Vallat's edited volume offers a rich and detailed examination of how the speeches in Virgil's Aeneid were received and analysed by late antique commentators and exegetes. The book significantly contributes to our understanding of Virgilian rhetoric and its role in late antique education and literary criticism. As Vallat highlights in the introduction, at some indeterminate point, possibly starting in the second century ce, exegetes of Virgil began to see the speeches in his works as models of eloquence. The earliest evidence of this shift is an opusculum attributed to Florus, titled Vergilius, orator an poeta? This title alone suggests a well-established debate about Virgil's rhetorical value within educational contexts. The critical question of Virgil's status and role in education persisted, as evidenced by late antique commentators such as Tiberius Claudius Donatus, who argued that Virgil should have been taught by orators rather than grammarians. Macrobius further solidified Virgil's reputation as an orator in his Saturnalia. In Book 1 Symmachus provokes Evangelus, a detractor of Virgil, into admitting the poet's rhetorical prowess. Despite Evangelus’ initial reluctance, the subsequent discussion in Book 5 presents a consensus that Virgil should be considered both an orator and a poet, exhibiting a mastery of rhetorical discipline and a strict observance of rhetorical rules.
The present volume is organised into four parts. The first part is dedicated to two works located ‘at the boundaries of exegesis’: M. Bažil's ‘Proba oratrix: Éléments virgiliens dans les discours directs du Centon de Proba’ highlights how Proba not only borrows lines and half-lines from Virgil but also emulates his rhetorical techniques, integrating them into her adaptation of biblical narratives. B. Bureau's ‘Virgile chez Aelius Donat et le discours théâtral’ investigates the significance and utilisation of Virgilian speeches in Donatus’ commentary on Terence.
Part 2 explores specific rhetorical techniques used in the Aeneid and their analysis by ancient commentators. M.L. Delvigo's ‘Oratorie dicta nel commento di Servio e Servio Danielino all’Eneide’ studies how, in the commentaries of Servius and Servius Danielis, the terms related to oratory are infrequently used but are significant when they appear, particularly in discussions of direct speeches. While these discussions often highlight the rhetorical skills of positive characters such as Aeneas, they also address the oratorical abilities of more morally ambiguous or negative characters, demonstrating their use of rhetorical techniques. Special attention is given to the complex relationship that the commentators observe between oratory and cunning, especially in the interactions between Juno and Venus, the rhetorical tactics of Turnus and the persuasive speech of Drances.
Vallat's ‘Commencer le discours: beniuolentia, attentio et docilitas dans l'exégèse virgilienne’ explores how these classical rhetorical concepts as well as those of principium and insinuatio, all of which aimed to create favourable conditions for the audience to engage with the speaker, were employed by commentators to analyse the beginnings of speeches in Virgil, positioning him as a model for rhetorical instruction in the art of persuasion and supplication. Despite common sources, commentators differed in their rhetorical approaches: Servius was cautious of potentially amoral interpretations, whereas Ti. Donatus placed greater emphasis on rhetorical analysis.
U. Tischer's ‘Indirekte Kommunikation. Antike Kommentare über nicht-offene Rede in Vergils Aeneis’ focuses on three exchanges of speeches involving Venus from Books 1, 4 and 10, showing how ancient commentators demonstrate an understanding of non-open speech, emphasising the motivations, methods and effects of such rhetoric. While familiar with contemporary rhetorical theories, the commentators adapt these concepts to their interpretative frameworks, focusing on specific textual contexts and the dual layers of character and author–reader communication.
Part 3 addresses some thematic aspects of Virgilian rhetoric. M. Squillante's ‘Vergilius orator an poeta? (Ti. Donat., Interp. Verg., Aen. 1–2)’ explores Ti. Donatus’ commentary on the first two books of the Aeneid to clarify how he addressed the question of whether Virgil is more of an orator or a poet. M. Lafond, in ‘Amour et persuasion dans l’Énéide à travers le regard de Servius’, compares the perspectives of Servius and Servius Danielis on the rhetoric of love and persuasion in the Aeneid. Lafond highlights the differences in their approaches, with Servius Danielis emphasising rhetorical technique and a moralistic approach in his commentary, while Servius focuses on pathos and the significance of emotional bonds, refraining from any moral condemnation of the character Dido.
F. Stok's ‘Obscura quidem, sed uera. Profezie e divinazioni nella prospettiva serviana’ examines how Servius and Servius Danielis focus on the fact that Books 2 and 3 of the Aeneid are speeches that Aeneas addresses to Dido. Stok concentrates especially on how the ancient commentators address the prophetic abilities of Anchises, which they, especially Servius Danielis, relate to early Latin epic traditions. He also explores the exegesis of the prophetic speeches in Book 3, particularly the oracle of Apollo at Delos, misunderstood by Anchises, and the prophecy of the Penates at Crete.
The final part of the volume provides detailed analyses of individual speeches in the Aeneid. S. Clément-Tarantino's ‘Vt solet, Venus uincit: le dialogue entre Vénus et Junon au chant 4 de l’Énéide lu par les commentateurs antiques de Virgile’ observes how the ancient commentators generally tend to favour Venus in their remarks about the exchange between the goddesses in Book 4. Servius and Ti. Donatus focus on the concepts of dissimulation and hostility. They highlight how the two goddesses are much more aggressively antagonistic than it might initially seem. Their speeches are filled with hidden meanings and implications, particularly that of Venus. Her superior cunning lies not only in discerning Juno's true intentions but also in merely pretending to submit to Jupiter's wife and her proposals.
M. Simon, S. Estienne and J. Rohman analyse the speeches of Juno, Amata and Allecto in Book 7 in their study, ‘Les remarques de Servius à propos des discours féminins du chant 7 de l’Énéide’. They note how Servius’ commentary focuses less on rhetorical analysis and more on vocabulary accuracy and the overall coherence of Virgil's poem. Servius provides few detailed annotations, even on speeches considered paradigms of rhetorical pathos, such as Juno's monologue, which Macrobius presents as a model of pathetic discourse. Servius’ primary aim is not to train in eloquence but to justify Virgil's choices and highlight the poem's richness and dramatic tension. He praises Virgil's genius, emphasising the necessity of these speeches for narrative progression, and demonstrates how they contribute to character development and the epic's dramatic impact.
L. Pirovano's ‘Deliberat Diomedes, an Latinis auxilium petentibus ferat: Diomede e l'ambasceria dei Latini tra esegesi, retorica e prassi scolastiche’ compares the treatment of the Venulus embassy episode given by the rhetorical sources with that of the late antique exegetes of Virgil. Sulpicius Victor and Emporius offer a rhetorical reading of the episode, which is expected. More surprisingly, similar detailed interpretations are found in the works of Servius, Servius Danielis and Ti. Donatus, despite their broader context and differing presentations. These similarities suggest a continuous exchange between different levels of ancient teaching, highlighting Virgil's central role in Latin education. There are two main perspectives: one analyses the rhetorical skills of Virgilian characters, such as Venulus and Diomedes, for teaching purposes, while the other uses rhetorical analysis to evaluate Virgil's characterisations through their speeches. This complex relationship is crucial for a deeper understanding of the texts.
I. Torzi's ‘Le parole di Drance al vaglio dei commentatori tardoantichi’ analyses Drances’ speeches in Book 11. Late antique commentators focus on the rhetorical strategies used by Virgil, highlighting Drances’ negative portrayal, personal animosity towards Turnus and his attempts to sway opinion by praising Aeneas. Ti. Donatus is detailed in his analysis, recognising both Drances’ eloquence and his flaws, and emphasising recurring themes such as Lavinia's marriage as a diplomatic tool. Servius and Servius Danielis are more concise, noting Drances’ cunning and Aeneas’ persuasive tactics. They often point out the use of envy as a rhetorical device and Virgil's skill in echoing speeches among characters.
Vallat's volume is a significant contribution to the study of late antique rhetoric and Virgilian exegesis. By bringing together diverse perspectives on the reception and analysis of Virgil's speeches, the book offers a comprehensive overview of how Virgil was read and taught in late antiquity. The emphasis on the rhetorical dimensions of the Aeneid underscores the centrality of Virgil in the educational curricula of the time as well as the adaptability of his work to various exegetical and rhetorical frameworks. One of the strengths of the volume is its interdisciplinary approach, combining literary analysis with insights from rhetorical theory and educational history. The contributors effectively demonstrate how Virgil's speeches were used not only as models of eloquence but also as tools for moral and intellectual instruction. The book also highlights the differences in approach among various commentators, offering a nuanced understanding of the exegetical traditions that shaped the reception of the Aeneid.
