xilovelatinassignmentsx

[xilovelatinassignmentsx]

Intertextuality in Poetry of the Roman Classical Period

In every age of human history, people have been telling stories, and creating art and poetry. However what a story is, and how it is expected to be told has differed over the ages and across cultures, particularly the idea of what a "Good story" can be. For example, nowadays in the 21st century it is most common for a written fictional text to be presented in prose, and for the authour to have an advanced understanding of grammar and syntax as well as skill in formulating and telling the story. As opposed to, for example, just publishing a script with stage directions. In the ancient world, in Rome, across its ages, there were also ways that a fictional story or myth was commonly told. As may be evident, fiction being presented in poetry or verse was almost ubiquitous. To have a story without it being presented in poetic verse was almost unheard of, and to be skilled in usage of verse was a skill that was not only venerated amongst the artistic nobility but also expected if one were to attempt to compose a fictional work. And crucially, as will be explored in this post, the idea of intertextuality was extremely prevalent in many bodies of surviving Roman poetic work. Possibly as a result of only a few authours being venerated as the best, and a good portion of trained artisanally inclined literate nobles all being familiar with that certain body of works, referencing them and playing with the implications to add layers of subtext amongst their equally well-read Roman peers, is one common thread in the works I will explore here- albeit in different ways with different levels of emphasis. 

OVIDS HEROIDES (Emphasis on Heroides 7)

A good example of intertextuality in Roman classical work are a series of poems written in Hexameter verse authoured by "Ovid" (Publius Ovidius Naso), which are titled "Heroides" or "Heroines". "The Heroides" in style, are presented as a series of fictional letters, authoured by famous women in Roman legend and history. The particular myths that they are from vary, and the body of each poem also varies depending on the relationship between the woman and who it's addressed to. For example, "Heroides 7, Ovid to Aeneas" will be different in content and mood to "Ovid 10, Ariadne to Theseus" because the relationship between the characters are different. However they're all connected by use of connecting poetic tools and the fact that whilst they might be different, they're all a series from the perspective of these legendary women.

What I find to be particularly interesting about this body of work is that it's difficult to find a modern equivalent to the style of fiction that they're presented as, less so in regards to the fact that they are intertextual, but also the level of intertextuality that they rely on to be understood at all. 

[We in the modern day, are not alien to the idea of intertextuality between fictional works, having varying levels of relevance to the understanding of the work depending on the text that it is. It is quite common for works to reference other works, to name characters after figures of legend or from famous texts to hint at their fate or relationship to other characters to generate a deeper body of implied subtext through the common understanding of another text by authour and reader. In modern times we can even look at the concept of the "Sequel" either in film or in writing as an example of modern intertextuality. A story that cannot be fully understood without seeing the previous works. In most cases it can still be enjoyed, whilst missing perhaps a few names or pieces of context. To me, the most striking thing about reading The Heroides especially as a piece of published, popular work during the classical Roman period- is that the intertextuality, the understanding of the texts theyre based upon and referencing is not just useful but Crucial in understanding the content of the material that it could be described as parasitic. The Heroides that are meant to serve as the perspective of women in the classical epics are written in such a way that it relies upon a comprehensive understanding of the texts they originate from. There is no introduction saying "this is the character", "this is the story" even briefly, it expects you to know and relies upon its reader already knowing. The women of the texts, possibly for the sake of poetic impact, often tend to have an extemporaneous understanding of events that they wouldn't realistically be able to know about at the point in the story they're from. In Heroides 7 for example, Dido speaks of her death and Aeneas's subsequent actions regarding Rome's founding with such certainty its as she already knows it will happen, like she is speaking coming from a place of fact rather than assumption- when she accuses Aeneas about what he did and didn't do regarding their relationship. 

In this way, the Heroides have an out-of-time feeling which also strongly point against their purpose as being quite literally intended by Ovid to be pasted onto the original texts as supplementary material. Instead, I'd argue that the poetry is best enjoyed once the reader has already finished the original work. This understanding allows the metaphors of the piece to fully shine, and instead many of them aim to retroactively recontextualise the motivations of the characters, or add additional speculated context about their inner minds that perhaps the original texts did not provide.

In Heroides 7 again as our prior example, Dido in the Aeneid can easily be seen as a hysterical or overly emotional foreign woman, constrasting against "Pius Aeneas" and by contrast strengthening the image of his strict adherence to (what would become) Roman values. It's easy to only read th Aeneid and leave seeing Dido this way, because that is how she is through Aeneas's eyes- and what she needs to be for the story. She doesn't need to be anything else.

Yet the Heroides poem keeps her actions true but then moreso positions them in a sense of moral relativity. Instead of "she was like that because she wasn't Roman" it asks, "What would it take for a strong and dutiful woman to be so emotionally devastated", in her own words (as portrayed by Ovid).

If this were within the Aeneid it would change the entire context of Aeneas leaving and drastically alter the analysis of its themes. Instead, as a stand alone but heavily intertextual work, it allows a reader who is familiar with the Aeneid to both enjoy it, but also question the entire themes of the work of the Aeneid and not only view Dido as more relateable than she's portrayed in the original, but also to question the Aeneid entirely as a work. "Why wasn't this explored, for what purpose?" "Is Aeneas truly a paragon of virtue?" "What was Virgil trying to convey by not showing this perspective of Dido?" and possibly even "Are these Roman values as embodied by Aeneas truly so noble?" It is a work that cannot exist without, and yet that some scholars argue also innately attacks the original work, subsumes it, intends to recontextualise it whilst being an entirely separate thing. In modern times, it's very rare to see published work that seeks to achieve these things in a similar kind of way. Save for, arguably, Fan Fiction. Folk, unpublished stories that require a fundamental understanding of an original work by another authour which can either build upon pre- established notions or criticise them where a writer thinks the authour failed, or both.

The fact that Ovid's Heroides were popular, and well-liked enough in order to be preserved until today can perhaps shine a light on some interesting things regarding the common body of pre-existing famous epics the readership was commonly familiar with, and also of the fact that they were able to publish something like this. Copyright and plaigarism and suchlike may have looked very different to todays standards, if at all.

This will be explored a bit more in the next work that I will be looking at, that is also heavily intertextual, and is also extremely relevant both in its own right and for understanding Roman literature of the time.

PROBA'S CENTO

Proba was a female poet who lived some time in the 4th century, she is famous for creating a "Cento" that retells the Old and New Testaments of the Bible, using verse from a variety of classical pagan texts.

"Proba" is only the short form of her name used in English though, in part due to the fact that there are two "Proba"s which scholars still debate that she could have been. She was either a woman named "Faltonia Betitia Proba", who lived in the earlier 4th century when Christianity had been state recognised but was still quite new for the majority of the Roman population, particularly the aristocracy. Alternatively she was a woman called "Faltonia Anicia Proba", who lived in the later part of the 4th century, when Pagan practises were beginning to be outlawed and harsher restrictions placed upon their usage. 

Whilst there is debate on the time of origin of Proba's Cento and wider context of the work, it remains a crucial piece of poetry which highlights the innate intertextual tradition in Roman verse that was already popular, and she is one of the only Roman female poets of who's work we have preserved of the time and is very important in understanding both this political time in Rome's history but also its common poetry. 

The first thing one may ask when looking at Proba's poem is "What is a "Cento?". A "Cento" is a piece of poetry which was fairly common during this time in Roman history. It's a type of poem that takes lines and verses only from other, already existing pieces of work- but combines them in such a way to create an entirely new poem, with an entirely new meaning. However, there is also a subtext of established understood meaning which would come from knowing the texts the lines were taken from, and the context of those lines themselves. In this way alone, the style of poem innately relies on intertextuality to truly understand its meaning. Unlike Ovid's Heroides, whilst this poem can be enjoyed as its own piece alone, the emphasis on that intertextual analysis becomes clear when one asks the question "Why was this line used, what was the emphasis of that line? Why this and not that?" and also the work which it was taken from.

In the time period in history when it was composed, this was particularly relevant because it was such a turbulent time in the religious landscape of the Roman Empire, with Christianity emerging as a new power. Many people of the time were conflicted about whether or not traditional pagan literature and classics had any place in the new Christian world, and the debate as such varied quite a lot between different religious and political groups. However, what some authours did and what Proba very evidently sought to do, was to create a bridge between the traditions of Pagan Rome, and its new future.

It was not uncommon for poets of the time to rewrite the scriptures into verse as opposed to its as-written direct and in the opinion of some- simplistic style, to be more appealing to a Roman audience.

What Proba does in her Cento however, is not just recontextualising the Old and New testaments into verse, but the verse which she uses for the structure of her Cento comes almost entirely from Virgil, and Virgil's Aeneid. Virgil was considered at the time, to be one of the greatest Roman Poets of the age- to such an extent that students would be taught to imitate his style to also be considered "good poetry" because he was a "Good poet". 

In this way, by using Virgil's words and particularly the Aeneid as it was- a founding myth of the creation of Rome and Roman Values, she not only makes the scripture easier to understand for a Roman Audience, but links the new Christian text with Rome's past very intentionally.

She herself says, in some of the opening lines that she wishes not to be inspired by the Muses to write her poem, but by the Christian God. Dedicating a text to the muses before an epic poem, famously the Odyssey's "Sing in me, Muse" was common and also used with some of the most famous epics by the great classical authours of the time. In this way she is deliberately referencing this traditon intertextually, and recontextualising it in a christian context, putting the Christian God above, but keeping the tradition. And it could be argued, framing The Bible like it would be one of the great Roman epics, and in the text likens Jesus in many ways to Aeneas. Both being paragons of morality, both having a duty to create a great nation- For Aeneas, Rome, for Jesus, the Kingdom of Heaven.

Proba also goes to far as to retroactively recontextualise the Aeneid itself as being a Christian text and makes reference to the fact that she not only believes that the Aeneid Can be understood in a Christian Context, and that Aeneas ascribes to Christian values, but that Virgil himself was divinely inspired by the Christian God to write it. "I will declare that Virgil sang about the pious feats of Christ".

This too, is another way she retroactively recontextualises an existing work with her own, somewhat similar to the Heroides but with more emphasis on interpreting authourial intent in a way that would allow Christian Romans to keep respect for their revered history, regardless of the Pagan context. 

There is much more that can be said about both of these texts, but they are a beginning to understanding the traditions of roman literature and how deeply they relied upon understanding of existing bodies of work to propagate their intended or unintended political messaging and deeper subtext, alongside the context of the actual body of work- that today might be regarded as plaigaristic in nature. They not only allow us to see Rome and its people and what they may have been reading and what may have been popular and significant, but allows us to ask questions regarding literature in the modern day, and what consitutes original art. Transformative work clearly had a revered place in the Roman literary tradition and it is deeply fascinating to explore. (Further reading links/Sources: - -Schottenius Cullhed, S. (2015). Proba the Prophet. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004289482 -

-Efrossini Spentzou. (2003). Readers and Writers in Ovid’s Heroides. In Oxford University Press eBooks. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199255689.001.0001

-A Companion to Ovid. (2009). In Wiley eBooks. Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444310627

- Fowler, D. (1997). On the Shoulders of Giants: Intertextuality and Classical Studies. Materiali E Discussioni per l’Analisi Dei Testi Classici, 39, 13. https://doi.org/10.2307/40236104

-Thomas, R. F. (1986). Virgil’s Georgics and the Art of Reference. Harvard Studies in Classical Philology, 90, 171. https://doi.org/10.2307/311468

-Ingleheart, J. (2021). The Ovidian Bedroom (Ars amatoria 2.703-34): The Place of Sex in Ovidian Erotic Elegy and Erotodidactic Verse. TAPA, 151(2), 295–333. https://doi.org/10.1353/apa.2021.0012

-Kyriakidis, S. (1992). Eve and Mary: Proba’s Technique in the Creation of Two Different Female Figures. Materiali E Discussioni per l’Analisi Dei Testi Classici, 29, 121. https://doi.org/10.2307/40236015

-Miller, P. A. (2004). The Parodic Sublime: Ovid’s Reception of Virgil in Heroides 7. Materiali E Discussioni per l’Analisi Dei Testi Classici, 52, 57. https://doi.org/10.2307/40236444

-Davis, Peter J. (2006). Ovid and Augustus; a political reading of Ovid's erotic poems.)