloquial sense of "open mind" is glaring and hard to avoidable. As Henderson notes, the very words "are caught up in the 'civil war' of Lucan's text, where opposed senses tear themselves up and rip the signifiers from signification." [6] Perhaps Lucan's favourite source for puns is the name of a character. The endless punning on the name Magnus - of which stat magni nominis umbra (1.135) is perhaps the finest example - is a case in point. Scholars have also pointed to the coincidence - surely not innocent - of Pompey's son Sextus appearing first and most prominently in Book 6. (The point here is not merely triteness, but a kind of jarring incongruity created by the very inappropriateness of the pun.) Likewise Erictho, who tirelessly threatens the underworld gods, has a name etymologically appropriate to her role (i.e. a combination of the Greek words eris and cthon, "strife-earth"). Moreover, Scaeva, the other prominent figure in Book 6 is fully exploited for the suggestiveness of his name. Henderson suggests that "it is emphatically Lucan's poetic to deny his characters proper names." [7] Footnotes[2] This aspect of Lucan's style elicited the following much-quoted evalutation from the rhetorician Quintilian: Lucanus ardens et concitatus et sententiis clarissimus et, ut dicam quod sentio, magis oratoribus quam poetis imitandus (10.1.90). [4] By including such authorial interjections, Lucan has given the poetic persona a more overt status in his poem than the conventional epic narrator. The "author in the text" of the Bellum Civile comes to have a presence much like that of a character. This aspect is particularly in evidence in the Thessalian excursus, where the questions posed by the authorial persona on the nature of the power exercised by the Thessalian witches over the gods (6.492-9, quoted above) are subsequently answered by Erictho herself:
Here the authorial persona might almost be said to engage in an indirect dialogue - albeit at a distance of 250-odd lines - with one of the characters of the poem. Related Articles: Poem Summary | Poetic Style | Versification | Characters | Bibliography |