Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T04:19:21.712Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Octavia Praetexta: A Survey1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 February 2009

C. J. Herington
C. J. Herington
Affiliation:
University of Exeter
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The Octavia is, on the face of it, one of the most bizarre documents which have reached us from antiquity. If the news of its discovery had broken yesterday, there would certainly have been a sensation at the bare idea, whatever the literary merits of the work. A few years ago the publication of a 15-line fragment of a Greek play about Gyges caused discussion enough; but here we have a complete Roman historical play, unlike any other ancient play in structure, featuring Nero, Octavia, Poppaea, Seneca. …

Type
Research Article
Information
The Classical Quarterly , Volume 11 , Issue 1-2 , May 1961 , pp. 18 - 30
Copyright
Copyright © The Classical Association 1961

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

page 19 note 1 Possibly one should add the rather trite account of the successive ages of the world put into the mouth of Seneca in lines 395–435. But this is hardly a mythological allusion in the strict sense; in intention, at any rate, it is history—the history of the moral decline of the world. That decline culminates, as it were, on the stage, with the entrance of Nero (line 436; well remarked by Giancotti, F., L'Octavia attribuita a Seneca, p. 213)—a highly dramatic touch which, like so much in the Senecan tragedies generally, can only be properly appreciated when the play is read aloud.Google Scholar

page 20 note 1 Dio 62. 16. 2; Suet. Nero 39.

page 20 note 2 Dio 63. 9. 4; Suet Nero 21. 3; referring to the Greek tour in A.D. 67.

page 20 note 3 63. 22. 5.

page 20 note 4 63. 28. 5.

page 20 note 5 8. 211 ff.

page 20 note 6 The chief parallels will be found in Hosius's notes to Oct. 5, 31 f., 37, 43, 66, 137, 169: then 715, 719, 931, 962. A parallel neglected by Ladek and Hosius is that between Oct. 18–20 and Electra 201–8 (which goes a long way to confirming Helm's suggestion that nox should be read in Oct. 18 init., lux at 20 init.).

page 21 note 1 Date given indirectly by Suet. Ner. 57 init., where he says that Nero died on the same date as that on which Octavia had been executed.

page 21 note 2 Mostly following Tacitus (Ann. 14. 57–64).Google ScholarPubMed

page 21 note 3 This interval rests on Suetonius' authority alone (Nero 35. 3).

page 22 note 1 laeta nam postquam dies; cf. 646.

page 22 note 2 Poppaea has seen her vision, in the night before this scene, amplexu novi haerens mariti (i.e. Nero).

page 22 note 3 Cf. Sluiter's, preface to his edition of the Octavia, pp. 9–11.Google Scholar

page 22 note 4 Compare Sen. Agam. (Mycenaeans and Trojan women), H.O. (women of Oechalia and of Aetolia).

page 22 note 5 Almost certainly the Chorus favourable to Poppaea: they begin the Exodus with reflections on the unreliability of mob-support (877 ff.): cf. 805 ff. and contrast the attitude of the earlier Chorus of Roman citizens, 683 ff. But this last Chorus too are ultimately moved to pray for Octavia's safety.

page 23 note 1 Lines 23, 61, 263.

page 23 note 2 Line 631.

page 23 note 3 Nero 34. We have a contemporary witness for the fact that Nero did try to summon up Manes generally: Pliny, , N.H. 30. 2.Google Scholar

page 25 note 1 Pollio (a hostile witness) in Cic. Fam. 10. 32. 3 (from Corduba, 8 June 43 B.C.). Balbus' journey was from Caesar's camp to Pompey's at Dyrrachium, for the purpose of discussing with Lentulus the price of his (Lentulus') treason; see Veil. Pater. 2. 51. 3.

page 25 note 2 They include Flinck, Pease, Paul Maas, and Sluiter.

page 25 note 3 It does seem that style and structure are the decisive criteria in the question of author ship; there have of course been many contributions based on the play's subject-matter (for example, the fairly accurate prophecy of the manner of Nero's death in lines 619–31). But any argument of this sort turns out in practice to be two-edged: the proSenecans can always find a not-impossible retort.

page 25 note 4 Apart from proper names, the Octavia contains rather more than forty words not found in any of the other tragedies. Here is the list, based on the Index Verborum by Old father, Pease, and Canter (Illinois, 1918): adimo, adolescentia, audacia, caenum, dementia (twice), cometes, commendo, comprobo, confestim, confirmo, consecro, cratis, dementia, destruo (twice), discidium, enitor, flammeum (as noun), foedare, illustris (twice), insitivus, insociabilis, intermitto, iuste (adverb), luxuria (twice), monumentum, no, obsequium (thrice), ominor, praecipio, praefectus (twice), praepotens, princeps (nineteen (times), probitas (twice), procreo, proveho (probably twice), recolo, satelles, senatus (thrice), senesco, singuli, solor (twice), studium, stulte (adverb). Less certain instances, for various reasons (which will appear from the entries in the Index Verborum), are: accenseo, excubo, firmus, proavus, respectus (though there is now manuscript testimony for this, Rh. Mus. ci [1958], 368), reticeo.Google Scholar

page 26 note 1 ‘Die Octavia Praetexta’ in Berlin Akademie Sitzungsberichte, Phil.-hist. Klasse, 1934, pp. 283–347.Google Scholar

page 26 note 2 Helm, op. cit. pp. 317–18Google Scholar; Flinck, E., De Octaviae Praetextae auctore, diss. Helsingfors, 1919, P. 44.Google Scholar

page 27 note 1 His prose works of this last period are as powerful in phraseology, and as rambling in design, as ever they were. Both the Haturales Quaestiones and the Epistulae Morales certainly belong to the time of his retirement; further, the N.Q. alludes to an earthquake of Feb. A.D. 63 (6. 1. 2; date disputed, but needlessly, cf. Schanz-Hosius, ii. 700), and Ep. 91. 1 to the burning of Lyons in A.D. 64 or 65.

page 27 note 2 Ritter, F., Bonn, 1843.Google Scholar

page 27 note 3 There is one line of approach, incidentally, which has been often tried in the past, but which seems to me impracticable; that is to attempt to show the Octavia's dependence on one or other of the Roman historians, or— in extreme cases—the dependence of one or other of the Roman historians on the Octavia. But deadlock has been reached here because of the massive uncertainty-factor, the numerous lost works (and lost conversations ?) which might have served as common sources. A glance at pages 199–200 of Syme's, R.Tacitus, vol. i, will show how intricate the problem is.Google Scholar

page 28 note 1 Vit. Persii, lines 44 f. in Clausen's Oxford text: the name of the play was given, but is corrupt.

page 28 note 2 The plays of this group are: Persius' play; Aeneas (?) by Pomponius Secundus, friend of the elder Pliny; Curiatius' Cato and Domitius. For evidence and discussion, see Helm's article ‘Praetexta’ in R.-E. xii. 2. 1559 ff.Google Scholar

page 29 note 1 10. 1. 125 ff.

page 29 note 2 The reference is to the funeral oration over Claudius, composed by Seneca and spoken by Nero, , Ann. 13. 3.Google Scholar

page 29 note 3 Historical particulars, on the whole, we do not expect to recover from the tragedy. None the less, J. P. V. D. Balsdon (in a letter which he kindly allows me to quote) observes two passages where the author shows knowledge of an important point which is stated by none of the extant historians, though it can be inferred from the facts which they record. '‘Tacitus makes Poppaea the final cause of Nero's killing his mother. This was in 59. Why then did he not marry her until 62 ? My own guess is that he was not going to do this until he was certain that she was going to be more successful than Octavia in producing children. (There is an odd murmur of this in Tac, . Ann. 14. 1.) In 62 when the dispatch of Octavia came, it was all carried outGoogle Scholar in a very great hurry. The child of Poppaea was born in January of 63, as the evidence of the Arval Brothers shows. I feel certain that Nero waited until Poppaea was pregnant before he married her. Oddly, the historiansdo not say so. But our playwright does (181 f., 591).' Here we have yet another reason for thinking that the author is a near-contemporary witness.