Carmen 4.2 is one of the most commented upon of the odes of Horace.Footnote ² It is indeed a complex poem. To summarize roughly: addressing the young poet Iullus Antonius, Horace presents the dangers of emulating Pindar, offering what seems like a lengthy description as well as an approximation of Pindar's own poetic style (1–24).Footnote ³ Not as a doomed Icarus imitating the grand Pindaric swan, but in his own preferred mode, like a bee on the banks of Tibur, Horace will continue to produce his own highly refined poems on a small scale (25–30). Iullus Antonius, on the other hand, will sing of Augustus’ triumph maiore plectro (33, a phrase which in all likelihood refers to his activity as an epic poet).Footnote ⁴ Modestly, Horace himself will be content to join in with the popular chants for Augustus’ triumphal return as one happy civilian among the crowd (33–52).Footnote ⁵ Iullus Antonius will moreover offer a grand sacrifice of ten bulls and as many cows on that occasion, whereas Horace promises a single bull-calf that he is saving especially for the purpose (53–60). I will try to offer a new interpretation of these last two strophes by pointing out an unnoticed allusion to a Hellenistic subtext.

As a paraphrase already brings to the fore, Odes 4.2 seems to incorporate a specimen of Pindarizing (lines 1–24), whilst warning against any attempt to emulate the poet. It is also an ostensible recusatio of any grand praise poetry of a public kind (as apparently solicited for the occasion of the triumph by the young Iullus),Footnote ⁶ while constituting a poem in praise of Augustus’ triumph. It is then, like most recusationes, but perhaps in a more complex way than most, recusatio, praise and poetic manifesto at the same time.Footnote ⁷

That Pindar and Horace have more in common than might appear seems to be implied by the fact that the imagery used in the first strophes to describe both poetic styles, the Pindaric one and the Horatian one, focusses on water (the great Pindaric mountain stream, 5–18, and the glassy sea which will bear the name of the hubristic Icarian emulator, 3–4, but note also watery Tibur, the modest, homely surroundings of the Matine bee, 30–1). This water imagery has double connotations, as Harrison notes, in that it ‘not only reflects Pindar's own description of his poetry, but also the terms of Callimachean literary polemic, above all the end of the Hymn to Apollo’.Footnote ⁸ This looks like an implied recognition that these poets have more in common than meets the eye.Footnote ⁹

That this is the underlying message seems supported by the observation that the imagery of the bee with which Horace describes his own poetic activities in lines 27–32 reflects both Pindaric self-description and the programmatic poetics at the end of Callimachus’ Hymn to Apollo (lines 110–12).Footnote ¹⁰ Pindar, Horace and the unnamed but implied Callimachus could all be described in terms of water imagery and bee imagery. This juxtaposing and contrasting of the poetics of Pindar and Horace (25–32) and of Iullus Antonius and Horace (33–52) seems finally to be answered in the imagery of the last two strophes (53–60), the description of the respective offerings on the occasion of Augustus’ triumph, in that we expect them to be, in some way, equal:Footnote ¹¹

As critics have remarked, on a formal level, the descriptions of the respective offerings as it were directly oppose what is conveyed by them. The great and costly sacrifice of ten bulls and ten cows receives only one line, whereas the small sacrifice of Horace is described in seven.Footnote ¹³ The Hellenistic metapoetical subtext here has been widely acknowledged: the opposition between a small and a large sacrificial offering immediately brings to mind the ‘fat victim’ versus the ‘slender muse’ of Callimachus, Aetia fr. 1.23–4 Pf. and Virgil, Eclogue 6.4–5.Footnote ¹⁴ In Odes 4.2, the Muse is left out, and instead two types of sacrifice are juxtaposed, but with similar metapoetic significance.Footnote ¹⁵

But why is the uitulus described in the kind of detail it is, and what is the significance of the various elements of the description? Superficially, one might say, with most critics, that the explanation for the lengthy description lies in the tone and the loving concern expressed in the choice of the sacrificial animal and the care taken of it.Footnote ¹⁶ This intensely personal, carefully selected and carefully grown offering perfectly symbolizes Horace's small scale poetry, as referred to in lines 31–2: operosa paruus | carmina fingo. This symbolism fits well with the fact that the calf is tagged with the epithet tener (54), a reference to Callimachean poetics which could be read as a translation of the Hellenistic poetic keyword λɛπτόςFootnote ¹⁷ and with the fact that the calf ‘miraculously for an animal, but suitable for an Horatian artifact … grows young (iuuenescit) rather than old’ (Putnam [n. 13], 61).

Yet, in my view even more is going on beneath the surface of this exquisite image. The fact that the words imitatus and referentis follow hard upon each other in two consecutive lines might provide a hint to look for further intertextual references. Indeed, as is widely acknowledged, lines 56–60 provide a remarkably faithful echo of Moschus’ Europa, lines 84–8, which describe the bull-shape which Zeus has adopted to attract Europa's attention and kidnap her. Horace changes the order, in that the first two lines of Moschus’ description (τοῦ δή τοι τὸ μὲν ἄλλο δέμας ξανθόχροον ἔσκɛ | κύκλος δ’ ἀργύϕɛος μέσσῳ μάρμαιρɛ μɛτώπῳ, 84–5) are echoed by the last two in Horace's (qua notam duxit niueus uideri | cetera fuluus, 59–60). The last two verses of the Moschus passage (ἶσά τ’ ἐπ’ ἀλλήλοισι κέρα ἀνέτɛλλɛ καρήνου | ἄντυγος ἡμιτόμου κɛραῆς ἅτɛ κύκλα σɛλήνης, 87–8) are conversely echoed by the first two in Horace (fronte curuatos imitatus ignis | tertium lunae referentis ortum, 57–8).Footnote ¹⁸

Following Davis (n. 3), 143, I think that the subtext from Moschus is crucial. The Horatian calf may be small and delicate, but it hides (an allusion to) Zeus, the father of gods and men. Moschus actually makes the bull itself say as much, some seventy lines later: αὐτός τοι Zɛύς ɛἰμι, κɛἰ ἐγγύθɛν ɛἴδομαι ɛἶναι | ταῦρος, ἐπɛὶ δύναμαί γɛ ϕανήμɛναι ὅττι θέλοιμι (155–6). Could there be a more appropriate offering to Augustus, who we know was regularly equated with Jupiter in official propaganda?Footnote ¹⁹ The small ruddy calf with its white spot may seem modest, but what it hides is many times greater and more majestic than the offering of the twenty pieces of indiscriminate (epic) cattle of Iullus. And is it a coincidence that this poetic uitulus should by its wording refer to a Zeus-bull in a small-scale Hellenistic epic text by someone called Moschus (‘calf’)?Footnote ²⁰ The subtext at any rate enhances the impression already conveyed by the elaborate phrasing as such (the seven lines reserved for the uitulus) that what seems at first glance the smaller offering is in fact the grander and more fitting one.

But there may even be more. Focussing on the Horatian lines that echo the Moschus passage, there is one detail that appears to have no basis in the Greek subtext. I refer to the fact that the calf imitates with its brow the fires of the moon as they ‘bring back its third rising’ (imitatus ignis | tertium lunae referentis ortum). As we recall, Moschus speaks only of the κύκλα σɛλήνης.

The Kiessling–Heinze commentary is one of the few to even remark upon this detail, as follows: ‘erst am dritten Abend des sichtbaren Mondes … ist seine Sichel breit genug um mit seinen Spitzen an Hörnen zu erinnern’.Footnote ²¹ According to this commentary, then, the description functions as a visual aid to the reader trying to picture the horns of the calf. It must however be noted that it remains remarkably unclear whether lines 57–8 in fact refer to the horns of the calf or rather to the white spot (59–60). Most commentators are silent on the question, but seem to assume that lines 57–8 refer to the horns of the calf.Footnote ²²

On the basis of the subtext that I will trace in these lines, it may well be that in fact the horns of the calf are meant, rather than the shape of the white spot. For in this context, thick with Hellenistic allusions, the specific description of the moon at its third rising inescapably looks like a reference to a key passage from another Hellenistic poem. I am referring to Aratus’ Phaenomena, the celebrated Hellenistic didactic poem about weather signs, which specifically describes the (horns of) the moon at its third rising at lines 783–7.

In these particular Aratean lines, moreover, a poetically significant and widely celebrated acrostic appears: the Greek word Λɛπτή is spelled out both horizontally and vertically by the poet, beginning at line 783. That Aratus was aware of the particular poetic connotations of this acrostic seems confirmed by the notice that he also wrote a collection of poems entitled (like the [pseudo-]Virgilian collection) Κατὰ λɛπτόν.Footnote ²³ Indeed, the passage itself constitutes a double proclamation of the Hellenistic poetic ideal of λɛπτότης: it spells the feminine of λɛπτός out in the acrostic and at the same time illustrates exactly what this ideal implied: the subtle and able versification that allowed the double (or triple) incorporation of the word in these lines. The passage reads:

We see that Odes 4.2.53–60 in fact alludes to this passage through its reference to the third rising of the moon, but also compounds the allusion in several ways. The Aratean passage speaks of ‘horns’ (785) of the moon, which would make a reader of Horace think of the passage more readily when reading of a calf; compare my remarks above on the question whether these in fact imitate the moon.

Secondly, Aratus’ moon is described as ‘quite red’ (784), a shade which might be said to return in the colour of the calf (fuluus, 60).Footnote ²⁴ Staying on the topic of colours, it might even be argued that the Homeric acrostic of Iliad 24.1–5 (λɛυκή), apparently unintentional but well-known in the Hellenistic era, to which the text of Aratus appears to be referring, returns in the adjective describing the white mark (niueus) of the otherwise ruddy calf. In the same sentence one might even be tempted to see a reference to the title of the Phaenomena in the verb uideri (Greek ϕαίνɛσθαι), alerting readers to this intertextual play.Footnote ²⁵

Thirdly, as Thomas notes, reporting a suggestion of John Henderson,Footnote ²⁶ the Horatian poem itself seems to trace an aborted acrostic in its opening lines as well (P-I-N-N-, possibly referring both to Pindarus, 1; and to pinnis, 4)Footnote ²⁷ which might iconically suggest the fall of the Icarus-like would-be emulator of Pindar. In his note on these lines, Thomas actually refers to the Aratean acrostic (without naming the reference in 53–60), pointing out that it was an imitation of the Homeric one in Iliad 24, and that it may well be meaningful in this particular context of emulation (aemulari, line 1) that Aratus was in fact considered a Ὁμήρου ζηλωτής in antiquity.Footnote ²⁸ These suggestions, and the observation of the aborted acrostic in 1–4, are rendered even more compelling by the end of the poem, where, as I argue, the actual reference to this acrostic occurs.

We may also wonder whether the content and context of the Aratean passage harbour significant issues. Phaenomena 783–7 starts off with the description of the slender moon as a good weather omen (ɛὔδιός κ’ ɛἴη), which according to Jacques (n. 23), 55 was metapoetically intended as a good omen for Aratus’ poetry.Footnote ²⁹ This may also apply in Horace's poem or, more specifically, to the occasion for which he is saving his sacrifice, the safe homecoming of Augustus. More generally, the Aratean description that lines 53–60 refer to incorporates the word λɛπτή thrice, a Hellenistic poetic keyword which, as pointed out, not only returns in the epithet tener (54), but is in harmony with the Callimachean opposition between the small sacrifice and the great one.

In antiquity, the Phaenomena was an extraordinarily popular poem, as testified by epigrams in praise of it by Aratus’ contemporaries Callimachus, Leonidas of Tarentum and ‘King Ptolemy’,Footnote ³⁰ as well as by its unusually rapid adoption in the Greek school curriculum.Footnote ³¹ The Romans also showed great interest in the poem: Cicero, Germanicus and Avienus all produced commentaries or translations, and Virgil, Georgics 1.351–460 is recognizably influenced by Phaenomena 758–1152. The Aratean acrostic in 783–7 was especially famous in antiquity. The aforementioned epigrams by Callimachus, Leonidas and ‘King Ptolemy’ go out of their way to incorporate the word λɛπτή or its cognates in their praise of Aratus.Footnote ³² This suggests that they saw the acrostic as one of the salient features of the poem.Footnote ³³ All of this makes it likely that that Horace too was aware of it, and that the detail of the third rising in the phrasing imitatus ignis | tertium lunae referentis ortum is a pointed reference to this celebrated and metapoetically important passage.

We can now see the full significance of what would otherwise be a practically meaningless detail, namely that the moon on the brow of the clearly Hellenistic poetical figure of the calf is a moon at its third rising. This, I argue, is Horace's way of subtly alluding to the most famous acrostic in Hellenistic poetry, and thus claiming allegiance to the poetic ideal it proclaims. By its incorporation in such an understated, yet significant way, the passage moreover admirably exemplifies the Hellenistic poetic ideal of λɛπτότης. That the allusion could be noted despite its subtlety is helped by the fact that the reader is already primed for Hellenistic poetic messages by the earlier Callimachean water and bee imagery in the opposition between Pindar and Horace, the quasi-Callimachean opposition between small and great sacrificial offerings, and by the fact that calf is described in terms of the Zeus-bull in Moschus’ Europa.

If we agree that this passage harbours an Aratean allusion, the poetic message of the last strophes gains an even greater depth. On an obvious level of quantity versus quality, the image of the small, single calf versus the costly, grand sacrifice of ten bulls and ten cows constitutes a reminder of Hellenistic poetics in the vein most notably of Callimachus (the fat victim versus the slender Muse). Moreover, the calf hides, under its ruddy skin with its single white mark, the signs of Jupiter/Zeus as described in Hellenistic poetry, both a distinct aggrandizement of the seemingly modest choice of animal, and at the same time a paradoxical reference to the small-scale refinement of Hellenism. But to compound the Hellenistic subtlety, Horace in the same lines includes a reference to a remarkable passage of a poetic work that in Rome was known as the apex of λɛπτότης and thoughtful poetic composition, the acrostic in lines 783–7 of Aratus’ Phaenomena. In this way, what is seemingly a small and modest offering turns out to comprehend entire worlds of poetic allusion.Footnote ³⁴