This monograph, a revised version of Bernhard Söllradl’s doctoral thesis (Vienna, 2021), offers a fresh and engaging perspective on the relationship between myth and history in Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica, making an original contribution to a fruitful tradition of scholarship.
The research aims are clearly presented in ch. 1: S. seeks to explore systematically the political dimension of the Argonautica, in relation to the rise of the Flavians and Vespasian’s principate. Although S. places the composition of the poem within a broader chronological span (between 70 and 85 c.e., cf. 3), the discussion of political aspects focuses on Vespasian (accordingly, Titus and Domitian are treated as successors: cf. e.g. ch. 7.4). In the review of literature (5–19), particular emphasis is placed on the approach adopted by T. Stover (Epic and Empire in Vespasianic Rome, 2012), though S. challenges its excessive optimism by offering a more nuanced interpretation. In fact, S. focuses on the ‘poetics of ambivalence’, an approach that he first systematically applies to the whole poem (18–19). The methods employed are intertextuality and zeithistorische Perspektivierung, i.e. the identification of specific or paradigmatic references to the author’s own time.
The first part (chs 2–4) is devoted to (civil) war. Ch. 2 examines the proem (Argon. 1.1–21), in which the poet celebrates the Flavian victories in Judaea but also uses intertextual references to allude to the civil war of 68–69 through which Vespasian seized power, thereby correcting the official narrative. Chs 3 (the episode at Cyzicus) and 4 (the war in Colchis) focus on complex war narratives that blur the boundary between bellum externum and bellum civile. According to S., these episodes confirm the proem’s ‘subversive’ signals: allusions to Lucan and Virgil undermine the idea that lasting peace would follow Vespasian’s victory in the civil war.
The second part (chs 5–7) is centred around politics and dynasty. Ch. 5, drawing on Tacitus and the lex de imperio Vespasiani, explores the relationship between the Senate and the princeps. Helvidius Priscus’ political activity and suicide (Tac., Hist. 4.4–11) are linked to the suicide of Jason’s parents (Argon. 1.730–850) and to the storm in 1.498–692: while the restriction of libertas is necessary to ensure political stability, the Stoic suicides of opponents are presented as a futile act of resistance, aimed at achieving personal fame. Ch. 6 examines the Flavians’ distancing from Nero: through a comparison with Seneca’s De clementia and tragedies — reinterpreted in the light of Nero’s damnatio memoriae during the Flavian era — the tyrants portrayed by Valerius Flaccus (particularly Pelias: cf. ch. 6.2) can be seen as negative exempla for the Flavian emperors. Conversely, Jupiter is proposed as the model of the ideal sovereign (ch. 6.5). Finally, ch. 7 deals with dynastic succession, the associated fears of the senatorial class, and the suitability of the successor. Valerius’ cautious use of the myth of Phaethon is particularly significant in this context (see ch. 7.5).
The third part consists solely of ch. 8, which is devoted to religion. First, S. examines Vespasian’s strategy of self-legitimisation through religio (ch. 8.1), then turns to the religious aspects of the poem, highlighting how Jason manipulates oracles and divine signs to influence the opinions of his men (ch. 8.2). In contrast to the Aeneid, the fatum here remains unknowable, and the Argonauts fail to recognise their sufferings as part of a greater plan. Furthermore, as with the Flavians in the civil war, the Argonauts too commit a nefas (Cyzicus) that must be atoned for (ch. 8.3.2).
Ch. 9 contains the conclusions, which are divided into four sections, corresponding to the introduction and the three main parts of the book. Each section summarises the conclusions of the individual chapters. The book ends with a general Fazit, revolving around the key terms that have emerged in the preceding discussion.
Overall, S.’s book is detailed and thorough. The argumentation is clear and the prose is lucid. The structure of the chapters, with a Rückblick at the end of each section and the concluding Ergebnisse, helps the reader to follow the reasoning and identify the key points. As well as assisting readers in working their way through the book from cover to cover (which is definitely worth doing), this also enables individual chapters to be read in isolation (cf. xiii).
The volume is very well edited, and I only spotted very few errors (64 ‘Insel’ instead of ‘Halbinsel’; 371 ‘Cyzcus’ for ‘Cyzicus’). It is also worth noting that some abbreviations are not expanded in the final Literaturverzeichnis (e.g. Ferenczi 2014; Lovatt 2019). Finally, a couple of additions could be made to the already rich bibliography, of which S. demonstrates a thorough command, especially M. Fucecchi’s commentaries on Argonautica 6 (Pisa 1997 and 2006) and A. Canobbio’s article on the proem (Paideia 67 (2012), 55–75), which is also useful for the passage’s difficult constitutio textus.
These minor observations do not detract from the value of S.’s book, which is notable for its skilful attempt to capture the complexity of the Argonautica, a poem reflecting a period of crisis and transition. Furthermore, S. not only offers an engaging reading of Valerius’ epos but also proposes a perspective applicable to other literary works (28), thus laying the foundations for future studies (perhaps on his contemporaries Statius and Silius Italicus?).
