2.) Horace Epistles 1.3: Intro
1 Leave a comment on paragraph 1 0 This epistle is addressed to Julius Florus who is on campaign with Tiberius, but, after wondering where he may be, Horace focuses on his own literary work and that of the other poets with him. It was common for Roman generals to have writers on staff, even poets if the general was a lover of poetry and one may parallel the moments when Catullus writes about his time on the staff of Memmius in Bithynia (Cat. 28). According to Suetonius, Tiberius enjoyed erudite (if not recondite) Hellenistic poetry (Vita Tiberii 70). It would be interesting to have Florus’ poetry, which may have been Pindaric, to see if he writes in the vein of the poets that Tiberius is said to have enjoyed (Parthenius, Euphorion, Rhianus). Horace offers friendly literary criticism of this entourage’s work, hoping they steer clear of plagiarism and devote themselves, in part, to philosophy. The language of the poem often has both epistolary and metaliterary significance (see the commentary). The conclusion of the letter brings up a rift Florus had with Munatius, and Horace urges him to reconcile with his former friend. He promises them a sacrifice on their safe return from campaign and one has to see that this reconciliation would be putting into practice some of the philosophical material that he hopes Florus learns. For more on the imagery of this poem see West 1967: 30-39.
2 Leave a comment on paragraph 2 0
3 Leave a comment on paragraph 3 0 As a side note, it is interesting that Robert Greene, a playwright in London in 1592, utilizes the fable of this poem to criticize Shakespeare (and it is one of our first pieces of evidence that Shakespeare was an actor and playwright himself): “There is an upstart crow, beautified with our feathers, that with his tiger’s heart wrapped in a player’s hide supposes he is well able to bombast out a blank verse as they best of you, and being an absolute Johannes-factotum is in his own conceit the only Shake-scene in a country.”