Epic and Empire

David Quint

Comparative Literature, Vol. 41, No. 1. (Winter, 1989), pp. 1-32.

Stable URL:
http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0010-4124%28198924%2941%3A1%3C1%3AEAE%3E2.0.CO%3B2-O

Comparative Literature is currently published by University of Oregon.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/about/terms.html. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained
prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in
the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/journals/uoregon.html.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.

The JSTOR Archive is a trusted digital repository providing for long-term preservation and access to leading academic
journals and scholarly literature from around the world. The Archive is supported by libraries, scholarly societies, publishers,
and foundations. It is an initiative of JSTOR, a not-for-profit organization with a mission to help the scholarly community take
advantage of advances in technology. For more information regarding JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

http://www.jstor.org
Fri Jul 20 18:54:04 2007
 Epic and Empire
To the memory of J. Arthur Hanson

I NSCRIBED ON the center of the shield of Aeneas is an ideology

of empire that informs the Aeneid and that Virgil bequeathed to
subsequent literary epic. Virgil depicts the battle of Actium and its
aftermath:
in medio classis aeratas, Actia bella,

cernere erat, totumque instruct0 Marte uideres

feruere Leucaten auroque effulgere fluctus.

hinc Augustus agens Italos in proelia Caesar

cum patribus populoque, penatibus et magnis dis,

stans celsa in puppi, geminas cui tempora flammas

laeta uomunt patriumque aperitur uertice sidus.

parte alia uentis et dis Agrippa secundis

arduus agmen agens, cui, belli insigne superbum,

tempora nauali fulgent rostrata corona.

hinc ope barbarica uariisque Antonius armis,

uictor ab Aurorae populis et litore rubro,

Aegyptum uirisque Orientis et ultima secum

Bactra uehit, sequiturque (nefas) Aegyptia coniunx.

una omnes ruere ac totum spumare reductis

conuulsum remis rostrisque tridentibus aequor.

alta petunt; pelago credas innare reuulsas

Cycladas aut montis concurrere montibus altos,

tanta mole uiri turritis puppibus instant.

stuppea flamma manu telisque uolatile ferrum

spargitur, arua noua Neptunia caede rubescunt,

regina in mediis patrio uocat agmina sistro,

necdum etiam geminos a tergo respicit anguis.

omnigenumque deum monstra et latrator Anubis

contra Neptunum et Venerem contraque Mineruam

tela tenent, saeuit medio in certamine hlauors

caelatus ferro, tristesque ex aethere Dirae,

et scissa gaudens uadit Discordia palla,

quam cum sanguine0 sequitur Bellona flagello.

Actius haec cernens arcum intendebat Apollo

desuper; omnis eo terrore Aegyptus et Indi,

 ornnis Arabs, onincs ucrtchant tcrga Sabaci.

ip.ia uidchatur uen1i.i regina uocatis

u e l , ~dare ct laxos iam iamcjue imrnitte1.r funis.

illam intrr cacdcs pallcntcm tnortc fillura

fcccrat ignipotcns nndis ct 1ap)gc fcrri,

contra a u t e ~ nInasno rnaercntcnl corporc Xiluni

pandentemclue sinus ct tota urste uocante~n

caerulcum in grcniiutn 1atcbro.iaquc fluniina uictos.

a t (:ac.iar, triplici inucctur Koniana triutnpho

tnocniL~. di.i Iialis ~lotuniinitnor~alcsacrabat,

niavinia tcr c(7ntunitotatn dclubra pcr urbctn

laclitia lutlisclue uiar plausuclue Cretnebant;

omnibus in templis m a t r u ~ nchorus, omnibus arae:

ant? aras trrram c,rcsi straucrc iuuenci.

I ~ X scdcns niuco candcnlis liniinc I'hochi

dona recognoseit populoruni aptatcjue supcrhis

postihui: incedunt uictae long ordine gente.i,

qualn u;~ri,lelinguis, habitu tarn uestis et armis.

hie ;\omadurn genus et discinctos ;\lulciber ~\fros.

hie 1,clcgas Carasque .iag~ttiicrosquc(;clones

finrerat: Euphratrs ihat iani tnollior undi.i,

extremiqur hominum hlorini. t<henurcjue bicornis.

indotnitique L)ahac, et ponte~nindignatus t\rascs. (8.(ii3-728)

( I n the center \$-ere to he seen brazen ships and the fighting at t\ctium: you \\nuid see
all Lcucntc glowing \\it11 dra\vn-up forces of \Var and the \\aves glittering .ivith gold.
O n this .iidc i-\ugustus C:acsar is Icad~ngthe Italians into battle \\it11 the fathers of thc
senate and the 1lcol)lc. \ ~ i t l lthc l'cnatcs and great gods; as he stands on the high sLcrn.
hi? happ) brows pour ont i \ ~ i nI1anic.i and his father's star appears hy his head. I n
anothei- sector i.i '\grippa, with the favoring ~ ~ i n and d s god?; lofty and proud. he leads
on his formation: his bro~vsgleam \\-it11 the nax-a1 crown, decorated u i t h .ihip.i3 beaks.
proud insignia of \\ ar.
O n the othcr .iidc; Anton!. u i t h barbaric \\calth and varied arnms, victor from the
nations of the dawn m d the rudd) Indian sea, draws with hitn Eg).pt, the po\vcr.i of the
Ea.it. and utmost Bactra; and [o shameful/ his Eg!ptian wife fi~llowshini.
1\11 rurh togcthcr. and all ihc sea foams, uptorn !]I the dra\\ n-back oars and the trident
l~caks.The) scck the drcp n a t r r : you \vould think that the uprooted Cl>clades \\ere
floating on thc sca or that high mountains wcrc clash~ngwith mountains: of such great
bulk are the turrctcd ships in nhich thc scanicn attack. Their hands sho\ver fla~nitlgto\\
and darts of fl!ing .iteel, and Scptunc'.i fic1d.i grow red n i t h new bloodshed. In the midst
thc queen suninions her fol-ce.iu i l h her natix-c sistruni, nor as ).ct d0c.i she look back a t
thc tnin serpents brhind her. 3lonstrous gods of c\.cry kind togcthcr with harking Anlibis
~vield\\eaI)ons q a i n s t ;\e~)tuncand \yenus and l l i n r r v a . In the midst of the conflict
liars rages, engraved in steel. \\it11 thc gloom) Furies from on hlgh. and in her rent
eloaf< Iliscord ad\.ancc.i rejoicing. \vho~nUcllona follows brandishinp a blood) whip.
Beholding these .iight\, Actian .-\pollo \\as hending his bow frotn above: at that terror
,111 Eg!~)t and tht: Indi;rns, all the i-\rabs and all the Sabaean.i turned thcir backs in
flight. T h e cluccn hcrscli' \vas seen to h a w invoked the xvind.i and .iprrad her ?ails. and
now. cvcn no\\. to Ict loose the slackened r0pe.i. T h e God of Firc has fashioned hcr atnid
the slaughter. gro\\ing pale u i t h approach~ngdeath. borne on !]I the \\a\.e.i and \\?.it
wind, ~ h i l eopposite her hc depicted thc hugc bod)- of the mourning Nile, \\ ho \\as
spreading open his folds and all hi? cloak and \\as 1n7-iting thr 7-anciuished to hi? iizure
I!
 EPIC: ,2NIJ1)ELLPIRE

lap and hlddcn depths.

But C a c ~ a s hsougl~t
. into the walls of Rome with a thrcefoid triuniph, was dedicating
an immortal \oti\,e gift to the Italian gods: three hllndrcd s w a t temples throujih thr
\vholc city: thc 5trcct.i rcsoundcd with ,jo! and ganic?. and applause: in all the temple?
thcsc \\as a band of tnatsons: in all n c r c altars and heforc thc altars slain cattle Ttrcw
the ground. Hc hitnrclf, seatcd on the sno\\) threshold of dazzlinji \\hit? z\pollo. count?
up the gift? of nation? and places thcni on thc proud doorposts of the tctnple: the
conciuercd peoples file by in long formation, as xaried in dress and arms as in languages.
Here Vulcan portra).ed thc Solnad race and loosely robed t\iricans, here the 1.elcgei
and Clasians and thc assow-bcas~ngGclonians: the Euphrates was floning now xvith a
tnosc suhducd curscnt. and thc hforini. the mo?t d i ~ t a n tof nicn. \vcsc there, and thc
double-hosncd Hhinc, and thc indotnitahlc Dahac, and thc i-\raxc.i. resentful ofits bridge.')

The imperial ideology articulated in these 17ersesis not identical to the

"meaning" of the Aeneid, which devotes a considerable part of its energy
to criticizing and complicating what it holds up as the oficial party
line. The advantage of ideology, by contrast, is its capacity to simplify,
to make hard and fast distinctions and draw up sides. At Virgil's Xctium
the sides are sharply drawn between the forces orAugustus and Xntony.
although the historical battle was, in fact, the climax of a civil war.
Roman against Roman, where distinctions between the contending
factions were liable to collapse. The construction of an apologetic prop-
aganda for the winning side of Augustus brings into play a whole
ideology that transforms the recent history of civil strire into a war of
foreign conquest. There is a fine irony in the fact that epic's most
influential statement of the imperialist project should paper over a
reality of internecine conflict. But this irony points precisely to the
function orthe imperial ideology to which the Aeneid resorts: its capacity
to project a roreign "otherness" upon the vanquished enemies orAugus-
tus and of a Rome identified exclusively with her new master. The
Xctium passage defines this otherness through a series or binary oppos-
itions that move from concrete details of the historical and political
situation and range to abstractions of a mythic, psychosexual, and
philosophical nature. These can be identified and listed in a kind of
catalogue (see Figure I ) . Through 17irgil's artistry, each contiguous
pair or opposed terms suggests their morphological similarity to the
next as the description of the shield unfolds. Thus, even as these sets
of oppositions are separated out to grasp their individual implications -
both for the Aeneid and ror the later epic tradition-they constitute a
single ideological program, the sum or its parts.'
'Unless othcrlvise notcd. all translations of classical tcxts arc ni) own.
'Thc ?cent of hctlum has been discur.icd by other critics and readers of the .Iclieici,
and m). anal!sis is vartously indebted to thcni. RIy argument differs in its attenipt at
comprehensivene?~and in its c n i ~ to ~ t demonstrate ho\\ tnetaphorical analogic? rclatc
thc tnctonymically contiguous description? of the shield and unite thc passage into a
sin~lwc hole. Scc the anal).se.i in 1.: 0. r.\ S!nic 296.2%: Gcrhard Binder 213-2711: Philip
Ofle national unit).: .lioiy uariiscjui- armis (ii8i)
agens 1talo.i (13713) t':astcrn overpopulation and
patribus populoclue (679) fcrtilit)
I;enio/e .\%) ptia coniunx (ijXti)

(.oli/iol stans celsa in puppi ((i8U) Loss of C O , I ~ ip?a

I ~ / uidcbatur 11cnti.i r e i n n
partc alia ucntis ct dis .%grippa ~locati.i/ucla dasc (7116-07)
secundis (682)
.Iugustlt? at tile rudder
('iioos rculllsa.i/C") cladas (fig1-92):
l)c.los unfastened
montis concurrcre niontibur (692)
tlic Giants
O!?,I~I]J?UII
(;iiii, Scptune. \'enus.
A\io,is/rr Coci, otnnigcnunicluc deuni
h1ines.r a (609) tnon.itra ct latrator t\nubis (6913)

Al/~ol/o
react? lo god? .\fun, /)?roe I)zscoichii (700-03). Ex:-)p tians.
of war and disosdcr Indians, Arabs panic at thc .ii:ht of
(704-05 1 .\pollo (70.5-06)
l'einiii?ie?iceu o t u ~ ni ~ n ~ n o r t a l(714)
e Fliii; Lo,, NjIc/elit?[j' Vile (7 1 1 - 1 2 suicide,
.%LI~LI~L te~nplc
L I S ~ofL Apollo (720) death nish
Oiiler inccdunt uictae longo osdine
genies (722)
One ~mpesialunit! out of man) .\iolg i n d i p a t u s z\sawc.i (72ti I
conclilcsed nation?. cmpisc Parthian Ilosdcs
\\ithoui end cnd of empirc?

The struggle between Augustus and Antony pits the forces of the
IVest against those or the East. continuing the pattern or epic confron-
tation that 17irgilfound in the Iliad.'This pattern would subsequently
be repeated in those Renaissance epics which portray an expansionist
Europe conquering the peoples and territories of Asia, AGica, and the
recently discol~eredNew TVorld: Ariosto's knights vanquish an Islamic
army collected from Spain. North riGica. Samarkand. India, and
Cathay; Tasso's paladins deliver Jerusalem from Syrians, Egyptians.
Hasdic 97-1 111, Eugenc T'anct., rspt.ciall> 124-130, whcrc TTnnccprcwnts hi? own table
of binar) idcolo~icaloppositions; Paxe Dubois 43-47: and Scsgio Zatti 51-50, for a
di.icursion of I'asso'? imitation of the scene.
'The Ilioci dr;r~\.shut pl;r)s do\vn thc cultllr,ll distinct~on.ibct\\ccn Gsccks and 7s0,jan.i.
Rut, I]! the time that T7isgil T\roti,, the I/?iic/ had itsclr been appropri;rted h) .Alexander
thc Grcat who c1;rinlcd descent frotn .Achilles and s o u ~ hto t cmulatr his b:astesn concjuests.
Ser 1)iodorus Sicl~lus17.17. 17.97. Plutasch. I.i/c i!f.l/rio?iiir,-13. 1 ~i;
.%rr~an1.12. hlcxandcr'.i
firmou? vi.iit to the tonih of .Ichillc.i at Tro! i? rcpcated and parodied h) the tour of
Tro! 11) I,ucan'.i C:ac.iar in Phor~o/iliO.l)i,lT.-C~arsar looks on the cit) of hi3 anccstos
hcnea? and then gocs on in LIook 10 to \isit the tonih or .Alcxandcr him.ielf (10f.).
 EPIC: AND EAIPIRl<

and Turks; Clamdes's Portuguese seamen lay the foundation for a com-
mercial empire in Alozambique, India, and the Far East; Xlonso de
Ercilla's Spanish conquistadors attempt to wipe out the resistance of
the Araucanian Indians of Chile, Indians who speak surprisingly in
the Latinate accents of \'irgil's Turnus and hlezentius. hlilton may
satirize this imperial pattern a t one le\,el of Pal-adiseLost when he depicts
Satan intrnt on colonizing the castrrn rralnl oS Eden, yrt, at another
1~1.~1, the same pattrrn occupics a crntral placr in his pocm. Alilton's
God \\.rests his "rtcrnal cnlpirr" fi.0111 the realnl of Night, thc darkest
of dark c o ~ ~ t i n c n tand
s , Satan is described as a "sultan" whosr palacr
in P;llldaemolliunl, built by diabolic art fionl the most prrcious matc-
rials in naturc, fkr outdors the ~vcalthand splcndor of a n oriental
drspot, "xvhcre thc gorgeous East rvith richest hand / sho~verson her
kings barbaric pearl and gold" (2.3-41.'
Barbaric richcs ("opc barbarica") li.01-n the East iill up Anton)-'s \var
chest. T h r ~vcalthat the basis ol'Eastern po\ver--thr gold rvhich founds
Dido's Carthagr ( - 4 ~ n ~1.357-60)
id is allothrr rxamplr-is pro1.crbially
fabulous to thr E ~ ~ r o p c arvhon co17ets it, and t h r Roman conclurst of'
t h r East in t h r first crntury B.Cl. had: in Glct, brought untold: unpre-
cedrntrd riches to the patriciate. But this wralth is also \.ie\vrd \vith
nloral disapprolral, for afilucncc produccs illdolcncc and luxur)..' \'ir-
gil's Numanus in Book 9 is a spokrsman for t h r I\-estrrn rvork rthic.
H c praises the 1.irility ol' thc Latin youth r\~llosctimc is consunlcd in
tilling t h r iields and making \var, "inllurrd to rvork and accustomed
to making do ~ v i t hlittlr" (9.607). IVhcn, by contrast, the East's abull-
dant \vealth providrs somr rcspite from constant labor and opens up
spacrs oS lrisurc timc, a young man's l'ancy is fycc to ~ v a n d c r and
, thr
oriental is inevitably addictcd to ~vonlanizing-Alltony in this respect
has sinlply gone nati1.e-and hrllce bccomcs \vomanish, soft and plras-
urr-lo~illg.Arumanus taunts thc Trojans for their idlrncss, fkncy Asiatic
clothcs, and c1Trnlinacy (614-20). Numallus is himsclf'a kind of carica-
turc of reactionary agrarian patriotis~n-to~vard~vhich\'irgil may in-
dicatc his 01~11antipathy by pronlptly h a ~ i n ghim dispatched by a n
arro\v from the b o ~ vof'Xscanius. I7ct the vcry manner of' his dcath may
coniirm ATunlanus's insulting chargcs against his l'oes: the bor\~,\vhich
allo~vsits user to strike from a distance and disprnsc ~ v i t hfighting
man-to-man, is thc Eastern r ~ ~ r a p opar n rxcellrncr, as the "arro~v-bear-
ing Gclonians" on thc shicld of Xrncas attest (723); it is thr \\.capon of
the r\.onlanizer Paris whom Diomcdcs taunts in the Iliad ( 1 1.385-95),
and it is thc Ivcapon of \'irgil's \vonlan ~varriorC:amilla as rvrll. For
'011 Satan as oricntal tlcspot, sce Strvic U;r\.ics 57-88,
'For an anal!sis oftlie c n s i c l i ~ n c nof~ the patviciatc t h n ~ u g hRonic's easlcvn co~iclucsts.
s r r E. R;rtlia~i.T h e risr of luxul! iri thc second c e n ~ u s )B.C:. is tliscussed )1, \\'illiarn \'.
Har1-is 8(j-9:3.
all that hc is a caricature, Numanus cxprcsscs well and clearly thc
censorious European attitude to~vardEastern opulcncc and thc corrupt
pleasures it b r c c d ~ T. ~h e Eastcrncrs ha.\.c nlore wealth than is entirely
good f'or thcm, and the Ttcstrrncr, with sornc minimal rcscrvations
that he might be corrupted in turn, may actually be doing thc1-n a f'a\.or
by expropriating it.
Togcther rvith the gold of' the East, Antony brings to Actium its
hunlan ~vcalthof'barbarian hordes, the "\.aried arms" (uariiscjur . . . ar-
mis) dra\vn fionl its many terming natiollalitics. This amalgam of
fbrrign auxiliaries suggests \\.hat epic sees as thc dangerous cxccss of
thc East, whose populations nlultiply at an alarming rate and swell
into arnlics that o\.rrflo~vto~vardsthc Ttcst. Tthcn their nurllbcrs reach
the million mark, as they do in thc pagan arrnics of' Boiardo's Orlando
int~anzorafo,thc poet nlay bc suspected of tongue-in-chcek exaggeration,
but cpic combat typically finds the European troops outllumbercd by
thcir oriental fbcs. Yet, like the ~ v r a l t hr\~hichsof'tens up thcir fighting
f'orrn, the immense size of the Eastern fbrcrs may be the ultimate cause
of' their dckat-thc apparent assets that Antony drarvs from thc East
turn out to be liabilities instead. T h e huge numbers and \.aricd compo-
sition of thc Asiatic arrnics make thcnl difficult to control and command;
they rnake for "curnbcrsomc 1 Luggage," as C:hrist trrnls the Parthian
host in Paradise Regain~d (3.400-01)) a host r\~hicIris compared to
Boiardo's arnlics (336-43). The "myriad troops" ( 1 7.220) of' allies ~ v h o
come to the deknse of Troy in the Iliad appcar to be confused by the
diversity of' the languages they speak (4.437-38) .' T h e great Saracen
army in the Gerz~sulemmeliberafa is, according to thc C:rusadcr intclligrncc
reports, largely usclcss, colrlposcd of' lrlrn r\~hodo not listen to orders
or bugle signals (19.122)." Such armies are apt to fragment in
undisciplined routs, and \'irgil suggests ho\v Antony's composite f'orccs
Fall apart r\.hrn hc describes the different peoples-Egyptians, Indians,
Arabs, Sabarans-in terror-stricken flight.
By contrast, Augustus leads a unified patriotic army of' Italians. I t
has been remarked that \'irgil's appeal to a larger Italian rather than
Rolrlan nationalism rcflccts thc nerv social basis of Augustus's p o r ~ ~ r r ;
the port Ivas hi~nsclfa pro\.incial From Italian Gaul." The depiction of
a unified Italian front rnakcs it seem as il'thc Social TZ'ar had not taken
place 60 years earlier. Similarly the coupling "patribus populo," \vhile
',The real epic locii, tlnjjiczlr f i ~ this
r anti-Ezrstern p r o p q a n d a is 1,cn~ulus'scondcnina~ion
or the Parlhians in ~ h cP%nnn/in8.331-439. 1,ucan's passzrge is the modcl, in turn, f i ~ r
Jesus's rejection of Parthian arms in Llook 3 oTi'nraclz,[, Re,ynninrci
'So this Iliadic passage l\.;rs read by Po1)bius. ~vliocites it \\hen 11c describes Lhc
conf~~sion or the l ~ o l ) g l oCl;rr~h;rgini;rn
~ forces at the l ~ a ~of~ L;rm;r
le ( I 5.121.

I Tasso's p;rss;rgc irnitates C:acsar's asscssnienL of Pornpcy's rnultin,~~ional Lroops

in P/in?rnlln
7.272-74. As \vc sliall scc. Luc;rn's Phars;rlia is an cpic h;rL~lemodeled on Virgil's .lc~iuni.
"See Symc 46:-66.
6
 EPIC XNlI EI\/IPIRE

it repcatsthe official fbrrnula, "scnatus populusque," also suggests an

end to thc class rvarfarr b r t ~ v r e noptimatcs and popularcs by uniting
them on thc same side. In fact, as the cxarllplc of the Iliud first demon-
strates, the European arrny must initially achieve unity in its o\vn ranks
bcf'ore it can 1.anquish the h e . T h e dissension it expels is often displaced
into the enn-ny camp. I n Xriosto's poem, a personified Discord dcscends
upon the ~xigarlhost (27.35C): Tasso's :\rrnida hcrsclf'crnbodics discord,
c s the C:rusader's tents early in the Liberuta (5.60C)
and she m o ~ ~ from
to emerge later among the leaders of'the Saracen army (17.41S.).hugus-
tus's great acl~icvcmrnt-drpictcd in his triumph rvhich ends tlre de-
scription of the shield-is to irnposc order ("longo ordinc") upon thc
dcf'catrd Eastern peoples. "Variiscjur . . . arrnis" is n o ~ valrlplificd to
"uariae linguis, habitu tam urstis ct armis" (7231, indicating both the
dificulty and the rxtcnt of this achicvcmcnt. T h c Roman empire creates
a cohcrcllt political entity out of' thcsc disparate peoples: a unity of
which they tl~nnsclves\\.err incapable.
T h e TZ'rstcrn armies are portrayed as ethnically homogcncous, discip-
lined, and united, ~vlrilcthe forces of the East are a loose aggregate of'
nationalities prone to internal discord and Sragmcntation. T h e TVcst,
in fact, corllrs to ernbody tlrc prillciplc of' cohcrencc and the East that
of'disordcr. T h e struggle bctrvccn tlrc two accluircs cosmic iml~lications
that appear to extend bcyolld alterllativc rllodcls of political and martial
organization. T h e mythological analogies prcscntrd by lines 691-92,
where thc galleys or hugustus and Antony sccm to bc uprooted islands
and onrushing mountains, suggest tlrat the 1,rr.y coherence of' natural
creation may be at stake. T h e clashillg moulltains arc rcmillisccnt of'
the rvar bet\vcen the giants and the gods, ~ v h c nthe giants thrcw moun-
tains at the Olympians and \vcrc, in turn, buried beneath mountaillous
rllasscs- this gigantomachy is also recalled rvhcn the Rornan gods op-
pose the monstrous gods of tlre East at lines 698-701. T h c ilrlagc of'thr
Cycladrs srvimming upon the sea may be nlore significant, for it alludcs
to the myth of Drlos, the central isle of' thc C:ycladcs.'" \'irgil rccounts
(3.73-76) tlrat Delos once wandercd on thc wa17cs until it bccamc thc
birthplace of' Apollo. T o express his gratitude to the island, the god
chained it in place and lrladr it his shrine. Propertius, in his poem on
Actium (4.6): alludes dircctly to this story rvhcn he describes :\pollo
coming to the battle Gom Delos rvhich r ~ ~ once a s at the r1lrr.c)- ol' tlre
\vinds but no\v stands anchored by the god's rvill. T h e image of'nclos
newly rclcascd fi-on1 its mooring, like that of'mountains torn a r ~ ~ aand y
rvicldrd by giants, suggests a dccrration of tlre cosmic order. T h e
guarantor of this order is Apollo, the supposed di\.ine father and
!"On ihesc cosmocratic analogies, and for largrr disc~~s,ion of thc m o ~ i fof gigan-
toniach) in thc ;lpncii/, see t11c cxcellel~tcli;rpters in H;rrdie 85-lj6.
7
patron of I\ugustus, \vho ~ v a t c h r shis triumph seated on the steps of
the sun god's ternplc. Xpollo is the god or \'Vestern rationality and his
tfrcisi~~c intcr~rentionin the battle is apparently a reaction to the confu-
sion and destruction bred b!- the Furies of' \\:ar, Discord, and Strife.
But, because it is the Eastern troops and (:leopatra ~ v h panic
o at Xpollo's
appearance, t l ~ gbrcorne the cmbodirncnt of'thr disorder and ~riolellcr
that the god steps in to quell. Thus the sheer violence o r ~varfjrc,in
~vhichboth co~:tcrlding sides might sccrn to partake \vithout difkrenti-
ation-and all the more so in the case of a c i ~ i l\ v a r b r c o r n c s a n
Eastern principle, and the \Vestern soldier is seen as the instrunlent
not o f ~ v a rbut of order a n d pacification.
T h e image of Dclos ~vandcringupon the seas is, irl [act, rcpcatcd in
C;lcopatra's flight fL-om .Actium. Tllc cjuccn "gi1.c~" her sails to the
~vindsshe has summoned, and \vc next see her brillg passi\.cly carried
alvay Sro1-n the battle by Iva17c~ ~ ~cilld.
n d \Vith Clleopatra the opposition
betlveen East and TVest is explicitly charactcrizcd in terms of' gender:
the othcrncss of' the Easterner becomes the othcrnrss of the sccolld
sex." If' the oriental is gi\.cn to wolnallizi~~g and rl'frrninacy, here a
Ivoman has usurped the colnlnalld of the Eastern forces-rnuch more
than Xntony, it is Clcopatra \\hose actions are follo~vcdon the shield.
'J'hrsc actions mirror other cpisodt.~in the Aeneid. Cllcopatra's pallor
and f ~ ~ t u suicide
rr ~.rrball?-recall that of Dido (4.G44). and the rc-
semblance between the two :\fi.ican queens is a n important rlcrnrnt in
the poem's set of' topical allusions: \vhcrl, fbr example, at the end of'
Book 1 , Dido nnbracrs a Cupid ~ v h ohas been substitutcd for :\scallius,
the scene suggests C:leopatra's lo1.c-child Clacsarion, ~vhornshe and
Anton)-, at i t ceremony in Alexandria in 34 B.C:., attclnptrd to pass olf
as <Julius Clacsal.'~ 1lcir.l' I n addition, Clropatra's calling upon the
winds-the formulaic "urntis . . . uocatis"-niay return to the \.cry bc-
ginning ol'the poerri ~ v h c nj u n o succcssS~11lyentreats Arolus to ullleash
his storm ~vindsthat scatter I\rnras's fleet in confusion ( I ..5Of:). I n the
allegorical tradition, Jurio-Hrra is the goddess of air and thus particu-
larly associated ~ v i t h the ~ v i n d . ]June
' also represents a uni~rcrsal
"T7irgil exploits a prccetlini: cl;rssic,rl ~raditioliof pc11drr dcfi~litiona n d tli\tinction. T h e
chart of opposit~onsth;rl 1 II;L\ c tlra\\n up Tor thc rlescription of r \ c t i ~ ~ can n i 1jc comparcd
to the lablc ofopljosilcs thac .\ristotle ;rttribuLi~sto tlic 1') ~llaqorcansin . i l e t n p / ~ ~ ~ 5186;r. icr
a lablr that iniludes ;r pol;rri~vb e t ~ v c e ~~ll l cscxcs: li~~~i~/unliiilitc.d, odtl/e\ en, o ~ l i / p l u r -
slit), rightllrft. ni~tlelfemale.r(.stillp/liio~ills. stsaighe/r~tr\rd. light/d;rrkness, good/bad,
squareloblong. See .\riitotle 2:1 i i 9 . 'l'his P\thqosc;rn Table ol Opposilcs Isas to 1jc a
corners~onein ,I s ~ ~ b s c q u trndilion
cn~ ofmisog! 11). bcc P~.udenicAllen 19-21. :rntl 113.167
lor hcr s u r \ e > of itle;rs of qc,ntlcr in . l r i s ~ o t l i, ~ n dlalcr i1,~5sic;rl\\ricers to t l ~ rtirnc of
Virgil. For Ll~eserclerrliics I an1 i n d i l ) ~ c dto [he ;rrgumenc in Pzrtricia Parkcr, l,ite,-a~)
fit Liid7e~ 181-85.
"Scr \V. IV. Tar11 ;tiiti h I . 1'. C:l~arI(~s\\orth 101-103.
I, j '\'entiscluc uoca~is"BPI~(.;LI.S at 3.233 ,111cl 3.21 1 \\.ithout nn) Junonian i1np1ic;rtions:
Scmininc principle, and she, likc Cllcopatra, gi~rcsthe narne of 11~oma11
to the forces inherent in the East, in the cosmos, and in thc humall
psychc. \\'oman, likc Cllcopatra's boat, is a p a s s i ~open
~ , \.essel, unable
to direct her destiny, subject to the e\.rrchallging winds ofcircumstancc.
As Alercury remarks of Dido in tlic accents oS a rnan of the ~ ~ ~ o r l d ,
11~0111a11is a n e\.er fickle and cl~allgillgthing (4..iGY-70). R), inkrcncc,
the \vomanish Easterners cannot rule thctnscl\~csand recjuire the mas-
culine go~~erllrnent of their European masters.
LTnlike Clcopatra, wlio is carried alvay on lvllat 11'e might call her
ship ol'statc, Xugustus stands firrnly in control at the stern, bcsidc thc
rudder, ~vllilehis right-hand man ;\grippa is posted at onc side of the
battle. IYith Agrippa arc the l'avoring lvillds-"urntis srcundis"-that
ensure 1.ictor.y; the ac?jrcti\.c "sccundis" suggests that these \vinds, likc
:\gripl~a, arc subordillatrs to Augustus: unlike tllc hapless Cllcopatra,
Augustus masters the shifting winds oSchallcc. If Antony has Cleopatra
fbr his consort, Augustus is accompanied by his t u l o fathers, :\pollo and
the star of Caesar: ILP is the true <Julianheir. T h e TYcstcrn empire is a n
all-male all'air, a patriarchy rnarked by the use oSb'patribus" to describe
the senators and thus by tllc rcpctition "patribus"/"patri~~m" in lines
679-8 1. \Yoman is subordinated or, as is generally the case in the Lleneid,
cxcludcd Srorn po\ver and the process of rn~pirc-building:this exclusion
is r~ridentin the poem's fiction whcrc Clrcusa disilppears and Dido is
abandoned, as well as in thc historical circurnstancrs that n ~ a d :lugus-
c
tus the adopted son of Julius Caesar. IVoman's place or displacement
is tl~crcforrin the East: and epic f'caturcs a series or oriental hrroincs
\vhosc scductions arc potentially tnorr perilous than Eastern arms:
Llcdca, Dido, Angelica, Annida, and Llilton's Elre.
The danger lbr thc TYcst is to rcpcat the Sate oS hntony, to bccorne
Easternizcd and lvornanis!l. Such a Sate implies castration and the loss
oS thc sign ~Sfatherhoodthat shines so brightly above Augustus's head.
\Voman cannot possess a n illdependent identit)-, and there is rnorr than
a mere convention of' hugustan political propaganda in the sul~pression
ol' Cllcopatra's name in this episode. This loss of identity is illustrated
by C:lcopatra's and hntony's absorption into tllc lap oSthr Nile, lca\.ing
no trace behind. As Odysseus remarks lvhcn he is adrift on Cktlypso's
raft during a storm at sca ( O h ' s s q 5.306-12). a lvatcry dcath robs thc
epic hero of a Suneral and gra1.e) the commcn~oratiwmonument-like
the 11oer11itself-to his existence. Arneas in his opening speech, w'rlich
imitates this Odysscan rnodcl, scctns to desire just such an anonymous
itnmcrsion in the wa17esof his native Sirnois ( 1.94- 10 1 ), and the Ae~zrid
in C:lcopau;r's c;r5e, the ivinds d o comc, but onl! lo s \ \ e e p hcr to~v:lrds hcr dcath. .As
1t.e sli'11l sce bcIo\c. 1,uc;rn interprrts Cllcop<~tr,~'s
p,lss~\il! as a n ; ~ b n n d o n m e nof~ control:
his s~niile(7.1 25-27) romp'lrcs Polnpc) ;rt P h a r s a l i ~to~ 'I pi lo^ \ \ h o [orsakes the rnddcr
dnd litcrall) S ~ cs T [he ship to thr ivinds. Fur Juno as air. sce \Iiclicic1 I\lurrin 3-25.
51
C:OXIPARA4TTT7ELITERATURE

must \\.age a campaign against this death-wish, dra~vingits hero a\vay

from the rvomb-like waters of deatI1.l' This terllptatioll is the greatest
of Eastern temptations, and it accounts for the oriental fatalism \vhich,
in such epic characters as hriosto's hgramante, Tasso's Solimano,
Ercilla's C:aupolic&n, and Milton's Satan, call rise to a kind of tragic
grandeur."
In the last 17ersesthat describe the shield, the manifestation of the
East becomes the ri1.e~itselc to the Nile are added the Euphrates, the
Rhine, and the Araxes at the Gontiers ofthe empire. T h e east is identified
\\.it11 its fertility, rvith the cyclical fluid fertility of woman, and both of
these are identified, in turn, \vith the creati1.e potential of nature. T h e
ri\.er, the Heraclitean emblem of flux, further redefines the imperial
enterprise as the conquest not merely of space but of time. C:leopatra's
boat, srvept about by the \vind, rvill become in the Renaissance the
emblem of Fortune, time as a purely random series of disparate eI7ents;
and Fortune is a capricious rvoman, a strumpet.lb\\'hat may finally be
at stake is how much can be left to chalice, ~vhethertime can be marked
off and enclosed like a piece offoreign territory. \'irgil's<Jupiter promises
Rome an empire lvithout end (1.279). and Augustus grants the gods
in return an immortal pledge on his triumphal march through the city
depicted on the shield ( 7 13). Epic takes particularly literally the axiom
that history belongs to the ~vinners.Imperial conquest of geopolitical
sixice- the imposition of a single, identical order upon different regions
and pcoplrs- brcomes a process of history-making. T h c zlenrid appears
to idcntif) history itself with a nc\v idea of universal history: Polybius,
the Grrek historian of thc second century B.C., argued that Romr's
emerging rrnpirc had for thr first timr made such a history possihlc,
a history in \vhich "thr affairs of Italy and :\frica I1a1.r been interlinkrd
~ v i t hthosc of Greccc and Asia, all lrading up to one end."" Virgil's rpic
!'This p'lssage h'ls hccn c l o c ~ u c n ~ discussed
l) by J o h n Arthnr H m s o n 686-88.

! ~ ~ r l a n c i o ~ f i u41.12-15;
r;~~o Geru~alenmeiiberatn 19.41. "1.73-71: ;lraucana 34.5-15, 22-23:

I'a~adi,e Lort 1.32-1 13. In ~ l i c;lii~triada113821 oTJndn Rufo. Ali U,IJ,I, thc c o ~ n ~ n a n t l ofer
~ h 0c ~ ~ o 1 n ;frlnc c ~; r ~Lcp'~nLo,1e;rrns fiom his astrologcr t11'1t he \Lars look u n f k ~ o r ~ ~ b l )
on his enterprise in he coming l ~ a ~ t l t11' c , 1t ~ h Fd~cs
c (hncfu,) are prep;rring niisTortunes
(cle,aenti~rar)Tor he hloslem rorces. Ali replies LO this Irager oTchance \ r i ~ hhis o\vn s ~ o i c
fatalism and c o n s t ~ ~ n c y :

El ciclo y el inficrno cchcn cl rcslo

Q n e yo scr6 m:ls firtne clue diani;rnte:

IDc 1'1 vidd triunf;rr puetlc l;r ninertc.

Q u c nu tle 1'1 xirlud del var6n f11c.r~~. (22.85)

Ali is killcd in thc s u l ~ s c q u c nl ~~ a ~ ~fighting

le, LO thc cntl. cursing h1oh;rnimed (21.26).
l''Sec Frederick Kiefcr. F o r ~ u n c ' sl~o;rLis 'rlre'ld) 'I cl;rssic;rl ~noLiE Kiefer notes t h ' ~ ~
both O ~ i ddnd Scncc,~"likcn Fortune LO ;r l~reezefilling thc sails of;r ship"(4).
"Polyl~ins1:7-9. 0 1 1 P o l ) l ~ i l ~a sn d unixcrsal history. see F. I Y . 1V;rlbank 67-68 a n d he
rcTie\r oTI\';rlb'~nk 11) ;\rn'~ltlo hlo~nigliano,"Thc Histori;rn's Skin."
 EPIC: ;\Nil EhlPIRE

dcpicts imprrial ~ i c t o r yas thc victory of thr principle of izistorr-a prin-

ciple vrsted in thc JVcst, ~ v h r r eidrntity and po1vc1. a r r transmitted
across time in patrilineal succession-over the lack or negation or his-
torical identity that characterizes the everchanging, reminized nature
of the East. From this perspective, the vanquished Easterners not only
do not possess a history: but are virtually incapable of one. Augustus's
bridge triumphs over the raging Araxes, and the river itself' is carried
in his triumph; the image suggests that the victory a t Actium, which,
like all battles, is in the last analysis a struggle ror survival, is also a
victory over time.
But this final image of the shield, the Araxes indignant a t the new
bridge that replaces the one put up by Alexander, the last Western
conqueror orthe East, raises questions about the permanence of Augus-
tus's achievement. T h e river had washed away Alexander's bridge and
now chafes a t its subjection to Roman rule. The Iliad offered its own
version of time and nature destroying the works of human conquest:
the great landward wall that the Greeks have built to shelter their ships
from the Trojans will eventually he overturned and swept away when
Apollo and Poseidon turn loose upon it the flooded rivers or Mount
Ida (12.10-33). T h e Araxes, moreover, by the convention of the Roman
triumph, where depictions or river gods were carried in the procession
to symbolize the vanquished peoples residing by their streams, here
stands for the dreaded Parthians. T h e excessive natural energy and
fertility or the East is once again associated with its great hordes who
stand poised to flood across the newly-conquered territories. IS the
glorious parade of Roman history in the underworld of Book 6 ended
with the death of Marcellus, the male heir, and hence with the threat
oS new dissension and civil war destroying the empire from within, the
shield's eclually glorious triumph culminates with a nervous glance at
the peril Srom without. T h e river's resentment echoes that of the pent-up
winds oS Aeolus (1.55), of the f~lrious,dying soul oSCamilla (1 1.831),
and similarly or the soul or the wrathSu1 Turnus in the final line of the
zleneid.How long can the forces orchange and disorder be held in check?
The rivers at the end or the description or the shield look hack to the
beginning oS Book 8, ~vherethe Tiber smooths out his waters to give
A-Ieneas'sruture Romans easy sailing up his stream (86-89). But Virgil's
Rome ~ v a s\\-ell acquainted ~viththe periodic disasters of the Tiber's
floods.'"
li'lj~~ch
flooding, which also rccalls Xchillcs's h , ~ ~ \~v il~ch~ h ovcrflo\ving
c Sc'~rn,~nder in
Iliad 21, hccorncs an cpic ~ o l ~ oins Pharralza 1.48-120, \vl~crcC:,~cs~lr's c,lmp , ~ n d,Ism)-
arc alrnos~"shil~wrcckcd" (87) ,mtl c,~rrictl,I~.,I)h>-~ h flootling
c spring ri\crs of Sp'lin.
Hcrc. significantly, ~ h r,~in
c clo~ltlscoinc from ~ h cE'ISL.from X r , ~ b i ,.~~ n dI n d i , ~(61-70).
Fr,~nccscoBr,~ccioliniimit,~testhis p ~ l s s ~ in e opening episode ofhls L a Croc~Kaccjiii~tnta
~ gthe
( 16 13 i - 'I less Lh,ln gre'lt lleroic poem -\vhere the f,~llen'ln-el and \v,~ter-demon,Hi-
C:oXII'ARATI\ I:, I,I1 EllATLJRF

The ideological dichotomies tirawn between the winners and losers

at ,-lctium also have formal implications for epic and its idea ornarrative.
This is best seen in the epic tradition that Sollowed \'irgil and that
would repeatedly invoke, imitate, and re~\-ritethe central scene on
Aeneas's shield. Later epic poets fbund a normative narrative form
embodied in the triumph ofhugustus. I n C:leopatra's flight, by contrast,
they saw a rival generic model ol' narrative organization.
Epic loves a parade, perhaps because the procession that keeps its
shape through both space and time resembles its own regular verse
scl~emes-meter, rhyme, stanza- that similarly spatialize time and join
the poem's beginning in interconnected sequence to its end."' Augustus's
triumph can be assimilated with the military muster that instigates
catalogues of ships or troops, or the review ornational heroes or dynastic
descendants like the procession ol'l'lltule Romans that Anchises displays
to Aeneas in Virgil's underworld. 'his second category is a kind of'
historical pageant, and in fact, the depiction of Actium culminates,just
such a review or Roman history (8.626-74), a history that now can be
secn, even Gom its beginnings, to have been leading up to the victory
of Augustus:
illic r i s Irnlns Kolrianor~irnqr~e tl-iuniplios
hnutl uarrlm ignzrru ~icnruri[l~lc insci~lsaeui
ilccr,lt ignil~otcns.illic gcnrls oninc iiit~lrac
t i r p i s zrh .isczrnio, ~ ) ~ l g n n t a c jIn
n i ortlini hellzr. (8.626-2'31
(Tliisr the Fire-gotl. not ~~nzrcq~izrinrcd \\ill1 prophec! nor igiiorzrnt of' rhr filt~lrc.hat1
scrllprctl rhc \tor) of Ital) and of rllc t r i ~ ~ m p lof
i s Rolrlc, c\ cr) d c s c ~ n d ~ ~
roncome
r Srom
thc racr of r l ~ c ~ ~ n, i~~nidrhe
s \jars the) fo~i:l~t dcl~irredin order.)

'lhe imperial triumph is one in a series of'triumphs, itselra triumphal

procession or Roman conquests that are presented in linear chronolog-
ical order-"in ordinen-like the "longo ordine" in which Augustus's
dei'eated l'oreign sub-jects file by. The triumph thus gives its shape not
only to the political unity or the empire, but to a unified narrative that
imperial conquest has conferred upon Roman history. The shield depicts
Augustus's victory at Actiurn as the victory or history itself-of the
very possibility orlinking disparate events across time into a rneaningl'~i1
tlm~l\sc.causes rlle E ~ i l ~ h r a t c s\\olli.ns. \\-it11 th? streams of Rlounr Taurus, Lo flood rhe
c'irnlj of t l ~ eemperor Hcracli~is ( I .'I-?ii. Hcsaclir~\'\Iirst spi.cc11 i~llirntesthe opeiilng
wortls ofL-\cncas cail:-l~r in thc sczr s t o r ~ of ~ l.leii~id 1 : Heracli~iswishc\ thar hc had found
tlearli in a 11,1trli. .i\osrh) oC mcmo~.) (26-271. I n ;Ins\jes to rhe pr'l) ers of the saint11
y
. ~ccro,'In zrngcl or God dcsci~idsl ~ ~ iCt~lI I I S C S rlle tlootlillg ri\er to s~ibside;Heracli~is
'

no\\ ini~tntcs(9'18.39) the " 0 socii" spei*cll that .iclie,l\ makes .~frcrhis llcct 11,~ssnirl).
~ r c ~ ~ c htlic
e d I . i l ~ > ~sliorc.
n Ur,lcciolirii's conflarion of L ~ i c a nand T.irgil demonstrzrres hojv
rhc tlre'ld of'sul~mcrsion-in "Easrcrl~"\ \ . ~ ~ e r s - m a ) I)c the singlc g r c , l ~ c sk~a r eaperi-
cncrd 11) [lie IVcstcrn cpic hero.
"'For n p;rrrlc~il,~~- 1 - r r s i o oSthe
~~ ri,lnrionship ot'tl~ccpic \ crse schrrnc ro zr ~inificd1 isloll
of hisror) . i r e J o h n Frcccero 2,i8-27 1.
narrativ-and this history turns out to link a scquence oi'victories,
the constant growth and expansion of Roman arms.
The epic victors depict themselves as ever \~ictorious,and, by a kind
of'tautology, impose a unified meaning upon history. This same logic
is at work when imperial themes reemerge in Renaissance epic, in
another era of' the expansion of' empire. Cam6es recalls \'irgil's Actium
in The Lzlsiads (1572) to describe the recent imperial conquests or Por-
tugal in the Indian Ocean.
hrunc'l com Rl,~rtrinsrrliro e firioso
Si. \ i u fer\.cr Lc~lcatr,q l ~ a n d oX ~ i g ~ i s t o
N,ls ci\.is ictias gricrras aniinoso
O c,~pitZo\-encell iom'lno injusto.
Q ~ i ctlos 11ovos d a hul.or:r e tlo inmoso
N ~ l oe do Uncrra srilico c rohu\co
X \ ir6r1a r r , ~ ~ icap r e n rirzr,
Prcso dn egipcia liiitla e n j o p~ltlirn.

Chmo T crcis (3 nlar fervendo aceso

(:05 incPndios ~ I O S \OSSOS; pclrjando.
I . e ~ . ~ l n doo I d o l o l , ~ ~ rca o hlouro l~rcso,
Llc nny6cs dircrcnrcs rsi~inf~lntlo;
E. sujeicn n r i c , ~h u r c ~Q~icrsoncso,

XtC o lonqinco C:hina na\-egnndo

E ,ls ilh,~smnis 1ernoLns tlo Oricnrt..

Scr-lhc-5 todo o Occnno ohctlicnrr. (2.3:3-541

( L e ~ i c , ~ was
t e never sccn co brim \villi fliriolis and d ~ . ~ ~ \ \ n\vnrf"~rc,
- ~ l p wllen, in tlii. cixil
wars of rlcri~im,the \ nlorous rlugust~isdcfc<~rcdthc ~ l n j ~ l sKomnn r cnprniii who drew
wirh him vicrory and rich captrlrrd boot) from thc proplcs o f t h c dawn. frorn rllr farnous
Nile. , ~ n dfsom mig1lc:- Sc)-rhi,ln R,~c~sin-hehimsclf c a l ~ t ~ i r rh>- d the fair , ~ n d1lnc11,~s~e
Eg) piinn \hrornnn-as you will see rhe s c , ~h~irning,kiiitllcd \vie11 the fires of')our \\-,~rring
Port~lg~lese. raking cap1iT.e thc Hindu ido1,~tor.lnd the PIIoor, tri~iml~hiilg oT.er the v,~rious
n'lrions. and. once rlic rich Goldrn C:liersoncsc is ~ ~ i h j ~ ~ ,sailing ~ r c d .IS
. far as tlistnnt
Clllin'l and the most rcmorc is1,lnds of rhc East: the cnrirc Oce'ln will ohe). ~hern.1

These stanzas culminate the prophecy oSPortugal's greatness (2.42-55)

made by @am6es5sJupiter to his daughter \'enus in clear imitation of
Jupiter's prophecy to \'enus in Book 1 of the A-leneid. The rather of the
gods foretells a history that will he an unbroken string of Portuguese
victories and conquests in East Africa (48), the Red Sea (-19),and then,
coasting down the \Vestern shores of India, at Diu (50), Goa (51),
Cananor, Calicut, and C:ochin (52). In k t , these last southernmost
Indian cities were the first to Call to the Portuguese: the poet's strategy
has been to present the course of empire in geographical sequence, as
a single progression to~vardsthe Kast which no\v, in stanza 54 cited
above, continues past hlalaya and Gllina to Japan and the lloluccas.
At the end the Portuguese rule the ocean itself: there is loosely present
here the Yirgilian analogy between the peoples of the East and the
watery element, the latter a hardly less formidable obstacle to a maritime
13
COhIPARATI\'E LITERATURE

empire. Tike the victory of Augustus: the Portuguese conquests assume

the rorm or an orderly triumph-"lle naq6es direrentes triunrandom-
and their spatial mapping lends a linear shape to Portugal's imperial
history. A reference to I\'lagellan in the Sollowing stanza which concludes
,Jupiter's prophecy (2.55.6) suggests that the final goal of the steady
eastward expansion is world-empire: an empire that circumnavigates
the globe, one on which the sun never sets. The completion of this
circle implies, in fact, a kind ostimeless cessation of history itsel& the
ultimate dream of imperial power.LoTZ'ith this goal, epic linearity-the
sequential linking or events-becomes a teleology: all events lead to a
final end. The parade oShistory reaches a transhistorical or eschatolog-
ical finish line, what in the etlzical scheme of the Lusimls is the locus of
eternal Same. Augustus's triumph similarly ended on the steps or the
temple of' Apollo.
The narrative shape of' this history-as-triumph bears an affinity with
the well-made literary plot-the plot that presents a whole with its
linked beginning, middle, and end-defined by Aristotle in the Poetics
(7c). I n ract, it was apparently with the Aristotelian passage in mind
that Polybius saw Rome's rise to empire forming a historical whole:
"the subjection of the known parts or the world to the dominion or
Rome should be viewed as a single whole, with a recognized beginning,
a fixed duration, and a n end which is not a matter of dispute" (Histories
3.1; Pobbius 2:3). If the plot of' imperial history projected by L'irgilian
epic may already he modeled upon a classical idea of literary rorm,
this plot, in turn, seems to lend its linearity and teleology to the epic
narrative itself, which typically recounts a critical, founding chapter in
that history. If epic usually begins in medias res, it moves towards a
fixed endpoint, the accomplishment of a single goal or mission-the
Trojans' settlement in Italy, Portugal's opening or the Indian trade
route, the delivery ofJerusalem, the Fall of' Adam and Eve. The rormal
completion or the epic plot speaks for the completeness of' its vision of'
history: telling a fUll story, epic claims to possess tlze rill story. Other
accounts that might compete with the victors' version of history are
merely dismissed as historical accidents, deviations from the straight
line of imperial triumph: opposed to epic's end-directed narrative, these
rival narratives appear directionless and beside the point."
I t is the possibility orjust such a deviant and episodic narrative that
"'Thc '~n'llog)- bctwccn irnperinl pcrm'lnence and csc11,~tologyh'ls rcceivetl rich disc~is-
sions in F r m k Kerrnodc. The Sm~eof on Bnclin~y 3-3 I . .lntl The C:lnrsic 15-45.
> ' T h eideological clos~lrclo \\-hich his epic insistcncc upon a single n a r r ~ ~ t i corresponds
ve
has elicitcd somc sllggcstive reinarks h) hl. hl. B'lkhtin. who secs in epic n sealed-off.
sacros'lncL vision of n nn~ionnlpas[ (16-17). J,~cqllcsDcrrida has spokcn of'1ine~lrit)-CIS
the "rnod?lc !pique" ofwestern thought , ~ n dlogic, n inotlcl that suppresses n "pluri-dimcn-
sion,~li[i." of meaning( 1301.
 CI'IC AND EhIPIIIE

Cam& opposes to this triumphalist narrative of' empire: the negative

example of the captivated Antony, who a t Actium leaves the scene of
history-making and follows aster Cleopatra. L'irgil's depiction of
Cleopatra's fleeing, wind-tossed boat is related to the wandering ship
of Odysseus and to an alternative, looser form of narrative organization
that the O(<ysse3, had introduced into epic (the first half of the Aer~eid
had explored the implications of' this Odyssean model as it traced the
Trojans' erratic voyage from Troy to Italy). For Borges and Northrop
Frye, the wandering ship or Odysseus is the virtual emblem orromance:
a narrative which moves through a succession of virtually discrete and
unconnected episodes (Frye 15:30). The ship often finds these episodes
on islands that reinforce their selr-enclosed nature." T h e romance
episode thus resists fitting into the teleological scheme of' epic, and
L'irgilian epic consequently sees any deviance rrom the historical course
of empire assuming the shape of' romance narrative, whether this he
the deviance or the Eastern conquered peoples whom we have seen to
be without historical identity: or that or the individual whose personal
desire or very individuality is opposed to the collective goals or history
and empire: this is the case of Antony, who thinks more of Cleopatra
than of'victory: and very nearly that of' Aeneas content to rorget his
Roman mission in Dido's Carthage. Epic views all such romance alter-
natives as dead ends-quite literally in the case of Antony and
Cleopatra-stories which, unlike its own narratives or missions ac-
complished, have no place to go. For its part, the romance narrative
bears a suh\~ersiverelationship to the epic plot line Srom which it
diverges, for it indicates the possibility or other perspectives, however
incoherent they may ultimately be, upon the epic victors' singleminded
story of history.
The afinity or Cleopatra's fleeing ship to the patterns of romance is
documented by a literary history that would eventually transrorm the
scene on Aeneas' shield into a central narrative complex in the great
Italian romances oSBoiardo and Ariosto, Renaissance poets who sought
to invest their chivalric fictions with models Gom classical epic. The
story or this transformation, as befits a romance plot, follows two inter-
related paths. The Aeneid itself' replicates the ship of'cleopatra in the
boat that carries Turnus out of the battle in Book 10 (653-688), after
he has pursued a phantom Aeneas set in his path by ,]uno. I n both
cases the epic protagonist briefly escapes an inevitable defeat and death,
"For [he ide'l of .~dvcn~llre. an animating principle of rorn,mce. as an "isl'md" of
cxl~eriencc.s cc Gcorg Sirnmel 244. O n ~ h rcla~ionship
c of thc tligressi~e rom'lncc el~isode
LO cpic tclcolog) I am most indch~ctl~oPa~riciaP,~rkrr, Inucnbablr Komnnte. and Lo James
hrohrnbcrg, especi,~ll>-1-22. Scc also my css'~)-."The 1:ignrc of h ~ l a n ~ hriosto
e: mtl
Boi'lrtlo's Poem." In thc IIresenL stud) I wish LO sho\v how the epic-rom,~nccdicho~orn)
c'ln )-icltl politic,~lideological meanings.
15
 and \'irgil underscores the analogy to Cleopatra by having the despon-
dent Turnus briefly consider s~licide(680-82). The Turnus episode is
later imitated, in turn, by Roiardo in the fifth canto (46-55) oS thr
Orlando innanzorc~to.There the paladin Ranaldo, pursuing a similar phan-
tom figure oS his enemy Gradasso, is transported by an enchanted,
pilotless boat to an island pleasure garden prepared for him by the
beautilill and amorous Angelica: both the boat and the ga1,den are
Samiliar loci of chivalric romance."
The same Angelica appears at the opening (1.10) oSAriosto's Orlando
Jlrioso ( 15 1 G), her unbridled steed crashing headlong through the tan-
gled woocls of romance error:
I1 mover de Ic fi-ondi r di ~ - r r / ~ i r c ,
chc tli ci,rri scntkl, ti'olmi c tli fnqgi.
farto Ic 'IT ca con suhirr p,iurc
r r o ~ ~tli
l r rjli'l tli 12 srmni x-iaqgi. (1.33)

( T h c sorindi shc hcartl from [he rnoxenient of the hr,~nches, ~ n dlc'l~cs of o'lks. elms.
and heerllcs gnvc hcr slldtlcn ir'lrts ant1 ni'ldr her take odd p,~rhsno\\- in this direcrion.
now in 'lnother.)

Angelica is initially fleeing Gom the war between Charlemagne and

the Islamic forces of King Agramante, and the scene recalls and verbally
echoes the flight oS the defeated Pompey a t the opening of Book 8 of
Lucan's Pharsalia. Pompey is escaping on horseback from the battlefield
in 'lhessaly:

(Slxirring his llorse, Polripcy confuscd the ir1distincr tr,lcks of his Ilighr a n d rangled his
p'1t11 in his ers,ltic co~irsc.H e k a r s rhc noise of the woods moxing in thc wind . . .)

And behind Pompey's flight lies Cleopatra's. 1.ucan depicts Pharsalia

as an earlier version or Virgil's Actium: Caesar's defeat of Pompey is
presented as a victory oS disciplined IVestern legions over a polyglot
army collected Gonl the East, numerically superior (7.360-68), but
unreliable when the fighting starts (7.269-74,525-44).I.ucan, the enemy
oS the Caesars, draws the analogy between the two battles partly to
explain why Pompey's republicans lost, but also to suggest that the
victory a t Actium was precisely what \'irgil has said it was not: less a
glorious triumph over foreign enemies than a continuation oS Rome's
civil wars and the final crushing oS her liberty. In drawing such a
parallel 1.ucan comes close to equating republican freedom with the
cause of the conquered peoples of the East. The clearest evocation of
"I follo\v rhe nn'llysis of this episode in Kohrnbrrq 9-10
\'irgi15s Actium comes in a description of Pompey and his army on the
eve or battle.
Sir L t u r ct at-nla
Permittit populis fi.eno\q~iefilrimtih~~s i1.n
Lasnt ct lit \.ictus \.iolento na\.itd Chro
Ll,~tscgilricn \-enti$ i g n n \ . ~ i r n q ~drte
~ c rclict,~
Puppis onus tmhitur. Trepido conflis,~t ~ ~ r n ~ i l t ~ ~
(:astrd f r r m ~ i n t .nnimique truces su,r pcctol,~] ) I I ~ S ~ I I I ~
Ictihus incertis. h l u l t o r ~ i mpallor i l l ore
hlortis \ rntrlrnc frtciesque silriillinla fato. (7.123-30)

(So Pompe; s l ~ c ~ 'lnd ~ k s~ ~ l l o wtllrs n'ltions to , ~ r n i and

. gi1.r.s I-cins to thcir f r c n ~ i c dwr,~th;
so .I s'lilor, \ ancll~iihcdb) tllc \iolcnt northwest q,~le,fors,~kcshis skill nntl gives 11p his
r ~ ~ t l t l to
c r thc wintls. .lntl is s \ \ c l x 'llone:. a listlcss burden to thc ship. 'l'he conf~isrtlc a m p
trclriblcs with anxious h~ibhrlb,, ~ n dIicrcc spirits throb \vith isreg~ilarhcartheats in t h r
soldiers' hrcnsts. I n the klccs of 111,111) tl~crv. ~ l ~ p c n r cthc d p ~ ~ l l oofr nl~pronchingdrat11
, ~ n dtheir frntl~rcswere the imagc ol' cnlnmit) . I

Pompey's eastern troops share Cleopatra's and Dido's pallor, and the
simile comparing their general to the sailor who gives up his vessel to
the winds is an evident recollection of Cleopatra's loss of control a t
hctium ("uentis . . . uela dare"). Pornpey's loosing the reins of war
("Srenos . . . laxat") is a conventional turn of speech that recalls the
ship ropes that Cleopatra lets fall slack ("laxat . . . funis") and also
suggests how his subsequent equestrian eacape Gom Pharsalia can be
a rewriting or the \'irgilian scene; the conrused pattern oS11is horse's
tracks repeats her panicked ilight. Ariosto's Angelica, in Sact, gives up
control of her- reins and lets her horse carry her wherever it wills (1.13).
Her flight is the opening image oSthc Orlc~ndo,firiosoand it announces
a centrifugal trajectory that will eventually carry Angelica out of the
poem itself, still fleeing, as she seeks to return to her home in Cathay
(30.16)."
Both Boiardo and hriosto thus present versions, mediated a t second
hand, or the fleeing errant Cleopatra and associate them with their
central Semale object of desire: hngelica's flight is the very emblem of'
the Furioso S wandering, entangled romance plots. Later in the I ~ z ~ r i o s o ,
moreover, Ariosto includes a moral allegorization or the voyage of'
Boiardo's Kanaldo to the island of' pleasure. I n Canto 4: Ariosto's hero
Ruggiero mounts on the back or a winsed hippogriff which, like
Ranaldo's boat: moves by enchantment and which Ruggiero cannot
rein in and control (4.49). Two cantos later Ile is deposited on the East
Indian island paradise or the fa); Alcina, to whom he is soon amorously
-"On this ccntr,~lmotif of the It,llinn romances, see A. Unstlett G i , ~ m ~ ~ t t"Hc,~dlong
i's
Horses, Hcadlcss Horst-men: An Ess'~) on tlle Clhi\.,~lric Epi( s of Pulci. Boiartlo. , ~ n d
hriosto."
enthralled. No less in love, Alcina regales him with 1,anquets that are
compared to the Alexandrian feasts of Clleopatra (7.20). \\'hen Rug-
giero subsequently abandons her, Alcina follows in hot pursuit and
there ensues a sea hattle between her arrnada and the forces of her
sister fay 1.ogistilla. Alcina's defeat and flight invoke the struggle at
Actium:
Fuggcsi Alcina, e sua misera gcnle
arsa c PSCSR riman, solla c solnnlcrsa
D ' a ~ e rRuggier perdulo rlla si sente
\ ia p i i ~
dolcr cllc d ' a l ~ r acosa avcrsa:
nolle e di pcr lui gcme amaramente;
e lacrime prr lui dagli occhi \-crsa;
c pcr dar fine a tanlo aspro martirc.
spesso si duo1 di non polcr morire.

hlorir non puote alcuna fata mai,

fin chc '1 sol gira, o il ciel 11011 muta stilo
Sc cio non fossc, cra il dolorc assai
1"s ~nuovcrClolo ad ini~s~)i~rle il iilo:
o qua1 Didon finia col Serro i guai,
o la regina splendida dcl Nilo

avria irnilata con mortiSer sonno:

m a lc Sire lnorir sclnprc non ponno. (10..75-.76)

(Alcina flees and hcr miserahlc lroops rc~nainhchind. h ~ ~ r n e caplurcd,

d, des~ro)-ed.and
sunk. She Seels much more s o r r o \ ~at h a \ - i n losl Ruggicro than at an) olher of her
calamities: shc sohs hit~crlyfor llim nigh1 and day and her c)-cs polis oul tcars; and she
oficn grievcs hat shc can no^ die lo nlake an cnd of slich crliel suffering.
No fa) can ever die. while he sun turns or the l~eavensdo not change their pattern.
For if lhal wrcrc not the case, hcr grief \\.as sutficicnt lo mo\ e C l o ~ olo wind out her kital
~ h r c a d ;or, likc Dido; shc wolild 11avr iinishcd 11cr lamcnls wilh the hlade oSa sword. or
she ~vould11ai.e imilaled the splendid queen of thc Nile with a dcadl) slccp: hut fals
may never die.)

Lest his reader rniss the parallel between the fleeing Alcina and the
fleeing Cleopatra on Aeneas's shield, Ariosto spells it out." I n Virgil's
scene, the historical conlhatants at Actiunl were transformed into per-
sonifications oS reasoned order and directionless irrationality. Their
struggle already suggested the kind of I'rudentian psycl~omacl~ia, an
allegorical battle between bvarring principles in the human soul, that
takes place in Ariosto's episode. Logistilla is the allegorical figure oS
reason, \vhose realm has been usurped by her illegitimate half-sisters
Alcina and hforgana (6.43-45), the two lower forces, concupiscence
and bvrath, of the tripartite Platonic soul. Alcina makes war to recapture
her erstwhile lover and the battle is a fight both Sor and bvithin Ruggiero's
'~.Alcina's flight scelns LO hc repcated and echoed h) Xgramanle's Iliglll-"Fugge
h g r a m a n ~ c "(40.0)-Srom ~ h c limaclic sea hattle before Riserta. Thus lhis h a t ~ l calso
I,ccomcs a kind oS h c ~ i u m ;and likc the dcfeated Cleoparra and Anton)-. Xgramanre
tontemplates suicide a l 40.36.
18
 EPIC XSD Ehlt'TIZE

soul. T h e allegory comments on the wandering romance narratives of

the Fkr-2050:Ruggiero's journey on the hippogriff appears to he morally
identical to the realrn of the lower senses to which it leads, a realm
that is revealed as aimless, anarchic, and, as the fate of its Eastern
fernale ruler demonstrates, ultimately self-destructive. And yet Alcina
cannot die. \\'it11 his celebrated moral flexibility, Ariosto seems to
suggest that appetites and desires are an irleradicahle part of what
constitutes the hurnan. This is one of the truths that ronlance tells, in
oppositiorl to a voice of reason that would suppress or straighten out
narratives ofhuman experience that cannot be anything but w a y b ~ a r d . ' ~
Tasso's quarrel with Ariosto lies precisely over this question. \\'it11
the conviction that reason can rule supreme and that the deviancy of
ronlance can be contained and subordinated to epic form, Tasso takes
over Ariosto's moral, psychological allegory for his own imitation of
the Alcirla episode, the extended rornance digression in Cantos 14-16
of the Gern~c~iemrne liber-ata.Tasso's hero Rinaldo, having rebelled against
the jurisdiction oS GoII'redo, the commander-in-chid of the Clrusader
army, leaves the battleSront and wanders into a realm of romance. H e
captivates and is captivated in turn by Armida, the beautiful Syrian
enchantress and enemy of the Clrusade; like Ariosto's Ruggiero and
Alcina, the tbvo lovers end up on a distant island paradise. T h e prose
allegory that Tasso published along with his epic explains that the
entire Crusader army stands corporately Sor the individual human soul.
Goffredo, its head, represents the rational faculty of the soul. Rinaldo
embodies the second, irascible part of the soul which, when it ref~ises
the government of reason, becomes susceptible to Armida. Tasso's
allegory hardly needs to explain that she represents the tenlptatiorls of
c o n c ~ p i s c e n c e .This
~ ~ moral internalization oS the Liber-atcl's action
closely resembles Ariosto's persorlification allegory when it identifies
the poem's central ronlance episode as a choice of appetite over reason,
hut Tasso goes quite beyond Ariosto by identifying reason with Gof-
fredo's leadership and with the imperial enterprise of the Crusade itself.
The power that speaks in the rlarne of reason-a hfachiavellian rc~gior~e
di ~tntonewly Sorrnulated in sixteenth-century political thought-be-
cornes the guarantor of reason. And this rationality, embodied by the
teleological epic plot that airns a t the conquest of Jerusalem, stands as
",The incradical,ilit) ofXlcina's prcscnce is discussed 1,)- (:iamatti in The Eu'(i,thbPnrndisr
164: .Albert Russell ilscoli dcscrihcs hlcina as a douhlc of that "reason" that \vould
control or displace ller, 121-46. Ascoli Lvritcs oi'thc "blindness. madness. and error \vhich
Platonism, and ilriosto helic1.c to I,c essential characteristics oi' liSi in thc l,od>-"(221).
'-l:or thc prosc allcgor). scc Tasso's Le prose dioerse 1:301-308. The Librruiu spclls out
the al1cgor)- at 17.62-63. ~vhcrcRinaldo is instructed to use his \vrathf~11 Saclilt) to subdue
"le clipidigic, clnpi nemici intcrni" (63). and to submit to a commander-in-cllicS ~vllois
either (;offredo or reason or both at oncc. Sce I\lurrin 87-107.
a fixed pole in the Liberc~tc~
against the sidetracking appetites. Rinaldo's
choice receives a familiar imperial analogy in the scene of Actiunl that
appears on the sculpted portals of Armida's palace (16.4-7):'"
Ecco (116 p ~ l n t oi~ncorla pugna inchina)
ccco f~uggirla harhara rcina.

E S~lggeAntonio. c lasciar pub la s ~ c n i ~

dc l'iml~criodcl lnondo oi.'cgli aspira.
Non ii~ggcno, non temc il ficr, non tcmc.
ma scgue lci che Sugge c scco il tira.
\~edrestilui, simile ad uoln che freme
d'amorc a un tclnpo c di vcrgogna c d'ira.
mirar alternamente or la crudele
p q n a ch'? in dubhio, or le fuggcnti velc. (16.5-6)

(ilnd IIOIV hehold-thc ourcomc of thc hattlc as )-ct inclincs to neither sidc-bchold thc
barbarian queen in flight.
And .Anton) flees. and can 1eai.c behind the hope of ~vorld-empireto \l-llicl~he aspires.
Hc docs not flcc. no. that valiant man has no fear: he does not fear. hut follo\l-s her who
flces and dra\is him \l-it11 hcr. Yoti would see him thcre, like a man who ;it the same
moment trcnihlcs \vith lo\c and \l-ith shame and \l-ratll, g a ~ i n gin turn no\< at the crucl
iigllt \l-hich stands in doubt, nowr at hcr llccing sails.)

Cleopatra's flight becomes here again the archetype of the digressive

romance narrative, a narrative explicitly posed as a n alternative to the
rnartial epic and its pursuit of world-empire. The hesitatirlg Antony
knows better, as he chooses love over duty and a place in history. \\'hat
is important here is the sense of choice itself, the availability of the epic
arena as a n escape from the wanderings of romance desire. There is
nothing inevitable here-as there might be in the Furioso, the poem of
madness-about the option of romance. Antony has simply made the
wrong choice, and for the moment Rinaldo, enthralled by Armida, has
done the same.
T h e diversion of the Clrusader soldiers from battle has been Armida's
aim from the beginning of the poem. \\'ithin the \'irgilian dichotomies
betbveen TVest and East that Tasso revives, rornance 1,ecomes a delib-
erate strategem used by the fernale Easterner to impede the progress
of the Crusade. Armida plays the role of Clleopatra throughout the
Libel-cltc~.Her first appearance in the Christian camp (4.28f.), where she
turns the knights' sympathies towards her with her fetching feigned
grief-"finto dolor" ('77)-and with a n invented story that casts her as
a princess whose realrn has been unjustly usurped, is modelled upon
Clleopatra's other appearance in Ronlan epic, her audience in the Plzar-
salicl (10.81f.) with Julius Caesar, whorn she persuades with her beauty
and "simulaturn . . . dolorern" (82) to restore her to the throne of Egypt.
?"l:or lasso's trcatmcnt of ilctium, sce %atti 51-.76.

20
T h e scene also recalls the opening of the Orlando i71r~arnor-ato(I.1 .2Of.)
bvhere Boiardo's Angelica arrives a t the court of Charlernagne with her
plot to capture and disperse all of his paladins. Here again Cleopatra
is assimilated with the leading heroine of Italian romance. T.ater, when
Armida has joined up with the Saracen army, she participates in the
great final battle for Jerusalern. She panics and flees from the fighting,
drawing several lovestruck pagan champions after her, and is explicitly
compared to Clleopatra, turning this battle, too, into another version
of Actiurn:
Tnl C l e o p a ~ r aa1 sccolo ~ c t u s t o
sola S~~ggia dn la tenLon crudele.
lnsciando inconma nl fortunato Xugusto
nc' maritimi rischi il s r ~ ofedelc.
chc 1"'s anior Sitto a sc s l e s o ingiusto
tosto segui le solitnrie \ elc (20.118)

(So Clcopalra, in nncicnt lime, fled alone froni the crucl fighting, len~.ingher fr~ithf~ul
lo\cr LO Sacc the Sortunatc hugustus in the perils of the sea-hnttlc: he, unjnst LO himself
i ~ e c a ~ i of
s r lo\c; soon follo\vcd her solitar) \ails.)

Rinaldo, bvho has returned to the Crusader army and has acquired a
proper sense of the relationship of epic dut)- to love, now makes the
correct choice. H e first assures himself that the decisive battle has been
won and only then turns his thoughts to following and regaining the
fugitive Armida (121); he reaches her just in time to prevent her from
killing herselS, her face, too, colored with the \'irgilian pallor of death:
"gik tinto in viso di pallor di morte" (12'7). She is portrayed as a
Cleopatra saved from suicide, he as an AntonyIAugustus bvho resists
oriental temptations, notably the temptation to wander from epic to
romance.
This subordination oS romance to epic is the stated goal of Tasso's
poetic theory, ~ v h i c hattempts to accommodate the pleasing variety of
Boiardo's and Ariosto's romances to a Virgilian epic teleology. But this
subordination is also identical to the \Yestern mastery-achieved by
the \Yestern male's selS-mastery-of a feminized East ~vhosedisorder
tends towards self-destruction. The Aristotelian "unity oS the fable"
which is Tasso's overridirlg theoretical concern is the reflection of a n
irnperial unity achieved both over the vanquished foreigners and within
the victors' own ranks."' This unity depends on the logic of reducing
the other to the same: to rnake different peoples a n d individuals march
together in the triumphal procession that is a rnodel of political and
narrative cohesion and singleness of purpose. Romance plots crop up
'"Scc Rohcrl 1)urling 120.23. Thc rei.i\.al oSXrislolclian idcns o S u n i ~in
~ .six~ccnth-cen-
lur) li~ernr) heo or> is, as U~irlingp o i n ~ so~ut;dt.cpl) conncctcd to tllc (re)uniS)in im-
~xrialistprojects of he Counter-reform and of c m e r c n ~nation-sla~es.
21
in epic-and Tasso's treatment of his Italian ronlance predecessors
repeats Virgil's sinlilar gestures in the Aerieid towards the legacy of the
041'ssq'a nd Argonc~~ctica-to suggest alternatives to the iinperial ideology
of the unified and the same. These alternatives are multiple, precisely
as epic accuses then1 of being, because dilrerence from the same can
take any number of shapes and meanings, and thus romance divergence
can signify Inany dilrerent things within a single epic and differ in its
significance from one epic to another. Formally, however, these paths
of resistance to epic triurnphalisrn assume a conlrnon shape: in oppo-
sition to a linear teleology that disguises power as reason and univer-
salizes imperial concjuest as the imposition of unity upon the flow of
history, the dissentirlg narrative becomes deliberately disconnected and
aimless. This is the case not only when a I'irgilian poet like Tasso
dramatizes what he sees as the perilous alternatives to the imperial
order his epic upholds, but also bvllen foes of ernpire like Lucan attempt
to write a new kind of epic that would challenge I'irgilian norms. There
is something preemptive in the clairn that the imperial epic makes to
the high ground of classical form, of narrative unity and purpose: the
critique of this epic and of the ideological agenda behind it appears to
be condemned not so much to the construction of alternative literary
forms as to the dismantlirlg of forrn itself-and hence is liable to the
charge of "bad form."

Elemental forrn is directly at stake in the \\'ar in Heaven in Book 6

of Par-c~di~e
L o ~ t a, conflict that closely imitates 17irgil's Actiunl even as
it verges on mock epic."' T h e battle bet\veen the rival angelic forces
places in jeopardy, as does Actium, the very bonds of creation: "and
now all heaven 1 H a d gone to bvrack with ruin overspred" (669-70).
T h e angels have torn up the mountains of heaven and cast them at
each other-"So hills amid the air encountered hills" (664)-a recollec-
tion of the classical battle between the giants and the gods that was
also recalled by I'irgil's description of the clashirlg ships of Augustus
and Antony: "montis concurrere montibus altos" (692). I t is at the
point when the war threatens His creation that 5lilton's God intervenes
and sends His Son, the hfessiah, to decide the battle. T h e Son rides
in "the chariot of paternal deity" (750): like 17irgil'sAugustus, he fights
in his father's name, and the \\'ain Heaven is a war of divine succession,
fought over the Son's right to inherit His Father's rule. God shines His
radiance upon the Son's face (719-21)-Milton's scriptural source is
'"Thc classic cssa) on thc IVar in Heaven reniains Arnold Stcin's "Alilton's \Var in
Hca~.en-.An Extendcd I\letapllor." also a chapter in Stein's L4n.cii~erubleS!,'/e (17-37).
Stein points out that thc ~ v a ris f ~ ~ n n hlore
y. recent colnmcntators strcss. as 1 do, niore
serious aspects oi' the cpisodc. See hlichael Lieh 246-312. Stclla Puree Kc\ard. andJames
hf. Frccman.
22
 EPIC: hU1) ELIPIRE

Hebrews 1:3-a sign of paternal legitimatiorl t l ~ parallels

t the star of
Julius Caesar shining up011 Augustus's brow.
T h e Messiah's decisive appearance in tlie chariot of the Lord panics
the rebel angels and sends them into a c o n f ~ ~ s erout
d over the bvalls of
Heaven where they are swallowed u p by Hell and "the wasteful deep"
(862). The action typologically anticipates the ahsorptiorl or I'haraoh's
troops by the Red Sea; its epic rnodel is Apollo's appearance at Actiunl
that sends the Eastern forces into terror-stricken flight and Cleopatra
and Antony into the ernbrace or the Egyptian Nile. \\'here 17irgil's
Apollo berlds his bow at the Easterners, the Son is armed with a bow
and a quiver of thunderbolts that, like Apollo's arrows, shoot "Plagues"
(838) into the souls of His foes. hfiltorl plays upon a pun that is com-
monplace in English sacred poetry. T h e Son is the true sun. I t is Satan
\vho earlier assumed the false pagan type:
High in thc midst, cxcllted as a god
Thc apostate in his sun-lxight chariot sat
Idol oS majcst)- di~.inc.. . . (100-02)

Satan presents himself in a kind ofApollonian solar chariot in emulation

of the chariot of God. As an "Idol of majesty divine," he recalls the
sun-kings of the seventeenth century-especial1~- Charles I and Charles
11-bvho equated their autocratic rule with the creative power of the
sun. This equation goes back to the Roman emperors who identified
themselves with the Mithraic cult of "Sol invictus," the invirlcible Sun."
Milton may create his own solar pun bvhen the Son returns in triumph
as "Sole victor" (880) from the expulsiorl of the bad angels.
There is a sense, then, in bvhich the Son has conquered and cast out
the very pagan imperial typology which Milton's version of Actiunl
has imitated. O r rather, the typology can only belong to God, and
hfilton's account of the first events of history demorlstrates that it
originally did helorlg td God, before it was illegitimately imitated and
taken over by denlonic and human powers. Thus the triumph of the
Son (880-893) which corlcludes Raphael's narration is the sacred orig-
inal of \vhich the triumph of l'irgil's Augustus is a profane copy.'2 T h e
angels declare Hinl
Son, hcir. ,lnd lord, to him dominion given,
IVortl~iestto rcign: 11c cclchrarcd rodc
T r i ~ i m p l ~ a tnht r o ~ i g lmid-11ea1.en.
~ into thc courts
.And temple oi'his mighty 1:ather throned
011 high: (888-91)

"]:or Charles and solar imager)-, sce ~ J o a nS. Bennett and Da~.ies14-19. Davics, 121.
nlcntions the cult oS sol in71iclzi.c in a larger discussion of Roman impcrial imager) in
P(~i(ci,cidise Lojt. 89-126.
7'Xlastair 1:owlcr ( 1 16-17) notes that thc T r i ~ i m p hoS thc Son Salls at thc I er)- ~niddlc
oS 111c 10,550 \,cries of the iirst edition of Pii,riilije Lost (1667).
23
So I'irgil's Augustus will later ride through the general applause of
Rome and seat himself in the ternple of liis divine father Apollo, con-
firnled in a n imperial power that, for the I'uritan, staunchly republican
Alilton, is a 1,lasphemous pagan atternpt to play god.
The reversal by which hfilton's classical models are discovered to
he secondary imitations oS his own fiction is a well-known strategy of
Pclrcldz~eL o ~that
t nreds no f ~ ~ r t hcomment
er here. But 5lilton's attempt I '

to divorce a divine, cosrnogonic order fi-om a human political order

allows us to see just what is at stake in the Virgilian equatiou of the
two. By holding the divine power of His Son in reserve until the third
day of battle, 5lilton's God produces a temporary power vacuurn and
allows the poet to depict a n alternative model of the universe, what it
bvould look like without God: a state of perpetual civil warfare between
the good and bad angels, in theological terms a hfanichaean struggle
bvhere neither side can gain ascendancy. This rnodel is strongly reminis-
cent of; and, in fact, appears identical to, the state of Chaos described
earlier by Rlilton in Book 2. T h e "intestine bvar in heaven" (6.259)
threatens to return the heavenly landscape to the untreated, primordial
condition of Clhaos, and C:haos himself describes his realm as wracked
by "intestine broils" (2.1001), a locus of "endless bvars" (2.897) arnong
elemental forces: without God's shapirlg hand, these "must ever fight"
(2.914) and can never reach the stage of created form.'l T h e Son's
intervention which ends the TVar in Heaven and puts the scenery hack
in place is thus analogous to His act of creating the universe described
immediately afterbvards in Book 7, and indeed the Son is the creative
TVord of God hy which all things first carne into being (5.835-41; 7.216
f.).
Both the as yet undecided angelic bvarfare and the neitherlnor state
of Clhaos present images of formlessness, and particularly of the ab-
sence of tew~por-c~iform. After tlie first day of battle, when Satan finds
that, despite the pain they have suffered, his troops have survived to
fight another day, he reasons in an aside, "And if one day, why not
eternal days?" (424). 5lilton's God acknowledges that as long as H e
suspends the outcorne of the bvar, "in perpetual fight there needs must
last / Endless, and no solution bvill be found" (693-94). \Vhen the Son
steps in to end the fighting, H e thus ernbodies aprir~cipleofending- "none
but thou / Clan end it" (702-03), His father tells Him-what we have
already seen to be the teleology or eschatology with ~.vhichepic shapes
a master narrative of history. Otherwise the \Var in Heaven would
.'See Harold Rlooln 12.;-40; Parkcr. I~iesciil~ciblr Rorrin~rce130-35: Quint, Oricgin iinil O I < ~ -
i ~ l n l t !in~ IZeliiiissiilice Literntiire 207- 18.
'Il:or a disclission ~ S h l i l ~ o nC:haos's thal slresscs ~ h split
c I,etlveen poetic rcprcscn~alion
and c u ~ ~ l i cdoclrinal
it Sornlularion, sce Regina Scllrtartz. Scc also A. R. C:hclmhcrs.
always be fa wledias yes, bvithout a before and after-it bvould revert to
the condition of Chaos in \vhose continuous bvarfare "time and place
are lost" (2.894), and bvhere events come in such purely random succes-
sion, governed by "high arbiter/ Clhance" (2.909-lo), that they cannot
be sequentially narrated.
I t is this loss of ternporal coordinates that causes 5lilton to align
Clhaos, a "universal 1 1 u ~ ~ ~wild/~ u h Of stunning sounds and voices all
c o n f ~ ~ s e d(2.931-52)
" with the "hubbub strange" of Babel, "The work
C:onfusion named" (12.60,62)." The \Tar in Heaven joins this typology
as bvell: "horrid confusion heapedl Upon confusion rose" (6.668-69)
like the Bahelic tower itself. \\'hat is at issue in the war is the very
possibility of discursive meaning. Tike Chaos, the potentially endless
war seems to be the final reduction of the cyclical view of time and
creation advanced by Satan in Book 5 (859 f.) whereby the universe is
subjected to the arbitrary power of Fate and to the infinite creative
and destructive cycles of nature, a nature devoid of hurnan meaning.
T h a t meaning is ordered by language, whose syntax, in turn, depends
upon temporal sequence-what is threatened by the apparent reversi-
hility or repeatability of cyclical time. Thus, at one level, the victory
of the Son is the triurnph of linguistic intelligibility-bvhich the Son
embodies as the creative \\'ord of God-over a n inarticulate nature, a
nature of Babelic noise. At a higher, discursive level, this triumph is
identical to the inlposition of a finite narrative form upon time-the
closed structure of Christian history-that transcends natural cycles.
Paradise Lost thus aligns itself with other epic fictions that identify power
with the capacity to create a n order of historical meaning. It suggests,
perhaps more clearly than any other epic, the dependence of its own
capacity to signify upon the power whose victory it celebrates.
\\'hen 5lilton's version of Actium substitutes God for Claesar, it may
appear to subsume the political altogether. But if the Son's power has
no equivalent in human politics, the same is not true for the angelic
civil war ~.vhichthe Son steps in to end. This conflict unmistakably
evokes the recent English Civil \\'ars in which 5lilton served as a
propagandist. Satan's resemblance to Clharles I has already been noted,
and in the devils' mock-heroic shenanigans the \\'ar in Heaven satirizes
a n aristocratic martial heroism traditional in epic, the gallantry of the
cavalier now outdated by gunpowder and artillery. \\'bile the war can-
not be decided without the Son's intervention, the good angels nonethe-
less have their part: as they attempt to stand firm and maintain disci-
~'011Chaos and Rahcl, scc Q t i i n ~ .017,oin mid Or(qinn1ip 210-1 1. One mighr now h o ~ v
rhc Uahelic quality of rhe \\'ar in kTea\.cn rcpcars ~11clinguis~icmulriplicity attributed
1,) cpic to defeated Easterners, the man)- nalions. "\-aria? linguis." ~vllomarch in ilugus-
tus's triumph. Uahcl is irsclf thc Uil,lc's figure for thc ~torld-cmpircthat gathers diffcrcnr
nationalirics under its rlilc.
pline, their very dependence upon God recalls the pious ranks of Crom-
well's New Model Army.'6 And yet the same parliamentary forces were
farned for the cannonry that hllilton ascribes to the devils' invention,
and the good and had angels become virtually interchangeable when
they both resort to flinging the nlountains of heaven at one another.
This rnuddle of topical reference reflects the confusion of civil war that
rnixes friend and foe and seesaws back and forth in a seemingly endless
chain of retaliation. For Milton this c o n f ~ ~ s i ohas n becorne the political
condition ofhzirnclri hztmclr2hiJ9' i t ~ e i Jespecially
; after the 1660 Restoration and
the failure of his own republican hopes. The Son's entrance into the
heavenly war prefigures an apocalyptic end to history that is anticipated,
in no small measure, as a solution to a n un1,earable political situation,
a situation nleanirlgless in itself. h/lilton's inlitation thus finds common
ideological ground with its 17irgilian model in the two poets' shared
experience of civil bvar: a state of political conf~isionthat both equate
bvith a threat to narratable historical meaning, and, hence, to their own
narrative projects, which are portrayed as depending upon that rnean-
ing. For l'irgil, the way out of the impasse is achieved by the total
victory of Augustus's faction that allows the poet to rewrite the conflict
with Antony not as civil strife a t all, hut rather as part, perhaps the
culmination, of Rome's larger historical plot of empire: her conquest
of foreign enenlies bvho ernbody precisely the c o n f ~ ~ s i othat n has been
displaced from within the Roman state itsell'. hfilton's Roy a 1'1st contem-
poraries saw the returning Charles I1 as a new Augustus similarly
putting an end to the new threats of civil bvar, a horror they described
with metaphors virtually identical to those that h/lilton would hirnself
employ:
IVhat a strange R a l r l havc ~ v csccn of latc!

Call it a largcr Ucdlam, not a State;

O r sccond Chaos; r e a t c r than thc first

\Vhcre in a rude coniilscd mass wcre nurst

T h c sceds oi' all Xntipathics;

So wrote IVilliarn Uvedale in 1660 to welcome the king's return."; But

hfilton pointedly rejects the Augustan and cosnlocratic analogies of
Restoration propaganda. H e reclairns the 17irgilian typology for God
alone, the only true bestower of a n intelligible historical narrative, a
narrative whose final shape is promised but not yet revealed.
Narrative itself thus becomes ideologically charged, the formal cause
"See the illuminating chapter. "IVar," in I,icl,, Poetics qf'the HoL7, espcciall) 277-82 011
the humiliation oS God's soldiers.
"U~.edale's pocm. ~vhichbegins "\Vclcomc, Drcad Sir; to this no\< 11app)- Ile;" is
includrd in Britunnin Rediuiua. an antholug) oS1,atin and English poems wrritten h>-Oxibrd
Lvits to grcct thc rvt~irningkil~g.
 EPIC: IU1) EMPIRE

or consequence of that \Vestern rnale rationality and historical identity

that epic ascribes to the imperial victors. Epic draws an ecjuation be-
tween power and narrative: a power able to end the indeternlinacy of
war and to emerge victorious, showing that the struggle had all along
been leading up to its victory and thus imposing upon it a narrative
teleology-the teleology that epic identifies wit11 the very idea of narra-
tive. I'ower, moreover, is defined by its capacity to maintain itself across
time, and it therefore requires narrative in order to represent itself: in
this sense, n a r r a t i ~ ~like
e , ideology, is itself empowering. T h e epic victors
both project their present power prophetically into the future and trace
its legitinlatirlg origins back into the past. T h e first of these narrative
procedures in sorne sense depends on and is implied by the second: the
victors can claim that they always will he protagonists in a continuing
story of imperial and national destiny because they always have been.
And it is this story that epic identifies bvith the possibility of narrative
meaning itself. For, conversely, the ability to construct narratives that
join beginnings purposefully to ends is already the sign and dispensation
of power.
Epic's losers, the enenlies of empire whom epic ideology assimilates
with the East, bvoman, nature, irrationality, chaos, consequently also
embody a potential, indeed inevitable, collapse of narrative. This is
bvhat epic depicts in the undecided suspense and confusion of battle-
the endless bvar that h/lilton's Satan bvould prolong into eternity-and
in the circuitous wanderings of romance. Clleopatra's flight from Actiurn
displaces the former into the latter and suggests how, from the perspec-
tive of epic, rornance is a narrative representation of the non-narratahle.
And Cleopatra's ship gives this epic version of rornance a distinctly
political genealogy: the condition of non-narratability is the condition
of the vancjuished and powerless, those bvho drop out of the llistorical
narrative written by the bvinners.
Epic indicates its allegiance to the \vinning side through the shape
of its own narrative. T h e victors' achievement is restaged by a narrative
that steadily advances to reach the ending towards which it has been
directed from the beginning. Just as the victors' ideology ascribes prin-
ciples of confusion and disorder to the enemy so that victory over them
may be described as a triumph of reason and meaning, the epic narrative
projects episodes of suspension and indirection in order that it may
overcome them and demonstrate its ultimately teleological form. \\'hen
these episodes expand or multiply to disrupt narrative unity and closure,
epic may be suspected of going over to the side and perspective of the
losers, as it does in the anti-17irgilianpoems of T'ucan and his successors.
For if the teleological epic narrati1.e is directed to answering the cjues-
tion, "TVho has won?", the absence of a n organizing teleology proposes
the ansbver, "Nobody bvins," which might be seen as a deep truth (or
clichi.) about the absurdity of bvar and history. T h e losers console
themselves that in the long run empire is a no-bvin alrair, that its
corlcjuests are bound to perish, and even the staunchly imperialist epic
may concede this possibility. Rut it is precisely empire's long run
through history that informs epic's sense of narrative coherence and
completion.
A P P E N D I X 1: Alilton and Honlcr

'Thcrc is a sccond major epic modrl hchind ~ h war c in Rfilton's licaven. \\'lien tlic
Son intervenes on the third dn). and panics tlie had angels, lie recalls not onl>-T7irgil's
Xpollo a t ilctiurn hiit thc Achilles who returns to hattlc in tlic t\venticth hook oS the
Iliciil, roiiting thc '1-rojan forces; and \vho c\ cntiiall) wins thc climactic duel \vitli Hector
in Rook 22." IYitli this much de1a)-ed al-i~teiciAchilles confirms his ccntral role as tlic
hcro oS tlie Iliad tlie epic is ahout hilli and his \vrnth. a n d thc \var Sor Tro>-can onl>-hc
dccidcd b>- his exploits. During his sulking ~I>SCIICC. tlic Sort~lncsOS battle repeatedl)
cliangc; particularl) during the so-callcd (;scat DL? oSRattlc tliat occupies Books 11-18.
T h e advnntn~(eahilis at least se\,cn timrs as the Trojans alternntely tlec lbr their city or
drive t h r Greeks hack tv their ships.
'I'lic unccrtaint) vI' tlie I~attlc'soutcomr during the Gre'lt Day is accompanied h) tlie
determining prcsence ol' pro.jectilc ueapvns in tlic unrfarc. I n Bovk 11 Paris \tounds
Diomedes, hlnclion: and Eurypylus \vitli his nrrv\v, earning Diorncdcs's exccrntion o n
a n arcliery that equals tlic \varrior ~vitli\\urnen and children (385f.1;in Bvok 12: it is
the Greek archer '1-eukrvs \\rho ~ v v u n d stlic 'I'rojan ally Glaukos (389), and Lokrian
slingcrssimilarly drive tlie '1-rojnns back in Book 13 (71 1-22]; in Bvok I5 Ajas appeals
tv Tcukros to stop Hector and the Trolans xvitli liis arrolvs (437-4701,then finds liinlsclf
I~eatcnI ~ a c kby the vollc>s ol'the 'Irojans; finall!-, in Bovk 16, the o\~crrcacliingPatroklvs
is struck dolvn 11y the thro~vinu,spcnr of tlic lightly-nrmcd Euplivrhvs (806-8151 and h:
tlie ~vratliol' Llpollo, "him ~vliostrikes fiom alar" (7 11 I .
These nlissile arms thrcnten tv suhmcrgc hcncatli their often randvm and anonymous
vo1le)s tlic Iinnd-to-hand csplvits of individual \varriors. Their promincnce suzgests that
in tlic nhscncc of the main licrv, Llcliilles, hcroism is itself in jeopnrd). '1.11~Great Day
vf Battle thus hears a sul~versi\.crelationship to the rest o f t h e Iliad. Against the larger
epic's ctlios vl'individual martial glor!: it rrpresents an nlternative picture o f \ v n r h r c :
a confused melee ol'massed Ibrces, n s h o er ~ of fl) ing \venponry that cannot he rcduced-
and thcrehy given meaning- to a narrntive of the deeds ol' a single hero vr small xroup
ol'lieroes. 'I'liis is pnrticularl~ true \vIlcn vnc cvnsidcrs the nature vf Acliillcs's o u n dcntli
tliat lies ,just heyvnd the cvcnts vf tlic Iliczd and that tlie epic dors not recviint. Accvrding
ro the rnytli: Iic is killed 11) an a r r o u , shot citlirr 11) Paris or by Apvllo: I ~ u this
t m)th
may itself IIC I~asedupon n readinu, of [lie Iliczd:' hloreo\ er: the indecisive st,~lematevl'
the Great Day of Battle suggests an unending \tarfare, similnrl) unnarratahle, tlint

.'.'I'he Acliillean Ilindic niodel has l o n ~hern nvtcd h) critics vl' the \\'as in Heaven.
Joseph Addison's commentnr! vn Book 6 in tlie .Epectiitoi- 333 (1712) also discusses niodcls
fur tlic \ t a r in Hcsiod's treatnlcnt of tlie I ~ a t t l cof thc Titans and Gvds in the Tlicogo~y,
Clnudian's Gi~yii~~tornachj, and thc theomncliin of Niczd 30; see zlddisvn 92-96. For n morc
recent discussivn, see Bnrl~arnKiel'er Le~vnlski59-62.
F o r a late antlque version of Achilles's dcatli that depends on the Iliiid and approp-
riately uses tlic mvdcl vf tlic death vl'Pntroclus in Bvok 16, scc Bovk 3.21-185 of Quintus
S r n y r n a c u ~\Vounded hy the nrrolv of Apvllo, Achilles protests a ~ a i n s ai n enemy ullv
has not fought him hce-to-hce.
 EPIC XSD ERlPIRE

\\vuld appear mcrcl) to prolong the fighting at Trvy that at tllc heginning of' the Ilznd
has already dragged on Ibr nine inconclusive )ears.
I n hlilton's imitation, this seemingly interminal~lelvar: with nolv one side, nolv the
otller, gaining tllc upper hand: I~ccvmcsthe duhious hattlc in Hcavcn that Satan lvvuld
endlessl) perpetuate. T h e arcllery that le\.cls the Homeric hcrv \\it11 the cvmmvn soldier
l~ccomcstllc devils' artillcry and the [lying mountains that over~vllelm~vllolelegions of
cclcstial ~varrivrs.lliltvn vpcnly mucks the indi\.idual martial heroics that the Ilziid had
at least seen threatened 11) mass \varf;lrc and prr!jcctilc ~vcapvns.Bcyvnd this undoinx
of' the Homeric ~varrivrcode, tllc chaotic, potentially endless hca\.cnly \ \ a s endangers
meaning itselC \l'llen Achilles returns to battle, hc rc-instates Ilcrvisrn; tllc intcrvcntion
vf'hliltvn's Sun hrinxs into Christian llistor) its principle of intclligihility. Both Achilles
and the Sun dccidc tllcir rcspcctive \\ass, and botll introduce closure into a narraii\.c
\\llvsc means or nliddlc has threatened to expand indefinitely and tv engulf its end.
'I'he contlativn hy hliltvn's fiction vl' its Homeric and 17irxilianepic models points up
tlle difference bet\\ecn the t~vo:the change that 17irgil urouxht upon the genre 11y
apprvpriating Homeric epic Ibr imperial politics. lliltvn follo\\s Hvmcr h) porvayinx
the undecidability ol'the heavenly u a r as the rcsult vf tllc hcrv's ahscnce, and, uitllout
tlle Son, the good and had angcls hcgin to look alike. But hlilton also follv~vstllc paucrn
ofTTirgil's hctium and ascrihcs that undccidahilityille possil~ilityof endless strife and
c h a o s t o the losers~the rel~clangcls \\llo arc nut rncrcl) demonized hut literal demons.
Epic reaclles llere its hrtllest extreme from the irnpariialiiy for ullich Homer is famous:
an impartiality that is also a sympathy Ibr botll Grccks and Trr!jans. Homer may acllieve
this c\,cn-llandcdncss hecause lle celel~ratesthe individual hero Achillcs instcad vf'o~le
of the t u o rival sides-a llcro ~vllvis, in h c i , ,~lienatedfrom his v\vn as ~vcllas tllc cncrny
camp. T7irgil's politicized epic denlands tllc conquest or sacrifice of this third, indcpcndcni
pcrspcciive of' the hero as mucll as it demands x iciory o \ ~ the r lbes ol' Augustus and of
Rome's imperial destiny.

APPEXDIX 2 Lcpanio and Actinm

I n 1371 the battle of Lepantv \\as fougllt in uaters not h r liom Actium. Hcrc \Vest
vncc again struxgled axainst East and the t ~ v vnaval hattlcs u e r c inevitabl) compared."'
In the Adonc (1623) of'hlarinv, I7enus passes by tllc site of tllc battles and invokes 110th

"'Scc for exanlple Paolo Paruta's 1572 funeral oration Ibr the I'enetian dead at Lcpanto
in Giuscppc Lisio 306-07. Ferrante Carrafi composcd tllc li)llouinx sonnet in his cvllcctivn
of cclchratory poems on Lepanto: De/l'.4iistriiz:

Otlenne Llugustvglorivso \,anto

D'avcr ncl seno Aml~ratioil gran Romanv
17inio,dove xinceste I'Ottomanv
TTvisignor degno d'altro grido: c canto.
Chc Clevp'~ir,~ vinse quel, ch'a canto
Nuomini inermi Ilax ca, pcrche la mano
Di hlarco Anioniv, anzi guerrier sovranv
Svggctiv era a colei col mortal manlv.
D'chcno navi 11ax.ea la gentc imhcllc,
h l a Nemhroth, Golij, Tifci, giganti
I'inceste voi, galcc di qucrcia antiche.
Ond'a l'ottava spera i svmrni anlanti
170stre glorie fatto han, \ ~ s v hc tiche
Di pingere: e scolpir di clliarc stcllc.

Third part, 19
C:OhlPARATI\.E LITERATURE

tllc love stor) of Antony and Cleopatra and the defeat of tllc T u r k s t h e latter is Hca\,cn's
punishmcnt Ibr the Ottoman capture and destruction of 17enus'srealm of Cyprus (1 7.168-
17.5). 'I'lle tradition of Spanis11 epic poems that celebrate Lepantv provides a further
chapter in the imitation vf T7irgil's Actium. Juan Latino recalls Actiurn in vrder to claim
t h a ~Lcpanto surpassed it in scale in Book 2 ol'his hriel'epic, the 24z~striasCarmen (1373)
and Crist6hal dc T7iruCs couples ccpllrastic descriptions of A c ~ i u mand Lcpantv in the
k)urtll canto of his H i ~ t o ~ dcl
i ~ z,~on~crriitc

(4.18-42) ."
hlore extended T7irgilian allusion and imitation can 11c fuund in the Aust~</zd~z
(1582)
of Juan Rufo, uhicll celebrates the carccr of Don Juan of Austria: the leader of the
Christian Hvly League, and in the Second Part ol' Ercilla's .Arnz~ca~ln(1378), \\here
Lcpanto appears as a vision in the crystal hall of the Indian ~virardFit6n. Both Rufc)
(22.93-93) and Ercilla (23.77) recall the ancient struggle hct\\ccn Augustus and Anton?.
Rufo describes Actiurn as a n act of revenge Ibr the murder vf Julius Caesar, and 11c
cmphasires the po\\cr vf even the dead Caesar to slva) tllc course of hattlc: "Quc nun
muerto Cesar cs ficro enemigo" (22.93). Three stanzas carlicr the poet in\.okcd tlle
Ilcavenl) spirit vf Cllarles \', and the analogy het~vecntllc t u o battles s u ~ g e s t sthat at
Lcpantv, too: the sun is fighting in the nanle of the fatllcr. I n Ercilla's description of
Lepanto, the Julian comet ullicll shone ahove Augustus's head at Actium is replaced
11) an inscription \\rittcn in gold upvn Dun Juan's helmet (and spelled out in capital
letters in the text): "DON JUAN HIJO DE C ~ S A RCARLOS QUIN'I'O" (24.8). '1-11c
TTirgilian nlotif of paternal, Caesarian authorirativn is used 11y I~otllpoets to tic Lcpantv
hack to Charles 1. and to his title vf Hvly Rvman Ernpervr, to make the hattlc indeed
a second Llctiurn:~vhcrcSpain, allied to Papal Rvmc, rcnclvs and extends Roman imperial
conquest. The emphasis is also dictated h) a particular, a\vk\\ard llistvrical circumstance:
Don Juan ~ m s in , fact, the illegitimate sun ol' Charles.

Princeton Cnir:ersity

Works Cited

Addison, Joseph. Criticism on lilton on'^ Paradise Lust. Ed. Ed~vardLlrber. 1869; rpt. Nelv
York: AhlS Press: 1966. 92-96.
Allen, Prudcncc. The Concept of Il'omnn. hlontrcal: Eden Prcss, 1985.
Llriosto, Ludovicv. Orlnndo~fi~ioso.
Ed. Lankancv Caretti. hlilan and Naples: Ricciardi,
1954.
Aristotlc. The Complete J l h ~ k soj24ristotle. Ed. Jonathan Barnes. 17vl.2. l'rinceton: Princeton
Universit) Prcss, 1984. 2 1.01s.
Llscoli, Albert Russell. drio~to'sBitter Harrrlor~y:Crisis and Evasion in the Italian Renai~sance.
l'rinccton: Princeton Universit) Press: 1987.
Badinn, E. Roman Imperialirrn in the Late Republic. 1968. Ithaca: C:vrnell Uni\,crsity Prcss,
1971.
Bakhtin, h l . h1. "Epic and Svvcl." The Dinlogic Imngination. Ed. hlichael Hvlcluist. Austin
and London: University of'l'esas Press: 1981. 3-40.
Bennett, Joan S. "Gvd, Sacan, and King Charles: hlilton's ro?l portraits." P J I L A
92(1977):441-57.
Binder, Gerhard. dcneas u71d d u g z i ~ t u ~hlciscnlleirn
. an1 Glan: H. Hain, 1971.

"I am indcl~tcd to Jack \Yinklcr Ibr tllc Latino rel'erence: to hlichael Murrin Ibr
Cristiihal dc TTirilcs.
30
 EPIC A S D ELIPIRE

Bloom, Harold. A. 11la/1 ojJlisreadiri~y.N c ~ vYork: Oxrord University Press, 1975.

Bracciolini, Francesco. La C'rocc Racqziistata. Piaccnrn: Giovanni Baznchi, 1613.
Cam8es, Luis de. OJ Liisia(ln\. Ed. Frank Pierce. Oxford: Oxford Uni\,ersity Press, 1973.
Carrafi, Fermnic. Dell'24z~stria.Naples: G. Caccllij, 1372.
Cllnml~ers,A. B. "Cllaos in P a ~ a d i Lo~t.",Joziinalojt/ie
~c History ojIdeas 24(1963): 53-84.
Dn\.ics, Sic\,ic. Irna,ges qf k'irig~hil~
i n Paradise Lost. Colurnhin: University of' hlissouri
Prcss, 1983.
Derrida, Jacclues. D c la C~mmmatologie.Paris: Les Editions de hlinuit, 1967.
Duhvis, l'nxc. I-listoy, Rheto~lcalDe~criptionand the Epic. Cnml~ridgcand '1-otoua: D. S.
Brcl\:cr/Bil~lioDisiribution Services, 1982.
Durling, Robert. "Tlle Epic Idcn." The Old I170rld: Discor:crl:andRebi~th.Ed. David Daichcs
and Antllvny Tllvrlhy. Lvndon: Aldus, 1974. 103-146.
Ercilla, Lllvnso dc. La draucana. Introduction hy Ofelia Gnrzn dc dcl Cnsiillo. hlcxico
City: Editorial Porriln, 1972.
Fvwlcr, Alasinir. Triumphal F o ~ m s Cambridge:
. Camhridxc University l'rcss, 1970.
Frccccro, Jolln. "'1-he Significance vf Terza Rirna." Dante: Tlie Poetics qf Conr:e~sion.C am-
hridgc, hlass. and London: Harvard Uni\.crsity Prcss, 1986. 238-271.
Freeman, Janles hI. Alilton and the .\lartial J l z i ~ c .P rincctvn: Princeton University Press,
1980.
Fryc, Sortllrop. The SccularSc~zpt~~re.
Camhridgc, hlass.: Harvard University Prcss, 1976.
Giamatti: A. Bartlctt. The Eartlib Paradlse and the Rcnai~~ance
Epic. Princeton: Princetvn
University Press, 1966.
. "Hcadlonx Horses, Headless Hvrscmcn: An Essay on the Cllivalric Epics of'
Pulci, Boinrdo, and Ariosio." Exile and C'iiange in Renai~sanceL i t e ~ a t u ~ Neu
e. Haven and
Lvndon: Ynlc University Press, 1984. 33-75,
Hanson, John L l r t l ~ u r"T7crxil."
. Ancient Il'rite~s: G~ecccand Rome. Ed. '1.. James Luce. 17vl.
2. N c ~ vYork: Scrihners, 1982. 2 1.01s.
Hardie, Pllilip. T'irgil's.Aeneid, Cosmos andlmpcriurn. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1986.
Harris, Ll'illiarn T7. Il'ar arid Inipcrialisrr~ in Republican Rome ,727-70 B . C . Oxford: Oxfc~rd
University Press, 1979.
Kcrmodc, Frank. The C'ia~sic.Camhridxc, hlnss. and Londvn: Harvard Uni\,crsiiy Prcss,
1983.
. The Sense c f a n Ending. London, Oxlbrd, and Xelv York: Oxlbrd University Press:
1966.
Kicfcr, Frcdcrick. "'1-he Conflation vf Fortunn and Occasio in Renaissance ihouxht and
icvnoxrnphy." Jozi~nalcf Renaissance and .\ledieual Studie~9(1979): 1-27.
Latino, Juan. .Azistriai Cairnen. A d Catiioiicurr~pariter et irivictissirnztm Phi/ij~pZiVi. . . .Austrias
Carrrlen. Gmnnda: Hugo de hlena, 1573.
Lelvalski, Bnrhnrn Kicf'cr. Palxdise Lust and the Rhetoric oJ Literay Fo~rrls. Princeton:
Princcivn Uni\,crsiiy Press, 1985.
Licl,, Michael. Poetics oftlie Holy. Chnpcl Hill: Universit) of S o r i h Cnrolina Press, 1981.
Lisio, Giuscppc, ed. O~azioniscelte del secolo X U . 1897; rpt. Florence: Sansoni, 1957
Lucan. 11l. .Annaei Lztcani Bclli ciailis l i b ~ idecem. Ed. A. E . Housman. Oxford: Oxlbrd
Uni\.ersiiy Prcss, 1926.
hliltvn, John. The Poems ofb/o/in Jlilton. Ed. J. Cnrcy and A. Fouler. Lvndon and S c ~ v
Yvrk: Lvnxmnns/Norton, 1968.
31
 J d n c i r ~ orld
hlvmigliano, Llrnaldo."Tlle Histo~.ian'sSkin." ~ ~ . ' J J ~ J211 ~ t .llodcrrl I-listorzogrii/~hy.
Oxford: Oxford Universit) Press, 1977. 67-77.
hlurrin, hlicllncl. The.-Il/e,gorical l?/~ic.C l l i c a ~ v'~ n d1,vndvn: Univrrsity oI' Chicago, 1980.
Xollrnbcrg, James. The Annlo,g' of the 1:acric Q i ~ c r n c .Princcton: Princeton Uni\,crsit)
Press, 1976.
Parker, Patricia. Ine~cizj,iz6leRor~~nrice.
Princetvn: Princetvn U n i ~
ersit) Prcss, 1!)7!).
. L i t e ~ o yI;ot Lodies. 1,ondon: hlethucn, 1987.
Polyhius. The H i s t o ~ i e Trans.
~.
and Londvn: \V. K. Patvn,
I\'. R. Pntvn. 6 \.ols. N e ~ vYvrk
\\'illiam Hcincmann, 1922.

C2uint: David. "'1-he Figure vf Atlnnte: .lriosto and Boiardo's Poem." .\iL.\'94(1979):
77-91.
. Origin and O~z,qina/ipin Renairsor~ce Lzte~nture. S c ~ vHn\.cn and Londvn: Yale
Univcrsity Press, 1983.
Rc\.nrd, Stella Purcc. The 11'01 in ITeaan~.Ithaca and Londvn: Col.nell University Press,
1980.
Rufo, Juan. 24z~it~iii(l/2.
Poemizs ~ / ~ i c o sI'd.
. Don Ca)ctnno Roscll. 1'01. 1. hladrid:
hl.Rivadcnc) rn, 1854. 2 vols.
Scllrvartz, Rcginn. "llilton's Ho5tilc Chaos: '. . . And the Sea \\as nu \lore."' ELIT
52(1985): 337-374.
Sirnnlcl, Gevrx. '"I'lle rldvcntrlre." (;ro~,gSirnmel 1ll.iR-ISIR: .-I (:o/lection of'Essi~ys.Ed. Kurt
H . \\'olff. Columbus: Ohio State Universit) Press: 1959. 243-258.
Smyrnncus, Quintus. The Fall ojTroy. Trans. Arthur S. \\'a). London and Cnml~ridge,
hlass.: \\'illiam Hcincmann and Has\ nrd University Press 1913.
Stein, Llrnvld.24n~ic,c~a6/e
.Sp/e. hlinneapolis: Uni\.crsity of hlinnesvta Prcss, 1953.
. "hlilton's IVar in Heaven-An Extended hlctapllol.." ELIT 18(1951): 201-220.
S)rnc: K. 0. A. Tiic Rornizrl Rer:ol~i/zon.Oxford: Oxlbrd Uni\.crsit) Prcss, 1939.
T a m , \V. \V. and hI. P. Cllarles. Octizuiiin. 24nto~y.and Cleo/~izt~a.
Caml~ridge:Cnrnl~ridgc
University Prcss, 1965.
'I'asso, Torquato. Oj~ere.E d. IIruno llnier. 5 vols. hlilnn: Rizzoli, 1964.
. L c p m ~ eclzue~~e
dl Torqziato T h o . T701. 1. Ed. Cesarc Guasti. Florcncc: Lc llonnicr,
1875. 2 vols.
Uvcdalc, \\'illiam. "\\~clcome,Drcnd Sir." B~iliir~nliz
Rc(liair:iz. Oxfc~rd:L. Lichfield, 1660.
n.p.
T7ancc, Euxcnc. "\Varf;lrc and the Structure ol' Thought in I'irgil's deneid." n_u/zde~ni
zirbiniztz dz cultz~roclizxszciz 15(1973): 11 1-162.
17irxil.P. E r ~ i l i lA\loro~~is
Opelo. Ed. R , A. 13. llynors. Oxlbrd: Oxlbrd University Press,
1969.
T7iruCs, Cristohal dc. I-listorio del L W o l ~ ~ e ~ mpocmii~
te. 1?11ico~.Ed. Don <:ayetanv Roscll.
TTol. 1. hladrid, 1831. 503-570. 2 \.ols.
\\'alhank, F. \V. Pobbiu,. Berkeley, Los Ansclrs, and London: University vf Califc~rnia
Prcss, 1972.
%atti, Sergiv. L'uniJo~meirzstiano e 11 mzt/t@rme pa,oono. hlilan: I1 Snggiatvrc, 1983.