This collection is brought together to honour the late Barbara Flaschenriem and to showcase work from her unfinished manuscript, Dream and Ekphrasis in Roman Elegy. The contributors are all scholars who knew Flaschenriem, some as graduate students and some through her work on women in Roman elegy. The book consists of a foreword by D. Rayor, Flaschenriem's colleague at Grand Valley State University; an introduction by James, who attended graduate school at Berkeley with Flaschenriem and is the volume's editor; and seven chapters on Propertius, including two written by Flaschenriem herself.
The volume offers a snapshot of recent work on Propertius by scholars who have been defining voices in the study of Roman poetry for decades. While the topics appear to have been broadly chosen to reflect Flaschenriem's interests in feminist readings of elegy as well as ekphrasis, the contributors present a wide variety of approaches to Propertius, including a formalist reading by A. Feldherr, a post-colonialist interpretation by L. Bowditch and guidelines for a Propertian version of reader response theory by James. The contributors do not always agree, particularly on the text of Propertius, resulting in debates across chapters such as differing readings of 2.12's role in the structure of Propertius’ work in Feldherr's and James's chapters (for this debate see, e.g., S. Heyworth, PLLS 9 [1995]; C. Murgia, MD 45 [2000]; M. Wyke, The Roman Mistress [2002], pp. 74–7). The result is that the volume offers a microcosm of the discussions at the heart of Propertian studies.
Chapters 1 and 2 were originally written to be the second and fourth chapters of Flaschenriem's monograph on dreams and ekphrasis in Roman elegy. They expand on her previously published work on dreams in Propertius (CP 105 [2010]). There, as in Chapters 1 and 2, Flaschenriem was particularly interested in fantasy sequences in Propertius that involve a speaking role for a female character. In Chapter 1 Flaschenriem approaches 1.3, 2.29a and 2.29b as ekphrases in which the speaker engages in fantasies drawn from contemporary visual art: depictions of Ariadne, Andromeda and Maenads in the case of 1.3, and depictions of winged Cupids in the case of 2.29a. She argues that in both scenarios the speaker uses ekphrastic description as ‘a tool of imaginative inquiry’ (p. 9) that allows him to explore his mistress's unknowable inner life. Cynthia's direct speeches at the end of 1.3 and at 2.29b, and particularly the ways in which her version of events differs from that of the speaker, take that inquiry to the next level by confirming her subjectivity and hinting at other ways of telling their shared story. In both chapters Flaschenriem nuances ongoing conversations about the function of ekphrasis in Roman elegy (e.g. J. Elsner, CP 102 [2007]; E. Scioli, Dream, Fantasy, and Visual Art in Roman Poetry [2015]; P. Martins, Classica(Brasil) 30 [2017]).
In Chapter 2 Flaschenriem shifts her focus to the dreams recounted in Propertius 3.3 and 4.7, considering how they draw from contemporary visual arts, landscape architecture and funeral monuments to set the scene for meetings with suprahuman figures: the Muse Calliope in 3.3 and the ghost of Cynthia in 4.7. Although Flaschenriem explains that 3.3 and 4.7 are similar in structure, with visually focused dream sequences leading to encounters with the supernatural, her readings of the two poems feel somewhat disconnected. In her discussion of 3.3 Flaschenriem argues that Propertius filters his allusions to Hesiod, Callimachus and Philetas through a description of a Roman garden, bringing his Greek predecessors into his own cultural sphere. This literary-historical approach stands in contrast to her examination of 4.7, which returns to the idea of ekphrastic descriptions of Cynthia as ‘a tool of imaginative inquiry’ (p. 72). In 4.7, as in 1.3 and 2.29b, the speaker's intense visual focus on his mistress leads him to grant her subjectivity in the form of a direct speech, in which Cynthia once again asserts her fidelity and a version of events that differs dramatically from that of the speaker. Flaschenriem's explorations of both poems are perceptive and well argued. It is only because her discussion of 4.7 ties so well into her previous chapter that her reading of 3.3 feels out of place.
Feldherr offers a wide-ranging discussion of Propertius 2.12 in Chapter 3, building on M. Wyke's argument that the speaker's depiction of Cynthia is a ‘verbal analogue’ (p. 78) to the painting of Amor as a winged boy (The Roman Mistress [2002], p. 67). Throughout, Feldherr is interested in cycles: of creation and reception, experience and mimesis, subjection and mastery. In the first part of the chapter he focuses on the interaction of verbal and visual elements in 2.12, taking a formalist approach and considering the aesthetics of the poem's structure. He argues that the speaker in 2.12 is halfway between the reception and the creation of media, as he both observes the painting of Amor and creates his own depiction of Cynthia. In the second part Feldherr brings the poem's historical context into the analysis, focusing in particular on servitium amoris. He explores how the speaker, Amor and Cynthia are caught in cycles of dominance and domination in 2.12, arguing that Propertius uses these cycles to consider his own relationship with patronage. Feldherr's discussion draws on K. McCarthy's examination of servitium amoris (in Women and Slaves in Greco-Roman Culture [1998], pp. 174–92) and is an intriguing addition to ongoing conversations about this trope (e.g. W. Fitzgerald, Slavery and the Roman Literary Imagination [2000]; L. Fulkerson, in: The Cambridge Companion to Latin Love Elegy [2013], pp. 180–93; A. Keith, in: Gendering Roman Imperialism [2022], pp. 223–46). Of particular interest is his suggestion that we consider how elegy's meaning changed when it was mediated through an enslaved person's performance (p. 97).
In Chapter 4 E. Greene examines the speaker's violence in Propertius 2.1 and 2.15, adding to an extensive bibliography on violence in Augustan elegy (e.g. D. Frederick, in: Roman Sexualities [1997], pp. 172–96; S. James, Learned Girls and Male Persuasion [2003], pp. 184–97; D. O'Rourke, in: Texts and Violence in the Roman World [2018], pp. 110–39). Bringing her expertise on gender identity in ancient poetry to bear, Greene argues that the speaker's violence in Propertius conflates erotic descriptions with epic narrative, raising the lover-poet to the status of epic hero and suggesting that love could also be an arena for the display of masculine excellence. While Greene's argument is convincing, it could have been strengthened by being tied explicitly to her previous discussions of epic, violence and Roman masculinity in elegy (e.g. Greene, The Erotics of Domination [1999], pp. 67–92; in: The Blackwell Companion to Roman Elegy [2012], pp. 357–72), which would clarify that this use of violence to explore gender and genre is not unique to Propertius.
Bowditch offers an Orientalist and post-colonialist reading of Propertius in Chapter 5, drawing on the work of E. Said (Orientalism [1978]) and P. Hulme (Colonial Encounters [1992]). She examines Cynthia's consumption of foreign goods and her journeys away from Rome in 2.3, 1.8a–b and 1.11–12 through the lens of contemporary Roman mapmaking, arguing that Cynthia is figured in these poems both as Rome's dominance over conquered territories and as the lands subordinated to its empire. In Bowditch's reading Cynthia's contradictory status in these poems serves as a metaphor for Rome's relationship with Greece after its conquest, which was made complicated by the Romans’ reverence for and appropriation of Greek culture. This chapter adds to a growing discussion of Roman elegy's role as colonial discourse (e.g. Bowditch, in: Being There Together [2003], pp. 163–80; A. Keith, in: Women and War in Antiquity [2015], pp. 138–56; N. Pandey, CJ 113 [2018]) and offers an exciting taste of Bowditch's forthcoming book on the subject.
In Chapter 6 A. Keith examines allusions to Virgil in Propertius 4.1. The bulk of this chapter consists of sharp intertextual readings of the poem, culminating in the claim that Propertius’ allusions to Virgil in 4.1 play a role in its programmatic function. Building on previous scholarship on engagement with Virgil in Propertius’ fourth book (J. Allison, CP 75 [1980]; B. Flaschenriem, Helios 25 [1998]; R. Dimundo, RFIC 40 [2012]), Keith argues that every poem in Book 4 adapts material from the Aeneid. In her reading, Propertius uses allusions to Virgil in 4.1 to ‘articulate a more ambitious elegiac path’ (p. 156) and takes the Aeneid as the model for a new politically and historically engaged version of elegy. This chapter provides a roadmap for new interpretations of the Virgilian loci in the rest of Book 4.
Finally, James introduces a new model for applying reader response theory to Propertius in Chapter 7, drawing on the work of P. Rabinowitz (Critical Inquiry 4 [1977]), A. Sharrock (in: Intratextuality [2000], pp. 1–39) and T. Franklinos (Ph.D. dissertation [2015]). James argues that Propertius teaches his audience to be ‘attentive readers’ (p. 168), meaning readers who approach his poems intratextually and practice careful rereading. Attentive readers recognise the separation between the elegiac speaker and the historical poet, who directs his audience consistently back to 1.1 with repeated vocabulary, references to previous poems and discrepancies in the speaker's behaviour. Rereading the text, the audience is primed to focus on the poet's agenda, rather than the speaker's laments, and to see how the poet humorously undercuts his speaker. This chapter has a broad scope, covering all of Books 1–3 and including a brief coda on Book 4 in its conclusion. James does not have space here to develop her argument fully, but the chapter explicates the relationship between the historical Propertius, his speaker and his readers in an exciting new way. I look forward to further work on this project.
Golden Cynthia offers a collection of essays that demonstrate the experience and expertise of their authors. The chapters are connected by a shared focus on control: the speaker's desire for control over the mistress in the contributions by Flaschenriem, Feldherr and Greene; Rome's control over its empire in Bowditch's chapter; and Propertius’ control of his readers through intertextual and intratextual cues in the essays by Keith and James. Certain poems, particularly 1.3 and 2.1, are discussed in multiple chapters, as are certain pieces of scholarship, such as M. Wyke's body of work. These shared focuses help the volume feel cohesive, but they are never acknowledged by the contributors. The book could have been made even stronger if the authors had read and engaged with each other's contributions. As it stands, though, Golden Cynthia is a well-crafted and thought-provoking addition to Propertian studies that will surely inspire future work.
