American Philological Association

Petronius, Seneca, and Lucan: A Neronian Literary Feud?

Author(s): J. P. Sullivan
Source: Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 99 (1968),
pp. 453-467
Published by: The Johns Hopkins University Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2935857 .
Accessed: 16/04/2013 11:48
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

American Philological Association and The Johns Hopkins University Press are collaborating with JSTOR to
digitize, preserve and extend access to Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological
Association.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 190.19.33.210 on Tue, 16 Apr 2013 11:48:16 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

PETRONIUS,
SENECA, AND LUCAN:
A NERONIAN
LITERARY
FEUD?
J. P. SULLIVAN
University
ofTexas

of theNeronianperiod
The chronological
problemsof theliterature
have onlygraduallyyieldedto thepatientefforts
of scholars.' The
taskwas complicated
indifference
of Roman historby thecustomary
iansand criticsto theexactdatingof literary
productions
and by the
reluctance
ofancientwriters
frequent
andunderstandable
tonameproinhostile
minent
contemporaries
contexts.2Enoughofa roughframeforus to beginto address
work,however,has now been established
ourselvesto thereal criticalquestions,
notably,thenatureand ideoof theperiod. Allogicalaims,if any,of theliterary
controversies
canbe usedtoventpettyspite,airpersonaldifferences,
thoughliterature
thesecontroversies
are sometimes
and currypatronage,
debatesabout
about how to writeand what to writeabout. If we do
principles:
notinvestigate
theseearlyBattlesoftheBooks,we areliableto forget
classicsarefirmly
thatmanyofourestablished
rootedin contemporary
evenin othercontemporary
concerns,
and so misapprehend
writings,
theirtruecharacter.In thispaperI proposeto connectsomepieces
ofhistorical
evidencefromTacitus,Suetonius,
andDio withtheliterary
us by Petronius,
evidencefurnished
Lucan, and Seneca in orderto
throwlighton one suchbattle.
See e.g. A. Momigliano, "Literary Chronology of the Neronian Age," CQ 3
96 (hereaftercited as Momigliano); P. Faider, "La vie litterairea Rome sous
le regnede Neron," Atud.Class.3 (I934) 3; K. Miinscher,"Senecas Werke," Philologus
suppl. i6 (I922)
53; K. F. C. Rose, "Problems of Chronology in Lucan's Career,"
TAPA 97 (I966) 379 (hereaftercited as Rose); J.P. Sullivan, TheSatyricon
ofPetronius:
A LiteraryStudy(Indiana I968), ch. i (hereaftercited as Sullivan).
2 For example, we do not know who Callimachus' Telchines were, Ovid's Ibis,
or the poetastersof Persius' firstsatire; even Horace's feud with Propertiusinvolves
some guesswork.
I

(I944)

This content downloaded from 190.19.33.210 on Tue, 16 Apr 2013 11:48:16 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

454

J. P. SULLIVAN

[i968

The literaryrenaissanceunder Nero, emperorand artifex,was,

of Latinliterature
as the flowering
at least,as impressive
externally
and exunderAugustus. At anyrateithasleftus as manyestablished
and
tantclassics,even if Seneca,Pliny,Lucan, Persius,Calpurnius,
ratedlowerthanVergil,Horace,and the
areconventionally
Petronius
intermsofmoney
achievement
otherAugustans.Rewardsforartistic
formisapplied
genius
weregreat,3
althoughthepenalties
andinfluence
as Nero's own artisticambitions4
were perhapsgreater,particularly
politicaldangersthatfaced all imperial
added to the ever-present
production.
writersand wits.5 But therewas no dearthof literary
recitalsthatPersiusmocksin hisfirstsatire
Apartfromtheliterary
(iSff.),and theusualpublicationin book form,theemperor'sown
and ambitionsadded some more avenuesof publication:
interests
oftenof a dramatickind
exhibitions,
notablypublicand semi-public
contests
(withprizes),suchas theLudi
(Plin. NH 14.5i), and literary
Iuvenalesin 59 A.D. (Dio 62.I9) and the Neroniaof 6o and 65 A.D.6
3 Consider, for example, Menecrates' rewards (Suet. Nero 30); the foundation of
Seneca's power was his reputationas the leading literarylight of the period (Plin. NH
his recall fromexile to serveas Nero's tutor.
I4.5I),whichledto
and artisticabilitiesthe main evidence is: Suet. Nero
4 For Nero's literaryinterests
(ioculariacarmina),52.I; Vitell. II.2 (Neronian
30.2, 38.2, 42-43
20-2I,
II.3,
IO.2,
(the
62.29.I
62.2I.2,
cantica);Dio 6I.20 (his poem at theLudi Iuvenales), 62.20.I-2,
Troica),63.I.I-2, 63.3, 63.8.2; Juv. 8.220 if.; Tac. Ann. I4.52 (his stage appearances).
5Nero was unpredictablein thismatter. He tolerateda certaintoughnessin Burrus
and calculatedimpudence fromPetroniusand Otho (Plut. Mor. 60DE;
(Dio 52.I3.i-2)
But he resentedVestinus'
Galba I9.3); he even toleratedlampoons (Suet. Nero 39.I-2).
jokes, which perhaps strucktoo close to home (Tac. Ann. i5.68), and Cornutus was
Althoughthe emperorhimself
exiled forcriticizinghis literaryprojects(Dio 62.29.2).
carmen)againstAfraniusQuintianus
was not above writinga maliciouspoem (probrosum
(Tac. Ann. I5.49), Lucius FabriciusVeiento was banished for his libelous "codicilli"
against the priesthoodand the senate (ibid. I4.50), and the praetor AntistiusSosianus
carmina,deliveredat a crowded
principem
suffereda similarfateforhis probrosaadversus
It was saferto chalk
dinnerparty at the house of Ostorius Scapula (ibid. I4.48-49).
anonymousverseson the wall about Nero's matricide(Suet. Nero 39; Dio 62.29.4).
i.e. poetryand oratory.
in 60 A.D. was devotedto mousike',
6 A thirdof theperformance
Quite eminentmen contended,although Nero won the prize for the lyre (Suet. Nero
It is possible to make too much of thesefirstNeronia,as does J. M. C. Toynbee,
20).
Calpurnius'
CQ 36 (I942) 83, who wishes to transferto them the Apocolocyntosis,
Bucolica,the second of the carminaEinsiedlensia,and part of Lucan's Pharsalia. G.
Bagnani wished to ascribe to them the publication of part of Petronius' Satyricon,
cf ArbiterofElegance(Toronto I954) 66 (but in what class could it have been entered?).
Againsttheseviews, see Momigliano 96, and Rose 379.

This content downloaded from 190.19.33.210 on Tue, 16 Apr 2013 11:48:16 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Vol. 991

PETRONIUS,

SENECA,

AND LUCAN

455

Neroevenorganized
trainedclaquesfortheapplause.7 But thesewere
all full-dress
occasions,and we know of other,lessformaloccasions
for artisticexpression.Apart fromhis early after-dinner
sessions
with the musicianTerpnus(Suet. Nero I9), Nero established
also a
kindofpoetryworkshop,
fromwhichsomeshavings
oftheemperor's
own survived,at leastuntilSuetonius'time(ibid.52). Under the
year59 A.D. Tacitustellsus thattheemperorformeda literary
circle
thatwentintosessionafterdinner(Ann.14.16). Thiscirclewas composedofassociates
withsomefaculty
forverse,whoseabilities
hadnot
yetattracted
publicattention
(" quibusaliqua pangendifacultasnecduminsignis
erat"). Heretheywouldrevisehalf-completed
productionsor offerimpromptu
fortheimperialcriticism
compositions
and
revision,
as Nerowas supposedto havea pretty
knackforsuchthings.8
We hear of both poetry-readings
and lyre-recitals
at Nero's house
(Suet.Nero10, 22). It would be intothiscirclethatLucan withhis
precociousgiftsand,perhapsmoreimportant,
withhisuncleSeneca's
influence
at court,was introduced,
perhapsbeingrecalledfromAthens
forthepurpose. Andhereno doubtdevelopedthatfriendly
competitionwithNero thattheVoss Lifespeaksof. It was publicfameof
coursethatled to Lucan'sfallfromtheimperialfavor.
Tacitusis ratherslighting
abouttheproductions
of thiscoterie,but
he cannothaveseenthemall,and itsveryexistence
is a further
proof
ofNero'sgenuine,ifjealous,literary
interests.Moreoverphilosophical debatesvariedthe poeticdiet,even if inconclusive
dialecticand
sectariansquabblesratherthan the truthprovidedthe interest
and
amusement.Tacitus informsus sardonicallythat there was no
dearthof apparentlyseriousphilosophersin attendance.And it
mighthave been at sucha literary-philosophical
soir6ethatAnnaeus
stoic
Cornutus, tragedian,
andcritic,
philosopher,
andoneoftheeditors
of Persius'satires,
unwiselycriticized
Nero's projectfora longpoem
on Roman history
(Dio 62.29.2).
7 Tac. Ann. I4.2; Suet. Nero 20; Dio 6I.20.I-2.
Suet. Nero42. He had been taughtimpromptuoratoryby Seneca (Tac. Ann. 14.52).
This particulartalentwas as highly prized in Neronian times as at any other period.
Remmius Palaemon (cf. Suet. De gramm.)and Lucan were renowned forit, and two
charactersin Petronius' Satyriconpreen themselveson their instantverses (Sat. 4.5,
8

I09.8).

This content downloaded from 190.19.33.210 on Tue, 16 Apr 2013 11:48:16 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

456

J. P.

SULLIVAN

[I968

friendly
It is clearfromtheevidencethatsucha circlebredrivalry,
fame
andpowerbuilton literary
andofcoursereputation
orotherwise;
example
incitebothjealousyand attack. Therewas one pre-eminent
achievements-Seneca.Almostfrom
gainedby literary
of influence
had had purposesbeyondthenatural
Seneca'swritings
thebeginning,
of the emperor
Stoic aim of improvingmankind. The flattery
Polybiusfromexilemaynothave had an
Claudiusand hisfreedman
but the Consolatioad Polybiumand Seneca'sother
immediateeffect,
untilit was naturalthat
builtup hisreputation,
undoubtedly
writings
Agrippinashouldrecall him to become the young Nero's tutor.
His positionof influencewith the waywardprincewas no doubt
the emperor'sspeeches(Quint. Inst.
by his ghost-writing
reinforced
work,
flowof literary
8.5.i8; Tac. Ann. I3.3) and his continued
and hisattackon thedead Claudiusin the
includingtheDe clementia
thatSeneca,with
to believe,therefore,
It is difficult
Apocolocyntosis.
figureat the
as theleadingliterary
hisjealouslyguardedreputation9
in theseliterary
court,would have had no part,or takenno interest,
frompubliclifein
at leastbeforehis gradualretirement
gatherings,
62 A.D.
Was theadmissionof hisnephewLucanto thecirclea sign
of thisinterest?In fact,two of the chargesmade by his enemies
afterthedeathof Burrus)werethatSenecaclaimed
(who multiplied
sole honorsfor eloquenceand had also startedwritingversemore
for it (Tac.
now thatNero had developedan affection
frequently
more
verseis thatSenecahadwritten
The implication
Ann. I4.52).
to theseliterary
symposiaor to counor plays-eitheras contributions
productions.In eithereventhe would
teractthembyhisindependent
emhis standingwiththeartistically-minded
be tryingto safeguard
peror. Certainlyin Tacitus' account,Seneca'saccusershad urged
guide,whichsuggests
Nero to rid himselfof a vain and pretentious
had triedto retain
that,in positiveor negativeways,thephilosopher
of Nero'sliterary
tastes. His praise
hisearlierpositionas thedirector
quaestiones
fora line of Nero's versein theNaturales
(i5.6) wistfully
recallshis formerstatusas chiefcritic. Such a statuswould not be
vatumnow aroundNero. Certoleratedeasilyby thegenusirritabile
giftsseemsindicatedby Seneca's
tainlyan attackon Seneca'sliterary
9 One recalls with amusement the familiaranecdote that Seneca diverted Nero's
attentionfromCicero so thathis own stylemightshinethe brighter.

This content downloaded from 190.19.33.210 on Tue, 16 Apr 2013 11:48:16 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Vol. 991

PETRONIUS,

SENECA, AND LUCAN

457

to lay
temporary
modestyabout themin 62 A.D., when he offered
down his power and richesand retire;'0he termsthemstudiain
due solelyto theirsupposedhelp in
umbraeducata,
theirreputation
fromcourt
educating
theprince. Fromthisdateon, Senecawithdrew
or sightseeing
life,devotinghimselfto writing,valetudinarianism,
in themorefashionable
partsofCampania. WiththedeathofBurrus
and the subsequentsemi-retirement
of Seneca,Nero enteredmore
fullyinto his own, and came underthe influence
of verydifferent
advisersfromthosehe formerly
had: Tigellinusand Petroniuswere
amongthem.
A tabletfromHerculaneumhas enabled us to date Petronius'
consulship
to around6I A.D., II and Tacitus'account(Tac. Ann.i6. i 820) thengives us his careerin more detail.I2 Afterhis consulship
Petronius
enteredthesmallcircleofNero'sintimates.Not,however,
thereallyclosecircle,ofwhichTigellinuswas a member,
forPetronius
had to getthedetailsof Nero'slesselegantand moreorgiastic
amusementsfromhis partnerin vice, Silia, a consular'swife. Now if
Petroniuswas not masterof theserevels,but simplyNero's arbiter
itis a reasonable
elegantiae,
thatoverandabovehistastefor
assumption
lavishexpenditure
and fluorspar
wine-dippers,
attestedby Plinyand
Plutarch,I3
Petronius
had ingratiated
himself
by his culturalinterests.
Suetoniuseven tellsus thatNero distributed
and hostility
friendship
accordingto thelavishness
ofmen'spraisesforhisvocalperformances.
How many circleswould the emperorhave had? Excludingthe
10 For Seneca'spoems,see Quint.Inst. IOLI.29;
Plin.Ep. 5.3 (eroticverses,which
would be appropriate
enoughin Neroniancircles);Tac. Ann. 14.52; Prisc.lib. 7.759
(Putsch),
whereitisstatedthatthepoemswereoriginally
infourbooks. The emperor's
refusal
ofhisoffer
shouldnotbe takentoo seriously
in viewofPOxy. inv.3B36/G(3-4),
whichis datedto25 Oct. 62 A.D.: a ,auGrCTs was running
Seneca'sproperty
in Egypt
andthisindicates
thatit(orsomeofit)hadbeenconfiscated
byNero,whichmayexplain
thetoneofEp. 77. See G. M. Browne,"WithdrawalfromLease,"BASP 5 (i968)

?7if.,and Rostovtzeff,SEHRE2 2.67I, 3.25.

'I Tab. Herc.Ins.v no.22: seeG. PuglieseCarratelli,
" TabulaeCerataeHerculanenses,"

PP 3 (I946) 38I.

I2 The identity
of thesuffect
consulof 6o, 6i, or 62, T. Petronius
Niger,withthe
courtier
described
byTacitusandtheauthoroftheSatyricon
hasbeenmostfullydemonstratedby thelateK. F. C. Rose, "The Authorof theSatyricon,"Latomus20 (i96i)
82i; cf.R. Syme,Tacitus(Oxfordi958) 387note,743. The present
paperwill,I hope,
demonstrate
stillfurther
thelikelihoodoftheidentification.
'3 Plin.NH 37.8.20; Plut.Mor. 60E.

This content downloaded from 190.19.33.210 on Tue, 16 Apr 2013 11:48:16 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

458

J. P.

SULLIVAN

[I968

andSilia,wouldthe
Tigellinus
cliquethatincluded
smalldisreputable
fromthosequibus
ofAnnalsi6 be quitedifferent
familiarium
paucos
eratofAnnalsI4 ?14 Thereis
insignis
necdum
facultas
aliquapangendi
wanedas timewenton-quite
interests
no signthatNero'sliterary
aretrue,could
Eventhefireof Rome,ifthestories
thecontrary.
suchas his
diverthis mindfrommoreseriousthings,
notentirely
thattheemperor
ofTroy. Arewe topostulate
poemon thecapture
wareoverdinner
ofmyrrhine
hiscollection
spentonenightdiscussing
his
s versesor reading
someone
thenext,discussing
withPetronius;
Sporus,
closeted
withSilia,Tigellinus,
forrelaxation,
own;andthenext,
emof thatilk? A literary-minded
orgiasts
and otherdisreputable
as
such
of
friends
fair
a
number
literary-minded
have
perorwould
thatPetronius
wasamongthem.
assumption
Lucan. Itisa reasonable
butbefore
byevidence,
canonlybevalidated
Thisa priori
possibility
at
let
us
look
still
the
literary
closer
itself,
we turnto theSatyricon
at Nero'scourtaboutthisperiod. The figureof Lucan
situation
talents,
literary
itself
onourattention.Hisprecocious
forces
naturally
and wellseenin suchearlyworksas hisIliaconand Catachthonion
withhisuncle's
influence,
coupledperhaps
knownno doubtinAthens,
and fast
his friendship,
himtheemperor's
attention,
had brought
amicorum,
intothecohors
He was admitted
politicaladvancement.
a veryearlyquaestorship
andgranted
(in
senatorial
status,
accorded
we
cannot
surmise
how
was
he
only20).15 Naturally
60 A.D., when
fallfromgracein 62 A.D., or to the
he reactedto Seneca'sinvoluntary
bymoresinister-ormorefrivolous-influences.
old man'sreplacement
fromcourtlifeseemsto havebeengradualand
But Seneca'sretirement
freefromany immediatedanger. He went on publishingliterary
works,and perhapswe can detectin themand in thatfactthehope
14 Tacitus' failureto connect these two groups is not decisive: not only is there a
three-yearintervalor so between the beginning of the literarysoireesand Petronius'
admissioninto Neronian circles,but it is also likely thatTacitus is using two different
sources. His account of Petroniushimselfmightwell come fromone of the Hadrioof the
Trajanic biographical collectionsor a collection of the exitusvirorumillustrium
sort composed by Pliny's friendsGaius Fannius and Titinius Capito; see Plin. Ep.
latineinconnue(Paris I956) 2.207-9. If
5.5i, 8.I2.4; and H. Bardon, La Litte'rature
Petroniuswas a man of literaryas well as materialgood taste,the combinationin the
Satyriconof literarycriticismand parody with satireon personal or materialvulgarity
would be highlyappropriate.
Is Suet. Vit.Lucani.

This content downloaded from 190.19.33.210 on Tue, 16 Apr 2013 11:48:16 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Vol. 99]

PETRONIUS,

SENECA,

AND LUCAN

459

inthemandtheir
thattheflattery
gentle
simultanemoralizing
might
andopen
ouslyclosetheemperor's
eyesto thewriter's
allegedfaults
hisearstotheimplicit
criticism
ofthevoluptuaries
andthedelicati
that
werenowa maincomponent
ofthecourtcircle. ButLucan'stalents
soonbecametoo muchfortheemperor:
as Balzacsaid,friendships
lastwheneachfriend
hehasa slight
thinks
overtheother.
superiority
After
their
initial
friendly
Nerodeliberately
rivalry,
offended
thepoet,
and thelatterwas bannedfromoratory
and frompublishing
his
poetry.'6Thebanis datedto theyear65 A.D. byDio, andtheLife
ofVaccatellsusthatonlythefirst
three
booksofthePharsalia
wereby
thenpublished
intheformwe havethem(ifwe ignoretheminordisputeabouttheopeninglines).I7No doubthe continued
to work
onthepoemafter
theban,anditwaspresumably
thenthatheheightenedtheanti-Caesarian
noteto be foundin thelastthreebooksof
theepic. Dio ofcourse
mayberather
compressing
events
fordramatic
effect,
andso making
Lucanverybusyin thelastfewmonths
of his
life. He wasworking
onhisepic,andhewasalsointriguing
withthe
Pisonian
conspirators.
But beforethis,thereis nothing
implausible
inLucan'scontinuing
to flourish-or
onlygradually
falling
intodisfavor-fortwo or threeyearsafterSeneca'sown downfall.After
all,NerowasawayinAchaeain63 A.D., andthere
isnoneedtoassume
fromTacitus'accountthatPetronius
wrotetheextantpartsof the
Satyricon
immediately
on hisarrivalat court.i8Evenhisunofficial
as arbiter
position
elegantiae
wouldhardly
be builtina day,andTigellinus,whohadsucceeded
Burrus,
didnotlookforan opportunity
to
be ridofhimuntil66 A.D.
BearingLucan'scareerin mindwe maynow turnto theSatyricon.'9

In ch.ii8 oftheSatyricon,
Eumolpuscriticizes
thosewho turntheir
oratorical
gifts
tothesupposedly
easierchannel
ofpoetry,
whoindulge
inidlesententiae
intheir
writing,
andwhoabandon
theVergilian
machineryof the godswhenwriting
historical
epic. The criticism
is
16

Tac. Ann. I5.49; Dio 62.29.4.

See Rose 384. SignificantlyNero, according to Dio 62.29.3, had in mind an
historicalepic of an even more ambitiouskind.
18 Particularlyin view of the lengthof the work; cf. Sullivan 34.
I9 The Satyricon
has been neglectedas a literary
document(thoughnot in otherways)
largely because of the long persistentdoubts about its exact dating. Scholars were
thereforeunwillingto draw any but the most tentativeand generaldeductionsfromit.
I7

This content downloaded from 190.19.33.210 on Tue, 16 Apr 2013 11:48:16 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

460

J. P. SULLIVAN

[I968

atLucan:itfitshim-andno oneelsewe knowof2O

directed
clearly
Ifwe askwhyLucanisnotnamed,we neednotinvoketheprinciple
contexts
are not usuallynamedin unfavorable
thatfellowwriters
conventheliterary
butin addition,
thisis trueenough),
(although
characters
forbidit. How shouldpicaresque
tionsof theSatyricon
developliterary
withthelatest
SouthItalybeaufait
around
wandering
debellocivilithatfollowsthecritique
mentsin Rome? The carmen
the
particularly
on Lucan'sPharsalia,
andunmistakably
drawsheavily
theory
modern
and
medieval
the
dismiss
to
Except
books.
three
first
on Romanvices,we mayleaveasideherethe
satire
thatitis a serious
are clearly
exact natureof the relationship.2IBut the implications
has
as
Duckworth
Vergilian,
is
more
critical. For theversification
recentlyshown(TAPA 98 [I967] io6 note), and back comes the
of gods and goddessesthatLucan-not without
Vergilianmachinery
good reasons-hadseenfitto dispensewith.
mayhave chosento attackLucan,a farlongerestablished
Petronius
fora numberofreasons. Perhapshe wished
courtfigurethanhimself,
to profitfromthe emperor'sgrowingjealousy of Lucan's genius;
or
forLucan'sepic experiments
perhapsto expressa genuinedistaste
Epicurean
his whole way of writing;perhapsfroman instinctive
persuasion,
againstSenecaandthoseofthesamephilosophical
animosity
Stoicpoettheirmostprominent
byattacking
whichhe couldgratify
Lucan had earlierenjoyedcloserelaamicorum,
foroutsidethecohors
tionswithPersiusand AnnaeusCornutus,the tragedianof the sect,
can hardlybe doubted,
loyaltyto his principles
and his continuing
It
his
of lastfewdays. mustbeadded,ofcourse,
despitethepoltroonery
thatPetronius'
on anychronological
mortgages,
to avoid foreclosing
of Lucan would be welcometo theemperorshortlyafter,
criticism
as well as before,thepoet'sdeath.
The attackon Lucan, however,is an isolatabledigressionin the
integralto the work,is
farmorepervasive,and therefore
Satyricon;
Seneca's
proseand verse.22
of,
and
parody
frequent
the allusionto,
Cf. the similar criticismsin Quint. Inst. Io.I.9o; Mart. I4.I94; Serv. ad Aen.
ad Phars.i.i; Isid. Orig.8.7.I0.
21 See Sullivan I70 and the bibliographytherecited.
22 See G. Studer,RhM 2 (i843) 89;
J. Gottschlich,"De parodiisSenecae apud Petro(Breslau I863), and the re-examination
nium" in Misc. Philol.lib.zu Frid.HaaseJubildum
of the evidence in A. Collignon, Etude sur Petrone(Paris i892); P. Thomas, L'age et
20

I.382; Schol.

This content downloaded from 190.19.33.210 on Tue, 16 Apr 2013 11:48:16 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Vol. 99]

PETRONIUS,

SENECA,

AND LUCAN

46I

ofthemanyparallels
havebeenraised
Objections
tothisinterpretation
SenecaandPetronius
on thegrounds
between
thattwocontemporary
authorsmighteasilyallude,accidentally,
to similarcontemporary
characters,
issues,
andphilosophical
commonplaces;
alternatively,
they
on commonsources.But,if theseparallels
maybothbe drawing
are accidental,
we mightreasonably
expectthemto be distributed
overthewholecorpus
ofSeneca's
prosework. Butifwe excludethe
Apocolocyntosis,23
mostof theparallels
arewiththeEpistulae
morales,
a workwhichisamongthelatest
ofSeneca's
writings,
andwhichseems
to havebeenpublished,
several
booksata time,inthelastthree
years
ofhislife. Thisperiod,ofcourse,
coincides
withthepostulated
rise
of Petronius
to hisunofficial
positionas Nero'sarbiter
elegantiae.
As forthe objection,whichcan neverbe completelydiscounted,
thattheparallelsbetweenthetwo authorsare due to theirdrawing,
eachforhisverydifferent
purposes,
on a commonsource(or sources),
one can onlyreplythatit is moreplausiblein theabstract
thanin the
concrete. In the Neronian contextit makes littlesense. If we
postulatesomelargemassof StoicwritinguponwhichPetronius
and
Senecadraw,thenPetronius
is castingtoo wide a net. As Collignon
said,"parodiertoutle monde,c'estparodierpersonne." Moreover,
the parallelsare not merelyof thoughtor exemplaryincident;in
someof themostimportant
cases,theresemblance
is stylistic
also. It
issurelytoomuchto imaginethatotherStoicswerewriting
in Seneca's
uniquestyle.
The usesto whichPetronius
putshisSenecanmaterial
maybe classifiedin threeways:24thefirstis straight
parody,consisting
of fairly
long passageswhichread like a pasticheof Senecanprose. They
concernsuch mattersas the decadenceof the age (Sat. 88);25 the

I'auteurdu Satyricon
(Ghent I905) II, I7; S. Gaselee, SomeUnpublished
Materials
for
an EditionofPetronius
(Cambridge Univ. Library I909); H. C. Schnur, The Age of
Petronius
Arbiter
(Ann Arbor microfilmI957) I23; K. F. C. Rose, TheDate andAuthor
oftheSatyricon
(unpublisheddiss. Oxford I963) 205.
23 The parallels
betweentheSatyricon
andtheApocolocyntosis
aremostfullytabulated

by Bagnani (above, note 6) 80. Their explanation,however, is to be sought in the

Menippean and Varroniantradition.
24 I omit here the poem on the Capture of Troy (Sat. 89), which is writtenin the
meter and styleof Senecan tragedy(see Sullivan i86 and P. G. Walsh, CP 63 [I968]
2I0).
25

CompareEp. II5.Io-I2;

QN7.3I.I

ff.

This content downloaded from 190.19.33.210 on Tue, 16 Apr 2013 11:48:16 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

J. P.

462

SULLIVAN

[I968

tofortune
(Sat.II 5.8andman'ssubjugation
ofhumanwishes
vanity
(Sat.125.4).27 Theyare
oftheevil-doer
conscience
9);26 theuneasy
in whichtheyappear
contexts
as parodyby theridiculous
revealed
that
of thecharacters voicethesentiments.
or by thedisreputability
is putinto
on theage'sdecadence
theloftydiscourse
For,instance,
he hastoldthe
justafter
poetEumolpus
themouthofthepederastic
ofhishost'ssonatPergaofhisseduction
story
ifamusing,
scabrous,
mum(Sat.85ff.).
from
distinguished
(notto be toosharply
The secondclassification
tothrowscornon its
material
useofSenecan
isthedramatic
thefirst)
foundin the Cena
This is generally
implications.
philosophical
will
perhaps
suffice.Seneca's
examples
of
A couple
Trimalchionis.
points:
several
makes
ofslaves
treatment
47ontheproper
Epistle
famous
has thesamepowerover
beings;Fortune
slavesare fellow-human
wrongwithdiningwithone's
and slaves;thereis nothing
masters
basis;andsoon. IntheCena,Trimalchio's
atleastona selective
slaves,
to join thecompanyat table
household
his
to
invitation
drunken
abouttheircommonhumanity
(Sat. 70.10), his maudlinremarks
satire
senseas straight
all makegoodliterary
theirillfortune:
despite
point
more
much
how
but
freedman,
on a vulgarandpretentious
do theygainif we haveSeneca'sletterin mind? AndEncolpius'
bad taste
and Trimalchio's
is heremoreheavilyunderlined
disgust
incidentally,
life,
inreal
thanusual. Petronius
exposed
moreexplicitly
In hislasthourshe
had no truckwiththissortof egalitarianism.
or
eitherlashings
with
deserts
to
their
according
slaves
his
treated
rewards(Tac. Ann.I6.I9).

ofEumolpus'
suspicious
at Sat. ioo is extremely
Again,Encolpius
thispiece of
with
himself
He
consoles
Giton.
towards
attitude
moralizing:
placet.quidautemnoncommune
estquodpuerhospiti
molestum
estquod naturaoptimumfecit? sol omnibuslucet. lunaetiamferas

tamen
potest?inpublico
adpabulum.quidaquisdiciformosius
ducit
erit?immo
quampraemium
potius
manant.solusergoamorfurtum
inviderit.
bonanisiquibus
populus
veronolohabere
26 Cp. Ep. 92.34-35;
Cp. Ep. io5.7-8.

99.8-9, 3I; IOI-4, 6.

27

This content downloaded from 190.19.33.210 on Tue, 16 Apr 2013 11:48:16 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Vol. 991

PETRONIUS,

SENECA,

AND LUCAN

463

The parallelpassagein Seneca,however,is completelyserious(Ep.

73.6-8):
annotemperansolilunaeque
plurimum
debeo,etnonunimihioriuntur;
nihilinmeumhonorem
tiqueannum
deoprivatim
obligatus
sum,quamvis
sint. stultaavaritiamortalium
possessionem
pro<annua> descripta
prietatemque
discernit
nec quicquamsuumcreditessequod publicum
nihilsuummagisiudicatquamcuiusillicumhumano
est;at illesapiens
genere
consortium
est,etc.
Encolpius'argument
is,in fact,inconsistent
and almostirrelevant,
for
he soon consoleshimself
withthethoughtthatEumolpusis too old
to get up to any mischiefwithoutgiving himselfaway. What
could be the point of thislittlesoliloquyin such a ridiculousand
situation
unseemly
exceptparody?
The thirdtypeofparallelbetweenPetronius
andSenecamayexplain
why some scholarshave been temptedto denythetheoryof parody
and fall back on the explanations
of chanceand commonsources.
These last instances
cannotbe construedas straight
parody,stylistic
or otherwise;theyarerathera subtlerdeployment
of Senecanthemes
and materials
forotherand moreamusingpurposes,
in orderto show
Petronius'artistic
superiority
as well as hisironicrejectionof Seneca's
philosophicalposturingsand stylisticexuberance.2SJust as the
is superiorto theApocolocyntosis
Satyricon
as an experiment
in Menippean satire,so Petroniustakesmaterialin whichSenecamaybe seen
at hisbest,namelyvividsatirical,
or indignant,
description,
and turns
it to quite different
uses. The greatportraitof Trimalchio,for
fleshedout with,amongotherthings,much
example,is deliberately
Senecanmaterial-I would cite in particularSeneca's vignettesof
CalvisiusSabinus,Pacuvius,and Maecenasin Ep. 27, I2, and II4.29
The intentions
thatunderliesucha literary
procedureare not unfamiliarin ancientauthors:theyprovidea typicalGraeco-Roman
28 By comparison
withSeneca,naturally,
Petronius'
styleis Atticist,
and hisartistic
credo,
stressing
simplicity,
pleasure,and theacceptance
of lifeas it is (expressed
at Sat.
would be diametrically
opposedto all thatSenecastoodforin his lifeand
I32.I5),

writings.

29 Significantly,
Trimalchio's
posthumously
assumedagnomen
is to be Maecenatianus
(Sat. 7I.I2).

This content downloaded from 190.19.33.210 on Tue, 16 Apr 2013 11:48:16 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

464

J. P. SULLIVAN

[I968

from
amusement
andfurther
ofallusions;
in therecognition
pleasure
context.Thisisindeedoneofthemainsources
changed
theradically
of Vergilis
forwhicheventhesacredstream
humor,
of Petronian
would
emulation
a
certain
invidious
context
tapped. InourNeronian
usehe could
couldshowtowhatbetter
notbe precluded.Petronius
whileatthesametimedenigratmaterial,
intended
putevenseriously
werc
motives
butnotidentical,
moralism.Similar,
ingitsstrenuous
of theearlypartof thePharsalia.Had
at workin hisrehandling
parodyof
Petronius'dealingswithSenecabeen merelyconventional
withitssatireon poetic
thesortone findsevenin theApocolocyntosis,
ways of tellingthe timein ch. 2, theremighthave been less doubt
but thesophistication
of the Satyricon,
about the date and intentions
materialconfusedthe
of Petronius'methodsin usingcontemporary
allusionin the Cena in
issue.30 There is a wealthof contemporary
sources
and literarymaterialdrawnfromcontemporary
particular,
butthereis no oneway or onepurposeat work,and
is indeedutilized,
With thisin
nioone personunderattackin each characterization.
of some of
be
offered
might
mind,a more convincingexplanation
the shorterpoemsin the Cena, and perhapseven of thatpuzzling
the Troiaehalosisin ch. 88.3' The mostlikelypurposeof
insertion,
poemwas to parodySeneca'stragicstyle,and lines40657
Petronius'
forcomparison.The Troiae
maybe recommended
of theAgamemnon
favorite
words,a fairproportion
of
Seneca's
a
number
contains
halosis
of repetition.
and is also verytolerant
of verballypointedsententiae,
of the
It hasnot,of course,beenuncommonto datethecomposition
to
wish
a
out
of
pious
in
exile
Seneca's
perhaps
to
Corsica,
tragedies
but thereis no concretedatingevidenceas
fillin histimeprofitably,
thereis withsomeof theproseworks,and he couldjust as wellhave
someor all of themafterhisreturn. His accusersdid charge
written
30 Against the early theoriesof direct parody and satire-of Nero in Trimalchio,
of Seneca in Eumolpus, which were clearlyuntenablein such crude forms-a reaction
set in thatflatlydenied such contemporaryreferencesand so led to the extremeaberraput forwardby Marmorale and his followers.
tions on the dating of the Satyricon
3' It is unlikelythat this is a parody of Lucan's Iliacon,an early work, which was
probably writtenin hexameters. And althoughwe cannot entirelyexclude the possibilitythat the theme was chosen because of one of Nero's own compositions,such as
the poem on the destructionof Troy which he recitedwhile Rome burned in 64 A.D.
yet this does seem rathera dangerous game even for
(Tac. Ann. 15.39; Dio 62.I8.i),
one as apparentlyinsolentas Petronius.

This content downloaded from 190.19.33.210 on Tue, 16 Apr 2013 11:48:16 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Vol. 991

PETRONIUS,

SENECA,

AND LUCAN

465

init,and
himwithwriting
moreversesinceNerodevelopedaninterest
Nerowasespecially
recitation
andperformances.32
interested
indramatic
So farwe have examinedthe evidencefromthe Satyricon
for a
literaryfeud betweenthe rising-or now established-arbiter
of
eleganceand the two most importantwritersof the courtcircle,
Lucanand Seneca. But was thefeudone-sided? We do notknow,
thecontentofLucan'slibelouspoemof65 A.D. against
unfortunately,
the emperorand the most powerfulof his friends,althoughit is
unlikelythatPetronius
was overlooked.33Seneca'sobliqueresponse,
however,seemsto have survived. In Ep. I22 thereis a sustained
tiradeon the turbalucifugarum,
who turnnightinto day withtheir
lengthypotations. Seneca attacksat lengththeirmaterialluxury,
theirdesirefor notoriety,theireagernessto appear different,
the
elaborateeleganceof theirtableand theirway of life,although,as is
customary,
only names fromthe past are cited. The description
squaresvery closelywith Tacitus' accountof Petronius'elegance,
luxury,and his turningnightinto day.34 Significant
also is thatin
theselater lettersSeneca suddenlyadopts a hostiletone towards
in general,in sharpcontrastto his earliersympathetic
Epicureanism
references
toEpicureandoctrine
in thefirst
threebooksoftheletters.35
The lastpieceof evidenceis evenmorehypothetical.It consists
of
certain
epigrams
fromthepoeticcorpusattributed,
on variousgrounds,
to Senecaand now in theAnthologia
Latina(396ff.).36 Some of these
32 Supposedly
he composeda tragedy
(Philostr.
Vit.Apoll.4.39); he playedin tragediesto theendofhislife(Dio 62. I4.4); Suetonius
evenliststhepartshe played(Canace,
Orestes,Oedipus,and Heracles:Nero2I, cf.Dio 63.22.5-6). Althoughappearances
on stagesuchas thoseofPiso (Tac. Ann.I5.65), otherprominent
citizens
(Dio 62.I7.3,
fortheLudiMaximi),and theemperorhimself
(Suet.Neroii) werelookeddownon,
thewriting
ofplayswaspopular,as is clearfromthesurvival
ofSeneca'sowntragedies,
theslightly
laterOctavia,andtheevidenceforCornutus'playsanda praetexta
fromthe
pen ofPersius(Suet.Vit.Pers.).
33 Cf. Suet.Vit.Lucani:"sed et famosocarmine
cumipsumtumpotentissimos
amicorumgravissime
proscindit."
34 See P. Faider,
1tudessurSe'neque
(GhentI92I) 15.
35 For Petronius'
Epicureanism
(or at leastthe sophisticated
Roman interpretation
ofit),seeTacitus'description,
Petronius'
artistic
credo
at Sat. I32.I5, 0. Raith,Petronius
einEpikureer
(Nuremberg
I963), and Sullivan98. The hostilereferences
in theLetters
includeEp. 88.5 and I23.-IOII.
toLucilius
36 See, mostrecently,
C. Prato,Gli Epigrammi
attibuiti
a L. AnneoSeneca(Rome
I964) andthebibliography
theregiven.

This content downloaded from 190.19.33.210 on Tue, 16 Apr 2013 11:48:16 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

466

J. P. SULLIVAN

[I968

wasnotlimited
belongtohisexile,buthispoeticactivity
poemsclearly

to thisperiod,as we knowfromTacitus(Ann. I4.52). The arbitrary

lead one
of variousgroupsof epigrams37
collocationand dislocation
four
books
all
the
perhapsfrom
to surmise
thattheywereanthologized
which Priscian(lib. 7.759) mentionsas comprisingSeneca'spoetic
oeuvre. Of the epigramsattackingpersonalenemies,some seem
to theperiodin Corsica,butothers(notably4I2 and 4I6)
appropriate
ratherthan
read as thoughSenecais in a positionto be undermined
fromexile,andthesemaytherea remotehopeofreturning
cherishing
forebelongto a laterperiod. The two poemsin questionare complaintsof the malicious,if witty,backbitingof an enemy. One
name,
to a certainMaximus,no doubta fictitious
(4I6) is addressed
who hasbeeninjuringSeneca'sreputation:

maligno
sermone
nostram
famam
temptasti
iocis.
invidiose,
laederefellitis,

forourpurposesis 4I2, fortheenemyinvokedhere

More interesting
buthe writessatirical
poemsas well:
is notonlyverballymalignant,
carmina
mortifero
tuasuntsuffusa
veneno,
nigramagis.
atsuntcarminibus
pectora
thisenemy'snamealsowas as blackas hisheart.
One wonderswhether
Was Senecacovertlyalludingto T. PetroniusNiger? Certainlythe
mightsuithim:
description
crimina
ludis.
bellushomoes?validecapitalia
We cannotof coursemaketoo muchof all this,but theepigramsat
thatliterary
feuds,or ratherquarrelscarriedon in verse,
leastconfirm
from
of courtlifein Seneca'stime,and thathe suffered
werea feature
them.
literary
(andpersonal)
Thisthenis theevidencefora notunexpected
feud betweenNero's newer friendsand his old Stoic counselor,
withhim.
Seneca,andthosesuchas Lucanwhowouldalignthemselves
Petroniusseemsto have beenfora timethevictor(Tac. Ann.i6.i8,
" dumnihilamoenumet molleaffluentia
putat,nisiquod ei Petronius
37 For example, 432 (on Cato) seems to belong with the short cycle on the same
in the sequence of erotic
subject,397, 398, and is one of severalunexpectedinterruptions
poems, 427-39.

This content downloaded from 190.19.33.210 on Tue, 16 Apr 2013 11:48:16 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Vol. 991

PETRONIUS,

SENECA,

AND LUCAN

467

untilhehimself
felltothemoreunscrupulous
machinapprobavisset"),
has some
ationsof Tigellinus.All this,if acceptedin principle,
fortherelative
implications
chronology
ofNeronian
literature,
but,
ithasrelevance
forourinterpretation
oftheSatyricon
moreimportantly,
itself.We may,forexample,
almostruleoutthemoralistic
accounts
the
critics
as
Gilbert
of Satyricon
offered
bysuchverydifferent
Highet
isnot,as theyrespectively
TheSatyricon
andWilliamArrowsmith.38
anEpicurean
tract
argue,
advocating
thequietlifeofataraxia
bymeans
andhorrendous
ofamusing
noryeta surgical
examples,
exposeofall
inNeronian
inthemanner
thatwasrotten
ofTheWaste
society
Land.39
TheSatyricon
wasa workwritten
fortheamusement
oftheNeronian
literary
circle;itpandered
to thetastes
andsnobbisms
of thatgroup;
and reliedon its literary
for appreciation.
When
sophistication
morality
lifts
itsheadin theSatyricon,
it turns
outto be a parodyof
whoseimplications
areproperly
moralizing,
"placed"by contextual
irony.Even apparently
seriouspassageswhichmightchimewith
theauthor's
ownviews-chs.i-j, forexample,
oncontemporary
rhetoricaltraining-should
be scrutinized
forparody,humor,
and even
lesscommendable
motives.Someofthethemes
derided
byEncolpius
areverylikethosetobe foundintheElderSeneca'shandbooks.
It wouldseemthenthattaste,
andwitinliterature
andartare
style,
Petronius'
notmorality
orphilosophy.Sucha workwould
positives,
itself
wouldthecharacter
notcommend
to Seneca,butneither
and
is thata work
styleoflifeoftheauthor.Therealmiracle,
however,
suchas theSatyricon,
so rootedin thelife,literature,
andintrigues
of
itstimes,
could,byitssuperior
styleandartistry,
latergeneraimpress
tionsasalmost
a timeless
40 a ktema
work,
esaeirather
thantheago6nisma
es toparachre'ma
it was partlyintendedto be.

38 See "Petronius
theMoralist,"TAPA 72 (I94I) I76, and "Luxuryand Death in
theSatyricon,"
Arion5 (I966) 304.
39 Eliot'sepigraphfor The WasteLand,takenfromthe Cena,is fortuitously
misleading.
40 It hasbeenattributed
to periodsrangingfromthereignof Augustus
to thereign
of Gallienus.

This content downloaded from 190.19.33.210 on Tue, 16 Apr 2013 11:48:16 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions